Quarterly Review
VOLUME 19 , NUMBER 38 (July 1818)

NOTES

• This Number was published 2 Feb. 1819 [Courier advertisement, 2 Feb. 1819]
  
  
• This Number was ready for publication in early December, but it was delayed for want of the last pages of a single article [Murray MS., WG to John Coleridge, 7 Jan. 1819]. 
  
  
• Announced for publication 30 Jan. in Courier advertisement, 25 Jan.; postponement announced in Courier, 29 Jan.
  
  
• An editor's Note appears on page 569 of this Number concerning #457. The note clarifies a reference to the conduct of Captain Parry
  
  
• Items for 1819 from Jack Lynch's literary resources page, slightly modified and with additions:
  
  
  • The so-called Peterloo Massacre occurs 16 August when Manchester magistrates order armed and mounted soldiers to clear an assembly of sixty thousand protestors. Around five hundred are injured and eleven killed; the radical leaders, including Henry Hunt, are imprisoned. (See QR #533)
    
  • The British Government passes the so-called 'Six Acts' for the suppression of radical political activities and labor organization. Henry Grattan's motion to consider Catholic emancipation is defeated by two votes in the Commons.
    
  • "Missouri Compromise" in United States Congress admits slave-holding Missouri into the Union. Slavery is maintained in southern states while it is outlawed in the north and any future state.
    
  • Declarations of independence from Spain are made in Venezuela, Columbia and Ecuador.
    
  • August von Kotzebue is assassinated in Germany by a radical student, leading to a conservative government crackdown (see QR #614). The Convention of Karlsbad orders increased intellectual suppression in schools, universities and publishing.
    
  • Two further British expeditions to the Arctic Ocean in search of the Northwest Passage, including that by William Parry (see QR #585, 705).
    
  • In May, James Mill appointed assistant examiner of correspondence, East India House.
    
  • Robert Owen of New Lanark motivates passage of a Cotton Mills and Factories Act regulating conditions of employment in cotton mills. Still, children age nine and older can work 12 hour days.
    
  • Edward Irving becomes Thomas Chalmers's assistant (see QR #684).
    
  • Byron publishes Mazeppa and Don Juan, Cantos I-II; Keats publishes Ode to a Nightingale; Scott publishes The Bride of Lammermoor and A Legend of Montrose (see QR #605); Shelley completes Prometheus Unbound (see QR #607).
    
  • Victoria, John Ruskin, and Mary Evans (George Eliot) are born this year.
    

• Important or otherwise interesting articles in this Number include: #480, #482, #486, #487, #488, #491 (an article in which the Duke of Wellington had a part), #492
  
  
• Number of definite attributions for this issue: 10
  
  
• Number of probable or possible attributions for this issue: 2
  
  
• Number of articles for which no suggestion of authorship is made: 2

---

CONTENTS, IDENTIFICATION OF CONTRIBUTORS, AND HISTORICAL NOTES

---

479 Article 1. Henderson, Iceland; or the Journal of a Residence in that Island, during the Years 1814 and 1815, containing Observations on the Natural Phenomena, History, Literature, and Antiquities of the Island; and the Religion, Character, Manners, and Customs of its Inhabitants. Illustrated with a Map and Engravings, 291-321. Author: John Barrow, possibly, and possibly with Robert Southey.

Running Title: Iceland.

Notes: In querying its attribution to Barrow, Shine follows JM III's Register and quotes from the following letters. Murray MS., WG to JM, 24 July 1818 and 6 Aug. [1818]: 'If your poetical friend means to take up Iceland, I shall lay it down.... I had actually begun a review of Ebenezer Henderson's tour .... I think it too serious and too much of a matter-of-fact volume for your flighty friend.' Annotation on letter suggests QR No. 38, Art. 1. Murray MS., WG to JM [postmark Ramsgate, 6 Aug. 1818]: 'Barrow—Why should he not take Henderson? It would not interfere with Cohen.' [Quarterly Review Archive editor's note: as in Shine, but the transcription should instead read 'Colden' and is therefore a reference to #482, an article probably by Barrow.]  

