Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 51.djvu/95

 amount of work. Lockhart describes (ib. ch. xxvii. p. 256) how in 1814 a youthful friend of his own was irritated by the vision of a hand which he could see, while drinking his claret, through the window of a neighbouring house, unweariedly adding to a heap of manuscripts. It was afterwards identified as Scott's hand, then employed upon ‘Waverley;’ and the anecdote shows that he sometimes, at least, wrote into the evening.

During 1806–7 Scott was hard at work upon ‘Dryden,’ and in the spring of 1807 visited London to make researches in the British Museum. He was also appointed secretary to the parliamentary commission upon Scottish jurisprudence (ib. ch. xvi.), and took much pains in qualifying himself for the duty. An essay upon the changes proposed by the commission was afterwards contributed by him to the ‘Edinburgh Annual Register’ for 1808 (published 1810), and shows his suspicion of the reforms which were being urged by Bentham among others (see, Works, vol. v.) At the same time he was writing ‘Marmion,’ upon which he says (Introduction of 1830) that he thought it desirable to bestow more care than his previous compositions had received. Some of it, especially the battle, was composed while he was galloping his charger along Portobello Sands during his volunteer exercises (, ch. xvi.). The introductory epistles, which most of his critics thought a disagreeable interruption, were carefully laboured, and at one time advertised for separate publication (ib. ch. xvi. p. 154). They are of great biographical interest. Constable offered a thousand guineas for the poem before seeing it, and Scott at once accepted the offer. He had a special need of money in consequence of the failure, at the end of 1806, of his brother Thomas. ‘Marmion’ was published on 23 Feb. 1808, and was as successful as the ‘Lay.’ The general applause was interrupted by some sharp criticism from Jeffrey in the ‘Edinburgh Review.’ Jeffrey, besides a general dislike to the romanticism of the new school, strangely accused Scott of neglecting ‘Scottish feelings and Scottish characters.’ He sent the review, with a note, to Scott, with whom he was engaged to dine. Scott received him with unchanged cordiality, but Mrs. Scott sarcastically hoped that he had been well paid by Constable for his ‘abuse’ of his host. Scott himself ceased to be a contributor to the ‘Edinburgh,’ although his personal relations with Jeffrey were always friendly (see Letters, i. 436–40, ii. 32). Other reasons sufficiently explain his secession. In November 1807 he had proposed to Southey to become one of Jeffrey's contributors, in spite of certain attacks upon ‘Madoc’ and ‘Thalaba.’ Southey declined, as generally disapproving of Jeffrey's politics, and Scott was soon annoyed by what he thought the unpatriotic tone of the review, especially the ‘Cevallos’ article of October 1808. He at once took up eagerly the scheme for the ‘Quarterly Review,’ which was now being started by Murray, who visited him in October 1808 (see Murray, i. 96 seq.) Canning approved the scheme, and Scott wrote to all his friends to get recruits. Lockhart says that he could ‘fill half a volume with the correspondence upon this subject’ (see, too, Gifford's letters in Letters, vol. ii. appendix). The quarrel with Jeffrey involved a quarrel with Constable, the publisher at this time of the ‘Edinburgh.’ Other serious difficulties had arisen. The edition of ‘Dryden’ in eighteen volumes, with Scott's admirable life, had appeared in the last week of April 1808. He had worked hard as an editor, and received 756l., or forty guineas a volume. He had by October 1808 prepared an edition of the ‘Sadler Papers’ (published in 1809–10), and was at work upon a new edition of the ‘Somers Tracts,’ and now, besides some other trifles, had undertaken the edition of Swift, for which Constable offered him 1,500l. A partner of Constable's, named Hunter, an intelligent and honourable man, but strongly opposed to Scott in politics, was dissatisfied with the Swift bargain. Scott was bitterly offended at some of Hunter's language, and on 12 Jan. 1809 wrote an indignant letter breaking off all connection with the firm. He had previously engaged John (1774–1821) [q. v.], the younger brother of James Ballantyne, who had failed in business, to act as clerk under the brother. It was now decided to start a publishing firm (John Ballantyne & Co.) in opposition to Constable. Scott was to supply half the capital, and the other half was to be divided equally between James and John. According to Lockhart, Scott had also to provide for James's quarter, while John had to borrow his quarter either from Scott or some one else (, ch. xviii. p. 174). The new firm undertook various enterprises, especially the ‘Edinburgh Annual Register,’ to which Southey was a contributor; and Scott now hoped, with the alliance of John Murray, to compete successfully with Constable.

In the spring of 1809 he visited London and saw much of his new acquaintance, John Bacon Sawrey Morritt [q. v.], with whom he stayed at Rokeby Park on his return. In London he saw much of Canning, Ellis, and