The Burning of Byron’s Memoirs (edited from B.L. Add.Mss. 56548 73v-87v)

Friday May 14th 1824

This morning at a little after eight o’clock I was roused by a loud tapping at my door, and on getting up had a packet of letters put into my hand, signed “Sidney Osborne”11 on the outside, with the words “By Express” above, and also a short note from Kinnaird.  I anticipated some dreadful news, and on opening Kinnaird’s note, found that Lord Byron was dead.  In an agony of grief such as I have experienced only twice before in my life – once when I lost my dear friend Charles Skinner Matthews12 in 1811, and afterwards when at Paris I heard my brother Benjamin had been killed at Waterloo / Quatre Bras13 – I opened the dispatches from Corfu, and there saw the details of the fatal event.

The letters were from Lord Sidney Osborne to me, from Count Gamba, Lord Byron’s companion,14 to me, from Count Gamba to Lord Sidney Osborne, and from the same to our Consul at Zante.15  Besides these there were letters from Fletcher, Byron’s valet, to Mrs Leigh,16 to Captain George (now Lord) Byron, and to (Fletcher’s) his wife.  Also there were four copies of a Greek proclamation by the provincial Government of Missolonghi, with a translation.17  The whole of these documents spoke the intense grief of everybody at this great calamity.  The proclamation described my dear departed friend’s illness of ten days – the public anxiety during that period – his death – the universal dejection and almost despair … then the proclamation decreed that all the shops should be shut for three days, that the Easter festivals should be suspended, that a general mourning of twenty days should take place, and that at sunrise the next morning, the twentieth of April, thirty-seven minute guns should be fired from the batteries of the town to commemorate the age of the deceased – he was in his thirty-seventh year.

I read this proclamation over and over again in order to find some consolation in the glorious conclusion of his life for the loss of such a man – but in vain: all our ancient and most familiar intercourse – the pleasure I had enjoyed in looking back to the days of our amusements at home and our travels abroad – the fond hope with which I had contemplated over again in our own country renewing the more than brotherly union which had bound us together – all our tokens of regard – nay even our trifling differences – all burst upon me and rendered me alive only to the deprivation I was now doomed to endure.

Afterwards I saw the account of his last illness by Fletcher in a letter to Mrs Leigh18 – which letter she copied for me.  The reading this letter tore my heart to pieces.  It showed the boundless and tender attachment of all about him to my dear, dear friend – I shall keep it for ever.  It seems he had but imperfectly recovered from the violent epileptic fit which had seized him on the 15th of February19 – he had even had a slight return of it – but his death was owing to his being caught in a hard shower of rain when riding near Missolonghi.  A fever ensued – he refused to be bled, and his physicians, young men, did not press him much but put it off from day to day.  Fletcher says he was on his knees with tears in his eyes and implored him to be bled – at last he consented,20 but Fletcher says it was then too late – he became delirious – and then for the last twenty-four hours neither spoke nor moved.21  He died on the nineteenth of April at six o’clock in the evening.  It is most afflicting to think that with good care he might have recovered, and yet it is possible that in his very reduced state he might not have been able to bear bleeding.  To fancy that he might have been saved, and was not, doubles our regret.  I shall take some calmer moment for recording some of the particulars of this calamity.

I sent for Sir Francis Burdett and Mr Kinnaird – both of whom were much afflicted … the former kindly undertook the painful duty of informing Mrs Leigh of the event, the latter transmitted other letters from Lord Sidney Osborne to various correspondents, and went to the evening newspaper office to make the intelligence public by the speediest means.

After the first access of grief was over I then determined to lose no time in doing my duty by preserving all that was left to me of my dear friend – his fame: my thoughts were turned to the Memoirs of his Life, given to Thomas Moore, and deposited by him in Mr Murray’s hands for certain considerations.22  It had so happened that a few days before Thomas Moore had told me that he had made an effort to get the Memoirs out of Mr Murray’s hands by coming to some arrangement with Messrs Longman’s the booksellers, who had promised to advance him 2,000 guineas on his insuring his life,23 which soon would enable Moore to repay Murray the loan advanced to him.  I was not aware whether or not the money had actually been paid to Murray, and consequently in whose hands the Memoirs were.

