Thomas Bond was a lawyer who operated from Mountrath Street, Dublin, behind the Four Courts. Balderston identifies Bond as probably the ‘connection of the family by marriage’, mentioned by Prior (I: 17), who purchased the estate of Lissoy from Goldsmith's nephew Henry in 1802. Here we can see continued evidence of Goldsmith's concern for his nephew, William Hodson.

The copy-text is the manuscript in the Houghton Library, Harvard University. It was first published in Dobson's Life of Goldsmith (1888). It was addressed to ‘Mr. Thos. Bond Attorney in | Montrath-Street | Dublin’, and postmarked 21 December.

Be pleas’d to answer this directly.

Exasperated at Colman's dithering over his comedy, Goldsmith sent a copy to David Garrick, manager of the rival patent theatre, Drury Lane. After discussing this move with the ‘sensible friend’ noted in the letter, he soon repented this fit of pique and requested the return of the manuscript. The identity of the ‘sensible friend’ is unknown, although Johnson must be a very likely candidate; Joseph Cradock and Arthur Murphy, both of whom contributed epilogues, are also possibilities.

The copy-text is the manuscript in the Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Yale University. It was first published in James Boaden, The Private Correspondence of David Garrick with the Most Celebrated Persons of his Time, 2 vols. (London: Henry Colburn, 1835), I: 527. It is addressed, ‘To | David Garrick Esqr. | Adelphi.’ and is endorsed in Garrick's hand ‘Dr. Goldsmith's about his play’. The letter is dated 6 February by Boaden but nothing on the manuscript corroborates the date.

See headnote to previous letter.

The copy-text is a facsimile of the manuscript in the sale catalogue of The Library of Jerome Kern, New York City, Part 1, A–J (1929), 198. A copy of the catalogue is housed at the Rosenbach of the Free Library of Philadelphia. Balderston accessed this letter in the private collection of A. S. W. Rosenbach, then of New York. The catalogue records, as does Balderston, that the letter is endorsed on the reverse ‘To Mrs. Johnson’. Balderston also notes that, along with the endorsement, there is a partially illegible memorandum in an eighteenth-century hand: ‘There is a 3 or 400 pds worth of things brought in to the House which [ ] no person.’

Henry Goldsmith (1722–68) was Oliver's older brother and the sibling to whom he looked for guidance in his youth. Henry had acted as a peacemaker with his brother's tutor Theaker Wilder during Goldsmith's troublesome early Trinity years, and Goldsmith would stay with Henry, a clergyman, upon his return from Dublin in 1751–2. In the dedication to The Traveller, or a Prospect of Society (1764), Goldsmith indicated that he had sent a draft of part of that poem to Henry from Switzerland, probably in 1755. The letter below features lines of verse; Henry may, therefore, have been a sounding board for Goldsmith's earlier poetic efforts, though no other examples of such correspondence are extant. Henry died unexpectedly, and much to his brother's sorrow, in 1768. Hence, Goldsmith dedicated his second major poem, The Deserted Village (1770), to Joshua Reynolds: ‘The only dedication I ever made was to my brother, because I loved him better than most other men. He is since dead. Permit me to inscribe this Poem to you’ (CW, IV: 285).

The copy-text is the manuscript in the British Library. It was first published by Percy in 1801. It is addressed ‘To | The Revd. Henry Goldsmith, at Lowfield, near | Ballymore in Westmeath; | Ireland.’ It is postmarked 13 January.

Goldsmith was working on An History of the Earth, and Animated Nature at his writer's retreat in Farmer Selby’s. Nonetheless, much as when he went to Paris with the Hornecks, the letter suggests that he was anxious to keep in touch with his social circles and the news from London.

The date of the letter can be determined from a number of circumstances. Goldsmith did not take up his residence at Edgeware until the summer of 1771 when Percy was at Alnwick, and Percy, for his part, did not return to London until October, after Goldsmith had returned to town. We can be confident then that the exchanges with Penneck occurred the following spring, after Goldsmith had returned to Edgeware. As Isaac Bickerstaff, whose invitation to dinner is mentioned in this letter, had fled London in mid-May, the dinner must have occurred before then. Finally, Sir Joshua Reynolds's pocket book for 1772 helpfully records an engagement with Goldsmith on Sunday 22 March.