The following evidence is published here in full for the first time; taken as a whole, it does not support a possible attribution to Southey that was first published in VPR 27, nor does it definitively point to Barrow as author of the review. Shine, having in the second letter quoted above misread 'Colden' as  'Cohen,' incorrectly conjectures that the 'poetical friend' mentioned in the first letter quoted above is 'Cohen.' Colden is the subject of #482, an article probably by Barrow. In the light of the following letter, there is reason to posit, instead, that the 'poetical friend' is Southey. Murray MS., Robert Southey to JM, 4 Sept. 1817: 'I will be kind to Dr. Holland.' (See p.301 of the article.)  In content, structure, and language the article resembles Southey and not Barrow: the article is more analytical than descriptive (the former Southey's, the latter Barrow's usual manner); the author's interest is political and social, not anthropological and geographical (the former Southey's, the latter Barrow's usual interests). Note also sentiments characteristic of Southey but certainly not of Barrow: the emphasis on religious language and a 'moral' view (p.292); concern for pastoral care (p.298); an interest in the Sabbath (p.299); a concern over the prevalence of 'popish' religion (p.301). As it was Barrow's signature practice in his QR articles to refer to his own works,  it is relevant that the article contains no references to works by Barrow, and yet twice the article's author refers to #182, an article by Southey on Iceland. However, the article is not on Southey's definitive MS. list of his QR articles and, moreover, Shine quotes the following letter that appears to rule out a contribution by Southey to this Number. BL MS., 28603 [no folio number given], Robert Southey to William Peachey, 9 Feb. 1819: 'there is nothing of mine in the last Quarterly [QR Number 38, the most recent issue, was published 2 Feb. 1819].' A series of letters preserved at the Bodleian also appears to preclude Southey as author of this article. Bodleian Library MS. Western MSS. d.47 (ff.128-29), Robert Southey to Grosvenor Bedford, 28 Nov. 1818, speaks of Copyright (#502) and the Catacombs (#507) as the two articles he is working on now, that when he completes them he will write nothing more for the QR for the next six months. Bodleian Library Western MSS. d.47 (ff.134), Southey to Bedford, [30 Jan. 1819], says that WG has postponed both of his articles for a future Number. Bodleian Library Western MSS. d.47 (ff.136-37), Southey to Bedford, 8 Feb. 1819, is disappointed in the current Number of the QR. There is no mention of his having contributed to the issue.

JM III's Register: '? Barrow' and note: 'See letter of J B July 24'.

480 Article 2. Maturin, Women: or, Pour et Contre. A Tale. By the Author of 'Bertram.', 321-28. Author: John Wilson Croker.

Running Title: Women: By the Author of 'Bertram.'

Notes: In attributing the article to Croker, Shine cites JM III's Register; Graham 41; and Brightfield 455.

The following evidence and discussion is published here for the first time. Claimed by Croker in six of his Clements Library MS. lists and included in the Cambridge University bound volumes of Croker's articles. NLS MS. 852 (f.58), Walter Scott to JM, 12 Aug. 1818 (copy), says he returns an article and regrets it is not as good as Jeffrey's in the Edinburgh Review. It was Scott, apparently, who reviewed Maturin's novel in the Edinburgh (ER #837, June 1818) which makes his opinion on #480 hardly disinterested! (See Wellesley Index I 458 for the attribution to Scott; in an age when reviews tended to be unsigned, it was the usual practice among commentators to putatively attribute an article to a journal's editor, as Scott does in his comment to JM.) The reason the article Scott refers to is probably #480 is because Birkbeck on America is the only other book reviewed by both the ER and the QR during this period, a topic unlikely to have concerned Scott enough for JM to have sent it to him, whereas Scott was Maturin's patron.

