Any works which should fall in your way respecting the Jews since the destruction of the Temple, I should of course be glad to look through.  Above all, Mezeray’s (no! that is not the name, I think) “History of the Jews,” that I must have.

I shall be impatient for the rest of Mr. Frere’s sheets.  Most unfeignedly can I declare that I am unable to decide whether the admiration which the excellence inspires, or the wonder which the knowledge of the countless difficulties so happily overcome, never ceases to excite in my mind during the re-perusal and collation of them with the original Greek, be the greater.  I have not a moment’s hesitation in fixing on Mr. Frere as the man of the correctest and most genial taste among all our contemporaries whom I have ever met with, personally or in their works.  Should choice or chance lead you to sun and air yourself on Highgate Hill during any of your holiday excursions, my worthy friend and his amiable and accomplished wife will be happy to see you.  We dine at four, and drink tea at six.

Yours, dear Sir, respectfully, S.T.  COLERIDGE.

Mr. Murray did not accept Mr. Coleridge’s proposal to publish his works in a collected form or his articles for the Quarterly, as appears from the following letter: 

Mr. Coleridge to John Murray.

HIGHGATE, March 26, 1817.

DEAR SIR,

I cannot be offended by your opinion that my talents are not adequate to the requisites of matter and manner for the Quarterly Review, nor should I consider it as a disgrace to fall short of Robert Southey in any department of literature.  I owe, however, an honest gratification to the conversation between you and Mr. Gillman, for I read Southey’s article, on which Mr. Gillman and I have, it appears, formed very different opinions.  It is, in my judgment, a very masterly article. [Footnote:  This must have been Southey’s article on Parliamentary Reform in No. 31, which, though due in October 1816, was not, published until February 1817.] I would to heaven, my dear sir, that the opinions of Southey, Walter Scott, Lord Byron, Mr. Frere, and of men like these in learning and genius, concerning my comparative claims to be a man of letters, were to be received as the criterion, instead of the wretched, and in deed and in truth mystical jargon of the Examiner and Edinburgh Review.

Mr. Randall will be so good as to repay you the L50, and I understand from Mr. Gillman that you are willing to receive this as a settlement respecting the “Zapolya.”  The corrections and additions to the two first books of the “Christabel” may become of more value to you when the work is finished, as I trust it will be in the course of the spring, than they are at present.  And let it not be forgotten, that while I had the utmost malignity of personal enmity to cry down the work, with the exception of Lord Byron,