BENJAMIN DISRAELITHOMAS CARLYLEAND OTHERS

Me. Disraeli’s earliest appearance as an author had been with the novel of “Vivian Grey,” published after a brief visit to Germany while he was still in his eighteenth year. Two volumes were published in 1826, and a third volume, or continuation, in the following year. The work brought the author some notoriety, but, as already noticed, it contained matter which gave offence in Albemarle Street. After the publication of the first part, which was contemporaneous with the calamitous affair of the Representative, Mr. Murray saw but little of the Disraeli family, but at the commencement of 1830, Mr. Benjamin Disraeli once more applied to him for an interview. Mr. Murray, however, in whose mind the former episode was still fresh, was unwilling to accede to this request, and replied in the third person.

John Murray to Mr. B. Disraeli.

“Mr. Murray is obliged to decline at present any personal interview; but if Mr. Benjamin Disraeli is disposed to confide his MS. to Mr. Murray as a man of business, Mr. Disraeli is assured that the proposal will be entertained in every respect with the strictest honour and impartiality.”

Mr. B. Disraeli to John Murray.

UNION HOTEL, COCKSPUR STREET, 1830.

The object of my interview with you is purely literary. It has always been my wish, if it ever were my fate to write anything calculated to arrest public attention, that you should be the organ of introducing it to public notice. A letter I received this morning from my elected critic was the reason of my addressing myself to you.

I am sorry that Mr. Mitchell is out of town, because he is a person in whom you rightly have confidence; but from some observations he made to me the other day it is perhaps not to be regretted that he does not interfere in this business. As he has overrated some juvenile indiscretions of mine, I fear he is too friendly a critic.

I am thus explicit because I think that candour, for all reasons, is highly desirable. If you feel any inclination to pursue this affair, act as you like, and fix upon any critic you please. I have no objection to Mr. Lockhart, who is certainly an able one, and is, I believe, influenced by no undue partiality towards me.

At all events, this is an affair of no great importanceand whatever may be your determination, it will not change the feelings which, on my part, influenced this application. I have the honour to be, Sir,

Your obedient Servant,

BENJ. DISRAELI.

P.S.I think it proper to observe that I cannot crudely deliver my MS. to any one. I must have the honour of seeing you or your critic. I shall keep this negotiation open for a couple of daysthat is, I shall wait for your answer till Tuesday morning, although, from particular circumstances, time is important to me.

Mr. Disraeli was about to make a prolonged journey abroad. Before he set out he again wrote to Mr. Murray:

Mr. Disraeli to John Murray.

BRADENHAM, BERKS, May 27, 1830.

SIR,

I am unwilling to leave England, which I do on Saturday, without noticing your last communication, because I should regret very much if you were to misconceive the motives which actuated me in not complying with the suggestion therein contained. I can assure you I leave in perfect confidence both in your “honour” and your “impartiality,” for the first I have never doubted, and the second it is your interest to exercise.

The truth is, my friend and myself differed in the estimate of the MS. alluded to, and while I felt justified, from his opinion, in submitting it to your judgment, I felt it due to my own to explain verbally the contending views of the case, for reasons which must be obvious.

As you forced me to decide, I decided as I thought most prudently. The work is one which, I dare say, would neither disgrace you to publish, nor me to write; but it is not the kind of production which should recommence our connection, or be introduced to the world by the publisher of Byron and Anastasius.

I am now about to leave England for an indefinite, perhaps a long period. When I return, if I do return, I trust it will be in my power for the third time to endeavour that you should be the means of submitting my works to the public. For this I shall be ever ready to make great sacrifices, and let me therefore hope that when I next offer my volumes to your examination, like the Sibylline books, their inspiration may at length be recognised.

I am, Sir,

Your obedient Servant,

B. DISRAELI.

John Murray to Mr. Disraeli.

May 29, 1830.

Mr. Murray acknowledges the receipt of Mr. Benjamin Disraeli’s polite letter of the 27th. Mr. Murray will be ready at all times to receive any MS. which Mr. B. Disraeli may think proper to confide to him. Mr. Murray hopes the result of Mr. Disraeli’s travels will complete the restoration of his health, and the gratification of his expectations.”