JM III's Register: attribution to Croker, citing unspecified letters.

481 Article 3. Milman, Samor, Lord of the Bright City. An Heroic Poem, 328-47. Author: John Taylor Coleridge.

Running Title: Milman's Samor.

Notes: In attributing the article to Coleridge, Shine cites JM III's Register; Coleridge 277; and Milman 38. Shine quotes from BL MS., 28603 [no folio number given], Robert Southey to William Peachey, 9 Feb. 1819: 'there is nothing of mine in the last Quarterly. The reviewal of Henry Milman's poem is I think the best piece of poetical criticism that appeared in the Journal. I believe it is written by John Coleridge.' 

The following evidence is published here for the first time. Murray MS., WG to John Taylor Coleridge, 7 Jan. 1819, says he still has Coleridge's MS. of 'Samor.' Murray MS., WG to JM, [1818 postmark]: 'I think Samor has much mind in it—especially when compared with the review in the British Critic.' Murray MS., Coleridge to WG, 22 Jan. 1822: 'I long to know how Milman bears the review of Samor, & if he tells you I shall be glad to have it communicated to me. I have a great deal of love for his heart, & respect for his head & should be most sorry if any difference of opinion on a matter of taste should be taken unkindly by him.' Bodleian MS., d.130 (ff.13-14), Thomas Arnold to Coleridge, 5 Feb. 1819, says he likes the review of Samor, as does 'Lowe,' one of Milman's most intimate friends, but regrets 'Gifford's rude Treatment' in cutting some of his (Arnold's) favourite extracts. Murray MS., WG to Coleridge, 12 Mar. 1819, Friday, says his 'Samor' is well liked and he is surprised at Milman's reaction. 'I am more sorry than surprised at your account of Milman. He ought to be pleased; but I suppose tis as hard to be an author & wise, as it is to be in love & be wise. ... no one suspects it of being severe in any instance.'

482 Article 4. The Life of Robert Fulton. By his friend Cadwallader D. Colden. Comprising some Account of the Invention, Progress, and Establishment of Steam-Boats; of Improvements in the Construction of Navigation of Canals, &c., 347-57. Author: John Barrow.

Running Title: Fulton—Torpedos, Steam-Boats, &c.

Notes: In querying its attribution to Barrow, Shine quotes from Murray MS., WG to JM, 6 Aug. [1818]: 'Fulton cannot come into this No. unless Mr B wishes it, & there is enough of America.' 

The following evidence supports a definite attribution to Barrow and was first published in VPR 27. Gentleman's Magazine (Mar. 1844), 246-47, in which Barrow's son claims 'inventions' as one of his father's preoccupations in the QR during this period. Murray MS., WG to JM, 6 Aug. [1818], asks why Barrow should not write #479; it will not interfere with his 'Colden'. The author claims personal knowledge of official Admiralty proceedings (pp.350-51). As Second Secretary to the Admiralty, Barrow had unrestricted access to Admiralty documents and proceedings. The article is referred to at #54WI, which is also by Barrow. In his QR articles, it was Barrow's signature practice to refer to his own works. Torpedoes is spelled in the running title as above.

483 Article 5. Moore, The History of Small-pox; Moore, The History and Practice of Vaccination, 357-75. Author: David Uwins.

Running Title: History of Small-Pox and Vaccination.

Notes: In attributing the article to Uwins, Shine cites the DNB article on Uwins and Gentleman's Magazine XXI 141.

The following evidence is published here for the first time. The article begins with a disclaimer against publishing articles on purely professional topics; the identical disclaimer appears in #564, also an article by Uwins. The enumerated conclusion ('in the first place,' 'secondly') is also found in #391 and #564, both of which are by Uwins. Murray MS., WG to JM, 4 Aug. 1818 [postmark]: '... Uwin's paper ... is a very good one.' 

484 Article 6. Phillips, Essays on the Proximate Mechanical Causes of the General Phenomena of the Universe, 375-79. Author not identified.

