keen a sense of humiliation, may be gathered from his letter to Mudford, then assistant editor of the Courier-Woe is me! that at 46 I am under the necessity of appearing as a lecturer, and obliged to regard every hour given to the PERMANENT, whether as poet or philosopher, an hour stolen from others as well as from my own maintenance.' 1 The prospectus promises fourteen lectures on Shakespeare and on Poetical Literature, native and foreign. From Crabb Robinson's Diaries we learn that the first lecture was delivered 2 on its appointed date, Jan 27, 1818, and that, up to the tenth, due dates (Tuesdays and Fridays) had been observed. After the tenth, Robinson went on circuit, not to return until March 26, by which date the course must have been finished. Hazlitt was lecturing on Poetry at the same time, sometimes on the same evenings, at the Surrey Institution, a competition which cannot have contributed to the success of either course. On the evidence of Allsop-that the lectures were 'constantly thronged by the most attentive and intelligent auditory I have ever seen' it has been believed that the course was very successful pecuniarily, but neither Robinson's nor Coleridge's account fully bears this out. The audiences fluctuated, and, even more, the quality of the lectures. Robinson was far from being satisfied with most of Coleridge's appearances, feeling that as a rule he was repeating himself—which is not very surprising seeing that he had lectured on the same subjects so often before, and that the preparation was made either amid the distractions of finishing The Friend, or (more probably) not at all.3 With or without reason, Coleridge failed to send a ticket for these lectures to Lamb, but there was no cessation of intercourse, and when Lamb brought out his collected Works' in June 1818,4 the volumes were dedicated to Coleridge in a letter conceived in terms equally reverent and affectionate. After a passage recalling the smoky suppers at the Salutation and Cat,' Lamb proceeds: The world has given you many a shrewd nip and gird since that time, but either my eyes are grown dimmer, or my old friend is still the same who stood before me three-and-twenty years ago-his hair a little confessing the hand of time, but still shrouding the same capacious brain, -- his heart not altered, scarcely where it "alteration finds."' The old feeling had suffered no change, but opportunities of free companionship were awanting. In October, Lamb wrote to Southey5: I do not see S. T. C. so often as I could wish. He never comes to me, and though his host and hostess are very friendly, it puts me out of my way to see one person at another person's house. It was the same when he resided at Morgan's.' A new friendship was about to begin, and to brighten Coleridge's life. Thomas Allsop had introduced himself to Coleridge after the first lecture at Flower-de-luce Court. By September, the young man was sending presents of 1 Canterbury Magazine for September 1834, p. 125. 2 At a hall in Flower-de-luce Court, in Fetter Lane. 3 The record is scanty. A few preparatory notes, mostly marginalia, on a copy of Warburton's Shakespeare, with a few jottings taken down by friends, were piously collected in Lit. Rem. (i. 61-241) under the heading 'Course of Lectures, 1818.' A slight addition was made by the publication in Notes and Queries (1870, series iv. vol. v. 335, 336) of some memoranda made by a Mr. H. H. Carwardine; and I have reprinted from Leigh Hunt's Tatler some notes of the ninth and fourteenth lectures (Athenæum, March 1889). 4 I suppose the new edition of The Friend had been published before this, but have failed to discover the exact date. 'THE FRIEND: A Series of Essays, in Three Volumes (etc.) By S. T. Coleridge. A new edition. London: Printed for Rest Fenner, Paternoster Row, 1818.' 5 October 26, 1818. Ainger's Letters, ii. 16. game, which were repaid by an invitation to 'The Grove,' and before the end of the year Coleridge addressed to Allsop the first of a series of confidential letters. It is dated Dec. 2. 