Chapter XXIV: Part II: , 405 n.; (4)

[119] He reverts to this “turning of the worm” in a letter to Morgan dated January 5, 1818. He threatened to attack publishers and printers in “a vigorous and harmonious satire” to be called “Puff and Slander.” I am inclined to think that the remarkable verses entitled “A Character,” which were first printed in 1834, were an accomplished instalment of “these two long satires.” Letter in British Museum. MSS. Addit. 25612. _Samuel Taylor Coleridge, a Narrative_ by J. Dykes Campbell, p. 234, note; _Poetical Works_, pp. 195, 642.

[120] A work which should contain all knowledge and proclaim all philosophy had been Coleridge’s dream from the beginning, and, as no such work was ever produced, it may be said to have been his dream to the end. And yet it was something more than a dream. Besides innumerable fragments of metaphysical and theological speculation which have passed into my hands, he actually did compose and dictate two large quarto volumes on formal logic, which are extant. “Something more than a volume,” a portentous introduction to his _magnum opus_, was dictated to his amanuensis and disciple, J. H. Green, and is now in my possession. A commentary on the Gospels and some of the Epistles, of which the original MS. is extant, and of which I possess a transcription, was an accomplished fact. I say nothing of the actual or relative value of this unpublished matter, but it should be put on record that it exists, that much labour, ill-judged perhaps, and ineffectual labour, was expended on the outworks of the fortresses, and that the walls and bastions are standing to the present day.

[121] The appearance of these “Essays on the Fine Arts” was announced in the _Bristol Journal_ of August 6, 1814. They were reprinted in 1837 by Cottle, in his _Early Recollections_, ii. 201-240, and by Thomas Ashe in 1885, in his _Miscellanies, Æsthetic and Literary_, pp. 5-35. Coleridge himself “set a high value” on these essays. See _Table Talk_ of January 1, 1834.

[122] The working editor of the _Courier_.

[123] The third letter to Judge Fletcher on Ireland was published in the _Courier_, October 21, 1814. It is reprinted in _Essays on His Own Times_, iii. 690-697.

[124] John Cartwright, 1740-1824, known as Major Cartwright, was an ardent parliamentary reformer and an advocate of universal suffrage. He refused to fight against the United States and wrote Letters on American Independence (1774).

[125] Lord Erskine’s Bill for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals was brought forward in the House of Lords May 15, 1809, and was passed without a division. The Bill was read a second time in the House of Commons but was rejected on going into committee, the opposition being led by Windham in a speech of considerable ability.

By “imperfect” duties Coleridge probably means “duties of imperfect obligation.”

[126] This article, a review of “The Letters of Lord Nelson to Lady Hamilton; with a Supplement of Interesting Letters by Distinguished Personages. 2 vols. 8vo. Lovewell and Co. London. 1814,” appeared in No. xxi. of _The Quarterly Review_, for April, 1814. The attack is mainly directed against Lady Hamilton, but Nelson, with every pretence of reluctance and of general admiration, is also censured on moral grounds, and his letters are held up to ridicule.

[127] A partner in the publishing firm of Ridgeway and Symonds. _Letters of R. Southey_, iii. 65.

[128] The reference is to Swift’s famous “Drapier” Letters. Swift wrote in the assumed character of a draper, and dated his letters “From my shop in St. Francis Street,” but why he adopted the French instead of the English spelling of the word does not seem to have been satisfactorily explained. _Notes and Queries_, III. Series, x. 55.

[129] The _View of the State of Ireland_, first published in 1633.

[130] John Kenyon, 1783-1856, a poet and philanthropist. He settled at Woodlands near Stowey in 1802, and became acquainted with Poole and Poole’s friends. He was on especially intimate terms with Southey, who writes of him (January 11, 1827) to his still older friend Wynne, as “one of the very best and pleasantest men whom I have ever known, one whom every one likes at first sight, and likes better the longer he is known.” With Coleridge himself the tie was less close, but he was, I know, a most kind friend to the poet’s wife during those anxious years, 1814-1819, when her children were growing up, and she had little else to depend upon but Southey’s generous protection and the moiety of the Wedgwood annuity. Kenyon’s friendship with the Brownings belongs to a later chapter of literary history.

[131] _Poetical Works_, p. 176; Appendix H, pp. 525, 526.

[132] _Poetical Works_, p. 450.

[133] In 1815 an act was brought in by Mr. Robinson (afterwards Lord Ripon) and passed, permitting the importation of corn when the price of home-grown wheat reached 80s. a quarter. During the spring of the year, January-March, while the bill was being discussed, bread-riots took place in London and Westminster.

[134] It would seem that Coleridge had either overlooked or declined to put faith in Wordsworth’s Apology for _The Excursion_, which appeared in the Preface to the First Edition of 1814. He was, of course, familiar with the “poem on the growth of your mind,” the hitherto unnamed and unpublished _Prelude_, and he must have been at least equally familiar with the earlier books of _The Excursion_. Why then was he disappointed with the poem as a whole, and what had he looked for at Wordsworth’s hands? Not, it would seem, for an “ante-chapel,” but for the sanctuary itself. He had been stirred to the depths by the recitation of _The Prelude_ at Coleorton, and in his lines “To a Gentleman,” which he quotes in this letter, he recapitulates the arguments of the poem. _This_ he considered was _The Excursion_, “_an Orphic song indeed_”! and as he listened the melody sank into his soul. But that was but an exordium, a “prelusive strain” to _The Recluse_, which might indeed include the Grasmere fragment, the story of Margaret and so forth, but which in the form of poetry would convey the substance of divine philosophy. He had looked for a second Milton who would put Lucretius to a double shame, for a “philosophic poem,” which would justify anew “the ways of God to men;” and in lieu of this pageant of the imagination there was Wordsworth prolific of moral discourse, of scenic and personal narrative--a prophet indeed, but “unmindful of the heavenly Vision.”

