
‘SATIRE
IS BAD
TRADE’
Dr John Wolcot and his Publishers
and Printers
in Eighteenth-Century England
Donald Kerr
‘Wolcot left behind many boxes of unpublished
manuscripts of his own writings for which, it
was said, the booksellers offered a thousand
pounds, but for which the executor demanded
double and which when he, too, died, disappeared.’
[1]
‘They will probably be disposed of as waste-paper’
said [John] Taylor ruefully, ‘though perhaps,
if properly selected they might prove a valuable
addition to the poetical treasures of the country.’
[2]
Catalogue of a valuable collection of Autograph
Letters […] of the published and unpublished
literary remains of Dr John Wolcot (Peter Pindar)
[…] lots 267–312, which will be sold by Auction
by Messrs Puttick and Simpson […] on Thursday,
May 17th, 1877. [3]
* * * * *
On 7 April 1888, Governor Sir
George Grey (1812–98) bought from John Davies
Enys (1837–1912) six volumes of unpublished material
by and about Dr John Wolcot, the Regency satirist.
[4]
Grey paid £30 for the manuscripts, once part of
a much larger Wolcot Collection that was sold
off by Puttick and Simpson in London on 17 May
1887 and somehow acquired by Enys, who, born in
Penryn, Cornwall, lived in New Zealand from 1861
to 1891. [5]
Five volumes contain hundreds of unpublished verse
on small pieces of paper in the poet’s hand. [6]
The sixth volume (GMS 5) contains 288 leaves of
letters and ledger documents concerning Wolcot’s
affairs with his publishers, printers and booksellers
between 1785 and 1810. The accounts, the book
lists, the promissory notes, and letters are not
in Wolcot’s hand, rather, in the hand of those
with whom he had dealings. There are, however,
numerous annotations by Wolcot on these documents
that give small but no less significant information.
While much of the material is new in relation
to Wolcot’s literary activities, they do shed
light on book trade practices (and its vagaries)
in eighteenth-century England, in particular the
cost of printing advertisements (a most necessary
expense), the cost of fundamentals such as stitching
and collation, and more specifically, Wolcot’s
somewhat testy relationship publishers William
West (and Thomas Hughes) and John Walker, printers
Thomas, Charles, and William Spilsbury, and Thomas
Brice and bookseller Margaret Sweetman of Exeter.
In addition, embedded in many of them are clearer
indicators of when the titles were printed. Such
information assists greatly the researcher who
wants to establish those bibliographical certainties
concerning Wolcot’s total literary output. However,
before documenting the archive material pertinent
to the book trade, it is necessary to provide
a brief overview of Dr John Wolcot’s life.
John
Wolcot was born on 6 May 1738 at Dodbrooke near
Kingsbridge in Devonshire and, according to records,
was baptised a few days later on 9 May. [7]
The schools he attended included the Free School
of Kingsbridge, Liskeard Grammar, under the Revd
Mr Hayden, and then the Revd Dr Fisher’s Academy
at Bodmin. [8]
In 1751, after the death of his father, he was
sent to Fowey, Cornwall, and placed in the care
of his uncle John, a surgeon–apothecary. His uncle’s
sisters also lived there and it was they who ‘kept
[him] under rigid control [and who] cowed his
spirit’. [9]
His apprenticeship with his uncle was grudgingly
done. He preferred the Muses. A favourite haunt
during his teens was the old defence towers at
Fowey where he would write poetry, away from the
watchful eyes of his domineering paternal aunts,
‘who, although women of solid intellects, and
literary acquirements, could not overcome the
common prejudice, that poetry is a very dangerous
interruption to business.’ [10]
His first appearance in print was a poem to Miss
B[etsy] C[ranch] in Martin’s Magazine for
1756, followed by another in the same periodical
in 1757 called On the Recovery of Mr Pitt from
an Attack of Gout. [11]
In
1761, Wolcot was sent to France to learn the language.
This reward for completing his apprenticeship
backfired. Although he gained a good command of
the language, he developed a strong dislike of
the French, something that was borne out in his
later verse. His return to England saw a couple
of years’ work in hospitals in London, where he
also developed contacts in the literary and art
world. In 1764, he returned to Fowey to assist
his uncle and on 8 September 1767 he was granted
an MD Diploma from Aberdeen without attending
the University. His competence was satisfied by
a Dr Huxham of Plymouth who gave him ‘a strict
examination’. [12]
Wolcot’s
desire to make a break from life at Fowey and
gain personal and financial independence was strong.
The Trelawney family (of Trelawne, Fowey) came
under the care of the Wolcots and their practice.
When Sir William Trelawney was appointed the Governor
of Jamaica, Wolcot applied for the position of
physician. Here was his opportunity: ‘Ah! Benjy
it is not the idea of grandeur but of independence
that seduces me from Great Britain, or should
I say from old England; the hope of placing myself,
by the labour of a few years beyond the caprice
of a mob.’ [13]
He was successful and, by October 1768, Wolcot
was living in Jamaica as attendant physician to
Sir William. Encouraged by Trelawney to take orders
with the likelihood of a preferment in Jamaica,
Wolcot returned to England in June 1769. On 24
[]June 1769, he was made deacon by Richard Terrick,
the Bishop of London, and the following day ‘by
the assistance of Almighty God a Special Ordination’,
a priest. [14]
He returned to Jamaica in March 1770 to hear that
the living dangled before him was no more. Grudgingly
an inferior clerical appointment was taken: Vere,
at £800 per year, along with the rather official-sounding
but hardly onerous ‘Physician–General to all the
Horse and Foot Militia raised or to be raised
throughout the island’. [15]
Wolcot’s foothold on island life ended abruptly
when Trelawney died in December 1772. Stranded
with unlikely employment from the new governor,
he left for England about March 1773 as escort
to his late patron’s widow, Lady Trelawney. He
may have planned a more lasting relationship with
her, but disappointment again followed. She died
suddenly on 28 May 1775.
Island
life obviously afforded Wolcot ample time to versify.
Sometime in the first three months of 1773, he
developed a desire to see more of his verse in
print. Just before he left Jamaica, he paid Joseph
Thompson, a Kingston-based printer, an unknown
sum to print Persian Love Elegies (1773).
The work was dedicated to Lady Trelawney, and
contained the ‘Nymph of Tauris’, an elegy
on Anne, Sir William’s sister, who had also unexpectedly
died in Jamaica. [16]
Between
1773 and 1779, Wolcot lived in Truro, Falmouth,
and Helston, where he practised as a doctor. As
an amateur artist himself (he had been schooled
by Richard Wilson, the Welsh painter, who was
proclaimed by Wolcot as the ‘English Claude’),
[17]
he continued to cement friendships with the London
art and literary crowd. In 1774, he wrote to James
Northcote, the English (Plymouth-born) painter:
‘I have sent you a Compliment on your Picture
at the Royal Academy [No. 195. “a Lady in the
character of St Catherine”].’ [18]
In the same year, he wrote again to Northcote
asking for a portrait: ‘Dear Northcote—Come out
of that d—mn’d p— Hole or by G— you’ll die,—much
obliged t’ye for your compliments on my poetical
talent […] I long for a head’. [19]
With such familiarity, it is no wonder the relationship
between Northcote and Wolcot cooled. To Ozias
Humphry, the English portrait painter, he offered
a welcome return ‘from Italy to old England, loaded
(I make no doubt) with all the Excellencies of
the Painters of His Holinesses Dominions’ and
again asked for a portrait: ‘As I am myself a
Dabbler I want a Head in water colors &
in oil finished in your highest manner, not only
for my Instruction but for the Vanity of being
possessed of the finest paintings in the world.
Will you please tell me in your next [letter the]
Price?’ [20]
In
1778, Wolcot gained small notice in the London
literary world with the publication of A Poetical,
Supplicating, Modest and Affecting Epistle to
those Literary Colossuses, the Reviewers.
Supposedly written ‘on behalf of a poetical Friend’,
[21]
this satire gave him the first opportunity to
attack his critics, albeit provincial ones such
as Henry Rosewarne, the MP for Truro. This modest
sampling was printed in Truro and paid for by
Wolcot. With his London contacts, he arranged
for Robert Baldwin, the London bookseller in Paternoster
Row (who, according to Benjamin Collins of Salisbury,
was ‘a happy Collation of Industry, Integrity,
and Method’ to sell it). [22]
Baldwin’s involvement continued briefly when he
teamed up with Thomas Egerton (of Chancery Lane)
and John Debrett (178 Piccadilly) to sell Wolcot’s
Lyric Odes to the Royal Academicians (1782).
These fifteen ‘odes’ demolished some members of
the Royal Academy. Benjamin West was viciously
attacked, George Stubbs was told to stick to painting
horses, and Dominic Serres and John Zoffany, the
first being about sixty and the last about forty-nine
years of age, were told rather cuttingly that
‘you’ll improve as you grow older’. [23]
There was praise: Sir Joshua Reynolds (a Devonshire
man himself) was called an eagle among wrens and
Thomas Gainsborough ‘has great merit too’. [24]
It also contains some of Wolcot’s common sense
sentiments towards painting and painters. This
is but one:
Carry your eyes with you, where’er you go;
For not to trust to them, is t’abuse ’em:
As Nature gave them t’ye, you ought to know
The wise old Lady meant that you should use ’em;
And yet, what thousands, to our vast surprise,
Of Pictures judge by other people’s eyes. [ 25]
The work bore the by-line ‘Peter
Pindar, a Distant Relation to the Poet of Thebes’
and it marked the beginning of the Pindar industry,
so aptly described by P. M. Zall: ‘From 1782 until
his death in 1819 Wolcot managed to survive the
strains of the beau monde, political and
legal tangles, and physical and emotional crises,
mainly with the income from the labours of Peter
Pindar.’ [26]
In
1780, Wolcot (at forty-three) moved to London
and introduced into London society John Opie,
an ex-mine-carpenter’s apprentice, whose artistic
talents had attracted his attention while living
in Truro. Wolcot had instructed the ‘Cornish Wonder’
in art and manners—‘I want to polish him, he is
an unlicked cub yet’ [27]—and,
in anticipation of their individual successes
in the city, it was mutually agreed to ‘share
the joint profits in equal division’. [28]
After setting themselves up at Orange Court, they
began to attract attention. A green feather in
Opie’s hat was but one device. The high point
for Opie was obtaining the patronage of Sir Joshua
Reynolds, then the president of the Royal Academy,
and receiving an introduction to George III and
Queen Charlotte, who bought a painting, A Beggar
and his Dog. The partnership between Wolcot
and Opie dissolved the following year by pressure
bought about from Opie’s in-laws (his first wife
was Mary Bunn; his second Amelia Alderson) who
no doubt saw Wolcot as a hindrance to their son-in-law’s
future success (in 1786, Opie was elected a member
of the Royal Academy). Wolcot and Opie remained
on amicable terms, with the latter recognising
the debt he owed to mentor: ‘I promise to paint
for Doctor Wolcot any picture or pictures he may
demand as long as I live; otherwise I desire the
world will consider me a damned ungrateful son
of a bitch.’ [29]
Under
the pseudonym of Peter Pindar, Wolcot wrote more
than sixty satires of varying length from 1782
to 1817, five miscellanies of serious and humourous
verse, two edited works, one play, and a large
number of unpublished manuscript pieces. [30]
His attacks on the follies and foibles of George
III, and others such as William Pitt, Sir Joseph
Banks, and James Boswell, and on particular events,
were all fair game. It suited his prime purpose
of gaining money and provided the public with
good reading copy. Indeed, he inspired tributes,
attacks, imitators, and followers who traded radical
satire under the same or similar pseudonyms (‘Peter
Pindar, Esq.’, aka C. F. Lawler; ‘Peter Pindar,
Junior’, aka John Agg, who also wrote under the
name of ‘Humphrey Hedgehog’) and piracy (rewards
of ten and twenty guineas were posted in many
of Wolcot’s works). [31]
Although a relatively late-starter, Wolcot was
certainly popular and, at the height of his reputation,
‘twenty to thirty thousand of his works went off
in a day’. [32]
This is a large number, and if Cyrus Redding’s
account is true, it says much about the reading
public’s awareness and their reception of the
various topics dealt with by Wolcot during this
period. [33]
Indeed, such was his success that it has been
claimed that he was ‘the only man who really made
money by poetry in the last decades of the eighteenth
century’. [34]
In
his last years, Wolcot was blind and although
he continued to write (often through an amanuensis),
the body of this work remained unpublished. He
was still socially active, accepting visitors
such as Mary Shelley, William Godwin, William
Hazlitt, and Henry Crabb Robinson for dinner.
