The Sun.
London, England, 1858-11-17 00:00:00

216 208 68

MR. THA CKERAYANIUND
YA TES-TILE GARRICK CLUB.

.
A case which promises to be of considerable in-
terest in literary and club circles, and which will
raise an important and novel point, is to be tried
by one of the common law courts, at Westminster,
probably during the sittings at nisi Arius after the
present term. It arises out of the dispute between
Mr. Thackeray and Mr. Edmund Yates, both mem-
bers of the Garrick Club, which arose under the
following circumstances Under the title of
" Literary Talk," Mr. Yates published an article
having for its subject Mr. W. M. Thackeray, and
thus described his " appearance"—Mr. Thackeray
is 46 years old, though from the silvery whiteness
of his hair he appears somewhat older. He is
very tall, standing upwards of six feet two inches,
and, as he walks erect, his height makes him
conspicuous in every assembly. His face is blood-
less, and not particularly expressive, but re-
markable for the fracture of the bridge of his nose,
the result of an accident in youth. He wears
small grey whisker, but otherwise is clean shaven.
No one meeting him would fail to recognise in him
a gentleman. His bearing is cold and uninviting,
his style of conversation either openly cynical or
affectedly good-natured and benevolent; ben-
hommie is forced, his wit biting, his pride easily
touched, but his appearance is invariably that of a
cool, suave, well-bred:gentleman, who whatever may
be rankling within, suffers no surface display of
his emotion." Mr. Yates then proceeded to com-
ment on Mr. Thackeray's genius :—" It was with
the publication of the third and fourth numbers of
Vanity Fair' that he began to dawn upon a read-
ing public as a great genius." Then, " His success
culminated with Lectures on English Humorists
of the Eighteenth Century,' which were at-
tended by all the Court and fashion of Lon-
don, The prices were extravagant ; the
lecturer's adulation of birth and position was
extravagance ; the success was extravagant."
The publication of the article in question
having been brought to the knowledge of Mr.
Thackeray, he wrote to Mr. Yates, with whom he
had been on speaking terms as members of the
same club, in which he described the article " to
be not offensive and unfriendly merely, but slan-
derous and untrue." Mr. Thackeray concluded
with the following admonition—" I;beg, as I have
a right to do, that you will refrain from printing
comments upon my private conversation, that you
will forego discussion, however blundering, on my
private affairs, all that you will henceforth please
to consider any question of my personal truth and
•
sincerity as quite out of the province of your
criticism." Mr. Yates immediately rejoined by
a letter, in which he rejected Mr. Thackeray's
" angry understanding" of his phrases, adding,
" If your letters were not slanderous and untrue,
I should readily have discussed the subject with
you, and avowedmy earnest and frank desire to set
right anything I may have left wrong." Mr.
Thackeray then submitted the correspondence which
had passed between Mr. Yates and himself, toge-
ther with the copy of the article to which he had
taken exception, to the committee of the Garrick
Club. " I think," wrote Mr. Thackeray, "I may
fairly appeal to the committee of the Gar-
rick Club to decide whether the complaints I have
against Mr. Yates *are not well founded, and
whether the practice of publishing such arti-
cles as that which I enclose would not be fatal
to the comfort of the club, and is not intoler-
able in a society of gentlemen." Mr. Yates, having
heard that Mr. Thackeray had adopted this course

wrote to ask the committee to suspend their judg-
ment until he could consult his friends and prepare
his own version of the case to lay before them.
This was on the 19th of June, but on the 23d Mr.

Yates wrote to the committee, questioning their
right to entertain the matter at all. " The article,"

he said, " maylbe in exceedingly bad taste, but
the committee is not a committee of taste."
The committee held a special meeting on the
26th, and came to a decision expressed in certain
resolutions. They resolved that it was competent
to them to entertain Mr. Thackeray's complaint ;
that the complaint itself was well grounded; and
that the practice of publishing such articles, being
reflections by one member of the club against any
other, would be fatal to the comfort of the club
and,intolerable in a society of gentlemen. The
committee further resolved, that Mr. Yates was
bound to make an " ample apology," or retire from
the club. Mr. Yates declined either to retire or

to apologise, and stated he would appeal to a gene-
ral meeting on two questions—first, whether the
ease between Mr. Thackeray and himself was such
a case as should be submitted to the committee at
all ; and secondly, " Whether Mr. Thackeray has
any right to call for an apology from me when he
has so very arrogantly and coarsely addressed me."
The result was that Mr. Yates' subscription was
returned, and it was intimated to him that he was

expelled the club. He has therefore instituted an
action against the committee for trespass, in refus-
ing to allow him to enter the club, and this will

raise the important question, as affecting the rights
of members generally, whether the club had the
right to expel Mr. Yates or not. It is understood
that there will be a large array of legal talent on
both sides, and the trial, both from the nature of
*e issue and the position of the parties, will possess
great interest. The Attorney-General has been
rotained for the committee of the Garrick Club.
Mr. Edwin James, Q.C., is to lead the the case on
behalf of the plaintiff, Mr. Edmund Yates.