[135] The Rev. William Money, a descendant of John Kyrle, the “Man of Ross,” eulogised alike by Pope and Coleridge, was at this time in possession of the family seat of Whetham, a few miles distant from Calne, in Wiltshire. Coleridge was often a guest at his house.

[136] A controversial work on the inspiration of Scripture. A thin thread of narrative runs through the dissertation. It was the work of the Rev. J. W. Cunningham, Vicar of Harrow, and was published in 1813.

[137] The Hon. and Rev. T. A. Methuen, Rector of All Cannings, was the son of Paul Methuen, Esq., M. P., afterward Lord Methuen of Corsham House. He contributed some reminiscences of Coleridge at this period to the _Christian Observer_ of 1845. _Samuel Taylor Coleridge, a Narrative_, by J. Dykes Campbell, 1894, p. 208.

[138] The annual payments for board and lodging, which were made at first, for some time before Coleridge’s death fell into abeyance. The approximate amount of the debt so incurred, and the circumstances under which it began to accumulate, are alike unknown to me. The fact that such a debt existed was, I believe, a secret jealously guarded by his generous hosts, but as, with the best intentions, statements have been made to the effect that there was no pecuniary obligation on Coleridge’s part, it is right that the truth should be known. On the other hand, it is only fair to Coleridge’s memory to put it on record that this debt of honour was a sore trouble to him, and that he met it as best he could. We know, for instance, on his own authority, that the profits of the three volume edition of his poems, published in 1828, were made over to Mr. Gillman.

[139] _Zapolya: A Christmas Tale, in two Parts_, was published by Rest Fenner late in 1817. A year before, after the first part had been rejected by the Drury Lane Committee, Coleridge arranged with Murray to publish both parts as a poem, and received an advance of £50 on the MS. He had, it seems, applied to Murray to be released from this engagement, and on the strength of an ambiguous reply, offered the work to the publishers of _Sybilline Leaves_. From letters to Murray, dated March 26 and March 29, 1817, it is evident that the £50 advanced on _A Christmas Tale_ was repaid. In acknowledging the receipt of the sum, Murray seems to have generously omitted all mention of a similar advance on “a play then in composition.” In his letter of March 29, Coleridge speaks of this second debt, which does not appear to have been paid. _Samuel Taylor Coleridge, a Narrative_, by J. Dykes Campbell, p. 223; _Memoirs of John Murray_, i. 301-306.

[140] Murray had offered Coleridge two hundred guineas for “a small volume of specimens of Rabbinical Wisdom,” but owing to pressure of work the project was abandoned. “Specimens of Rabbinical Wisdom selected from the Mishna” had already appeared in the original issue of _The Friend_ (Nos. x., xi.), and these, with the assistance of his friend Hyman Hurwitz, Master of the Hebrew Academy at Highgate, he intended to supplement and expand into a volume. _Samuel Taylor Coleridge, a Narrative_, by J. Dykes Campbell, p. 224 and note.

[141] Apart from internal evidence, there is nothing to prove that this article, a review of “Christabel,” which appeared in the _Edinburgh Review_, December, 1816, was written by Hazlitt. It led, however, to the insertion of a footnote in the first volume of the _Biographia Literaria_, in which Coleridge accused Jeffrey of personal and ungenerous animosity against himself, and reminded him of hospitality shown to him at Keswick, and of the complacent and flattering language which he had employed on that occasion. Not content with commissioning Hazlitt to review the book, Jeffrey appended a long footnote signed with his initials, in which he indignantly repudiates the charge of personal animus, and makes bitter fun of Coleridge’s susceptibility to flattery, and of his boasted hospitality. Southey had offered him a cup of coffee, and Coleridge had dined with him at the inn. _Voila tout._ Both footnotes are good reading. _Biographia Literaria_, ed. 1817, i. 52 note; _Edinburgh Review_, December, 1817.

[142] Two letters from Tieck to Coleridge have been preserved, a very long one, dated February 20, 1818, in which he discusses a scheme for bringing out his works in England, and asks Coleridge if he has succeeded in finding a publisher for him, and the following note, written sixteen years later, to introduce the German painter, Herr von Vogelstein. I am indebted to my cousin, Miss Edith Coleridge, for a translation of both letters.

DRESDEN, April 30, 1834.

I hope that my dear and honoured friend Coleridge still remembers me.
To me those delightful hours at Highgate remain unforgettable. I have
seen your friend Robinson, once here in Dresden, but you--At that time
I believed that I should come again to England--and in such hopes we
grow old and wear away.

My kindest remembrances to your excellent hosts at Highgate. It is
with especial emotion that I look again and again at the _Anatomy of
Melancholy_ [a present from Mr. Gillman], as well as the _Lay
Sermons_, _Christabel_, and the _Biographia Literaria_. Herr von
Vogelstein, one of the most esteemed historical painters of Germany,
brings you this letter from your loving

LUDWIG TIECK.

[143] Henry Crabb Robinson, whose admirable diaries, first published in 1869, may, it is hoped, be reëdited and published in full, died at the age of ninety-one in 1867. He was a constant guest at my father’s house in Chelsea during my boyhood. I have, too, a distinct remembrance of his walking over Loughrigg from Rydal Mount, where he was staying with Mrs. Wordsworth, and visiting my parents at High Close, between Grasmere and Langdale, then and now the property of Mr. Wheatley Balme. This must have been in 1857, when he was past eighty years of age. My impression is that his conversation consisted, for the most part, of anecdotes concerning Wieland and Schiller and Goethe. Of Wordsworth and Coleridge he must have had much to say, but his words, as was natural, fell on the unheeding ears of a child.

[144] The Right Hon. John Hookham Frere, 1769-1846, now better known as the translator of Aristophanes than as statesman or diplomatist, was a warm friend to Coleridge in his later years. He figures in the later memoranda and correspondence as ὁ καλοκάγαθος, the ideal Christian gentleman.