1818.1 In this, Coleridge's wounded feelings towards Wordsworth (unnamed) are expressed characteristically. He has never admitted 'faults in a work of genius to those who denied its beauties.' If (he says) he has appeared in one instance to deviate from this rule, 'first, it was not till the fame of the writer (which I had been for fourteen years successively toiling like a second Ali to build up) had been established; and secondly and chiefly with the purpose .. of rescuing the necessary task from malignant defamers, and in order to set forth the excellencies, and the trifling proportion which the defects bore to the excellencies. But this, my dear sir, is a mistake to which affectionate natures are too liable the mistaking those who are desirous and well pleased to be loved by you, for those who love you.' He doubts if the open abuse of himself in the Edinburgh is worse than the cold compliments and warm 'regrets' of the Quarterly, but his own one regret is the old one, that pressing need of bread and cheese diverts him from the completion of the Great Work.' If only he could have a tolerably numerous audience to his first, or first and second lectures on the History of Philosophy, he should entertain a strong hope of success, for the course will be more entertaining than any he has yet delivered. On Nov. 26, Coleridge had sent to Allsop a prospectus of two sets of lectures to be delivered at the Crown and Anchor' tavern, in the Strand,—one of fourteen on the History of Philosophy, the other on six select plays of Shakespeare -Tempest, Richard II. (and other dramatic Histories), Hamlet, Macbeth, Othello, and Lear. The two sets were to be delivered concurrently—the former on Mondays, the latter on Thursdays-intermitting the Christmas week-beginning with Monday, Dec. 7.3 The commencement, however, was postponed for a week, the first philosophical lecture taking place on Dec. 14, and the first Shakespeare one on the 17th. Besides the prospectus, there was issued An Historical and Chronological Guide to this [Phil.] Course, price Sixpence,' and it is no doubt a portion of this lost pamphlet which Allsop has printed at page 187. A ticket was presented to Lamb, who writes on Dec. 24: Thank you kindly for your ticket, though 6 1 Letters, Conversations, and Recollections of S. T. Coleridge (2 vols. Moxon, 1836). My references are to the third edition, with a Preface by the Editor, 'Thomas Allsop, late of Nutfield, in the County of Surrey, and formerly of the Stock Exchange, and Royal Exchange Buildings. Farrah, 1864 (p. 3). This book is the main authority for the details of Coleridge's life, 1820-1826. 2 Mr. Wordsworth, for whose fame I have felt and fought with an ardour that amounted to self-oblivion, and to which I owe mainly the rancour of the Edinburgh clan, and (far more injurious) the coldness. . . of the Quarterly Review, has affirmed in print that a German critic first taught us to think correctly concerning Shakespeare' (S. T. C. to Mudford, 1818: Canterbury Mag. Sep. 1834, p. 126). If Coleridge here referred to the passage in the 'Essay, supplementary to the Preface' to Words worth's Poems, 1815 (i. 352), this deduction is unwarranted. 3 Allsop prints the body of the prospectus of the Philosophical Course (p. 240); but makes no mention of the other. Mr. E. H. Coleridge has kindly permitted me to see his unique complete copy of the original. There are other references (pp. 85, 187, 205) to these lectures in Allsop's book, but they have been overlooked by all Coleridge's editors and biographers, who uniformly write of the Flower-de-luce Court Series (Jan.-March 1818) as the last. No adequate record of either course is known to exist-the few fragments I have been able to discover in the journals of the day will be found gathered together in the Athenæum for Dec. 26, 1891, and Jan. 2, 1892; Art. Some Lectures delivered by Coleridge in the winter of 1818-19.' Ainger's Letters, ii. 16. the mournful prognostic which accompanies it certainly renders its permanent pretensions less marketable; but I trust to hear many a course yet. . . . We are sorry it never lies in your way to come to us, but, dear Mahomet, we will come to you on 3rd January 1819. Shall we be able to catch a skirt 1 of the old out-goer?' If all the lectures promised in the prospectus were given, the delivery must have been carried into the beginning of April, for there was a break of a week, on account of indisposition. From Coleridge's letter to Mudford (Canterbury Magazine), we learn that the lectures attracted but scanty audiences. "When I tell you that yesterevening's receipts were somewhat better than many of the preceding; and that these did not equal one-half of the costs of the room, and of the stage and hackney coach (the advertisements in the Times and Morning Chronicle, and the printer's prospectus bill, not included). . . Again, the Romeo and Juliet pleased even beyond my anticipation but alas! scanty are my audiences! But poverty and I have been such old cronies, that I ought not to be angry with her for sticking close to my skirts.'2 About the same time Coleridge wrote, also to Mudford: Alas! dear sir, these lectures are my only resource. I have worked hard, very hard, for the last years of my life, but from Literature I cannot get even bread.' From the letter to Britton mentioned in the preceding footnote, we gather that Coleridge had been asked to re-deliver, at the Russell Institution, the course of lectures given at the Surrey Institution. Coleridge replies that he possesses no MS. or record, even in his memory, of these or any other lectures he has delivered. 