102
NOTES AND QUERIES. m s. iv. ACG. 5, 1911.
MR. HERBERT B. CLAYTON on the 9th of
November, 1901, in reference to Thackeray's
early writings, gives a romance of the sale-
room mentioned by The Era of the 14th of
the previous September. The incident was
recalled by the death of Mr. John Taylor,
the Northampton bookseller. He had
placed in his catalogue a copy of * The
Exquisites,' pricing it at half-a-crown.
Not selling it, he sent it to Sotheby's, and
obtained 58 for it.
MR. RICHARD H. THORNTON, who was then residing in Oregon, asks on the 9th of March, 1901 : " Why was Thackeray's drawing of the Marquis of Steyne suppressed in the second and later editions of ' Vanity Fair ' ? " This brought a reply from LORD SHERBORNE, which appeared in ' N. & Q.' on the 30th of March, and which is so important that I reproduce it in full :
" The legend that the original portrait of the Marquis of Steyne was withdrawn because Lord Lansdowne was offended at the likeness which it bore to him (which it undoubtedly did) has already appeared in ' N. & Q.' It occurred to me to refer the matter to probably the one person now alive who could speak autho- ritatively on the subject, viz., my aunt, Lady Louisa Howard, Lord Lansdowne's only daughter. Her answer is so interesting that I think it deserves to be recorded in full in the pages of ' N. & Q.' : Hazelby, Newbury, March 15, 1901.
DEAR SHERBORNE, I am sorry I did not answer your letter at once about my father, as no one who knew my father could have believed it for a moment, but I waited to see if I could recollect anything that might have led- to such an absurd idea. I never myself met Thackeray at Lans- downe House, or heard of him there, but a friend of mine tells me she did so several times in his later years, and I feel sure the acquaintance began long after ' Vanity Fair ' was published. My brother lent us the early numbers to read as they came out, but I did not finish it till the edition of 1849 which I imagine was the first but I never heard a word of any supposed likeness to my father in any of the illustrations. If any such was pointed out to him, he would have only laughed and taken no further notice, and I am sure never imagined that the character of Lord Steyne, if he had read it, could be pointed at him. I remember hearing at the time that Lord Hertford was supposed to be suggested : certainly no part of it suits my father, except perhaps a taste for pictures and the title.
I wonder who started the idea in Notes and Queries, and what it was founded on. I have been looking at the illustrations in my copy of ' Vanity Pair,' in hopes of seeing a likeness of my father, which would be curious, as in the caricatures of the day he was never a real like- ness, only a conventional sort of face.
I hope some one will take up and answer in Notes and Queries, but the lapse of time reduces the number of his friends and contemporaries over forty years since his death, and I am older than he was. Your affectionate aunt,
L. HOWARD.
" Thus it remains a mystery why Thackeray
really did withdraw the first woodcut of the
Marquis of Steyne. Perhaps there may be
some one still alive who, on seeing this letter,,
may be able to give the real reason."
This drew from Miss HENRIETTA COLE on- May 18th another interesting contribution on the subject :
" Mrs. Richmond Ritchie sends me the follow- ing :
" ' I oddly enough don't know anything for certain about this particular incident. Lord Steyne was certainly not Lord Lansdowne, for whom my father had a respect and admiration. I suppose my father may have been told the picture was like Lord Hertford, and thought it best to suppress it ; or perhaps the publishers advised him to do so. I remember hearing my elders talking about it, but I can't remember what they said. The only thing I know for certain is that it couldn't have had anything to do with Lord Lansdowne.' "
In Mudge and Sears' s * Thackeray Dic- tionary' (Routledge & Sons, 1910) it is stated that a full discussion of the Marquis of Hertford as the original of Lord Steyne will be found in Mr. G. S. Layard's ' Sup- pressed Plates,' chap. i.
MR. F. G. KITTON having asked a question as to Thackeray's moustache, MR. EYRE- CROWE, A.R.A., replies on the 12th of September, 1903 :
"As to there being any portrait extant done in the year 1855 of W. M. Thackeray, it may be pretty safely said that none exists. I was with the author almost daily whilst he was writing the ' Newcomes,' in the midsummer of that year, in Paris, the last number being dated 28 June He had then no moustache. It is just possible that between that date and mid-October he may have grown one. He at times dispensed with the ' barber's shear,' when travelling about, to save time and trouble. But this very locomotion would preclude lengthy sittings needed for a limning. Ten years before I made a sketch of him in fez and caftan, smoking a long cherry- stick pipe. As he had then clipped off his moustaches, they were omitted ; but as he scanned the outline, he took the pencil in hand, and added these adornments to his upper lip. I may add that 1840 as a date is only put proxi- mately on Maclise's drawing of him. It looks much younger than he appeared at that time ; and not then moustached."
JOHN COLLINS FRANCIS. (To be concluded.)
GALLY KNIGHT:
"IPECACUANHA" IN VERSE,
IN ' Erewhon ' Butler's ' Life and Letters of Samuel Butler ' (his grandfather) are some amusing things. I do not know if the jeu d 'esprit of Gaily Knight has appeared in ' N. & Q.' before. The passage I give