Nearly two years passed before Mr. Disraeli returned to England from those travels in Spain, the Mediterranean and the Levant, which are so admirably described in his “Home Letters,” and which appear to have exercised so powerful an influence on his own character, and his subsequent career. Shortly after his return, he wrote to Mr. Murray:

Mr. Disraeli to John Murray.

BRADENHAM HOUSE, WYCOMBE,

February 10, 1832.

Sir,

I have at length completed a work which I wish to submit to your consideration. In so doing, I am influenced by the feelings I have already communicated to you.

If you retain the wish expressed in a note which I received at Athens in the autumn of 1830, I shall have the honour of forwarding the MS, to you. Believe me, Sir, whatever may be the result,

Very cordially yours,

BENJ. DISRAELI.

The MS. of the work was at once forwarded to Mr. Murray, who was, however, averse to publishing it without taking the advice of his friends. He first sent it to Mr. Lockhart, requesting him to read it and pronounce his opinion.

Mr. Lockhart to John Murray.

March 3, 1832.

“I can’t say what ought to be done with this book. To me, knowing whose it is, it is full of interest; but the affectations and absurdities are such that I can’t but think they would disgust others more than the life and brilliancy of many of the descriptions would please them. You should send it to Milman without saying who is the author.J.G.L.”

The MS. was accordingly sent to Mr. Milman, but as he was very ill at the time, and could not read it himself, but transferred it to his wife, much delay occurred in its perusal. Meanwhile, Mr. Disraeli became very impatient about the publication, and again wrote:

Mr. Disraeli to John Murray.

March 4, 1832.

MY DEAR SIR,

I wish that I could simplify our arrangements by a stroke by making you a present of “The Psychological Romance”; but at present you must indeed take the will for the deed, although I hope the future will allow us to get on more swimmingly. That work has, in all probability, cost me more than I shall ever obtain by it, and indeed I may truly say that to write that work I have thrown to the winds all the obvious worldly prospects of life.

I am ready to make every possible sacrifice on my part to range myself under your colours. I will willingly give up the immediate and positive receipt of a large sum of money for the copyright, and by publishing the work anonymously renounce that certain sale which, as a successful, although I confess not very worthy author, I can command. But in quitting my present publisher, I incur, from the terms of our last agreement, a virtual penalty, which I have no means to pay excepting from the proceeds of my pen. Have you, therefore, any objection to advance me a sum on the anticipated profits of the edition, not exceeding two hundred pounds?

It grieves me much to appear exacting to you, but I frankly tell you the reason, and, as it will enable me to place myself at your disposal, I hope you will not consider me mercenary, when I am indeed influenced by the most sincere desire to meet your views.

If this modification of your arrangement will suit you, as I fervently trust it will, I shall be delighted to accede to your wishes. In that case let me know without loss of time, and pray let us meet to talk over minor points, as to the mode of publication, etc. I shall be at home all the morning; my time is very much occupied, and on Thursday or Friday I must run down, for a day or two, to Wycombe to attend a public meeting.

Fervently trusting that this arrangement will meet your wishes,

Believe me, yours,

BENJ. DISRAELI.

While the MS. was still in Mr. Milman’s hands, Mr. Disraeli followed this up with another letter:

Mr. Disraeli to John Murray

35 DUKE STREET, ST. JAMES’S.

MY DEAR SIR, I am very sensible that you have conducted yourself, with regard to my MS., in the most honourable, kind, and judicious manner; and I very much regret the result of your exertions, which neither of us deserve.

I can wait no longer. The delay is most injurious to me, and in every respect very annoying. I am therefore under the painful necessity of requesting you to require from your friend the return of my work without a moment’s delay, but I shall not deny myself the gratification of thanking you for your kindness and subscribing myself, with regard,

Your faithful Servant,

BENJ. DISRAELI.

At length Mr. Milman’s letter arrived, expressing his judgment on the work, which was much more satisfactory than that of Mr. Lockhart.

The Rev. H.H. Milman to John Murray.

READING, March 5, 1832.

