Additional Manuscripts c

The review of RJ in the Quarterly Review is not to be WW's after all [see WW to RJ, 1 November 1831]. John Lockhart writes to WW to say 'that the article is written without communication with him by a gentleman who had undersood that department of the Review to be in his handsetc and has thought it necessary to let this person's review stand rather than lose the benefit of his labours in future'. However, he also says that WW's labour shall not have been spent in vain. This may mean part of it used in the other man's article: 'I expect this will turn out a good thing for you for the man will of course praise your book as opposed to the McCullochites, and you may come to the honour of being the creed of the tories before your full time. At any rate you will see the impression your book makes on a man not disposed to judge it unfavourably and will get the notoriety of being reviewed in the two opposing reviews immeadiately'.