OF LITERARY FILCHERS.

An honest historian at times will have to inflict severe stroke on his

favourites. This has fallen to my lot, for in the course of my

researches, I have to record that we have both forgers and purloiners,

as well as other more obvious impostors, in the republic of letters! The

present article descends to relate anecdotes of some contrivances to

possess our literary curiosities by other means than by purchase; and

the only apology which can be alleged for the _splendida peccata_, as

St. Austin calls the virtues of the heathen, of the present innocent

criminals, is their excessive passion for literature, and otherwise the

respectability of their names. According to Grose's "Classical

Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue," we have had celebrated _collectors_,

both in the learned and vulgar idioms. But one of them, who had some

reasons too to be tender on this point, distinguished this mode of

completing his collections, not by _book-stealing_, but by

_book-coveting_. On some occasions, in mercy, we must allow of softening

names. Were not the Spartans allowed to steal from one another, and the

bunglers only punished?

It is said that Pinelli made occasional additions to his literary

treasures sometimes by his skill in an art which lay much more in the

hand than in the head: however, as Pinelli never stirred out of his

native city but once in his lifetime, when the plague drove him from

home, his field of action was so restricted, that we can hardly conclude

that he could have been so great an enterpriser in this way. No one can

have lost their character by this sort of exercise in a confined circle,

and be allowed to prosper! A light-fingered Mercury would hardly haunt

the same spot: however, this is as it may be! It is probable that we owe

to this species of accumulation many precious manuscripts in the

Cottonian collection. It appears by the manuscript note-book of Sir

Nicholas Hyde, chief justice of the King's Bench from the second to the

seventh year of Charles the First, that Sir Robert Cotton had in his

library, records, evidences, ledger-books, original letters, and other

state papers, belonging to the king; for the attorney-general of that

time, to prove this, showed a copy of the _pardon_ which Sir Robert had

obtained from King James for _embezzling records_, &c.[222]

Gough has more than insinuated that Rawlinson and his friend Umfreville

"lie under very strong suspicions;" and he asserts that the collector of

the Wilton treasures made as free as Dr. Willis with his friend's

coins.[223] But he has also put forth a declaration relating to Bishop

More, the famous collector, that "the bishop collected his library by

_plundering_ those of the clergy in his diocese; some he paid with

sermons or more modern books; others, less civilly, only with a _quid

illiterati cum libris?_" This _plundering_ then consisted rather of

_cajoling_ others out of what they knew not how to value; and this is an

advantage which every skilful lover of books must enjoy over those whose

apprenticeship has not expired. I have myself been plundered by a very

dear friend of some such literary curiosities, in the days of my

innocence and of his precocity of knowledge. However, it does appear

that Bishop More did actually lay violent hands in a snug corner on some

irresistible little charmer; which we gather from a precaution adopted

by a friend of the bishop, who one day was found busy in _hiding his

rarest books_, and locking up as many as he could. On being asked the

reason of this odd occupation, the bibliopolist ingenuously replied,

"The Bishop of Ely dines with me to-day." This fact is quite clear, and

here is another as indisputable. Sir Robert Saville writing to Sir

Robert Cotton, appointing an interview with the founder of the Bodleian

Library, cautions Sir Robert, that "If he held any book so dear as that

he would be loath to lose it, he should _not let Sir Thomas out of his

sight_, but set 'the boke' aside beforehand." A surprise and detection

of this nature has been revealed in a piece of secret history by Amelot

de la Houssaie, which terminated in very important political

consequences. He assures us that the personal dislike which Pope

Innocent X. bore to the French had originated in his youth, when

cardinal, from having been detected in the library of an eminent French

collector, of having purloined a most rare volume. The delirium of a

collector's rage overcame even French politesse; the Frenchman not only

openly accused his illustrious culprit, but was resolved that he should

not quit the library without replacing the precious volume--from

accusation and denial both resolved to try their strength: but in this

literary wrestling-match the book dropped out of the cardinal's

robes!--and from that day he hated the French--at least their more

curious collectors!