MY DEAR SIR,

I have been utterly inefficient for the last week, in a state of almost complete blindness; but am now, I trust, nearly restored. Mrs. Milman, however, has read to me the whole of the MS. It is a very remarkable productionvery wild, very extravagant, very German, very powerful, very poetical. It will, I think, be much readas far as one dare predict anything of the capricious taste of the daymuch admired, and much abused. It is much more in the Macaulay than in the Croker line, and the former is evidently in the ascendant. Some passages will startle the rigidly orthodox; the phrenologists will be in rapture. I tell you all this, that you may judge for yourself. One thing insist upon, if you publish it-that the title be changed. The whole beauty, of the latter part especially, is its truth. It is a rapid volume of travels, a “Childe Harold” in prose; therefore do not let it be called “a Romance” on any account. Let those who will, believe it to be a real history, and those who are not taken in, dispute whether it is truth or fiction. If it makes any sensation, this will add to its notoriety. “A Psychological Auto-Biography” would be too sesquipedalian a title; but “My Life Psychologically Related,” or “The Psychology of my Life,” or some such title, might be substituted.

H.H. MILMAN.

Before Mr. Milman’s communication had been received, another pressing letter arrived from Mr. Disraeli.

Mr. Disraeli to John Murray.

MY DEAR SIR,

It is with deep regret and some mortification that I appear to press you. It is of the highest importance to me that the “P.R.” should appear without loss of time. I have an impending election in the country, which a single and not improbable event may precipitate. It is a great object with me, that my work should be published before that election.

Its rejection by you will only cause me sorrow. I have no desire that you should become its publisher, unless you conceive it may be the first of a series of works, which may support your name, and sustain your fortunes. There is no question of pecuniary matters between us; I leave all these with you, with illimitable trust.

Pray, pray, my dear Sir, do not let me repent the feelings which impel me to seek this renewal of our connection. I entreat therefore your attention to this subject, and request that you will communicate your decision.

Believe me, as I have already said, that whatever that decision may be, I shall not the less consider myself,

Very cordially yours,

B. DISRAELI.

And again, in a subsequent letter, Mr. Disraeli said:

“There is no work of fiction on whose character I could not decide in four-and-twenty hours, and your critic ought not to be less able than your author. Pray, therefore, to communicate without loss of time to your obedient faithful servant.

“B.D.”

On receiving Mr. Milman’s approval, Mr. Murray immediately made up his mind to publish the work. He wrote to Mr. Disraeli:

John Murray to Mr. Disraeli.

March 6, 1832.

MY DEAR SIR,

Your MS. has this moment been returned to me, accompanied by a commendation which enables me to say that I should be proud of being its publisher. But in these times I am obliged to refrain from speculation, and I cannot offer any sum for it that is likely to be equal to its probable value.

I would, however, if it so please you, print at my expense an edition of 1,200 or 1,500 copies, and give you half the profits; and after the sale of this edition, the copyright shall be entirely your own; so that if the work prove as successful as I anticipate, you will ensure all the advantages of it without incurring any risque. If this proposal should not suit you, I beg to add that I shall, for the handsome offer of your work in the first instance, still remain,

Your obedient Servant,

JOHN MURRAY.

Some further correspondence took place as to the title of the work. “What do you think,” said Mr. Disraeli, “of the ‘Psychological Memoir’? I hesitate between this and ‘Narrative,’ but discard ‘History’ or ‘Biography.’ On survey, I conceive the MS. will make four Byronic tomes, according to the pattern you were kind enough to show me.” The work was at length published in 4 vols., foolscap 8vo, with the title of “Contarini Fleming: a Psychological Biography.”

Before the appearance of the work, Mr. Disraeli wrote to Mr. Murray as follows:

Mr. Disraeli to John Murray.

BRADENHAM HOUSE, May 6, 1832.

DEAR SIR,

From the notice of “C.F.” in the Literary Gazette, which I received this morning, I imagine that Jerdan has either bribed the printer, or purloined some sheets. It is evident that he has only seen the last volume. It is unnecessary for me to observe that such premature notice, written in such complete ignorance of the work, can do no good. I think that he should be reprimanded, and his petty larceny arrested. I shall be in town on Tuesday.

Yours, B.D.

The work, when it appeared in 1833, excited considerable sensation, and was very popular at the time of its publication. It is now included in the uniform edition of Lord Beaconsfield’s works.

During his travels in the East, Mr. Disraeli was attended by Lord Byron’s faithful gondolier, who had accompanied his master to Missolonghi, and remained with him till his death.

Mr. Disraeli to John Murray.

DUKE STREET, July 5, 1832.