The copy-text is the manuscript in the library of Haverford College, Philadelphia. It was first published in S. H. Harlowe, ‘Original Letters of Dr. Johnson and Oliver Goldsmith’, 101–2. It is addressed ‘To | the Revd. Mr. Pennick | at the | Museum’, and above, in a different hand, is written, ‘Doctor Goldsmith No. 49’. There are two postmarks, one of which has a ‘W’ (Wednesday?) visible but the rest is smudged; the other reads ‘Penny Post Paid WTU’.

William Cooke, Goldsmith's friend and chronicler, made the following observation on Goldsmith's methodological approach to history writing:

Goldsmith, working on the second edition of his History of England, indicates in this letter that he read widely and was assiduous in consulting the latest available sources. Frances Brooke (bap. 1724, d. 1789), writer and playwright, was the author of Elements of the History of England from the Invasion of the Romans to the Reign of St George, 4 vols. (London: 1771). This was a translation of Claude-Francois- Xavier Millot's original publication, Élémens de L’Histoire d’Angleterre depuis son Origine sous les Romains jusqu’au Règne de George II (Paris, 1769). It is possible that Goldsmith knew Brooke: she was acquainted with Johnson, and Garrick had rejected a tragedy of hers. Another plausible connection may be through Arthur Murphy and John Boyle, Earl of Cork and Orrery, who contributed to her periodical Old Maid (1755–6).

The copy-text is the manuscript in the Rosenbach of the Free Library of Philadelphia. It was first published by Prior in 1837. It is addressed to ‘Mr. Cadell. | Strand.’ The letter must follow the preceding letter very closely.

David Garrick (1717–79), actor and playwright, was also manager of Drury Lane which he ran for almost thirty years (1747–76). His London debut as Richard III in 1741 was a sensational success: his naturalistic style of acting was exuberant and energetic, and supplanted the more classical style of older actors such as James Quin. Goldsmith's earlier writings on theatre in the Enquiry into the Present State of Polite Learning and the Bee applaud him as an actor but are more critical of his managerial practices. Garrick, in turn, had refused to support Goldsmith for the position of secretary to the Society of Arts and Sciences so their relationship was always awkward. Garrick would continue to be associated with Shakespearean roles throughout his career and was instrumental in the Shakespeare Jubilee in 1769. He collaborated successfully with George Colman when the pair wrote The Clandestine Marriage (1766), the comedy for which he is best remembered as a playwright. He retired from acting in 1776 after a series of farewell performances and he sold his share of Drury Lane to a consortium led by Richard Brinsley Sheridan.

Garrick had turned more to management and writing at the date of this letter’s composition. Goldsmith had submitted the manuscript of The Good Natur’d Man for his consideration despite their lukewarm relations, perhaps because the management situation at Covent Garden was uncertain following the retirement of John Rich. Garrick vacillated for a period before agreeing to meet with Goldsmith to discuss changes to the play, but the nascent dramatist refused to submit to Garrick's requested amendments. When Colman agreed to stage the comedy, Goldsmith wrote this politic letter to smooth things over with Garrick, whose friendly response seems to indicate that he held no grievance.

The copy-text is the manuscript in the New York Public Library. It was first published by Prior in 1837. It is addressed ‘To | David Garrick Esqr. at | Litchfield’. There are two postmarks dated 20 and 21 July respectively. It is marked by Garrick on the front, perpendicular to the address: ‘Dr Goldsmith's | Letter wth.

This is Goldsmith's first known letter home following his arrival in February 1756 in London and gives an account of the beginnings of his career in writing, providing reviews for Ralph Griffiths's Monthly Review from April 1757. The letter conveys his sense of financial embarrassment and his conflicted mental state, critical of his home country's limitations but disturbed by an inexplicable homesickness. That he was writing the letter from Temple Exchange Coffee House helps explain his nostalgia for home as Goldsmith mixed with Irish students of the law who socialized there. The coffee house was located on Fleet Street, near Temple Bar.

The copy-text is the manuscript in the British Library. It was first published, with omissions, by Percy in 1801. It is addressed ‘To | Daniel Hodson Esqr. At Lishoy near Ballymahon, Ireland’. The bracketed portions are worn away in the manuscript; like Balderston, we have taken Percy's readings of those portions where they are likely to have been accurate and have noted where Balderston diverges. We have, in a few instances, ventured suggestions where none have been offered to date.

