Your kind & charming letter, my dear Sir William Elford was exceedingly welcome to me. I shall obey of you in all my best--but you & Mrs Elford will spoil not only me but my letters by your exquisite kindness--If once you make me think for a moment of what I am going to say--I am undone & you will get a petrifaction--a fine specimen of the Lithographic art instead of the nonsense you are so good as to like.--We agree completely respecting the Queen--her defence seems to me to strengthen the evidence--& I am convinced that 10 years hence every body will be of our opinion. It will never be a disputed point in history like the guilt of Queen Mary of Scotland--Indeed I rather think that except Mrs. Dickinson & that part of the "reading public" called the mob every body is of the same opinion now. I have not the least notion that the Whigs think her innocent or the reformers either--they treat it as a mere party question--an engine for dislodging & heaving out the Ministry--& they ought to be ashamed of themselves for confounding the great moral distinctions of right & wrong to attain their own ambitious ends. I have done with them. And I beg you of all love, my dear Sir William, never to call me "Miss Whig" again. In the mean time I am heartily glad that the cause is over. It is no great triumph God knows to the Guilty--& the cessation & laying to rest of the subject will be the greatest possible comfort & relief to all sane persons. Of late one really could not stir without being haunted with it--People breathed an Atmosphere of impurity, & some persons really became so hardened to the improprieties of the topic as to say with perfect unconsciousness things exceedingly distressing to hear. Our dear friend Dr. Valpy for instance got so used to talk in the style of the Queen's Trial, that his daughters have been several times obliged to leave the breakfast table & really regarded the unfolding of a newspaper as a signal for quitting the room. To be sure the dear & excellent Doctor is not very particular. He brought a fair neighbour of your's yours into a curious scrape the other day--If you will promise to be very discreet & not repeat it to any one who will tell the Rowes I will tell it you. You promise? Well Miss R owe --Hannah--Glumdalclitch as Miss James used to call her, is staying in the Forbury & they have had in Reading an Itinerant Lecturer--a showman of the sciences--whose lectures were attended by all the house of Valpy & half of the school. Well the last lecture was on Electricity–-one of the boys was electrified–-& the good Doctor before a hundred people very gravely led poor Glumdalclitch up to the youth, & desired him to kiss her by way of communicating the shock & completing the experiment. Luckily the boy was a lad of grace & had too much modesty to comply–-& as to poor Hannah she was quite enough electrified by the proposal. They say it was a curious scene. I did not see it myself–-for I have a horror of those sort of things & hate an electrical apparatus as bad as a gun–-I don’t know why I hate either for I have never been eithershot or electrified–-but I have run away pretty often from both machines–-I remember when we had Mr. Walker to give us a course of Lectures at school I absconded from the Electricity-–I scudded away like a hare and I skulked under the bed till the Lecturer & his apparatus were safe out of the house-–& I verily believe I should do the same tomorrow rather than stay–-only that I have now sufficient moral courage to own my fear.-–To return to our friend the Queen. I heard the other day a curious story of the way in which the “ladies address processions” are got up. Mrs. Bartley the actress was at her Mantua Makers giving some orders & observed an unusual hurry scurry about the house–-at last a coach & four stopped at the door & four gaily dressed women got into it-–one of whom was very handsome. at last When the Mantua Maker came to her she apologised for detaining her & explained the bustle by saying, that some customers of hers had requested she would lend some finery to the persons whom they should send & who were to fill a carriage in one of the Brandenburgh House processions that accordingly she had decked out these females who were to be returned safely to her who on their return were to be stripped of their borrowed plumage & that the woman whom Mrs Bartley admired so much was a person, & to whom she had trusted the most valuable of the dresses, (a French silk richly flowered with lace) knowing her to be exceedingly honest & careful-–she (the Mantua Maker) had known her for many years-–she kept an apple stall at the corner of the street!--pretty Addressers are they not?--When I said that Mrs Dickinson was the only living woman who believed the Queen innocent I did not mean to accuse Lady Madelina Palmer of saying the thing that is not"The thing that is not" is an allusion to Gulliver's Travels But her Ladyship is I doubt not a little led away by party spirit and by the sort of indulgence which women of fashion extend to those cases-–& when she says she thinks the Queen innocent she means a very different sort of innocence from Mrs Dickinson, who really believes her to be as pure as the unsunned snow. Lady M. P ’s notion of an innocent Queen is probably, not very guilty-–Now Mrs Dickinson would I am convinced stake her own existence or her baby’s uponm the perfect purity of the Queen’s every thought & word & action. I should think this a false perception & be afraid that my dear Friend was upon this subject a little diseased, if I did not know that she has an instinct of credulity a power of believing such as no mortal ever possessed. She does not know what doubt means. Every word that is said she believes au pied de la lettre. The common forms of politeness, the dearest Madam-–& your faithful humble servant find in her the most absolute faith-–This is a very amiable mistake-–resulting from her own singular truth & frankness-–but it’s a very troublesome one to some of her stiff proud neighbuors, whose drawings-balk, & civil subterfuges she oversets at a blow by not understanding them-–lugs gouty people out of their carriages who only meant to leave a card & “were sorry they had no time to alight?”-–& furnishes with requests to fix his own day, an excuse-making Grandee who had called to express his regret that he could not attend her dinner party--“Well then why won’t you stay to day"--was her last answer to his last apology--& the luckless Illustrissimo ran away-–as I did from the electrification. “How sorry he was not to be able to stay-–how extremely unlucky that he is so engaged-–he’s a very polite man, and would be very glad to be a good neighbour” was all her remark. Her faith in human truth is incorrigible, and as she reads an opposition paper, no wonder she believes in the Queen-–the only chance was that the Attorney General might have gained her by having the first word-–but Alderman Wood had her before.