Leveson Gower appeals to internal as well as external evidence,
(1) He regards the great inferiority of _Werner_ to Byron's published
plays, and to the genuine (hitherto) unpublished first act, together
with the wholesale plagiarisms from Miss Lee's story, as an additional
proof that the work was none of his.
(1) He regards the great inferiority of _Werner_ to Byron's published
plays, and to the genuine (hitherto) unpublished first act, together
with the wholesale plagiarisms from Miss Lee's story, as an additional
proof that the work was none of his.
Byron
to her niece, Lady Caroline Ponsonby (better known as Lady
Caroline Lamb), and that she, some years later, handed it over to Lord
Byron, who, in 1822, published it in his own name;" (2) a letter written
in 1822 by his mother, Lady Granville, to her sister, Lady Carlisle,
which asserts that their mother, the duchess, "wrote an entire tragedy
from Miss Lee's _Kreutzner the Hungarian_ (_sic_)," and that the MS. had
been sent to her by Lady Caroline's brother, Mr. William Ponsonby, and
was in her possession; (3) another letter of Lady Granville's, dated
December 3, 1822, in which she informs her sister that her husband, Lord
Granville, had promised to read _Werner_ aloud to her (i. e. Byron's
_Werner_, published November 23, 1822), a promise which, if fulfilled,
must have revealed one of two things--the existence of two dramas based
on Miss Lee's _Kruitzner_, or the identity of Byron's version with that
of the duchess. Now, argues Mr. Leveson Gower, if Lady Granville had
known that two dramas were in existence, she would not have allowed her
daughter, Lady Georgiana Fullerton, to believe "that the duchess was the
author of the published poem. "
I will deal with the external evidence first. Practically it amounts to
this: (1) that Lady Granville knew that her mother, the Duchess of
Devonshire, dramatized Miss Lee's _Kruitzner_; and (2) that Lady
Georgiana Fullerton believed that the duchess gave the MS. of her play
to Lady Caroline Ponsonby, and that, many years after, Lady Caroline
handed it over to Byron.
The external evidence establishes the fact that the Duchess of
Devonshire dramatized _Kruitzner_, but it does not prove that Byron
purloined her adaptation. It records an unverified impression on the
part of the duchess's granddaughter, that the MS. of a play written
between the years 1801-1806, passed into Byron's hands about the year
1813; that he took a copy of the MS. ; and that in 1821-22 he caused his
copy to be retranscribed and published under his own name.
But Mr.
Leveson Gower appeals to internal as well as external evidence,
(1) He regards the great inferiority of _Werner_ to Byron's published
plays, and to the genuine (hitherto) unpublished first act, together
with the wholesale plagiarisms from Miss Lee's story, as an additional
proof that the work was none of his. (2) He notes, as a suspicious
circumstance, that "while the rough copies of his other poems have been
preserved, no rough copy of _Werner_ is to be found. "
In conclusion, he deals with two possible objections which may be
brought against his theory: (1) that Byron would not have incurred the
risk of detection at the hands of the owners of the duchess's MS. ; and
(2) that a great poet of assured fame and reputation could have had no
possible motive for perpetrating a literary fraud. The first objection
he answers by assuming that Byron would have counted on the reluctance
of the "Ponsonby family and the daughters of the Duchess" to rake up the
ashes of old scandals; the second, by pointing out that, in 1822, he was
making "frantic endeavours to obtain money, not for himself, but to help
the cause of Greece. "
(1) With regard to the marked inferiority of _Werner_ to Byron's other
plays, and the relative proportion of adapted to original matter, Mr.
Leveson Gower appears to have been misled by the disingenuous criticism
of Maginn and other contemporary reviewers (_vide_ the Introduction,
etc. , p. 326). There is no such inferiority, and the plagiarisms, which
were duly acknowledged, are confined to certain limited portions of the
play. (2) There is nothing unusual in the fact that the rough draft of
_Werner_ cannot be found. In fact, but few of the early drafts of the
dramas and other poems written in the later Italian days ever reached
Murray's hands, or are still in existence. The fair copy for the printer
alone was sent home. The time had gone by when Byron's publisher, who
was also his friend, would stipulate that "all the original MSS. ,
copies and scraps" should fall to his share. But no argument can be
founded on so insignificant a circumstance.