Running Title: Sir R. Phillips, on the Phenomena of the Universe.

Notes: In the absence of guidance from JM III's Register, Shine does not suggest an author for this article. 

The following discussion is published for the first time. Perhaps William Gifford. Note the article's brevity and its ironic tone; Gifford's first youthful accomplishment was mathematics.

485 Article 7. Brown, The Northern Courts; containing Original Memoirs of the Sovereigns of Sweden and Denmark, since 1766, 379-90. Author not identified.

Running Title: Brown's Northern Courts.

Notes: In the absence of guidance from JM III's Register, Shine does not suggest an author for this article.

The following discussion is published for the first time. The frequent use of italics, parentheses, and dashes is characteristic of Robert Hay. The article's author refers back to #223, on Gustavus IV, which is by Reginald Heber. Scandinavia was shared by Heber and Hay as their preserve. As the article speaks authoritatively in its defence of government ministers and diplomats (including Pitt and Canning), it appears to have been written by someone close to the journal's editorial coterie. A number of the works alluded to were reviewed by Heber (in #51, #76, #471, and #622 possibly). The subject of #342, by Croker, Wraxall's spurious Memoirs, is alluded to in the article. But there is no indication in any of Croker's Clements Library MS. lists that he wrote #485.

486 Article 8. Davison, Observations relating to some of the Antiquities of Egypt, from the Papers of the late Mr. Davison. Published in Walpole's Memoirs, 391-424. Author: John Barrow and Thomas Young, with Henry Salt.

Running Title: Antiquities of Egypt.

Notes: In co-attributing the article to Barrow, Young, and Salt, in that order, Shine cites JM III's Register; Gentleman's Magazine (that says the article was compiled from documents sent over by Salt); Young 240-41 (that says Barrow aided by Young); Pettigrew IV 21 (that says Young did the restoration and translation of the inscription on the Sphinx); and Brande XXVIII 157, [which] 'attributes to Young the "Restoration and Translation of the [Greek] Inscription on the Sphynx,"' on p.411 of QR XIX. Actually the transcription, restoration, and translation occupy two pages: pp. 411-12. And p. 411 specifically assigns to Young the work of restoring and translating. Shine says to see also Salt II 127.

The following evidence is published here for the first time. Murray MS., John Barrow to JM, 17 Nov. 1818, says both he and Young want duplicates of Greek inscriptions in the article (see pp.411-15) to see that they are correct. The article is listed in Young's definitive MS. list of his QR articles. The article is referred to in #536, #563 (twice), and #651, all of which Barrow contributed. The author of #486 twice refers to #472, which is also by Barrow. In his QR articles, it was Barrow's signature practice to refer to his own works. The linguistic discussion p.411ff. is probably Young's contribution. 

JM III's Register: [in dark ink] 'Dr Young' [in lighter ink, and superscript] '? & Barrow'.

487 Article 9. Hazlitt, Lectures on the English Poets. Delivered at the Surrey Institution, 424-34. Author: Eaton Stannard Barrett.

Running Title: Hazlitt's Lectures on the English Poets.

Notes: In attributing the article to Barrett, Shine cites JM III's Register and quotes from Murray MS., WG to JM, [Ramsgate, Aug. 1818 postmark]: 'Mr Barrett's parcel contained a sprightly & well written review of his second Woman [i.e., Barrett's second poem entitled Woman: see Entry 477]—It is by a friend. .... B himself is at work upon a review of modern poetry for the next No.' Shine also quotes from Murray MS. WG to JM, [Ramsgate, 4 Aug. 1818 postmark]: 'I have a review of Hazlitt by Mr Barrett.' In suggesting an alternative attribution to William Gifford, Shine cites Hazlitt 432-41 and Spurgeon II 96. James Russell is suggested as a third alternative because of JM III's evidently mistaken attribution. For the latter attribution, Shine also cites Graham 41 and Clark 215, but these sources are also misled by the Register.