[145] Samuel Purkis, of Brentford, tanner and man of letters, was an early friend of Poole’s, and through him became acquainted with Coleridge and Sir Humphry Davy. When Coleridge went up to London in June, 1798, to stay with the Wedgwoods at Stoke House, in the village of Cobham, he stayed a night at Brentford on the way. In a letter to Poole of the same date, he thus describes his host: “Purkis is a _gentleman_, with the free and cordial and interesting manners of the man of literature. His colloquial diction is uncommonly pleasing, his information various, his _own mind_ elegant and acute.” _Thomas Poole and his Friends_, i. 271, _et passim_.

[146] For an account of Coleridge’s relations with his publishers, Fenner and Curtis, see _Samuel Taylor Coleridge, a Narrative_, by J. Dykes Campbell, p. 227. See, too, _Lippincott’s Mag._ for June, 1870, art. “Some Unpublished Correspondence of S. T. Coleridge,” and Brandl’s _Samuel Taylor Coleridge and the Romantic School_, 1887, pp. 351-353.

[147] J. H. Frere was, I believe, one of those who assisted Coleridge to send his younger son to Cambridge.

[148] John Taylor Coleridge (better known as Mr. Justice Coleridge), and George May Coleridge, Vicar of St. Mary Church, Devon, and Prebendary of Wells. Another cousin who befriended Hartley, when he was an undergraduate at Merton, and again later when he was living with the Montagus, in London, was William Hart Coleridge, afterward Bishop of Barbados. The poet’s own testimony to the good work of his nephews should be set against Allsop’s foolish and uncalled for attack on “the Bishop and the Judge.” _Letters, etc., of S. T. Coleridge_, 1836, i. 225, note.

[149] Poole’s reply to this letter, dated July 31, 1817, contained an invitation to Hartley to come to Nether Stowey. Mrs. Sandford tells us that it was believed that “the young man spent more than one vacation at Stowey, where he was well-known and very popular, though the young ladies of the place either themselves called him the Black Dwarf, or cherished a conviction that that was his nickname at Oxford.” _Thomas Poole and his Friends_, ii. 256-258.

[150] The Rev. H. F. Cary, 1772-1844, the well-known translator of the _Divina Commedia_. His son and biographer, the Rev. Henry Cary, gives the following account of his father’s first introduction to Coleridge, which took place at Littlehampton in the autumn of 1817:--

“It was our custom to walk on the sands and read Homer aloud, a practice adopted partly for the sake of the sea-breezes.... For several consecutive days Coleridge crossed us in our walk. The sound of the Greek, and especially the expressive countenance of the tutor, attracted his notice; so one day, as we met, he placed himself directly in my father’s way and thus accosted him: ‘Sir, yours is a face I _should_ know. I am Samuel Taylor Coleridge.’” _Memoir of H. F. Cary_, ii. 18.

[151] It appears, however, that he underrated his position as a critic. A quotation from Cary’s _Dante_, and a eulogistic mention of the work generally, in a lecture on Dante, delivered by Coleridge at Flower-de-Luce Court, on February 27, 1818, led, so his son says, to the immediate sale of a thousand copies, and notices “reëchoing Coleridge’s praises” in the _Edinburgh_ and _Quarterly Reviews_. _Memoir of H. F. Cary_, ii. 28.

[152] From the _Destiny of Nations_.

[153] Joseph Henry Green, 1791-1863, an eminent surgeon and anatomist. In his own profession he won distinction as lecturer and operator, and as the author of the _Dissector’s Manual_, and some pamphlets on medical reform and education. He was twice, 1849-50 and 1858-59, President of the College of Surgeons. His acquaintance with Coleridge, which began in 1817, was destined to influence his whole career. It was his custom for many years to pass two afternoons of the week at Highgate, and on these occasions as amanuensis and collaborateur, he helped to lay the foundations of the _Magnum Opus_. Coleridge appointed him his literary executor, and bequeathed to him a mass of unpublished MSS. which it was hoped he would reduce to order and publish as a connected system of philosophy. Two addresses which he delivered, as Hunterian Orations in 1841 and 1847, on “Vital Dynamics” and “Mental Dynamics,” were published in his lifetime, and after his death two volumes entitled _Spiritual Philosophy, founded on the Teaching of S. T. Coleridge_, were issued, together with a memoir, by his friend and former pupil, Sir John Simon.

His fame has suffered eclipse owing in great measure to his chivalrous if unsuccessful attempt to do honour to Coleridge. But he deserves to stand alone. Members of his own profession not versed in polar logic looked up to his “great and noble intellect” with pride and delight, and by those who were honoured by his intimacy he was held in love and reverence. To Coleridge he was a friend indeed, bringing with him balms more soothing than “poppy or mandragora,” the healing waters of Faith and Hope. _Spiritual Philosophy_, by J. H. Green; Memoir of the author’s life, i.-lix.

[154] This must have been the impromptu lecture “On the Growth of the Individual Mind,” delivered at the rooms of the London Philosophical Society. According to Gillman, who details the circumstances under which the address was given, but does not supply the date, the lecturer began with an “apologetic preface”: “The lecture I am about to give this evening is purely extempore. Should you find a nominative case looking out for a verb--or a fatherless verb for a nominative case, you must excuse it. It is purely extempore, though I have thought and read much on this subject.” _Life of Coleridge_, pp. 354-357.

[155] The “Essay on the Science of Method” was finished in December, 1817, and printed in the following January. _Samuel Taylor Coleridge, a Narrative_, by J. Dykes Campbell, 1894, p. 232.