'I should greatly prefer' (he writes 3) your committee making their own choice of the subjects from English, Italian, or German Literature; and even of the Fine Arts, as far as the philosophy of the same is alone concerned.' He goes on to say that he feels himself, from experience, so utterly unfit to discuss pecuniary matters, that if the committee will mention the sum it would be disposed to give, he will consult a friend and instantly decide. Whether anything came of these negotiations, I am not aware. Robinson makes no mention of hearing lectures at the Russell Institution, but this is not even negative evidence, for he makes no mention of the Crown and Anchor' series. XIII. HIGHGATE In March 1819, Coleridge had an interview with Blackwood, who had the hardihood to call at Highgate to solicit contributions to his Magazine. Surely Coleridge's poverty and not his will consented even to receive the owner of a periodical which had eighteen months before so grossly outraged him. To Mudford, Coleridge wrote: It seems not impossible that we may form some connection, on condition that the Magazine is to be conducted,—first, pure from private slander and public malignity; second, on principles the direct opposite to those which have been hitherto supported by the Edinburgh Review, moral, political, and religious.' Perhaps Coleridge waited a little to see whether his conditions would be fulfilled, for nothing 1 'When lo! far onwards waving on the wind I saw the skirts of the DEPARTING YEAR!' -Original editions of the Ode, 11. 7, 8. 2 Romeo and Juliet was not among the six plays announced, but in Coleridge's letter to Britton (Feb. 28, 1819), a portion of which is printed in the Lit. Rem. ii. 2, mention is made of a lecture on R. and J. at the 'Crown and Anchor.' 3 In the portion omitted from the Lit. Rem. See the entire letter, which is very interesting, in the Literary Gazette for 1834, p. 628. And of his appeared in Blackwood until seventeen months had passed away. I It was in April of this year that Coleridge met Keats in a Highgate lane, and felt death in the touch of his hand. When, thirteen years later, he related the incident to his nephew (Table Talk, Aug. 14, 1832) he had forgotten that the interview had lasted more than a minute or so'; but Keats's own account, only recently given to the world, was contemporary: Last Sunday I took a walk towards Highgate, and in the lane that winds by the side of Lord Mansfield's park, I meet Mr. Green, our demonstrator at Guy's, in conversation with Coleridge. joined them after inquiring by a look whether it would be agreeable. I walked with him, at his alderman-after-dinner pace, for near two miles, I suppose. In those two miles he broached a thousand things. Let me see if I can give you a list -nightingales--poetry-on poetical sensation-metaphysics-different genera and species of dreams-nightmare-a dream accompanied with a sense of touch-single and double touch- -a dream related-first and second consciousness-the difference explained between will and volition—so many metaphysicians from a want of smoking the second consciousness-monsters-the Kraken-mermaids-Southey believes in them-Southey's belief too much diluted-a ghost story-Good morning. I heard his voice as he came towards me--I heard it as he moved away-I had heard it all the interval-if it may be called so. He was civil enough to ask me to call on him at Highgate. Good-night!' The spring of 1820 was brightened by a visit of the poet's sons, Hartley and Derwent. Would to Heaven' (he wrote to Allsop, April 10th) their dear sister were with us the cup of paternal joy would be full to the brim,' and he cites the rapture' with which both brothers speak of Sara. At the same time Coleridge was invited to meet Scott at Charles Mathews': 'I seem to feel that I ought to feel more desire to see an extraordinary man than I really do feel, and I do not wish to appear to two * Except Fancy in nubibus' (p. 190). See 'Note 203,' p. 639. With reference to this Lamb writes (to S. T. C. January 10, 1820; Ainger's Letters, ii. 31): 'Why you should refuse twenty guineas per sheet from Blackwood's or any other magazine, passes my poor comprehension,-But, as Strap says, "you know best." Another exception may perhaps be mentioned. It was an involuntary contribution. In August or September 1820, Coleridge wrote a rather effusive private letter to John Gibson Lockhart, who printed it (or a portion of it) in Blackwood for September 1820-calling it a Letter to Peter Morris, M.D.' This abuse of his confidence was deeply resented by Coleridge. + Letters, etc., pp. 8, 9. 