The united opinion. [volume] (Bradford, Vt.) 1881-1970, 1886-10-22
GENIUS AND BUSINESS.
THE iMPROvIpeNCE OF SOME MEN
OF LITERARY TASTES.

less expenditure N"o"s '"o A"'""'s
of Modern Times-English Writers and
Our Own Literary Men.
Coming down TO more recent times we find
among the modern men OF Genius coripara'
lively few examples Of rgal iriprovleace.
Leigh Hunt Is usually considered as one OF
this class, for he was poor all his life ana al
ways in debt. and at one time considered not
ovcrscrupulous in payment, William Ha2litt
lived I'LL his life FROM hand to mouth, G3l
would never write nm article or do any kind
OF literary work as long as he had guinea In
his purse Gentle Lit 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 loNl'ssco of earning
money. There were nine executions in his
house during his brief married life, and he in
dignantly sent back II 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 mserably poor in the early days He
carried the economics of his youth little
beyond the time they were necessary, and
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 Tennyson has never disiained
to make money from his work; indeed, he has
seemed extremely anxious to do so, and has
succeeded even beyond his ho.ns. lie has
probably received the largest prices for liter
airy work of any NAH living, and lie has Care
fully husbanded his gains.
Thomas de Quincy was d" man almost de-
void of financial knowleGc'r 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 he 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 n young
girl, after which his affairs were kept in better
order. Walter SCOTS pecuniary troubles
have become historical hut they may per-
haps be attributed as much to misfortune as
to incompetency. Charles Lamb, although
overgenerOus, could not be called IMPROVE
dent. By his own unaided exertion he cared
for himself and afflicted sister through lie,
and even made provision for Mary after his
death.
Macaulay was prudent although a gen.
erous man. He amassed 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 a 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 habit of practicing them that
he could not drop them when they ceased to
be necessary; as is so often the case with
other people beside poets. Unlike Words
worth in this respect was Sydney Smith, who
practiced close economy while it was neetiful,
but spent his money very literally, though
always wisely, after he became rich.
Douglas Jerrold was man very liberal
OF his money when he had any. Tom Hood
was always POOR and always sick, yet be 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 keen, business man
almost too keen, it was thought, in his
later years. 1t was known at the time-to
himself as we'll as to his friends-that he was
seriously injuring his health by his reading
tours, yet it seemed almost impossible for him
to give them up as long as they were so i'm
profitable Thackeray was a man
who combined prudence with generosity, and
who skilfully managed all his business affairs;
and yet he was open handed to his needy
friends He saved for his daughters a very
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 a large family
of sisters out of his literary profits, and left
moderate fortune besides. Bryant saved
quite a fortune for his time, and was esteemed
q shrewd business man. Emerson had the
Yankee good sense and economy, and, though
be "hitched his wagon to a STAR" never lost
his hold on mundane things. Longfellow was
a good man Of business, and in his latter years
was reputed wealthy Even Whittier, who
gave so much time and strength unselfshly
TO the antislavery reform, has always been
and has none of poets disregard
for worldly affairs. Prescott and Motley and
Bancroft were all shrewd men of affairs, as
ire Lowell and DR.. Holmes Mark Twain
mas genius for money making, and .Howells
and Aldrich are prosperous men. Mr.. Alcott,
,he philosopher, is our only visionary of the
I'D school, I think, unless we should mention
rhoreau in that connection. Hawthorne was
ooor and had no love for the task of money
getting, yet he could not be called IMPROVE
lent or devoid of good sense in financial
affairs. Altogether the modern man Of
renius may be trusted to take care of himself,
md seems to succeed in worldly matters quite
IS well as his brethren less favored by the
,ods-Hattie Tying Griswold in Chicago
Tribune.
why Some Occupations Are Despised.
II wonder why we despise certain occupa-
ions? We don't despise man who hammers
tone and saws boards; why should we despise
! barber? Is the care of the human head in