Death and Mr. Pickwick (77 page)

‘Fourteen pounds a month,' she said, ‘must seem like a fortune to him.'

‘Well, he has his salary as a parliamentary reporter.'

‘Even so,' she said, ‘he should be grateful to you for the great favour you have done him.'

 

*

‘NOW,' SAID MR INBELICATE.
‘
I
have an account here, by someone we shall meet later on, who had a friend present at that very gathering.'

‘I presume his friend is the person who spoke about the beard model.'

‘Yes. And according to the friend, the convulsions of laughter continued, and I quote, “till a late hour in the evening, or rather night”. So how
could
Seymour have given his consent to an alteration in the scheme, and sent a message to Boz in time for that letter to be written on Wednesday evening? Seymour was still reading
Sketches by Boz
in the evening – either that very Wednesday evening, or an evening even later in the week.'

‘I agree that you would expect Seymour to read
Sketches by Boz
to consider the credentials of the man proposed as the supplier of letterpress. And you would expect him to take some time over it.'

‘And here is the account confirming he did so. The conclusion I reach is that when Boz wrote that letter to his fiancée, he had signed up
completely
for the scheme proposed to him. No objections were raised. Go on, let your horns grow again.'

I took a bottle of a fruit liqueur, called shrub, and poured us each a glassful. He opened the refrigerator, and I added ice.

‘What about Thursday morning?' I said. ‘Perhaps Boz sent that letter to his fiancée, fully intending to do what Seymour wanted, but during the night he had misgivings. Perhaps he sent Chapman and Hall a letter on Thursday morning, setting out his objections.'

‘Boz said in the letter that the emolument was too tempting to resist. Are you saying that the next morning he does indeed resist the emolument? If he were to say in a letter “I cannot do it, and even were I to agree to do it, I would take my own way regardless”, then he would be turning the job down. He could have no guarantee that any alternative scheme would be agreed to. Are you saying that overnight the emolument suddenly lost its power? Besides, there is no evidence of such a letter. And there are
other
reasons for thinking that no such letter was ever sent.'

Again he opened the file. He showed me a letter Boz had written on the Thursday, to the publisher of
Sketches by Boz
, John Macrone. He read aloud the lines: ‘“I have been busy with a magazine paper during the last three days. I shall finish it today I hope, and if you are likely to be at home at one o'clock tomorrow I will call on you then.”'

Mr Inbelicate stared at me, as though I was expected to see some peculiar significance in these lines. In response to my looks of bewilderment, he said: ‘There are two important points to note there, Scripty. One is Boz's use of the word “hope”. The other is the time he suggests for meeting Macrone – one o'clock.'

‘I fail to see—'

‘The magazine paper is of course “The Tuggs's at Ramsgate” which will appear in the monthly
Library of Fiction.
The story has been a great struggle. He
hopes
to finish it on Thursday. Which means that he knows he might even be working on it on Friday morning, immediately prior to seeing Chapman and Hall.'

‘I still don't see—'

‘Put yourself in Boz's shoes, Scripty. The story had been murder to write. The previous day, in his letter to his fiancée, he said: “It must be done tomorrow.” And he adds, in explanation, that there are “more important considerations than the mere payment for the story involved, too”. To me that suggests he fears the great emolument could be lost – because in a work demanding punctuality, and the regular submission of letterpress, why should Chapman and Hall take on a man who cannot even finish one short story on time? But now that the Thursday is here, he realises he might not finish until Friday morning. He must be getting anxious. It is very difficult to predict when this story will be done – and so he opts for safety. The time he chooses for his meeting with Macrone is one o'clock. That would be compatible with seeing Chapman and Hall by noon, because Macrone is in business at St James's Square, and he could see Chapman and Hall, and then make his way to Macrone afterwards.'

‘And if he gets to Chapman and Hall by noon,' I said, ‘even one minute before noon, he has delivered “The Tuggs's at Ramsgate”, strictly speaking, in the morning. He has proved his punctuality.'

