had ampler space for this noble subject than the
Review would have afforded. I thought, however, that this would not be
a fair or friendly course towards you. I accordingly told the applicants
that I had promised you an article, and that I could not well write
twice in one month on the same subject without repeating myself. I
therefore declined; and recommended a person whom I thought quite
capable of producing an attractive book on these events. To that person
my correspondent has probably applied. At all events I cannot revive the
negotiation. I cannot hawk my rejected articles up and down Paternoster
Row.

I am, therefore, a good deal vexed at this affair; but I am not at all
surprised at it. I see all the difficulties of your situation. Indeed,
I have long foreseen them. I always knew that in every association,
literary or political, Brougham would wish to domineer. I knew also that
no Editor of the Edinburgh Review could, without risking the ruin of
the publication, resolutely oppose the demands of a man so able and
powerful. It was because I was certain that he would exact submissions
which I am not disposed to make that I wished last year to give up
writing for the Review. I had long been meditating a retreat. I thought
Jeffrey's abdication a favourable time for effecting it; not, as I hope
you are well assured, from any unkind feeling towards you; but because I
knew that, under any Editor, mishaps such as that which has now occurred
would be constantly taking place. I remember that I predicted to Jeffrey
what has now come to pass almost to the letter.

My expectations have been exactly realised. The present constitution
of the Edinburgh Review is this, that, at whatever time Brougham may be
pleased to notify his intention of writing on any subject, all previous
engagements are to be considered as annulled by that notification. His
language translated into plain English is this: "I must write about this
French Revolution, and I will write about it. If you have told Macaulay
to do it, you may tell him to let it alone. If he has written an
article, he may throw it behind the grate. He would not himself have
the assurance to compare his own claims with mine. I am a man who act
a prominent part in the world; he is nobody. If he must be reviewing,
there is my speech about the West Indies. Set him to write a puff on
that. What have people like him to do, except to eulogise people like
me?" No man likes to be reminded