(240) The Society of Antiquaries, having obtained permission to
do so, had, on the 2d of May 1774, opened the tomb of Edward the
First in Westminster. The body was found in perfect
preservation, and most superbly attired. The garments were, of
course, carefully replaced in the tomb.-E.
Letter 101 To Thomas Astle, Esq.
December 19, 1775. (page 147)
Sir,
I am much obliged, and return you my thanks for the paper you
have sent me. You have added a question to it, which, if I
understand it, you yourself, Sir, are more capable than any body
of answering. You say, "Is it probable that this instrument was
framed by Richard Duke of Gloucester?" If by framed you mean
drawn up, I should think princes of the blood, in that barbarous
age, were not very expert in drawing acts of attainder, though a
branch of the law more in use then than since. But as I suppose
you mean forged, you, Sir, so conversant in writings of that age,
can judge better than any man. You may only mean forged by his
order. Your reading, much deeper than mine, may furnish you with
precedents of forged acts of attainder: I never heard of one; nor
does my simple understanding suggest the use of such a forgery,
on cases immediately pressing; because an act of attainder being
a matter of public notoriety, it would be revolting to the common
sense of all mankind to plead such an one', if it had not really
existed. If it could be carried into execution by force, the
force would avail without the forgery, and would be at once
exaggerated and weakened by it. I cannot, therefore, conceive
why Richard should make use of so absurd a trick, unless that
having so little to do in so short and turbulent a reign, he
amused himself with treasuring up in the tower a forged act for
the satisfaction of those who, three hundred years afterwards,
should be glad of discovering new flaws in his character. As
there are men so bigoted to old legends, I am persuaded, Sir,
that you would please them, by communicating your question to
them. They would rejoice to suppose that Richard was more
criminal than even the Lancastrian historians represent him; and
just at this moment I don't know whether they would not believe
that Mrs. Rudd assisted him. I, who am, probably, as absurd a
bigot on the other side, see nothing in the paper you have sent
me, but a confirmation of Richard's innocence of the death of
Clarence. As the Duke of Buckingham was appointed to superintend
the execution, it is incredible that he should have been drowned
in a butt of malmsey, and that Richard should have been the
executioner. When a seneschal of England, or as we call it, a
lord high steward, is appointed for a trial, at least for
execution, with all his officers, it looks very much as if, even
in that age, proceedings were carried on with a little more
formality than the careless writers of that time let us think.
The appointment, too, of the Duke of Buckingham for that office,
seems to add another improbability [and a work of supererogation]
to Richard's forging the instrument. Did Richard really do
nothing but what tended to increase his unpopularity by glutting
mankind with lies, forgeries, absurdities, which every man living
could detect?
I take this opportunity, Sir, of telling you how sorry I am not
to have seen you long, and how glad I shall be to renew our
acquaintance, especially if you like to talk over this old story
with me, though I own it is of little importance, and pretty well
exhausted.(241) I am, Sir, with great regard, your obliged
humble servant.
(241) To the above letter it was intended to subjoin the
following queries:--
"If there was no such Parliament held, would Richard have dared
to forge an act for it?
"Would Henry VII. never have reproached him with so absurd a
forgery?
"Did neither Sir T. More nor Lord Bacon ever hear of that
forgery?
"As Richard declared his nephew the Earl of Warwick his
successor, would he have done so, if he had forged an act of
attainder of Warwick's father?
"if it is supposed he forged the act, when he set aside Warwick,
could he pretend that act was not known when he declared him his
heir? Would not so recent an act's being unknown have proved it a
forgery; and if there had been no such Parliament as that which
forged it, would not that have proved it a double forgery? The
act, therefore, and the parliament that passed it, must have been
genuine, and existed, though no other record appears. The
distractions of the times, the evident insufficiency or
partiality of the historians of that age, and the interest of
Henry VII to destroy all records that gave authority to the House
Of York and their title, account for our wanting evidence of that
Parliament."
Letter 102 To The Rev. Mr. Cole.