JM III's Register: attribution to 'Mr Russell' and WG, but without evidence.

488 Article 10. Sir James Smith, Considerations Respecting Cambridge, more particularly relating to its Botanical Professorship; Monk, A Vindication of the University of Cambridge from the Reflections of Sir James Edward Smith, President of the Linnaean Society, &c, 434-46. Author: George D'Oyly, probably.

Running Title: Cambridge Botanical Professorship.

Notes: In querying its attribution to D'Oyly, Shine cites JM III's Register and quotes from Murray MS., WG to JM, [1818]: 'I send you <?> for Mr D'Oyly, & the volume of Sir James —The latter is the most ignorant & impudent work that the press has lately produced. It must not & shall not escape—tell Mr D'Oyly this.'

The following evidence was first published in VPR 28. Linnaean Society MS., Smith correspondence 12.84, Bishop Carlisle to Sir James Smith, says he has been assured that this article was by an Oxford man (and therefore not George D'Oyly). 'Many thanks to you for your reply to Monck [sic] and Q. Reviewer. ... I see how strong your learning was that Monck had written the Review—I am assured that it was written by an Oxford man. ... If the fact be true that an Oxford man was the author, that will serve to exculpate D'Oyly ... besides I cannot think it possible, that so very Gentlemanly & quiet a man as D'Oyly, should overhand apply to you for information of which he has made material use, & underhand attack you in the dark, anonymously in a Review. I cannot think him capable of such a thing.' In the article a footnote that discusses Cambridge University policy would more likely come from a Cambridge than and Oxford man. The defence of Christianity, which is the thrust of the article, is in keeping with D'Oyly's official position at the university as Christian apologist.

The article was the occasion for Sir James Edward Smith, A Defence of the Church and Universities of England, against such injurious advocates as Professor Monk, and The Quarterly Review for January, 1819 (1819). [Bookseller's note: 'James Henry Monk was Regius Professor of Greek at Cambridge in succession to Porson. He had replied to Smith's criticism of the University of Cambridge in 1819 (sic), after Smith was not allowed to lecture because he was a Unitarian.']

489 Article 11. Bellamy, A Reply to the Quarterly Review on the New Translation of the Bible from the original Hebrew, 446-60. Author: William Goodhugh.

Running Title: Bellamy's Reply to the Quarterly Review.

Notes: In attributing the article to George D'Oyly, Shine quotes from Murray MS., WG to JM, [1818]: 'I send you <?> for Mr D'Oyly, & the volume of Sir James —The latter is the most ignorant & impudent work that the press has lately produced. It must not & shall not escape—tell Mr D'Oyly this.' [Quarterly Review Archive editor's note: Shine also cites D'Oyly 24, but the claim in that work that D'Oyly wrote #489 undoubtedly arose over a confusion with #546, an article on the same topic that is indeed by D'Oyly.] As an alternative, Shine suggests an attribution to William Goodhugh and cites JM III's Register and Gentleman's Magazine XXI 141.

The following evidence was published in VPR 28. Murray MS., Goodhugh to JM, 24 Dec. 1835, states that in 1818 he wrote a review of Bellamy's translation. Laing MSS. II, 784-85, William Goodhugh to Lord John Russell, 1 June 1839: 'Twenty years ago I was the writer of an article in the Quarterly Review defending the purity and excellence of our present English version [of the Bible] from the attacks of Bellamy ....' Gentleman's Magazine XXI, 141. Claimed for Goodhugh in the DNB article on him (that also, incorrectly, claims #546 for him).

JM III's Register: 'Goodhugh', but without evidence.

