Herewith are a set of verses which I thought pretty enough to send to press. Then I thought of the _Manhattan_, towards whom I have guilty and compunctious feelings. Last, I had the best thought of all—to send them to you in case you might think them suitable for illustration. It seemed to me quite in your vein. If so, good; if not, hand them on to _Manhattan_, _Century_, or _Lippincott_, at your pleasure, as all three desire my work or pretend to. But I trust the lines will not go unattended. Some riverside will haunt you; and O! be tender to my bathing girls. The lines are copied in my wife’s hand, as I cannot see to write otherwise than with the pen of Cormoran, Gargantua, or Nimrod. Love to your wife.—Yours ever, R. L. S. Copied it myself. TO THOMAS STEVENSON _La Solitude_, _April_ 19, 1884. MY DEAR FATHER,—Yesterday I very powerfully stated the _Heresis Stevensoniana_, or the complete body of divinity of the family theologian, to Miss Ferrier. She was much impressed; so was I. You are a great heresiarch; and I know no better. Whaur the devil did ye get thon about the soap? Is it altogether your own? I never heard it elsewhere; and yet I suspect it must have been held at some time or other, and if you were to look up you would probably find yourself condemned by some Council. I am glad to hear you are so well. The hear is excellent. The _Cornhills_ came; I made Miss Ferrier read us ‘Thrawn Janet,’ and was quite bowled over by my own works. The ‘Merry Men’ I mean to make much longer, with a whole new denouement, not yet quite clear to me. ‘The Story of a Lie,’ I must rewrite entirely also, as it is too weak and ragged, yet is worth saving for the Admiral. Did I ever tell you that the Admiral was recognised in America? When they are all on their legs this will make an excellent collection. Has Davie never read _Guy Mannering_, _Rob Roy_, or _The Antiquary_? All of which are worth three _Waverleys_. I think _Kenilworth_ better than _Waverley_; _Nigel_, too; and _Quentin Durward_ about as good. But it shows a true piece of insight to prefer _Waverley_, for it _is_ different; and though not quite coherent, better worked in parts than almost any other: surely more carefully. It is undeniable that the love of the slap-dash and the shoddy grew upon Scott with success. Perhaps it does on many of us, which may be the granite on which D.’s opinion stands. However, I hold it, in Patrick Walker’s phrase, for an ‘old, condemned, damnable error.’ Dr. Simson was condemned by P. W. as being ‘a bagful of’ such. One of Patrick’s amenities! Another ground there may be to D.’s opinion; those who avoid (or seek to avoid) Scott’s facility are apt to be continually straining and torturing their style to get in more of life. And to many the extra significance does not redeem the strain.