DEAR SIR,

I have just returned to town, and will call in Albemarle Street as soon as I can. Tita, Lord Byron’s faithful servant, and who was also my travelling companion in the East, called upon me this morning. I thought you might wish to see one so intimately connected with the lost bard, and who is himself one of the most deserving creatures in the world.

Yours faithfully,

B. DISRAELI.

At the same time that Mr. Disraeli was engaged on his novel, he was busy with another, but this time a political work entitled “England and France: a Cure for the Ministerial Gallomania,” dedicated to Lord Grey. The first letter on the subjectafter Mr. Murray had agreed to publish the workappears to have been the following, from Bradenham, Monday night, but without date:

Mr. Disraeli to John Murray.

DEAR SIR,

By to-morrow’s coach, at your desire, I send you one-half of the volume, which, however, is not in the finished state I could have wished. I have materials for any length, but it is desirable to get out without a moment’s loss of time. It has been suggested to publish a volume periodically, and let this come out as N; so as to establish a journal of general foreign politics, for which there are ample means of first-rate information. I have not been able even to revise what is sent, but it will sufficiently indicate the work.

I am to meet a personage on Thursday evening in town, and read over the whole to him. It is therefore absolutely necessary that the MS. should be returned to you on Thursday morning, and I will call in Albemarle Street the moment of my arrival, which will be about four o’clock. If in time, acknowledge the receipt by return of post.

The remaining portion of the volume consists of several more dramatic scenes in Paris, a view of the character and career of L.P., a most curious chapter on the conduct of the Diplomatists, and a general view of the state of Europe at the moment of publication. Pray be cautious, and above all let me depend upon your having the MS. on Thursday, otherwise, as Liston says in “Love, Law and Physic,” “we shall get all shot.”

B.D.

Mr. Disraeli to John Murray,

Friday, 11 o’clock.

MY DEAR SIR,

I much regret that I missed you yesterday, but I called upon you the instant I arrived. I very much wish to talk over the “Gallomania,” and will come on to you, if it be really impossible for you to pay me a visit. I have so much at this moment on my hands, that I should esteem such an incident, not only an honour, but a convenience.

B.D.

There seems to have been a difference of opinion between the author and the publisher respecting the title of the book:

Mr. Disraeli to John Murray.

DEAR SIR,

I have a great respect for your judgment, especially on the subject of titles, as I have shown in another instance, one which I shall ever regret. In the present, I shall be happy to receive from you any suggestion, but I can offer none. To me the Gallomania (or mania for what is French) appears to be one of the most felicitous titles ever devised. It is comprehensive, it is explicit, it is poignant and intelligible, as I should suppose, to learned and unlearned. The word Anglomania is one of the commonest on the other side of the channel, is repeated daily in almost every newspaper; has been the title of one or two works; and of the best farce in the French language. It is here also common and intelligible.

There is no objection to erasing the epithet “New,” if you think it loads the title.

Yours truly,

B.D.

The three following letters were written on the same day:

Mr. Disraeli to John Murray. DUKE STREET, March 30, 1832.

DEAR SIR,

I am going to dine with Baron D’Haussez, Baron de Haber, et hoc genus, today, and must report progress, otherwise they will think I am trifling with them. Have you determined on a title? What think you of “A Cure for the Ministerial Gallomania,” and advertise, dedicated to Lord Grey? Pray decide. You are aware I have not yet received a proof. Affairs look awkward in France. Beware lest we are a day after the fair, and only annalists instead of prophets.

Your very faithful Servant, B. DISRAELI.

March 30.

DEAR SIR,

I think it does very well, and I hope you are also satisfied. I shall send you the rest of the MS. tomorrow morning. There is a very remarkable chapter on Louis Philippe which is at present with Baron D’Haussez; and this is the reason I have not forwarded it to you. I keep the advertisement to show them.

B.D.

MY DEAR SIR,

In further answer to your note received this evening, I think it proper to observe that I entirely agree with you that I “am bound to make as few alterations as possible,” coming as they do from such a quarter; and I have acted throughout in such a spirit. All alterations and omissions of consequence are in this first sheet, and I have retained in the others many things of which I do not approve, merely on account of my respect for the source from whence they are derived.

