Richmond daily Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1842-1861, 1853-09-10
Lord John Russel's Life OF Tom Moore

Some time ago submitted comments on Lord
John kussels Life of Tom Moore and venturcd IN, opn
ion that the fame OF the poet likely to suffer from the
unsatisfactory and undscernng In which the no
bic bogapher had used the materials placed in his hands
we really did not know however, that time how much
mischief the work result in the memory Of the
Dead and only since have read the last number
the London Quarterly Review, that have fully recog-
nsed tue Improperly OF ncautousy paradng before the
pubic, journals and memoranda designed for the perusa
oil friends alone. An article in the Quarterly which draws
all Its weapons Of attack from Lord Johns volumes most
violently and vndctively assaults the poet and
by TAR the most savage demolition of character we have
ever read So skful lawyer like piece of argumenta
t'on could never have been constructed of the old
acts OF which were in possession, concerning Moore
Life. IL is from the diary and the correspondence so
pArdonaby published in gross by Lord John Russell that
most OF the frame work OF the demonstration is made
The writer convies Moore of a deal of toadvsm
and personal vaniyhe shows how little Anacreon lived
on smiles and wine in the houses of the great folks and
treasured up every syllable OF pras, that bestowed
upon the Anaereontics;-how he sIpped aud sinned in
dear, delightful Paris, and chroncl his head aches n
the morning in the duest of diares-how he drove the
best bargain he could with his publishers all the while
vowng how he detested money and sung his melodies a
mong the Don ton tn make them sell when brought out
Ill this anda great deal more does theyiew fully substAn.
tate TO TOMS discredit-for which he Right Honorable
Lord John Russell be thanked
But there points sought established here which
altogether untrue all who hav, read ANYTHING of the
tury, see beforehand The reviewer charges Moore
with beng rake as well toaCS, aud with treating
with ind ference, and with crutty that devoted wife
OF whom lie spoke but in OF the ondest aic-
uon and Who survives him cherih his love and hle
~ the dearest recollection her e We envy not the
critic however great his nay be, who can thus
dcsecrae the sanctes of the domestic circle and embit
ter the sad evening of widows declining age that he
may lodI e III aft the fame OF one whose genius will Tor
ever outshine his oSu II is a ma yuant envy such a.
Better belts the aspiring Ounce it Eeature than grave
rrVie~er sitting in Jadgmen upon the career OF fellow
mortal, that lind qualification such an employ.
meut.
We are a; loss 10 conjecture who Is that thus comes
forward TO magn the dehd;-we recollect similar per
iOtinlGtc wears ago when all that remained the once
gay and brilliant Theodore Hook vas consigned to the
grave, which executed by John wilson Croker This
gentleman, who edited very bad edition of Dos
wells Life of johnson, got very severely shed for it by
Macauy, and has since devoted himself to asinr
criticisms, suppose, 10y yeti. with the craft
Of reviewers, sam Weller tells Us turnpike keepers
are usAnhropc fellows, who have been badly used and
revenge themselves mankind by taking toll But
while We may question the justice many of Mr. Croker
articles much more seriously question the taste Of
them, directed, a they generally ire, the dead.
The quarterly Will not be able think gibbet Tom
Moore. That Tom had his faults il were vain To deny
and Lord John Ruscls Life OF him only too conclusively
proves but lie bad also his irtuce which will Vet be kent
IN remembrance, while the echoes Of his song will
uger ia sweetness for centuries aker Mr. Croker aud h
| cTogkinEs are fOrgOtten.-Pst E.Err--