I called on Kinnaird, it being agreed that Burdett and I should dine with him.  Kinnaird very generously wrote a letter to Moore offering to give him £2,000 at once in order to secure the MSS in whose ever hands it was, for the family of Lord Byron – that is to say, in order to destroy the same MSS.24  Burdett came in before the note was written, and he also offered to give the £2,000.  I said I should be glad to give £1,000, or whatever I could, for such a purpose, but Kinnaird persisted in sending his note, and it was sent.  Kinnaird said at the same time that he doubted not the family of Lord Byron or Lady Byron would see the propriety of repaying the money.

We had a melancholy evening, recalling to mind the various excellencies of our dear friend – I shall never forget this dreadful day …

I should have mentioned <the Saturday Mr> [that] at Mrs Leigh’s desire I called on her – she was in a <dreadful> afflicting condition.  She gave me Fletcher’s letter to read, and I could not restrain my sorrow, but again burst out in uncontrollable lamentation: but when recovered I thought it right to engage Mrs Leigh not to communicate, to any but the nearest friends, one part of the letter, which mentioned that since Lord Byron’s fit on the fifteenth of February, he had placed on his breakfast table a bible every morning.  This circumstance, which pleased his valet Fletcher, I was afraid might be mistaken for cowardice or hypocrisy,25 and I was anxious that no idle stories to his discredit should get abroad.  I dare say that the bible was on his table – I have long recollected his having one near him – it was a volume given to him by his sister,26 and I remember well seeing it on his table at Pisa in 1822; but, unless his mind was shaken by disease, I am confident he made no superstitious use of it – that is to say, I am confident that although he might have a general belief in its contents, he was not overcome by any religious terrors.  He has often said to me, “It may be true – it is, as D’Alembert said, a grand peut-être”;27 but I own that I think he was rather inclined to take the opposite line of thinking when I saw him at Pisa, for when I remonstrated with him on the freedom of some of his later writing in that respect, he said, “What, are you canting?”  He then protested he would tell his opinions boldly, let what would be the consequences.  Both Burdett and Kinnaird were anxious as well as myself that no rumours prejudicial to his fame respecting his last moments should get abroad – and we therefore resolved to know the contents of Fletcher’s letters to Mr Murray and to his wife.  This we accomplished by giving those letters to the parties themselves – Mr Murray read the letter for him to me, and Mrs Fletcher did the same for Kinnaird – they contained nothing but the expression that “my lord died a good Xtian”.

Mrs Leigh seemed to view the subject in the same point of view as myself, and promised to be discreet.  Captain George Byron (now, alas, Lord Byron) went down this evening to Beckenham in Kent to communicate the tidings to Lady Byron.

Saturday May 15th 1824

I sent for Mr Murray, to give him Fletcher’s letter28 and also to sound him respecting the Memoirs – for I own I did him the injustice to think he might prove the obstacle to their destruction.  He came.  Whilst he was with me Tom Moore’s card was put into my hand, and Moore was shown into the other room.

Murray was truly affected.  He proceeded to speak of the Memoirs – told me they were still in his hands, that Moore had talked of paying the money, but had not done it.  He then added that he had thought of giving up the MSS at once to Mr Wilmot Horton,29 to be by him delivered to Lady Byron or Mrs Leigh – as for the money he had advanced to Moore, he did not care whether he got it or not.

It is as well to record here that after Moore had found out that Lord Holland and others, as well as myself, disapprove very much of the original transaction respecting the Memoirs – namely that Moore should raise money on them, and that they should be published at Lord Byron’s death – he had determined to alter the nature of the agreement between himself and Murray, to which Murray very generously, as Moore told me at the time, consented.  He gave the MSS into Murray’s keeping, but he gave Murray a bond for 2,000 guineas that Murray lent him on the occasion, and he cancelled the original assignment, or rather explained it away by another agreement, which was drawn up and signed by both parties, so that in fact Moore was a simple debtor to Murray of 2,000 guineas, and the Memoirs were in fact only a sort of honourable pledge to induce Moore to repay the money and recover the MSS.  I was not aware until afterwards of the exact nature of this agreement, as will be seen.

