2944. Robert Southey to Charles Watkin Williams Wynn, 17 March 
2944. Robert Southey to Charles Watkin Williams Wynn, 17 March  *
My dear Wynn
If you think it is proper for me to notice Wm Smiths rascally attack,  – send the inclosed to the Courier.  As neither he nor I are Duellists no harm will come of it. – & he will not be very ready to engage in a paper war, with one who knows how to thrust as well as to parry. – I thank you for defending me;  – & wish the Courier had reported upon your reply as fully as it did the provocation.
I should like to discover by whom Wat Tyler was published,  – I know not what has been done since the second affidavit  was returned, – & am surprized at not hearing.  It is now of no other consequence to apply for the injunction, – than as a formal & legal disavowal on my part of the publication.
God bless you
Monday. 17 March.
* Address: [deletions and readdress
in another hand] To/ C W Williams Wynn Esqre M.P./
Hamilton Place/ London/ <Norton Priory/
Warrington/ Acton/ Wrexham>
Stamped: KESWICK/ 298
Postmarks: FREE/ 20 MR 20/ 1817; [partial] FREE
MS: National Library of Wales, MS 4812D. ALS; 2p.
 Smith had denounced Southey in the House of Commons on 14 March 1817 in the debate on the Seditious Meetings Bill, condemning ‘the settled, determined malignity of a renegado’ and comparing Southey’s arguments against radical views in Quarterly Review, 16 (October 1816), 227 with those expressed in Wat Tyler (1817), Act 2, lines 103–112. BACK
 As soon as Smith had spoken in the Commons on 14 March, Wynn had replied in Southey’s defence. BACK
 The firm of William Sherwood (1776–1837), Samuel Dunbar Neely (dates unknown) and Robert Jones (dates unknown) had published Southey’s early Jacobin play, Wat Tyler, without his knowledge. BACK