490 Article 12. De Genlis, Abrégé des Mémoires ou Journal du Marquis de Dangeau, avec des Notes Historiques et Critiques, et un Abrégé de l'Histoire de la Régence; Lémontey, Essai sur l'Establissement Monarchique de Louis XIV. précédé de Nouveaux Mémoires de Dangeau, avec des Notes Autographes curieuses et anecdotiques ajoutées à ces Mémoires par un Courtisan de la même Epoque, 460-78. Author: John Wilson Croker.

Running Title: Dangeau's Mémoires de Louis XIV.

Notes: In attributing the article to Croker, Shine cites JM III's Register and quotes from Iowa MS., JM to [John Wilson Croker], n.d.: 'Murray is sending Croker a borrowed copy of Dangeau. Shine also quotes from Iowa MS., JM to Croker, n.d.: 'The last <?> sheet of Dangeau—is thank God worked off—or we should never be out—& your note may be passed off in another number.' 

The following evidence is published here for the first time. Claimed by Croker in six of his Clements Library MS. lists and included in the Cambridge University bound volumes of Croker's articles. 

JM III's Register: attribution to Croker, citing unspecified letters.

491 Article 13. Wilson, Letter from Sir Robert Wilson to his Constituents in Refutation of a Charge for dispatching a false Report of a Victory to the Commander in Chief of the British Army in the Peninsula in the Year 1809; and which Charge is advanced in the Quarterly Review published in September, 1818, 478-92. Author: William Carr Beresford, with material supplied by Arthur Wellesley, Duke of Wellington.

Running Title: Sir R. Wilson's Letter to the Borough Electors.

Notes: Shine, misled by the Iowa MS. letters quoted below, tentatively attributes the article to John Wilson Croker. 

The following definitive evidence in favour of Beresford and Wellington was first published in VPR 28. The article answers #471 (p.140), by Heber. Southampton MS. WP/1/613/4, James Stanhope to Arthur Wellesley, Duke of Wellington, 2 Jan. 1819: Beresford has been asked to inform Wellington of the progress of his article on Sir Robert Wilson's conduct during the Peninsular War. Wellington has already provided information for use in the article; would he be willing to provide more? The editor requires the article back that evening. Iowa MS., JM to John Wilson Croker, n.d. [quoted in Shine]: 'I hope to send you on Monday a new work of Sir Robert Wilson—an account of his own operations in Spain—if you did not appropriate this I think of introducing it to Capt. Pasely.' (Captain Sir Charles William Pasley, 1780-1861). Iowa MS., JM to Croker, n.d. [quoted in Shine], asks Croker to review Sir Robert Wilson. But this article is claimed by Croker in none of his Clements Library MS. lists and it is not included in the Cambridge University bound volumes of Croker's articles.

492 Article 14. First, Second, Third, Fourth and Fifth REPORTS of the Select Committee appointed to Inquire into THE EDUCATION OF THE LOWER ORDERS IN THE METROPOLIS, and to report their Observations thereupon, together with the Minutes of the Evidence taken before them from time to time, to the House: and who were instructed to consider WHAT MAY BE FIT TO BE DONE WITH RESPECT TO THE CHILDREN OF PAUPERS WHO SHALL BE FOUND BEGGING IN THE STREETS in and near the Metropolis, or who shall be carried about by Persons asking Charity, and whose Parents, or other Persons who [whom] they accompany, have not sent such Children to any of the Schools provided for the Education of Poor Children; A Letter to Sir Samuel Romilly, M.P. from Henry Brougham, Esq. M.P. F.R.S. upon the Abuse of Charities. Tenth Edition; The Speech of Henry Brougham, Esq. M.P. in the House of Commons, May 8th, 1818, on the Education of the Poor, and Charitable Abuses; A Letter to the Right Hon. Sir William Scott, &c. &c. M.P. for the University of Oxford, in Answer to Mr. Brougham's Letter to Sir Samuel Romilly, upon the Abuse of Charities, and Ministerial Patronage in the Appointments under the late Act. Fourth Edition; Bowles, Vindiciœ Wykehamicœ; or, a Vindication of Winchester College: in a Letter to Henry Brougham, Esq. occasioned by his Letter to Sir Samuel Romilly, on Charitable Abuses; Clarke, A Letter to Henry Brougham, Esq. M.P. F.R.S. in Reply to the Strictures on Winchester College, contained in his Letter to Sir Samuel Romilly, M.P.; A Letter to Henry Brougham, Esq. M.P. from John Ireland, D.D. formerly Vicar of Croydon, now Dean of Westminster, with an Appendix, containing the Letter from Mr. Drummond, 492-569. Author: John Wilson Croker and James Henry Monk, with William Gifford, George Canning, Charles Manners-Sutton, and others.