—
—

Seeing Murray in the proper frame of mind, I ventured to say to him that he should not lose the 2,000 which he had lent to Moore, and that I would undertake, if he delivered the MSS up to Mrs Leigh, that he should be repaid what he had advanced.  He made no difficulty about this, but said as he had communicated with Mr Wilmot Horton, he should like that gentleman to be a party to the transaction.  I made no objection, of course.

I then spoke to him of the many letters of Lord Byron in his possession, and conjured him to destroy whatever writing of his might be discreditable to his fame.  Murray solemnly promised he would do so.30  He went away.

I called in Thomas Moore – his first address showed me the difference between his feelings and the bookseller’s.  He began talking about some work of mine.  We then went to business about the Memoirs.  He complained of Murray – he said he had received Kinnaird’s note – he would not let anyone pay the money – he would pay the money himself – he thought it shameful that Murray had not told me the MSS were his (Moore’s).  He had no objection to delivering the MSS to Mrs Leigh, but he would do it himself – he would have the grace of this sacrifice himself.31  He would take the MSS home with him.

All this rather pleased me except the latter part – I did not like his taking the MSS home, considering all that had passed before – especially as he told me that he had suffered several people to see the MSS abroad, and that Lady Burghersh at Florence32 had actually copied a great part of them – which copy, however, Moore had seen her burn.  I could not help expressing my astonishment that Moore should have ever shown the MSS, much less have suffered them to be taken out of his sight.  He told me Lord Byron had wished him to do so – but he afterwards owned that Lord Byron’s expressions were “Show them to the elect”.  Now it was impossible Byron should mean by these words any person to whom Moore wished to show his intimacy with Lord Byron – which was the true motive for showing about these unjustifiable Memoirs.  Moore also told me that the first part of the Memoirs contained nothing objectionable except one anecdote, namely, that Lord Byron had Lady Byron on the sofa before dinner on the day of their marriage33 – and Moore actually showed this to Lady Burghersh and others!!!34  When I told this to Burdett, he said, “He ought to have had his brains knocked out for doing so – that, is for showing it”.35

The second part contained all sorts of erotic adventures, and Gifford of the Quarterly, who read it at Murray’s request, said that the whole Memoirs were fit only for a brothel, and would damn Lord Byron to certain infamy if published.36  Knowing all this, I was anxious to get the MSS destroyed at once,37 so I proposed that Moore should walk with me to Douglas Kinnaird’s.  We went there and found Douglas Kinnaird at home.  Kinnaird entered at once into my views, but agreed with Moore that he ought to have the grace of the sacrifice as the property was his.  Kinnaird then drew out a paper in these words as a guide for me in communication with Murray:

Moore agreed to this paper, only saying that it looked too much like a bargain, and that if his friends had transactions with him, they would have trusted more to his honour.  He then said (what I shall never forget), “I hope after this sacrifice that if any memoirs are to be written, the family will give me the preference”.  Kinnaird said, “I think they ought”.  I added, “Why – that must be for consideration”.38

Here was a specimen of a poet’s friendship!!  It was like Rousseau consoling himself for Claude Anet’s loss by thinking he should get his old coat!39

I went to Murray’s with my paper.40  Murray agreed to it, with this addition:

I undertook for this additional sum.  Murray then said that, having spoken to Mr Wilmot Horton, he wished that gentleman to be present on the occasion when the MSS were burnt.

I left Murray and called on Mrs Leigh – told her of the purposed destruction of the MSS – she did not at first understand it – but was much pleased afterwards.41

Captain George Byron came into us – he was much affected – he had seen Lady Byron, and told me she was in a distressing state.  She had said she had no right to be considered by Lord Byron’s friends, but she had her feelings.  She wished to see any accounts that had come of his last moments.  I agreed to send my letters down to her by Captain Byron, and I did so.

This day I dined with my family in Berkeley Square.

Sunday May 16th 1824

Moore and Kinnaird called.  I communicated Murray’s assent to the proposal – Moore then began to abuse Murray, and he also threw out hints again that he did not think his feelings of honour had been sufficiently relied upon – “He might have been trusted,” &c., &c., but he would do what he had promised.  The money was ready and would be paid tomorrow at twelve.  Kinnaird said the sooner the better.  I mentioned that Murray had said he hoped if any memoirs were published he should have the preference – Tom Moore decried this, forgetting he had made the very same stipulation.  Kinnaird went away, he being on the moment of departing for Scotland.