Of such an evening, the latter stated:
The man whom we [Robinson, Thelwall,
etc.] went to see, and, if it we could, admire,
was Dr Wolcott [sic], better known as Peter
Pindar. He talked about artists, said that West
could paint neither ideal beauty nor from nature,
called Opie the Michael Angelo of our age, […]
spoke contemptuously of Walter Scott, whom, he
said, owed his popularity to hard names […] He
recollected on [his own writings] with no pleasure,
[adding], ‘Satire is a bad trade.’ [35]
His main comforter was music,
composing light airs for amusement. According
to the entry in the DNB, Wolcot was
‘a thick squat man with a large dark
and flat face, and no speculation in his eye.’
He possessed considerable accomplishments, being
a fair artist and, as mentioned, a good musician.
Despite the character of his compositions, his
friends described him as of a ‘kind and hearty
disposition.’ He was probably influenced in his
writings by no real animosity toward royalty and
himself confessed that ‘the king had been a good
subject to him, and he a bad one to the king.’
His writings, despite their ephemeral interest,
still furnish stock quotations. [36]
He died on 14 January 1819 and
was buried in St Paul’s Church, Covent Garden.
His funeral was attended by William Francis and
John Taylor, Wolcot’s executors, and ‘eleven of
his most particular friends agreeable to his wishes.’
[37]
As requested in his will, he was laid next to
the remains of Samuel Butler, satirist and author
of Hudibras. [38]
According to his good friend John Taylor, his
final words were: ‘Bring back my youth.’ [39]
Wolcot was one of the most important satirists
of the eighteenth century and, as one commentator
has stated, constituted a link between the satiric
work of Charles Churchill and Lord Byron. [40]
PUBLISHERS
John Taylor, editor of The
Morning Post, met Wolcot and formed a friendship
that lasted until the latter’s death in 1819.
Taylor included many of Wolcot’s poems in his
paper and it was this exposure that resulted in
an approach by George Kearsley, the Fleet Street
publisher. Kearsley was certainly known to Wolcot.
He had published John Wilkes’s North Briton
and had been arrested (with fifty others), but
later discharged, for issuing the seditious No.
45 (23 April 1763). Kearsley (and sometimes ‘W.
Foster’ or ‘Forster’) was Wolcot’s publisher between
1785 and 1790, and published twenty titles and
some eighty-five reissues and new editions. The
first was More Lyrical Odes to the Royal Academicians
in 1786 and the last A Rowland for an Oliver
(1790). About 1791, Kearsley’s involvement
with Wolcot as publisher ended. This was about
the time that Catharine, Kearsley’s wife, joined
her husband on the imprint. [41]
Although Wolcot did suffer financial losses (he
supposedly lost £40 with More Lyrical Odes),
he was, by 1790, very successful in his verse-writing.
Why did the association end? Perhaps Mrs Kearsley
did not like Wolcot and saw him as a risk, a contentious
versifier who not only made barbed attacks on
the monarch but also on celebrities such as Boswell
and Banks. Such a man could easily cause her husband
to be sent back to jail.
In
1791, James Evans, a bookseller of Paternoster
Row, took over the role of publisher. Although
Evans’s involvement only lasted two years, he
published eight titles, many of them significant
in the Wolcot canon. The first was A Commiserating
Epistle to James Lowther (1791), Wolcot’s
vitriolic and libellous response to Lowther, the
‘bad earl’ of Lonsdale, and his actions in not
only closing down a mine in Whitehaven but also
withholding compensation to the local community.
Evans also published the third Canto of The
Lousiad, part of Wolcot’s most important and
longest work. The last title was More Money,
or Odes of Instruction to Mr Pitt (1792),
a satire on the request through Parliament for
additional money that because of the King’s frugality
was not really required. Despite its title, the
work actually focused more on George III than
the Prime Minister. Evans also reprinted some
of Wolcot’s works, including Lyric Odes for
the Year 1785 (1791) and Peter’s Pension
(1792). Although Wolcot must have been seen as
a steady earner, the financial gain from his publications
was not enough. Evans was bankrupt by July 1795
and, after leaving his family, he went to America.
According to John Nichols, he returned and died
in absolute distress. [42]
Wolcot
then attached himself to Henry Delahay Symonds,
a bookseller in Paternoster Row. Symonds also
had his problems with the authorities. He had
been fined £100 for publishing The Jockey Club,
a satirical work attributed to Charles Pigott,
and was imprisoned in Newgate for a year for publishing
Thomas Paine’s The Rights of Man before
its two-year expiry term. [43]
He received a further year and a fine of £100
for publishing Paine’s Address. In 1792,
Symonds published ten titles by Wolcot, three
of which were reprints: The Remonstrance,
A Complimentary Epistle to James Bruce,
and A Poetical, Supplicating, Modest and Affecting
Epistle to those Literary Colossuses, the Reviewers.
The last was one of Wolcot’s first productions
and it had been republished in 1787 and 1789.
With assistance from James Robertson and Walter
Berry of Edinburgh, Symonds obviously felt another
reprint was worth it. [44]
The Conger
After Symonds, Wolcot settled on George Goulding,
a music seller and publisher; John Walker, a one-time
auctioneer and bookseller in Paternoster Row;
and the Robinsons, John and George, the latter
who, ‘greatly respected meritorious authors, and
acted with singular liberality in his pecuniary
dealings with them’ and was a successful purchaser
of copyrights. [45]
Sometime between 1793 and 1795, the four men—with
John Walker as delegated spokesman—agreed to give
Wolcot an annuity of £250 for life for copyright
permission to publish his collected works. [46]
This contract was not without discord:
A year or two later they attempted
to establish that this agreement was to include
his unwritten works, as and when they became
available; a suggestion which Peter stoutly resisted
with some justice. [Wolcot] maintained that ‘with
respect to my annuity from the Robinsons, it is
£250 per annum. It was not a part of the
agreement, that they were to have my future
works included for the annuity: these they were
to purchase, provided I chose to sell them.
Such is the agreement. But possibly they wish
to dragoon me into a sale.’ [ 47]
Even though Wolcot won his suit at Chancery with
costs, there were still misunderstandings. The
question was still what constituted copyright
properties, and even though in 1802 it was agreed
that ‘all animosities shall be laid aside’ there
was still dissent. [48]
In fact, Wolcot left Walker, his prime publisher
at this time, and had his The Horrors of Bribery
published under Thomas Dean’s imprint. A court
case brought against Walker and summarily dismissed
in his favour by Justice Lord Eldon did not help
relations. According to one of Wolcot’s obituarists,
‘much skirmishing constantly took place on these
occasions; and […] many angry words passed so
that Peter was at last obliged to employ the good
offices of a third person to transact the business.
On these occasions he was particularly bitter’.
[49]
Yet despite all
the legal rancour, Wolcot and Walker’s relationship
continued. Walker, undoubtedly aware of Wolcot’s
popularity and saleability, reprinted many of
his past works (often supported by others), and
published new titles and those contentious collected
works. He was known as the ‘Trade Auctioneer’
and, according to John Nichols (1745–1826),
was greatly respected in the trade. [50]
However, there was obviously a niggle present
because Nichols himself was disparaging about
Walker and his ‘trade sale’ activities
of selling copies—modern day remainders—of
recently published works at a less than usual
price. [51]
Even bookish competition can be cut-throat.
Problems were further
exacerbated by the deaths of most of the signatories
of the annuity to Wolcot: Robinson in 1800; Goulding
about 1800, and Walker sometime after 1816. The
litigious squabbling passed to their families
and others. Sarah Goulding was left to pay George
Goulding’s share and in 1815 there was reluctance
by the Robinsons to pay their full share. [52]
This was complicated by the involvement of a Mr
Potter and a Mr Wilkie, the last being ‘the greatest
defaulter’ and who, like Potter, did not sign
the bond. [53]
TheWalker himself was miffed by the pressure he
received from Wolcot’s ‘third person’: ‘Sir, I
am rather surprised that Mr Pollen should have
stated he has called several times upon me for
the annuity as I never objected but on the contrary
always paid him immediately.’ [54]
Indeed, Walker’s intentions had already been made
clear to Wolcot by William Francis, the satirist’s
lawyer: ‘[Walker] has no wish on his part but
to pay the Doctor honestly and punctually his
annuity.’ [55]
The ‘heat’ continued after Walker’s death, and
the obvious frustration over the lack of information
on publication details was directed at William
Wood, his executor.
Sir
From the terms of your letters we are led
to suppose that your clients have left you quite
uninstructed in this matter. In your last you
state that it is quite evident we must let the
Executors have an account what works and editions
our client [Wolcot] has any claim upon, &
in what way. Your clients bought the copyright
of all Dr Woolcot’s [ sic] writings commonly
called ‘Peter Pindar’s Works’ for an annuity to
be paid to the Doctor for life and with an agreement
to pay him a certain sum for every subsequent
edition. They have been going on ever since publishing
edition after edition: and what we now ask is
how many editions they have published. It is impossible
we can tell what has been doing in their workshops.
Will you favour us with a call?
We are Sir,
Your Obed’t Serv’t
Amory & Coles
52 Lothbury. [ 56]
John
Walker
One publication that highlights Wolcot’s
popularity was his Pindariana, or Peter’s
Portfolio, a work that contains a number
of serious and satirical poems on various subjects
(Sir Joseph Banks, the French, author-reviewer
relationships). [57]
It occupied 242 pages in quarto and was printed
in 1794 by Thomas Spilsbury for Walker and James
Bell, J. Ladley, and Mr Jeffrey. According to
the records, a staggering 42,500 copies were printed.
at a cost of £189 18s, with an additional
£9 2s 1½d to cover Stamp Duty and
copies to the Stationers’ Hall. This number
reflects Wolcot’s immense popularity and
says much about the publisher’s confidence
in making sales. However, not everything went
smoothly. The sum of £238 4s 6d stands out
as representing returned copies of this work,
some 13,235 copies. Despite advertising strategies,
this must have hurt Walker. Indeed, leaves 25–26
of the same volume contain further details of
Wolcot’s accounts with Walker, spanning
the years 1794 to 1796. Running account balances
are present as well as cash and book advances
(of £105 6s 9d), and the cost of paper,
for example 18 reams of paper at £22 2s
for the third edition of Hair Powder: A Plaintive
Epistle to Pitt, and 30 reams of Demy at
£31 10s for the second edition of The
Royal Tour and Weymouth Amusements. The sum
total is £318 2s 1½d. Various entries
on the contra side reduce this amount. They include
£8 11s 6d from ‘W. Gutherie by W.
