The Library: The Transactions of the Bibliographical Society 7.1 (2006) 25-64
 
[Access article in PDF]

Hazlitt's Unpublished History of English Philosophy:

The Larger Context

Oxford

When in 1931 P. P. Howe included the Prospectus of a History of English Philosophy in Volume 2 of Hazlitt's Complete Works, he did so in the belief that, as he states in his 'Bibliographical Note', 'The only copy known is that in the Windham collection in the British Museum.'1 Since that copy dates from 1809, both the History and its Prospectus2 have come to be regarded as projects exclusively of that year (as distinct from Hazlitt's philosophy lectures of 1812), while non-publication of the History has led it to be seen as an early failure. They go unmentioned in Sir Geoffrey Keynes's Bibliography of William Hazlitt (2nd edn, Godalming, 1981), and Herschel Baker has speculated that 'neither Windham nor presumably anybody else was stirred' to subscribe to Hazlitt's proposed History.3 New evidence (principally from St Bride Printing Library and Sir John Soane's Museum) now prompts reassessment. As will be demonstrated, the History may have come closer to publication than has previously been acknowledged. In addition, it is now clear that, far from being an obscure non-event, it was known to a cross-section of literati, including politicians, clerics, lawyers, and physicians. And, contrary to earlier suggestions, Hazlitt continued to work towards publication for the best part of the following decade. Nor should we regard the History's non-appearance as proof of fecklessness; rather, Hazlitt's conviction in it persisted even under the most adverse circumstances. In order to provide a full outline of these circumstances, it is necessary to invoke a sizeable cast of characters from diverse contexts, many of whom have not previously been connected with Hazlitt. [End Page 25]

The History of English Philosophy can be regarded as a spin-off from Hazlitt's first book, An Essay on the Principles of Human Action (1805), which it would have amplified and supplemented. An incomplete manuscript apparently existed by the time he set out his 'refiections on the prevailing system of metaphysical reasoning' and 'the outlines of a system, which I should wish to see established in its room' in a letter to the Monthly Magazine for February 1809.4 Much of what he said there would be repeated, verbatim, in the Proposals. 'I will resume the subject in another letter', he concluded, but nothing more was forthcoming, although the Monthly Magazine for March would contain a response from Capel Lofft beginning: 'I am glad to find the metaphysical subject revived by W. H.'.5 Perhaps Lofft made contact with Hazlitt at around this time, or perhaps he heard more about the History from his friend and correspondent Henry Crabb Robinson. At all events, he was an early supporter of Hazlitt's enterprise.6

Howe suggests that by the time Hazlitt wrote to the Monthly Magazine the £100 he had borrowed from his former patron, Richard Sharp, in order to write the History had been exhausted.7 Further financial support was therefore required if he was to complete and publish it. Three years before, Hazlitt had published Free Thoughts on Public Affairs at his own expense, but his means would not now allow that. His wife had given birth to their first son on 15 January 1809, and money for private commissions was not easy to come by. Prior to his departure for Winterslow in November 1808 he made a number of visits to his friend William Godwin,8 and may have discussed the problem with him. Perhaps Godwin proposed the book to Joseph Johnson9 or his own publisher George Robinson; if so, neither thought it worth the risk. The obvious solution was to form a subscription -- something recently achieved by none other than Hazlitt's father with what was to [End Page 26] prove his last book, Sermons for the Use of Families (1808), brought out by Johnson.10 Hazlitt would therefore have been aware of the mathematics. When in 1817 Shelley was to publish 750 copies of Laon and Cythna, it would cost him 2,366 shillings11 -- nearly £200; Longman's total costs for a new copyrighted title in 1818 would be estimated at 2,100 shillings.12 These figures apply to octavo publications; the History was to be a quarto production, so would have been more expensive. But if we take them to give a general idea of the sums involved, we can calculate that if (as stated on the copy of the Proposals sent to Windham) each subscriber pledged £110s. 0d., Hazlitt would have known from the outset that he needed advance sales of about 140­150 copies merely to cover his expenses.

He had probably worked this out by the time he left London for Wiltshire in November 1808, and had certainly done so by the time he published in the Monthly Magazine, because he had by then provided Richard Taylor, the printer in Shoe Lane, off Fleet Street, who in 1806 had produced Free Thoughts on Public Affairs, with copy for the document entitled Proposals for Publishing, in One Large Quarto Volume, a History of English Philosophy.

Originally from Norwich, Taylor remained a practising Unitarian throughout his life. Apprenticed to fellow-Unitarian Jonas Davis in 1797, he had his own printing business in the city by 1803. Though he did not accept solely Unitarian commissions, it is worth noting that he printed, among other things, the sixth edition of the Essex Street Chapel liturgy, as well as works by Thomas Belsham, Amelia Opie, and Theophilus Lindsey. In this he benefited from a cordial relationship with Joseph Johnson. Taylor is the first of a number of prominent Unitarians who would have an interest in Hazlitt's History. His records, preserved at St Bride Printing Library, London, show that Proposals was not funded solely by its author: Taylor's list of printing jobs for 1809 contains an entry dated 18 February for 'Proposals for Hist. of English Philosophy' alongside the names of 'Mr. Hazlitt' and 'B. Montagu' (see Fig. 1). It shows that 500 copies were13 printed at a cost of 19s. 6d.

This is an intriguing addition to what little is known of Hazlitt's early friendship with the lawyer Basil Montagu, and is consistent with the fact that, three years later in 1812, 'Montagu tried to put money in Hazlitt's [End Page 27]

 Richard Taylor & Co., Check book 18051810, entry for 18 February 1809, showing the names of 'Mr. Hazlitt' and'B. Montagu' alongside 'Proposals for Hist. of English Philosophy'. By kind permission of St Bride Printing Library, London.
Click for larger view
Figure 1
Richard Taylor & Co., Check book 1805­1810, entry for 18 February 1809, showing the names of 'Mr. Hazlitt' and 'B. Montagu' alongside 'Proposals for Hist. of English Philosophy'. By kind permission of St Bride Printing Library, London.
 Richard Taylor & Co., Check book 18101825, entry for 7 December 1811, showing the order for the 'Prospectus of Lectures', which Hazlitt was to deliver at the Russell Institution in January 1812. By kind permission of St Bride Printing Library, London.
Click for larger view
Figure 2
Richard Taylor & Co., Check book 1810­1825, entry for 7 December 1811, showing the order for the 'Prospectus of Lectures', which Hazlitt was to deliver at the Russell Institution in January 1812. By kind permission of St Bride Printing Library, London.
[End Page 28]

pocket [. . .] by commissioning a pamphlet for the Society for the Diffusion of Knowledge upon the Punishment of Death which he had founded in 1809, but the pamphlet did not appear; nor is it clear that Hazlitt was paid'.14 Had the pamphlet ever reached a printing-house, it would most likely have been that of Taylor (who Montagu probably met through Hazlitt), for in a letter to Coleridge of 1809, Montagu called him 'one of the best of men'.15

Montagu had known Wordsworth and Coleridge before Hazlitt -- indeed, it was his son, Basil Montagu Jr, whom the Wordsworths were looking after at Alfoxden at the time of Hazlitt's visit in 1798. It is likely, therefore, that Hazlitt encountered the son prior to meeting his father. Indeed, Stanley Jones suggests that Hazlitt and Montagu could not have met until after 26 August 1807,16 when Montagu sent James Mackintosh a copy of Hazlitt's Abridgment of The Light of Nature Pursued (1807) saying, 'Search has been abridged, and I am told very well, by some Person unknown to me: You will receive it with this letter.'17 I hesitate to differ with Jones, but would suggest that what this demonstrates is that Montagu was unaware of Hazlitt's authorship of the Abridgment; whether or not they knew each other is another matter. Certainly, they cannot have been well acquainted if Montagu did not know who was responsible for the Abridgment, but there had been numerous opportunities in the preceding years for encounters, however fieeting.18 After all, Montagu had been an acolyte of Godwin's in the mid-1790s when Hazlitt first encountered the philosopher,19 and all three were in the audience when Mackintosh commenced his marathon lecture series 'The Law of Nature and Nations' at Lincoln's Inn in February 1799. It would be curious if, on Hazlitt's many visits to Godwin since around 1797, he remained ignorant of Montagu.

It is unclear whether Montagu's contribution to the printing costs of the Proposals was supposed to be a loan, but it is clear that in due course he would lend Hazlitt a sizeable amount of money: in 1817 John Herbert Koe (agent for Hazlitt's then-landlord, Jeremy Bentham) reported that Hazlitt 'at [End Page 29] one time owed Montagu about £500 [. . .] and that debt has been gradually reduced to £50'.20 That sum may have included payments made to Taylor.

Montagu apparently dealt with Taylor in London during February 1809, arranging for copies of the Proposals to be sent to Hazlitt in Winterslow so that he could send them out to potential subscribers such as William Windham. Herschel Baker thought the approach to Windham a misjudgement: 'That the author of Free Thoughts on Public Affairs (which Windham probably never heard of) should have sought support from a panjandrum of the Tories who had been a valued friend of Pitt's betrays either naiveté or cynic-ism.'21 This is to do Windham scant justice. He had been an enthusiast for the French Revolution until the king's acceptance of the new constitution in September 1791, when he became a convert to Burke's views. He made his name not as a Tory but as a Whig spokesman in opposition, supporting Catholic relief and repeal of the Test Act in Scotland, as well as by opposing the slave trade. By the time Hazlitt contacted him in 1809 he had served in Pitt's government as Secretary at War (1794­1801) and in the same office in the 'talents' ministry of 1806­07. Far from being a Tory panjandrum, Windham had the reputation of a maverick; indeed, David Wilkinson, in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, describes him during the last phase of his career as having had 'an unpopular, even slightly deranged, character' -- precisely the sort of politician in whom Hazlitt would have taken an interest. And if Hazlitt was aware that Windham had in 1802 given Cobbett £600 to help establish his Political Register, he may have hoped that the ageing politician would help him publish his History -- even more so if he had ensured in advance that Windham knew he had included one of his speeches in The Eloquence of the British Senate (1807), in which, at the Peace of Amiens, Windham forecast a resumption of hostilities with the French and deplored the inadequacies of British defences against invasion.22 The high opinion of Windham's oratory that this appears to imply was shared by John Whishaw, who, writing to James Mackintosh on 19 October 1810, shortly after Windham's death, remarked that, 'Since the deaths of Burke, Pitt & Fox he was the greatest ornament of the House of Commons; and all things considered, he was perhaps the most accomplished converser of his time, without excepting any of his most distinguished co-temporaries & friends.'23 It is not difficult to see why Windham was one of those Hazlitt [End Page 30] admired for being, as he put it, one of 'a few persons distinguished for liberal knowledge, & elevated powers of mind'.24

Hazlitt wrote to him from Winterslow on 15 February 1809, and the letter reached London two days later.25 How much consideration its recipient gave the Proposals we do not know, but he was disinclined to oblige his correspondent, even if (fortunately for us) he could not bring himself to dispose of the document. Windham's was one of 250, but no other examples of that print run have come to light.

Baker says that no one, Windham included, subscribed to Hazlitt's proposed History, and that as a result 'the project had to be abandoned for something that would make more money'.26 He is probably mistaken on both counts. Friends such as Montagu, Henry Crabb Robinson, and Lamb are likely to have signed up at this stage, as are their associates -- Anthony Robinson, Capel Lofft, Thomas Massa Alsager, and the Burneys, to name a few. And while it is true that the History was not published in 1809­10, as fewer than the required number of subscribers came forward, the project would continue to command its author's attention.

In February 1810 Hazlitt wrote to tell Crabb Robinson of his plan to turn 'the History of E. Philosophy into a volume of Essays on the subjects mentioned in the prospectus, making the history subservient to the philosophy, which I believe is what I should do best, but I suspect that this is a subject to which Tipper would not very seriously incline his ear'.27 This provides us with the first evidence that the History was complete in manuscript, and that Hazlitt regarded it as work in progress. He hoped that Crabb Robinson would propose it in slightly adjusted form, perhaps with the assistance of a copy of Proposals, to Samuel Tipper, publisher of the London Review of which Robinson was co-editor with Richard Cumber-land.28 There is no evidence that he did so, perhaps because Hazlitt's suspicion about Tipper was correct.29

Hazlitt revised the History into lecture form during the summer of 1811. The next we hear of it is in a letter to Robinson of 29 October 1811, in [End Page 31] which, again writing from Winterslow, Hazlitt opens 'my case, which is briefiy this':

That I am going (in spite of the muse that presides over eloquence, I do not know her name) to deliver lectures, that I have got 30 subscribers, & want ten or a dozen more if I can possibly get them. If therefore you could assist me by picking up one or two names, I can only say I shall be much obliged to you, & that the lectures will be as good as I can make them.30

Hazlitt then outlines the series in detail. This shows astonishing confidence given that it would be six weeks before the Russell Institution formally accepted the proposal that he deliver the series under its aegis; perhaps Montagu believed that the committee of the Institution was in his pocket. On 7 December, the committee's decision still nearly two weeks hence, Taylor entered in his records a new commission: 'Prospectus of Lectures. 1 page 4to Post', charged to 'Mr. W. Hazlitt', with the name of 'B. Montagu' in brackets, immediately underneath it (Fig. 2, p. 28 above). On this occasion the charge for compositing was two shillings, and 100 copies were printed.31 The presence of Montagu's name can mean only one thing -- that he paid Taylor's bill.