While you remind me of what I observed to your son, let me also remind you of the condition with which my permission was accompanied, viz.: that everything was to be submitted to my approval, and subject to my satisfaction. On this condition I have placed the proofs in the hands of several persons not less distinguished than your friend, and superior even in rank and recent office. Their papers are on my table, and I shall be happy to show them to you. I will mention one: the chapter on Belgium was originally written by the Plenipotentiary of the King of Holland to the Conference, Baron Van Zuylen. Scarcely a line of the original composition remains, although a very able one, because it did not accord with the main design of the book.

With regard to the omission, pp. 12, 13, I acknowledge its felicity; but it is totally at variance with every other notice of M. de Talleyrand in the work, and entirely dissonant with the elaborate mention of him in the last chapter. When the reviser introduced this pungent remark, he had never even read the work he was revising.

With regard to the authorship of this work, I should never be ashamed of being considered the author, I should be proud to be; but I am not. It is written by Legion, but I am one of them, and I bear the responsibility. If it be supposed to be written by a Frenchman, all its good effects must be marred, as it seeks to command attention and interest by its purely British spirit.

I have no desire to thrust my acquaintance on your critic. More than once, I have had an opportunity to form that acquaintance, and more than once I have declined it, but I am ready to bear the brunt of explanation, if you desire me.

It is quite impossible that anything adverse to the general measure of Reform can issue from my pen or from anything to which I contribute. Within these four months I have declined being returned for a Tory borough, and almost within these four hours, to mention slight affairs, I have refused to inscribe myself a member of “The Conservative Club.” I cannot believe that you will place your critic’s feelings for a few erased passages against my permanent interest.

But in fact these have nothing to do with the question. To convenience you, I have no objection to wash my hands of the whole business, and put you in direct communication with my coadjutors. I can assure you that it is from no regard for my situation that Reform was omitted, but because they are of opinion that its notice would be unwise and injurious. For myself, I am ready to do anything that you can desire, except entirely change my position in life.

I will see your critic, if you please, or you can give up the publication and be reimbursed, which shall make no difference in our other affairs. All I ask in this and all other affairs, are candour and decision.

The present business is most pressing. At present I am writing a chapter on Poland from intelligence just received, and it will be ready for the printer tomorrow morning, as I shall finish it before I retire. I await your answer with anxiety.

Yours truly,

B.D.

Mr. Disraeli was evidently intent upon the immediate publication of his work. On the following day he wrote again to Mr. Murray:

Mr. Disraeli to John Murray.

March 31, 1832.

MY DEAR SIR,

We shall have an opportunity of submitting the work to Count Orloff tomorrow morning, in case you can let me have a set of the proofs tonight, I mean as far as we have gone. I do not like to send mine, which are covered with corrections.

Yours truly, B.D.

Mr. Disraeli to John Murray. Monday morning, 9 o’clock [April 2].

DEAR SIR,

Since I had the honour of addressing you the note of last night, I have seen the Baron. Our interview was intended to have been a final one, and it was therefore absolutely necessary that I should apprize him of all that had happened, of course concealing the name of your friend. The Baron says that the insertion of the obnoxious passages is fatal to all his combinations; that he has devoted two months of the most valuable time to this affair, and that he must hold me personally responsible for the immediate fulfilment of my agreement, viz.: to ensure its publication when finished.

We dine at the same house today, and I have pledged myself to give him a categorical reply at that time, and to ensure its publication by some mode or other.

Under these principal circumstances, my dear sir, I can only state that the work must be published at once, and with the omission of all passages hostile to Reform; and that if you are unwilling to introduce it in that way, I request from your friendliness such assistance as you can afford me about the printer, etc., to occasion its immediate publication in some other quarter.

After what took place between myself and my coadjutor last night, I really can have for him only one answer or one alternative, and as I wish to give him the first, and ever avoid the second, I look forward with confidence to your answer.

B.D.

Mr. Disraeli next desires to have a set of the proofs to put into the hands of the Duke of Wellington:

Mr. Disraeli to John Murray,

April 6, 1832.

MY DEAR SIR,

I have just received a note, that if I can get a set of clean proofs by Sunday, they will be put in the Duke’s hands preliminary to the debate. I thought you would like to know this. Do you think it impossible? Let this be between us. I am sorry to give you all this trouble, but I know your zeal, and the interest you take in these affairs. I myself will never keep the printer, and engage when the proofs are sent me to prepare them for the press within an hour.