January 26, 1776. (page 148)
I have deferred answering your last letter, dear Sir, till I
cannot answer with my own hand. I made a pilgrimage at Christmas
to Queen's Cross, at Ampthill, was caught there by the snow,
Imprisoned there for a fortnight, and sent home bound hand and
foot by the gout. The pain, I suppose, is quite frozen, for I
have had none; nothing but inflammation and swelling, and they
abate. In reality, this is owing to the bootikins, which -though
they do not cure the gout, take out its sting. You, who are
still more apt to be an invalid, feel, I fear, this Hyperborean
season; I should be glad to hear you did not.
I thought I had at once jumped upon a discovery of the subject of
the painted room at the Rose Tavern, but shall not plume myself
upon my luck till I have seen the chamber, because Mr. Gough's
account seems to date the style of the painting earlier than
-will serve my hypothesis. I had no data to go upon but the site
having belonged to the family of Tufton (for I do not think the
description at all answers to the taking of Francis I., nor is it
at all credible that there should be arms in the painting, and
yet neither those of France or Austria). I turned immediately to
Lord Thanet's pedigree, in Collins's Peerage, and found at once
an heroic adventure performed by one of the family, that accords
remarkably with the principal circumstance. It is the rescue of
the Elector Palatine, son of our Queen of Bohemia, from an
ambuscade laid for him by the Duke of Lorrain. The arms, Or, and
Gules, I thought were those of Lorrain, which I since find are
Argent and Gules. The Argent indeed may be turned yellow by age,
as Mr. Gough says he does not know whether the crescent is red or
black. But the great impediment is, that this achievement of a
Tufton was performed in the reign of Charles II. Now in that
reign, when
we were become singularly ignorant of chivalry, anachronisms and
blunders might easily be committed by a modern painter, yet I
shall not adhere to my discovery, unless I find the painting
correspond with the style of the modern time to which I would
assign it; nor will I see through the eyes of my hypothesis, but
fairly.
I shall now turn to another subject. Mr. Astle, who has left me
off ever Since the fatal era of Richard III. for no reason that
I can conceive but my having adopted his discovery, which for
aught I know may be a reason with an antiquary, lately sent me
the attainder of George Duke of Clarence, which he has found in
the Tower and printed; and on it, as rather glad to confute me
and himself, than to have found a curiosity, he had written two
or three questions which tended to accuse Richard of having
forged the instrument, though to the instrument itself is added
another, which confirms my acquittal of Richard of the murder of
Clarence-but, alas! passion is a spying glass that does but make
the eyes of folly more blind.
I sent him an answer, a copy of which I enclose. Since that, I
have heard no more of him, nor shall, I suppose, till I see this
new proof of Richard's guilt adopted into the annals of the
Society, against which I have reserved some other stigmas for it.
Mr. Edmondson has found a confirmation of Isabella Fitz-Osbert
having married Jernegan after Walpole. I forget where I found my
arms of the Fitz-Osberts. Though they differ from yours of Sir
Roger, the colours are the same, and they agree with yours of
William Fitz-Osborne. There was no accuracy in spelling names
even till much later ages; and you know that different branches
of the same family made little variation in their coats.
I am very sorry for the death of poor Henshaw, of which I had not
heard. I am yours most sincerely.
P. S. The queries added to the letter to Mr. Astle were not sent
with it; and, as I reserve them for a future answer, I beg you
will show them to nobody.
Letter 103To Edward Gibbon, Esq.(242)
(February 1776.] (page 149)
Mr. Walpole cannot express how much he is obliged to Mr. Gibbon
for the valuable present he has received;(243) nor how great a
comfort it is to him, in his present situation, in which he
little expected to receive singular pleasure. Mr. Walpole does
not say this at random, nor from mere confidence in the author's
abilities, for he has already (all his weakness would permit)
read the first chapter, and it is in the greatest admiration of
the style, manner, method, clearness, and intelligence. Mr.
Walpole's impatience to proceed will struggle with his disorder,
and give him such spirits, that he flatters himself he shall owe
part of his recovery to Mr. Gibbon; whom, as soon as that is a
little effected, he shall beg the honour of seeing.
(242) Now first collected.
(243) The first quarto volume of the History of the Decline and
Fall of the Roman Empire.-E.
