spring-velvet in winter; and if I am not a beau-whythen-that explains itself. But let me go on to your two next strange lines : : "And bring with you a wig that is modish and gay, The absurdity of making hay at Christmas you yourself seem sensible of; you say your sister will laugh, and so indeed she well may! The Latins have an expression for a contemptuous sort of laughter, Naso contemnere adunco; that is to laugh with a crooked nose; she may laugh at you in the manner of the ancients, if she thinks fit. But now I am come to the most extraordinary of all extraordinary propositions, which is, to take your and your sister's advice in playing at loo. The presumption of the offer raises my indignation beyond the bounds of prose; it inspires me at once with verse and resentment. advice! And from whom? You shall hear.— I take [Here follows the poetry, sixty-six lines: for which see the Poems.] I challenge you all to answer this: I tell you, you cannot. It cuts deep ;-but now for the rest of the letter; and next-but I want room. So I believe I shall battle the rest out at Barton some day next week. I don't value you all! O. G. LETTER XXV. TO GEORGE COLMAN, ESQ. [This letter, which must have been written in January, 1773, would come next in order. But having given it in full in our Life of Goldsmith,' p. 32, ante, we now merely refer there to it, and to the circumstances (connected with the production of 'She Stoops to Conquer') under which it was written. It is curious that it is the only letter from Goldsmith published in the 'Posthumous Letters to George Colman the Elder,' &c., 1820. Another letter to Colman, of an earlier date, and relating to the production of the Good Natured Man,' will be found in Forster's Life of Goldsmith' (2nd edit., ii. p. 66), where it is printed in fac-simile.-ED.] 6 DEAR SIR, LETTER XXVI. то MR. GARRICK.1 February 6, 1773. I ask many pardons for the trouble I gave you of yesterday. Upon more mature deliberation, and the advice of a sensible friend, I began to think it indelicate in me to throw upon you the odium of confirming Mr. Colman's sentence. I therefore request you will send my play by my servant back; for having been assured of having it acted at the other house, though I confess yours in every respect more to my wish, yet it would be folly in me to forego an advantage which lies in my power of appealing from Mr. Colman's opinion to the judgment of the town. I entreat, if not too late, you will keep this affair a secret for some time. I am, dear Sir, your very humble Servant, LETTER XXVII. TO JOSEPH CRADOCK, ESQ., AT THE HOTEL, IN PALL-MALL.2 Sunday Morning [? Feb. or March, 1773]. MR. GOLDSMITH's best respects to Mr. Cradock, when he asked him to day, he quite forgot an engagement of above This letter, from the Garrick Correspondence, vol. i. p. 527, was written two or three weeks after that to Colman about the same play (She Stoops to Conquer') which we have given in our Life of Goldsmith,' p. 32.-ED. 6 2 First published in Mr. Cradock's Memoirs,' 1828, vol. i. p. 225, where it has no date. Mr. Forster says "the rehearsal" spoken of was that of Threnodia Augustalis' (1772), at which, he adds, Cradock helped; but Prior and Cunningham say the reference is to 'She Stoops to Conquer,' and they therefore date the letter 1773. Cradock himself seems to have forgotten to what it referred, though he says it "must have had reference to one of his " (Goldsmith's) "earlier productions," a remark a week's standing, which has been made purposely for him; he feels himself quite uneasy at not being permitted to have his instructions upon those parts where he must necessarily be defective. He will have a rehearsal on Monday; when, if Mr. Cradock would come, and afterwards take a bit of mutton-chop, it would add to his other obligations. LETTER XXVIII. TO JOSEPH CRADOCK, ESQ.1 MY DEAR SIR, The play has met with a success much beyond your expectations or mine. I thank you sincerely for your epilogue, which however could not be used, but with your permission shall be printed. The story, in short, is this; Murphy sent me rather the outline of an epilogue than an epilogue, which was to be sung by Mrs. Catley, and which she approved. Mrs. Bulkley hearing this insisted on throwing up her part, unless, according to the custom of the theatre, she were permitted to speak the epilogue. In this embarrassment I thought of making a quarrelling epilogue between Catley and her, debating who should 6 that accords more with the Threnodia' theory than with that pertaining to She Stoops to Conquer.' Cradock, however, makes no mention of having helped with the Threnodia,' whereas he asserts (strangely enough), that he "altered" She Stoops to Conquer" "in Leicestershire." He also wrote an epilogue for the comedy. See the next letter and its notes. See also the notes at pp. 95, 97, 106, 110, of the Poems, and at pp. 290-91 of She Stoops to Conquer,' in vol. ii.-ED. 1 First printed in Cradock's Memoirs, 1828, vol. i. p. 225. It bears no date, but was evidently written immediately after the first representation of She Stoops to Conquer' (the "play" referred to), March 15, 1773.