The Bath speech gave desperate offense to the Portuguese.  Livingstone thought it a good sign, wrote playfully to Mr. Webb that they were “cussin’ and swearin’ dreadful,” and wondered if they would keep their senses when the book came out.  In a postscript to the preface to The Zambesi and its Tributaries, he says, “Senhor Lacerda has endeavored to extinguish the facts adduced by me at Bath by a series of papers in the Portuguese official journal; and their Minister for Foreign Affairs has since devoted some of the funds of his Government to the translation and circulation of Senhor Lacerda’s articles in the form of an English tract.”  He replies to the allegations of the pamphlet on the main points.  But he was too magnanimous to make allusion to the shameless indecency of the personal charges against himself.  “It is manifest,” said Lacerda, “without the least reason to doubt, that Dr. Livingstone, under the pretext of propagating the Word of God (this being the least in which he employed himself) and the advancement of geographical and natural science, made all his steps and exertions subservient to the idea of ... eventually causing the loss to Portugal of the advantages of the rich commerce of the interior, and in the end, when a favorable occasion arose that of the very territory itself.”  Lacerda then quoted the bitter letter of Mr. Rowley in illustration of Livingstone’s plans and methods, and urged remonstrance as a duty of the Portuguese Government.  “Nor,” he continued, “ought the Government oL Portugal to stop here.  It ought, as we have said, to go further; because from what his countrymen say of Livingstone—­and to which he only answers by a mere vain negation,—­from what he unhesitatingly declares of himself and his intentions, and from what must be known to the Government by private information from, their delegates, it is obvious that such men as Livingstone may become extremely prejudicial to the interests of Portugal, especially when resident in a public capacity in our African possessions, if not efficiently watched, if their audacious and mischievous actions are not restrained.  If steps are not taken in a proper and effective manner, so that they may be permitted only to do good, if indeed good can come from such,” etc.

“26_th Sept_.—­Agnes and I go to-day to Newstead Abbey, Notts.  Reach it about 9 P.M., and find Mr. and Mrs. Webb all I anticipated and more.  A splendid old mansion with a wonderful number of curiosities in it, and magnificent scenery around.  It was the residence of Lord Byron, and his furniture is kept” [in his private rooms] “just as he left it.  His character does not shine.  It appears to have been horrid....  He made a drinking cup of a monk’s skull found under the high altar, with profane verses on the silver setting, and kept his wine in the stone coffin.  These Mrs. Webb buried, and all the bones she could find that had been desecrated by the poet.”

In a letter to Sir Thomas Maclear he speaks of the poet as one of those who, like many others—­some of them travelers who abused missionaries,—­considered it a fine thing to be thought awfully bad fellows.