CHAPTER III.

_Jem White.--Coleridge.--Lamb's Inspiration.--Early Letters.--Poem

published.--Charles Lloyd.--Liking for Burns, &c.--Quakerism.--Robert

Southey.--Southey and Coleridge.--Antijacobin.--Rosamond Gray.-George

Dyer.-Manning.--Mary's Illnesses.--Migrations.--Hester Savory._

After the pain arising from the deaths of his parents had somewhat

subsided, and his sorrow, exhausting itself in the usual manner, had given

way to calm, the story of Lamb becomes mainly an account of his

intercourse with society. He was surrounded, during his somewhat

monotonous career, by affectionate and admiring friends, who helped to

bring out his rare qualities, who stimulated his genius, and who are in

fact interwoven with his own history.

One of the earliest of these was his schoolfellow James (familiarly Jem)

White. This youth, who at the beginning of this period was his most

frequent companion, had great cleverness and abundant animal spirits,

under the influence of which he had produced a small volume, entitled

"Original Letters of Sir John Falstaff and his Friends." These letters

were ingenious imitations of the style and tone of thought of the

celebrated Shakespearian knight and his familiars. Beyond this merit they

are, perhaps, not sufficiently full of that enduring matter which is

intended for posterity. Nevertheless they contain some good and a few

excellent things. The letter of Davy (Justice Shallow's servant) giving an

account to his master of the death of poor Abram Slender is very touching.

Slender dies from mere love of sweet Ann Page; "Master Abram is dead;

gone, your worship. A' sang his soul and body quite away. A' turned like

the latter end of a lover's lute."

White's book was published in 1796; and one of the early copies was sold

at the Roxburgh sale for five guineas. Is it possible that the imitations

could have been mistaken for originals? Afterwards, the little book could

be picked up for eighteenpence; even for sixpence. It was always a great

favorite with Lamb. He reviewed it, after White's death, in the

_Examiner_. Lamb's friendship and sympathy in taste with White induced him

to attach greater value to this book than it was, perhaps, strictly

entitled to; he even passes some commendation on the frontispiece, which

is undoubtedly a very poor specimen of art. It is remarkable how Lamb, who

was able to enter so completely into Hogarth's sterling humor, could ever

have placed any value upon this counterfeit coin.

But Lamb had a great regard for Jem White. They had been boys together,

school-fellows in Christ's Hospital; and these very early friendships

seldom undergo any severe critical tests. At all events, Lamb thought

highly of White's book, which he used often to purchase and give away to

his friends, in justification of his own taste and to extend the fame of

the author. The copy which he gave me I have still. White, it seems, after

leaving Christ's Hospital as a scholar, took some office there; but

eventually left it, and became an agent for newspapers.

In one of the Elia essays, "The Praise of Chimney-sweepers," Lamb has set

forth some of the merits of his old friend. Undoubtedly Jem White must

have been a thoroughly kind-hearted man, since he could give a dinner

every year, on St. Bartholomew's day, to the little chimney-sweepers of

London; waiting on them, and cheering them up with his jokes and lively

talk; creating at least one happy day annually in each of their poor

lives. At the date of the essay (May, 1822) he had died. In Lamb's words,

"James White is extinct; and with him the suppers have long ceased. He

carried away with him half the fun of the world when he died--of my world,

at least. His old clients look for him among the pens; and, missing him,

reproach the altered feast of St. Bartholomew, and the glory of Smithfield

departed forever."

The great friend and Mentor, however, of Charles Lamb's youth, was (as has

frequently been asserted) Samuel Taylor Coleridge, who was a philosopher,

and who was considered, almost universally, to be the greater genius of

the two. It may be so; and there is little doubt that in mere capacity, in

the power of accumulating and disbursing ideas, and in the extent and

variety of his knowledge, he exceeded Lamb, and also most of his other

contemporaries; but the mind of Lamb was quite as original, and more

compact. The two friends were very dissimilar, the one wandering amongst

lofty, ill-defined objects, whilst the other "clung to the realities of

life." It is fortunately not necessary to enter into any comparative

estimate of these two remarkable persons. Each had his positive qualities

and peculiarities, by which he was distinguishable from other men; and by

these he may therefore be separately and more safely judged.