Letter 104 To Edward Gibbon, Esq.(244)
February 14, 1776. (page 150)
After the singular pleasure of reading you, Sir, the next
satisfaction is to declare my admiration. I have read great part
of your volume, and cannot decide to which of its various merits
I give the preference, though I have no doubt of assigning any
partiality to one virtue of the author, which, seldom as I meet
with it, always strikes me superiorly. Its quality will
naturally prevent your guessing which I mean. It is your amiable
modesty. How can you know so much, judge so well, possess your
subject, and your knowledge, and your power of judicious
reflection so thoroughly, and yet command yourself and betray no
dictatorial arrogance of decision? How unlike very ancient and
very modern authors! You have, unexpectedly, given the world a
classic history. The fame it must acquire will tend every day
to acquit this panegyric of flattery.(245) The impressions it
has made on me are very numerous. The strongest is the thirst of
being better acquainted with you--but I reflect that I have been
a trifling author, and am in no light profound enough to deserve
your intimacy, except by confessing your superiority so frankly,
that I assure you honestly, I already feel no envy, though I did
for a moment. The best proof I can give you of my sincerity, is
to exhort you, warmly and earnestly, to go on with your noble
work--the strongest, though a presumptuous mark of my friendship,
is to warn you never to let your charming modesty be corrupted by
the acclamations your talents will receive. The native qualities
of the man should never be sacrificed to those of the author,
however shining. I take this liberty as an older man, which
reminds me how little I dare promise myself that I shall see your
work completed! But I love posterity enough to contribute, if I
can, to give them pleasure through you.
I am too weak to say more, though I could talk for hours on your
history. But one feeling I cannot suppress, though it is a
sensation of vanity. I think, nay, I am sure I perceive, that
your sentiments on government agree with my own. It is the only
point on which I suspect myself of any partiality in my
admiration. It is a reflection of a far inferior vanity that
pleases me in your speaking with so much distinction of that,
alas! wonderful period, in which the world saw five good monarchs
succeed each other.(246) I have often thought of treating that
Elysian era. Happily it has fallen into better hands!
I have been able to rise to-day, for the first time, and flatter
myself that if I have no relapse, you will in two or three days
more give' me leave, Sir, to ask the honour of seeing you. In
the mean time,,be just; and do not suspect me of flattering you.
You will always hear that I say the same of you to every body. I
am, with the greatest regard, Sir, etc.
(244) now first collected.
(245) "I am at a loss," says Gibbon, in his Memoirs, "how to
describe the success of the work without betraying the vanity of
the writer. The first impression was exhausted in a few days; a
second and third edition were scarcely adequate to the demand;
and the bookseller's property was twice invaded by the pirates of
Dublin. My book was on every table, and almost on every
toilette; the historian was crowned by the taste or fashion of
the day; nor was the general voice disturbed by the barking of
any profane critic."-E.
(246) Walpole, in August 1771, had said, "The world will no more
see Athens, Rome, and the Medici again, than a succession of five
good Emperors, like Nerva, Trajan, Adrian, and the two
Antonines." See ante, p. 56-E.
Letter 105 To The Rev. Mr. Cole.
Arlington Street, March 1, 1776. (page 151)
I am sorry to tell you that the curious old painting at the
Tavern in Fleet Street is addled, by the subject turning out a
little too old. Alas! it is not the story of Francis I., but of
St. Paul. All the coats of arms that should have been French and
Austrian, and that I had a mind to convert into Palatine and
Lorrain, are the bearings of Pharisaic nobility. In short, Dr.
Percy was here yesterday, and tells me that over Mr. Gough's
imaginary Pavia is written Damascus in capital letters. Oh! our
antiquaries!
Mr. Astle has at last called on me, but I was not well enough to
see him. I shall return his visit when I can go out. I hope
this will be in a week: I have no pain left, but have a codicil
of nervous fevers, for which I am taking the bark. I have
nothing new for you in our old way, and therefore will not
unnecessarily lengthen my letter, which was only intended to
cashier the old painting, though I hear the antiquaries still go
on with having a drawing taken from it. Oh! our antiquaries!