Walker on Wolcot’s account’, £6
6s ‘paid by Dr Wolcot for his engraving
of his head for the work of 1796 which ought to
have been charged to Mr Walker’, the amount
of £32 for the sale of Picturesque Views
with Poetical Allusions (1797), four guineas
charged to Wolcot but returned to Walker, £11
9s profit from the sale of Celebration, or
the Academic Procession to St James’s: An
Ode (1794), twelve guineas allowed from ‘Batch’s
[Bache] bill’, £4 11s to Thomas Spilsbury
for a reprint of Canto Two of The Lousiad,
£2 ‘for stitching 4000 of the Pindariana
which were not done’, six guineas in favour
of Dr Wolcot for Liberty’s Last Squeak
(1795), £17 10s 3d as balance of account
for The Convention Bill: An Ode (1795),
and £4 13s 11d for advertisement overcharging.
This crawl back totalled £115 12 s 8d, which
when subtracted from the above total of £318
2s 1½d resulted in a balance of £202
18s 5½d. A note is scrawled beside it:
‘Balance due to J. Walker.’ Payment
was often slow, indeed glacial. Walker’s
own note reflects this: ‘This is the account
allowed by me this 20th December 1801.’
There were also
new ventures initiated by Walker. One was a new
edition of Pilkington’s Dictionary of Painters
(1799), edited by Wolcot, who was certainly capable
of such a role. As a memo reveals, it was to be
a shared venture. [58]
The second venture was a monthly publication tentatively
titled ‘Miscallanious [sic] Collection
of poetry’, comprising poems selected from British
and other poets, with criticisms and remarks by
Wolcot (15 February 1804; GMS 5, ll. 12–13). This
publication was probably The Beauties of English
Poetry. Selected from the Most Esteemed Authors.
By Dr Wolcot. Containing Several Original Pieces,
Never before Published (London: Walker, 1804),
undoubtedly following in the path of Thomas Percy’s
Reliques of Ancient English Poetry (1765)
and Johnson’s Lives of the English Poets
(1779–81), and the myriad of other anthologies
of the day, is of interest on two levels. Firstly,
it involved the quartet of Walker, Goulding, and
the Robinsons, each willing to back Wolcot on
such an ambitious project. Confidence was high,
because they were prepared to pay him ‘twenty-five
guineas per volume whether the works sells
or not’ and an additional ‘ten guineas’ for
every 500 copies sold after the first 1,500. [59]
Secondly, the publishers had definite views on
what the publication would look like. Wolcot’s
‘Miscellany’ was to be ‘brought out in volumes
the size of Hayley’s The Triumphs of Temper
or smaller as the Publishers think proper consisting
on 164 pages or theirabouts [sic] monthly.’
William Hayley’s poem was published in 1781 and
it was his most popular work. That it stood out
as a model is testimony to its physical makeup,
to John Dodsley who published it, and its overall
effect amongst other publications. Importantly,
it provides a benchmark for what Wolcot would
have produced. [60]

West & Hughes
William West and Thomas Hughes took over the
publishing role between late 1799 and late 1801.
They were based at Paternoster Row, London. West
had experience in the trade. He had been apprenticed
to Robert Colley (stationer, 1784) and was later
turned over to Thomas Evans. West was manager
to Evans, and on the latter’s retirement he assisted
the already mentioned James Evans. [61]
On the latter’s departure to America, West was
left on his own. Little is known of Hughes, the
partner. It is in this capacity that these two
men had dealings with Wolcot, who, again, must
have seemed a lucrative catch, a sure means to
bolster their business. In a little over two years,
they published five works and from the records
available, actively promoted them.
The first work
they published was Nil Admirari, printed
by William and Charles Spilsbury in an edition
of 1,000 c. 21 October 1799. [62]
This work was a satire on Hannah More and Beilby
Porteus (1731–1808), Lord Bishop of London, and
centred on the folly of flattery occasioned by
Porteus’s generous praise of More’s Strictures
on the Modern System of Female Education (1799).
A sorry Critic thou in prose
and Metre,
Or thou hadst judged her power a scanty Rill;
Which, if thou wilt believe the word of Peter,
Crawls at the bottom of th’ Aonian
hill.
Twice can’t I read her labours, for
my blood;
So simply mawkish, so sublimely
sad:
I own Miss Hannah’s Life is very good;
But then, her Verse and prose are very bad.
(Nil Admirari, Works,
IV, 261)
While in London,
the Polish General Tadeusz Kosciuszko had expressed
interest in seeing only one person: Peter Pindar.
He wanted to present the good Doctor with some
Falernian wine in acknowledgement of the pleasure
he derived from reading his works while in prison.
The Expostulation to Miss Hannah More,
which accompanies the above work, carries Wolcot’s
record of their meeting.
Me Kosciusko deems a Bard divine;
My Works illumed his dungeon of affright*
‘Twas here the Hero read my Lyric Line;
Yea, read my Lucubrations with delight.
To me the Hero rich Falernian sent,
To sooth the horrors of our gloomy weather:
To him in Leicester-fields with joy I went;
For Bards and Heroes pair like Doves
together.
*When a prisoner in Russia.
[Wolcot’s footnote.]
(Nil Admirari, Works,
IV, 281)
The satire also
included a prose Postscript in which Wolcot
provided model reviews of his own satire for magazines.
It represents one of his strongest statements
on the work of critics and reviewers:
Instead of coming forwards
as the fair and candid interpreters of the Muses,
they [the critics] are too many of them the partial
trumpeters of their own pigmy pretensions: or
despicable pimps, hired to debauch the public
taste, and mislead the judgment; to displace the
statues of Genius, to make room for those of Arrogance
and Folly. (Postscript, Nil Admirari, Works,
IV, 297)
In business together
for the first time, West and Hughes obviously
wanted to capitalise on this new work by promoting
it as much as possible. Wolcot’s West Country
contacts and his immense popularity induced them
to extend their advertising beyond the London
newspapers, those traditional outlets that would
normally have catered to most new book sales and
promotion. They made sensible use of the established
networks for distribution in the provincial areas.
Indeed, over the two-year period, twenty-four
towns were integrated into the firm’s distribution
network. The coverage is reasonably extensive,
given that sixty-nine provincial towns (and their
various newspapers) are listed in the New
Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature.
[63]
Advertisements promoting
Nil Admirari were printed on 5 and 7 October
1799, at a cost of 5s (GMS 5, l. 237), while simultaneously
charges for placing theadvertisements in various
newspapers and periodicals were recorded (GMS
5, l. 164). Five London newspapers are listed:
the Sun, the Star, the Morning
Chronicle, at a combined cost of £1 7s, the
‘Times & Mail’ at 18s, and the Oracle
at a lower rate of 9s. [64]
Further advertisements were recorded for towns
rather than specific newspapers: Portsmouth, Bristol
(twice & postage), Bath (twice & postage),
and Canterbury (twice & postage). [65]
Charges were £1 each except for the second despatch
to Bath at £1 3s 6d. Thus began a concentrated
effort by both West and Hughes to promote Nil
Admirari . Indeed, just over a week later,
there was a flurry of repeats. On 16 October,
advertisements were recorded for the Sun,
the Star, the Morning Chronicle,
and the Oracle, with additional advertisements
for ‘Whitehall’, the Herald, the Volunteer,
and John Taylor’s London-based True Briton.
[66]
The cost for these was £6 17s.
A month later,
accounts for various towns were again recorded
with a mention of some specific newspapers and
journals. On 25 November 1799, Robert Raikes’s
Gloucester Journal (8s) and one in ‘Newcastle’
(9s 8d) [67]
were recorded, while on 27 November, the Hereford
Journal & Post, an unknown paper in ‘Edinboro’,
and the Chelmsford Chronicle were recipients,
with their respective charges: 8s 1d, 8s 8d, and
9s 6d. The following day advertisements were recorded
for Worcester (9s 7d), Hull (9s 6d), and Brighton
(8s), while on 29 November, Dorchester (10s 6d)
and Norwich (11s 1d) were added. [68]
The final run on 30 November included Northampton
(10s), Maidstone, probably the Maidstone Journal
(9s), Oxford (9s), Bury [St Edmunds], probably
the Bury and Norfolk Advertiser (10s),
Exeter (10s 8d), and Norwich again—twice (£1 2s).
[69]
During this period,
9 copies were sent to the Stationers’ Hall, 1
to the Stamp Office, and 6 to reviewers unknown.
[70]
By late October 1799, Wolcot was working on his
next production, Lord Auckland’s Triumph.
Although sales of Nil Admirari had no doubt
lessened, this did not stop West and Hughes registering
advertisements in a ‘Gloucester paper’, no doubt
Raikes’s newspaper again (9s), the Aberdeen
Journal (9s 6d) and the Sheffield Gazette
(9s) on 26 May 1800, and later, in a ‘Doncaster
paper’ (9s 6d) and a ‘Winchester paper’ for 15
August and 5 November 1800 respectively. They
certainly received encouragement. William Meyler,
a bookseller in Bath and agent for the Gazetteer,
commented to West: ‘You will give my best Respects
to [Wolcot]. I have had volumes of Lampoons on
him for his Admirari sent for publication.
I have not inserted any, and yet the work sells
here with great avidity!’ (16 December 1799; GMS
5, l. 44)
A relatively small
number of returns of Nil Admirari are
recorded: 34 copies, amounting to £3 6s,
with the commission on 1,300 [sic] copies
at ‘9/12/ per 100 5%’ equalling £6
5s. Two eager readers are also recorded as ordering
copies; each verifying the sale price of 2s: ‘Oct
23—3 [copies] Wilson Stewart Dutton—6s’
and ‘Jan 13 1800—2 copies to order
Mr Vizer [or Viger]—4s.’ The account
sub-total of £43 7s 10d was added to a brought
forward sum of £1 9s 6d for a grand total
of £127 6s.
Such
was the pattern and strategies that West and Hughes
put in place. From the appearance of Lord Auckland’s
Triumph or the Death of Crim. Con, published
in June 1800 in an edition of 1,000 copies (GMS
5, l. 237), [71]
Out at Last, printed about 14 March 1801
in an edition of 1,000 copies (GMS 5, l. 238),
and Odes to Ins & Outs, to A
Poetical Epistle to Benjamin Count Rumford,
Wolcot’s ‘Knight of the Dishclout’
published in mid-July 1801 in an edition of 1,500
copies (GMS 5, l. 32) and Dr Wolcot’s Tales
of the Hoy, in which William Richardson and William
Clarke were also involved, [72]
the same newspapers and journals featured, with
a marked degree of consistency. The Sun,
the Morning Chronicle, the Post,
the Star, the Oracle (6s) and
the Courier (and others) appear regularly
as recipients, with advertising charges recorded
as remarkably consistent, hovering around the
5s to 8s 6d per advertisement. Other consistencies
include the 9 copies despatched to the Stationers’
Hall, and a copy to the Stamp Office, although
charges reveal that there may have been more than
1 copy.
Returns—bugbears
to any publisher—were also present. Thirty-five
copies of Wolcot’s Lord Auckland
copies were returned at a cost of £3 8s,
240 copies of Out at Last, 191 copies
of Odes to Ins and Out at a cost of £18
8s, 650 copies of A Poetical Epistle to Benjamin
Count Rumford, Wolcot’s satire on the
American Benjamin Thompson, Count von Rumford
(1753–1814), and 67 copies of Tales
of the Hoy—supposedly. Underneath the
above figure for the Hoy there is in Wolcot’s
hand a note: ‘The above 65 [sic]
copies not returned according to Bennett’s
account’ and beside the entry, in faded
pencil, is the succinct: ‘not returned’.
[73]
As will be seen, this would not be the first time
Wolcot would question his publisher’s dealings.
