. 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 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. 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. 6 3 Mr. Cunningham's transcript reads "of it to you."-ED. DEAR SIR, LETTER XXXI. TO DAVID GARRICK, ESQ.1 TEMPLE, June 10th, 1773. To be thought of by you obliges me; to be served by you is still more. It makes me very happy to find that Dr. Burney thinks my scheme of a Dictionary useful; still more that he will be so kind as to adorn it with any thing of his own. I beg you will also accept my gratitude for procuring me so valuable an acquisition. I am, dear Sir, Your most affectionate Servant, LETTER XXXII. TO DAVID GARRICK, ESQ.2 MY DEAR FRIEND, [1773.] I thank you! I wish I could do something to serve you. I shall have a comedy for you in a season or two at farthest, that I believe will be worth your acceptance, for I fancy I will make it a fine thing. You shall have the refusal. I wish you would not take up Newbery's 3 note, 3 1 First published in Mdme. D'Arblay's memoirs of her father, 1832, vol. i. p. 272. It was enclosed by Garrick to Dr. Burney. The dictionary referred to was the Dictionary of Arts and Sciences' projected by Goldsmith just before his death. Burney actually wrote the article 'Musician' for this Dictionary. See also our Life,' p. 37.-ED. 2 This letter followed one to Garrick asking the loan of sixty pounds (Forster's Life,' vol. ii. p. 439). It was first printed by Prior from the original, then in the Upcott collection. It bears no date, but evidently belongs to 1773. Mr. Forster says Garrick had endorsed it "Goldsmith's parlaver" (sic).-ED. 3 Newbery junior is here spoken of. John Newbery, the "philanthropic bookseller" of the ' Vicar of Wakefield,' died in 1767.--ED. but let Waller1 tease him, without however coming to extremities; let him haggle after him and he will get it. I will draw upon you one month after date for sixty pound, and your acceptance will be ready money, part of which I want to go down to Barton2 with. May God preserve my honest little man, for he has my heart. Ever, OLIVER GOLDSMITH.3 LETTER XXXIII. TO MR. CADELL.* [1773.] DOCTOR GOLDSMITH'S compliments to Mr. Cadell, and desires a set of the History of England for correction, if interleaved the better. LETTER XXXIV. TO MR. CADELL. [1773.] MR. GOLDSMITH's compliments to Mr. Cadell, begs for an hour or two, the use of Millot's History by Mrs. Brooke.5 Mr. Cadell, Strand. 1 Mr. Cunningham says this should be Wallis, for Albany Wallis, Garrick's solicitor and executor.-ED. 2 The residence of Goldsmith's friends the Bunburys: see Poems,' p. 106.-ED. 3 Mr. Cunningham says that Goldsmith's draft on Garrick for £60, dated 1773, and accepted by Garrick, was sold at Sotheby and Wilkinson's, Aug. 5, 1851, for £3 168.-ED. This and the next note bear no date, but are supposed to have been written in 1773. Prior first published them. Mr. Cadell, the publisher to whom they were addressed, had at that time become part proprietor of Goldsmith's History of England,' and the books asked for were no doubt wanted for preparing a new edition.-ED. 5 This book, we suppose, was 'The Elements of English History' by the Abbé Millot, translated by Mrs. Brooke, 1771, 2 vols. 12mo. -ED. |