[1] See the First Series of “The Mysteries of London.”
[2] See Chapter LIX.
[3] See Chapter LXIV.
[4] See last paragraph of Chapter LXV.
[5] See Chapter LXXIX.
[6] This was when Rainford quitted the packet-ship at Guernsey, and commenced his career as the Blackamoor.
[7] See first paragraph, second column, page 28, of this Volume of the Second Series.
[8] “An obscure threepenny print, called the Daily News, published in its impression of November 2nd, an article purporting to be a notice of the leading works belonging to the sphere of Cheap Literature, but in which a vile, cowardly, and ruffian-like attack was made upon Mrs. Reynolds’s novel of ‘Gretna Green.’ The article alluded to appeared in the evening of the same date in the Express, a paper made up from the contents of the other, but of whose existence we were totally unaware until the occurrence of the matter in question. The attack, though evidently written by some silly boy, was so savage and malignant, and was made up of such a pack of atrocious lies, that it became necessary to take some kind of notice of it, although neither the Daily News nor its evening reflex enjoy a circulation or an influence sufficient to effect the amount of mischief which the dastardly scribe sought to accomplish. Our solicitors were accordingly instructed to write to the Editors of the News and Express, requiring a complete contradiction to the libel, or menacing an action as the alternative. The letter which our legal advisers despatched was a gentlemanly and talented remonstrance, which soon brought the stupid Editors of the Daily News and the Express to reason. Bradbury and Evans, the proprietors of those threepenny prints, shook in their shoes at the idea of an action, they already having enough law business on their hands in consequence of their treatment of Messrs. Powell and Wareing:—and, accordingly, the News and Express ate their own words, on Tuesday, Nov. 9th, in the following terms:—
“‘We have received a letter, protesting against Mrs. S. F. Reynolds’ work of “Gretna Green” being included in that list of popular works described as marked by “looseness, warmth of colouring in criminal scenes, and the false glow cast around guilty indulgencies.” We must admit that “Gretna Green” does not merit this; and that, whatever its faults it certainly contains nothing derogatory to the character or delicacy of a lady writer.’
“Now let our readers mark well the atrocity of the proceeding on the part of the News and the Express. They first denounce ‘Gretna Green’ in the strongest terms: they are afterwards compelled, by the fear of law proceedings, to ’admit that “Gretna Green” does not merit this, and that it contains nothing derogatory to the character or delicacy of a lady writer.’ Then how dared the wretched scribe to act such a miscreant’s part as to accuse a lady of writing with ’looseness,’ when he must have known the charge to be unfounded? He told a downright, deliberate, wilful lie: he has proclaimed himself, and likewise admitted himself to be, an abominable liar! And as such we denounce him.