Yours,

B.D.

Mr. Disraeli to John Murray.

MY DEAR SIR,

I am very glad to receive the copy. I think that one should be sent to the editor of the Times as quickly as possible; that at least he should not be anticipated in the receipt, even if in the notice, by a Sunday paper. But I leave all this to your better judgment. You will send copies to Duke Street as soon as you have them.

B.D.

After the article in the Times had appeared, Baron de Haber, a mysterious German gentleman of Jewish extraction, who had taken part in the production of “Gallomania,” wrote to Mr. Murray:

Baron de Haber to John Murray.

2 Mai, 1832.

MON CHER MONSIEUR,

J’espere que vous serez content de l’article de Times sur la “Gallomania.” C’est un grand pas de fait. Il serait utile que lé Standard et lé Morning Post lé copie en entier, avec des observations dans son sens. C’est a vous, mon cher Monsieur Murray, de soigner cet objet. J’ai infiniment regrette de ne m’etre pas trouve chez moi hier, lorsque vous étés venu me voir, avec l’aimable Mr. Lockhart.

Tout a vous,

DE H.

Baron de Haber to John Murray.

Vendredi.

MON CHER MONSIEUR MURRAY,

Vous desirez dans l’interet de l’ouvrage faire mentionner dans lé Standard que lé Times d’aujourd’hui paroit être assez d’accord avec l’auteur de la “Gallomania” sur M. Thiers, esperant que de jour en jour il reviendra aux idées de cet auteur.

Il seroit aussi convenable de dire que la prophétie dans la lettre a My Lord Grey était assez juste: Allusion“In less than a month we shall no doubt hear of their warm reception in the Provinces, and of some gratifying, perhaps startling, demonstrations of national gratitude.” Voyez, mon cher Monsieur, comme depuis 8 jours ces pauvres Deputes qui ont vote pour lé Ministre sont traites, Si vous étés a la maison ce soir, dites-lé-moi, je desire vous parler. Dinez-vous chez-vous?

Vôtre dévoue,

DE H.

The following announcement was published by Mr. Disraeli in reply to certain criticisms of his work:

“I cannot allow myself to omit certain observations of my able critic without remarking that those omissions are occasioned by no insensibility to their acuteness.

“Circumstances of paramount necessity render it quite impossible that anything can proceed from my pen hostile to the general question of Reform.

“Independent however of all personal considerations, and viewing the question of Reform for a moment in the light in which my critic evidently speculates, I would humbly suggest that the cause which he advocates would perhaps be more united in the present pages by being passed over in silence. It is important that this work should be a work not of party but of national interest, and I am induced to believe that a large class in this country, who think themselves bound to support the present administration from a superficial sympathy with their domestic measures, have long viewed their foreign policy with distrust and alarm.

“If the public are at length convinced that Foreign Policy, instead of being an abstract and isolated division of the national interests, is in fact the basis of our empire and present order, and that this basis shakes under the unskilful government of the Cabinet, the public may be induced to withdraw their confidence from that Cabinet altogether.

“With this exception, I have adopted all the additions and alterations that I have yet had the pleasure of seeing without reserve, and I seize this opportunity of expressing my sense of their justness and their value.

“The Author of ‘Gallomania.’”

The next person whom we shall introduce to the reader was one who had but little in common with Mr. Benjamin Disraeli, except that, like him, he had at that time won little of that world-wide renown which he was afterwards to achieve. This “writer of books,” as he described himself, was no other than Thomas Carlyle, who, when he made the acquaintance of Mr. Murray, had translated Goethe’s “Wilhelm Meister,” written the “Life of Schiller,” and several articles in the Reviews; but was not yet known as a literary man of mark. He was living among the bleak, bare moors of Dumfriesshire at Craigenputtock, where he was consoled at times by visits from Jeffrey and Emerson, and by letters from Goethe, and where he wrote that strange and rhapsodical book “Sartor Resartus,” containing a considerable portion of his own experience. After the MS. was nearly finished, he wrapt it in a piece of paper, put in it his pocket, and started for Dumfries, on his way to London.

Mr. Francis Jeffrey, then Lord Advocate, recommended Carlyle to try Murray, because, “in spite of its radicalism, he would be the better publisher.” Jeffrey wrote to Mr. Murray on the subject, without mentioning Carlyle’s name:

Mr. Jeffrey to John Murray. May I, 1831.

