The Palatka daily news. (Palatka, Fla.) 1884-1888, 1886-11-20
GENIUS AND BUSINESS.
THE IMPROvIDENCE or SOME MEN
OF LITERARY TASTES.


less Expenditure Among the Authors
of Modern Times-EngIish Writers and
Our Own Literary Men.
Coming down to more recent times We find
among the modern men of genius compare
lively few examples of real improyidence.
Leigh Hunt is usually considered as one Of
this class, for he was poor all his life and al
ways in debt and at one time considered not
overscrupulouS in payment William Hazltt
lived all his life from hand to mouth, and
would never write an article or do any kind
of literary work as long as he had guinea in
his purse Gentle Kit North was another
man who had little regard for money. He
never looked at or touched money in the
usual way. No one for its own sake or for
his own purposes ever regarded riches with
such perfect indifference.
Byron, who was born to debts and an in
numbered estate, had 4 lords scorn Of earning
money. There were nine executions in his
house during his brief married life, and he in
dignantIy sent back a check to his publishers
at the very time when the officers were pre-
siding over his establishment
CARLYLE was too canny a Scotchman not to
know how to take care of himself, although
he was Iniserably poor in the early days. He
carried the economies of his youth little
~
made it somewhat harder for Mrs. Carlyle
than there was need Of all the way
through, much to his own regret after her
death Lord Tenuyson has never diselaincl
to make money from his work; indeed, he has
seemed extremely anxious to do 50, and has
succeeded even beyond his hopes. He has
probably received the largest prices for liter
airy work of any man living, and Ec has care
fully husbanded his gains.
Thomas de Quincy WAS q man almost de
void of financial knowledge or ability of any
kind. He almost starved in the streets OF
London when young, although his father was
a. wealthy man. Later in life lie so misman-
aged money, and was so conscious of it him
self, that he gave up all management Of his
expenses to daughter, then but a young
girl, after which his affairs were kept in better
order Walter SCOTS pecunary troubles
have become historical, but they may per-
haps be attributed as much to misfortune rs
to incompetency. Charles Lamb, although
Overgenerous, could not he called improvi-
dent By his own unaidcd exertion he cared
for himself and afflicted sister through life,
and even made provision for Mary after his
death.
Macaulay was prudent, although n gen
erous, man. He amaSsed n considerable for
tune, although he cared for his entire family
for a large portion of his life, and was very
open to calls upon his resources from those
who had no particular claim upon him.
Wordsworth was man prudent even to par
simony, standing almost alone among the
records of genius in this respect. In the early
part Of the poets life petty economies had
been absolutely necessary, and he had ac-
quired such a habit OF practicing them that
he could not drop them when they ceased 10
be necessary; as is SO often the case with
other people beside poets. Unlike Words
worth in this respect wa Sydney Smith, who
practiced close economy lille it was needful
but spent his money very lihcralIy, though
always wisely, after he became rich.
Douglas Jerrold was n man very liberal
of his money when he had any. Tom Hood
was always poor and always sick Yet he was
possessed of sturdy Independence which re
fused the assistance of friends though ten
dered ever so delicately, and of a generous
heart which gave to others even out of his
pittance.
Charles Dickens was a keen business man
almost too keen, il was thought, in his
later years. 1t was known at the time-to
himself as well as to his friends-that he was
seriously iniuring his health by his reading
tours, yet it seemed almost impossible for him
to give them up Us long as they were so i'm
mensely profitable. Thackeray was q man
who combined prudence with generosity. and
and yet he was open handed to his needy
friends. He saved for his daughters a very
comfortable fortune out of his literary gains
Our own literary men of note-if we except
Poe-have all been men of thrift and practi-
cal sense in business affairs. Washington
Irving cared for himself and large family
of sisters out of his literary profits and left n
moderate fortune besides. Bryant saved
quite a fortune for his time, and was esteemed
A.
Yankee good sense and economy, and, though
he stitched his wagon to a star never lost
his hold on mundane things. Longfellow was
good man OF business, and in his latter years
was reputed wealthy. Even Whittier, who
gave so much time and strength unselGshly
TO the anti slavery reform, has always been
well-to-do, and has none of poets disregard
Tor worldly affairs. Prescott and Motley and
Bancroft were all ShrewJ men Of affairs, as
are Lowell and Dr.. Holmes. Mark Twain
has genius for money making, and Howells
and Aldrich are prosperous men. Mr.. Alcott,
the philosopher, is our only visionary of the
old school, | think, unless we should mention
Thoreau in that connection. Hawthorne was
poor and had no love for the task of money
getting, Yet he could not be called iulprovi-
dent devoid of good sense in financial
affairs. Altogether the modern man of
genius may be trusted To take care of himself,
and seems to succeed in worldly matters quite
as well as his brethren less favored by the
godS.-Hattie Tying GriSwold in Chicago
Tribune.
Why Some Occupations Are Dcsrisetl.
Il wonder why we despiSe certain occupa-
tions' We don't despise a man who hammers
stone and saws boards; why shoJ;'d we ds.piSe
n barber i the care of the human head in
trillSicaliy less honorable tl:an the shaping Of
such rude matcriali WHY do we still coaten,u