Wolcot’s
growing dissatisfaction with West and Hughes is
further evidenced in two leaves that contain notes
by him on what was to be discussed next time they
met. Headed ‘Agenda’, he begins: ‘To
meet West & his books and desire the different
receipts for cash & and [sic] orders
for Pamphlets &c. To see some of the newspapers—the
Post, Oracle, Times, Chronicle—and search
the file. To make Mr West produce proofs of the
insertions of advertisements & the names of
the Papers (Country) and Publishers.’ (GMS
5, l. 69) In short, Wolcot did not trust publishers.
Other notes by him bear this out. In reference
to an announcement in a newspaper of ‘the
Horrors’ (a work written about July 1800
and not appearing in Wolcot’s Collected
Works), he asked ‘What papers’, and in relation
to Out at Last, he noted ‘balance of acc’t
false by 100 copies.’ He repeated the details
of the 65 missing copies of the Tales of the
Hoy and recorded overcharges: ‘38 shillings
for ream charged for Lord Auckland—I think an
overcharge’ and ‘Sundries charged without specification’.
And, with reference to William Richardson: ‘Mr
West rec’d £15 from Richardson. Unmentioned in
his acc’t. Upon questioning him about it he answered
he had rec’d nothing from him—the £15—was for
£25 Tales of the Hoy. Richardson showed me his
books.’ He continued: ‘Advertisements not inserted—the
particular paper scarcely mentioned—a Brighton
paper charged that never existed.’ He is more
specific on West: ‘I think W charges me with more
sets of my works, printed by the Robinson’s, than
I ever received. Memo: to investigate, also orders
of the smaller publications as I never gave a
verbal one but a written [sic] by our mutual
agreem’t.’ Throughout these agenda notes, Wolcot
also itemises money owed or drawn upon, as for
example, ‘Drawn by West £29’, ‘My note to Spilsbury
accp. but not paid (£50)’, and ‘Promissory note—May
30 1801 in my possession (£30)’. Another account
headed ‘Pindar’s Picturesque Views’, giving the
sum of £9 12s owed, has Wolcot’s note: ‘N.B. Mr
West received from my house July 13 ’99. 6 Picturesque
Views delivered by me to his boy. Mr West has
forgotten to make me creditor, for those he rec’d
from Richardson, also the money from Richardson.’
(GMS 5, l. 88)
Wolcot was dependent
on verse-making for a living and his concern over
money issues is understandable. [74]
A letter from West and Hughes not only highlights
their promotional efforts in selling his works—most
certainly at this time A Poetical Epistle to
Benjamin Count Rumford—but also their
efforts in placating the satirist. Of particular
importance is the list of booksellers, their presence
reiterating the wide range of provincial and city
locales that formed part of the publisher’s distribution
network. They represent the real depth in the
book trade of the late eighteenth century.
No. 40 Paternoster Row
10 [th] August 1801
Sir,
On
the 20 [th] July we sent your last adv’t accompanied
with Copies of the work, through the medium of
their own & other Booksellers Parcels (to
save yr expence of carriage &c) to the following
places—Collins—Salisbury; Goadby—Sherborne; Burbage—Nottingham;
Wolmer [sic]—Exeter; Swinney—Birmingham;
Wood—Shrewsbury; Flower—Cambridge; Bacon—Norwich;
Merrit—Liverpool; Meyler—Bath; Bulgin—Bristol;
Raikes—Gloucester. These with once in the Times—Post—Courier—Oracle—Star
& Morning Chronicle we conceived was a good
beginning, but as you wished it to appear more
public in Town we are much vexed that it has from
several perplexing circumstances been delay’d,
but more particularly so at your taking the trouble
upon yourself—as you must no doubt be much offended
with us in taking that step. The advertisement
has appeared in the Birmingham & Bristol papers
& no doubt several others by this time. I
have now sent again for the Paper for the Canto.
What they sent me was too white. Spilsbury will
no doubt have it today. Mr Dwyer has apartments
a little beyond Walworth Terrace, but I do not
know the name of the Person. I observe your 12
Views are charged 15/– each, 9£ in our invoice.
He has promised to call & pay his Bill of
90£ in a few days, and if you think proper to
trust us with ye Rect of it the money it
shall be sent to you immediately we receive
it. We have been in hopes of his calling and that
we might have the pleasure of his & your company
in a friendly way. We also hope you will not continue
to be offended, as no such delays shall occur
in future.
We remain Sir
Your most obd’t Serv’t
West & Hughes.
(GMS 5, ll. 186–87)
A year later, West sent another letter to Wolcot.
In this he is apologetic about his services, making
references to the dissolving and the ‘difficulties’
of the firm which had occurred the previous year.
Indeed, the firm of West and Hughes had been declared
bankrupt on 3 October 1801 and both men were now
operating separately. Scribbled on a corner is
a note by Wolcot, ‘West Nov. 1802 acknowledging
error in acc’t, particularly Richardsons.’ The
letter is given in full below:
No. 8 Queen’s Row
Newington, Nov. 11 1802.
Sir,
I duly received
your letter this morning, and beg leave to inform
you that nothing has been more distant from my
thoughts than that of treating your letters with
disrespect, or wishing you to experience an unnecessary
loss in addition to the real one which our affairs
have created. At the same time if you could have
form’d an idea of the necessities & state
of mind I have experienced in keeping myself &
family together, you would not I am sure altogether
condemn my conduct. Indeed former difficulties
must in some measure palliate those little irregularities
which you have complained of, but which I am willing
to rectify to the best of my ability. Our books
are in course copies of the accounts delivered,
but as I have sent them to Mr Hughes, No. 1 Queens
Head Passage as you requested, and am willing
to meet or wait upon you. I trust you will not
judge so harshly upon explanation. With respect
to Richardson’s account, I do not find that you
are credited for what he paid, altho’ I remember
settling an account with him at the early part
of our concerns. I do not recollect the sum, but
that and other circumstances shall be clear’d
up.
With respect to Mr Dwyer’s
business, the evil could not be forseen as his
acc’t was included in a note at 20 months &
was paid before our misfortune so that I could
have no view to your suffering on that account.
If you judge otherwise, I have no objection to
liquidate it as I can spare it if I should succeed.
Mrs Colbert has made some
large returns of your works—which shall be delivered
up to you, as some indemnification from the loss.
I am not surprized you
should be angry at my apparent neglect, but if
you were aware of the struggles I have had, I
am convinced you would not wish to add to them.
Be that as it may I await your appointments hoping
all difficulties will be adjusted in an amicable
manner.
I am Sir
With due respect,
You very obed’t serv’t,
William West.
(GMS 5, ll. 188–89)
Wolcot was by no means blameless. An unsigned
undated letter conveys something of the intricacies
of eighteenth century record keeping and hints
at the Doctor’s reputation.
Dear Sir
Incl’d
last week a Letter from Dr Wolcot informing me
that he had given you a Bill on me for ten guineas.
I have been so much confined by indisposition,
and my mind so much employed that I really neglected
to investigate the matter. I have now ascertained
the acc’t and find the Dr. erroneous. I had 6
from Walker—6 from the Dr. & two coloured
ones. He says 12 but does not mention the
two in colours. I have drawn out an exact
statement of the Account & enclose you the
Balance which I hope Dr Wolcott [sic] will
find right. Your submission [sic] is to
him and explaining the matter will oblige me for
the Doctor is too powerful in and attentive to
Numbers to stoop to the drudgery &
minutia of Figures, I presume.
(GMS 5, l. 51)
PRINTERS
Printers also came and went. The already mentioned
Thomas Egerton, before joining his brother John
as a publisher, printed More Lyrical Odes
(1783). John Jarvis (283 Strand) printed the very
successful first Canto of The Lousiad (1785)
and Lyric Odes for the Year 1785 (1785),
while Joseph Cooper printed Peter’s Prophecy
(1788), a successful attack on William Pitt, Sir
William Chambers and Sir Joseph Banks. [75]
This work contains one of Wolcot’s finest (and
last) renderings of the manners and speech of
King George III:
What’s new, Sir JOSEPH?
what, what’s new found out?
What’s the society, what, what about?
Any more monsters, lizard, monkey, rat,
Egg, weed, mouse, butterfly, pig, what, what,
what?
Toad, Spider, grasshopper, Sir JOSEPH
BANKS?
Any more thanks, more thanks, more thanks, more
thanks?
You still eat raw flesh, beetle, viper, bat,
Toad, tadpole, frog, Sir Joseph, what, what,
what?
(Peter’s Prophecy,
Works, II, 63)
Thomas Brice
In 1790, Wolcot was living in the
West Country. His versifying continued. For convenience,
he employed Thomas Brice, the Exeter based printer
and newspaper proprietor, to prepare copy. [76]
Brice printed 1,500 copies of A Complimentary
Epistle to James Bruce, costing out the typesetting
of one copy at ‘6 sheets, at 15/6’ for a total
of £4 13s (possibly the first edition; GMS 5,
l. 56). Although priced 19 years later, this is
much less than the £1 6s per sheet that Benjamin
Collins charged for 1,500 copies of Smollett’s
Humphrey Clinker. [77]
The account—dated 17 September 1790—also priced
corrections to the copy at 4s. And as expected,
paper was the most expensive commodity. Eight
and a half bundles of ‘fine demy’ cost £14 17s
6d, at £1 15s per bundle. The cost of ‘folding,
collating and stitching’ the said number was 2s
per 100, which at 1,500 copies came to £1 10s.
However, Brice underestimated the amount of paper
required for the job and he was forced to obtain
an additional 17 quires, at the cost of 17s 6d.
Cartage, from London by water (not an unusual
practice) and from Topeham, was included. In addition,
advertising in an unknown paper cost 5s 6d.
The following month,
on 7 October 1790, Brice completed the printing
of a ‘new edition’ of 500 copies of Wolcot’s Instructions
to a Celebrated Laureat, the first of which
appeared in 1787 (GMS 5, l. 57). The typesetting
for this work was £2 7s 6d, involving 4½ sheets
at 11s per sheet; 4½ reams of ‘demy paper’ at
13s was used, costing £2 18s 6d, and the seemingly
constant 2s per 100 for folding, collating, etc.
The total sum on the invoice was £5 18s 6d.
A draft payment
of 5 guineas was made by Wolcot on this title
in 1791. The remaining balance was added to another
printing job, completed by Brice some time after
1 January 1791. This was another reprint, a reissue
of Lyric Odes to the Royal Academicians
in 1,000 copies, which first appeared in 1782.
[78]
Once again the account is broken down to the cost
of setting copy: ‘6½ sheets at 12s per sheet’;
folding only at 10s; ‘8 bundles of demy paper
at 35s per bundle’ (£14); ‘To Land Carriage of
Paper’ at £1 12s; and package at 3s. The total
was £21 14s 10d. Because of Brice’s own efforts
to upgrade his stock, a letter of 4 January 1791
accompanying the account was sent to Wolcot, who
was by now back in London. Directed care of Kearsley
in Fleet Street, it read:
Sir,
Your books were sent
by waggon for Spilsbury on Saturday last—and I
take the liberty to send the bill on the other
side. I have ordered new letter for my news-paper
[Old Exeter Journal] of Mr Jackson, letter-founder,
Salisbury Court, and it is necessary for me to
discharge a demand he has already on me.