This was so precipitate that Robinson can hardly be blamed for having had doubts. Hazlitt had asked him to find subscribers and take their money in advance, without being able to announce a venue. Privately, he confided to his brother his doubts as to whether Hazlitt would be able to deliver:

Hazlitt was in town lately. I saw him but for a moment. He too thought of delivering lectures this winter in town, but I hardly think he will bring them to effect. He is coming to spend some months here at all events.32

Such scepticism was well-founded. Both Robinson and his brother knew of another instance in which Hazlitt's ambition had overstretched his abilities. Robinson had attempted to help him by commissioning from him a portrait of his brother Thomas -- a task that dragged on for so long that in July 1811 the artist was obliged to write an ashamed letter of apology to his sitter.33 It was still unfinished at the end of 1812 when, questioned about it at the Lambs', Hazlitt assured Robinson that it was near completion. When finally delivered, Thomas was so disappointed that he destroyed it.

Nonetheless, Robinson believed in Hazlitt's talents and wanted to give him a chance. In the ensuing weeks he procured at least two subscribers to [End Page 32] the lectures in the form of John Buck and John Dyer Collier.34 When Hazlitt heard this:

He first sent me three tickets & then wrote to beg I would pay for them. J. B. & J. C. consented And I left him the Six Guineas When the lectures will be delivered I can not tell. He means to deliver them as he does to deliver yr picture, And will probably do both sooner or later, but we must wait his time -- I feel real compassion for the poverty into which a man of great powers of mind is cast.35

If Robinson's strictures seem harsh, it is worth remembering that they were written on 16 December 1811, three days before the Russell Institution agreed to host the lectures. At that juncture any prudent individual, asked to part with six guineas, would have been entitled to wonder if they were really to take place.

The Russell Institution had been established as follows: 'Some Gentlemen of Russell Square, and its Vicinity, being desirous of establishing a Literary and Scientific Institution in that neighbourhood, a Public Meeting was convened at the Russell Rooms, Great Coram Street, on the 8th day of January 1808, when James Scarlett, Esq.36 was solicited to take the Chair.'37 The idea was that the Russell Rooms in Great Coram Street, running westwards off the north side of Brunswick Square into Woburn Place, would house the Institution's library and serve as the venue for lectures. Its founding committee included Sir Samuel Romilly, James Burton, J. Edwards, and T. Tooke; founding proprietors included Francis Horner, Montagu, John Thelwall (an acquaintance of Hazlitt's), the Revd W. Tooke, and Charles Warren, most of whom are likely to have attended Hazlitt's lectures. It was doubtless at Montagu's instigation that Hazlitt applied to use the Institution's facilities, and on 19 December the committee met to consider his proposal; chaired by John Whishaw, it comprised Mr Serjeant Clayton, Mr Pote, Francis Horner, Dr Charles Whittel, the Revd John Coates, Mr Sermon, John Scarlett, Mr Walton, Mr Jordan, and Dr Marcet. Its decision was recorded in the minutes:

Resolved that Mr. Hazlitt's proposal for giving a course of Lectures, be accepted, and a letter be written to him, by the Secretary, acquainting him with this resolution, and desiring that he will transmit the Draft of an advertisement for [End Page 33] insertion in the public newspapers, to be considered & approved by the Committee.38

Of those present, Scarlett can be presumed to have been on Hazlitt's side, as he was probably briefed in advance by Montagu; Whittel (for reasons that will become clear) would also have been in favour. Hazlitt's brother John was to paint a miniature of the Revd John Coates, which was exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1819;39 perhaps, even at this early stage, Coates was supportive of the 1812 lectures.

A week later the Institution published its own 'Prospectus' for the lectures, a transcription of which appears in the papers of W. C. Hazlitt:

Russell Institution

Decr. 26th. 1811
On Tuesday the 14th of January 1812 at this Institution Mr. Hazlitt will commence a course of Lectures, on the rise & progress of modern philosophy, containing an historical & critical account of the principal writers, who have treated on moral & metaphysical subjects, from the time of Lord Bacon to the present day. The Lectures will be on the following Subjects: -- Lecture I. 'On the writings of Hobbes, shewing that he was the father of the modern system of philosophy'; II. 'On Locke's Essay on the human Understanding; or on the formation of ideas in general'; III. On Berkeley's principles of human knowledge, & on the nature of abstraction. IV. On selfiove. V. Same subject continued, with an account of the Writings of Hartley & Helvetius. VI. On Bishop Butler's theory of man, or on the love of happiness, the love of action, & the human conduct. VII & VIII. On the writers on Liberty & necessity & on materialism. IX. On the theory of language as treated of by Horne Tooke, by the Author of Hermes & Lord Monboddo. X. On natural religion --

Ticket of Admission to persons not being Proprietors of the Institution, 2 Guineas, to any member of the family of a proprietor or Subscriber to the Lectures, One Guinea, the Lectures to begin at Eight in the Evening, & to be continued weekly.40

From this it is clear that Hazlitt's proposal to the Institution said nothing about the distinctive subtext of the lectures: to articulate 'the outlines of a system, which I should wish to see established', his philosophy of disinterestedness as described in An Essay on the Principles of Human Action (1805). Perhaps the omission was Montagu's suggestion, who may have feared its being thought subversive or arrogant. [End Page 34]

This was of course the second 'Prospectus' to be published, the first having been issued by Hazlitt and Montagu c. 7 December -- though without giving details of times, dates, or venue. They would have been pleased that in addition to the second 'Prospectus' the Institution produced an Advertisement, also published on Boxing Day 1811:

Russell Institution

Dec 26th 1811
On Sunday the 14th of January 1812, at this Institution, Mr. Hazlitt will commence a course of Lectures, on the rise & progress of modern philosophy, containing an historical, & critical account, of the principal writers, who have treated on moral & metaphysical subjects, from the time of Lord Bacon, to the present day. Tickets of admission to persons not being proprietors -- 2 guineas each. The Lectures will be 10 in number, and will begin at Eight in the Evening. To be continued weekly. Persons desirous of subscribing are requested to apply at the Russell Institution, Great Coram St, Russell Square.
George Hack Secretary41

Perhaps as a means of encouraging the attendance of some of the more distinguished of his acquaintance, Hazlitt seems to have distributed some tickets granting the bearer free admission to the entire series, written in his own hand. One of these survives in W. C. Hazlitt's interleaved copy of The Hazlitts, now preserved in the British Library.42

Hazlitt began the series, as advertised, on 14 January 1812, but ran into difficulties immediately. The first lecture proved too dense as written, and after attending it Robinson noted that 'as he seems to have no conception of the difference between a lecture & a book his lectures cant possibly be popular, hardly tolerable'.43 Spurred by the knowledge that something had gone wrong (as well as by a straight-talking note from his brother-in-law John Stoddart, who had been in the audience), Hazlitt hurriedly restructured the series to produce an extended run of eleven lectures.

As subscribers to the Russell Institution could attend the entire course free of charge, he needed to attract as much outside interest as possible, because it was from them that he would take his commission. The opening lecture, generally held to be a failure, was not likely to help. Nor was the fact that the subscription was thought by some to be a little steep. It was true that for his series of fifteen lectures at the Philosophical Society on Shakespeare and Milton from November 1811 to January 1812 (some of which Hazlitt attended) Coleridge also charged two guineas,44 but he was better known [End Page 35] and was scheduled to deliver five more lectures than Hazlitt. Moreover, Haz-litt's course overlapped with the end of Coleridge's (although they were lecturing on different days of the week -- Coleridge on Mondays and Thursdays, Hazlitt on Tuesdays) and some might have felt that two evenings with Coleridge were exertion enough. Whatever the reason, Hazlitt was barely a month into the series when Robinson recorded on 11 February that 'The attendance was thin'.45 A month later Hazlitt was compelled to 'postpone' the series because of financial difficulties, as Robinson recorded: 'I wish I cd. afford him assistance, for I know no state of suffering more dreadful than that of indigent genius nor is my pity less for H. because my esteem for him is not great.'46 The series resumed on 31 March, the remaining three lectures being delivered at fortnightly intervals.

Hazlitt was over three weeks from the end of the course when Taylor made a further entry in his check book: 'Proposals for Histy. of Philosophy; -- 1 Ž2 sheet, long Primr 8vo'. This shows that the Proposals of 1809 were reset on 11 April 1812, when twenty-five copies were printed, further corrections being made on 25 April, 2 May, 9 May, 6 June, and 27 June, prior on each occasion to further reprintings (see Fig. 3). Textual adjustments can have been few in number, and the Proposals as printed on 27 June 1812 probably differed only in minor details from the text mailed to Windham over three years before. Once again Montagu seems to have paid all or part of Taylor's bill, as his name surmounts Hazlitt's in the check book.

In all, 175 copies were generated between 11 April and 27 June. The success of his lectures thus encouraged Hazlitt to revive his History, and it must have been principally to his audience at the Russell Institution that he distributed fresh copies of the Proposals. But this was not all. Taylor records something new, not hitherto noted: a 'Table of Philosophical Opinions' typeset at a cost of £313s. 0d., of which twenty-five copies were printed on 18 April, twelve on 25 April, and 250 on 9 May -- and by writing 'Do.' alongside it Taylor indicates that the job was commissioned by Hazlitt and Montagu. If, as seems likely, the 'Table' was by Hazlitt, it is a previously unrecorded work no copy of which is known to have survived. Two hundred and eighty-seven copies were printed and (probably) distributed with the Proposals in April 1812. The total cost of work on both items was £47s. 6d. (Fig. 3).47

If there was ever a time for Hazlitt's History to have been published it was during the spring or summer of 1812. And he knew it. Towards the end of July he borrowed £30 from Anthony Robinson as a subvention for printing costs, promising repayment within a fortnight. Taylor reprinted Proposals [End Page 36]

 Richard Taylor & Co., Check book 18101825, entries from 1812, relating to the printing of 'Proposals for Histy. of Philosophy' and 'Table of Philosophical Opinions'. By kind permission of St Bride Printing Library, London.
Click for larger view
Figure 3
Richard Taylor & Co., Check book 1810­1825, entries from 1812, relating to the printing of 'Proposals for Histy. of Philosophy' and 'Table of Philosophical Opinions'. By kind permission of St Bride Printing Library, London.
 Richard Taylor & Co., Check book 18101825, entries from 181213, showing Hazlitt's name alone against further reprintings of the 'Proposals for Hist. of Philosy.'. By kind permission of St Bride Printing Library, London.
Click for larger view
Figure 4
Richard Taylor & Co., Check book 1810­1825, entries from 1812­13, showing Hazlitt's name alone against further reprintings of the 'Proposals for Hist. of Philosy.'. By kind permission of St Bride Printing Library, London.
[End Page 37]

on 15 August and 24 October 1812 and on 3 April 1813, producing a further 130 copies at a cost of 4s. 6d. This time, however, only one name appears in his check book -- that of 'Mr. Hazlitt' (see Fig. 4).48 Montagu's absence is intriguing. Perhaps he had tired of the project or grown impatient with its author. At all events, Anthony Robinson had not been reimbursed by September, nor had the History been published.

The explanation is probably that Hazlitt failed to collect sufficient funds to cover his costs. And there were other reasons. Since the birth of another child in September 1811 he had come under increasing pressure from his wife, Sarah, to find regular employment -- something he had preferred not to do since their marriage in May 1808. Instead he busied himself with schemes for which he received payment in advance, chiefiy portrait-painting and lecturing. Those irregular remittances might have enabled a bachelor to get by, but they were not adequate to the needs of a young family, and the Hazlitts were now in desperate straits. This is clear from Hazlitt's frantic attempts to generate income throughout the summer and early autumn of 1812. We have already seen that in mid-July Montagu commissioned him to write 'On the Punishment of Death' as a way of helping out, and in September Hazlitt asked Henry Crabb Robinson for a handout of £20 -- 'This, however, I refused to do', Robinson commented in his diary.49

Hazlitt relinquished hope of becoming an artist and lobbied his friends for help in obtaining a job as parliamentary reporter with a newspaper. On 21 September Robinson visited John Stoddart to get him to persuade John Walter II to give him a position on The Times,50 whilst on 3 October Lamb asked John Dyer Collier to talk with James Perry about a post on the Morning Chronicle. Hazlitt's success in procuring employment with Perry a few days later would detain him from the History -- much to the relief, one suspects, of his wife.