“Lord Jeffrey understands that the earlier chapters of this work (which is the production of a friend of his) were shown some months ago to Mr. Murray (or his reader), and were formally judged of; though, from its incomplete state, no proposal for its publication could then be entertained. What is now sent completes it; the earlier chapters being now under the final perusal of the author.

“Lord Jeffrey, who thinks highly of the author’s abilities, ventures to beg Mr. Murray to look at the MS. now left with him, and to give him, as soon as possible, his opinion as to its probable success on publication; and also to say whether he is willing to undertake it, and on what terms.”

Carlyle, who was himself at the time in London, called upon Mr. Murray, and left with him a portion of the manuscript, and an outline of the proposed volume.

Mr. Carlyle to John Murray.

6 WOBURN BUILDINGS, TAVISTOCK SQUARE,

Wednesday, August 10, 1831.

DEAR SIR,

I here send you the MS. concerning which I have, for the present, only to repeat my urgent request that no time may be lost in deciding on it. At latest, next Wednesday I shall wait upon you, to see what further, or whether anything further is to be done.

In the meanwhile, it is perhaps unnecessary to say, that the whole business is strictly confidential; the rather, as I wish to publish anonymously.

I remain, dear Sir, yours truly,

THOMAS CARLYLE.

Be so kind as to write, by the bearer, these two words, “MS. received.”

When Carlyle called a second time Murray was not at home, but he found that the parcel containing the MS. had not been opened. He again wrote to the publisher on the following Friday:

Mr. Carlyle to John Murray.

DEAR SIR,

As I am naturally very anxious to have this little business that lies between us off my handsand, perhaps, a few minutes’ conversation would suffice to settle it allI will again request, in case I should be so unlucky as to miss you in Albemarle Street, that you would have the goodness to appoint me a short meeting at any, the earliest, hour that suits your convenience.

I remain, dear Sir, yours truly,

THOMAS CARLYLE.

This was followed up by a letter from Mr. Jeffrey:

Mr. Jeffrey to John Murray.

Sunday, August 28, 1831.

MY DEAR SIR,

Will you favour me with a few minutes’ conversation, any morning of this week (the early part of it, if possible), on the subject of my friend Carlyle’s projected publication. I have looked a little into the MS. and can tell you something about it. Believe me, always, very faithfully yours,

F. JEFFREY.

The interview between Jeffrey and Murray led to an offer for the MS.

Mr. Carlyle to John Murray.

TUESDAY.

DEAR SIR,

I have seen the Lord Advocate [Jeffrey], who informs me that you are willing to print an edition of 750 copies of my MS., at your own cost, on the principle of what is called “half profits”; the copyright of the book after that to belong to myself. I came down at present to say that, being very anxious to have you as a publisher, and to see my book put forth soon, I am ready to accede to these terms; and I should like much to meet you, or hear from you, at your earliest convenience, that the business might be actually put in motion. I much incline to think, in contrasting the character of my little speculation with the character of the times, that now (even in these months, say in November) were the best season for emitting it. Hoping soon to see all this pleasantly settled,

I remain, dear Sir, yours truly,

THOMAS CARLYLE.

Mr. Murray was willing to undertake the risk of publishing 750 copies, and thus to allow the author to exhibit his literary wares to the public. Even if the whole edition had sold, the pecuniary results to both author and publisher would have been comparatively trifling, but as the copyright was to remain in the author’s possession, and he would have been able to make a much better bargain with the future editions, the terms may be considered very liberal, having regard to the exceptional nature of the work. Mr. Carlyle, however, who did not know the usual custom of publishers, had in the meantime taken away his MS. and offered it to other publishers in London, evidently to try whether he could not get a better bid for his book. Even Jeffrey thought it “was too much of the nature of a rhapsody, to command success or respectful attention.” The publishers thought the same. Carlyle took the MS. to Fraser of Regent Street, who offered to publish it if Carlyle would give him a sum not exceeding L150 sterling. He had already been to Longmans & Co., offering them his “German Literary History,” but they declined to publish the work, and he now offered them his “Sartor Resartus,” with a similar result. He also tried Colburn and Bentley, but without success. When Murray, then at Ramsgate, heard that Carlyle had been offering his book to other publishers, he wrote to him:

John Murray to Mr. Carlyle.

