Skip to main content

[The N. Y. Times is]

image 1image 2image 3image 4cropped image 1

☞ The N.Y. Times is apparently well posted in the details of literary life in London.1 This morning it contains an article on the Bulwer scandal which gives the most satisfactory explanation we have seen of the domestic difficulties between the baronet and his wife.2 It appears that shortly after his marriage, Bulwer, under the pretense of pressing literary engagements, hired a set of apartments in one of the rooms of Court and there led a life more gay than studious.3 "But," says the Times:

"One bright day it came to the reluctant ear of Mrs. Bulwer, that the ardor of her husband was not exclusively literary. It was breathed that strange spirits haunted his quasi bachelor quarters, and the wife, as well-conducted wives always do, went in person to investigate the business. Climbing the stairs to the marital snuggery, she was startled by the sound of revelry within, and stopped by the lacquey, who stood without and stoutly denied her admittance. The power of woman’s rights, however, proved too cogent for the doorkeeper, and she burst into the room. And the scene—who shall describe it? There was the indefatigable scholar at the head of a board laden with the choicest viands and rarest wines, and surrounded by a half-dozen notorious demireps of unmistakable reputation."

This ended the martial connection and the parties separated—the author of "Pelham" to pursue his round of dissipation and the wife to write satirical novels concerning him.4 Her bitterness of spirit seemed to increase as the years went by, and not long ago we heard of her appearance at the hustings when the husband was portraying the recommendations of himself and conservatism to a delighted squirearchy. Here was the wife of his bosom, confronting him in the midst of his friends and supporters, and denouncing him as a scoundrel and a villain. This, however, was a little too much. Sir Edward had Lady B. confined to a lunatic asylum, where she still remains. As we stated in our foreign news, the other day, however, her friends are about taking legal measures to procure her release.

These squabbles between literary men and their wives are most disgraceful. They throw discredit on the whole profession, and encourage the opinion that a woman might as well marry the venerable Harry himself, as a man who dabbles in pen and ink. These Bulwer scandals and Dickens scandals, are doing more to lower the profession in the eyes of the world, than any other one cause whatever.5


Notes:

1. The New-York Times was a leading daily newspaper, then published by Republican Henry Jarvis Raymond (1820–1869) but aiming for a neutral tone of reporting. Whitman contributed a number of writings to the paper. For more information, see also Walter Graffin, "New York Times," Walt Whitman: An Encyclopedia, ed. J.R. LeMaster and Donald D. Kummings (New York: Garland Publishing, 1998) and Susan Belasco, The New-York Times[back]

2.  [back]

3. Edward Bulwer-Lytton (1803–1873), was an English writer and politician. His novel The Caxtons: A Family Picture (1849) was a breakout hit at the time. Whitman once accused Lytton of plagiarizing a book titled Zicci, stating it was the exact same as the novel Zanoni. Both novels, however, were written by Lytton. Whitman described the controversy in a number of Aurora editorials. See "The Great Bamboozle!—A Plot Discovered!" (March 28, 1842), and "More Humbug" (April 4, 1842). [back]

4.  [back]

5.  [back]

Back to top