Moore began to talk on the same subject.  He then, for the first time, said he would not be present at the burning of the MSS I told him I thought he had better be there – it would be a satisfaction to him to be able to say hereafter, if any spurious work appeared, “I saw the Memoirs burnt” – he said no, but he would think of it.  He talked of Lord Byron’s friendships, and said he had told him in his last letter that he never felt safe when absent from him – that he feared stones might be suddenly generated in the higher regions of his fancy and even in the serenest sky might drop down and crush him (Moore).  Byron’s answer to this was pettish42 – I told Moore that Byron did not like being suspected.

Moore then asked me if we had been as good friends during our last interview at Pisa in 1822 as we used to be!!!43 – a delicate question, quite of a piece with all the other conduct of Tom Moore respecting Byron – whom I am confident he did not like, and never forgave for his satire in English Bards &c. against him.44

Moore at last went away, agreeing to be at Mrs Leigh’s with the money next day at twelve.  Sir Francis Burdett called.  My dear sisters Sophia and Matilda came.  When Burdett was gone, I showed them the copy of Fletcher’s letter to Mrs Leigh, and went upstairs – on coming down I found them in floods of tears, such had been the effect of this simple narrative of the last moments of my dear friend on their tender hearts.  They continued weeping during their visit.

Indeed, I see by the papers that the regret is universal – the loss is felt to be a national loss.45  Party feeling is suspended in the contemplation of the genius of our fellow-countryman, and of sympathy with him for the great cause, to promote which he may fairly be said to have died.  The Times of yesterday announced his death in a manner which is I think a fair sample of the general opinion in this event.

The writer, is, however, mistaken in saying that others may have “been more tenderly beloved than Lord Byron”,46 for no man ever lived who had such devoted friends.  His power of attaching those about him was such as no-one I ever knew possessed – no human being could approach him without being sensible of this magical influence.  There was something commanding but not overawing in his manner.  He was neither grave nor gay out of place, and he seemed always made for that company in which he found himself.47  There was a mildness and yet a decision in his mode of conversing, and even in his address, which are seldom united in the same person.  He appeared exceedingly free, open, and unreserved with everybody, yet he contrived at all times to retain just as much self-restraint as to preserve the respect of even his most intimate friends – so much so that those who lived most with him were seldom if ever witnesses of any weakness of character that could sink him in their esteem.  He was full of sensibility, but he did not suffer his feelings to betray him into absurdities.  There never was a person who by his air, deportment, and appearance altogether <gave one> decidedly persuaded you at once that he was well-born and well-bred – he was, as Kinnaird said of him, “a gallant gentleman”.48

The influence he had acquired in Greece was extraordinary, and he had exerted it in a manner most useful to her cause.  Lord Sidney Osborne, writing to Mrs Leigh, says that had he never written a line in his life he had <already> done enough in the last six months in Greece to immortalise his name.  He adds that no-one unacquainted with the circumstances of the case can have any idea of the difficulties he has overcome: he has reconciled the contending parties, he has given a character of humanity and civilisation to their warfare, and he has contrived to prevent their offending their powerful neighbours in the Ionian Islands.49  Sir Frederick Adam, in a dispatch to Lord Bathurst,50 bears testimony, I hear, to his great qualities, and laments his death as depriving the Ionian government of the only man with whom they could act with safety.

His friend Gamba says in his letter to me that, “though cut off in the flower of his age in the midst of his hopes”, Byron will “always be regarded” as the saviour of Greece – “always!”  Mavrocordato, in his letter to Bowring,51 calls him “a great man”, and confesses himself almost ignorant how to act when deprived of such a coadjutator.

Monday May 17th 1824

On getting up this morning I found two letters on my table, one from Murray, to whom I had written desiring him to be with the MSS at Mrs Leigh’s at twelve o’clock, and who now announced that he could not be there, and another from Moore in these words:

I immediately went without breakfasting, and met Moore in Albany Yard.54  I expostulated with him on changing his mind respecting the immediate and total destruction of the MSS without reading them.  At last I said that he must excuse me for telling him that if the matter were ever publicly discussed I must say what I thought of the whole transaction.  He quoted Lord Lansdowne’s and Rogers’ opinions.  I said I cared for no man’s opinion – I had his agreement – I was born all my life to be in a minority – but I was certain that in this case there was but one line for a man of honour and for a friend of Lord Byron to take.  He proposed my going with him to Luttrell in Albany.  I went, but Luttrell agreed to come to me.  Moore and I returned to my rooms.