[156] The Hebrew text and Coleridge’s translation were published in the form of a pamphlet, and sold by “T. Boosey, 4 Old Broad Street, 1817.” The full title was “ISRAEL’S LAMENT. Translation of a Hebrew dirge, chaunted in the Great Synagogue, St. James’ Place, Aldgate, on the day of the Funeral of her Royal Highness the Princess Charlotte. By Hyman Hurwitz, Master of the Hebrew Academy, Highgate, 1817.”

The translation is below Coleridge at his worst. The “Harp of Quantock” must, indeed, have required stringing before such a line as “For England’s Lady is laid low” could have escaped the file, or “worn her” be permitted to rhyme with “mourner”! _Poetical Works_, p. 187; Editor’s Note, p. 638.

[157] The _Kritik der praktischen Vernunft_ was published in 1797.

[158] This statement requires explanation. Franz Xavier von Baader, 1765-1841, was a mystic of the school of Jacob Böhme, and wrote in opposition to Schelling.

[159] Ludwig Tieck published his _Sternbald’s Wanderungen_ in 1798.

[160] Heinse’s _Ardinghello_ was published in 1787.

[161] Richter’s _Vorschule der Aisthetik_ was published in 1804 (3 vols.).

[162] See _Table Talk_ for January 3 and May 1, 1823. See, also, _The Friend_, Essay iii. of the First Landing Place. Coleridge’s _Works_, Harper & Brothers, 1853, ii. 134-137, and “Notes on Hamlet,” _Ibid._ iv. 147-150.

[163] Charles Augustus Tulk, described by Mr. Campbell as “a man of fortune with an uncommon taste for philosophical speculation,” was an eminent Swedenborgian, and mainly instrumental in establishing the “New Church” in Great Britain. It was through Coleridge’s intimacy with Mr. Tulk that his writings became known to the Swedenborgian community, and that his letters were read at their gatherings. I possess transcripts of twenty-five letters from Coleridge to Tulk, in many of which he details his theories of ontological speculation. The originals were sold and dispersed in 1882.

A note on Swedenborg’s treatise, “De Cultu et Amore Dei,” is printed in _Notes Theological and Political_, London, 1853, p. 110, but a long series of marginalia on the pages of the treatise, “De Cœlo et Inferno,” of which a transcript has been made, remains unpublished.

For Coleridge’s views on Swedenborgianism, see “Notes on Noble’s Appeal,” _Literary Remains_; Coleridge’s _Works_, Harper & Brothers, 1853, v. 522-527.

[164] It may be supposed that it was Blake, the mystic and the spiritualist, that aroused Tulk’s interest, and that, as an indirect consequence, the original edition of his poems, “engraved in writing-hand,” was sent to Coleridge for his inspection and criticism. The _Songs of Innocence_ were published in 1787, ten years before the _Lyrical Ballads_ appeared, and more than thirty years before the date of this letter, but they were known only to a few. Lamb, writing in 1824, speaks of him as _Robert_ Blake, and after praising in the highest terms his paintings and engravings, says that he has never read his poems, “which have been sold hitherto only in manuscript.” It is strange that Coleridge should not have been familiar with them, for in 1812 Crabb Robinson, so he tells us, read them aloud to Wordsworth, who was “pleased with some of them, and considered Blake as having the elements of poetry, a thousand times more than either Byron or Scott.” None, however, of these hearty and genuine admirers appear to have reflected that Blake had “gone back to nature,” a while before Wordsworth or Coleridge turned their steps in that direction. _Letters of Charles Lamb_, 1886, ii. 104, 105, 324, 325; H. C. Robinson’s _Diary_, i. 385.

[165] In the _Aids to Reflection_, at the close of a long comment on a passage in Field, Coleridge alludes to “discussions of the Greek Fathers, and of the Schoolmen on the obscure and abysmal subject of the divine A-seity, and the distinction between the θέλημα and the βουλή, that is, the Absolute Will as the universal ground of all being, and the election and purpose of God in the personal Idea, as Father.” Coleridge’s _Works_, 1853, i. 317.

[166] The bill in which Coleridge interested himself, and in favour of which he wrote two circulars which were printed and distributed, was introduced in the House of Commons by the first Sir Robert Peel. The object of the bill was to regulate the employment of children in cotton factories. A bill for prohibiting the employment of children under nine was passed in 1833, but it was not till 1844 that the late Lord Shaftesbury, then Lord Ashley, succeeded in passing the Ten Hours Bills. In a letter of May 3d to Crabb Robinson, Coleridge asks: “Can you furnish us with any other instances in which the legislature has interfered with what is ironically called ‘Free Labour’ (_i. e._ dared to prohibit soul-murder on the part of the rich, and self-slaughter on that of the poor!), or any dictum of our grave law authorities from Fortescue--to Eldon: for from the borough of Hell I wish to have no representatives.” Henry Crabb Robinson’s _Diary_, ii. 93-95.

[167] James Maitland, 1759-1839, eighth Earl of Lauderdale, belonged to the party of Charles James Fox, and, like Coleridge, opposed the first war with France, which began in 1793. In the ministry of “All the Talents” he held the Great Seal of Scotland. Coleridge calls him plebeian because he inherited the peerage from a remote connection. He was the author of several treatises on finance and political economy.

[168] It was, I have been told by an eyewitness, Coleridge’s habit to take a pinch of snuff, and whilst he was talking to rub it between his fingers. He wasted so much snuff in the process that the maid servant had directions to sweep up these literary remains and replace them in the canister.

[169] A pet name for the Gillmans’ younger son, Henry.

[170] Coleridge was fond of quoting these lines as applicable to himself.

[171] Washington Allston.

[172] Charles Robert Leslie, historical painter, 1794-1859, was born of American parents, but studied art in London under Washington Allston. A pencil sketch, for which Coleridge sat to him in 1820, is in my possession. Mr. Hamo Thornycroft, R. A., after a careful inspection of other portraits and engravings of S. T. Coleridge, modelled the bust which now (thanks to American generosity) finds its place in Poets’ Corner, mainly in accordance with this sketch.