To do this I have ventured to draw on you for
Ten Pounds at Twenty Days, and you will
greatly add to your former favours by accepting
this draft. I wish you care and health amidst
the fogs of London, and am respectfully,
Yours at Command
Thomas Brice
(GMS 5, l. 58)
Thomas
Spilsbury & Sons
The ‘Spilsbury’ mentioned in the
above letter was Thomas Spilsbury, a printer who
operated at Snowhill, London. Between 1790 and 1808,
the Spilsbury family—including Charles and William—were
employed in printing Wolcot’s verse and promotional
material. According to John Nichols, himself a printer,
an author (Literary Anecdotes of the Eighteenth
Century), and a publisher of the Gentleman’s
Magazine, Thomas Spilsbury was a man of the
strictest integrity. He was said to be the first
in London, if not England, to print French accurately.
[79]
He printed the works of the Revd William Herbert
(1778–1847?), the translator of Danish and Icelandic
sagas and poetry, and printed Lloyd’s Evening
Post from 1791 to 1796. Spilsbury traded alone
from 1781 to 1795, and then later with his son William
as ‘Spilsbury and Son’. Wolcot himself states the
beginning of their business relationship: ‘Spilsb:
& I came together March 11 1790’ (GMS 5, l.
87). When Spilsbury Senior died in December 1795,
his sons Charles and William carried on a joint
business between 1796 and 1803. After 1803, they
dissolved the partnership: William operating solely
up to 1808 and Charles operating solely up to 1810.
Although
there is only one document at Auckland that relates
specifically to Thomas Spilsbury, it is important
because it contains details on his activity as a
printer of advertisements for 16 works written by
Wolcot between 1790 and 1794 (GMS 5, l. 223).
The number of advertisements printed not only indicates
the extent the publisher was prepared to promote
each title, with telling hints on the realities
of the marketplace, but also reveals the day-to-day
work and production costs of an eighteenth century
English printer.
In 1790, Thomas Spilsbury’s
‘Wolcotian’ efforts were but small beer. On 10 April,
96 ‘8vo page foolscap’ advertisements for A Rowland
for an Oliver (1790) were registered (GMS 5,
l. 223): the cost of printing them was 3s. Two months
later, on 30 June, 40 ‘8vo page’ advertisements
were invoiced for Wolcot’s Advice to the Future
Laureat (1790), his instructions to Thomas Warton’s
unknown successor: these cost 2s. [80]
In 1791, the production rate increased. Five new
Wolcot titles were promoted: the third Canto of
The Lousiad, the Rights of Kings,
Odes to Mr Paine, the Remonstrance,
and A Commiseration Epistle to James Lowther
(GMS 5, l. 223). The largest number of 60 advertisements
was registered to Odes to Mr Paine, while
the lowest of 24 was recorded for Epistle to
James Lowther and the Remonstrance. A
supplementary sheet covering 1791 through to 1795
records the days on which the advertisements were
printed, their associated costs, but no actual numbers
issued (GMS 5, l. 226). For example, advertisements
were printed for Odes to Mr Paine on 8, 13,
15 and 18 July 1791, and cost £1. Two batches for
the Remonstrance, Wolcot’s defence against
the charge that he joined the King’s party because
of his attack on Thomas Paine, were printed on 23
and 26 September 1791: these cost 12s. Liberty’s
Last Squeak and The Royal Visit to Exeter,
both written in 1795, had advertisements printed
on 4 and 7 December respectively. The total cost
for 16 titles was £8 6s 6d.
As Wolcot continued
to write his odes and elegies, his publisher continued
to job them out to Spilsbury. And here the pattern
was the same, from More Money (1792) through
to the advertisements and proposals for Pindar’s
Works and Pindariana, or Peter’s Portfolio
(1794–[1795]). All the advertisements were printed
on octavo or half-sheet pages in much the same quantity
and cost, approx-imating to 1d per page.
Although Thomas Spilsbury
printed many of Wolcot’s works, there was only one
title that registered his actual involvement: the
above-mentioned Pindariana. Perhaps Spilsbury’s
more tangible involvement was a catalyst to greater
promotion. On 23 August 1794, ‘1000’ proposals were
printed at a cost of 13s, which included the cost
of alterations to the text. Noticeably, these octavo
pages were printed on ‘fine wove paper’.
Spilsbury also printed
a backlist of available titles by Wolcot. On 4 June
1791, 200 ‘8vo page, on half-sheet foolscap’ were
invoiced at a cost of 7s. Four months later, on
25 September, Spilsbury printed another 154, including
30 that were ‘recomposed’ in ‘brevier’ for the newspapers.
The latter process was relatively expensive and
cost 3s. The other 124 advertisements cost 6s total.
Given Wolcot’s popularity with the reading public,
a further 4,000 ‘Copies of a List of P. Pindar’s
Works’ were printed (and invoiced) on 27 October
1792 for 16s. Seemingly, this was an insufficient
number because twenty days later, on 17 November,
another 75 were produced on octavo foolscap, costing
3s.
The stitching of
printed gatherings—especially smaller verse
publications—was an integral part of book
production. An account detailing the cost of stitching
27 titles from March 1790 to 10 August 1793 reveals
costs of this important process and offers valuable
evidence on issue numbers and anticipated demand.
[81]
Thirteen titles were reprints or later editions,
ranging from Wolcot’s An Epistle to the
Reviewers, Ode upon Ode, and A
Poetical Epistle to a Falling Minister to Peter’s
Pension, the Remonstrance, and A
Complimentary Epistle to James Bruce. The numbers
of copies of these 6 titles stitched give a good
indication of commitment by the publisher: 286,
750, 409, 500, 1,750, and 750 respectively. They
are priced accordingly: 1s 6d, 3s, 2s 6d, 3s, 2s
6d, and 2s 6d. Indeed, John Nichols criticised the
relatively high cost of Wolcot’s productions.
‘They were […] very dear to the purchaser,
being printed in thin quarto pamphlets at 2s 6d
each, and containing only a very small portion of
letter-press.’ [82]
The 14 other titles were more recent publications;
for example: on 30 June 1790, 950 copies of the
first edition of Advice to the Future Laureat
were stitched at a cost of 1s 6d per hundred, while
on 19 March 1791, 1,500 copies of the first edition
of Canto Three of The Lousiad were stitched
at 2s 6d per hundred. Two days later, 1,500 copies
of the first edition of the Rights of Kings were
stitched at 3s per hundred, while on 25 August 1793,
1,150 copies of another printing of A Pair of
Lyric Epistles to Lord Macartney were stitched
at 1s 6d per hundred. A month later, on 29 September,
2,000 copies of another edition (perhaps a third)
of Odes to Kien Long were stitched at 3s
per hundred. [83]
The tempo had increased with these titles. For example,
from March to 16 November 1791, 9,250 copies of
7 titles were stitched. Given that they were stitched
just after printing, the numbers indicate a fair
demand for Wolcot’s works. The bill for the
entire number stitched amounted to £31 1s
5½d.
The normal period of credit was
two months. [84]
Wolcot disregarded this convention totally; his
payments for printing were infrequent and were never
in full. A ‘Memoranda’ note reveals the complexities
of Wolcot’s finances and a decided lack of any systematic
records. It is as follows:
On June 29 1790 Mr Sp[ilsbury] received a draft
of 23 from Kearsley on my acct. Mr Sp. in his account
makes it in the year 1791 without specifying the
month. It is probable that I should [sic]
have made no payment between June 1790 and January
17 [th] 1793? But grant that Mr Sp. is right &
that it was 1791, that I made him a payment, there
[sic] will be two years. But there was
money received by Mr Sp. from Evans by Mr Spilsbury’s
own man. Dawson [?] [illegible word] 21 taken from
Evan’s book. (GMS 5, l.
87)
Wolcot’s infrequent
payments to Spilsbury are further documented on
a small piece of paper headed ‘Paid Spilsbury’ (GMS
5, l. 92). Wolcot’s calculations are as follows:
‘1792 July 31 draft on Symonds £30; December 17
£20; 1793 May 26 £20; June 24 £20; April 1792 £21;
June 1790 from Kearsley’s acc’t £23.’ In his hand,
there is a further note: ‘Jan 17 1793 gave Mr Sp.
a £20 note on Beddingsed [?] […] see my long green
book.’ Crossed out and still readable is the note,
‘I certainly paid Sp. for ever [?] before July 31
1792. What were terms?’
Charles &
William Spilsbury
As already mentioned, William and
Charles Spilsbury joined forces after their father’s
death, and statements of account, spanning May 1797
to December 1802, reveal their involvement with
Wolcot and detail the job-to-job activities in their
printing house. The information includes numbers
printed, composition, format details, and costs,
and confirm many of the details registered in the
other accounts. one details costs of Wolcot’s Picturesque
Views with Poetical Allusions, one of his few
non-satiric works, and as such, it is worth quoting
in full.
| |
Dr
Wolcot |
|
|
|
| |
To W & C
Spilsbury 1797 May 28 |
|
|
|
| |
To printing Descriptive Verses to Six Picturesque
Views, |
|
|
|
| |
elegantly, with superfine ink, Super-Royal
Folio, 1000 Copies— |
|
|
|
| |
3 Sheets (2 pages on each sheet) @ 36/– |
5 |
8
|
0
|
| |
Title to ditto (twice composed) 500 copies |
1 |
0
|
0
|
| |
To 1000 Wrappers to ditto |
0 |
18
|
0
|
| |
Hot-pressing the work, 7 R[ea]ms |
2 |
14
|
0
|
| |
Ditto Wrappers, 2 R[ea]ms |
|
|
|
| |
2 Rms of Double Crown Blue Paper |
1
|
16
|
0
|
| |
1 Bundle of Tissue Paper |
0
|
16
|
0
|
| |
|
£12
|
12
|
0
|
| |
To balance on former Bill |
1 |
0
|
7
|
| |
|
£13
|
12
|
7
|
| |
To an Advertisement of Picturesque Views
in Lloyd’s Evening Post, July 15, 96,
May 8, 17, & 26, 97 @ 5/– |
1 |
0
|
7
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Total: |
£14 |
12
|
7
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
(GMS 5, l. 234) |
Another
ledger details charges for the printing of six titles
(GMS 5, l. 238–39), of which four are given
here. There is a marked consistency in the price
structure, with small variation because of the different
numbers of sheets used and thus charged for. Nil
Admirari, one of the few Wolcot titles that
the Spilsburys assigned their name to, was printed
in a ‘demy 4to’ edition of 1,000 utilising 8½ sheets
at 19s per sheet: these cost £8 1s 6d. There were
the alterations and the ‘doing in slips’ which came
to £2 12s 6d. Stitching at the relatively higher
price of 3s 6d per hundred was recorded as well
as 17 reams of paper at 25s each. This last —the
most expensive commodity faced by printers—amounted
to £21 5s. The total cost (excluding advertising)
for producing this work of 68 pages was £33 13s
6d.
The printing of Wolcot’s
Tears and Smiles, a miscellaneous collection
of poems-, including ‘Elegies for Julia’ and ‘Orson
and Ellen’, occurred at the end of May 1800, even
though the imprint—under publishers West and Hughes—is
dated 1801. Once again, 1,000 copies were printed
utilising 11 sheets at £2 each. An additional note
highlights some consideration for workmanship and
the need for footnotes: ‘To printing elegantly in
Foolscap 8vo Tears & Smiles long primer with
Brevier Notes.’ The alterations for this 167-paged
work cost £1 2s, the total £23 2s. Interestingly,
this work formed the benchmark for another title,
planned and quoted for on 21 May 1806. George Hayden,
of 4 Bridges Street, Covent Garden, supplied the
first quote for ‘composing and printing a work in
the manner of “Tears and Smiles” same size page
and type, per sheet.’ His figures were: ‘500
copies at £1 11s 6d, 1000 copies at £2 2s, 1500
copies at £2 14s, and 2000 copies at £3 6s (GMS
5, l. 27). As expected, the more one wanted printed,
the less proportionately was the final unit cost.