Presently Murray came, and afterwards Luttrell.  On hearing that Moore proposed that the MSS should be read, and extracts made for publication, Murray became angry.  He sat down, and with a very determined voice and manner protested that the MSS should be burnt forthwith, according to Moore’s written proposal.  Moore then said that the MSS was his, and that he had now a right to redeem them, upon which Murray said as follows – “I do not care whose the MSS are – here am I as a tradesman – I do not care a farthing about having your money, or whether I ever get it or not – but such regard have I for Lord Byron’s honour and fame that I am willing and determined to destroy these MSS which have been read by Mr Gifford, who says they would render Lord Byron’s name eternally infamous.  It is very hard that I as a tradesman should be willing to make a sacrifice that you as a gentleman will not consent to!!”  Moore replied something to this, when Murray rose and said, “By God, then I say I will burn the papers, let come what will of it – you agreed to it – you proposed it – you have acted anything but like a man of honour!”

Moore said, “Go on sir, you know you may say what you like”.55  Luttrell now and then put in a word, saying he could see no harm in reading the MSS I took the other side, and insisted very strongly on the impropriety of such a proceeding.  Moore said that both Wilmot Horton and Colonel Doyle, friends of Lady Byron’s family, saw no objection as to the perusal of the MSS I said I could hardly believe that.  Murray said that these gentlemen were waiting at his house in order to see the MSS burnt.56

On this we agreed all to go to Murray’s.  We went there.  We found Horton and Doyle.57  The former had just finished a letter to Murray, which he read us.  We then proceeded to discuss the matter.  It appeared that Moore had stated a naked case to Doyle and Wilmot Horton, and on this they had given their opinion; but when they came to know of Moore’s written proposal – when they came to know of Mrs Leigh’s wish that the MSS should be destroyed at once – they both allowed nothing else could be done, and urged the necessity to Moore.  I added to this that Lord Byron in 1822 had to me personally certainly expressed himself very strongly as being of my opinion as to the unfitness of making use of the MSS as originally intended.58

We had a good deal of squabbling, Moore still struggling against the burning.  At last, when the MSS, and a copy made under Moore’s inspection, had been brought up, and Wilmot Horton had declared that it was unnecessary to proceed to Mrs Leigh’s, as he had her permission to see the MSS burnt for her, Moore was obliged to consent, but he said, “Recollect I told you, Hobhouse, I would be no party to the burning”. – “No”, said I, “you did not – you only said you could not be present at the burning – and when I replied that I thought it would be more satisfactory to you afterwards if you were, you said you would think of it”.  I continued telling him that I had no notion whatever that he made any objection to the destruction of the MSS – Indeed, he had said that if Lord Byron had lived long the MSS might have been considered as an early frolic, but his dying so soon after the writing altered the case.  Moore still remonstrated, saying “Remember I protest against the burning as contradictory to Lord Byron’s wishes and unjust to me”. – “That is not in the bond”,59 said I, holding his proposal out to him.60  Moore said, “Shylock and his bond!” – “Whatever you please”, I replied, “but I protest against your protestation, which you never said a word of originally”.

Someone61 then started whether or not it would be better to deposit the MSS under seals somewhere in order to compare them with any spurious copy that might be published – this was overruled.62  Colonel Doyle lastly said to Moore, “I understand then that you stand to your original proposal to put the MSS into Mrs Leigh’s absolute disposal?” – “I do”, said Moore, “but with the <former> protestation”. – “Well then”, said Doyle – “I put them into the fire” – accordingly Wilmot and Doyle tore up the MSS, and the copy, and burnt them.63