By the time Hazlitt commissioned Taylor to produce the final batch of Proposals in April 1813, he had made a significant alteration to his text: instead of the paragraph that concluded previous printings,51 he introduced a list of those who had subscribed to the work so far. We know this from the unique copy to be found among the papers of Sir John Soane, not previously noticed. I will return to the list of subscribers shortly, but since nothing has previously been said by Hazlittians about the Soane­Hazlitt friendship,52 it is worth summarizing here what is known of it. In order to do that, it is necessary to jump ahead some five years. [End Page 38]

Soane and Hazlitt probably met at the Surrey Institution in 1818. Jones suggests that Hazlitt chose the venue for his lectures on the English poets having there attended some of those given by James Ogilvie in July­August 1817;53 indeed, Godwin's diary indicates that he and Hazlitt twice went there for that purpose.54 Founded in 1808, the Institution possessed a 'News Room' where members could read the latest newsprint; a reading room where they would have access to 'Literary Journals, New Books, and Pamphlets of present Interest'; a reference library 'comprising a Selection of the best Works in every department of Literature and Science'; and 'the Library of Circulation, consisting of Standard Works in British Literature; Voyages, Travels, and Topography; -- History; Biography; the Belles Lettres; Science, and the Arts'.55 Subscribers were also given access to the Institution's 'convenient Laboratory, furnished with the necessary apparatus affording every facility to Chemical and Philosophical Researches'. Admission to lectures was included in the annual subscription of £33s. 0d.

Soane did not attend Hazlitt's lectures until the last -- that of 24 February 1818 -- when he slipped into 'On the Living Poets'. He was delighted with it. It was one of the liveliest because, as Robinson records:

H. was so contemptuous towards Wordsworth -- speaking of his letter abot Burns that I lost my temper & hissed, but I was on the outside of the room -- I was led to burst out into declams agt H. which I afterws regretted tho' I uttered nothg but the truth -- Haz: abused Wordsworth in a vulgar style, imputing to him the mere desire of representg himself as a superior man.56

Notwithstanding Robinson's disgust, the series as a whole and this lecture in particular were a success (the audience being 'crowded to the ceiling'),57 and it is likely that Soane and Hazlitt met that evening. Gillian Darley suggests that they were introduced by James Perry,58 but it is not clear that he was present and in any case there was lingering resentment over Hazlitt's dismissal from the Chronicle. Hazlitt and Soane had a mutual friend in Benjamin Robert Haydon, but we have no evidence that he was in attendance either. Whoever effected the introduction, the two men hit it off. Soane evidently expressed regret at having missed the other lectures, at which Hazlitt revealed that he would have a second chance because he was intending to repeat them at the Crown and Anchor Tavern in the Strand.59 Soane asked for details, and Hazlitt promised him free admission. He must also have [End Page 39] asked about Hazlitt's recent publications, because the subject of Characters of Shakespear's Plays (1817) came up, shortly to appear in a second edition. Hazlitt refers to all this in the note he sent Soane not long afterwards:

Mr. Hazlitt incloses a ticket to his Lectures & begs Mr. Soane to accept his best acknowledgements for the favour and fiattering attention he has shewn him. Mr. H. will leave a copy of the book on Shakespear, the instant the second edition is out, which will be this or the following week.

19 York Street, Westminster

Monday morning.60

This is not easy to date. Hazlitt's reference to the second edition of Characters of Shakespear's Plays, published 30 May 1818, suggests a date of either Monday 18 or Monday 25 May. However, he cannot have written the note as late as that because by then the Crown and Anchor lectures had concluded. That suggests that he was mistaken in saying that the book would be published 'this or the following week': it was to be delayed. We should not be surprised at such inexactitude: the circumstances by which the work was transferred from the Ollier brothers (who first published it) to Taylor and Hessey remain obscure, and it may be that negotiations took longer than expected, especially if Hazlitt was tempted to drive a harder bargain than usual -- something to be expected in the light of his growing fame.

The least precarious method of dating Hazlitt's note to Soane is to use the gift of free admission. His phrasing -- 'Mr. Hazlitt incloses a ticket to his Lectures' -- implies that admission was for the entire series. If so, the most likely 'Monday morning' for it to have been sent would be that of either 16 or 23 March, the latter being the day on which the series commenced. For whatever reason, Soane did not get around to attending until 13 April, when he went to hear Hazlitt on 'Burns and the Old English Ballads',61 four days after which he heard the repeat of 'On the Living Poets'. Soane's diary entries for those dates provide the detail:

13 April

In the Eveng Mr. Turner etc drank Tea with me & we went to Mr Hazls Lecture --
at Holyland 3s/6d
17 April62

Went with Mr. Turner to Haslitts last Lect. Paid 0.3/6. [End Page 40]

'Holyland' was a coffee-house on The Strand, conveniently located for Somerset House and the Royal Academy of Arts (hence its popularity with Academicians); 'Mr. Turner' is identifiable as Joseph Mallord William Turner, who had been Soane's friend since the early 1790s and a regular visitor to his house at 12 Lincoln's Inn Fields.63 Soane thus provides two occasions on which Hazlitt would have seen, and was probably introduced to, the man described in The Round Table (1817) as 'the ablest landscape painter now living, whose pictures are, however, too much abstractions of aerial perspective, and representations not so properly of objects of nature as of the medium through which they are seen'.64 Perhaps it was in full knowledge of this that Turner accompanied Soane; even if he had not seen that remark, it is clear from Turner's letter to A. B. Johns of October 1814 that he had read two of Hazlitt's articles on the fine arts for The Champion, though he may not have been aware of their authorship.65 If indeed Hazlitt met Turner at the lectures, it does not seem to have improved his opinion. In a later essay, 'On Envy', Hazlitt was to say:

We are unable as well as unwilling to connect the feeling of high intellect with low moral sentiment: the one is a kind of desecration of the other. I have for this reason been sometimes disposed to disparage Turner's fine landscapes, and be glad when he failed in his higher attempts, in order that my conception of the artist and his pictures might be more of a piece.66

On that basis Howe noted in 1931, 'We may gather from this passage that Hazlitt knew Turner',67 but until now it has not been clear when, or how, they met. Soane's diary provides an answer.

It would not have taken Soane and Hazlitt long to discover that they shared an admiration for Napoleon, the epitome of 'the romantic figure of genius, an "imaginary historic person", or even several people, whose heroic and contradictory myth was conducive to the notion of the artist as hero'.68 And it is not surprising that Soane sought out the first two volumes of Hazlitt's biography of Napoleon in August 1828, seven months after their publication.69 [End Page 41]

There is more to be said about Hazlitt and Soane. Soane was to attend some of the former's lectures on the comic writers, delivered at the Surrey Institution in November and December 1818, and on 25 January 1819 he invited Hazlitt for dinner at his home, taking him to one of Fuseli's lectures afterwards. But for present purposes it is sufficient to note that their friendship was established in April 1818, and that Hazlitt sent him a copy of the second edition of Characters of Shakespear's Plays, probably in early June 1818, now preserved in Soane's library.

It was probably at around that time that Hazlitt gave Soane a copy of what must have been the final printing of Proposals for a History of English Philosophy.70 This is a surprising thing for him to have done, as six years had passed since the lectures at the Russell Institution, and nearly a decade since its first printing. The earliest subscribers must have long relinquished hope of seeing the momentous quarto, yet here he was, all these years later, distributing copies of Proposals in the hope that sufficient pledges might be procured to cover the cost of publication. Far from being a project only of 1809, the History was still live in 1818. Two emendations made to Soane's copy of the Proposals in Hazlitt's hand confirm this: in the first, he changed the cost to two guineas; in the second, he deleted the request that the subscription be paid 'on Completion of the Work', writing instead: 'one half to be paid on subscribing' -- not the kind of alterations he would have made had he given up hope of publication. Immediately beneath his name on the front page he described himself as the author of 'Lectures on the English poets, &c.', the work that had brought him to Soane's attention (see Fig. 5).

The text itself contains some minor revisions to the 1809 version, but the most significant change is that the final paragraph is replaced by a list of those who had subscribed up to April 1813. This is a fascinating piece of evidence about the circles in which Hazlitt moved at an early stage in his career. I transcribe it here, preserving the order and orthography of the names as printed, and annotating them with what information I have been able to gather about each. As will be evident, there are errors in the published list, which I have allowed to stand, correcting them in my commentaries. The information given here aims principally to explain the connection of each subscriber with Hazlitt and his circle, though in the case of less well-known figures I have sometimes provided some indication of their subsequent careers. In this regard I am much indebted to Josephine Hutchings, Archivist [End Page 42]

 The first page of the copy of Proposals that Hazlitt gave to Sir John Soane, bearing emendations in Hazlitt's hand. By courtesy of the Trustees of Sir John Soane's Museum.
Click for larger view
Figure 5
The first page of the copy of Proposals that Hazlitt gave to Sir John Soane, bearing emendations in Hazlitt's hand. By courtesy of the Trustees of Sir John Soane's Museum.
[End Page 43]

at Lincoln's Inn Library, for providing useful information on some of the lawyers.71

The following is a List of Subscribers to this Work.

W. Allen, F.R.S. & L.S.

William Allen (1770­1843), of Plough Court, Lombard Street, was a prominent Quaker philanthropist and scientist, who at the time he subscribed to Hazlitt's book held a lectureship at Guy's Hospital. He was a friend of Thomas Clarkson, who as Hazlitt's patron may have been responsible for interesting him in the History, though it is worth adding that when subscribing to Coleridge's The Friend in 1809, he dealt not with Clarkson but with Montagu.72 Allen was elected FRS in 1807.

B. Allen, Esq. Temple

Writing to James Mackintosh on 26 March 1810, Montagu remarked: 'I daily see Baugh Allen in court: -- I have never heard him engaged in any cause. -- I rather think that he attends there from habit than from any hope of employment. He is as chearful & good natured as when first I knew him.'73 This was probably the same 'L. B. Allen' listed in Boyle's Guide (1812) as resident at 7 Paper Buildings, Temple. It may have been at that time that he subscribed to the History.

T. Alsager, Esq. Southwark

Thomas Massa Alsager (1779­1846) was proprietor of a factory in Great Suffolk Street, Southwark, stretching semi-finished cloth to the width required by law. He is known to have met Henry Crabb Robinson in 1812, and it may have been through74

him that he came to subscribe to Hazlitt's History.

J. Abraham, Esq. Temple

The initial letter is a misprint: Thomas Abraham was admitted to the Middle Temple on 20 November 1804 and called to the bar on 12 February 1819. He was probably a legal contact of Montagu.

C. Barber, Esq. Lincoln's Inn

Charles Henry Barber (1782­1849) was admitted to Gray's Inn in June 1805 and called to the bar there in July 1810. He was admitted ad eundem to Lincoln's Inn on 1 November 1809, and described in the Inn's admission register as aged twenty-seven, only son of John Barber of Gray's Inn, gent. It would be reasonable to assume that he subscribed to Hazlitt's History shortly after that date. He was appointed KC in 1834. [End Page 44]

A. P. Buchan, M.D. F.L.S.

Alexander Peter Buchan (1764­1824) became Licentiate of the College of Physicians on 12 April 1802, and was a physician at the Westminster Hospital from 1813. It is not clear how he came to subscribe to Hazlitt's History, though it is worth noting that Anthony Carlisle, also on this list, was one of his colleagues.

Captain Burney

James Burney (1750­1821), resident at 26 James Street, Pimlico, was a friend of Charles Lamb from 1803, having met him at John Rickman's house. He and his wife Sarah, said to be the model for Lamb's Mrs Battle, became close friends of the Lambs through whom Hazlitt encountered them. Lamb probably secured his support for the History, as he did in August 1809 for Coleridge's The Friend. 75

M. C. Burney, Esq.

Martin Charles Burney (1788­1852) was a barrister, the son of James Burney; Lamb introduced him to Hazlitt, with whom he played racquets. As with his father (see preceding entry), Lamb probably encouraged him to subscribe.

Rev. Wm. Brison

The Reverend William Bryson (1729/30­1815) was a Unitarian of the Arian stamp, minister of the Presbyterian Meeting House in Antrim, 1764­1810.76 His presence here is probably owing to the infiuence of Hazlitt's father, with whom he matriculated at Glasgow University in 1756. They came from the same liberal wing of Irish Presbyterianism, and shared many views of which the 'old College' at Glasgow was peculiarly encouraging.77

Rev. John Barwis

Barwis was, among other things, a correspondent of William Windham MP, to whom he wrote not long before Hazlitt, on 22 November 1808, to promote the poetry of a 'Miss Johnson'.78 He was also a friend and correspondent of John Stoddart, Hazlitt's brother-in-law, and was probably urged to subscribe by him or his sister.

John Barwis, Esq.

This John Barwis (as opposed to the preceding one) was admitted to Gray's Inn on 10 May 1797, a month after John Stoddart -- whom he certainly knew, and who may have urged him to subscribe. He is probably the 'Mr Barwis' mentioned in Mary Lamb's letter to Sarah Stoddart Hazlitt of 23 October 1806,79 and the 'Barwise Esq.re' who subscribed to Coleridge's The Friend in 1809 (Rooke, ii, p. 413). When in 1822 Hazlitt divorced Sarah Stoddart, Barwis was one of the executors of a covenant made out in favour of her and William Hazlitt Jr.80 According to Boyle's Guide (1811) he was resident at Essex Court, Temple. [End Page 45]

J. P. Burrell, Esq.

John Palfrey Burrell was admitted to Gray's Inn on 29 April 1794, and according to Boyle's Guide (1809) was resident at 1 Gray's Inn Square. Introduced to Hazlitt by Henry Crabb Robinson, Burrell helped abridge the second of the philosophy lectures prior to delivery on 21 January 1812. He can therefore be presumed to have attended at least the first two lectures, and probably subscribed to the History at that time. Robinson described him as 'a man of sensibility and character' (Morley, i, p. 91).