An adjustment, however, was made when Wolcot supplied
a ‘sheet of 4to’ that was presumably more in line
with his liking—and purse. Hayden’s second quote
(on the same sheet) was a little cheaper: ‘500 copies
at £1 3s, 1000 copies at £1 10s, 1500 copies at
£1 18s, and 2000 copies at £2 6s. This work may
have been Wolcot’s Tristia, published in
1806 and in which from the ledger accounts extant,
Hayden had some dealings: ‘To bill delivered for
printing, boarding, and advertising Tristia, to
7 Oct. 1806—£38 11s.’ (20 August 1807; GMS 5, l. 6)
The third title was
Out at Last, a work that offers real indication
on the popularity of Wolcot’s verse. The first
edition was printed in 1000 copies about 14 March
1801. Two months later, two further separate editions
were printed, each at 1500 copies. And again it
was produced in a ‘demy quarto’ with
a noticeable increase of 4s per sheet (4½
sheets at £1 3s per sheet). Alterations and
‘doing in slips’ cost £1 18s 6d,
while stitching was charged out at 2s 6d per hundred.
Nine reams of paper were charged for at the higher
price of 30s per ream. On the 12 March 1801, 48
advertisements were printed on ‘8vo Foolscap’
for 5s, while 12 days later, another 48 were produced,
but because ‘in half sheets’ they were
charged out at a shilling extra (total 6s). The
cost of this edition was £21 17s. Again, paper
proved to be the most expensive commodity.
The last title, Odes
to Ins and Outs, was squeezed in between this
hectic activity of reprinting. In this case, 1,500
copies were printed. Perhaps this increase was the
result of the flurry of producing Out at Last;
perhaps because Odes to Ins and Outs was
seen as a companion piece to the former. At more
than double the sheets and well over 21 reams used,
and the increased number of issues stitched, its
cost was a rather large £48 13s 6d. Such was the
publisher’s commitment to Wolcot.
Wolcot’s The
Horrors of Bribery was printed on 18 December
1802. While this was not the last title the Spilsbury
brothers printed together, fractures were developing.
By 1803, they had split and were operating independently.
The reviews for The Horrors of Bribery
and another, Island of Innocence, were
bad: ‘Peter is generally speaking a merry
fellow and often a witty one, but we cannot say
we have once smiled during this perusal […]
we are afraid you have almost exhausted your budget.’
[85]
A lagging interest in Wolcot’s works would
not have helped sales. Nor would a slowness in paying
money owed. Indeed, the total balance registered
on the last account sheet was £244 12s 6d,
a rather large amount that needed paying. Although
written in the early part of 1796, the letter below
reflects the cash-flow situation (presumably not
an uncommon occurrence) that the brothers faced,
especially with their involvement over the years
with the slow-paying Doctor. The pirated copies
mentioned would not have assisted sales either.
Dear Sir,
It is with regret we trouble you in your
retirement from this scene of bustle and perplexity
with any thing that may put you in mind of it
sooner than you would wish. But, having before
stated to you the necessity we should be under
of applying to you soon for money, and as you
expressed your readiness to help us out, we have
made out, and now enclose your account to this
day, the balance of which (as stated) appears
to be £106 13s—and, as we have some very heavy
payments to make in a few days, we hope you will
be so good as to favour us with a draught for
the amount of it, or, if it should not be quite
convenient to settle the whole directly, for so
much of it as you can. Be assured Sir, that as
soon as we hear anything respecting Mr E’s [Evans’s?]
concerns, we will acquaint you. In respect to
the spurious Editions of your Works, we do not
pretend to advise you, as you no doubt have better
counsellors at hand; but we think it a duty to
remark to you, that they are daily advertised
in a most barefaced manner; that your property
seems to be suffering an irretrievable loss; and
that if some step is not immediately taken, your
own sale will be entirely stopped. We hope your
health is good; and remain,
Sir,
Yr obliged & obed. Humb. Serv’t
W & C Spilsbury.
P.S. Mrs S. & the rest of the Family
write in respectful compliments.
(GMS 5, l. 227)
Although their
partnership was dissolved in 1803, both brothers
figured later in printing for Wolcot. In June
1805 William Spilsbury details work done on two
titles for Wolcot (GMS 5, l. 249). He charged
£1 18s for the ‘Composition for Odes
of Horror in Great Primer Quarto, with Alterations’,
12s 6d for the ‘pulling in slips’,
and 14s for corrections ‘composed on half
sheet in Pica’. There is no mention of the
cost of paper. Two items, however, are of interest,
because they are not present in any of the other
accounts. Spilsbury itemises a separate ‘title
& preface’ page charge of 10s 6d, and
a charge for ‘Sunday work’, incorporated
into the amount of 12s 6d for slips. Comparisons
with charges made by other printers may reveal
interesting statistics, especially concerning
‘weekend’ work. The total for this
title was £3 15s.
Spilbury’s
printing of The Saints, in ‘Long
Primer and Brevier Foolscap Octavo 1000. No. 5
sheets @ 2. 0. 0.’, cost £10.
He lists an additional charge of £1 12s
6d for ‘Various corrections, pulling in
slips and matter erased’, while ‘sections
H and I with alterations’ cost a rather
high £3 4s. The total for this work was
£16 12s 6d. While both titles amounted to
£20 7s 6d, William Spilsbury made an adjustment:
‘As sheets H and I though composed were
not worked off, the amount must be reduced from
the sum total.’ The final total for these
publications—works that do not appear to
be by Wolcot—was £17 3s 6d.
In June 1808, Charles
Spilsbury printed ‘Odes to Academicians’,
either a reprint of either Lyric Odes
(first printed in 1782) or More Lyric Odes,
first printed in 1783 (GMS 5, l. 250). This work
consisted of 5½ sheets at 25s each (£6
17s 6d) and 8¼ reams ‘Demy’
at 38s per ream. There is no indication of how
many copies were printed, yet paper, as expected,
was the most expensive item: £15 13s 6d.
Corrections and ‘pulling Proofs on Slips’
amounted to £1 8s while printing a cancel
leaf (of possible interest to textual bibliographers)
cost 7s. Twenty advertisements printed on slips
cost 2s 6d. Below the total of £23 0s 6d,
there is a note signed by Spilsbury: ‘Mem.
Added by Bill @ 6 months. Due Feb 15th
1809.’ Such were the realities of dealing
with the slow paying Doctor.
DISTRIBUTION:
SWEETLAND & BRICE
Margaret Sweetland took over her late husband’s
book selling business in September 1787, where
she also traded in patent medicines and bound
‘books neatly done’. [86]
Although the documentation is sparse, Sweetland
seemed to play a pivotal role in disseminating
Wolcot’s works from her shop in Exeter,
passing the books to her Exeter colleagues such
as Robert Trewman, bookseller, printer, and proprietor
of the Exeter Flying Post; Shirley Woolmer,
one of the first to organise a circulating library
in Exeter; and John (Glanville) Manning or John
Manning, both booksellers in High Street, as well
as Gilbert Dyer, the ‘distinguished veteran
of the book trade’ and owner of a circulating
library, and James Manning. [87]
Between 11 September
and 12 November 1790, 24 titles by Wolcot were
recorded for Sweetland (GMS 5, ll. 54–55). In
almost all instances, 20 copies of each title
were despatched, ranging from Wolcot’s earliest
work, A Modest and Affecting Epistles to the
Reviewers (perhaps the 1789 reprint) to his
Epistle to John Nichols (1790). They were
registered on 26 October 1790 at a total cost
of £93 3s 4d. The exceptions were 75 copies of
A Complimentary Epistle to James Bruce
(1790) and 450 copies of Whitbread Brewhouse,
Wolcot’s celebrated account of the King’s visit
to Samuel Whitbread’s brewery, found in Instructions
to a Celebrated Laureat. These cost £7 10s
and £45 respectively. The fact that these 2 titles
were printed locally by Thomas Brice may have
explained the relatively high number ordered.
It certainly indicates a keen level of local support
by Sweetland.
Revealing a buoyant
optimism for items ‘hot off the press’,
an increased number were ordered and sent. [88]
On 21 October 1790, Kearlsey despatched ‘20
complete sets’, incorporating Wolcot’s
A Modest and Affecting Epistle to the Reviewers
and Rowland for an Oliver, and 20 engraved
portraits of Wolcot. Five months later on 31 March
1791, 50 copies of Canto Three of The Lousiad
were sent, followed two months later, with 30
copies of the Rights of Kings. On 31
October 1791, 50 copies of the Remonstrance were
sent, and then on 7 December, 50 copies of
A Commiserating Epistle to James Lowther
and a further 20 copies of Canto Three were despatched.
Finally, on 23 February 1792, 50 copies of More
Money (1792) were sent. As an established
bookseller, Sweetland would have done her best
to sell them. Indeed, a note headed ‘Dr
Woollcott [sic] to Marg Sweetland’
overlaps this period (GMS 5, l. 56). It records
brief details of Sweetland’s distributional
transactions with her book-selling colleagues
in Exeter. On 11 September 1790, she despatched
a dozen copies of Epistle to Bruce to Trewman,
6 to Woolmer, 4 to Manning and 2 to Dyer. Copies
were charged out at 2s each. On 18 October, 2
more copies of Epistle to Bruce and Whitbread
Brewhouse were ordered (at 2s each), while 8 days
later, 1 copy only of the Epistle was sent to
Woolmer along with 6 ‘sets’ of Wolcot’s
works. These last were registered at £2
15s 6d each, a total of £12 14s. They were
part of the consignment that had arrived directly
from Kearsley in London; the charge for the parcel
was 8s 2d.
On 25 September
1791, Sweetland wrote to Wolcot about binding
services provided by Woolmer. Among the plea for
more works, one wonders what the books were that
Wolcot himself requested.
Sir,
I delay’d to answer your last to this time,
in hope to remit the whole balance. Woolmer hath
not cared to pay me more than 2£ for that says
he you [sic] owe him for binding your Works,
notwithstanding I hope soon to induce him to.
Inclosed to Cr. Of Acct. is a five Guinea Bill
to Bearer on Demand. On the other side is the
list of all your works in Exon. I cannot find
those you request. Be pleased to send me of your
new Work without delay and of all others which
you may publish.
I am Sir,
Your most obedient
Margaret Sweetland.
(GMS 5, l. 45)
And true to her word, overleaf there are the numbers
of 27 titles that she had in stock. They ranged from
A Poetical Epistles to the Reviewers (2 copies),
Canto One of The Lousiad (2 copies), Advice
to a Future Laureat (4 copies) and Whitbread
Brewhouse (80 copies) to Epistle to Bruce
(69 copies), the Rights of Kings (5), and Odes
to Mr Paine (57 copies). The last had just been
printed. In an effort to monitor the traffic of his
publications, Wolcot added a note on the sheet: ‘Memo—To
enquire of Spilsbury what he has sent to Mrs Sw. of
my books.’ (GMS 5, l. 46)
Another longer
account headed ‘John Wolcot Esqr. Dr. to the late
Mrs Marg’t Sweetland’ covers the period 18 October
1790 to 28 June 1793 (GMS 5, l. 48). [89]
Aside from a draft of £20 on Balthius[?] entered
on 24 June 1793 and ‘Returns made to Goulding
of all that remained in hand’ amounting to £36
18s 7d, the charges recorded are divided into
two main areas: carriage and portage fees and
the cost of actual titles. And carriage costs
certainly mounted up. Sixteen instances are given,
some matching deliveries registered in the other
accounts. The highest charge of 8s 2d for the
delivery of Wolcot’s works from Kearsley
is again registered while 1s for 4 letters delivered
to unknown destinations is recorded as the least.
