 |
Draft letter from Dr J.W.
Polidori to Editor of Morning Chronicle
Sir,
As you were the first person to whom I wrote to state that the
tale of the Vampyre was not Lord Byrons - I beg you to insert
the following statement in your paper, without the fear of my
sending to withdraw it as I did the last. You would not have
been troubled with this if no other periodical publication than
those under the immediate influence of the publisher of the new
monthly magazine has dropt innendoes (sic) & hints with regard
to my being the person with whom the blame of the forgery lies.
Such contemptible papers as the Litterary Gazette etc would hardly
have drawn me forth, but when the Edinburgh Magazine of Constable
takkes up the same side I can no longer remain silent, but would
not have troubled you with my statement if it had not been too
late when I saw that paragraph to get a few lines inserted in
that Magazine for next month.
|
|
The tale as I stated to you
in my letter was written upon the foundation of a proposed and
began story of Lord Byron's. Two friends were to travel in Greece,
one was to die there: but before death having extracted an oath
of secrecy from his companion & was after his burial to appear
again & make love to his sister. Lord Byron in a letter dated
Venice stated that he knew nothing of the Vampyre story &
hated Vampyres, but while this letter was busy circulating in
all the London & provincial papers, the fragment at the end
of Mazeppa was in the hands of his publishers in Albemarle St
with the date of June 17, 1816 attached to it, being the beginning
of his tale upon this very foundation. My devellopement was written
on the Continent: left with a lady at whose request it was undertaken.
In the course of three mornings by her side it was produced &
left with her. From her hands by means of a correspondent without
my knowledge it came into those of the Editor of the New Monthly
with a letter stating it to be an ebauche of Lord Byron's. Mr
Watts as Editor of that magazine states in his notice that the
tale which accompanies the letters "we also present to our
readers without pledging ourselves for its authenticity as the
production of Lord Byrons, & he continues "we should
suppose it to have been committed to paper rather from the recital
of a third person.
This however after the publication of 100 copies was cancelled
by the publishers and another notice inserted stating it to be
decidedly his Lordships in direct opposition as I am informed
to the Editors' will who has since retired from the conduct of
the magazine.
Immediately it was published I found a copy and upon finding
that it was an almost forgotten trifle of my own, instantly wrote
to you as Editor of the Morning Chronicle stating the little
share Lord Byron had in the work. This was upon the Friday evening
after its publication. I at the same time wrote to the publishers
of the tale in its seperate form and to those of the magazine
to stop its sale under his Lordships name. On Monday the publishers
of the Magazine called upon me & promised it should be instantly
announced as mine. With regard to my property in it, he brought
forth a paper in which he proposed to give me a share in the
profits, but as he said the paper was rough & not of any
use, he said I might trust to his honour, I was persuaded so
to do. In the course of the conversation I stated having written
to you. He immediately begged of me as a favour to allow him
to withdraw that letter stating that as he being the publisher
was more compromised than myself that he wished I would allow
the first explanation to come from him promising that if I would
sign a short note he would send me, that he would attach to it
an explanation completely freeing me from all imputation. I consented
and he sent me the note signed by me which appeared in his magazine
and in which in the original was written more extended devellopement
which was erased by me. He then obtained a short delay on the
plea that having heard it reported that Lord Byron was really
the author of it by those who had been present at the conversation
mentioned in the letter that he wished to have a few days to
clear the matter up entirely. I granted him to the end of the
week. He has at the same time so cautiously in his correspondence
with me avoided mentioning the name of Vampyre or anything that
could positively be brought against him as a proof of his acknowledgement
of its being my property mentioning it as the affair, so that
when I came to claim my share in the profits I was offered 30£
instead of 300£. I find myself at the same time without
any paper, which could directly & at once, force him to give
me my rights. I agreed to take 30£ to account & determined
to sue for the rest; But I am frightened by the expense of the
law & fear that I must leave him to his meaness.
Hoping that you will make this statement public & thus free
me from the imputation his hangers on have striven to throw upon
me
I remain Sir
Your obedient servant
John Polidori
|