'I lost 1100 clear, and was forced to borrow £150 in order to buy up my own books and half copyrights, a shock which 1 Keats's Works, ed. by H. Buxton Forman. L or three persons (as the Mr. Freres, William Rose, etc.) as if I cherished any dislike to Scott respecting the Christabel, and generally to appear out of the common and natural mode of thinking and acting. All this, I own, is sad weakness, but I am weary of dyspathy.'1 opened your letter. ... . 6 One of the keenest sorrows of his life was about to fall on Coleridge. In 1819, Hartley had gained a Fellowship at Oriel. At the close of his probationary year he was judged to have forfeited his Oriel Fellowship, on the ground, mainly, of intemperance. Great efforts were made to reverse the decision. He wrote letters to many of the Fellows. His father went to Oxford to see and expostulate with the Provost. It was in vain. . . . The sentence might be considered severe, it could not be said to be unjust.' So writes Hartley's brother of this painful business. To Allsop, Coleridge wrote of it, July 31, 18203 Before I a heavy, a very heavy affliction came upon me with all the aggravations of surprise, sudden as a peal of thunder from a cloudless sky.' The father's conscience smote him. 'This' (he says of Hartley) was the sin of his nature, and this has been fostered by the culpable indulgence, at least non-interference, on my part,' and then he asks Allsop to pray that he may not pass such another night as the last.' The grief appears to have tempted Coleridge into a resort to an extra consumption of laudanum, with the consequence that the horrors described in The Pains of Sleep were revived. In August poor Hartley was settled in London under the fostering care of the Basil Montagus-some reconciliation with whom must have been effected-and set agoing by his father on some literary tasks. Of himself Coleridge writes: I at least am as well as I ever am, and my regular employment, in which Mr. [J. H.] Green is weekly my amanuensis, the work on the books of the Old and New Testaments. . . . You would not entertain the thoughts and hauntings that tamper with the love of life if I could transfer into you . . . the sense what a hope, promise, impulse, you are to me in my present efforts to realise my past labours. to enable you and my two (may I not say other?) sons to affirm,— Vivit, quia non frustra vixit.' 5 In October, Coleridge, accompanied by Allsop, went to Oxford, and had an interview with the Provost of Oriel-Coplestone, afterwards Bishop of Llandaff—on Hartley's behalf. The 'compensation' of £300 subsequently paid to Hartley may have been an effect of the interview. "Of this journey to Oxford' (says Allsop) 'I have a very painful recollection; perhaps the most painful recollection (one excepted) connected with the memory of Coleridge.' A few days after his return, Coleridge was still hankering after the publication of a pamphlet on the affairs of Queen Caroline, from which he had been twice over dissuaded by Gillman. A month later he has been more than usually unwell, and disheartened by finding Hartley in process of developing some of his own morbid weaknesses-procrastination, shrinking from the performance of duties which are surrounded by painful associations-stimulant motives acting on both as narcotics, 'in exact proportion to their strength.' For 1 Unfortunately no record of this meeting has come down to us. It is not mentioned by Lockhart. A very interesting criticism of Scott (as an author) was written in the form of a letter to Allsop on April 8, 1820 (Letters, etc., pp. 24-29). 2 Memoir prefixed to Poems by H. C. 1851, i. lxxiv. 3 Letters, etc., p. 40. See Table Talk for Jan. 2, 1833: Can anything be more dreadful than the thought that an innocent child has 5 For the sake of compactness I have here ventured to alter slightly the order of Coleridge's words. The letter is one of the most interesting Coleridge ever wrote. |