Even an author on his dying bed, at those awful moments, should a

collector be by his side, may not be considered secure from his too

curious hands. Sir William Dugdale possessed the minutes of King James's

life, written by Camden, till within a fortnight of his death; as also

Camden's own life, which he had from Hacket, the author of the folio

life of Bishop Williams: who, adds Aubrey, "did _filch_ it from Mr.

Camden, as he lay a dying!" He afterwards corrects his information, by

the name of Dr. Thorndyke, which, however, equally answers our purpose,

to prove that even dying authors may dread such collectors!

The medalists have, I suspect, been more predatory than these

subtractors of our literary treasures; not only from the facility of

their conveyance, but from a peculiar contrivance which of all those

things which admit of being secretly purloined, can only be practised in

this department--for they can steal and no human hand can search them

with any possibility of detection; they can pick a cabinet and swallow

the curious things, and transport them with perfect safety, to be

digested at their leisure. An adventure of this kind happened to Baron

Stosch, the famous antiquary. It was in looking over the gems of the

royal cabinet of medals, that the keeper perceived the loss of one; his

place, his pension, and his reputation were at stake: and he insisted

that Baron Stosch should be most minutely examined; in this dilemma,

forced to confession, this erudite collector assured the keeper of the

royal cabinet, that the strictest search would not avail: "Alas, sir! I

have it here within," he said, pointing to his breast--an emetic was

suggested by the learned practitioner himself, probably from some former

experiment. This was not the first time that such a natural cabinet had

been invented; the antiquary Vaillant, when attacked at sea by an

Algerine, zealously swallowed a whole series of Syrian kings; when he

landed at Lyons, groaning with his concealed treasure, he hastened to

his friend, his physician, and his brother antiquary Dufour,--who at

first was only anxious to inquire of his patient, whether the medals

were of the higher empire? Vaillant showed two or three, of which nature

had kindly relieved him. A collection of medals was left to the city of

Exeter, and the donor accompanied the bequest by a clause in his will,

that should a certain antiquary, his old friend and rival, be desirous

of examining the coins, he should be watched by two persons, one on each

side. La Croze informs us in his life, that the learned Charles Patin,

who has written a work on medals, was one of the present race of

collectors: Patin offered the curators of the public library at Basle to

draw up a catalogue of the cabinet of Amberback there preserved,

containing a good number of medals; but they would have been more

numerous, had the catalogue-writer not diminished both them and his

labour, by sequestrating some of the most rare, which was not discovered

till this plunderer of antiquity was far out of their reach.

When Gough touched on this odd subject in the first edition of his

"British Topography," "An Academic" in the _Gentleman's Magazine_ for

August 1772, insinuated that this charge of literary pilfering was only

a jocular one; on which Gough, in his second edition, observed that this

was not the case, and that "one might point out enough _light-fingered

antiquaries_ in the present age, to render such a charge extremely

probable against earlier ones." The most extraordinary part of this

slight history is, that our public denouncer some time after proved

himself to be one of these "light-fingered antiquaries:" the deed

itself, however, was more singular than disgraceful. At the disinterment

of the remains of Edward the First, around which thirty years ago

assembled our most erudite antiquaries, Gough was observed, as Steevens

used to relate, in a wrapping great-coat of unusual dimensions; that

witty and malicious "Puck," so capable himself of inventing mischief,

easily suspected others, and divided his glance as much on the living

piece of antiquity as on the elder. In the act of closing up the relics

of royalty, there was found wanting an entire fore-finger of Edward the

First; and as the body was perfect when opened, a murmur of

dissatisfaction was spreading, when "Puck" directed their attention to

the great antiquary in the watchman's great-coat--from whence--too

surely was extracted Edward the First's great fore-finger!--so that "the

light-fingered antiquary" was recognised ten years after he denounced

the race, when he came to "try his hand."[224]

Curiosities of Literature, Vol. 3 · 第 156 / 207 题