In his mature age (when I knew him) Coleridge had a full, round face, a

fine, broad forehead, rather thick lips, and strange, dreamy eyes, which

were often lighted up by eagerness, but wanted concentration, and were

adapted apparently for musing or speculation, rather than for precise or

rapid judgment. Yet he was very shrewd, as well as eloquent; was

(slightly) addicted to jesting; and would talk "at sight" upon any subject

with extreme fluency and much knowledge. "His white hair," in Lamb's

words, "shrouded a capacious brain."

Coleridge had browsed and expatiated over all the rich regions of

literature, at home and abroad. In youth his studies had, in the first

instance, been mainly in theology, he having selected the "Church" for his

profession. Although he was educated in the creed and rites of the Church

of England, he became for a time a Unitarian preacher, and scattered his

eloquent words over many human audiences. He was fond of questions of

logic, and of explaining his systems and opinions by means of diagrams;

but his projects were seldom consummated; and his talk (sometimes) and his

prose writing (often) were tedious and diffuse. His "Christabel," from

which he derived much of his fame, remained, after a lapse of more than

thirty years, incomplete at his death. He gained much reputation from the

"Ancient Mariner" (which is perhaps his best poem); but his translation of

Schiller's "Wallenstein" is the only achievement that shows him capable of

a great prolonged effort. Lamb used to boast that he supplied one line to

his friend in the fourth scene of that tragedy, where the description of

the Pagan deities occurs. In speaking of Satan, he is figured as "an old

man melancholy." "That was _my_ line," Lamb would say, exultingly. I

forget how it was originally written, except that it had not the extra (or

eleventh) syllable, which it now possesses.

There is some beautiful writing in this fourth scene, which may be read

after Mr. Wordsworth's equally beautiful reference to the Olympian gods

and goddesses, in the fourth book of the "Excursion," entitled

"Despondency Corrected." The last explains more completely than the other

the attributes of the deities specially named.

The most elaborate (perhaps impartial) sketches of Coleridge--his great

talents, combined with his great weaknesses--may be found in Hazlitt's

Essays, "The Spirit of the Age" and "My First Acquaintance with Poets;"

and in the eighth chapter of Mr. Carlyle's "Life of John Sterling."

In Lamb's letters it is easy to perceive that the writer soon became aware

of the foibles of his friend. "Cultivate simplicity, Coleridge," is his

admonition as early as 1796. In another place his remark is, "You have

been straining your faculties to bring together things infinitely distant

and unlike." Again, "I grieve from my very soul to observe you in your

plans of life veering about from this hope to the other, and settling

nowhere." Robert Southey, whose prose style was the perfection of

neatness, and who was intimate with Coleridge throughout his life, laments

that it is "extraordinary that he should write in so rambling and

inconclusive a manner;" his mind, which was undoubtedly very pliable and

subtle, "turning and winding, till you get weary of following his mazy

movements."

Charles Lamb, however, always sincerely admired and loved his old

schoolfellow, and grieved deeply when he died. The recollection of this

event, which happened many years afterwards (in 1834), never left Lamb

until his own death: he used perpetually to exclaim, "Coleridge is dead,

Coleridge is dead," in a low, musing, meditative voice. These exclamations

(addressed to no one) were, as Lamb was a most unaffected man, assuredly

involuntary, and showed that he could not get rid of the melancholy truth.