[173] _Letters, Conversations, and Recollections of S. T. Coleridge_, London, 1836, i. 1-3.

[174] The Prospectus of the Lectures on the History of Philosophy was printed in Allsop’s _Letters_, etc., as Letter xliv., November 26, 1818, but the announcement of the time and place has been omitted. A very rare copy of the original prospectus, which has been placed in my hands by Mrs. Henry Watson, gives the following details:--

“This course will be comprised in Fourteen Lectures, to commence on Monday evening, December 7, 1818, at eight o’clock, at the Crown and Anchor, Strand; and be continued on the following Mondays, with the intermission of Christmas week--Double Tickets, admitting a Lady and Gentleman, Three Guineas. Single Tickets, Two Guineas. Admission to a Single Lecture, Five Shillings. An Historical and Chronological Guide to the course will be printed.”

A reporter was hired at the expense of Hookham Frere to take down the lectures in shorthand. A transcript, which I possess, contains numerous errors and omissions, but is interesting as affording proof of the conversational style of Coleridge’s lectures. See, for further account of Lectures of 1819, _Samuel Taylor Coleridge, a Narrative_, by J. Dykes Campbell, pp. 238, 239.

[175] Thomas Phillips, R. A., 1770-1845, painted two portraits of Coleridge, one of which is in the possession of Mr. John Murray, and was engraved as the frontispiece of the first volume of the _Table Talk_; and the other in that of Mr. William Rennell Coleridge, of Salston, Ottery St. Mary. The late Lord Chief Justice used to say that the Salston picture was “the best presentation of the outward man.” No doubt it recalled his great-uncle as he remembered him. It certainly bears a close resemblance to the portraits of Coleridge’s brothers, Edward and George, and of other members of the family.

[176] My impression is that this letter was written to Mrs. Aders, the beautiful and accomplished daughter of the engraver Raphael Smith, but the address is wanting and I cannot speak with any certainty.

[177] Compare lines 16-20 of _The Two Founts_:--

“As on the driving cloud the shiny bow,
That gracious thing made up of tears and light.”

The poem as a whole was composed in 1826, and, as I am assured by Mrs. Henry Watson (on the authority of her grandmother, Mrs. Gillman), addressed to Mrs. Aders; but the fifth and a preceding stanza, which Coleridge marked for interpolation, in an annotated copy of _Poetical Works_, 1828 (kindly lent me by Mrs. Watson), must have been written before that date, and were, as I gather from an insertion in a note-book, originally addressed to Mrs. Gillman. _Poetical Works_, p. 196. See, too, for unprinted stanza, _Ibid._ Editor’s Note, p. 642.

[178] “To Two Sisters.” _Poetical Works_, p. 179.

[179] The so-called “Manchester Massacre,” nicknamed Peterloo, took place August 16, 1819. Towards the middle of October dangerous riots broke out at North Shields. Cries of “Blood for blood,” “Manchester over again,” were heard in the streets, and “so daring have the mob been that they actually threatened to burn or destroy the ships of war.” _Annual Register_, October 15-23, 1819.

[180] “Fears in Solitude.” _Poetical Works_, p. 127.

[181] Mrs. Gillman’s sister.

[182] A collection of casts of antique gems, once, no doubt, the property of S. T. C., is now in the possession of Alexander Gillman, Esq., of Sussex Square, Brighton.

[183] Edward Dubois, satirist, 1775-1850, was the author of _The Wreath_, a _Translation of Boccaccio’s Decameron_, 1804, and other works besides those mentioned in the text. _Biographical Dictionary._

[184] A late note-book of the Highgate period contains the following doggerel:--

TO THE MOST VERACIOUS ANECDOTIST AND SMALL-TALK MAN, THOMAS HILL, ESQ.

Tom Hill who laughs at cares and woes,
As nanci--nili--pili--
What is _he_ like as I suppose?
Why to be sure, a Rose, a Rose.
At least no soul that Tom Hill knows,
Could e’er recall a Li-ly.
S. T. C.

“The first time,” writes Miss Stuart, in a personal remembrance of Coleridge, headed “A Farewell, 1834,” “I dined in company at my father’s table, I sat between Coleridge and Mr. Hill (known as ‘Little Tommy Hill’) of the Adelphi, and Ezekiel then formed the theme of Coleridge’s eloquence. I well remember his citing the chapter of the Dead Bones, and his sepulchral voice as he asked, ‘Can these bones live?’ Then, his observation that nothing in the range of human thought was more sublime than Ezekiel’s reply, ‘Lord, thou knowest,’ in deepest humility, not presuming to doubt the omnipotence of the Most High.” _Letters from the Lake Poets_, p. 322. See, too, Letters from Hill to Stuart, _Ibid._ p. 435.

[185] William Elford Leach, 1790-1836, a physician and naturalist, was at this time Curator of the Natural History Department at the British Museum.

By Lawrencian, Coleridge means a disciple of the eminent surgeon William Lawrence, whose “Lectures on the Physiology, Zoölogy, and Natural History of Man,” which were delivered in 1816, are alluded to more than once in his “Theory of Life.” “Theory of Life” in _Miscellanies, Æsthetic and Literary_, Bohn’s Standard Library, pp. 377, 385.

[186] Included in the _Omniana_ of 1809-1816. _Table Talk_, etc., Bell & Sons, 1884, p. 400.

[187] Compare a letter of Coleridge to Allsop, dated October 8, 1822, in which he details “the four griping and grasping sorrows, each of which seemed to have my very heart in its hands, compressing or wringing.”

It was the publication of this particular letter, with its thinly-veiled allusions to Wordsworth, Southey, and to Coleridge’s sons, which not only excited indignation against Allsop, but moved Southey to write a letter to Cottle. _Letters, Conversation_, etc., 1836, ii. 140-146.