Peter Brodie, Esq.

Peter Bellinger Brodie (1778­1854) must have been known to Hazlitt as son of the late Rector of All Saints, Winterslow, the Revd Peter Bellinger Brodie (1742­1804). An asthmatic, he studied to be a lawyer and was called to the bar at the Inner Temple in 1815; he became an expert in conveyancing law and was involved in preparing reforming reports and drafting parliamentary legislation.81

John Beck, Esq.

No information available; he was probably not a lawyer.

Peter Beck, Esq.

No information available; he was probably not a lawyer.

John Bell, Esq. Lincoln's Inn

John Bell (1764­1836) was admitted to Middle Temple on 10 November 1787 and then to Gray's Inn on 8 November 1790 before being called to the bar in 1792. He was admitted ad eundem to Lincoln's Inn on 5 December 1797, described in the admission register as only son of Matthew Bell, late of Kendal, gent. According to Boyle's Guide (1809) he was resident at 2 Lincoln's Inn, New Square, and may have been a contact of Montagu. He became a Bencher of Gray's Inn in 1813, and was Treasurer in 1818­19 and 1834­35. He was appointed KC in 1816.

Jas. Burton, Esq.

James Burton (1761­1837), of 9 Bedford Place, was the architect and builder responsible for Russell Square, Waterloo Place, and many of Nash's terraces in Regent's Park. A member of the founding committee of the Russell Institution, he probably attended some of Hazlitt's lectures. It is likely that he subscribed to the History through Montagu, who was responsible also for his support of Coleridge's The Friend in February 1809 (Rooke, ii, p. 418).

Jas. Burton, jun. Esq.

James Haliburton (earlier Burton) (1788­1862), the fourth of James Burton's twelve children (see preceding entry), grew up to become a renowned Egyptologist. Though christened Haleburton he went by the name of Burton until 1838, when he changed to the form Haliburton. He worked for Sir John Soane before being articled at Lincoln's Inn in 1810 -- an affiliation suggesting that, as with his father, it was Montagu who secured his subscription. [End Page 46]

R. Bill, Esq.

Robert Bill (1754­1827), mechanic and inventor, patented a machine for washing clothes in 1811; it is not clear how Hazlitt made contact with him.

Rev. H. R. Burder

The second initial is a misprint: the Revd Henry Forster Burder (1783­1864) was a Congregational minister, and a former student of the Hoxton Academy and the University of Glasgow. From 31 October 1811 he was assistant to the Revd Samuel Palmer of St Thomas's Square Congregational Chapel, Hackney, and after Palmer's death he was ordained to his pastorate on 2 March 1814. From 1809 to 1829 he was Professor of Philosophy and Mathematics at the Hoxton and Highbury Colleges. It is not known how he came to subscribe to Hazlitt's History.

A. Carlisle, Esq. F.R.S. & L.S. Soho-square

Sir Anthony Carlisle (1768­1840) was among those who nursed Mary Wollstonecraft in her last days. He was a surgeon at the Westminster Hospital, surgeon-extraordinary to the Prince Regent, a Fellow of the Linnean Society from 1792,82 and of the Royal Society from 1804. Based at 12 Soho Square, he treated Coleridge in 1812, and was physician to Godwin and Montagu, among others. He was known also to Captain Burney and John Rickman, and was John Symmons's son-in-law; all of these are on this list. Hazlitt attended one of his lectures at the Royal Academy where he was Professor of Anatomy (see Jones, pp. 196­97), and featured him in the Memoirs of Thomas Holcroft, published in 1816. Lamb thought him 'the best story teller I ever heard'. Carlisle subscribed to Coleridge's The Friend in 1809 (Rooke, ii, p. 419).

Dr. Crumpton

Peter Crompton, physician, was a member of the Roscoe circle, and probably an old friend from Hazlitt's Liverpool period. He resided at what Coleridge described as a 'delightful Country Seat at Eaton, 5 miles from Liverpool'.83 He subscribed both to the Revd Hazlitt's Sermons for the Use of Families (1808), and to The Friend in 1809 (Rooke, ii, pp. 423­24).

Thomas Clarkson, Esq.

Thomas Clarkson (1760­1846), slavery abolitionist, was a native of Wisbech, home town of Hazlitt's mother. He was also a friend of Charles Lamb, and supped with Hazlitt and the Godwins at Lamb's house on 23 January 1807; Clarkson again met Hazlitt at Lamb's on 10 February 1811. Perhaps it was then that he commissioned Hazlitt to paint the portrait delivered in July. It is no surprise, in that light, that Clarkson should have subscribed to the History, probably c. 1811. In The Spirit of the Age Hazlitt pays tribute to Clarkson as 'the true Apostle of human Redemption [. . .] and who, it is remarkable, resembles in his person and lineaments more than one of the Apostles in the Cartoons of Raphael' (Wu, vii, p. 213). Though not himself a Quaker, Clarkson was probably responsible for enlisting the two known [End Page 47] Quakers here (William Allen and Halsey Janson), who, like him, subscribed to The Friend in 1809 (Rooke, ii, p. 421).

G. Caldwell, Esq. Tutor of Jesus College, Cambridge

Coleridge described Caldwell (c. 1773­1848) as 'my earliest College Friend, & a man deservedly loved & esteemed' (Griggs, iii, p. 438). A subscriber to The Friend, he sent Coleridge a list of other subscribers and offered to distribute prospectuses for it in December 1808 (Rooke, ii, p. 419; Griggs, iii, pp. 138, 152). Caldwell was also a friend of Montagu, who probably secured his subscription to Hazlitt's History.

A. Cullen, Esq. Lincoln's Inn

Archibald Cullen (1755­1824) was admitted to the Middle Temple on 2 March 1782, and was described in the admission register as youngest son of William Cullen of Edinburgh, doctor of medicine. Cullen was called to the bar in Middle Temple on 27 April 1787. By 1809 he was resident at 4 Lamb's Conduit Place, within ten minutes' walk of the Russell Institution. He became a bencher on 6 November 1818, becoming KC in the same year. The Lincoln's Inn affiliation suggests that his subscription was secured by Montagu.

R. Cargill, Esq. Nottingham Place, Mary-le-bone

A native of Jamaica, Richard Cargill was admitted to the Middle Temple on 6 November 1810, at which time he was resident at 2 Nottingham Place, across the road from Regent's Park. He made Henry Crabb Robinson's acquaintance the following year and was present at a party given by Thelwall on 27 February 1812, which Hazlitt also attended (Morley, i, p. 65). The likelihood is that he subscribed at around that time. He was called to the bar in 1817 and became a clergyman in later years.

James Curry, M.D. F.A.S.

James Curry (1762­1819) graduated doctor of medicine at Edinburgh on 13 September 1784. He was admitted Licentiate of the College of Physicians on 25 June 1801, and appointed physician at Guy's Hospital on 10 March 1802. It is not clear who solicited his support for the History.

J. W. Carr, Esq.

The initial letter is a misprint: Thomas William Carr was admitted to Gray's Inn on 10 November 1791 and by the time of Hazlitt's lectures was resident at 105 Great Russell Street. He met Henry Crabb Robinson on 24 May 1812 in the company of Wordsworth; on that occasion Robinson described him as 'a gentlemanly, pleasant man, an old acquaintance of Wordsworth' (Morley, i, p. 86). On 31 May Robinson dined at Carr's house with Sir Humphry Davy (also on this list) and his wife. It was, however, Montagu who secured his subscription to The Friend (Rooke, ii, p. 419) -- and probably, therefore, to the History.

M. Davy, D.D. Master of Caius College, Cambridge

Martin Davy (1763­1839), physician, was elected Master of Caius College, Cambridge, in 1803. From 1811, after his wife's death, he devoted himself to private study. He subscribed to Coleridge's The Friend thanks to the agency of Caldwell (Rooke, ii, p. 424), who may also have secured his support for the History. [End Page 48]

Sir Humphrey Davy, LL.D. F.R.S.

Sir Humphry Davy (1778­1829), chemist and inventor, dined with Henry Crabb Robinson at the house of T. W. Carr (also on this list) on 31 May 1812 -- though either Robinson or Montagu could have secured his subscription. It was less than politic for Hazlitt to comment, in 'The Indian Jugglers': 'Sir Humphry Davy is a great chemist, but I am not sure that he is a great man. I am not a bit the wiser for any of his discoveries, nor I never met with any one that was' (Wu, vi, p. 74). By 1809 he was resident at 21 Albemarle Street.

G. Dawe, Esq.

George Dawe (1781­1829), history and portrait painter, was known to Hazlitt from at least the 1800s, although their acquaintance has attracted scant comment. He may have been introduced to Hazlitt by Godwin, for all three were at Godwin's house with the Lambs, James Northcote, and James White on 6 March 1805. Thereafter, they coincided at Godwin's and Lamb's not infrequently until around 1811, Dawe enjoying increasing success as a painter while Hazlitt's artistic career languished. Dawe's earliest portrait, of Sir Samuel Romilly (also on this list) c. 1806, made him a sought-after portraitist. He became an associate of the RA in 1809, and an Academician in 1814. He and Hazlitt appear to have fallen out; in 'On Envy' Hazlitt refers to him as 'the antithesis of a man of genius; and yet he did better, by mere dint of dulness, than many men of genius. This was intolerable' (Wu, viii, p. 90).

P. Davis, Esq.

No information available; he was not apparently a lawyer.

J. Edwards, Esq.

Probably John Edwards (1773­1850), admitted to Lincoln's Inn on 23 May 1794. As a member of the founding committee of the Russell Institution, he probably attended the lectures of 1812, and is likely to have subscribed at that time. He lived at 3 Red Lion Square, barely ten minutes' walk from the Russell Institution; he is listed as a proprietor in 1826. A different John Edwards and his son of the same name, both of Whitchurch, subscribed to the Revd Hazlitt's Sermons for the Use of Families (1808).

J. J. Evans, Esq.

Joseph Evans was admitted to the Middle Temple on 14 June 1771. Henry Crabb Robinson referred to him as 'my old friend' in 1824 (Morley, i, p. 312), which suggests that he may have secured his subscription.

Rev. J. Evans, A.M.

John Evans (1767­1827) was ordained a Baptist minister to the congregation in Worship Street, London, in 1792, where he remained for the rest of his life. Three years later he married Mary Wiche, daughter of John Wiche, a Baptist minister of Maidstone who was one of the 'nearest and most beloved friends' of Hazlitt's father.84 Not surprisingly, therefore, Evans subscribed to the Revd Hazlitt's Sermons for the Use of Families (1808), as well as to Hazlitt's History, probably c. 1809. [End Page 49]

Rev. E. Forster, F.R.S.

Edward Forster (1769­1828), writer, was tutored by Samuel Parr (also on this list) at Norwich grammar school, and in 1803 presented to the rectory of Aston Somerville, Gloucestershire. He was elected FRS in 1801. It is not clear who solicited his subscription. Boyle's Guide (1809) lists him as resident at 60 South Audley Street, Mayfair.

Right Hon. J. Hookham Frere

It is surprising, to say the least, to find here John Hookham Frere (1769­1846), one of the foremost writers of the Anti-Jacobin and co-founder of the Quarterly Review. Frere was a career politician until August 1809 when he returned to England after being replaced as minister-plenipotentiary to the Central Junta of Spain by Marquess Wellesley. It is unlikely that he subscribed to Hazlitt's History before that; what tempted him to do so remains obscure, nor is it clear who might have solicited his support.

Thomas Forster, jun. Esq.

Thomas Ignatius Maria Forster (1761­1825), writer on science and phrenologist, was resident at 10 Southampton Street. He became a Fellow of the Linnean Society in 1811; his father, also a botanist, subscribed to Coleridge's The Friend in 1809 (Rooke, ii, p. 429). By this time Forster was a good friend of Thomas Love Peacock, the bulk of Peacock's extant letters to him dating from the years 1809­13.

W. Grey, Esq.

William Grey was admitted to Gray's Inn on 23 April 1790. Resident at 4 Gray's Inn Square, he probably attended the lectures of 1812 when he is likely to have subscribed to the History. By 1826 he was a proprietor of the Russell Institution.

J. Green, Esq.

Probably the same John Green of Dell Lodge, Blackheath, who subscribed to Coleridge's The Friend (Rooke, ii, p. 431).

J. Haslam, Esq.

Possibly John Haslam (c. 1764­1844), physician and specialist in insanity, resident apothecary at the Bethlem Hospital, 1795­1816. Hazlitt deleted Haslam's name from Soane's copy of the Proposals.

G. Heald, Esq. Lincoln's Inn

George Heald (c. 1775­1834) was admitted to Gray's Inn on 6 November 1793, the eldest son of Richard Heald of Horncastle, Lincolnshire. He subscribed to Coleridge's The Friend in 1809 (Rooke, ii, p. 434) thanks to Montagu's urgings, who was probably also responsible for his presence here. He was appointed KC in 1818.

John Hughes, Esq.

This is probably the same 'Hughes, Mr. John, sen.; Shrewsbury' who (with his son) subscribed to the Revd Hazlitt's Sermons for the Use of Families (1808). If so, his presence here probably owes much to the infiuence of Hazlitt's father.