Letter 106 To Dr. Gem.(247)
Arlington Street, April 4, 1776 (page 151)
It is but fair, when one quits one's party, to give notice to
those one abandons--at least, modern patriots, who often imbibe
their principles of honour at Newmarket, use that civility. You
and I, dear Sir, have often agreed in our political notions; and
you, I fear, will die without changing your opinion. For my
part, I must confess I am totally altered; and, instead of being
a warm partisan of liberty, now admire nothing but despotism.
You will naturally ask what place I have gotten, or what bribe I
have taken? Those are the criterions of political changes in
England-but, as my conversion is of foreign extraction, I shall
not be the richer for it. In One word, it is the relation du lit
de justice(248) that has operated the miracle. When two
ministers(249) are found so humane, so virtuous, so excellent as
to study nothing but the welfare and deliverance of the people;
when a king listens to such excellent men; and when a parliament,
from the basest, most interested motives, interposes to intercept
the blessing, must I not change my opinions, and admire arbitrary
power? or can I retain my sentiments, without varying the object?
Yes, Sir, I am shocked at the conduct of the Parliament-- one
would think it was an English one! I am scandalized at the
speeches of the Ivocat-g`en`eral,(250) who sets up the odious
interests of the nobility and clergy against the cries and groans
of the poor; and who employs his wicked eloquence to tempt the
good young monarch, by personal views, to sacrifice the mass of
his subjects to the privileges of the few. But why do I call it
eloquence? The fumes of interest had so clouded his rhetoric,
that he falls into a downright Iricism. He tells the King, that
the intended tax on the proprietors of land will affect the
property not only of the rich, but of the poor. I should be glad
to know what is the Property of the poor? Have the poor landed
estates? Are those who have landed estates the poor? Are the
poor that will suffer by the tax, the wretched labourers who are
dragged from their famishing families to work on the roads? But
it is wicked eloquence when it finds a reason, or gives a reason
for continuing the abuse. The Advocate tells the King, those
abuses are presque consacr`es par l'anciennet`e. Indeed, he says
all that can be said for nobility, it is consacr`ee par
l'anciennet`e--and thus the length of the pedigree of abuses
renders them respectable!
His arguments are as contemptible when he tries to dazzle the
King by the great names of Henri Quatre and Sully, of Louis XIV.
and Colbert, two couple whom nothing but a mercenary orator would
have classed together. Nor, were all four equally venerable,
would it prove any thing. Even good kings and good ministers, if
such have been, may have erred; nay, may have done the best they
could. They would not have been good, if they wished their
errors should be preserved, the longer they had lasted.
In short, Sir, I think this resistance of the Parliament to the
adorable reformation planned by Messrs. de Turgot and
Malesherbes, is more phlegmatically scandalous than the wildest
tyranny of despotism. I forget what the nation was that refused
liberty when it was offered. This opposition to so noble a work
is worse. A whole people may refuse its own happiness; but these
profligate magistrates resist happiness for others, for millions,
for posterity! Nay, do they not half vindicate Maupeou, who
crushed them? And you, dear Sir, will you now chide my apostacy?
Have-I not cleared myself to your eyes? I do not see a shadow of
sound logic in all Monsieur Seguier's but in his proposing that
the soldiers should work on the roads, and that passengers should
contribute to their fabric; though, as France is not so
luxuriously mad as England, I do not believe passengers could
support the expense of the roads. That argument, therefore, is
like another that the Avocat proposes to the King, and which, he
modestly owns, he believes would be impracticable.
I beg your pardon, Sir, for giving you this long trouble; but I
could not help venting myself, when shocked to find such renegade
conduct in a Parliament that I was rejoiced had been restored.
Poor human kind! is it always to breed serpents from its own
bowels? In one country, it chooses its representatives, and they
sell it and themselves--in others, it exalts despots--in another,
it resists the despot when he consults the good of his people!
Can we -wonder mankind is wretched, when men are such beings?
Parliaments run wild with loyalty, when America is to be enslaved
or butchered. They rebel, when their country is to be set free!
I am not surprised at the idea of the devil being always at our
elbows. They who invented him, no doubt could not conceive how
men could be so atrocious to one another, without the
intervention of a fiend. Don't you think, if he had never been
heard of before, that he would have been invented on the late
partition of Poland! Adieu, dear Sir. Yours most sincerely.
(247) An English physician long settled at Paris, no less
esteemed for his professional knowledge, than for his kind
attention to the poor who applied to him for medical assistance.