At this distance of time, many persons (judging by what he has left behind

him) wonder at the extent of admiration which possessed some of

Coleridge's contemporaries: Charles Lamb accorded to his genius something

scarcely short of absolute worship; Robert Southey considered his capacity

as exceeding that of almost all other writers; and Leigh Hunt, speaking of

Coleridge's personal appearance, says, "He had a mighty intellect put upon

a sensual body." Persons who were intimate with both have suggested that

even Wordsworth was indebted to him for some of his philosophy. As late as

1818, Lamb, when dedicating his works to him, says that Coleridge "first

kindled in him, if not the power, the love, of poetry, and beauty, and

kindness." He must be judged, however, by what he has actually _done_.

I am not here as the valuer of Coleridge's merits. I have no pretensions

and no desire to assume so delicate an office. His dreams and intentions

were undoubtedly good, and, had he been able to carry them out for the

benefit of the world, would have entitled himself to the name of a great

poet, a great genius. His readiness to discuss _all_ subjects, and his

ability to talk on most of them with ease, were marvellous. But he was

always infirm of purpose, and never did justice to his own capacity.

Amongst other men of talent who have sung Coleridge's praises should be

named Hazlitt, who knew him in 1798, and has enshrined him in the first of

his charming papers, entitled "Winterslow Essays." Hazlitt admits his

feebleness of purpose, but speaks of his genius, shining upon his own

(then) dumb, inarticulate nature, as the sun "upon the puddles of the

road." Coleridge at that time was a Unitarian minister, and had come to

preach, instead of the minister for the time being, at Shrewsbury. Hazlitt

rose before daylight (it was in January), and walked from Wem to

Shrewsbury, a distance of ten miles, to hear the "celebrated" man, who

combined the inspirations of poet and preacher in one person, enlighten a

Shropshire congregation. "Never, the longest day I have to live" (says

he), "shall I have such another walk as this cold, raw, comfortless one,

in the winter of 1798. When I got there [to the Chapel], the organ was

playing the one hundredth Psalm; and when it was done, Mr. Coleridge rose

and gave out his text--'And he went up into the mountain to pray, HIMSELF

ALONE.' The preacher then launched into his subject, like an eagle

dallying with the wind," &c. Coleridge was at that time only five and

twenty years of age; yet he seems even then to have been able to decide on

many writers in logic and rhetoric, philosophy and poetry. Of course he

was familiar with the works of his friend Wordsworth, of whom he cleverly

observed, in reply to the depreciating opinion of Mackintosh, "He strides

on so far before you, that he dwindles in the distance." [1]

It would be very interesting, were it practicable, to trace with certainty

the sources that supplied Charles Lamb's inspiration. But this must always

be impossible. For inspiration, in all cases, proceeds from many sources,

although there may be one influence predominating. It is clear that a

great Tragedy mainly determined his conduct through life, and operated,

therefore, materially on his thoughts as well as actions. The terrible

death of his mother concentrated and strengthened his mind, and prevented

its dissipation into trifling and ignoble thoughts. The regularity of the

India House labor upheld him. The extent and character of his acquaintance

also helped to determine the quality of the things which he produced. Had

he seen less, his mind might have become warped and rigid, as from want of

space. Had he seen too much, his thoughts might have been split and

exhausted upon too many points, and would thus have been so perplexed and

harassed, that the value of his productions, now known and current through

all classes, might scarcely have exceeded a negative quantity.

Then, in his companions he must be accounted fortunate. Coleridge helped

to unloose his mind from too precise notions: Southey gave it consistency

and correctness: Manning expanded his vision: Hazlitt gave him daring:

perhaps even poor George Dyer, like some unrecognized virtue, may have

kept alive and nourished the pity and tenderness which were originally

sown within him. We must leave the difficulty, as we must leave the great

problems of Nature, unexplained, and be content with what is self-evident

before us. We know, at all events, that he had an open heart, and that the

heart is a fountain which never fails.