Running Title: Mr. Brougham.—Education Committee.

Notes: Shine supplies voluminous and conflicting evidence to support various combinations of authors for this article, but for the most part the same names are involved, Monk, Gifford, Canning, and Croker. Of these only the attribution to Croker cannot be supported by the evidence Shine presents. Of the letters quoted below, Shine cites Murray MS., WG to JM [22 Jan. 1819] and Iowa MS., JM to Croker, n.d. Shine also cites Monk in Athenaeum No. 2472 pp. 393-95; Brightfield 215-16, 455; Gentleman's Magazine XXI 141; Dudley 215,.215n; and Greville I 74, 74n. 

The following evidence (some of which was first published in VPR 28 and the rest of which is published here for the first time) establishes the primary authors of the article, but it appears that there may have been even more hands involved. The gestation of this article caused a crisis of confidence in WG's leadership among the QR's editorial coterie. It seems that WG, wielding his usual dictatorial pen, excised much of Monk's material, but Croker and others took Monk's side. Against his will, and after an extraordinary representation by Croker of the combined opinion of the QR's editorial group, WG pulled the article back from the press, reinserted as much of Monk's material as he possibly could, and apologised to his coadjutors for his behaviour. The incident prompted WG seriously to consider resigning the editorship. Harewood MS., WG to George Canning, March 27 [1818 watermark], regarding the Report on Education, 'Monk has already written to me. I must now let him go on, keeping an eye on him.' Murray MS., James Monk to JM, 16 Jan. 1819, complains that he was hurried to get his article in and yet the Quarterly has not appeared. 'I understand that the Number was to be out a week at least before the enacting of Parliament ... as far as the last article is concerned, the effect will be unfortunate.' Murray MS., WG to JM, [22 Jan. 1819]: '... thank God I have been able to complete my design. I have tried to satisfy Monk & brought in every scrap that I could.' Iowa MS. (f.93), WG to JM, [n.d., no watermark]: 'I have, as you desired, opened your letter—& have sent the Art. It would bear the appearance of sheer obstinacy to hold out any longer, & in giving up my opinion I have the satisfaction of knowing that my friends will not think I give way lightly, or that I insert any thing without due consideration. That I am wrong, it is now my duty to think, and I most cheerfully leave you to get the affair thro' Rowarth's [the printer's] hands as speedily as possible. I hope the pages will contain the new matter [i.e., that the pages will not have to be completely reset]. This has been a trying day for me, & I am nearly exhausted. I hope the other changes were made. The errata must be prefaced with[:] / A few of our copies contain the following errata, which the reader will be pleased to correct[.] / Or the customary formula[.] Clements Library MS., Croker letters, Letter Book No. 8, John Wilson Croker to WG, 30 Jan. 1819 [copy]:  'My dear friend. / I have seldom felt more <concerned> than at all the trouble and vexation which I was the cause (with others) of giving you yesterday. / It has been all my life my rule to do what I think my duty to my friends at the risk of displeasing them, but really, ill as you are and fatigued and vexed by other matters I should not have pressed my opinion upon you if I had not thought the honor and safety of the good ship in which we all have the honor to serve under your orders, were in question. / I was the spokesman, but I assure you the crew were one and all [double underlined in the MS.] of the opinion I gave you and I was only the mouthpiece. My greatest apprehension, I will own to you, was not on account of the article or the person principally mentioned in our discussion. I trembled more for the fate of the last Article, that beautiful essay which unites in the highest degree sound reason, eloquent wit, irresistible logic, happy pleasantry with a true English