Los Angeles daily herald., 1886-12-30
GENIUS AND BUSINESS.
The Tmprovidence of Some Men
OF Literary Tastes.

Coming down to more recent times,
We find among the modern men of gen.
ius comparatively few examples of real
impovidence. Erigh Hunt is usually
considered as one OF this class, for he
WAS poor all his life and always in debt,
and ct one time considered as not over.
ssrupulous in payment. William Haz.
lit lived. all his life from hand to
mouth, and ild never write an article
or do any XII, Of literary work as long
as he had u guinea in l.is 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
oncumbered estate, had lords soorn of
earning money. There were nine execu.
lions in his house during his brief mar.
ried life, and heindiguantiy sent back a
check to his publishers at the very time
when the officers were presiding over his
establishment.
Carlyle was too canny Scotchman not
to know how to take care of himself,
although he was miserably poor in his
early days. He carried the economies
of his youth little beyond the time
they were necessary, and made it some-
what harder for Mrs. Carlyle than there
was need of all the way through, much
70 his own regret after her death. Lord
Tennyson has never disdained to make
money from his own work indeed he
has seemed extremely anxious TO do so,
and has succeeded even beyond his
hopes. He has probably received the
largest prices for literary work of any
man living, and he has carefully hus.
banded his gains.
Thomas de Quincy was man almost
devoid OF financial knowledge or ability
of any kind. He almost starved in the
streets of London when young, although
his father was wealthy man. Later in
life he so mismanaged his money, and
was so conscious of it himself that he
gave mp all management of his expenses
to . daughter then but young girl,
after which his affairs were kept in bet.
ter order. Walter Scott's pecuniary
troubles have become historical, but they
may perhaps be attributed as much to
misfortune as incompetency. Charles
Lamb although over-generous could not
be called impovldent. By his own un-
aided exertion he cared for himself and
AAiicted sister through life, and even
made provisions for Mary after his death.
Douglas Jerrold was a man very lib.
eral of his money when he had any.
Tom Hood was always poor and always
sick, yet he was possessed of a sturdy
independence which refused the assist.
ance of friends though rendered ever
80 delicately, and of generous heart
which gave to others even out of his
pittauce.
Charles Dickens was keen business
man-almost too keen it was thought,
In his later years. It was known at the
time--to himself as well as his friends
that he was seriously injuring his health
by his reading tours, yet it seemed al.
Hostippossible for him to give them up
20 long as they were SO immensely pro.
'fitatle. Thackeray was man who com.
bined prudence with generosity, and who
skillfully managed all his business af.
fairs; and yet he was open handed with
his needy friends. He saved for bis
daughters very comfortable fortune out
OF his literary gains.
Mark Twain has genius for money
making, and Howells and Alldrich are
prosperous men. Mr.. Alcotr the phi.
1osopher. is our only visionary of the
old sche0l, think, unless we should
epcution Thoreau in that connection,
Hawthorne was poor and had no love