The earliest productions of Lamb which have come down to us, namely,

verses, and criticism, and letters, are all in a grave and thoughtful

tone. The letters, at first, are on melancholy subjects, but afterwards

stray into criticism or into details of his readings, or an account of his

predilections for books and authors. At one or two and twenty, he had read

and formed opinions on Shakespeare, on Beaumont and Fletchcr, on

Massinger, Milton, Cowley, Isaac Walton, Burns, Collins, and others; some

of these, be it observed, lying much out of the ordinary course of a young

man's reading. He was also acquainted with the writings of Priestley and

Wesley, and Jonathan Edwards; for the first of whom he entertained the

deepest respect.

Lamb's verses were always good, steady, and firm, and void of those

magniloquent commonplaces which so clearly betray the immature writer.

They were at no time misty nor inconsequent, but contained proof that he

had reasoned out his idea. From the age of twenty-one to the age of fifty-

nine, when he died, he hated fine words and flourishes of rhetoric. His

imagination (not very lofty, perhaps) is to be discovered less in his

verse than in his prose humor, than in his letters and essays. In these it

was never trivial, but was always knit together by good sense, or softened

by tenderness. Real humor seldom makes its appearance in the first

literary ventures of young writers. Accordingly, symptoms of humor (which,

nevertheless, were not long delayed) are not to be discovered in Charles

Lamb's first letters or poems; the latter, when prepared for publication

in 1796, being especially grave. They are entitled "Poems by Charles Lamb

of the India House," and are inscribed to "Mary Anne Lamb, the author's

best friend and sister."

After some procrastination, the book containing them was published in

1797, conjointly with other verses by Coleridge and Charles Lloyd. "We

came into our first battle" (Charles says in his dedication to Coleridge,

in 1818) "under cover of the greater Ajax." In this volume Lloyd's verses

took precedence of Lamb's, at Coleridge's suggestion. This suggestion, the

reason of which is not very obvious, was very readily acceded to, Lamb

having a sincere regard for Lloyd, who (with a fine reasoning mind) was

subject to that sad mental disease which was common to both their

families. Lamb has addressed some verses to Lloyd at this date, which

indicate the great respect he felt towards his friend's intellect:--

"I'll think less meanly of myself, That Lloyd will sometimes think of me."

This joint volume was published without much success. In the same year

Lamb and his sister paid a visit to Coleridge, then living at Stowey, in

Somersetshire; after which Coleridge, for what purpose does not very

clearly appear, migrated to Germany. This happened in the year 1798.

Charles Lloyd, one of the triumvirate of 1797, was the son of a banker at

Birmingham. He was educated as a Quaker, but seceded from that body, and

afterwards became "perplexed in mind," and very desponding. He often took

up his residence in London, but did not mingle much with society. An

extreme melancholy darkened his latter days; and, as I believe, he died

insane. He published various poems, and translated, from the Italian into

English blank verse, the tragedies of Alfieri. His poems are distinguished

rather by a remarkable power of intellectual analysis than by the delicacy

or fervor of the verse.

The last time I saw Charles Lloyd was in company with Hazlitt. We heard

that he had taken lodgings at a working brazier's shop in Fetter Lane, and

we visited him there, and found him in bed, much depressed, but very

willing to discuss certain problems with Hazlitt, who carried on the

greater part of the conversation. We understood that he had selected these

noisy apartments in order that they might distract his mind from the fears

and melancholy thoughts which at that time distressed him.

It was soon after the publication of the joint volume that Charles

chronicles the different tastes of himself and his friend. "Burns," he

says, "is the god of my idolatry, as Bowles of yours." Posterity has

universally joined in the preference of Lamb. Burns, indeed, was always

one of his greatest favorites. He admired and sometimes quoted a line or

two from the last stanza of the "Lament for James, Earl of Glencairn,"

"The bridegroom may forget his bride," &c.; and I have more than once

heard him repeat, in a fond, tender voice, when the subject of poets or

poetry came under discussion, the following beautiful lines from the

Epistle to Simpson of Ochiltree:

"The Muse, nae poet ever fand her,

Till by himsel he learn'd to wander,

Adown some trotting burn's meander

An' no think't lang."

