id
the money to Mr. Poole, is that Charles Dickens was the trustee through
whom the dramatist received his pension.

The letter to the Duke of Devonshire has reference to the peace
illuminations after the Crimean war.

The M. Forgues for whom, at Mr. Collins's request, he writes a short
biography of himself, was the editor of the _Revue des Deux Mondes_.

The speech at the London Tavern was on behalf of the Artists' Benevolent
Fund.

Miss Kate Macready had sent some clever poems to "Household Words," with
which Charles Dickens had been much pleased. He makes allusion to these,
in our two remaining letters to Mr. Macready.

"I did write it for you" (letter to Mrs. Watson, 17th October), refers
to that part of "Little Dorrit" which treats of the visit of the Dorrit
family to the Great St. Bernard. An expedition which it will be
remembered he made himself, in company with Mr. and Mrs. Watson and
other friends.

The letter to Mrs. Horne refers to a joke about the name of a friend of
this lady's, who had once been brought by her to Tavistock House. The
letter to Mr. Mitton concerns the lighting of the little theatre at
Tavistock House.

Our last letter is in answer to one from Mr. Kent, asking him to sit to
Mr. John Watkins for his photograph. We should add, however, that he did
subsequently give this gentleman some sittings.

[Sidenote: Mr. W. H. Wills.]

49, CHAMPS ELYSEES, _Sunday, Jan. 6th, 1856._

MY DEAR WILLS,

I should like Morley to do a Strike article, and to work into it the
greater part of what is here. But I cannot represent myself as holding
the opinion that all strikes among this unhappy class of society, who
find it so difficult to get a peaceful hearing, are always necessarily
wrong, because I don't think so. To open a discussion of the question
by saying that the men are "_of course_ entirely and painfully in the
wrong," surely would be monstrous in any one. Show them to be in the
wrong here, but in the name of the eternal heavens show why, upon the
merits of this question. Nor can I possibly adopt the representation
that these men are wrong because by throwing themselves out of work they
throw other people, possibly without their consent. If such a principle
had anything in it, there could have been no civil war, no raising by
Hampden of a troop of horse, to the detriment of Buckinghamshire
agriculture, no self-sacrifice in the political world. And O, good God,
whe