and a true Christian spirit. I was afraid that an abject confession of a most unjustifiable calumny, when there was no calumny at all and only six letters unjustifiable would destroy our credit & involve B. in the acquittal of W. / For either of these worthies I do not care a fig. I believe they are both impotent, the one from over rage [overage?] and the other from poorness of intellect, but as the friends of the Church & State look to the Quarterly for what is to be said against them it would be a sad thing to weaken that confidence which the well disposed public has in our publication. / The good humour and kindness with which you have borne this intrusion of mine makes me more than ever you obliged and affectionate / JWC / W. Gifford Esq. / P.S. I am to be in Parliament to day.' Quoted in Smiles, II 49: John Wilson Croker to JM, n.d., 'I wrote to you and our friend from Gloucester Lodge [Canning's residence], I hope with some success, though I rather fear Mr G[ifford]'s illness may render him unwilling to have any more changes made. I would not press it, if I did not in my conscience believe that the character and efficacy of the Review is concerned, vitally concerned in the matter .... The Speaker [Manners-Sutton] longs to see the Review. Could you send him a number to-night. You might request not to show it till Monday; I will get back the copy from him.' Iowa MS. (f. 96), WG to JM, [n.d., no watermark], 'Burn this / My dear Sir / I read all the Proofs—still regretting even my gentle termination—but it is better to hazard it, than to continue the struggle, which I rather feared. I hope all is now done in good humour, & that no more will be said on either side—As for the public, they will stare perhaps—but one must keep our secret very strictly[.] Ever yours / William Gifford / I inclose a line for Mr —/ Whose <man> will call[.] I did not know till I came down to hear that he had been in the room. Yesterday tired me.' As the letter was in Croker's collection, evidently it was forwarded to Croker by JM to demonstrate Gifford's determination to put their difference behind him. Murray MS., Thomas Mitchell to JM, 29 May 1820 [notation on letter in JM II's hand: 'QR 38 last article.']: 'You once transmitted me ten names, as joint contributors to it, in which you were, no doubt, perfectly correct.' Suggests that Cambridge thinks it was solely the work of Professor Monk. Shine supplies a number of sources that claim a role for Canning in inspiring the article and in contributing the conclusion. Claimed by Croker in four of his Clements Library MS. lists. However, in what appears to be the latest of these lists, Croker's contribution is noted as partial. Included in the Cambridge University bound volumes of Croker's articles. The article was answered in a pamphlet, A Vindication of the Enquiry into Charitable Abuses, with an Exposure of the Misrepresentations Contained in the Quarterly Review (London, 1819). Smiles draws attention to an article in the Athenaeum (20 March 1875) in which this article is mentioned. Two later letters in the Murray archives bear on article #492 and the WG letters published in the Athenaeum, as follows. [Dr. Christopher Stray drew these letters to the attention of the present writer.] Murray MS., C. J. Monk to JM III, 25 Mar. 1875: 'my letter on the charge brought by Wm. Reeve & W. Hayward against Bishop Monk. ' Murray MS., JM to C. J. Monk, 29 March [1875]: 'The fact is that I read in that correspondence [published in Athenaeum 20 March 1875] the most complete confirmation of the statement I f received from my Father, & which I firmly believe, that, although the substance of the Article on Brougham, & all the solid parts were written by Dr. Monk, the wit, sparkle & sarcasm were added by the Editor at the inspiration of Mr Canning.' 

The education of the poor was the subject of ER #847, by an unknown author, though Francis Jeffrey appears to have had a hand in it.

JM III's Register: 'Rev Prof Monk (in part)' and note; [in pencil] 'Canning—Croker & Gifford assisting'.