New-York tribune., 1879-06-11
THE EDINBURGH REVIEW.


LETTERS TO THE KDrroR-BRoUGHAMs JEAI-
ousY OF MACAULAY, WHOM HE CALLS THE SEC
pNp GREATEST BORE HE HAS EVER KNOWN
CARLYLE on HIS cRARACTERIsTICs"- "-LET-
TIERS FROM JEFFREY AND DICKENS.
The inner history of The EdiabWgh Reriew
sn the days Of Brougham. Macaulay Carlyle, jeffrey
end other choice and spirits who. half century
and more ago, gave It wide and permanent fame tne
world Is learning little by little. Lord CockDurns
1Afe of jeffrey published in 1852, revealed much !;
Bougham's autobiography In 1871 added something
more, and Trevelysns Life OF Macaulay more recently
brought to light a great many interesting things
A new volume more important, perhaps, In
shis respect than any other now ex-
Rant. has Just been published by Macmillan
A Co, OF London and NewYorK under the title, Sc
fected Correspondence Of the late Macvey Naper ed
tied by his son Macvey Napier" The elder Macvey Ma
pier became the Editor Of The Rerec in 1929. when
Francis jeffrey resigned the office he had hiled Ior
more tnan quarter century 1t was on his recommen-
aton that Napier succeeded TO the place which he held
until his DEATH seventeen years afterward These let
GERS are about $50 In number, Of which l24 arc from
Hacaulay. 10 from Brough0m, 40 from jeffrey ana 10
from Carlyle About so of those from Macaulay have
been published I'm Teveyans book the others are new
uhose from Brougham In his autobiography; nor
id his executor acd them 20 IT, since he scrupulousy
obeyed Broughams instructions given IN italics and
large capitals that the be printed as he had
written it. The Carlyle letters are believed to be III
every case entirely new to the world Among other
famous men from whom letters are given are Scott
Stewart, Malthus, Macintosh. Halam, Bulwer Goa
win Moore, Campbell. PalmerstOn, Dickens, Lord John
Russell Thackeray aud MIL The letters from Carlyle
embrace the eleven years between 1880 and 1s41 only
one letter, however, written after August, 1882
His "Characteristos" had appeared IN tho last num-
ber but one before August 1892 and it had virtually
closed for all time his connection with The Rer'ep
When that celebrated article out Jeffrey wrote to
ffr Napier as follows, style which, in more ways
than one suggests his This will never do" In the open
sng Of his review of Wordsworths Excursion: 81
fear Carlyle will not do that is if you do not take the
liberties and the pains with him that did, by striking
out freely and writing In occasionally. The misfortune
fs that nc is very obstinate and am afraid, coneeited
mud unlucly In place ike this he finds people enough
10 abet and applaud him. to intercept the operation OF
lhe otherwise lnfalble remedy Of general avoidance
and neglect It is great pity, for he is man of genius
nnd industry. and with the capacity OF being an elo
uuen aud impressive writer" Before 1880 Carlyle had
written for this review four articles among them BIS
"Burns"; while his Voaire" had added 10 his repu
taon from another quarter He and jeffrey fell into
disagreement, however, and the contributions ceased
But in January 1880, after MI Napier became the
editor, lie is found writing as follows from Cragcn-
puttook:
lam much obliged by your wish that should write
something for you in The Edinburgh Rerteto have
happy to write In IL again as indeed there can be
more respectable vehicle for British mans specu
lauOus than II Is and has always BEEN My respected
friend your predecessor had difficulty with IN
adjusting the respective prerosauVes OF suIhor ana
used sometimes TO rebel against what reckoned mere
AUTHORITY and this partly perhaps as matter OF liter
nry conscience. Beng wont 10 w1te nothing without
oiSvs with an almost panui feeling OF scrupuiosity
that light editorial hacking and hewlng 10 right aud
gree the like difficulties might between you
me l II
willing. then am also willing to try.
CARLYLE on BYRON.