Caroline Lamb), and that she, some years later, handed it over to Lord
Byron, who, in 1822, published it in his own name;" (2) a letter written
in 1822 by his mother, Lady Granville, to her sister, Lady Carlisle,
which asserts that their mother, the duchess, "wrote an entire tragedy
from Miss Lee's _Kreutzner the Hungarian_ (_sic_)," and that the MS. had
been sent to her by Lady Caroline's brother, Mr. William Ponsonby, and
was in her possession; (3) another letter of Lady Granville's, dated
December 3, 1822, in which she informs her sister that her husband, Lord
Granville, had promised to read _Werner_ aloud to her (i. e. Byron's
_Werner_, published November 23, 1822), a promise which, if fulfilled,
must have revealed one of two things--the existence of two dramas based
on Miss Lee's _Kruitzner_, or the identity of Byron's version with that
of the duchess. Now, argues Mr. Leveson Gower, if Lady Granville had
known that two dramas were in existence, she would not have allowed her
daughter, Lady Georgiana Fullerton, to believe "that the duchess was the
author of the published poem. "
I will deal with the external evidence first. Practically it amounts to
this: (1) that Lady Granville knew that her mother, the Duchess of
Devonshire, dramatized Miss Lee's _Kruitzner_; and (2) that Lady
Georgiana Fullerton believed that the duchess gave the MS. of her play
to Lady Caroline Ponsonby, and that, many years after, Lady Caroline
handed it over to Byron.
The external evidence establishes the fact that the Duchess of
Devonshire dramatized _Kruitzner_, but it does not prove that Byron
purloined her adaptation. It records an unverified impression on the
part of the duchess's granddaughter, that the MS. of a play written
between the years 1801-1806, passed into Byron's hands about the year
1813; that he took a copy of the MS. ; and that in 1821-22 he caused his
copy to be retranscribed and published under his own name.
But Mr.
Leveson Gower appeals to internal as well as external evidence,
(1) He regards the great inferiority of _Werner_ to Byron's published
plays, and to the genuine (hitherto) unpublished first act, together
with the wholesale plagiarisms from Miss Lee's story, as an additional
proof that the work was none of his. (2) He notes, as a suspicious
circumstance, that "while the rough copies of his other poems have been
preserved, no rough copy of _Werner_ is to be found. "
In conclusion, he deals with two possible objections which may be
brought against his theory: (1) that Byron would not have incurred the
risk of detection at the hands of the owners of the duchess's MS. ; and
(2) that a great poet of assured fame and reputation could have had no
possible motive for perpetrating a literary fraud. The first objection
he answers by assuming that Byron would have counted on the reluctance
of the "Ponsonby family and the daughters of the Duchess" to rake up the
ashes of old scandals; the second, by pointing out that, in 1822, he was
making "frantic endeavours to obtain money, not for himself, but to help
the cause of Greece. "
(1) With regard to the marked inferiority of _Werner_ to Byron's other
plays, and the relative proportion of adapted to original matter, Mr.
Leveson Gower appears to have been misled by the disingenuous criticism
of Maginn and other contemporary reviewers (_vide_ the Introduction,
etc. , p. 326). There is no such inferiority, and the plagiarisms, which
were duly acknowledged, are confined to certain limited portions of the
play. (2) There is nothing unusual in the fact that the rough draft of
_Werner_ cannot be found. In fact, but few of the early drafts of the
dramas and other poems written in the later Italian days ever reached
Murray's hands, or are still in existence. The fair copy for the printer
alone was sent home. The time had gone by when Byron's publisher, who
was also his friend, would stipulate that "all the original MSS. ,
copies and scraps" should fall to his share. But no argument can be
founded on so insignificant a circumstance.
