“My poesy is in the hands of its various publishers; but the ’Hints from Horace,’ (to which I have subjoined some savage lines on Methodism, and ferocious notes on the vanity of the triple Editory of the Edin.  Annual Register,) my ‘Hints,’ I say, stand still, and why?—­I have not a friend in the world (but you and Drury) who can construe Horace’s Latin or my English well enough to adjust them for the press, or to correct the proofs in a grammatical way.  So that, unless you have bowels when you return to town (I am too far off to do it for myself), this ineffable work will be lost to the world for—­I don’t know how many weeks.

“‘Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage’ must wait till Murray’s is finished.  He is making a tour in Middlesex, and is to return soon, when high matter may be expected.  He wants to have it in quarto, which is a cursed unsaleable size; but it is pestilent long, and one must obey one’s bookseller.  I trust Murray will pass the Paddington Canal without being seduced by Payne and Mackinlay’s example,—­I say Payne and Mackinlay, supposing that the partnership held good.  Drury, the villain, has not written to me; ’I am never (as Mrs. Lumpkin says to Tony) to be gratified with the monster’s dear wild notes.’

“So you are going (going indeed!) into orders.  You must make your peace with the Eclectic Reviewers—­they accuse you of impiety, I fear, with injustice.  Demetrius, the ‘Sieger of Cities,’ is here, with ‘Gilpin Homer.’  The painter[30] is not necessary, as the portraits he already painted are (by anticipation) very like the new animals.—­Write, and send me your ’Love Song’—­but I want ‘paulo majora’ from you.  Make a dash before you are a deacon, and try a dry publisher.

     “Yours always, B.”

[Footnote 30:  Barber, whom he had brought down to Newstead to paint his wolf and his bear.]

* * * * *

It was at this period that I first had the happiness of seeing and becoming acquainted with Lord Byron.  The correspondence in which our acquaintance originated is, in a high degree, illustrative of the frank manliness of his character; and as it was begun on my side, some egotism must be tolerated in the detail which I have to give of the circumstances that led to it.  So far back as the year 1806, on the occasion of a meeting which took place at Chalk Farm between Mr. Jeffrey and myself, a good deal of ridicule and raillery, founded on a false representation of what occurred before the magistrates at Bow Street, appeared in almost all the public prints.  In consequence of this, I was induced to address a letter to the Editor of one of the Journals, contradicting the falsehood that had been circulated, and stating briefly the real circumstances of the case.  For some time my letter seemed to produce the intended effect,—­but, unluckily, the original story was too tempting a theme for humour and sarcasm to be so easily superseded by mere matter of fact.  Accordingly, after a little time, whenever the subject was publicly alluded to,—­more especially by those who were at all “willing to wound,”—­the old falsehood was, for the sake of its ready sting, revived.