Sir William Chambers (1722–96), architect, was born in Sweden and, after being educated largely in England, returned there to work for the Swedish East India Company. He acquired great wealth as well as knowledge of Chinese architectural styles through two voyages to China in the 1740s. He later studied architecture in Paris and Rome before setting up practice in London in 1755. Initially, he lived above Tom's Coffee House and it was here that he most likely first met Goldsmith and Johnson. Chambers produced some notable publications such as ‘Of the art of laying out gardens’ (1757) (much admired by Edmund Burke and Thomas Percy), Treatise on Civil Architecture (1759), and his provocative Dissertation on Oriental Gardening (1772), which brought him into conflict with Capability Brown. The argument with Brown, as this letter shows, coincided with the appearance of She Stoops to Conquer. His career was considerably progressed by his appointment as architect to Princess Augusta at Kew, and as architectural tutor to Prince George. A number of high-profile and lucrative commissions followed, culminating in the redesign and rebuilding of Somerset House, which he began in 1775 and which kept him occupied until his death in 1796.

The letter which provoked Goldsmith's response is extant and we have reproduced it in full below. Chambers's delight in the play is evident as are his reservations about John Quick (Tony Lumpkin) and Charles Lewes (Marlow). Chambers was also keen to solicit Goldsmith's views on the second edition of the controversial Dissertation on Oriental Gardening, to which he had annexed what he purported to be an explanatory discourse by Chitqua (or Tan-Che-Qua, as the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography also offers). Chitqua (c. 1728–96) was a Chinese artist who visited England between 1769 and 1772 and who moved in socially elite circles. The addition was supposed to assuage the controversy that the first edition had caused through its attack on Capability Brown. Chambers wished to recruit Goldsmith's pen to his cause, and to sound out Burke's stance in the debate, which, as the reference to the disparaging poem in the final paragraph suggests, had established itself in the public mind.

Goldsmith pleads with Hodson to allow his son travel to India as a surgeon; he makes it clear that this is an excellent opportunity, not least in financial terms. He is at pains to describe the efforts he has made on behalf of William since his arrival to London, in terms both of networking and financial support.

The copy text is the manuscript in the Houghton Library, Harvard University. It was first published in Dobson's Life of Goldsmith (1888). It was addressed ‘To Daniel Hodson Esqr.’ The address page is also marked ‘Doctor Goldsmith letter’ in another near-contemporary hand. The dating is conjectural. Lieutenant-Colonel Nugent died on 26 April. As this letter shows, there was a subsequent exchange of letters between William Hodson and his father: June then seems a reasonable estimate for this letter's composition.

Hester Thrale (1741–1821), writer, was introduced to Dr Johnson through their mutual friend the playwright Arthur Murphy in 1765. Stuck in a loveless marriage and burdened by a state of almost constant pregnancy in the late 1760s and 1770s, Thrale took great pleasure and inspiration from Johnson's friendship, while he derived equal enjoyment and gain from her conversation and literary prowess. Thrale undertook some significant translation tasks as well as making an important contribution to Johnson's Journey to the Western Isles and his Lives of the Poets. She also provided Johnson with a safe refuge when his mental and emotional health deteriorated. Thrale, with Johnson's assistance, was soon hosting a vibrant salon at her home in Streatham where guests included members of the Club, including Goldsmith; she was largely unimpressed by his ‘anomalous Character’.1 The death of her ne’er-do-well brewer husband liberated her financially as well as personally. She later married a Catholic Italian singer, Gabriel Piozzi, and her most serious period of literary activity ensued, including Anecdotes of the Late Samuel Johnson (1786), Letters to and from the Late Samuel Johnson (1788) and Retrospection (1801), before her death from gangrene.

The copy-text is a facsimile of the letter in a sales catalogue cutting in the New York Public Library. It was first published in A. M. Broadley, Doctor Johnson and Mrs. Thrale (1910). According to Balderston, it is addressed ‘To Mrs. Thrale’. It is endorsed by her ‘a Letter from Dr. Goldsmith’. Balderston established the date of the letter from the sale catalogue of William Evarts Benjamin, March 1886: ‘Hester L. Thrale (Mrs. Piozzi). 12th April 1773. A.L.S. 1 p., 4to. To Doctor Goldsmith, urging him to let her have the fourth and fifth volumes of his book (she does not say which one), and couched in terms of much stately courtesy’ (BL, 121).

Goldsmith writes to Hodson to confirm the safe arrival of his son, William, in London. As Hodson, alongside Oliver's beloved brother Henry, had given him financial support in his earlier life, notably in Edinburgh, Goldsmith was pleased to reciprocate.