Joseph Howell, Esq.

This is probably the man mentioned in Henry Crabb Robinson's diary entry of Saturday 23 March 1811: 'By W. Hazlitt having procured Mr Howel to sit for him for [End Page 50] his picture'.85 It is not included in W. Carew Hazlitt's incomplete list of his grand-father's portraits (Memoirs of William Hazlitt, i, p. xvi) but is in the updated list published by Howe in 1922 -- though not on the basis of a viewing.86 Howell's appearance here may be due to Robinson's efforts.

W. Hazlewood, Esq. Lin. Inn

William Hazlewood (or Haslewood) subscribed to Coleridge's The Friend in 1809 through Montagu (Rooke, ii, p. 434), who must also have been responsible for his presence on this list. Resident at 34 Fitzroy Square, he had a ten to fifteen minute walk to Great Coram Street where he could have heard Hazlitt's lectures. He was a solicitor, practising at 2 New Square, Lincoln's Inn, having been admitted to Inner Temple in 1793­94. In Venn's Alumni Cantabrigienses William Philip Haslewood is described as son of William Haslewood, barrister and 'professional adviser and friend of Nelson'. In 1826 he was listed as a proprietor of the Russell Institution.

Mr. Edward Horne, Clapham

Listed as a proprietor of the Russell Institution in 1826, then resident in Clapham Rise. He probably attended Hazlitt's lectures in early 1812, and subscribed at that time.

H. Hall, Esq.

Henry Hall was admitted to Lincoln's Inn on 23 January 1800, and by 1812 was resident at 63 Lamb's Conduit Street, barely ten minutes' walk from the Russell Institution in Great Coram Street. His affiliation with Lincoln's Inn suggests a connection with Montagu.

Walter Hall, Esq.

Hall also subscribed to Coleridge's The Friend in 1809 (Rooke, ii, p. 432), when he was listed as a merchant at 14 Birchin Lane.

Amelia Hanchecome

No information available.

S. Hoare, jun. Esq.

This is probably the Samuel Hoare, Esq. who subscribed to the Revd Hazlitt's Sermons for the Use of Families (1808), and who is there said to live in Hampstead. He was probably a Unitarian connection of the Revd Hazlitt.

Alfred Hardcastle, Esq.

No information available.

H. Janson, Esq.

Halsey Janson (b. 1779), resident at Bull Head Passage, Wood Street (where he owned a fiannel warehouse), was married to Lucy Lloyd, cousin of Charles Lloyd Jr (friend of Wordsworth, Coleridge, and Lamb). A Quaker,87 Janson was encouraged by Clarkson to subscribe to Coleridge's The Friend (Rooke, ii, p. 437), and it may have been by his agency that he appears on this list. [End Page 51]

Edw. Jenner, M.D. F.R.S. & L.S.

John Hazlitt painted a miniature of Jenner (1749­1823), surgeon and pioneer of smallpox vaccination, in 1809; it was exhibited at the Royal Academy later that year. He may also have asked him to subscribe to his brother's History.

P. Johnstone, Esq.

Peter Johnstone was resident at 11 Somerset Street, Portman Square, when in 1809 he subscribed to Coleridge's The Friend (Rooke, ii, p. 438); Montagu was responsible for both that and the subscription to Hazlitt's History.

E. Ironside, Esq.

Edward Ironside is listed as a proprietor of the Russell Institution in 1826, then resident in Guildford Street. He probably attended Hazlitt's lectures in early 1812, and subscribed at that time.

The Marquis of Lansdown

Henry Petty-Fitzmaurice, 3rd Marquis of Lansdowne (1780­1863), was resident at Berkeley Square, Bowood Park in Wiltshire, and Easthamstead Park, Berkshire. His father, William Petty, 2nd Earl of Shelburne and 1st Marquess of Lansdowne (1737 ­1805), had in 1783 done Hazlitt's father a favour, when at the behest of Richard Price he ordered away a regiment that was intimidating him for having defended the rights of American prisoners of war (Moyne, Journal of Margaret Hazlitt, pp. 41­43). It would appear that neither he nor his son ever lost interest in (or contact with) the Hazlitts. At the period during which subscribers to the History were being sought, Lansdowne was part of a circle of enlightened Whigs, some attached to Holland House, who took a benign interest in Hazlitt. Several belonged to the King of Clubs, founded in February 1798, a monthly dining society which in the course of time counted Sir Samuel Romilly, Richard Sharp (Hazlitt's patron), James Mackintosh, Henry Brougham, Francis Jeffrey, and James Scarlett among its members (see British Library, Add. MS 37337). Lansdowne's interest in the Hazlitts did not abate: as late as 1853 Henry Brougham wrote that 'Lord Lansdowne & others take an interest in him'88 -- that is, in William Hazlitt Jr, Hazlitt's son.

The essayist seems to have repaid his patron in typical fashion, including him alongside Lord Liverpool, Mackintosh, Peel, and Coleridge in a ribald account of Edward Irving's congregation (Howe, xx, p. 113), while a late essay 'The Court Journal -- A Dialogue' suggests that he was 'delighted with a description (not well-done) of his own house and furniture' (Howe, xx, p. 233).

Mr. Lingham

No information available.

A. Lamb, Esq. Prince's Street

No information available.

Capel Lofft, Esq.

Lofft (1751­1824), radical editor and writer, was resident at Troston, near Bury in Suffolk, and was an early supporter of the History in print (see above, p. 26). He and Hazlitt had a mutual friend in Henry Crabb Robinson, though it should be noted [End Page 52] that it was through Clarkson that he subscribed to Coleridge's The Friend, in which he is quoted (Rooke, ii, p. 443).

Charles Lamb, Esq.

Given the earlier listings of the two Burneys and Alsager, prominent members of the Lamb circle, Lamb's appearance is to be expected. Contrary to Howe, he attended the first of the lectures at the Russell Institution (Jones, p. 67). He probably subscribed to the History in 1809, the year in which he also subscribed to Coleridge's The Friend (Rooke, ii, p. 440).

Sir James Mackintosh

Hazlitt would have been pleased to secure the support of Mackintosh, 'one of the ablest and most accomplished men of the age', as he is described in The Spirit of the Age (Wu, vii, p. 153). Mackintosh read four of Hazlitt's early books while in India (perhaps having been sent them by Montagu, who probably secured his subscription). That can only have increased the irritation of discovering that Hazlitt had, as Mackintosh put it in a letter to his wife of 16 November 1814, 'abused me in the Examiner'.89 He was resident at 63 Hatton Garden, a short distance from Henry Crabb Robinson at number 59.

Mr. M'Creery

The radical publisher and printer John M'Creery (1768­1832) was a correspondent of William Windham MP and a friend of Godwin and of Robert Stodart (publisher of Hazlitt and Hunt's The Round Table). Hazlitt had probably known him in Liverpool during the 1790s, as they shared a patron in William Roscoe (also on this list), for whom he printed the Life of Lorenzo de' Medici. In late 1805 M'Creery moved to London, setting up as a printer and publisher in Black Horse Court. By 1812 he was closely associated with the parliamentary reformers who met regularly at the Crown and Anchor tavern, where Hazlitt was to repeat his lectures on English poetry in 1818. He printed Hazlitt's Memoirs of Thomas Holcroft (1816) for Longman, and Political Essays (1819) for Hone (a close friend). He also printed works by Montagu and Romilly (both on this list). In a letter of December 1827 Hazlitt refers to him as 'the severe author of the Press, a Poem' (Letters, p. 349).90

Basil Montagu, Esq.

Montagu was admitted to Gray's Inn on 30 January 1789. As is clear from Taylor's records, he was Hazlitt's principal backer in attempts to publish the History and promote the lectures. Many on this list were encouraged to subscribe by him. He was surely an early subscriber, c. 1809, in which year he also promoted Coleridge's The Friend to friends and acquaintances (Rooke, ii, p. 447).

E. Maltby, D.D.

Edward Maltby (1770­1859), Bishop of Durham from 1837 to 1856, acquired his DD at Cambridge in 1806. He was a friend of Montagu, who probably secured his support for Hazlitt's History. [End Page 53]

Thomas Meggison, jun. Esq.

Thomas Meggison was resident at 96 Hatton Garden, a short walk from Henry Crabb Robinson at number 56, who was probably responsible for soliciting his support for Hazlitt's History. We know they were acquainted because Robinson tells us that at Coleridge's lecture on Monday 18 November 1811 Meggison 'very loudly and before the lecturer had left his rostrum began to abuse him' (Morley, i, p. 51). I suspect that this was the same 'Mr Meggison' who subscribed to Coleridge's The Friend in 1809 through Montagu (Rooke, ii, p. 445), rather than the 'Holker Meggison' proposed by Rooke.

J. Merivale, Esq.

John Herman Merivale (1779­1844), lawyer and literary scholar, was brought up a Unitarian in Exeter. As a result he left St John's College, Cambridge, without taking a degree in 1796, being admitted to Lincoln's Inn on 17 December 1798. He must have come to know Montagu, because they were both to write on bankruptcy law and the death penalty. He probably attended Hazlitt's lectures in early 1812 and subscribed at that time, when he was resident in Woburn Place, just round the corner from the Russell Institution in Great Coram Street. By this time he was a friend of Byron. In 1817 Henry Crabb Robinson referred to him as 'Merivale the barrister, Chancery reporter, and compiler of that Shakespearian cento called Richard, Duke of York' (Morley, i, p. 211); he might have added 'reviewer', as Merivale wrote for the Quarterly. He was listed as a proprietor of the Russell Institution in 1826.

B. Nind, Esq.

Kent's Directory (1816) shows that Benjamin Nind, an attorney, worked from 8 Magdalen Row, Great Prescott Street, in the City of London. Little more seems to be known of him.

James Northcote, Esq. R.A.

Resident at 39 Argyll Street, Northcote had been a friend of Hazlitt since the 1790s

-- an association that lasted until Hazlitt's death. Northcote was also a friend of Godwin, who may have introduced them; he is the interlocutor of Hazlitt's last book, Conversations of James Northcote R.A., published on 26 August 1830.

Dr. Outram, Hanover-square

Benjamin Fonseca Outram (1774­1856), surgeon and naval officer, graduated doctor of medicine in Edinburgh in 1809 and was admitted licentiate of the Royal College of Physicians on 16 April 1810, after which he practised as a physician in London from 1 Hanover Square. He may have subscribed at some point after that date.

Rev. S. Parr, LL.D.

Samuel Parr (1747­1825), schoolmaster, friend and admirer of Priestley, and critic of Godwin, was known to others here, such as Martin Davy, Mackintosh, Charles Symmons, and Francis Wrangham. His support for the History was almost certainly secured by his friend Basil Montagu; as Anne Montagu told James Mackintosh in September 1809, 'Dr. Parr often writes to Basil, & Basilissa, as he whimsically calls me.'91 Indeed, Parr seems often to have stayed with the Montagus at 36 Thornhaugh Street, Bedford Square, on his visits to London. [End Page 54]

Parr remained an admirer of Hazlitt: at his death he owned copies of Characters of Shakespear's Plays (1817), Lectures on the English Poets (1818), and The Round Table (1817), which he thought 'very ingenious'.92 By contrast, Hazlitt's numerous references to Parr are uncomplimentary, typically the observation that his style was 'very tolerable, dull, common-place declamation -- a little bordering on fustian' (Wu, iv, p. 58).

J. F. Pinney, Esq.

John Frederick Pinney (1773­1845) was admitted to Lincoln's Inn on 27 July 1793. It was partly thanks to him that William and Dorothy Wordsworth were allowed to reside at Racedown Lodge in Dorset, rent-free, in 1795­97. His presence here is due not to Wordsworth but to the Stoddarts, of whom he was an old friend. Sarah was resident at his house, 46 Wimpole Street, in 1803 (Jones, p. 15), and Pinney's appearance here shows that after leaving it they did not lose touch. Indeed, at the time of her death in 1840 she was living with John Frederick's younger sister Elizabeth (b. 1774).

--- Pearson, Esq.

Probably the fugitive Leeds bookseller who also subscribed to Coleridge's The Friend (Rooke, ii, p. 450). By September 1809 the failure to track down 'the imaginary Pearson' led Coleridge to request that the copies sent to him be returned (Griggs, iii, p. 224).

D. Parkin, Esq.

Daniel Parken the younger (1785­1812), a baptist of Luton, was admitted to Lincoln's Inn on 5 September 1811, a barrister-at-law. He was a friend of Henry Crabb Robinson, who took him to the last of Hazlitt's lectures on 14 April 1812: 'Parken to whom I gave a ticket was much pleased with the lecture.'93 It is reasonable to suppose that he subscribed to the History at this time. The following month Robinson took him to some of Coleridge's lectures. Parken died young after a freak accident, as reported by the Monthly Magazine, 34 (September 1812), p. 171, 'while stepping out of a gig, in the momentary danger of being overthrown, by which he sprained his ancle, and injured his foot. [. . .] The shock had produced an effect of the membranes of the brain, which terminated in a brain fever, and ultimately in death. This young man was some time editor of the Eclectic Review, a work as devoid of honesty as of ability, and in many respects a disgrace to the periodical press'. It is unlikely that Hazlitt remained unaware of Parken's demise. He is bound to have seen Barron Field's elegiac 'Inscription' to Parken, which appeared in The Examiner for 8 November 1812 (p. 715).