The entry for the
300 copies of Whitbread Brewhouse stands
out. The order of 29 January 1791, which supplemented
the earlier one of October 1790, cost 6s to post
to Spilsbury in London. It obviously caused problems
later. Wolcot, in an effort to control the complex
transactions surrounding his works, has scrawled
at the bottom of the account, ‘N.B. I should think
that the 300 Whitbread above ought to be included
in the returns mentioned below, to Goulding.’
(GMS 5, l. 48) Obviously every penny counted.
Wolcot also questioned the bill of £106 8s 8d.
Underneath the above note, he wrote: ‘The note
of £5 to Walker should not be charged to me.’
The charges for
individual titles despatched also vary. A buyer
called Lucraft received 7 titles at 2s each. They
included the third Canto of The Lousiad
(on 7 March 1791), the Rights of Kings
(on 7 June), the Remonstrance (on 20 October),
More Money (on 27 February 1792), The
Tears of St Margaret (on 28 June), Canto Four
of The Lousiad (on 1 December), and A
Poetical, Serious and Possibly Impertinent Epistle
to the Pope (on 24 June 1793). The others
he received included Odes to Mr Paine at
9d on 6 December, Odes of Importance at
2s 6d on 19 May, A Pair of Lyric Epistles to
Lord Macartney at 1s 3d on 4 September, and
Odes to Kien Long at 2s 6d on 16 October.
Over the same two-year period, a similar number
of titles were despatched to a Mrs White, while
3 (Rights of Kings, Odes to Mr Paine
and Remonstrance) were sent to Mr Polwhele,
presumably Wolcot’s friend, the Revd Richard Polwhele
(1760–1838), the Cornish historian and poet, for
5s 3d. [90]
A further glimpse
of the distribution of Wolcot’s works out
West is highlighted in a scrappy notebook ‘Mr
Brice’s Book’ (GMS 5, ll. 52–53).
On 9 September 1790 the Exeter-based printer and
bookseller Thomas Brice despatched 200 copies
of A Complimentary Epistle to James Bruce
by coach to George Kearsley in London. The following
two days another 600 copies were sent. There was
also local distribution. On the 11 September,
50 copies were sent to Benjamin Haydon, a printer
and bookseller in Plymouth, 12 to Sweetland, 12
to Trewman, via Mrs Sweetland, an unknown number
to Woolmer at Fore Street, Dyer, and James Manning.
[91]
On the 13 September, 5 more copies were sent to
Mrs Sweetland and 52 to Edward Hoxland, another
bookseller and printer in Exeter. On the 14 September,
12 copies went to James Penny, another Exeter-based
bookseller and binder, while on 16 September,
24 more were despatched to Sweetland and a further
448 to Kearsley. [92]
Wolcot was given or sold 12 copies and Brice sold
3. Thus in matter of 8 days, 1,430 copies of a
run of 1,500 were distributed, and, as expected,
most were destined to London for sale. 
Although Wolcot’s reputation suffered much in
his last years, there were those such as John
Taylor, who remained a true and loyal friend.
Acknowledging his stormy relationships with the
reading public, Wolcot still expressed some fondness
towards them. It would be appropriate to completed
this study of Wolcot by allowing him the last
word in full. In an apparently unpublished account,
intended as a preface and written some time after
1800, Wolcot addresses the ‘Public’ much like
an old friend. Beginning with warm salutations,
it closes on a note of separation and departure.
It is worth giving in full.
My
Old Friend,
Many a year have
I written for thee and my own amusement, as well
as emolument, and I really have vanity enough
to fancy that I have not been unpleasant to thee.
The numerous editions through which my celebrations[?]
have passed in more than ones language form a
neat little pedestal for my statue to exhibit
itself, and which to the disgrace of your likes[?]
where be it said my envious enemies, the proprietors
of the Reviews & their journeymen have been
most unsuccessfully endeavouring to pull down.
Thou sawest their cruel dilapidating spirit and
did’st with thy friendly hand did’st sustain it
to their unspeakable mortification as well as
disappointment, for which I here make thee my
best bow. The Reviewers thou knowest, or oughtest
to know and all authors & authorlings hired
at an easy expence [sic] to puff off
the wares of their employers and decry shit of
others like those fellows thou frequently observest
in this great City, called Barkers, inviting and
rollicking the passing crowd to enter a dirty
auctioneer’s shop to be taken in by the
purchase of most excellent & cheap articles,
not worth one farthing. Indeed I have been treated
in a most barbarous manner and great, let me own
has been my danger. With propriety I may quote
an old Ballad and apply it to myself: For Death
he was so near / He took away one ear /
But yet thank God I’m here.
In my ramble I have
called at the lodgings of some of those mine enemies,
with whose characters thou will be somewhat acquainted.
Although I have christened this my youngest child
a sentimental brat, thou must not find much on
its wisdom. Should it fall into the hands of a
Frenchman he may possibly exclaim: Ah! Mon Dieu,
que ce Monsieur Pindare est plein de genie, de
fel, d’agremens et meme d’urbanite. How antipodically
opposite to the language of my countryman, coarse
inquisitors, the Reviewers. Let me not ostentatiously
assert that I have never been irritated by those
wasps. Not long ago in a splenetic humour I caught
up the Pen, and began an imitation of Juvenal’s
first satire in the following manner:
Heavens! Shall the patient
Muse restrain her rage,
While vice and folly stain th’ abandon’d age.
Condemn’d to silence say must I peruse
The stuff that issues from our vile Reviews,
The nonsense of each literary shrimp
Two booksellers, three parsons & a pimp.
The canting hypocrites of Paul’s churchyard
All busy lab’ring for God’s Glory hand
One eye with tears to heav’n uplifted floating,
The other down upon their Mammon glowing
One hand imploring Grace with the hearts sob
The other proding a blind Nation’s Job.
Quick let my vengeance on their heads be hurl’d
Quick on th’ impostors be my vengeance hurl’d,
And let me whip the rascals through the world.
Such was the poetical
foam of my fury but on reflection I threw the
verses aside consoling my wounded vanity with
an old reflection: a fly may sting a horse, yet
a fly is still a fly, and a horse, a horse. And
now my Friend I take my leave and let me thy sweet
smile receive. I care not for the scowl of dull
Reviewers, such stuff as forms for their flimsy
mind. In every ragshop I can find, nay find it
floating in a common sewer.
(GMS 5, ll. 7–10)

NOTES
1. Tom
Girtin, Doctor with Two Aunts: A Biography of Peter Pindar
(London: Hutchinson, 1959), p. 253.
2.
Ibid.
3.
Grzegorz Sinko, John Wolcot and his School: A Chapter from
the History of English Satire (Wroclaw: Prace Wroclawskiego
Towarzystwa Naukowego Travaux de la Société
des Sciences et des Lettres de Wroclaw, 1962), Appendix: p.
155.
4.
Wolcot Papers, Grey Manuscripts (GMS) 1–6, Special Collections,
Auckland Central City Library (APL); Grey also purchased from
Enys a portion of the journal of Sir Joseph Banks. See J.
D. Enys to Grey, 7 Apr 1888 (Grey Letters GL:NZE5(1), APL).
See June Starke’s ‘John Davies Enys’, Dictionary
of New Zealand Biography (Wellington: Bridget Williams
Books; Department of Internal Affairs, 1993), II
(1870–1900), 133–34.
5.
Cited in Sinko, Appendix: pp. 154–56.
6. ‘[Wolcot’s]
method was to tear a piece of paper into quarters, on each
of which he wrote a stanza of four or six lines, according
to the nature of the poem’. Cited in Kenneth Hopkins,
Portraits in Satire (London: Barrie Books, 1958), p.
265.
7.
See William Carr’s entry on Wolcot in the Dictionary
of National Biography, LXII, 290–93;
also, Sinko, p. 28.
8.
Hayden’s post at Liskeard is mentioned in a memorandum
by John Taylor, 11 Sep 1822 (A. H. Reed Autograph Collection,
No. 829, Dunedin Public Library).
9.
Wolcot, cited in Robert L. Vales’s Peter Pindar (John
Wolcot) (New York: Twayne Publishers, 1973), p. 13.
10.
‘Memoirs of the Author’
in The Works of Peter Pindar, Esq., 5 vols (London:
Printed for J. Walker; J. Robinson; Longman, Hurst, Rees,
Orme, and Brown; and G. Robinson, Paternoster Row; and G.
Goulding & Co., Soho Square, 1812), I,
vi. All of Wolcot’s verses quoted in this essay are
from the 1812 edn.
11.
Cited in Girtin, p. 25; Sinko, p. 18.
12.
‘Memoirs’, p. vi. Hopkins gives the examiner’s
name as ‘Hexham of Exeter’, see his Portraits
in Satire, p. 218.
13. Wolcot
to Benjamin Nankivell, 3 Dec 1767; cited in Vales, p. 14.
14. Girtin,
p. 47. Of Terrick, Horace Walpole said ‘that his only
episcopal qualifications were “a sonorous delivery,
and an assiduity of backstairs address.” ’—cited
in Ada Earland, John Opie and his Circle (London: Hutchinson,
1911), p. 10.
15. Girtin,
p. 48.
16. The
poem also appeared in the Annual Register (1773), 240.
17. Ode
VI, Lyric Odes to the Royal Academicans, Works,
I, 27.
18.
John Wolcot, Truro, to James Northcote,
Leceister Fields, London, 22 May 1774. The compliment was:
The Human Face whilst others
humbly paint
Northcotes bold art attempts the form divine;
So with each Grace celestial blooms the Saint,
and like her Beauties shows th’immortal Line
Pictor.’
—Verse on Mr Northcotes Picture of a St Catherine
at the Exhibition of the Royal Academy.
(AND/2/120 and AND/2/121, Royal Academy of Arts Archive, London)
19. Cited
in Girtin, pp. 63–64.
20. John
Wolcot, Truro, to Ozias Humphry, ‘at Mrs Sledges, Print-Seller,
Covent Garden, London’, 3 Aug 1777 (Hu/2/57, Royal Academy
of Arts Archive, London). 
21. Cited
in Hopkins, p. 225.
22. Letter
from B. C. Collins to John Nichols in 1793, cited in John
Feather, The Provincial Book Trade in Eighteenth Century
England (Cambridge: CUP, 1985), p. 111.
23.
Ode X, Lyric Odes, Works,
I, 36.
24.
Ode IV, Lyric Odes, Works,
I, 22.
25.
Ode XI, Lyric Odes, Works,
I, 38.
26.
P. M. Zall, ‘Peter Pindar
“Redivivus” ’, Notes and Queries
197 (19 July 1952), 319–22 (p. 319); cited in Sinko,
p. 32.
27.
Wolcot, cited in Cyrus Redding,
Fifty Years’ Recollections, Literary and Personal
with Observations on Men and Things, 3 vols (London: Charles
J. Skeet, 1858), I, 271.
28.
Cited in Hopkins, p. 224.
29.
Opie, cited in Girtin, p. 94.
30. New
Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1971), II,
695–97; hereafter cited as NCBEL. Sinko gives
a further list of titles in his bibliography section on Wolcot,
pp. 18–21.
31. For
example, Brother Peter to Brother Tom (1788) and Peter’s
Prophecy (1788). See also Walter Berry, the Edinburgh
bookseller, and his concerns on piracy in letters to Wolcot
on 21 Sep 1793 and 25 Aug 1794 (GMS 5, ll. 139 and 141), APL.
Bridget Ikin deals briefly with this issue in her ‘Peter
Pindar and the Pirates’, Factotum 9 (Aug 1980),
27–31.
32. Redding,
II, 273.