The letter is also noteworthy for the expression of Goldsmith's ambiguity towards the stage. Although it is clear from Boswell's records that theatre was of great interest not only to Goldsmith but to his circle more broadly, Goldsmith also ‘recounted all the disagreeable circumstances attending a dramatic author’. The difficulties attending getting The Good Natur’d Man performed and its modest success seem to be preying on his mind. On the other hand, dismissing the stage in this letter to a worried father would also have helped to assuage Daniel's fears. As to where William might have ‘contracted so beggarly an affection’, Goldsmith is surely being disingenuous, perhaps even writing with his tongue firmly in his cheek.

The date is conjectural. Following Balderston, we agree that it must fall approximately a year before Letter 36, and must allow sufficient time after Letter 29 to Maurice for a second exchange of letters between Maurice and Oliver, and for Maurice's visit.

The copy-text is the manuscript in the Houghton Library, Harvard University. It was first published in Austin Dobson's Life of Goldsmith (1888). It was addressed to ‘Danl: Hodson Esqr’.

See headnote to previous letter.

Goldsmith gratefully acknowledges Garrick's willingness to accept Newbery’s note as per his request in the preceding letter. Balderston includes a brief note, in the form of a bill of exchange, which accompanied the letter. The current location of the note is unknown. It reads:

To David Garrick Esqr |Adelphi.’

The bill is signed ‘Dec. 25, 1773 Accepted—D. Garrick’. Goldsmith's signature is on the back, along with those of Charles Ekerobh Mall, and Josiah Shaw, for B. St. Moyen Esqr. The date, ‘28 Jany.’ is likely to have been the date of payment.

Our copy-text is the manuscript in the Houghton Library, Harvard University. The date is determined by the date of Goldsmith's note accompanying the letter.

Contrary to his claim to Percy that he had received his medical degree at the age of 20, this letter indicates that Goldsmith had not received it by the age of 26, though he clearly still had intentions of so doing. The letter also discourses upon ideas of national character and the contemporary demand for travel accounts, with which Goldsmith would later engage in his periodical and natural historical writings, and in The Traveller, or a Prospect of Society (1764). He also evokes the cosmopolitan qualities of Leiden, a major centre of medical education and commerce.

The copy-text is the manuscript in the British Library. It was first published, with some omissions, by Percy in 1801. It was addressed ‘To | The Revd Mr Thos: Contarine | [K]ilmore near | Carrick on Shannon | in | Ireland’. It is postmarked 6 May and above the postmark is recorded ‘this lettr is charg’d 1s–8d’. The portions in square brackets are worn away in the manuscript and are supplied from a contemporary copy, made by Catherine Hodson, also in the British Library.

The opening night of She Stoops to Conquer saw Goldsmith, sick with nerves, go for a walk in St James's Park rather than attend Covent Garden Theatre. His apprehension – and indeed that of George Colman – proved unfounded as both audiences and critics expressed their approbation on the first few performances of the play. Reviews in the London newspapers were generally very positive and some noted that, unlike many contemporary authors, Goldsmith had not relied on the biased support of his friends who attended the opening night (Johnson, Reynolds, Burke and Richard Cumberland) to carry the play. In this letter, Goldsmith is anxious to assuage any imagined offence he had given Cradock by not using his epilogue but, typically, he also slides into melancholy even at this moment of great success. The letter must have been written after the first performance on 15 March but before the first benefit night of 18 March.

The copy-text is the manuscript in the Bibliotheca Bodmeriana, Switzerland. It was first published in Cradock's Literary and Miscellaneous Memoirs (1826). It is addressed ‘To | J. Cradock Esqr. at Gumbley | near Harbro’ | Leicester-Shire’. It is postmarked 20 March. Balderston dated the letter 16 March. We suggest a slightly later date because of the postmark and also because the newspapers’ attacks on Colman appear first in an evening paper of 16 March.

Balderston relied on the version published in Cradock's Memoirs. There are many minor differences in our transcription, related to capitalized letters and punctuation in the main. There are also three significant omissions in Cradock which are restored here. Firstly, the post scriptum text ‘I beg you’d send me an answer’ indicates an unusual level of concern for Goldsmith about the reply. Secondly, we have reversed Cradock's judicious deletion of Goldsmith's second sentence: ‘The news papers are now abusing Colman to some purpose.’ It is possible that Cradock, impecunious when publishing his Memoirs and who had dramatic ambitions himself, was hesitant about irritating George Colman the Younger, then Examiner of Plays, but it may simply have been common courtesy. Goldsmith's dismissive reference to the then retired actor John Quick (‘for nobody would think of letting Quick speak the Epilogue’) is also restored here for the first time.