[188] Compare “The Wanderer’s Farewell to Two Sisters” (Mrs. Morgan and Miss Brent), 1807. Miss Brent made her home with her married sister, Mrs. J. J. Morgan, and during the years 1810-1815, when Coleridge lived under the Morgans’ roof at Hammersmith, in London, and in the West of England, he received from these ladies the most affectionate care and attention, both in sickness and in health. _Poetical Works_, pp. 179, 180.

[189] The Reverend Edward Coleridge, 1800-1883, the sixth and youngest son of Colonel James Coleridge, was for many years a Master and afterwards a Fellow of Eton. He also held the College living of Mapledurham near Reading. He corresponded with his uncle, who was greatly attached to him, on philosophical and theological questions. It was to him that the “Confessions of an Enquiring Spirit” were originally addressed in the form of letters.

[190] Colonel Coleridge’s only daughter, Frances Duke, was afterwards married to the Honourable Mr. Justice Patteson, a Judge of the Queen’s Bench.

[191]

Like those trim skiffs, unknown of yore
On winding lake, or rivers wide,
That ask no aid of sail or oar,
That fear no spite of wind or tide.

“Youth and Age,” ll. 12-15. _Poetical Works_, p. 191. A MS. copy of “Youth and Age” in my possession, of which the probable date is 1822, reads “boats” for “skiffs.”

[192] Sir Alexander Johnston, 1775-1849, a learned orientalist. He was Advocate General (afterwards Chief Justice) of Ceylon, and had much to do with the reorganisation of the constitution of the island. He was one of the founders of the Royal Asiatic Society. _Dict. of Nat. Biog._ art. “Johnston, Sir Alexander.”

[193] Gabriele Rossetti, 1783-1854, the father of Dante G. Rossetti, etc., first visited England as a political exile in 1824. In 1830 he was appointed Professor of the Italian language at King’s College. He is best known as a commentator on Dante. He presented Coleridge with a copy of his work, _Dello Spirito Antipapale che Produsse la Riforma_, and some of his verses in MS., which are in my possession.

[194] From the letter of Wordsworth to Lord Lonsdale, of February 5, 1819, it is plain that the translation of three books of the Æneid had been already completed at that date. Another letter written five years later, November 3, 1824, implies that the work had been put aside, and, after a long interval, reattempted. In the mean time a letter of Coleridge to Mrs. Allsop, of April 8, 1824, tells us that the three books had been sent to Coleridge and must have remained in his possession for some time. The MS. of this translation appears to have been lost, but “one of the books,” Professor Knight tells us, was printed in the _Philological Museum_, at Cambridge, in 1832. _Life of W. Wordsworth_, ii. 296-303.

[195] Coleridge was at this time (1824) engaged in making a selection of choice passages from the works of Archbishop Leighton, which, together with his own comment and corollaries, were published as _Aids to Reflection_, in 1825. See Letter CCXXX.

[196] _Conversations of Lord Byron_, etc., by Captain Medwin.

[197] The frontispiece of the second volume of the _Antiquary_ represents Dr. Dousterswivel digging for treasure in Misticot’s grave. The resemblance to Coleridge is, perhaps, not wholly imaginary.

[198] John Taylor Coleridge was editor of the _Quarterly Review_ for one year, 1825-1826. _Southey’s Life and Correspondence_, v. 194, 201, 204, 239, etc.; _Letters of Robert Southey_, iii. 455, 473, 511, 514, etc.

[199] Henry Hart Milman, 1791-1868, afterwards celebrated as historian and divine (Dean of St. Paul’s, 1849), was, at this time, distinguished chiefly as a poet. His _Fall of Jerusalem_ was published in 1820. He was a contributor to the _Quarterly Review_.

[200] Afterward the wife of Sir George Beaumont, the artist’s son and successor in the baronetcy.

[201] Almost the same sentence with regard to his address as Royal Associate occurs in a letter to his nephew, John Taylor Coleridge, of May 20, 1825. The “Essay on the Prometheus of Æschylus,” which was printed in _Literary Remains_, was republished in _Coleridge’s Works_, Harper & Brothers, 1853, iv. 344-365. See, also, Brandl’s _Life of Coleridge_, p. 361.

[202] The portrait of William Hart Coleridge, Bishop of Barbadoes and the Leeward Islands, by Thomas Phillips, R. A., is now in the Hall of Christ Church, Oxford.

[203] A sprig of this myrtle (or was it a sprig of myrtle in a nosegay?) grew into a plant. At some time after Coleridge’s death it passed into the hands of the late S. C. Hall, who presented it to the late Lord Coleridge. It now flourishes, in strong old age, in a protected nook outside the library at Heath’s Court, Ottery St. Mary.

[204] George Dyer, 1755-1841, best remembered as the author of _The History of the University of Cambridge_, and a companion work on _The Privileges of the University of Cambridge_, began life as a Baptist minister, but settled in London as a man of letters in 1792. As a “brother-Grecian” he was introduced to Coleridge in 1794, in the early days of pantisocracy, and probably through him became intimate with Lamb and Southey. He contributed “The Show, an English Eclogue,” and other poems, to the _Annual Anthology_ of 1799 and 1800. His poetry was a constant source of amused delight to Lamb and Coleridge. A pencil sketch of Dyer by Matilda Betham is in the British Museum. _Letters of Charles Lamb_, i. 125-128 _et passim_; _Southey’s Life and Correspondence_, i. 218 _et passim_.

[205] George Cattermole, 1800-1868, to whose “peculiar gifts and powerful genius” Mr. Ruskin has borne testimony, was eminent as an architectural draughtsman and water-colour painter. With his marvellous illustrations of “Master Humphrey’s Clock” all the world is familiar. _Dict. of Nat. Biog._ art. “George Cattermole.” His brother Richard was Secretary of the Royal Society of Literature, of which Coleridge was appointed a Royal Associate in 1825. Copies of this and of other letters from Coleridge to Cattermole were kindly placed at my disposal by Mr. James M. Menzies of 24, Carlton Hill, St. John’s Wood.

