Record Number: 3459

---

Reading Experience:

Evidence:

'Sir, I have heard with great regret that you are the author of that gross personal libel which appeared in the Quarterly Review, in the form of criticism on my Life of Cardinal Wolsey. I say with regret because it has been my settled determination from the moment I read the article to make the author sensible that in accusing me of being activated by the most obnoxious principles, he had laid himself open to be suspected of obeying them himself.'

Century:

1800-1849

Date:

Between Sep 1812 and 21 Mar 1814

Country:

n/a

Time

n/a

Place:

n/a

Type of Experience
(Reader):
 

silent aloud unknown
solitary in company unknown
single serial unknown

Type of Experience
(Listener):
 

solitary in company unknown
single serial unknown

---

Reader / Listener / Reading Group:

Reader:

John Galt

Age:

Adult (18-100+)

Gender:

Male

Date of Birth:

2 May 1779

Socio-Economic Group:

Professional / academic / merchant / farmer

Occupation:

Writer

Religion:

n/a

Country of Origin:

Scotland

Country of Experience:

n/a

Listeners present if any:
e.g family, servants, friends

n/a

Additional Comments:

n/a

---

Text Being Read:

Author:

Thomas Dunham Whitaker

Title:

Galt's Life of Cardinal Wolsey

Genre:

Essays / Criticism

Form of Text:

Print: Serial / periodical

Publication Details

'Galt's Life of Cardinal Wolsey' appeared in the Quarterly Review, vol 8 no.15 (September 1812), 163-72

Provenance

unknown

---

Source Information:

Record ID:

3459

Source:

Manuscript

Author:

John Galt

Title:

Letters of Gifford to R.W. Hay

Location:

National Library of Scotland

Call No:

John Murray Archive, MS. 42242 (423A)

Page/Folio:

n/a

Citation:

John Galt, Letters of Gifford to R.W. Hay National Library of Scotland, p. John Murray Archive, MS. 42242 (423A), p. n/a, http://can-red-lec.library.dal.ca/Arts/RED/record_details.php?id=3459, accessed: 26 April 2024

---

Additional Comments:

Despite the labelling of the folder, this letter is not by Gifford, but clearly signed by John Galt, and is to R.W. Hay. Hay is NOT, however, the author of the review of which Galt complains, evidenced by Hay's response, which denies authorship of the review, and by Galt's second letter, which accepts this as true. The author of the review was Thomas Dunham Whitaker.