(248) The first lit de justice held by Louis XVI.
(249) Messieurs de Malesherbes and Turgot. When the intrigues
which had been set on foot to overthrow the administration of
Turgot had accomplished that object, an event which took place
shortly after the date of this letter Louis XVI requested
Malesherbes to remain in office; but when he refused to do so,
seeing that his friend Turgot had been dismissed, Louis conscious
of the increased anxieties in which he should be involved,
exclaimed, with a sigh, "Que vous `etes heureux! que ne Puis-je
aussi quitter ma place."-E.
(250) Monsieur de Seguier.
Letter 107 To The Rev. Mr. Cole.
April 16, 1776. (page 153)
You will be concerned, my good Sir, for what I have this minute
heard from his nephew, that poor Mr. Granger was seized at the
communion table on Sunday With an apoplexy, and died yesterday
morning at five. I have answered the letter with a word of
advice about his manuscripts, that they may not fall into the
hands of booksellers. He had been told by idle people so many
gossiping stories, that it would hurt him and living persons, to
be printed; for as he Was incapable of 1, if all his collections
were telling an untruth himself, he suspected nobody else--too
great goodness in a biographer.
P. S. The whole world is occupied with the Duchess of Kingston's
trial.(251) I don't tell you a word of it; for you will not care
about it these two hundred years.
(251) in Westminster Hall, before the House of Peers, for
intermarrying with the Duke of Kingston during the lifetime of
her first husband. She was found guilty, but, pleading her
privilege, was discharged without any punishment. Hannah More
gives the following description of the scene:--"Garrick would
have me take his ticket to go to the trial f the Duchess of
Kingston; a sight which, for beauty and magnificence, exceeded
any thing which those who were never present at a coronation or a
trial by peers can have the least notion of. Mrs. Garrick and I
were in full dress by seven. You will imagine the bustle of five
thousand people getting into one hall! yet, in all this hurry, we
walked in tranquilly. When they were all seated, and the
King-at-arms had commanded silence, on pain of imprisonment,
(which, however, was very ill observed,) the gentleman of the
black rod was commanded to bring in his prisoner. Elizabeth,
calling herself Duchess dowager of Kingston, walked in, led by
Black Rod and Mr. La Roche, courtesying profoundly to her judges.
The peers made her a slight bow. The prisoner was dressed in
deep mourning; a black hood on her head; her hair modestly
dressed and powdered; a black silk sacque, with crape trimmings;
black gauze, deep ruffles, and black gloves. The counsel spoke
about an hour and a quarter each. Dunning's manner is
insufferably bad, coughing and spitting at every three words, but
his sense and his expression pointed to the last degree: he made
her grace shed bitter tears. The fair victim had four virgins in
white behind the bar. She imitated her great predecessor, Mrs.
Rudd, and affected to write very often, though I plainly
perceived she only wrote, as they do their love epistles on the
stage, without forming a letter. The Duchess has but small
remains of that beauty of which kings and princes were once so
enamoured. She looked much like Mrs. Pritchard. She is large
and ill-shaped; there was nothing white but her face and, had it
not been for that, she would have looked like a bale of
bombazeen. There was a great deal of ceremony, a great deal of
splendour, and a great deal of nonsense: they adjourned upon the
most foolish pretences imaginable, and did nothing with such an
air of business as was truly ridiculous. I forgot to tell you
the Duchess was taken ill, but performed it badly." In a
subsequent letter, she says--"I have the great satisfaction of
telling you that Elizabeth, calling herself Duchess-dowager of
Kingston, was, this very afternoon, Undignified and unduchessed,
and very narrowly escaped being burned in the hand. If you have
been half as much interested against this unprincipled, artful,
licentious woman as I have, you will be rejoiced at it as I am.
Lord Camden breakfasted with us. He is very angry that she was
not burned in the hand. He says, as he was once a professed
lover of hers, he thought it would have looked ill-natured and
ungallant for him to propose it; but that he should have acceded
to it most heartily, though he believes he should have
recommended a cold iron." Memoirs, vol. i. Pp. 82, 85.-E.
Letter 108 To The Rev. Mr. Cole.