These he would press upon the attention of any one present (chanting them

aloud), and would bring down the volume of Burns, and open it, in order

that the page might be impressed on the hearer's memory. Sometimes--in a

way scarcely discernible--he would kiss the volume; as he would also a

book by Chapman or Sir Philip Sidney, or any other which he particularly

valued. I have seen him read out a passage from the Holy Dying and the Urn

Burial, and express in the same way his devotion and gratitude.

Lamb had been brought up a Unitarian; but he appears to have been

occasionally fluctuating in a matter as to which boys are not apt to

entertain very rigid opinions. At one time he longed to be with superior

thinkers. "I am always longing to be with men more excellent than myself,"

are his words. At another time he writes, "I have had thoughts of turning

Quaker lately." A visit, however, to one of the Quaker meetings in 1797,

decides him against such conversion: "This cured me of Quakerism. I love

it in the books of Penn and Woodman; but I detest the vanity of man,

thinking he speaks by the Spirit." A similar story is told of Coleridge.

Mr. Justice Coleridge's statement is, "He told us a humorous story of his

enthusiastic fondness for Quakers when at Cambridge, and his attending one

of their meetings, which had entirely cured him."

In 1797 Charles Lamb (who had been introduced to Southey by Coleridge two

years previously) accompanied Lloyd to a little village near Christchurch,

in Hampshire, where Southey was at that time reading. This little holiday

(of a fortnight) seems to have converted the acquaintanceship between

Southey and Lamb into something like intimacy. He then paid another visit

(which he had long meditated) to Coleridge, who was residing at Stowey.

It must have been shortly after this first visit (for Lamb went again to

Stowey, and met Wordsworth there in 1801) that Coleridge undertook the

office of minister to a Unitarian congregation at Shrewsbury, and preached

there, as detailed by Hazlitt in the manner already set forth. In 1798 he

took his departure for Germany, and this led to a familiar correspondence

between Lamb and Southey. The opening of Lamb's humor may probably be

referred to this friendship with a congenial humorist, and one, like

himself, taking a strong interest in worldly matters. Coleridge, between

whom and Lamb there was not much similarity of feeling, beyond their

common love for poetry and religious writings, was absent, and Lamb was

enticed by the kindred spirit of Southey into the accessible regions of

humor. These two friends never arrived at that close friendship which had

been forming between Coleridge and Lamb ever since their school-days at

Christ's Hospital. But they interchanged ideas on poetical and humorous

topics, and did not perplex themselves with anything speculative or

transcendental.

The first letter to Southey, which has been preserved (July, 1798),

announces that Lamb is ready to enter into any jocose contest. It includes

a list of queries to be defended by Coleridge at Leipsic or Gottingen; the

first of which was, "Whether God loves a lying angel better than a true

man?" Some of these queries, in all probability, had relation to

Coleridge's own infirmities: at all events, they were sent over to him in

reply to the benediction which he had thought proper to bequeath to

Charles on leaving England. "Poor Lamb, if he wants _any knowledge_ he may

apply to _me_." I must believe that this message was jocose, otherwise it

would have been insolent in the extreme degree. Coleridge's answers to the

queries above adverted to are not known; I believe that the proffered

knowledge was not afforded so readily as it was demanded.

It has been surmised that there was some interruption of the good feeling

between Coleridge and Lamb about this period of their lives; but I cannot

discern this in the letters that occurred between the two schoolfellows.

The message of Coleridge, and the questions in reply, occur in 1798; and

in May, 1800, there is a letter from Lamb to Coleridge, and subsequently

two others, in the same year, all couched in the old customary, friendly

tone. In addition to this, Charles Lamb, many years afterwards, said that

there had been an uninterrupted friendship of fifty years between them. In

one letter of Lamb's, indeed (17th March, 1800), it appears that his early

notions of Coleridge being a "very good man" had been traversed by some

doubts; but these "foolish impressions" were short-lived, and did not

apparently form any check to the continuance of their life-long

friendship.

