The Real Shelley. New Views of the Poet's Life. Vol. 2 (of 2)Jeaffreson, John Cordy
History
The Real Shelley. New Views of the Poet's Life. Vol. 2 (of 2)
Jeaffreson, John Cordy
Poets, English -- 19th century -- Biography; Shelley, Percy Bysshe, 1792-1822
The affair having been reported by Shelley to the Solicitor-General, it
became the subject of careful investigation. Not only was the evidence of
the alleged attack sifted, but it was sifted by persons peculiarly
qualified to examine it. The Solicitor-General of the county (an expert in
evidence touching assaults and other outrages against the law),
keen-witted Mr. Madocks (a man of affairs, familiar with the people of the
neighbourhood), Mr. Williams (Mr. Madocks’s agent, a shrewd Welshman), Mr.
Williams’s brother (a man of similar shrewdness) were amongst the persons
to look into the matter. All these persons were friendly to Shelley,
though they had for some time thought him given to talk too fast. All four
were on familiar terms with him. The Solicitor-General received the
Shelleys into his own house, and entertained them there from 27th February
to the day in the first week of March, on which they left North Wales for
Ireland. Consequently the investigation was directed, made, carried out by
the gentleman, who was at the moment of the investigation Shelley’s host.
Mr. Madocks and the Messrs. Williams had a distinct interest in keeping on
friendly terms with Shelley, and doing all that was just for the
maintenance of his credit. Consequently the investigation was in the hands
of Shelley’s especial friends. Yet the unanimous verdict of local opinion
was that no attack had been made, and that Shelley’s allegations
respecting the attacks said to have been made on him during the night of
the 26th of February were baseless and untruthful,--their untruthfulness
being referable either to delusion or falsehood on his part. No single
voice (except the voices of Harriett, Miss Westbrook, Shelley, doubtless
Daniel Hill, and possibly the other servants of the house,) was raised in
Carnarvonshire against the result of an investigation, which, be it
observed, was (from the wetness of the ground about the lodge, at the time
of the alleged assaults) made under peculiarly favourable conditions. With
the single exception of Mr. Hookham (who seems, at least for a moment, to
have believed the wild story), Shelley’s London friends were no less
unanimous in thinking the verdict of the inquisitors a just one. Hogg says
of the alleged attack, ‘Persons acquainted with the localities and with
the circumstances, and who had carefully investigated the matter, were
unanimous in the opinion, that no such attempt was ever made. _I never met
with any person who believed in it._’ In the summer of 1813 (within a few
months of the alleged attack), Peacock, who had made Shelley’s
acquaintance in the previous autumn, went from London to Wales, and
prosecuted inquiries on the spot respecting this Tanyrallt business; the
result being that he had no doubt the attacks were never made, and that
Shelley’s perplexing part in the affair was referable to
‘semi-delusion,’--the condition of mind in which Shelley, according to
Peacock, was partly deluded and partly untruthful.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account