Part 15 (1/2)
1593.
[95] Harvey's opponents were much nimbler penmen, and could strike off these lampoons with all the facility of writers for the stage. Thus Nash declares, in his ”Have with you to Saffron Walden,” that he leaves Lilly, who was also attacked, to defend himself, because ”in as much time as he spends in taking tobacco one week, he can compile that would make Gabriell repent himself all his life after.”--ED.
[96] He had written an antiquarian work on the descent of Brutus on our island.--The party also who at the University attacked the opinions of Aristotle were nicknamed the _Trojans_, as determined enemies of the _Greeks_.
LITERARY HATRED.
EXHIBITING A CONSPIRACY AGAINST AN AUTHOR.
In the peaceful walks of literature we are startled at discovering genius with the mind, and, if we conceive the instrument it guides to be a stiletto, with the hand of an a.s.sa.s.sin--irascible, vindictive, armed with indiscriminate satire, never pardoning the merit of rival genius, but fastening on it throughout life, till, in the moral retribution of human nature, these very pa.s.sions, by their ungratified cravings, have tended to annihilate the being who fostered them. These pa.s.sions among literary men are with none more inextinguishable than among _provincial writers_.--Their bad feelings are concentrated by their local contraction. The proximity of men of genius seems to produce a familiarity which excites hatred or contempt; while he who is afflicted with disordered pa.s.sions imagines that he is urging his own claims to genius by denying them to their possessor. A whole life pa.s.sed in hara.s.sing the industry or the genius which he has not equalled; and instead of running the open career as a compet.i.tor, only skulking as an a.s.sa.s.sin by their side, is presented in the object now before us.
Dr. GILBERT STUART seems early in life to have devoted himself to literature; but his habits were irregular, and his pa.s.sions fierce.
The celebrity of Robertson, Blair, and Henry, with other Scottish brothers, diseased his mind with a most envious rancour. He confined all his literary efforts to the pitiable motive of destroying theirs; he was prompted to every one of his historical works by the mere desire of discrediting some work of Robertson; and his numerous critical labours were all directed to annihilate the genius of his country. How he converted his life into its own scourge, how wasted talents he might have cultivated into perfection, lost every trace of humanity, and finally perished, devoured by his own fiend-like pa.s.sions,--shall be ill.u.s.trated by the following narrative, collected from a correspondence now lying before me, which the author carried on with his publisher in London. I shall copy out at some length the hopes and disappointments of the literary adventurer--the colours are not mine; I am dipping my pencil in the palette of the artist himself.
In June, 1773, was projected in the Scottish capital ”The Edinburgh Magazine and Review.” Stuart's letters breathe the spirit of rapturous confidence. He had combined the sedulous attention of the intelligent Smellie, who was to be the printer, with some very honourable critics; Professor Baron, Dr. Blacklock, and Professor Richardson; and the first numbers were executed with more talent than periodical publications had then exhibited. But the hardiness of Stuart's opinions, his personal attacks, and the acrimony of his literary libels, presented a new feature in Scottish literature, of such ugliness and horror, that every honourable man soon averted his face from this _boutefeu_.
He designed to ornament his first number with--
”A print of my Lord Monboddo in his quadruped form. I must, therefore, most earnestly beg that you will purchase for me a copy of it in some of the Macaroni print shops. It is not to be procured at Edinburgh.
They are afraid to vend it here. We are to take it on the footing of a figure of an animal, not yet described; and are to give a grave, yet satirical account of it, in the manner of Buffon. It would not be proper to allude to his lords.h.i.+p but in a very distant manner.”
It was not, however, ventured on; and the nondescript animal was still confined to the windows of ”the Macaroni print shops.” It was, however, the bloom of the author's fancy, and promised all the mellow fruits it afterwards produced.
In September this ardour did not abate:--
”The proposals are issued; the subscriptions in the booksellers' shops astonish; correspondents flock in; and, what will surprise you, the timid proprietors of the 'Scots' Magazine' have come to the resolution of dropping their work. You stare at all this, and so do I too.”
Thus he flatters himself he is to annihilate his rival, without even striking the first blow. The appearance of his first number is to be the moment when their last is to come forth. Authors, like the discoverers of mines, are the most sanguine creatures in the world: Gilbert Stuart afterwards flattered himself Dr. Henry was lying at the point of death from the scalping of his tomahawk pen; but of this anon.
On the publication of the first number, in November, 1773, all is exultation; and an account is facetiously expected that ”a thousand copies had emigrated from the Row and Fleet-street.”
There is a serious composure in the letter of December, which seems to be occasioned by the tempered answer of his London correspondent. The work was more suited to the meridian of Edinburgh; and from causes sufficiently obvious, its personality and causticity. Stuart, however, a.s.sures his friend that ”the second number you will find better than the first, and the third better than the second.”
The next letter is dated March 4, 1774, in which I find our author still in good spirits:--
”The Magazine rises, and promises much, in this quarter. Our artillery has silenced all opposition. The rogues of the 'uplifted hands'
decline the combat.” These rogues are the clergy, and some others, who had ”uplifted hands” from the vituperative nature of their adversary; for he tells us that, ”now the clergy are silent, the town-council have had the presumption to oppose us; and have threatened Creech (the publisher in Edinburgh) with the terror of making him a constable for his insolence. A pamphlet on the abuses of Heriot's Hospital, including a direct proof of perjury in the provost, was the punishment inflicted in return. And new papers are forging to chastise them, in regard to the poors' rate, which is again started; the improper choice of professors; and violent stretches of the impost. The _liberty of the press_, in its fullest extent, is to be employed against them.”
Such is the language of reform, and the spirit of a reformist! A little private malignity thus ferments a good deal of public spirit; but patriotism must be independent to be pure. If the ”Edinburgh Review” continues to succeed in its sale, as Stuart fancies, Edinburgh itself may be in some danger. His perfect contempt of his contemporaries is amusing:--
”Monboddo's second volume is published, and, with Kaimes, will appear in our next; the former is a childish performance; the latter rather better. We are to treat them with a good deal of freedom. I observe an amazing falling off in the English Reviews. We beat them hollow. I fancy they have no a.s.sistance but from the Dissenters,--a dull body of men. The Monthly will not easily recover the death of Hawkesworth; and I suspect that Langhorne has forsaken them; for I see no longer his pen.”
We are now hastening to the sudden and the moral catastrophe of our tale. The thousand copies which had emigrated to London remained there, little disturbed by public inquiry; and in Scotland, the personal animosity against almost every literary character there, which had inflamed the sale, became naturally the latent cause of its extinction; for its life was but a feverish existence, and its florid complexion carried with it the seeds of its dissolution. Stuart at length quarrelled with his coadjutor, Smellie, for altering his reviews. Smellie's prudential dexterity was such, that, in an article designed to level Lord Kaimes with Lord Monboddo, the whole libel was completely metamorphosed into a panegyric. They were involved in a lawsuit about ”a blasphemous paper.” And now the enraged Zoilus complains of ”his hours of peevishness and dissatisfaction.” He acknowledges that ”a circ.u.mstance had happened which had broke his peace and ease altogether for some weeks.” And now he resolves that this great work shall quietly sink into a mere compilation from the London periodical works. Such, then, is the progress of malignant genius! The author, like him who invented the brazen bull of Phalaris, is writhing in that machine of tortures he had contrived for others.
We now come to a very remarkable pa.s.sage: it is the frenzied language of disappointed wickedness.