September 17, 1831.

DEAR SIR,

Your conversation with me respecting the publication of your MS. led me to infer that you had given me the preference, and certainly not that you had already submitted it to the greatest publishers in London, who had declined to engage in it. Under these circumstances it will be necessary for me also to get it read by some literary friend, before I can, in justice to myself, engage in the printing of it.

I am, dear Sir, your faithful servant,

JOHN MURRAY.

To this Mr. Carlyle replied:

September 19, 1831

SIR,

I am this moment favoured with your note of the 17th, and beg to say, in reply,:

First.That your idea, derived from conversation with me, of my giving you the preference to all other Publishers, was perfectly correct. I had heard you described as a man of honour, frankness, and even generosity, and knew you to have the best and widest connexions; on which grounds, I might well say, and can still well say, that a transaction with you would please me better than a similar one with any other member of the Trade.

Secondly.That your information, of my having submitted my MS. to the greatest publishers in London, if you mean that, after coming out of your hands, it lay two days in those of Messrs. Longman & Rees, and was from them delivered over to the Lord Advocate, is also perfectly correct: if you mean anything else, incorrect.

Thirdly.That if you wish the Bargain, which I had understood myself to have made with you, unmade, you have only to cause your Printer, who is now working on my MS., to return the same, without damage or delay, and consider the business as finished. I remain, Sir, your obedient servant,

THOMAS CARLYLE.

In the meantime Murray submitted the MS. to one of his literary advisers, probably Lockhart, whose report was not very encouraging. Later, as Mr. Carlyle was unwilling to entertain the idea of taking his manuscript home with him, and none of the other publishers would accept it, he urgently requested Mr. Murray again to examine it, and come to some further decision. “While I, with great readiness,” he said, “admit your views, and shall cheerfully release you from all engagement, or shadow of engagement, with me in regard to it: the rather, as it seems reasonable for me to expect some higher remuneration for a work that has cost me so much effort, were it once fairly examined, such remuneration as was talked of between us can, I believe, at all times, be procured.” He then proposed “a quite new negotiation, if you incline to enter on such”; and requested his decision. “If not, pray have the goodness to cause my papers to be returned with the least possible delay.” The MS. was at once returned; and Carlyle acknowledged its receipt:

Mr. Carlyle to John Murray.

October 6, 1831.

MY DEAR SIR,

I have received the MS., with your note and your friend’s criticism, and I find it all safe and right. In conclusion, allow me to thank you for your punctuality and courtesy in this part of the business; and to join cordially in the hope you express that, in some fitter case, a closer relation may arise between us. I remain, my dear Sir, faithfully yours,

T. CARLYLE.

Mr. Carlyle returned to Craigenputtock with his manuscript in his pocket; very much annoyed and disgusted by the treatment of the London publishers. Shortly after his arrival at home, he wrote to Mr. Macvey Napier, then editor of the Edinburgh Review:

“All manner of perplexities have occurred in the publishing of my poor book, which perplexities I could only cut asunder, not unloose; so the MS., like an unhappy ghost, still lingers on the wrong side of Styx: the Charon of Albemarle Street durst not risk it in his sutilis cymba, so it leaped ashore again. Better days are coming, and new trials will end more happily.”

A little later (February 6, 1832) he said:

“I have given up the notion of hawking my little manuscript book about any further. For a long time it has lain quiet in its drawer, waiting for a better day. The bookselling trade seems on the edge of dissolution; the force of puffing can go no further; yet bankruptcy clamours at every door: sad fate! to serve the Devil, and get no wages even from him! The poor bookseller Guild, I often predict to myself, will ere long be found unfit for the strange part it now plays in our European World; and give place to new and higher arrangements, of which the coming shadows are already becoming visible.”

The “Sartor Resartus” was not, however, lost. Two years after Carlyle’s visit to London, it came out, bit by bit, in Fraser’s Magazine. Through the influence of Emerson, it was issued, as a book, at Boston, in the United States, and Carlyle got some money for his production. It was eventually published in England, and, strange to say, has had the largest sale in the “People’s Edition of Carlyle’s Works.” Carlyle, himself, created the taste to appreciate “Sartor Resartus.”