-ED. 2 The epilogue written by Cradock, but “too late" for She Stoops to Conquer.' See it duly printed, as Goldsmith promised it should be, with the comedy (vol. ii. p. 290, of the present edition). Concerning this epilogue Mr. Cradock has the following (Memoirs,' vol. i. p. 225):— "The Epilogue, as Dr. Goldsmith terms it, was a mere jeu d'esprit, returned to him, with the copy of his comedy, as a ludicrous address to the town by Tony Lumpkin, but not intended to be spoken; parts alluded to in it, had been even struck out by myself, as too free, in the doctor's original manuscript."-ED. speak the epilogue, but then Mrs. Catley refused, after I had taken the trouble of drawing it out. I was then at a loss indeed; an epilogue was to be made and for none but Mrs. Bulkley. I made one; and Colman thought it too bad to be spoken.1 I was obliged therefore to try a fourth time, and I made a very mawkish thing,2 as you'll shortly see. Such is the history of my stage adventures, and which I have at last done with. I cannot help saying that I am very sick of the stage; and though I believe I shall get three tolerable benefits, yet I shall upon the whole be a loser, even in a pecuniary light; my ease and comfort I certainly lost while it was in agitation. I am, my dear Cradock, Your obliged and obedient Servant, P.S.-Present my most humble respects to Mrs. Cradock. LETTER XXIX. TO THE PUBLIC. [Published in the Daily Advertiser, March 31, 1773. We have given this letter in full in our Life,' to pp. 35-36 of which we refer the reader for both the text of the letter and an account of the circumstances which preceded and followed its publication—the former including the fracas between Goldsmith and Evans, the publisher of the London Packet. And we add here, from the Percy memoir, pp. 105-6, the following fragment by Goldsmith giving some account of the scuffle just mentioned. Among his papers has been found the following unfinished relation of the adventure, dictated to an amanuensis; for the poor Doctor's hand was too much bruised to hold a pen : "As I find the public have been informed by the newspapers of a slight fray, which happened between me and the editor of an evening paper; to prevent their being imposed upon, the account is shortly this. A friend of mine came on Friday to inform me that a paragraph was inserted against me in the London Packet, which I was in honour bound to resent. I read the paper, and considered it in the same light 1 See these rejected epilogues at pp. 110 and 115 of the Poems, and the notes thereon.-ED. 2 Printed with the play in our vol. ii.—ED. 3 The usual three "author's nights." They produced over £400, Prior says.-Ed. as he did. I went to the editor, and struck him with my cane on the back. A scuffle ensued.'***" It is thought that this was a meditated explanation for the newspapers which was thrown aside for the letter addressed "To the Public."-ED.'] LETTER XXX. TO MR. JOHN NOURSE.2 [April, 1773.] SIR, The bearer is Dr. Andrews, who has just finished a work relative to Denmark, which I have seen and read with great pleasure. He is of opinion that a short letter of this kind expressing my approbation, will be a proper introduction to you. I therefore once more recommend it in the warmest manner, and unless I am mistaken it will be a great credit to him as well as benefit to the purchaser of the copy. 3 I am, Sir, Your most obedient Servant, 1 It should be mentioned that Thomas Evans, the publisher of the London Packet, and second hero in this notable "scuffle," was not Thomas Evans the bookseller of Pall Mall, who afterwards, in 1780, was the first publisher of a collected edition of Goldsmith's poems and plays. We here add to our account at p. 35 of the 'Life' the following version of the fracas from the London Chronicle of March 27-30, 1773:— “Dr. G―h, supposing himself ill-treated by a letter in the London Packet, went to the person's shop who published the paper, and struck him on the back with his cane. A scuffle ensued, in which the publisher made uncommon use of his nails, and was at length knocked down; he then arose, seized a stool, and attacked his antagonist, till some people coming in they were parted. Thus ended the contest between the son of literature and the publisher, the latter of whom bears a black eye and the author a scratched face." This account, we think, has not before been re-printed. It will be seen that it does not quite bear out the view expressed by our memoir writer, viz., that "the poet came by the worst.”—ED. 2 This note bears no date, but is endorsed "April 26, 1773." The original was in the possession of John Young, Esq., of Blackheath. Mr. Nourse, to whom this and the following letter were addressed, was the publisher of the Animated Nature.' Dr. Andrews's work, 'A History of the Revolutions in Denmark,' &c., was published by Nourse in 1774.-ED. 3 Mr. Cunningham's transcript reads "of it to you.”—ED. |