It is clear that Lamb's judgment was at this time becoming independent. In

one of his letters to Coleridge, when comparing his friend's merits with

those of Southey, he says, "Southey has no pretensions to vie with you in

the sublime of poetry, but he tells a plain story better." Even to Southey

he is equally candid. Writing to him on the subject of a volume of poems

which he had lately published, he remarks, "The Rose is the only insipid

poem in the volume; it has neither thorns nor sweetness."

In 1798 or 1799, Lamb contributed to the Annual Anthology (which Mr.

Cottle, a bookseller of Bristol, published), jointly with Coleridge and

Southey. In 1800 he was introduced by Coleridge to Godwin. It is clear

that Charles's intimacy with Coleridge, and Southey, and Lloyd, was not

productive of unmitigated pleasure. For the "Antijacobin" made its

appearance about this time, and denounced them all in a manner which in

the present day would itself be denounced as infamous. Some of these

gentlemen (Lamb's friends), in common with many others, augured at first

favorably of the actors in the great French Revolution, and this had

excited much displeasure in the Tory ranks. Accordingly they were

represented as being guilty of blasphemy and slander, and as being adorers

of a certain French revolutionist, named Lepaux, of whom Lamb, at all

events, was entirely ignorant. They wore, moreover, the subject of a

caricature by Gilray, in which Lamb and Lloyd were portrayed as toad and

frog. I cannot think, with Sir T. Talfourd, that all these libels were

excusable, on the ground of the "sportive wit" of the offending parties.

Lamb's writings had no reference whatever to political subjects; they

were, on the contrary, as the first writings of a young man generally are,

serious,--even religious. Referring to Coleridge, it is stated that he

"was dishonored at Cambridge for preaching Deism, and that he had since

left his native country, and left his poor children fatherless, and his

wife destitute:" _ex his disce his friends Lamb and Southey._ A scurrilous

libel of this stamp would now be rejected by all persons of good feeling

or good character. It would be spurned by a decent publication, or, if

published, would be consigned to the justice of a jury.

The little story of Rosamond Gray was wrought out of the artist's brain in

the year 1798, stimulated, as Lamb confesses, by the old ballad of "An old

woman clothed in gray," which he had been reading. It is defective as a

regular tale. It wants circumstance and probability, and is slenderly

provided with character. There is, moreover, no construction in the

narrative, and little or no progress in the events. Yet it is very

daintily told. The mind of the author wells out in the purest streams.

Having to deal with one foul incident, the tale is nevertheless without

speck or blemish. A virgin nymph, born of a lily, could not have unfolded

her thoughts more delicately. And, in spite of its improbability, Rosamond

Gray is very pathetic. It touches the sensitive points in young hearts;

and it was by no means without success--the author's first success. It

sold much better than his poems, and added "a few pounds" to his slender

income.

George Dyer, once a pupil in Christ's Hospital, possessing a good

reputation as a classical scholar, and who had preceded Lamb in the

school, about this time came into the circle of his familiars. Dyer was

one of the simplest and most inoffensive men in the world: in his heart

there existed nothing but what was altogether pure and unsophisticated. He

seemed never to have outgrown the innocence of childhood; or rather he

appeared to be without those germs or first principles of evil which

sometimes begin to show themselves even in childhood itself. He was not

only without any of the dark passions himself, but he would not perceive

them in others. He looked only on the sunshine. Hazlitt, speaking of him

in his "Conversation of Authors," says, "He lives amongst the old authors,

if he does not enter much into their spirit. He handles the covers, and

turns over the pages, and is familiar with the names and dates. He is busy

and self-involved. He hangs like a film and cobweb upon letters, or is

like the dust upon the outside of knowledge, which should not too rudely

be brushed aside. He follows learning as its shadow, but as such he is

respectable. He browses on the husks and leaves of books." And Lamb says,

"The gods, by denying him the very faculty of discrimination, have

effectually cut off every seed of envy in his bosom."