‘Yes, but there is more. In the letter Boz wrote to his fiancée, he says something else. Quote: “I hope I shall be able to get out to Brompton to dinner on Friday. I have to see these people” – and by “these people” he means Chapman and Hall – “and then Macrone with whom I shall be detained some time, but I trust I shall be able to manage it. Should I be disappointed (I don't think I shall be though) of course I shall be out, early on Saturday.” So Boz
wants
to go to Brompton. The logical thing would be to see Macrone as early as possible in the day, so that it is more likely he can go to Brompton. But instead, he chooses one o'clock.'

‘You are saying Boz leaves it that late because he wants to squeeze out every possible minute of writing time, compatible with getting to Chapman and Hall on Friday morning. He is scared, on Thursday, about whether he can finish this difficult story by the deadline.'

‘Yes. Now I ask you this, Scripty. If he is this anxious, would he
really
eat into his limited writing time, to think about some alternative course to Seymour's, then write a letter setting out his plans, both of which could take some time, and all for something which may be totally unacceptable to Chapman, Hall and Seymour, and could lose him the emolument? If he does have objections, and wishes to suggest an alternative, he would surely be wise to delay thinking about them and writing them down until after the “Tuggs's” was done. But the “Tuggs's” is unlikely to be completed before Thursday evening, at the earliest – remember he says he
hopes
it will be done Thursday, but he realises he could be working on it for several hours on Friday morning, right up to the deadline. And Thursday evening would surely be too late in the day to contact Chapman and Hall. Horns please.'

‘There is still Friday. He could raise objections at the meeting with Chapman and Hall. He could have finished his story on Thursday night, had time left over, thought about the alternative plans, and then presented them to Chapman and Hall at the meeting.'

‘Well done, Scripty! The trouble is, if he
did
present alternative plans at the meeting on Friday, Seymour would surely have to be contacted by Chapman and Hall, to get his approval. It would be the crucial point to be resolved – does Mr Seymour agree to the change of plans or not? And unfortunately for the fate of that hypothesis, we have a letter from Chapman and Hall to Boz, written that Friday, confirming the matters agreed at the meeting – and it doesn't even
mention
Seymour. If alternative proposals were raised at the meeting, such a letter would surely say: “Mr Seymour is totally in agreement with your proposals.” And the letter says nothing at all about Seymour. Come on, throw some other suggestions.'

I stood in front of an old sign saying ‘Take Notice: Man Traps and Spring Guns are Set on these Premises', below which was an example of a ‘spring gun', a shotgun which was operated by tripwire, used to deter poachers.

‘Suppose,' I said, ‘Seymour turned up at Chapman and Hall's office when Boz called for the meeting – or just happened to drop by – and so could say in person that he agreed with the new plans. Then there would be no need for him to be mentioned in the letter.'

‘Oh yes – except that there is Boz's statement, which we shall discuss in due course, that he met Seymour only once – and it wasn't in Chapman and Hall's office. But let us just suppose that Boz's statement is – I shall be kind – in error. Let me assert that I
do
think it is in error. I believe Boz and Seymour met more than once. Then I still think it is most unlikely that Seymour would have met Boz at Chapman and Hall's on the Friday, for the simple reason that it could be a wasted trip: Seymour did not know, for sure, that Boz would have accepted the job. It would be logical for him to see Boz
after
acceptance, not before, when it was all up in the air.'

He waited beside a ship in a bottle, which was labelled ‘Heavy Smack', to see whether I would say anything else. As I did not do so, he continued his argument.

‘And if you hypothesise that Seymour just happened to drop by Chapman and Hall's when Boz was present – well, what would be the point? He would only just have gone there that week, because that is how he acquired
Sketches by Boz.
Besides, when you come to think about it, Scripty, why would Boz have kept quiet about meeting Seymour at Chapman and Hall's on the Friday? If Boz put an alternative scheme in person to Seymour, and Seymour agreed, then there was no necessity to hush that up. It would
support
the idea that Boz had overturned the scheme. No, Seymour and Boz didn't meet on that Friday.'

‘There is something wrong here,' I said. ‘There must be.'

