perhaps the oldest poem. I had an idea of writing a "Job,' but I found it too sublime. There is no poetry to "be compared with it." I told him that Japhet's soliloquy in Heaven and Earth,' and address to the mountains of Caucasus, strongly resembled Faust's. "I shall have commentators enough by and by," said he, "to dissect my thoughts, and find owners for them.” "When I first saw the review of my Hours of Idleness,' "I was furious; in such a rage as I never have been "in since. "I dined that day with Scroope Davies, and drank three "bottles of claret to drown it; but it only boiled the more. "That critique was a masterpiece of low wit, a tissue of "scurrilous abuse. I remember there was a great deal of vulgar trash in it which was meant for humour, ‘about people being thankful for what they could get,'—' not * Written in 1808. 66 66 66 66 looking a gift horse in the mouth,' and such stable expressions. The severity of The Quarterly' killed poor Keats, and neglect, Kirke White; but I was made of “different stuff, of tougher materials. So far from their bullying me, or deterring me from writing, I was bent on falsifying their raven predictions, and determined to shew "them, croak as they would, that it was not the last time they should hear from me. I set to work immediately, "and in good earnest, and produced in a year The Eng"lish Bards and Scotch Reviewers.' For the first four days "after it was announced, I was very nervous about its fate. Generally speaking, the first fortnight decides the pub"lic opinion of a new book. This made a prodigious impression, more perhaps than any of my works, except The Corsair.' 66 66 66 66 66 66 "In less than a year and a half it passed through four editions, and rather large ones. To some of them, con trary to the advice of my friends, I affixed my name. The thing was known to be mine, and I could not have escaped any enemies in not owning it; besides, it was more manly not to deny it. There were many things in "that satire which I was afterwards sorry for, and I wished 66 to cancel it. If Galignani chose to reprint it, it was no "fault of mine. I did my utmost to suppress the publi"cation, not only in England, but in Ireland. I will tell 66 66 you my principal reason for doing so: I had good grounds "to believe that Jeffrey (though perhaps really responsible "for whatever appears in 'The Edinburgh,' as Gifford is for The Quarterly,' as its editor) was not the author of that article,—was not guilty of it. He disowned it; and though "he would not give up the aggressor, he said he would "convince me, if I ever came to Scotland, who the person 66 was. I have every reason to believe it was a certain lawyer, who hated me for something I once said of Mrs. The technical language about 'minority pleas,' plaintiffs,' 'grounds of action,' &c. a jargon only intelligible to a lawyer, leaves no doubt in my mind on the subject. I bear no animosity to him now, though, inde 66 6 66 66 pendently of this lampoon, which does him no credit, " he gave me cause enough of offence. 66 66 66 66 "The occasion was this :-In my separation-cause, that went before the Chancellor as a matter of form, when the proceedings came on, he took upon himself to apply some expressions, or make some allusions to me, which must have been of a most unwarrantable nature, as my friends consulted whether they should acquaint me with σε 66 66 "the purport of them. What they precisely were I never "knew, or should certainly have made him retract them. I “met him afterwards at Coppet, but was not at that time acquainted with this circumstance. He took on himself "the advocate also, in writing to Madame de Staël, and advising her not to meddle in the quarrel between Lady Byron and myself. This was not kind; it was a gratui“tous and unfeed act of hostility. But there was another reason that influenced me even more than my cooled resentment against Jeffrey, to suppress English Bards and "Scotch Reviewers.' In the duel-scene I had unconsciously made part of the ridicule fall on Moore. The fact 66 was, that there was no imputation on the courage of either " of the principals. One of the balls fell out in the car 66 66 riage, and was lost; and the seconds, not having a further supply, drew the remaining one. Shortly after this publication I went abroad: and "Moore was so offended by the mention of the leadless pistols, that he addressed a letter to me in the nature "of a challenge, delivering it to the care of Mr. Hanson, "but without acquainting him with the contents. This 66 letter was mislaid, at least never forwarded to me. T 66 66 66 "But, on my return to England in 1812, an enquiry was made by Moore, if I had received such a letter? adding, "that particular circumstances (meaning his marriage, or perhaps the suppression of the satire) had now altered "his situation, and that he wished to recall the letter, and to be known to me through Rogers. I was shy of this "mode of arranging matters, one hand presenting a pistol, "and another held out to shake; and felt awkward at the "loss of a letter of such a nature, and the imputation it might have given rise to. But when, after a considerable search, it was at length found, I returned it to Moore with the seal unbroken; and we have since been the best "friends in the world. I correspond with no one so regularly as with Moore. 66 66 66 "It is remarkable that I should at this moment number among my most intimate friends and correspondents those whom I most made the subjects of satire in Eng"lish Bards.' I never retracted my opinions of their works, I never sought their acquaintance; but there are men who can forgive and forget. The Laureate is not 168 66 one of that disposition, and exults over the anticipated death-bed repentance of the objects of his hatred. Finding that his denunciations or panegyrics are of little |