Dyer was very thin and short in person, and was extremely near-sighted;

and his motions were often (apparently) spasmodic. His means of living

were very scanty; he subsisted mainly by supervising the press, being

employed for that purpose by booksellers when they were printing Greek or

Latin books. He dwelt in Clifford's Inn, "like a dove in an asp's nest,"

as Charles Lamb wittily says; and he might often have been seen with a

classical volume in his hand, and another in his pocket, walking slowly

along Fleet Street or its neighborhood, unconscious of gazers, cogitating

over some sentence, the correctness of which it was his duty to determine.

You might meet him murmuring to himself in a low voice, and apparently

tasting the flavor of the words.

Dyer's knowledge of the drama (which formed part of the subject of his

first publication) may be guessed, by his having read Shakespeare, "an

irregular genius," and having dipped into Rowe and Otway, but never having

heard of any other writers in that class. In absence of mind, he probably

exceeded every other living man. Lamb has set forth one instance (which I

know to be a fact) of Dyer's forgetfulness, in his "Oxford in the

Vacation;" and to this various others might be added, such as his emptying

his snuff-box into the teapot when he was preparing breakfast for a hungry

friend, &c. But it is scarcely worth while to chronicle minutely the

harmless foibles of this inoffensive old man. If I had to write his

epitaph, I should say that he was neither much respected nor at all hated;

too good to dislike, too inactive to excite great affection; and that he

was as simple as the daisy, which we think we admire, and daily tread

under foot.

In 1799 Charles Lamb visited Cambridge, and there, through the

introduction of Lloyd, made the important acquaintance of Mr. Thomas

Manning, then a mathematical tutor in the university. This soon grew into

a close intimacy. Charles readily perceived the intellectual value of

Manning, and seems to have eagerly sought his friendship, which, he says,

(December, 1799), will render the prospect of the approaching century very

pleasant. "That century must needs commence auspiciously for me" (he

adds), "that brings with it Manning's friendship as an earnest of its

after gifts." At first sight it appears strange that there should be

formed a close friendship between a youth, a beginner, or student in

poetry (no more), and a professor of science at one of our great seats of

learning. But these men had, I suppose, an intuitive perception of each

other's excellences. And there sometimes lie behind the outer projections

of character a thousand concealed shades which readily intermingle with

those of other people. There were amongst Lamb's tender thoughts, and

Manning's mathematical tendencies, certain neutral qualities which

assimilated with each other, and which eventually served to cement that

union between them which continued unshaken during the lives of both.

Lamb's correspondence assumed more character, and showed more critical

quality, after the intimacy with Manning began. His acquaintance with

Southey, in the first instance, had the effect of increasing the activity

of his mind. Previously to that time, his letters had consisted chiefly of

witticisms (clever indeed, but not of surpassing quality), religious

thoughts, reminiscences, &c., for the most part unadorned and simple.

Afterwards, especially after the Manning era, they exhibit far greater

weight of meaning, more fecundity, original thoughts, and brilliant

allusions; as if the imagination had begun to awaken and enrich the

understanding. Manning's solid, scientific mind had, without doubt, the

effect of arousing the sleeping vigor of Lamb's intellect.

A long correspondence took place between them. At first Lamb sent Manning

his opinions only: "Opinion is a species of property that I am always

desirous of sharing with my friends." Then he communicates the fact that

George Dyer, "that good-natured poet, is now more than nine months gone

with twin volumes of odes." Afterwards he tells him that he is reading

Burnet's History of his own Times--"full of scandal, as all true history

is."