33. As
early as 1726, César de Saussure, the Swiss traveller,
wrote: ‘All Englishmen are great newsmongers. Workmen
habitually begin the day by going to coffee-rooms to read
the latest news […] Nothing is more entertaining than
hearing men of this class discussing politics and news about
royalty.’—cited in John Wardroper, Kings, Lords
and Wicked Libellers: Satire and Protest 1760–1837
(London: John Murray, 1973), p. 2. Cf. Roy Porter’s
‘the English [are] extraordinarily politically well
informed and attentive’ and Joseph Addison’s ‘nation
of statesmen’, cited in Roy Porter, English Society
in the Eighteenth Century (London: Allen Lane, 1982),
pp. 118–19.
34.
A. S. Collins, cited in Vales, p. 19.
Zall (p. 320) comments that ‘Wolcot was craftsman enough
to become the most popular writer of a decade’ (that
is, 1785 to 1795).
35.
Diary, Reminiscences and Correspondence
of Henry Crabb Robinson, 3rd edn, 2 vols (London: Macmillan,
1872), I, 171. See also Thomas Sadler’s
1869 edited work for another version of this quotation.
36.
DNB, LXII,
292. See also Mary Robinson [Perdita], Memoirs of the Late
Mrs Robinson, Written by Herself, 4 vols (London: Richard
Phillips, 1801), IV, passim.
37. William
Francis to Miss Wolcot, 25 Jan 1819 (Wolcot Papers, GMS 5,
ll. 138–40).
38.
‘Funeral costs for Dr John Wolcot’,
Jan 1819 (GMS 5, ll. 268–70); Wolcot, cited in Redding,
II, 267.
39. Cited
in Vales, p. 23.
40. Sinko,
p. 105. 
41. See
the entry for Kearsley in Ian Maxted’s Exeter Working
Papers in British Book Trade History, hosted by Devon Library
and Information Services. See http://www.devon.gov.uk/library/locstudy/bookhist/.
Kearsley continued to publish.
42. See
entry for Evans in Maxted’s Exeter website; see also
Nichols, Literary Anecdotes of the Eighteenth Century,
9 vols (London: For the Author, 1812–15), V,
712.
43. See
entry for Symonds in Maxted’s Exeter website. The
Jockey Club, or a Sketch of the Manners of the Age and
the Female Jockey Club established Pigott as one of
the first radical writers to make political capital out of
the ‘boudoir politics’ of the aristocracy: see
Nicholas Rogers, ‘Pigott’s Private Eye: Radicalism
and Sexual Scandal in Eighteenth-Century England’, Canadian
Historical Association Journal n.s. 4 (1993), 247–63.
44. This
was in the same year that Robertson, along with Walter Berry,
were indicted for publishing a seditious pamphlet. For further
details, see the Scottish Book Trade Index in the National
Library of Scotland website: http://www.nls.uk/catalogues/resources/sbti/.
45. John
Nichols, The Rise and Progress of the Gentleman’s
Magazine (New York: Garland, 1974), p. 38. William West
called George Robinson ‘the King of Booksellers’.
See the entry for George Robinson in Maxted’s Exeter
website.
46. There
is conflicting opinions on when the annuity was offered to
Wolcot. The DNB gives 1793; Girtin gives 1793–94;
Hopkins 1795.
47. Hopkins,
p. 252.
48. Cited
in a copy of memorandum of agreement between Messrs Goulding,
Robinsons and Walker and Dr Wolcot, 31 May 1802 (GMS 5, ll.
19–20).
49. Cited
in Girtin, p. 187.
50. Nichols,
Rise and Progress, p. 64.
51. Ibid.,
pp. 64–65.
52. ‘Statement
for Doctor John Wolcot’ by William Francis, 1 Nov 1815
(GMS 5, ll. 163–66).
53. Ibid.
54. John
Walker to John Wolcot, 18 Apr 1816 (GMS 5, l. 159).
55. ‘Statement
for Doctor John Wolcot’ by William Francis, 1 Nov 1815
(GMS 5, ll. 163–66); Francis’s emphasis.
56. Amory
& Coles to William Wood, 22 Sep 1817 (GMS 5, l. 153).
57. ‘Dr
Wolcot Account with Pindariana’, 1794 (GMS 5, ll. 229–30).
58. ‘Memorandum
of an Agreement between Dr W[olcot] & Mr Walker for Publishing
Pilkington’s Dictionary’ (GMS 5, l. 235): ‘A
& B hereby agree to print, conjointly, a New edition of
Pilkington’s Dictionary; and to take an equal share
in the expenses of Printing, Paper, Publishing, advertising,
&c. And whatever Profit may arise from the said publication,
is to be divided equally between A & B—but if any
loss should take place, then each part to take his share of
such loss.’
59. Ibid.
My italics.
60. Another
work by Hayley, The Triumphs of Music, appeared in
1804.
61. See
entry on West in Maxted’s Exeter website.
62. ‘Dr
Wolcot To W & C Spilsbury’ (GMS 5, l. 237). A 2nd
figure of 1,300 is found in ‘West’s Account of
Nil Admirari & advertising’, Oct 1799 (GMS
5, l. 64). Throughout these accounts there are issue number
discrepancies.
63. NCBEL,
II, 1353–69, with a list of towns
with newspapers.
64. The
second of these was more than likely the Star and Evening
Advertiser, and the fourth The Times; the Mail
remains unidentified. Cf. ‘The average front-page price
for advertisements in 1790 was 6s for 18 lines; in other parts
of the paper (London Adviser and Guide) 4s; and about
1d a line afterwards. The evening papers charges 5s a time
and the four Sunday papers a somewhat higher price.’—Dr
Trusler, in Arthur Aspinal, Politics and the Press c. 1780–1850
(London: Home & Van Thal, 1949), p. 6, n. 3.
65. Probably
the Portsmouth Gazette and Weekly Advertiser; for Bristol,
one of the various newspapers listed in NCBEL, II,
1354; for Bath, one of the many newspapers listed in NCBEL,
II, 1353; and either the Kentish
Chronicle, or the Kentish Herald and Universal Register.
66. Probably
the Whitehall Evening Post, or others listed in NCBEL,
V, 524; either the Morning Herald
or the London Herald and Evening Post; probably the
Volunteer, a London based periodical, or the Irish Volunteer
Evening Post.
67. Any
of those listed in NCBEL, II,
1362.
68. Either
Berrow’s Worcester Journal or the Worcester
Herald; either the Hull Packet or the Hull Advertiser;
and any of the newspapers in Norwich listed in NCBEL,
II, 1363. The Brighton and Dorchester
papers have not been identified.
69. The
Northampton paper remains unknown; it was either Jackson’s
Oxford Journal or the Oxford Mercury; and for Exeter
any of the newspaper listings in NCBEL, II,
1357–58.
70. An
unfavourable review appeared in the Nov 1799 issue of the
Anti-Jacobin Review, edited by John Richard Green.
Perhaps Green was one of the six recipients. Cited in Sinko,
p. 34.
71. Another
issue discrepancy of ‘949’ copies occurs in the
account headed ‘Lord Auckland’s Triumph’
(GMS 5, l. 79).
72. William
Richardson was nephew to Samuel Richardson, novelist and printer;
Clarke may have been related to the Quaker printer S. Clarke.
73. ‘Pindar’s
Tales of Hoy’ (GMS 5, l. 62). Of interest, Wolcot Papers,
GMS 6 contains the printed version of the Tales of the
Hoy and the entire manuscript of ‘Tales of the Hoy,
Part II’. This unpublished work will form the basis
of another article on Wolcot.
74. There
is evidence that Wolcot also received money from stocks and
shares. At his death, stock values were realised at £1,108
5s 2d. Cited in a document titled ‘Mr Francis, Executor
to the late Dr John Wolcot. Bank Acct. of Stock. 1819’
(GMS 5, l. 258).
75. John
Jarvis was the printer of English Chronicle 1783–87,
of Westminster Herald 1791. Joseph Cooper printed the
General Evening Post 1771, and the London Courant
1779–81. He was sentenced to twelve months in prison,
one hour in the pillory, and £100 fine for libel on
Russian ambassador 5 July 1781. He went bankrupt 25 Jan 1800.
For further details see entries in Maxted’s Exeter website.
Thomas Egerton is found in the ‘Index to Insurance Policies’;
John Egerton is not mentioned at all.
76. See
entry for Thomas Brice II in Maxted’s Exeter website.
77. Feather,
p. 104.
78. Although
there was certainly continued contact, this ‘new edition’
represented Wolcot’s last connection with George Kearsley
as a publisher.
79. See
entries for the Spilsbury family in Maxted’s Exeter
website. See also Nichols’s Literary Anecdotes,
III, 442.
80.
Thomas Warton died on 20 May 1790; the post of laureate was
eventually given to the ‘dull, inept and feeble’
Henry James Pye (1745–1813) in July 1790. See Vales,
p. 47.
81. ‘Messrs
Goulding, Robinsons & Walker to T. Spilsbury and Son,
GMS 5, l. 225.
82. Nichols,
Rise and Progress, p. 66.
83. The
first 2 edns were printed by Symonds, and Robertson and Berry
of Edinburgh.
84.
Feather, p. 55.
85. Cited
in Girtin, p. 218.
86. See
entry for Sweetland in Maxted’s Exeter website.
87. Thomas
Frognall Dibdin, cited in Ian Maxted’s ‘Some Scholars
in the Book Trades’ (no. 57), of A History of the
Book in Devon: Exeter Working Papers in British Book
Trade History 12. Online: Internet (Aug 2004):
<http://www.devon.gov.uk/library/locstudy/bookhist/west57.html>.
88. ‘Books
sent to Mrs Sweetland for Dr Wolcot’ (GMS 5, l. 47).
89. This
must have either been a slip of the pen or a bill presented
retrospectively by Sweetland’s creditors, as she had
died of a lingering illness in 1796. See entry for Sweetland
in Maxted’s Exeter website.
90. See
Richard Polwhele’s Traditions and Recollections,
2 vols (London: J. Nichols and Son, 1826), I,
passim, and Biographical Sketches in Cornwall,
3 vols (London: J. B. Nichols, 1831), II,
passim, for references to Wolcot.
91. Dibdin,
cited in Maxted (see n. 87 above).
92. See
entries for these booksellers in Maxted’s Exeter website.
COPYRIGHT
INFORMATION
This article is copyright © 2004 Centre
for Editorial and Intertextual Research, and is the result
of the independent labour of the scholar or scholars credited
with authorship. The material contained in this document
may be freely distributed, as long as the origin of information
used has been properly credited in the appropriate manner
(e.g. through bibliographic citation, etc.).
REFERRING
TO THIS ARTICLE
D. KERR. ‘ “Satire is Bad Trade”: Dr John
Wolcot and his Publishers and Printers in Eighteenth-Century
England’, Cardiff Corvey: Reading the Romantic Text
12 (Summer 2004). Online: Internet (date accessed): <http://www.cf.ac.uk/encap/corvey/articles/cc12_n02.html>.
CONTRIBUTOR
DETAILS
Donald Kerr is currently the Special Collections
Librarian at the University of Otago, Dunedin. In 1992,
he completed an MA on Frank Wild Reed (1874-1953) as a
collector of works of Alexandre Dumas père,
and in 2002 completed a PhD thesis on Governor Sir George
Grey (1812–98) as a book collector. Other publications
in the field of the history of libraries and book collecting
include work on Henry Shaw (1850–1928), another
Auckland book collector, and the Auckland City Library’s
holdings of Malagasy manuscripts and books. He is currently
working on a history of duelling in New Zealand.

Last modified
10 August, 2004
.
This document is maintained by Anthony Mandal (Mandal@cf.ac.uk).
|