[206] Harriet Macklin, Coleridge’s faithful attendant for the last seven or eight years of his life. On his deathbed he left a solemn request in writing that his family should make a due acknowledgment of her services. It was to her that Lamb, when he visited Highgate after Coleridge’s death, made a present of five guineas.

[207] Dr. Chalmers represented the visit as having lasted three hours, and that during that “stricken” period he only got occasional glimpses of what the prophet “would be at.” His little daughter, however, was so moved by the “mellifluous flow of discourse” that, when “the music ceased, her overwrought feelings found relief in tears.” _Samuel Taylor Coleridge, a Narrative_, by J. Dykes Campbell, 1894, p. 260, footnote.

[208] A disciple and amanuensis, to whom, it is believed, he dictated two quarto volumes on “The History of Logic” and “The Elements of Logic,” which originally belonged to Joseph Henry Green, and are now in the possession of Mr. C. A. Ward of Chingford Hatch. _Samuel Taylor Coleridge, a Narrative_, by J. Dykes Campbell, 1894, pp. 250, 251; _Athenæum_, July 1, 1893, art. “Coleridge’s Logic.”

[209] Henry Nelson Coleridge, 1798-1843, was the fifth son of Colonel James Coleridge of Heath’s Court, Ottery St. Mary. His marriage with the poet’s daughter took place on September 3, 1829. He was the author of _Six Months in the West Indies_, 1825, and an _Introduction to the Study of the Greek Poets_, 1830. He practised as a chancery barrister and won distinction in his profession. The later years of his life were devoted to the reëditing of his uncle’s published works, and to throwing into a connected shape the literary as distinguished from the philosophical section of his unpublished MSS. The _Table Talk_, the best known of Coleridge’s prose works, appeared in 1835. Four volumes of _Literary Remains_, including the “Lectures on Shakespeare and other Dramatists,” were issued 1836-1839. The third edition of _The Friend_, 1837, the _Confessions of an Inquiring Spirit_, 1840, and the fifth edition of _Aids to Reflection_, 1843, followed in succession. The second edition of the _Biographia Literaria_, which “he had prepared in part,” was published by his widow in 1847.

A close study of the original documents which were at my uncle’s disposal enables me to bear testimony to his editorial skill, to his insight, his unwearied industry, his faithfulness. Of the charm of his appearance, and the brilliance of his conversation, I have heard those who knew him speak with enthusiasm. He died, from an affection of the spine, in January, 1843.

[210] This lady was for many years governess in the family of Dr. Crompton of Eaton Hall, near Liverpool. _Memoirs and Letters of Sara Coleridge_, London, 1873, i. 8 109-116.

[211] Sir William Rowan Hamilton, 1805-1865, the great mathematician, was at this time Professor of Astronomy at Dublin. He was afterwards appointed Astronomer Royal of Ireland. He was, as is well known, a man of culture and a poet; and it was partly to ascertain his views on scientific questions, and partly to interest him in his verses, that Hamilton was anxious to be made known to Coleridge. He had begun a correspondence with Wordsworth as early as 1827, and Wordsworth, on the occasion of his tour in Ireland in 1829, visited Hamilton at the Observatory. Miss Lawrence’s introduction led to an interview, but a letter which Hamilton wrote to Coleridge in the spring of 1832 remained unanswered. In a second letter, dated February 3, 1833, he speaks of a “Lecture on Astronomy” which he forwards for Coleridge’s acceptance, and also of “some love-poems to a lady to whom I am shortly to be married.” The love-poems, eight sonnets, which are smoothly turned and are charming enough, have survived, but the lecture has disappeared. The interest of this remarkable letter lies in the double appeal to Coleridge as a scientific authority and a literary critic. Coleridge’s reply, if reply there was, would be read with peculiar interest. In a letter to Mr. Aubrey de Vere, May 28, 1832, he thus records his impressions of Coleridge: “Coleridge is rather to be considered as a Faculty than as a Mind; and I did so consider him. I seemed rather to listen to an oracular voice, to be circumfused in a Divine ὀμφὴ, than--as in the presence of Wordsworth--to hold commune with an exalted man.” _Life of W. Wordsworth_, iii. 157-174, 210, etc.

[212] He is referring to a final effort to give up the use of opium altogether. It is needless to say that, after a trial of some duration, the attempt was found to be impracticable. It has been strenuously denied, as though it had been falsely asserted, that under the Gillmans’ care Coleridge overcame the habit of taking laudanum in more or less unusual quantities. Gillman, while he maintains that his patient in the use of narcotics satisfied the claims of duty, makes no such statement; and the confessions or outpourings from the later note-books which are included in the _Life_ point to a different conclusion. That after his settlement at Highgate, in 1816, the habit was regulated and brought under control, and that this change for the better was due to the Gillmans’ care and to his own ever-renewed efforts to be free, none can gainsay. There was a moral struggle, and into that “sore agony” it would be presumption to intrude; but to a moral victory Coleridge laid no claim. And, at the last, it was “mercy,” not “praise,” for which he pleaded.

[213] The notes on Asgill’s Treatises were printed in the _Literary Remains, Coleridge’s Works_, 1853, v. 545-550, and in _Notes Theological and Political_, London, 1853, pp. 103-109.

[214] Admirers of Dr. Magee, 1765-1831, who was successively Bishop of Raphoe, 1819, and Archbishop of Dublin, 1822. He was the author of _Discourses on the Scriptural Doctrines of the Atonement_. He was grandfather of the late Archbishop of York, better known as Bishop of Peterborough.

