NOTE. THE immediate cause of the publication of this defence of Lady Byron, written early in the year 1870, is an article in the 'Edinburgh Review' for April, 1871, upon the late Lord Broughton's (John Cam Hobhouse) MS. Recollections of his Life. A very few words in reply to so much of that article as concerns the present controversy will add all that is necessary to Lady Byron's vindication. Lord Broughton asserts, "it was not fear, on the part of Lord Byron, that persuaded him to separate from his wife." The words do not exactly describe the case of a husband who, having repeatedly refused to separate, submitted to separation after a threat of an appeal to the law; and the boldest assertion of a friend's opinion can weigh nothing against the certain facts. Lord Broughton does not tell us what was the motive, and the words, "it was not fear on the part of Lord Byron," may cover many meanings. If he had thought fit, Lord Broughton might have asserted his conviction that his friend was guiltless. He does not seem to have gone so far as that. He says that he consulted Lord Holland as to the expediency of giving some public refutation of Lady Byron's defence of her father and mother, which he calls a "charge," an "attack," and that Lord Holland "strongly recommended silence, and did not scruple to say that the lady would be more annoyed if she were left unnoticed, than if, whether wrong or right, she had to figure in a controversy." Lord Holland's advice may not justify the conclusion that he believed Lord Byron to be guilty, but, certainly, a contrary conclusion cannot be drawn. If he had been sure of the guilt, he could have given no wiser counsel than "Be still." JUNE, 1871. |