“Now,” said I, “remains to pay the money, and to have the bonds, agreements &c. returned”.  Murray went downstairs, and returned, saying he could not find the <bond> agreement.64  This gave rise to another dispute, about whom the property was really rested in.65  Moore contended he had three months time allowed him after Lord Byron’s decease to redeem the MSS.  At last Murray’s solicitor appeared with a foul-copy of the second agreement, entered into at the time Moore received the money from Murray – there appeared nothing like it in that agreement.  At last the solicitor returned with the original, which did contain the stipulation as to the three months, but of a totally different nature, for it appeared the MSS could not be redeemed by Moore, except during Lord Byron’s life – and that Murray could not publish the MSS except in three months after Lord Byron’s death.66  A most important passage there was in the agreement – namely, that the motive for entering into this agreement was said to be “Lord Byron’s and Mr Moore’s not now inclining to make the said MSS public”.

This was, to be sure, a complete confirmation of all I had said – and I certainly did ask Moore how he could have possibly forgotten such a particular.  He said, he did not remember it.  He also said he did not know whether he had a copy of the agreement, and he repeated, what I have heard him say before, that he had not read the original indenture which I had complained of to Lord Byron giving up his fame and letters and friends and all to Murray and to Murray’s executors to be biographied by Moore, or if Moore were dead, by any one appointed by Murray or by Murray’s executors.  This indenture Doyle and Wilmot read – before we burnt it.

Moore now pulled the money out of his pocket, and put it on the table.  Murray said he would not take it – he had as it now turned out destroyed, not Moore’s, but his own property, and he would not take any money for that.  Moore insisted that he thought the MSS his own when he consented to the burning, and he would pay it.  At last Murray seemed to have some influence on Moore, but Luttrell said, “Recollect, Moore, you have had the money of Murray”, so the money was paid, and the bond was given up to Moore – Murray kept the agreement.

Previously to our going away, Murray expressed his regret at having used hard words to Moore.  I also said, “Moore, I am sorry I was obliged to <use/>tell you what I thought – but I did so to Lord Byron respecting the original transaction – and I do so to you.  Besides, I felt that by changing your mind as to the burning of the MSS you had compromised me with Mrs Leigh and Lady Byron”.

Moore replied, “I kept watching your words – you did not go beyond the bounds – if you had I should have stopped you”.67  I told Luttrell that the harshest thing I said to Moore was said in private – “If offence had been meant I should [have] said it publicly”.

Moore and Luttrell went away.  Murray spoke to me about the propriety of Murray’s family reimbursing Moore, and said he should advise it.  I ran after Moore and Luttrell, and told [them] this.  Luttrell agreed, and I did not think that Moore objected much – he told me a story of an Irishman who being asked why sentence should not be passed upon him said, “Oh by Jesus you have settled it all very nicely amongst you”.68  I laughed, and replied, “It is all your own fault – if it had not been for that Irish honour of yours, Murray would have burnt the MSS – and you would have had no return of money to make … now it appears Murray was right, Kinnaird was right, I was right, and you were wrong.”

Luttrell quoted “Father Foigard’s preference of taking money logice”,69 and so we parted.

My impression certainly was that Moore regretted he had paid the money, and was willing to get it for the family again.

Called on Mrs Leigh.

I called in Berkeley Square and walked a little – at half-past six came home to dine, and found this letter lying on my table:

I dined, then I went and found Sir Francis Burdett at Brooke’s.  I told him all the story, and communicated my resolution to give no answer at all to Moore, who had no right to ask such a declaration of me at any rate, particularly after he had told me he had watched my words and would have stopped me if I had gone beyond due limits.  I asked Burdett to call with me on Luttrell the next morning and to hear his opinion.

Burdett joined with me in regretting that Moore should have played such a part throughout the whole transaction, but attributed it to “his poverty and his vanity” which to be sure is the best excuse to be made for him.71

I should mention that this day I received a curious message from Lady Byron through Captain George (Lord) Byron.  It was that she wished me to give out that I should write Lord Byron’s memoirs, in conjunction with the assistance of the family, including Lady Byron – as that would stop all spurious efforts and would be particularly agreeable to her.  I returned for answer that I had no spirits now nor inclination for undertaking or thinking of any such task.

Poor Byron! here is his dear friend Tom Moore – his publisher Murray – and his wife – the first thing they think of is of writing his life or on getting it written – such are the friendships of great authors!!72

I passed the evening in Berkeley Square.