1966. Robert Southey to John Murray, 14 October 1811
1966. Robert Southey to John Murray, 14 October 1811 *
Keswick. Oct. 14. 1811.
My dear Sir
For the last three days I have looked very anxiously for the remainder of my Essay upon Bell & the Dragon, – because Dr Bell is at this time at Keswick. I now conclude that the remaining proofs [1] will not be sent, – seeing the number announced for Saturday. Dr B. is very eager to see what has been done, – & tho it is now too late to remedy any error which may have crept into it, if any there be, (which is his main cause of solicitude) – still he is eager. Let me beg you therefore, if the number is ready, to send it me without delay, – if it be not, to let me have the sheets of the article, – which, no doubt, Mr Croker will frank down.
Pray hunt out if it be possible, Helen Maria Williams book which contains her account of the Revolution at Naples. [2] Without it it will I cannot write that part of Nelsons life. [3] – I am getting on with this, & may xx go to press in a fortnight.
Yrs very truly
R Southey.
Notes
* Address: To/ Mr Murray/ Fleet Street/ London.
Stamped:
KESWICK/ 298
Postmark: E/ 17 OC 17/ 1811
Watermark: shield/ 1806
Endorsement: 1811 Octr 14/ Southey
R Keswick
MS: National Library of Scotland, MS 42550. ALS; 2p.
Unpublished. BACK
[1] The proofs of Southey’s review of Joseph Fox (1775–1816; DNB), A Comparative View of the Plans of Education as detailed in the Publications of Dr. Bell and Mr. Lancaster, and Remarks on Dr. Bell’s Madras School, and Hints to the Managers and Committees of Charity and Sunday Schools, on the Practicability of extending such Institutions upon Mr. Lancaster’s Plan, 3rd edn (1811); Herbert Marsh (1757–1839; DNB), A Sermon, Preached in the Cathedral Church of St. Paul, London, on Thursday, June 13, 1811. To which is Added, a Collection of Notes and Illustrations (1811); Reynold Gideon Bouyer (1741–1826; DNB), A Comparative View of the two New Systems of Education of the Infant Poor, in a Charge delivered to the Clergy of the Officialty of the Dean and Chapter of Durham, at Berwick-upon-Tweed, on Tuesday, May 12, 1811 (1811), in Quarterly Review, 6 (August 1811), 264–304. The article, which advocated Bell’s system, was heavily censored by Gifford prior to publication and personal attacks on the Edinburgh Review were removed; see the account in Jonathan Cutmore, The Quarterly Review Archive. BACK
