s original occupation of Langham, which realised
him a steady annual deficit, was followed by a return to London, a visit
to Brighton and, in 1835, a journey on the Continent to Brussels and
Lausanne.

He had, meanwhile, been contributing to _The Metropolitan Magazine,_
which he edited from 1832 to 1835, finally selling his proprietary
rights to Saunders and Otley for L1050. His editorial work was arduous,
and many of his own compositions were first published in _The
Metropolitan._ Here appeared _Newton Forster,_ 1832, _Peter Simple,_
1833, _Jacob Faithful, Midshipman Easy,_ and _Japhet in search of a
Father_(!) 1834, besides a comedy in three acts, entitled _The Gipsy,_ a
tragedy called _The Cavalier of Seville,_ and the miscellaneous papers
afterwards collected under the title, _Olla Podrida._

In 1833 he stood, as a reformer, for Tower Hamlets, but his methods of
canvassing were imprudent. He dwelt upon his own hobbies, and
disregarded those of the electors. He apparently expected to carry the
day by opposing the pressgang in a time of peace, and even permitted
himself to repudiate philanthropy towards the African negro. The
gallantry with which, on one occasion, he saved the lives of his
audience when the floor of the room had fallen in, was not permitted to
cover the rash energy of his reply to a persistent questioner:--"If ever
you, or one of your sons, should come under my command at sea and
deserve punishment, if there be no other effectual mode of conferring
it, _I shall flog you."_ It is hardly necessary to add that he lost the
election.

He afterwards failed in a plan for the establishment of brevet rank in
the army, but gave some valuable assistance in the preparation of the
Merchant Shipping Bill of 1834.

It was about this time that Marryat is currently reported to have
challenged F.D. Maurice to a duel. The latter had published an
anonymous novel, called _Eustace Conway,_ in which "a prominent
character, represented in no amiable colours, bore the name of Captain
Marryat." The truth of the story seems to be that the Captain went in
hot wrath to Bentley, and demanded an apology or a statement that the
coincidence was unintentional. Maurice replied, through his publisher,
that he had never heard of Captain Marryat. It may be questioned whether
the apology was not more galling than the original offence.

In 1834 some legal difficulties arose in connection with his father's
memory, which Marryat accepte