On Manning quitting England for China (1806), the letters become less

frequent; they continue, however, during his absence: one of them,

surpassing the Elia essay, to "Distant Correspondents," is very

remarkable; and when the Chinese traveller returned to London, he was very

often a guest at Lamb's residence. I have repeatedly met him there. His

countenance was that of an intelligent, steady, almost serious man. His

journey to the Celestial Empire had not been unfruitful of good; his talk

at all times being full of curious information, including much anecdote,

and some (not common) speculations on men and things. When he returned, he

brought with him a native of China, whom he took one evening to a ball in

London, where the foreigner from Shanghai, or Pekin, inquired with much

naivete as to the amount of money which his host had given to the dancers

for their evening's performance, and was persuaded with difficulty that

their exertions were entirely gratuitous.

Manning had a curious habit of bringing with him (in his waistcoat pocket)

some pods of the red pepper, whenever he expected to partake of a meal.

His original intention (as I understood) when he set out for China, was to

frame and publish a Chinese and English dictionary; yet--although he

brought over much material for the purpose--his purpose was never carried

into effect. Lamb had great love and admiration for him. In a letter to

Coleridge, in after years (1826), he says, "I am glad you esteem Manning;

though you see but his husk or shrine. He discloses not, save to select

worshippers, and will leave the world without any one hardly but me

knowing how stupendous a creature he is."

During these years Lamb's correspondence with Coleridge, Wordsworth,

Walter Wilson, and Manning (principally with Manning) goes on. It is

sometimes critical, sometimes jocose. He discusses the merits of various

authors, and more than once expresses his extreme distaste for didactic

writing. Now, he says, it is too directly instructive. Then he complains

that the knowledge, insignificant and vapid as it is, must come in the

_shape_ of knowledge. He could not obtain at Newberry's shop any of the

old "classics of the Nursery," he says; whilst "Mrs. Barbauld's and Mrs.

Trimmer's nonsense lay in piles about."

His own domestic affairs struggle on as usual; at one time calm and

pleasant, at another time troubled and uncomfortable, owing to the

frequent recurrence of his sister's malady. In general he bore these

changes with fortitude; I do not observe more than one occasion on which

(being then himself ill) his firmness seemed altogether to give way. In

1798, indeed, he had said, "I consider her perpetually on the brink of

madness." But in May, 1800, his old servant Hetty having died, and Mary

(sooner than usual) falling ill again, Charles was obliged to remove her

to an asylum; and was left in the house alone with Hetty's dead body. "My

heart is quite sick" (he cries), "and I don't know where to look for

relief. My head is very bad. I almost wish that Mary were dead." This was

the one solitary cry of anguish that he uttered during his long years of

anxiety and suffering. At all other times he bowed his head in silence,

uncomplaining.

Charles Lamb, with his sister, left Little Queen Street on or before 1800;

in which year he seems to have migrated, first to Chapel Street,

Pentonville; next to Southampton Buildings, Chancery Lane; and finally to

No. 16 Mitre Court Buildings, in the Temple, "a pistol shot off Baron

Masere's;" and here he resided for about nine years.

It was during his stay at Pentonville that he "fell in love" with a young

Quaker, called Hester Savory. As (he confesses) "I have never spoken to

her during my life," it may be safely concluded that the attachment was

essentially Platonic. This was the young girl who inspired those verses,

now so widely known and admired. I remember them as being the first lines

which I ever saw of Charles Lamb's writing. I remember and admire them

still, for their natural, unaffected style; no pretence, no straining for

images and fancies flying too high above the subject, but dealing with

thoughts that were near his affections, in a fit and natural manner. The

conclusion of the poem, composed and sent after her death (in February,

1803) to Manning, who was then in Paris, is very sad and tender:--

My sprightly neighbor, gone before

To that unknown and silent shore,

Shall we not meet, as heretofore,

Some summer morning?

When from thy cheerful eyes a ray

Hath struck a bliss upon the day,

A bliss that will not go away,

A sweet forewarning.

[1] The most convincing evidence of Coleridge's powers is to be found in

his Table Talk. It appears from it that he was ready to discuss (almost)

any subject, and that he was capable of talking ably upon most, and

cleverly upon all.

Charles Lamb: A Memoir · 第 3 / 7 章