[215] I am indebted to Mr. John Henry Steinmetz, a younger brother of Coleridge’s friend and ardent disciple, for a copy of this letter. It was addressed, he informs me, to his brother’s friend, the late Mr. John Peirse Kennard, of Hordle Cliff, Hants, father of the late Sir John Coleridge Kennard, Bart., M. P. for Salisbury, and of Mr. Adam Steinmetz Kennard, of Crawley Court Hants, at whose baptism the poet was present, and to whom he addressed the well-known letter (Letter CCLX.), “To my Godchild, Adam Steinmetz Kennard.”

[216] See _Table Talk_, August 14, 1832.

[217] So, too, of Keats. See _Table Talk_, etc., Bell & Sons. 1884, _Talk_ for August 14, 1832. _Table_ p. 179.

[218] “The sot would reject the poisoned cup, yet the trembling-hand with which he raises his daily or hourly draught to his lips has not left him ignorant that this, too, is altogether a poison.” _The Friend_, Essay xiv.; _Coleridge’s Works_, ii. 100.

[219] The motto of this theme, (January 19, 1794), of which I possess a transcript in Coleridge’s handwriting, or perhaps the original copy, is--

Quid fas
Atque nefas tandem incipiunt sentire peractis
Criminibus.

The theme was selected by Boyer for insertion in his _Liber Aureus_ of school exercises in prose and verse, now in the possession of James Boyer, Esq., of the Coopers’ Company. The sentence to which Coleridge alludes ran thus: “As if we were in some great sea-vortex, every moment we perceive our ruin more clearly, every moment we are impelled towards it with greater force.”

The essay was printed for the first time in the _Illustrated London News_, April 1, 1893.

[220] This letter, which is addressed in Coleridge’s handwriting, “Mrs. Aders, favoured by H. Gillman,” and endorsed in pencil, “S. T. C.’s letter for Miss Denman,” refers to the new edition of his poetical works which Coleridge had begun to see through the press. Apparently he had intended that the “Epitaph” should be inscribed on the outline of a headstone, and that this should illustrate, by way of vignette, the last page of the volume.

[221] Of the exact date of Sterling’s first visit to Highgate there is no record. It may, however, be taken for granted that his intimacy with Coleridge began in 1828, when he was in his twenty-third year, and continued until the autumn of 1833,--perhaps lasted until Coleridge’s death. Unlike Maurice, and Maurice’s disciple, Kingsley, Sterling outlived his early enthusiasm for Coleridge and his acceptance of his teaching. It may be said, indeed, that, thanks to the genius of his second master, Carlyle, he suggests both the reaction against and the rejection of Coleridge. Of that rejection Carlyle, in his _Life of Sterling_, made himself the mouth-piece. It is idle to say of that marvellous but disillusioning presentment that it is untruthful, or exaggerated, or unkind. It is a sketch from the life, and who can doubt that it is lifelike? But other eyes saw another Coleridge who held them entranced. To them he was the seer of the vision beautiful, the “priest of invisible rites behind the veil of the senses,” and to their ears his voice was of one who brought good tidings of reconciliation and assurance. Many, too, who cared for none of these things, were attracted to the man. Like the wedding-guest in the _Ancient Mariner_, they stood still. No other, they felt, was so wise, so loveable. They, too, were eye-witnesses, and their portraiture has not been outpainted by Carlyle. Apart from any expression of opinion, it is worth while to note that Carlyle saw Coleridge for the last time in the spring of 1825, and that the _Life of Sterling_ was composed more than a quarter of a century later. His opinion of the man had, indeed, changed but little, as the notes and letters of 1824-25 clearly testify, but his criticism of the writer was far less appreciative than it had been in Coleridge’s lifetime. The following extracts from a letter of Sterling to Gillman, dated “Hurstmonceaux, October 9, 1834,” are evidence that his feelings towards Coleridge were at that time those of a reverent disciple:--

“The Inscription [in Highgate Church] will forever be enough to put to shame the heartless vanity of a thousand such writers as the Opium Eater. As a portrait, or even as a hint for one, his papers seem to me worse than useless.

“If it is possible, I will certainly go to Highgate, and wait on Mrs. Gillman and yourself. I have travelled the road thither with keen and buoyant expectation, and returned with high and animating remembrances oftener than any other in England. Hereafter, too, it will not have lost its charm. There is not only all this world of recollection, but the dwelling of those who best knew and best loved his work.” _Life of Sterling_, 1871, pp. 46-54; _Samuel Taylor Coleridge, a Narrative_, by J. Dykes Campbell, pp. 259-261; British Museum, add. MS. 34,225, f. 194.

[222] The following unpublished lines were addressed by Coleridge to this young lady, a neighbour, I presume, and friend of the Gillmans. They must be among the last he ever wrote:--

ELISA.

TRANSLATION OF CLAUDIAN.

_Dulcia dona mihi tu mittis semper Elisa!_
Sweet gifts to me thou sendest always, Elisa!

_Et quicquid mittis, Thura putare decet._
And whatever thou sendest, Sabean odours to think it it behoves me.

The whole adapted from an epigram of Claudius by substituting _Thura_ for _mella_, the original distich being in return for a Present of Honey.

IMITATION.

Sweet Gift! and always doth Eliza send
Sweet Gifts and full of fragrance to her Friend.
Enough for Him to know they come from _Her_,
Whate’er she sends is Frankincense and Myrrh.

Another on the same subject by S. T. C. himself:--

Semper, Eliza! mihi tu suaveolentia donas:
Nam quicquid donas, te redolere puto.

Literal translation: Always, Eliza! to me things of sweet odour thou presentest. For whatever thou presentest, I fancy redolent of thyself.

Whate’er thou giv’st, it still is sweet to me,
For still I find it redolent of _thee_!

[223] _Philip Van Artevelde._

[224] Sir Henry Taylor.