CARLYLE proposes that he write Moorcs Life OF Byron
subject which eventually went 10 Macauay's hands,
md gives his opinion OF Byron as follows;
OfMr Moore himself should say little. rather per-
1aps he may be favOre Of yours, nOtngi neither
would my opinion OF Byron prove very heterOdOx.
My chief aim would him and show him not.
is TOO often tie way on could help IT, merely
about him and about bin but only to put forth
some which this Byron, If you ike it, fit enough
channel. Diletantlsm and mere toying with the truth
IS, on the whole a thing which | cannot practice.
Nevertheless real love- real belief, is inconsistent
S OF IT, o SSar sgan Rsg [ RS S eps Is
at heart only IDLE selfish, and quite fntolerant AT all
hysterical vehemepce foaming ana Missing, of all
beseems him that is convinced. and not only SDpOses
for Whatever reason, do not like this proposal WILL
without shadow Of scruple, tell me SO. have been
q man whom, though handled 70 the extreme OF trite-
ness II Tli be long years before We & 49oGrstSu 10
that beOkens insight into him. or even sincere belief
of such on part OF the writer should like 10 study
The man with what heartiness / coud, and form my
self integiDe picture OF him. both as bOgraphi-
.ai @ i 49, vyond r and i'm son,e sort
far more difficulty than Byron, and perhaps not so
promising at present
In April 1882 Carlyle again speaks Of Byron:
In my mind Byron has been sinking at accelerated
rate iCr 9e 51 5on gg o g low s TeTe heye nor Hbe
nicism involved In the expression HIS fame has been
very great, but see lot now 1t Is 10 endure neither
does that make him great. No genuine productive
thought revealed by him to mankind; indeed
ANYTHING but all had a certain falsehOOd. brawling
Theatrical msucere character The mans moral nature
TOO WAS bad ms demeanOr man was bad. What
was he, in short, but huge sHky dd'ldyi OF glaVt
dimensions be sure, but still dandy VINO sulked a.
Door Mrs Hunt expressed 1t, like schooboy who had
got plain bum given him Instead of plum one" His
bum was nevertheless, Gods universe with what tasks
art there and had served better men than he love
him not owe him nothing only pity and fOrgivenessi
he taught me nothing that had not again to forget
Following are a few words about GOcthe's Faust 4"
aud Jeremy Bentham:
Igreatly approved Of your friend Empson's ackuowl
edgment thai " Faust " was wonderful poem. and
Lord LevisOn Cover windbaC; only he LED m iar too
gently over the cOalei he should have roasted him
there ana made hun not Levison but cinder. IL is
positively the nearest approach we make 10 sacr
lege these days for a vain young man not knowing
hs night hand from his left to take an inspired work
like this OF Goethe and maugie II into SUCH an unspeak
able hash let 1t either be overlooked or punished by
auto-da-fe iar hner essay were faithful
LOVING and yet critical and III part condelnnatory de
lneatiOn Of Jeremy Bentlan and his place and work
OF the MOrlds Bcnthdm Will
not be put down By logic and should not be put down.
for we need HIN greatly as a backwOodsinau.
BenthaIn Is a denler; he denies with loud and uni
yersay convincing voice; bis fault is that lie can affirm
noIbing except that money Is pleasant IN the purse.
and food III the stomach and that by this simplest O ali
beliefs TeOrganize society he can shater 1t in
pIeces-no thanks 10 him, for lis old Iaseuings are
uute rotten-but he cannot reOrganzc 1t TINS Is work
quite others than he Sucn an essay on Benthan,
however, great task for any one; for me very
great one, and, perhaps, rather out OF my road.
Carlyle feared a Misunderstanding with Mr.. Napier,
ana intimates that there may be some game al
purposes which perhaps few words Of plain speech
might put end to-" and says:
have hesitation. for my own part, irstatng what
simply literal historical iact that there period
Zeal now extant In Britain when should so willingly
write for and publish oil my EssaylsPs ucubrauOns IN
as The Edinburgh Reptet1. III you really want to
preach your pulpit therefore, you have ony To say