Abraham Rees, D.D. F.R.S. & L.S.

Abraham Rees (1743­1825) was born in Llanbrynmair, Powys, Wales. During his tutorship at the Hoxton Academy in London, 1762­85 (where he taught the young William Godwin), he became a firm friend of Hazlitt's father; indeed, he was one of those who signed a testimonial for him when he took the family to America in [End Page 55] 1783. 94. Rees became a tutor at the Unitarian New College in Hackney in 1786 (in which year he was elected FRS), and it was there that he taught Hazlitt mathematics and algebra every Monday and Wednesday at 11 a.m. from 1793 to 1795. He remained at the college until it closed in 1796. His presence on this list is unsurprising in view of the fact that he subscribed also to the Revd Hazlitt's Sermons for the Use of Families (1808), indicating that he remained in touch with the family until well into the 1800s. He died on 9 July 1825 aged 81.

William Roscoe, Esq.

Roscoe (1753­1831) was an early patron of Hazlitt's, having commissioned him to paint his portrait in the early 1800s. After contradicting his assessment of Pope, Hazlitt believed himself to have fallen into disfavour (Wu, vi, p. 183), but Roscoe's presence here suggests that he was precipitate in thinking so. In fact, Roscoe had subscribed to the Revd Hazlitt's Sermons for the Use of Families in 1808, and must have pledged his support for the History at some point during succeeding years; a number of his circle followed suit (Shepherd, M'Creery, Crompton). In that light it was injudicious for Hazlitt to have offered the following comparison of Coleridge and Roscoe on the evening of 27 November 1811: 'The one was a man full of ideas but no industry, the other a man of great industry and no ideas' (Jones, p. 65). An early admirer of Coleridge, Roscoe also subscribed to The Friend in 1809 (Rooke, ii, p. 454).

John Rickman, Esq.

Rickman (1771­1840), parliamentary official and statistician, was resident by 1812 at St Stephen's Court, New Palace Yard, Westminster. He organized the first-ever national census in 1801. Hazlitt was introduced to him by Lamb, at whose house they met regularly. In all likelihood Lamb solicited his support, as he had when Rick-man subscribed to The Friend in August 1809 (Rooke, ii, p. 453).

A. Robinson, Esq. Four copies

Anthony Robinson (1762­1827), sugar refiner and writer, was a friend of Henry Crabb Robinson and helped Hazlitt find a publisher (Thomas Ostell) for his Eloquence of the British Senate (1807).95 With characteristic generosity he pledged to buy four copies of the History. He is listed as a proprietor of the Russell Institution in 1826.

H. C. Robinson, Esq.

Henry Crabb Robinson (1775­1867) was admitted to the Middle Temple on 18 February 1808 and called to the bar on 7 May 1813. One of the most energetic of Hazlitt's supporters, he must have been responsible for the subscriptions of many of those on this list. His own is likely to have been pledged early, c. 1809, the year in which he also subscribed to Coleridge's The Friend (Rooke, ii, p. 454). His residence at 59 Hatton Garden put him in close proximity not just to legal friends at Lincoln's Inn but to near neighbours such as Mackintosh and Meggison (also on this list). [End Page 56]

T. Robinson, Esq.

Robinson's brother Thomas lived at Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk. He was the subject of a portrait by Hazlitt deemed so bad that he destroyed it. His support for the History was canvassed, one assumes, prior to that event.

Sir Samuel Romilly, M.P.

Sir Samuel Romilly (1757­1818), lawyer and politician, was admitted to Gray's Inn on 10 February 1801. Resident at 21 Russell Square, he was a member of the founding committee of the Russell Institution in 1808, and probably attended Hazlitt's lectures. Doubtless his support of Hazlitt's enterprises was urged by Montagu (another founder member of the Institution) to whom he was a close friend. Hazlitt saw him speak in the Commons, and described him as 'too solemn a speaker' (Howe, xvii, p. 17). Romilly subscribed to Coleridge's The Friend in 1809 (Rooke, ii, p. 454), and may at the same period have pledged support for Hazlitt's History. At the time of his death he possessed a copy of Hazlitt's Eloquence of the British Senate (1807).96

Mr. Serjeant Rough

William Rough (1772­1838) was admitted to Gray's Inn on 9 February 1796, and became serjeant-at-law in 1808. A 'bibulous improvident barrister' (Jones, p. 56), he had known Coleridge at Cambridge. By the time he caroused at Lamb's house on 10 February 1811 in the company of Robinson and Hazlitt, he was resident at 24 Bedford Row, a short walk from the Russell Institution. He subscribed to Coleridge's The Friend through Montagu (Rooke, ii, p. 455), who was probably responsible for his presence here.

D. Rowley, Esq.

David Rowley (b. 1791) was admitted to Lincoln's Inn on 21 June 1811; the affiliation suggests that he was known to Montagu.

D. Reasdon, Esq.

No information available.

D. Rowland, Esq.

Daniel Rowland (1778­1859), antiquary, was educated at Shrewsbury and admitted to the Middle Temple on 31 August 1820. He practised as a barrister before settling at Frant in Sussex, becoming High Sheriff of the county in 1824. He was evidently an acquaintance of either Montagu or Robinson.

Russel Institution Library

According to its 1826 catalogue97 the Russell Institution library had a good selection of Hazlitt's works: Memoirs of Thomas Holcroft (1816), Characters of Shakespear's Plays (1817), A View of the English Stage (1818), and Lectures on Dramatic Literature (1820).

John Stoddart, LL.D.

Stoddart (1773­1856), Hazlitt's brother-in-law, was admitted to Gray's Inn on 9 February 1797. How many of Hazlitt's lectures he attended is not known, but he [End Page 57] was certainly there for the first, after which, as Henry Crabb Robinson recorded, 'Dr. Stoddart had left a letter of advice to [Hazlitt] on his lecture, which hurt him apparently, and the conversation that afterwards took place irritated him greatly' (Morley, i, p. 58). This is probably an understatement: as W. Carew Hazlitt reveals, the two men 'had never been very good friends' (another understatement), and Stoddart's increasing conservatism 'had produced a decided estrangement before 1806 or 1807'.98 Stoddart's note was probably a symptom of the fact that his attendance was not voluntary; if his sister's entreaties were not sufficient to get him there, he would have been dragged along by Montagu -- whom in 1796 he described as 'one of the best of human Beings, whose house is my house, & whose assistance is always at my service'.99

Rev. W. Shepherd, Two copies

William Shepherd (1768­1847), Unitarian minister and politician, was a member of the Roscoe circle and patron of Hazlitt during his Liverpool years. He was minister of the Unitarian chapel at Gateacre from 1791, and must at some point during the 1780s or 1790s have come to know Hazlitt's father, to whose Sermons for the Use of Families (1808) he subscribed. He is the 'sensible man' in 'On Application to Study' (Wu, viii, p. 56) and co-author (with James Scarlett) of some verses quoted in 'Hot and Cold' (Wu, viii, p. 160). Like Hazlitt he was 'very abusive against Southey' (Morley, i, p. 318).

John Symmons, Esq. F.R.S.

Symmons was the owner of Paddington House and father-in-law of Anthony Carlisle (also on this list), who married Symmons's daughter Martha in August 1800. He had been elected FRS in 1794 and died in 1832. Perhaps Carlisle brought Hazlitt's History to his attention.

Thomas Swanwick, Esq.

Thomas Swanwick (1773­1829) was the brother of Hazlitt's boyhood friend Joseph (see next entry). He married Hannah Thornthwait in 1798 and seems to have moved soon after to Chester, where all of their eleven children were born. He remained in touch with the Hazlitts, and subscribed to the Revd Hazlitt's Sermons for the Use of Families (1808), as well as to the History (probably c. 1809). In 1819 he and his family emigrated to America, settling in Randolph, Illinois.

Joseph Swanwick, Esq.

The ninth of twelve children, Swanwick (1777­1841) was a native of Wem in Shropshire, where Hazlitt's family settled in 1787 after returning from America. He and Hazlitt were boyhood friends and studied together at the Unitarian New College in Hackney, 1793­95. Swanwick married in Wem in 1800, but seems at some point in succeeding years to have moved to Chester, where he is listed as resident at the front of the Revd Hazlitt's Sermons for the Use of Families (1808), to which he subscribed (he purchased two copies). It would have been natural for him also to pledge support for the History, probably the following year. Relations between [End Page 58] the Hazlitt and Swanwick families remained warm for decades. The papers of W. C. Hazlitt include a letter from Swanwick's grandson recalling how, 'When about 4 years old (I am now 70) I went with my Grandfather on Sunday from Pim's Farm (the name of his small Estate) to Wem to hear Mr. Hazlitt'100 -- a reference to the Revd Hazlitt.

Edward Smith

Edward Smith was admitted to Lincoln's Inn on 30 April 1777, and was probably known to Montagu.

Joseph Spurrell, Esq.

No information available.

-- St. Quintin, Esq.

Boyle's Guide (1810) lists Dominic St Quintin as resident at 33 Hans Square. Perhaps he attended some of Hazlitt's lectures and subscribed to the History as a result.

C. Symmons, D.D.

Charles Symmons (1749­1826), poet and biographer, was made a member of Lin-coln's Inn in 1765, and knew Montagu, who secured his subscription to Coleridge's The Friend in 1809 (Rooke, ii, p. 461­62) -- as well as, presumably, Hazlitt's History. Resident in Richmond, Symmons was also a friend of Windham and Parr.

George Smith

George Smith was admitted to Lincoln's Inn on 9 March 1787, and by 1812 was resident at 3 Pump Court, Temple. He was probably known to Montagu.

R. Sharp, Esq. M.P.

Richard Sharp (1759­1835), politician, businessman, and wit, was a wealthy merchant by the time he became Hazlitt's patron. They met in the Lake District in 1803, and renewed the acquaintance in August 1806, Sharp having read Free Thoughts on Public Affairs, published the previous month. When in January 1808 Hazlitt told his fiancée that 'I will borrow a 100£' (Letters, p. 105) it is probable, as Howe argues, that the sum was furnished by Sharp so that Hazlitt could get on with the History of English Philosophy (Life of William Hazlitt, p. 397). Apparently the money was exhausted before it was finished, at which point it became necessary to find subscribers. Howe is 'pretty certain' that 'the withdrawal of Sharp's favour had wrecked the History of English Philosophy' by February 1809 -- but the appearance of Sharp's name on this list indicates that there is more to it than that. Sharp had not completely withdrawn his good graces from Hazlitt if he was willing to pledge a subscription, presumably c. 1809, in which year he also subscribed to Coleridge's The Friend (Rooke, ii, p. 457). He was MP for the pocket-borough of Castle Rising, Norfolk, 1806­12, and was elected FRS in 1806. He was also a member of the King of Clubs (see p. 52, above).

Richard Taylor, F.L.S.

Taylor (1781­1858) printed Hazlitt's Free Thoughts on Public Affairs (1806) and the Proposals, and would have printed the History had it come to pass. He subscribed [End Page 59] to Coleridge's The Friend through Montagu (Rooke, ii, p. 462), who probably solicited his support for Hazlitt's volume. He is one of several Unitarians on this list, including Bryson, Shepherd, Robinson, Rees, and Roscoe, and one of a number of Fellows of the Linnean Society (elected 1807).

J. Teed, jun. Esq. Gray's Inn

John Godfrey Teed became a member of Gray's Inn on 21 May 1811, aged 17 (after which date he subscribed to the History); that affiliation suggests that he may have been acquainted with either Robinson or Montagu.

I. Teed, Esq. Bedford-street

This was probably the same 'Teed, Mr.; Lancaster court' who subscribed to the Revd Hazlitt's Sermons for the Use of Families (1808); if so, he was probably a connection of Hazlitt's father. The change of address indicates a move from Lancaster Court (running north off the Strand to St Martin's Church) to a residence about half a mile north in the more fashionable Covent Garden.

Dr. Tuthill, F.R.S. Soho-square

George Leman Tuthill (1772­1835) was educated at Caius College, Cambridge, proceeding AB in 1794, fifth wrangler of his year. Shortly after graduating he became a friend of Mary Wollstonecraft, but absented himself from her funeral on grounds of non-belief. This did not much endear him to Godwin, but they remained friends in after-years, and it was probably through Godwin that Tuthill met Hazlitt. Detained in France with his wife after the breakdown of the Treaty of Amiens in May 1803, Tuthill was allowed to return only after she presented a petition to Napoleon in 1806. Manning introduced him to Lamb, who described him as 'a noble fellow, as far as I can judge'.101 Physician to the Westminster and Bethlehem hospitals, he ministered to Mary Lamb in 1810, and treated Coleridge prior to May 1814 (Griggs, iii, p. 490). He was elected FRS on 15 March 1810 and presumably subscribed after that date, perhaps at Lamb's suggestion. He lived at 13 Soho Square, close to his colleague at the Westminster Hospital, Anthony Carlisle (also on this list).

Rev. W. Tooke, F.R.S.

Tooke was a founding proprietor of the Russell Institution. He probably attended the lectures and is likely to have subscribed to the History at that time, c. 1812.

