xt7qjq0stw34_2382 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7qjq0stw34/data/mets.xml https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7qjq0stw34/data/1997ms474.dao.xml unknown archival material 1997ms474 English University of Kentucky The physical rights to the materials in this collection are held by the University of Kentucky Special Collections Research Center.  Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. W. Hugh Peal manuscript collection Edward Verrall Lucas letter to Ernest Dressel North text 43.94 Cubic Feet 86 boxes, 4 oversize boxes, 22 items Poor-Good Peal accession no. 11453. Edward Verrall Lucas letter to Ernest Dressel North 2017 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7qjq0stw34/data/1997ms474/Box_23/Folder_41/Multipage8135.pdf 1901 March 29 1901 1901 March 29 
  Scope and Contents
  
Peal accession no. 8803b. Includes a transcript.
 section false xt7qjq0stw34_2382 xt7qjq0stw34  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 86 Great Portland St., W.,
March 29,1901.

Mr.E.D.North,

Dear Sir:

With regard first and all to the necessity of a new

edition of Charles Lamb, I agree with you that for the ordinary reader
Canon Ainger's edition is admirable. But to those at all interested
in the complexities of Lamb's character, to those who hold his person-
ality so rare and precious that no expression of it is unimportant,
Canon Ainger'le'a-ve5wyery much to such. I have now been giving from
two to five hours a day to Charles Lamb for five and one-half months,
following upon less concentrated study for some years previously,
working with Ainger's edition (the new one) as a basis, and I have
found it a dissapointment in every way except in the charming intro-
ductions. The text of the "Elia" is practically accurate. I should
like you to see my collations of the text of the essays that Leah did
not collect himself. The poems too, are very 1ax-- "Ingenious Hone"
for "Ingenuous" for example, persists right into the edition "De Luxe";
but when it comes to the letters (and I have had the opportunity of
collating some 100 already) the discrepancies amount to something more
than carelessness. The unrevised omissions of sentiments superficially

discordant with Sunday School dogma, are numerous, and to my mind to

omit, without notifying an omission, amounts to a kind of fraud. If
the Fortnightly Review of April, which I am positing to you reaches

 

 2.

its destination, you will find the record of a sufficient kind of
emissions from a letter which Canon Ainger had every opportunity of
printing exactly as it was written, very slight maybe but also very
significant and necessary to a true Lamb zealot. Pray, don't think
that I wish in any way to belittle Canon Ainger- I do not, but his
theory of editing and mine are totally different, and it is

I hold, for Lamb to be ecclesiastized, so to speak. I am vain enough to
think that a renegade Quaker can come nigher to him than a practising
Canon, that is all.\\ Apart however, from errors of transcription and
omissions, I have already brought together some score of poems, a dozen
or so of letters (although this part of my task is only part beginning)
and some twenty thousand words of prose never yet collected and indis—
.putably Lamb's. These alone, I think, constitute justification for a
new edition; also I am doing to them as never before done- I am putting
those illustrations that are necessary, such as plate of Hogarth in
the Hogarth essay; the Witch of Endor from Stach ”C Bible, etc.
This particular feature will for awhile at any rate distinguish the
edition from any other, but it is sure to be copied-- I pray not

anticipated.

One little point Canon Ainger and Definitiveness. The Jno.

Woodvil notes in the Antheneum were written largely in his interest, as
Dykes Campbell points out at the beginning; yet not a hint of this or
of the interesting new readings of the play appear in the De Luxe. I
am quoting them entire an an appendix to the poetry volume.

Now as regards your material. When I wrote, it did not occur

to me that there would be any chance of your co~operation in the way

you name. I am thinking merely of engaging a copyist through your kind

 

 assistance, and getting leave for him to work. But your letter puts
a totally different complexion on the case, I hardly know what to say.
The edition has already, owing to copyright difficulties, been more
expensive than the publishers ever wanted it to be, but I am sending
your suggestion to Methuen to-day. Would you mind telling me the
value you place on your collations and your copies of letters never yet
printed in any edition, together with permission to use the work, also
the number of new letters you have and their recipients? I am not
particularly anxious to publish these first (provided I may include
them), my edition of the letters not being due until 1905 I think. I
do not want to interfere with your "Lamb in America" project at all,
although I was hoping to have an appendix to the life containing
marginalia from his library. I have three books prepared:- Milton,

Beaumont Fletcher and Wither. Possibly Methuen has not arranged his

American Editions. If Scribner were to have it, could you not add

your American notes volume to it? This is a sudden thought- probably

quite worthless, but you will understand my anxiety to be as complete

as possible and those American letters are so necessary.

{jfiflp' Meanwhile, I shall be glad if you will give me an idea of the
cost of allowing me to use in this country (returning the copy to you)
your collations of letters only, that is, provided I have convinced you
that my edition has the right to be, and I thank you very much for
your letter and its enclosure.

Believe me,

Yours faithfully,

E.V.Lucas.