‘I told you that our mission was to correct historical errors. Every moment when I am Inbelicate, and you are Inscriptino, it is a reminder that errors still need to be put right.'

‘Very well. Let's go back to the account of the people gathered to read
Sketches by Boz
. Perhaps that is the thing that is in error. Or perhaps, despite what we have said, Seymour
did
agree to a change in the scheme, as soon as he was passed
Sketches by Boz
, even before he went home.'

‘The people gathered in Seymour's parlour talk of Boz being the right man for
Mr Seymour's
scheme. There is no indication in the account of Seymour's ideas being overturned. Read it yourself.' He passed the file over to me. ‘And if Seymour's ideas
had
been overturned before that gathering – why, Seymour would then have had even less control over his pictures than those he did for Richard Carlile. You wouldn't then talk of Mr Seymour's scheme at all, and there would be no cause for celebration. And this clearly was a happy gathering.'

‘Boz must have suggested the change of plan
after
the meeting with Chapman and Hall, then. That has to be it.'

‘Boz sent a letter to Chapman and Hall the following Friday, which expresses his concurrence with the terms Chapman and Hall proposed. There is no mention at all of any change of plans, nor any mention of any contact between one Friday and the next. Boz is simply replying to their letter, and their letter arose from the meeting on the Friday.'

Almost in desperation, I said: ‘Wasn't Boz said to be a man of iron-hard will? Surely he would get his own way and not do someone else's bidding?'

‘With you, Scripty, it is almost like you check boxes on my list of possible objections.' With glee, he read to me a statement by an American writer, Nathaniel Parker Willis, who visited Boz one rainy day in November 1835, just two months before the meeting with William Hall. Willis was accompanied by the publisher of
Sketches by Boz
, and he stated: ‘I was only struck at first with one thing (and I made a memorandum of it that evening as the strongest instance I had seen of English obsequiousness to employers) – the degree to which the poor author was overpowered with the honour of his publisher's visit.' He closed the file and quoted the line again: ‘the strongest instance I had seen of English obsequiousness to employers'.

Mr Inbelicate walked around, allowing all this to sink into my thoughts. ‘I think you will conclude,' he said, ‘that there is no evidence for Boz changing Seymour's plans, and every reason for thinking he did not. Boz signed up completely for Seymour's scheme. Interesting how innocent letters can say so much, eh? But come, I fear that I have exhausted you. Enough for one day. Even devil's advocates must take a break from hell.'

*   *   *

The next morning, over breakfast, Mr Inbelicate said: ‘Today, Scripty, we are going to digress down a curious path. I am going to tell you about Ely Stott and Thomas Clarke.'

‘We have already had a Clarke – William Clarke. Any relation?'

‘None. But sometimes names reassert themselves.'

 

*

THE EARLIER HISTORY OF ELY
Stott is enveloped in clouds of obscurity, though it is known that he was born in 1749. Some authorities speak of Stott's apprenticeship to an old apothecary in Yorkshire and say that, by dispensing pills, powders and creams across a counter from labelled drawers, his curiosity about medicine was awakened. ‘How many complaints could there possibly be,' the young Stott perhaps asked himself, ‘and how many the methods of cure?'

Curiosity in ordinary men often leads to wanderlust; in Ely Stott, curiosity led to study at St Thomas's Hospital in London. He proved to be a medical student of no common kind.

Not for Ely Stott the traditional drunkenness and debauched nights of the young physician-to-be; instead, he would sit in his little tidy rented room, by the stub of a candle and, after a long session with his anatomy books, he turned to Holy Scripture. During demonstrations of surgery, he had none of the ghoulish fascination that attended the dissection of executed criminals. He would say ‘Hush!' if he heard muttering as a chest was scalpelled open. And if students discussed cadavers in the refectory – which they often did to draw attention to themselves, especially if some female guest were at the table – he would say ‘Hush!' there too. Once, an affable young man had attempted to draw Stott out of his shell, and had said at breakfast: ‘Why not come for a gargle with us tonight, after lectures, Stott?'