T. Tooke, Esq.

Resident at 12 Russell Square, Tooke was a member of the founding committee of the Russell Institution. He probably attended the lectures and is likely to have subscribed to the History at that time, c. 1812.

W. Vaughan, Esq.

William Vaughan (1752­1850) was the second son of Samuel Vaughan, a London merchant closely associated with Joseph Priestley. Indeed, William and his elder brother Benjamin lived and studied with Priestley at Warrington in Lancashire. Hazlitt's father must have come to know theirs102 during the period 1770­80, when he is known to have had dealings with Unitarian circles in London. Doubtless it was [End Page 60] for that reason that two of William's brothers, John and Samuel, welcomed the Hazlitt family when they settled in Philadelphia in 1783, and attempted to help the Revd Hazlitt find a post as Presbyterian minister -- a task in which he failed due to the bigotry of hard-line Calvinists in the city. The Revd Hazlitt must have re-established contact with the Vaughans when he returned to England in 1787, because William Vaughan and his wife subscribed to Sermons for the Use of Families (1808). By that time Vaughan was a FRS and FLS, and director of the Royal Exchange Assurance Corporation, a post he held from 1783 to 1829.

Mr. M. E. Wilkinson

Michael Eaton Wilkinson was admitted to Gray's Inn on 17 June 1820, and was listed as a proprietor of the Russell Institution in 1826. He probably attended Hazlitt's lectures and is likely to have subscribed to the History c. 1812.

Rev. David Williams

David Williams (1738­1816) was a political and religious theorist and founder of the Literary Fund, and one of the most distinguished radicals of his day, known to John Oswald, Horne Tooke, Holcroft, Godwin, Priestley, and Mackintosh. Having become a Presbyterian minister in 1758, he was by 1771 in charge of a small congregation in Highgate. He seems to have become friends with Benjamin Franklin at about the same time as Hazlitt's father -- in 1773,103 during the second English agency (December 1764 to April 1775). By 1809, the earliest he could have subscribed to the History, Williams was suffering from 'a severe paraletic affiiction' and financial difficulties; he suffered major strokes in 1809 and 1811. It is not clear whether the approach to him came from Hazlitt or his father -- either is possible, though the Revd Hazlitt seems more likely. In July 1816 he was buried in the churchyard of St Anne's, Soho, where in 1830 Hazlitt would also be laid to rest.

R. Withy, Esq.

According to Boyle's Guide (1812) R. Withy was resident at 18 Buckingham Street, within easy walking distance of the Russell Institution. He probably heard Hazlitt's lectures and subscribed to the History having received a copy of the Proposals.

Charles Warren, Esq. Lincoln's Inn

Charles Warren (1764­1829) was admitted to Lincoln's Inn on 30 January 1781, being described in the admission register as second son of Richard Warren MD of London. He was called to the bar at Lincoln's Inn on 3 February 1790. As a founding proprietor of the Russell Institution he probably attended Hazlitt's lectures, and is likely to have subscribed to the History c. 1812. In that year Boyle's Guide listed him as resident at 4 Stone Buildings, Lincoln's Inn. He became a Bencher of Lincoln's Inn on 16 May 1816, in which year he was appointed KC. He then followed the Inn's cursus honorum of five annual offices that a Bencher usually filled in turn: Keeper of the Black Book 1818; Dean of the Chapel 1819; Master of the Walks 1820; Treasurer 1821; Master of the Library 1822.

Warren was Attorney-General to the Prince of Wales, 1819­20, and MP for Dorchester, 1819­26. (His family had court connections, his father and grandfather [End Page 61] having been physicians to George II and George III.) As a new MP he showed his support for Lord Liverpool's repressive administration by stating in debate the grounds for the illegality of the St Peter's Field meeting in Manchester on 16 April 1819, thereby seeking to justify the Peterloo Massacre.

C. Whittel, M.D.

Whittel was a native of Cheshire who graduated doctor of medicine at Glasgow on 2 May 1808, being admitted licentiate of the College of Physicians on 22 December following. He was on the committee of the Russell Institution that voted to accept Hazlitt as lecturer on 19 December 1811; his presence here suggests that he thought well of Hazlitt's performance.

William Wordsworth, Esq.

Wordsworth's name is deleted in ink on Soane's copy of the Proposals, but deleted or not it is surprising to find it there, as he had developed a profound distaste for Hazlitt's company by April 1808, a year before its first printing. The deletion presumably indicates a stated intention to subscribe, followed by a change of heart.

Rev. Francis Wrangham

Wrangham (1769­1842), writer and Church of England clergyman, was a good friend of Wordsworth (with whom he collaborated on a translation of Juvenal) and Coleridge, to whose The Friend he subscribed in 1809. Indeed, he seems to have distributed copies of Coleridge's prospectus (Rooke, ii, pp. 466­67) and performed the same service for Leigh Hunt's The Examiner in 1808. It was probably Montagu who placed in his hands a copy of Hazlitt's Proposals, perhaps in 1809.

W. Wingfield, Esq. Lincoln's Inn

William Wingfield (Wingfield-Baker from 1849, c. 1772/73­1858) was admitted to Lincoln's Inn on 5 November 1792, and is described in the admission register as the second son of George Wingfield late of Micklesham, Surrey, deceased. Wingfield was called to the bar at Lincoln's Inn on 22 November 1797 and practised as an equity draftsman. (These practitioners were to be found at Lincoln's Inn in particular because of the Inn's traditional association with the Court of Chancery. They engaged in the technical business of drafting all the written proceedings in a court action by Chancery, as well as legal documents concerned with land and trusts.) Probably a friend of Montagu, Wingfield was resident by 1809 at 29 Montague Street at the opposite corner of Russell Square from Great Coram Street. He probably attended the lectures and is likely to have subscribed to the History c. 1812. In 1826 he was listed as a proprietor of the Russell Institution.

Wingfield became a Bencher on 16 November 1818, in which year he was also appointed KC. He was MP for Bodmin, 1806­07, and a Master in Chancery, 1824­49. In 1849 he inherited the Orsett Hall estate from Richard Baker and assumed the additional surname of Baker. Thomas Creevey described him as 'the most successful humbug simpleton I have known all my life'.

Conclusion

Far from being the obscure non-event it has sometimes been claimed, Haz-litt's History of English Philosophy, though never published, was well [End Page 62] known to numerous overlapping circles in London society: grandees such as Romilly, Hookham Frere, Maltby, Lansdowne, and Jenner (none of them previously connected with Hazlitt); lawyers (associates, one presumes, of Montagu and Robinson); fellows of the Royal Society and Linnean Society; dissenters (Unitarians and Quakers); members of the Lamb, Clarkson, Robinson, Montagu, Godwin, and Roscoe circles; politicians (Windham not being the only target in Hazlitt's sights) and physicians (Carlisle, Curry, Outram, Whittel); and in addition to these the name of Sir John Soane might have been eligible for inclusion in 1818 or thereabouts. Hazlitt enjoyed a considerable measure of success in attracting subscribers to his History, with over a hundred copies sold prior to publication.

Unfortunately, however, this was not sufficient to cover the cost of producing the quarto volume he projected. Even if one includes Soane and the two subscribers deleted on Soane's copy of the Proposals (Haslam and Wordsworth), advance sales numbered fewer than 120 -- a deficit of twenty to thirty. Despite Montagu's absence from Taylor's entries for the last three printings of the Proposals, he is likely to have kept a vigilant eye on the finances lest Hazlitt become more indebted than he was already, and would surely have discouraged him from going ahead with less than the required number.

Hazlitt's desire to see his History published would have been all the more intense given the failure of his other philosophical works. 'Early in life I had made (what I thought) a metaphysical discovery', he told William Gifford in 1819,104 and for years afterwards he was filled with the desire to expound it. The History of English Philosophy was one of several works to which it gave rise. By a fortunate accident, five of the eleven lectures delivered at the Russell Institution have survived, as William Hazlitt Jr related in his father's Literary Remains:

I found them with other papers in an old hamper which many years ago he stuffed confusedly full of MSS. and odd volumes of books, and left in the care of some lodging-house people, by whom it was thrown into a cellar, so damp that even the covers of some of the books were fast mouldering when I first looked over the collection. The injury to the MSS. may be imagined. Some of the Lectures indeed, to my deep regret, are altogether missing, burnt probably, by the ignorant people of the house; and I have had the greatest difficulty in preparing those that remain for the press. They are, however, most valuable.105

Fragments of three of the manuscripts are now at the Manchester Central Library.106 Baker speculated that those that survived were 'all his father [End Page 63] wrote', because Hazlitt preferred after the calamity of the first lecture to speak from notes, extemporizing on occasion.107

Once thought to be a by-way of Hazlitt scholarship, the surviving lectures on English philosophy have in recent years assumed an importance that might have surprised those who attended them at the Russell Institution: in 1978 John Kinnaird devoted nearly twenty pages of his William Hazlitt: Critic of Power (New York, 1978) to an explication of them; David Bromwich's seminal study of 1983, Hazlitt: The Mind of a Critic (New York, 1983), draws on them throughout; and they are an important source for Uttara Natarajan's analysis of Hazlittian metaphysics in Hazlitt and the Reach of Sense (Oxford, 1998). It is a vindication, if only a partial one, that what remains of the History has become central to our understanding of Hazlitt's intellectual achievement.

Duncan Wu is Professor of English Language and Literature in the University of Oxford and Tutorial Fellow of St Catherine's College. He is the editor of Selected Writings of William Hazlitt (9 vols, Pickering & Chatto, 1998), and he is currently writing a biography of Hazlitt.

Footnotes

1. The Complete Works of William Hazlitt, ed. by P. P. Howe, 21 vols (London, 1930­34) (hereafter Howe), ii (1931), p. 112. The Prospectus and Hazlitt's accompanying letter to Windham are now British Library, Add. MS 37916.

2. 'Prospectus of a History of English Philosophy' is Howe's title for what Hazlitt published as 'Proposals for Publishing a History of English Philosophy'. Howe first used it when he published the text in New Writings of William Hazlitt, Second Series (London, 1927), even though in his annotations (p. 207) he gave the correct name of the work as it appeared in what was then the only known copy. In the present essay 'Prospectus' is used only when Howe's text is referred to; otherwise it is called 'Proposals'.

3. Herschel Baker, William Hazlitt (Cambridge, MA, 1962), p. 171.

4. W. Hazlitt, 'To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine', Monthly Magazine, 27 (1809), 15­19. Not included in Howe's edition. This issue of the Magazine was published in early February, but Hazlitt's letter was written presumably in January. It was first identified as Hazlitt's by Geoffrey Carnall, 'A Hazlitt Contribution', Times Literary Supplement, 19 June 1953, p. 397.

5. Capel Lofft, 'To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine', Monthly Magazine, 27 (1809), 132­33 (p. 132).

6. Lofft's letter was known to Lamb, who described it as 'mad' to Wordsworth on 28 December 1814; see The Letters of Charles and Mary Anne Lamb, ed. by Edwin W. Marrs Jr, 3 vols (Ithaca, NY, 1975­78), iii, p. 125.

7. At least this appears to be the implication; see P. P. Howe, The Life of William Hazlitt (London, 1947), p. 397.

8. Hazlitt supped with Godwin on 10 September 1808; he and his wife dined with the Godwins on 11 October; Godwin called on Hazlitt on 22 October; Hazlitt called on Godwin on 29 October; Hazlitt supped with Godwin on 4 November; and Godwin called on Hazlitt on 16 November, shortly after which the Hazlitts left for Winterslow (Godwin's diary; Oxford, Bodleian Library, Abinger Collection, Dep. e.209). I wish to thank Bruce Barker-Benfield, Greg Colley, and the Bodleian Library generally for assisting me during my search through the Godwin diaries.

9. Godwin persuaded Johnson to take on Hazlitt's first book in 1805; see my 'Hazlitt's Essay on the Principles of Human Action: A Bibliographical Note', in Metaphysical Hazlitt: Bicentenary Essays, ed. by Uttara Natarajan, Tom Paulin, and Duncan Wu (London, 2005), pp. xv­xviii.

10. Hazlitt knew about it, as he asked Johnson for sight of the proofs in July 1807; see The Letters of William Hazlitt, ed. by Herschel Moreland Sikes, assisted by Willard Hallam Bonner and Gerald Lahey (New York, 1978), p. 92.

11. See William St Clair, The Reading Nation in the Romantic Period (Cambridge, 2004), p. 508.

12. ibid., p. 506.

13. Richard Taylor & Co., Check book 1805­1810, unpaginated (London, St Bride Printing Library). The entry indicates that, after the first 250 copies were printed, corrections were made before production of the remainder. I thank St Bride Printing Library for permission to quote from the check books, and its Curator, Nigel Roche, for kindly assisting my search through the Taylor archive.

14. Stanley Jones, Hazlitt: A Life (Oxford, 1991) (hereafter Jones), p. 71.

15. Basil Montagu to Samuel Taylor Coleridge, 11 February 1809 (Wordsworth Library, Grasmere, WLMS A/Montagu, Basil/10). I wish to thank Jeff Cowton for kind assistance at the Wordsworth Library.