-–By the way have you read a clever little joke upon the aforesaid Alderman called ? Very well done indeed! The story of Whittington and his cat--applied--as you may guess-–a very clever little book! (By the bye they are illuminating tonight in Reading-–making a terrible tintamarre-–bells ringing-–and a prodigious quantity of popping noises, produced as I conjecture by some little brass things kept by a war-fancying Gentleman who calls them cannon-–and pistols and blunderbusses and what not-–Thank Heaven I am not in that region of squibs and crackers. We don’t illuminate in Three Mile Cross-–that enlightened village is wiser.-–Besides I have been reading a clever little Poem called , which but for the abominable bad taste of addressing very graceful pleasant and Horatian verses to a lady of no equivocal character would be a most recommendable book-–and a cleverish work called ; (skipping the Political Economy which I can’t understand and the English Constitution two words I am tired of)-–and Mrs. Opie's -–of which the most certain thing that can be said is that they are exceedingly like her others--just the same things. She has no nice discrimination of character like our two favorites-–& incidents cannot be varied ad infinitum-–so that I should really think she must begin to find herself at a loss how to shew off her good heroines in small acts of generosity, & her bad heroes in killing their fathers and mothers.--Oh how different from Miss Austen & Miss Edgeworth-–Have you read the Critique on in the last ? There is some truth in what they say of him-–but surely Miss Edgeworth deserved more respect.-–I don’t think my dear Friend that I quite agree with you as to the facility of imitating Scott’s novels--We have had nothing like them yet--& I do not think we soon shall. Consider, with all his faults the great & rare qualities that must be united in such a novelist &-–the minute & curious learning which seizes with the certainty & ease of accurate knowledge on all the antiquarian detail that suits his purpose. The almost magical power of placing scenes and forms before you as in a picture--& leading you through a changing country which you trace as in a map. (This power of external representation is only equaled by Chaucer, Bocacio Boccacio & as far as scenery goes by Spenser)--& lastly his various & extraordinary delineations of character. It is quite nonsense to compare him as the ers do to Shakespeare in this respect and gives one the tendency to underrate him that such extravagant praises by a natural re-action always do-–his Characters have not the exquisite freedom of Shakespeare’s-–there is too much identity. He is afraid to trust them out of their prescribed bounds. Afraid to let them make any speech which cannot instantly be assigned to the right person. The keeping is too exact to be true to our mixed & varying nature-–but still the characters are finely del conceived & finely drawn, & there is a noble spirit of humanity an indulgence to human frailty which sets a grand lesson to the world. He makes good Shakespeare’s most beautiful saying “There is some soul of goodness in things evil.” , act four, scene one. & is as far as I know the only writer who has ever had candour & fairness enough to tolerate opposite bigotries. No, my dear Friend. It is not the mere fixing on some peculiar piece of history to illustrate that will produce even in powerful hands such novels as Walter Scott’s. As to Miss Holford I don’t think she has the slightest intention to imitate him-– seems to me an attempt to portray in very black & exaggerated colours the character of Lord Byron-–does it not strike you so? Some of the anecdotes-–that of the role with the orange flowers for instance-–are stories which have been currently told of his Lordship, & altogether I am afraid there can be no doubt but it was intended as a portrait. I say afraid-–because Mrs. Joanna Baillie the friend & protectress of Lady Byron ought not to have given the sanction of her name to such a libel-–He is quite bad enough, Heaven knows, without being loaded with crimes that do not belong to him. I wonder I did not mention the work to you, which I thought as you do very powerful-–you will have found out by this time that the Zingari was not an old woman, & that the conclusion though rather too combustible to suit my fancy can hardly be called unhappy. (I really think they must be springing a mine in Reading-–there is such a grand crash every now & then rising out of the hubbub-–“God help them silly one’s”-–as Mr. Canning says in his clever parody of Mr. Southey's ode. Don’t you delight in the “Poetry of the ?)-–Miss Holford wrote you know a very fine & powerful Poem which came out the same year with my & was worth a thousand of it. (Don’t contradict this-–if you do I shall think that you think I am begging for a compliment instead of telling a truth) & rather think that Miss Holford’s present work is more like Miss Porter than Walter Scott. Did you ever read ? Or the ""? They are much in the same style only less powerful-–less manly. I am very glad to hear that Lady Madelina does not write to you-–it is exceedingly kind & civil in her indeed. If she did woe be to me! My nose would certainly be out of joint. I dare say her silence is purely in condescension of my feelings for I told her she had superseded me & that I took it very hard. She is amazingly kind not to write-–And yet she ought to write too, that I might enjoy my right of reprisal by reading her letter. Would you show them to me? You are not the only traitor among my correspondents-–if that be any consolation-–I happened to say to a friend in Town that Mr. Hazlitt was “the most delightful & most impudent of writers” or words to that effect & what did my correspondent do but read him this curious panegyric the first time they met. Luckily Mr. Hazlitt is good humoured and took it without being astounded at my impudence.-–Mrs. Jonathan Elford is only too kind in condescending to be amused with such chit chat-–flattery of that sort is very dangerous to me-–one’s heart warms so at kindness-–does it not? I will certainly write again as you did me-–but what shall I do for a subject? How is Lady Madelina altered? Was not she a Queen’s woman at Bickham? She was a very determined one at Reading I know-–Yes-–she is a most delightful woman though she is my rival-–I wish she and her excellent and most gentlemanly husband would come to live at Luckley-–It is quite tantalizing to know a little of her and wish to know a great deal.