T. B. M.

To Hannah M. Macaulay.

London:  August 2, 1833.

My dear Sister,—­I agree with your judgment on Chesterfield’s Letters.  They are for the most part trash; though they contain some clever passages, and the style is not bad.  Their celebrity must be attributed to causes quite distinct from their literary merit, and particularly to the position which the author held in society.  We see in our own time that the books written by public men of note are generally rated at more than their real value:  Lord Granville’s little compositions, for example; Canning’s verses; Fox’s history; Brougham’s treatises.  The writings of people of high fashion, also, have a value set on them far higher than that which intrinsically belongs to them.  The verses of the late Duchess of Devonshire, or an occasional prologue by Lord Alvanley, attract a most undue share of attention.  If the present Duke of Devonshire, who is the very “glass of fashion and mould of form,” were to publish a book with two good pages, it would be extolled as a masterpiece in half the drawing-rooms of London.  Now Chesterfield was, what no person in our time has been or can be, a great political leader, and at the same time the acknowledged chief of the fashionable world; at the head of the House of Lords, and at the head of laze; Mr. Canning and the Duke of Devonshire in one.  In our time the division of labour is carried so far that such a man could not exist.  Politics require the whole of energy, bodily and mental, during half the year; and leave very little time for the bow window at White’s in the day, or for the crush-room of the Opera at night.  A century ago the case was different.  Chesterfield was at once the most distinguished orator in the Upper House, and the undisputed sovereign of wit and fashion.  He held this eminence for about forty years.  At last it became the regular custom of the higher circles to laugh whenever he opened his mouth, without waiting for his bon mot.  He used to sit at White’s with a circle of young men of rank round him, applauding every syllable that he uttered.  If you wish for a proof of the kind of position which Chesterfield held among his contemporaries, look at the prospectus of Johnson’s Dictionary.  Look even at Johnson’s angry letter.  It contains the strongest admission of the boundless influence which Chesterfield exercised over society.  When the letters of such a man were published, of course they were received more favourably by far than they deserved.

So much for criticism.  As to politics, everything seems tending to repose; and I should think that by this day fortnight we shall probably be prorogued.  The Jew Bill was thrown out yesterday night by the Lords.  No matter.  Our turn will come one of these days.

If you want to see me puffed and abused by somebody who evidently knows nothing about me, look at the New Monthly for this month.  Bulwer, I see, has given up editing it.  I suppose he is making money in some other way; for his dress must cost as much as that of any five other members of Parliament.