16. Jones, p. 60.

17. Basil Montagu to James Mackintosh, 26 August 1807 (British Library, Add. MS 52452, fol. 20r). Abraham Tucker's The Light of Nature Pursued was originally published (in 1768) under the name of Edward Search.

18. Montagu's manuscripts included a volume entitled 'Anecdotes of Hazlitt, C Lambe and Others'; should it ever turn up it may reveal the answers to some of these puzzles. See my 'Basil Montagu's Manuscripts', Bodleian Library Record, 14.3 (October 1992), 246­51.

19. Godwin's first encounter with Hazlitt is noted in his diary for 17 September 1794: 'Dine at Holcroft's: tea Hazlit's, w. H's, Hunters, Williams's & mrs Thelwal, Hazlit junr. & Swannick' (Bodleian Library, Abinger Collection, Dep. e.201, fol. 38r). The other Hazlitts mentioned here are John Hazlitt (the essayist's elder brother) and his wife. Joseph Swanwick was a friend of Hazlitt's from Wem who also attended the Unitarian New College at Hackney.

20. The Correspondence of Jeremy Bentham, ix: January 1817 to June 1820, ed. by Stephen Conway (Oxford, 1989), p. 113.

21. Baker, William Hazlitt, p. 171.

22 See Hazlitt, The Eloquence of the British Senate, 2 vols (London, 1807), ii, pp. 575­81.

23. British Library, Add. MS 78766, fol. 96r.

24. British Library, Add. MS 37916, fol. 146r. Because of the known deficiencies of the standard edition of Hazlitt's correspondence I have quoted from holograph wherever possible; see Stanley Jones's review of The Letters of William Hazlitt in The Library, vi, 2 (1980), 356­62, as well as his 'Some Notes on the Letters of William Hazlitt', The Library, vi, 3 (1983), 269­75.

25. Its progress can be tracked by the postmarks, all of which are clearly legible. It bears a Salisbury postmark dated 'FEB 16' and a 'FREE' frank dated 17 February, when Windham must have received it.

26. Baker, William Hazlitt, p. 171.

27. Henry Crabb Robinson, Correspondence 1809­17, fol. 20 (London, Dr Williams's Library). I am grateful to the Librarian and Trustees of Dr Williams's Library for permission to quote from Robinson's diaries and correspondence, and wish to thank the Librarian, Dr David Wykes, for generous assistance during my survey of the Robinson archive.

28. Henry Crabb Robinson on Books and their Writers, ed. by Edith J. Morley, 3 vols (London, 1938) (hereafter Morley), i, p. 13.

29. Jones, p. 59.

30. Henry Crabb Robinson, Correspondence 1809­17, fol. 57.

31. Richard Taylor & Co., Check book 1810­1825, unpaginated (St Bride Printing Library). See 'Jobs. 1811'.

32. Henry Crabb Robinson to Thomas Robinson, 30 October 1811 (Henry Crabb Robinson, Correspondence 1809­17, fol. 58).

33. See Letters of William Hazlitt, ed. Sikes, p. 132.

34. John Buck was the brother of Robinson's childhood friend (and wife of Thomas Clarkson), Catherine Buck; John Dyer Collier was a colleague of Robinson's on The Times. Robinson seems also to have procured the support of Mr Porden, mentioned in Robinson's diary entry for 17 January 1812, a few days after the first lecture: 'A call on Mr Porden No. 58 Berners Stt. He was pleased by Hazlitt's lecture' (Henry Crabb Robinson, Diary 2 (9 December 1811­22 January 1813), fol. 23v).

35. Henry Crabb Robinson to Thomas Robinson, 16 December 1811 (Henry Crabb Robinson, Correspondence 1809­17, fol. 66).

36. Scarlett was an admirer of Hazlitt's first book and may have sent a copy to James Mackintosh (Jones, p. 61).

37. An Account of the Proceedings, with a Prospectus, of the Russell Institution, for the Promotion of Literary and Scientific Knowledge (n.d., 1808?), p. 3. This booklet is preserved as British Library, 8306.a.12 (1).

38. This transcription from the minutes of the Russell Institution (present whereabouts not known) is from the papers of W. C. Hazlitt (British Library, Add. MS 38899, fol. 190r). The latter published some of these materials in Memoirs of William Hazlitt, 2 vols (London, 1867), i, pp. 192­93, with omissions.

39. This information is contained in a letter from E. Pretty to W. Carew Hazlitt, 5 December 1861 (British Library, Add. MS 38898, fol. 132v).

40. British Library, Add. MS 38899, fol. 190r-v, which is apparently the source of the text published in Memoirs of William Hazlitt, i, pp. 192­93.

41. British Library, Add. MS 38899, fols 190v­91r, published (with omissions) in Memoirs of William Hazlitt, i, pp. 193­94.

42. British Library, Add. MS 74782A, opposite p. 98.

43. Henry Crabb Robinson, Diary 2, fol. 22r.

44. Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Lectures 1808­1819 on Literature, ed. by R. A. Foakes, 2 vols (Princeton and London, 1987), i, p. 155, where Coleridge's prospectus is illustrated.

45. Henry Crabb Robinson, Diary 2, fol. 34v.

46. ibid., fol. 46v.

47. Richard Taylor & Co., Check book 1810­1825, unpaginated. See 'Jobs. 1812'.

48. ibid.

49. Henry Crabb Robinson, Diary 2, fol. 142r.

50. Stoddart was not at home that day, but Robinson persevered. He apparently managed to put Hazlitt's case to him on 28 September; see Henry Crabb Robinson, Diary 2, fols 141v­42r.

51. The text of the paragraph appears in Howe, ii, p. 119.

52. Neither Baker nor Jones refers to Soane, although the connection is mentioned by Gillian Darley, John Soane: An Accidental Romantic (New Haven, 1999), pp. 253­54.

53. Jones, p. 180.

54. Their visits took place on 12 July and 2 August.

55. Quotations from a document issued by the Institution dated October 1816, in a bound collection of miscellaneous papers relating to it, now British Library, 822i9.

56. Henry Crabb Robinson, Diary 6 (8 July 1817­2 December 1818), fol. 90v.

57. Jones, p. 283.

58. See Darley, John Soane, p. 254.

59. The Crown and Anchor had seen celebrations at the dawn of the French Revolution, and was now a regular meeting-place for parliamentary reformers and their ilk.

60. London, Sir John Soane's Museum, SM Priv. Corr. I.H.11.1, quoted here by courtesy of the Trustees of Sir John Soane's Museum. I wish to thank Susan Palmer, Archivist, for assisting me in my work there, and help with various aspects of this article.

61. Thomas Moore was also there, as was Owen Rees of the firm of Longman, Hurst, Rees and Orme (Jones, p. 282).

62. SM Priv. Corr. I.H.11.1.

63. This is confirmed by Susan Palmer, Archivist of the Soane Museum. For more on Holyland, see Turner Society News, 100 (August 2005), p. 2.

64. 'On Imitation'; see Selected Writings of William Hazlitt, ed. by Duncan Wu, 9 vols (London, 1998) (hereafter Wu), ii, p. 78.

65. Collected Correspondence of J. M. W. Turner, ed. by John Gage (Oxford, 1980), p. 58.

66. Wu, viii, pp. 90­91. For further information on Hazlitt's only known encounter with Turner, see my article 'When Hazlitt Met Turner', Turner Society News, 99 (May 2005), 8­10.

67. Howe, xii, p. 396.

68. Darley, John Soane, p. 254.

69. The receipt, now in Soane's archive at Sir John Soane's Museum, shows that they were purchased from Priestley and Weale, 5 High Street, Bloomsbury, for £17s. 0d. -- a considerable saving on the £3 price given on the labels of the first issue. The explanation for the discount was the financial collapse of its publishers, Hunt and Clarke, in the spring.

70. SM Priv. Corr. I.H.11.2. I am grateful to Susan Palmer, Archivist of Sir John Soane's Museum, for permission to quote from this copy of the Proposals.

71. Besides the Oxford DNB, the principal reference sources used are Records of the Honorable Society of Lincoln's Inn, 2 vols (London, 1896); The Register of Admissions to Gray's Inn, 1521­1889 (London, 1889); Henry F. Macgeagh and H. A. C. Sturgess, Register of Admissions to the Honourable Society of the Middle Temple, 3 vols (London, 1949); Arthur Robert Ingpen, The Middle Temple Bench Book (London, 1912); William Munk, The Roll of the Royal College of Physicians in London, 2nd edn, 3 vols (London, 1878); and Boyle's Court and Country Guide (1809­12).

72. Samuel Taylor Coleridge, The Friend, ed. by Barbara E. Rooke, 2 vols (Princeton and London, 1969) (hereafter Rooke), ii, p. 411.

73. British Library, Add. MS 78766, fol. 46v.

74. For more on Alsager, see D. E. Wickham, 'Thomas Massa Alsager (1779­1846): An Elian Shade Illuminated', Charles Lamb Bulletin, n.s. 35 (July 1981), 45­62. He does not seem to have become intimate with Lamb until 1813.

75. Letters of Charles and Mary Anne Lamb, ed. Marrs, ii (1976), p. 25.

76. George Eyre Evans, Vestiges of Protestant Dissent (Liverpool, 1897), p. 273.

77 See my '"Polemical Divinity": William Hazlitt at the University of Glasgow', Romanticism, 6. (2000), 163­77.

78. See British Library, Add. MS 37916, fol. 131.

79. Letters of Charles and Mary Anne Lamb, ii, p. 242.

80. This document is at British Library, Add. MS 62943, fols 23­24.

81. See Clive Cohen, So Great a Cloud: The Story of All Saints, Winterslow, 4 vols (Winterslow: Winterslow Parochial Church Council, 1995­99), ii (1999), p. 117. I am grateful to Archdeacon Cohen for assistance with these details.

82. I am grateful to Gina Douglas, Librarian and Archivist of the Linnean Society, for this information.

83. Collected Letters of Samuel Taylor Coleridge, ed. by Earl Leslie Griggs, 6 vols (Oxford, 1956­71), (hereafter Griggs), iii (1959), pp. 369­70.

84. The Journal of Margaret Hazlitt, ed. by Ernest J. Moyne (Lawrence, KS, 1967), p. 38. Letters of Wiche to the Revd Hazlitt appear among [Anon.], 'The Hazlitt Papers', in The Christian Reformer, 5 (1838), 505­12, 697­705, 756­64, and 6 (1839), 15­24.

85. Henry Crabb Robinson, Diary 1 (8 January 1811­8 December 1811), fol. 30v.

86. P. P. Howe, 'William Hazlitt', Notes and Queries, 12th series, 11 (22 July 1922), 70­71.

87. He is identified as such by Deirdre Coleman, Coleridge and The Friend (1809­1810) (Oxford, 1988), p. 195.

88. British Library, Add. MS 38898, fol. 43r.

89. British Library, Add. MS 52441, fol. 120v. I have not discovered what it was that upset Mackintosh.

90. See also J. R. Barker, 'John McCreery: A Radical Printer, 1768­1832', The Library, v, 16 (1961), 81­103.

91. British Library, Add. MS 78766, fol. 10v.

92. Bibliotheca Parriana: A Catalogue of the Library of the late Reverend and Learned Samuel Parr, LL. D. (London, 1827), p. 521.

93. Robinson, Diary 2, fol. 60v.

94. W. C. Hazlitt, The Hazlitts: An Account of their Origin and Descent (Edinburgh, 1911), p. 375.

95. See my 'Hazlitt's Essay on the Principles of Human Action: A Bibliographical Note' (n. 9 above).

96. [Sotheby], A Catalogue of the Entire and Valuable Miscellaneous Library of the late Sir Samuel Romilly ([London, 1819]), p. 25, lot 731.

97. Edward Wedlake Brayley, A Catalogue of the Library of the Russell Institution (1826).

98. Memoirs of William Hazlitt, i, p. 165.

99. R. S. Woof, 'John and Sarah Stoddart: Friends of the Lambs', Charles Lamb Bulletin, n.s. 45 (January 1984), 93­109 (p. 102). See also Stephen Burley, 'Hazlitt and John Stoddart: Brothers-in-Law or Brothers at War?', Charles Lamb Bulletin, n.s. 122 (April 2003), 52­63.

100. Jno. Swanwick Hincks to W. C. Hazlitt, 24 March 1873 (British Library, Add. MS 38901, fol. 385r).

101. Letters of Charles and Mary Anne Lamb, ii, p. 248.

102. Vaughan's father is mentioned in a letter of March 1788 written by Hazlitt to his father (Letters of William Hazlitt, p. 46).

103. For more on which, see Journal of Margaret Hazlitt, ed. Moyne, p. 38, and the present author's 'William Hazlitt (1737­1820), the Priestley Circle, and The Theological Repository: A Brief Survey and Bibliography', Review of English Studies, n.s. 56 (2005), 758­66 (pp. 761­62).

104. Wu, v, p. 376.

105. Literary Remains of the Late William Hazlitt, ed. by William Hazlitt Jr, 2 vols (London, 1836), i, p. 115.

106. Barbara Rosenbaum, Index to English Literary Manuscripts, iv: 1800­1900, part 2: Hardy-Lamb (London, 1990), p. 241.

107. Baker, William Hazlitt, pp. 185­86.