Showing 23 results

Edinburgh. - Thanks for the cheque settling the account.

40 Ennismore Gardens, S. W. - Glad affairs are 'so quiet'. Encloses the cheque for Gibson & Craig's account and will be much obliged if Ellis settles it. Will be at Welcombe near Stratford-on-Avon, home of [his grandfather] R. N. Philips MP for five to six weeks, and hopes this will 'set [him] up completely in health'.

Edinburgh. - Enclose their account [no longer present], which includes costs due by Sir Charles Trevelyan to Messrs Edmonston & Douglas and paid by Gibson & Co. They understood the correspondence of July-September 1875 to constitute an arrangement by which Sir Charles and George Trevelyan would stay proceedings, and Napier was not to publish any of the letters in question until the 'Life' of Lord Macaulay was published, and on this understanding they did not take steps to have the interdict declared perpetual. Therefore an order for costs against Messrs Constable would not be granted.

40 Ennismore Gardens, S. W. - Believes that the important thing in regard to Gibson Craig & Co is to 'take no step and "let sleeping dogs lie" till the book is out'.

Edinburgh. - They 'quite approve' of the terms of the proposed answer to Napier.

Spring Gardens. - Copy of letter from Napier to Ellis, 7 Sept. 1875 [O.18.7/49], followed by draft of letter from Ellis to Trevelyan. Napier's letter leaves Ellis 'no choice of withholding' it from Trevelyan, 'however inconvenient it may be'. Ellis believes that Napier 'misunderstands his position'; Gibson Craig & Co agree.

Edinburgh. - With thanks for copies of most recent letters; they also 'do not see what Mr Napier is aiming at, and you are quite right in not consenting to withdraw the interdict'. If Napier has no intention of publishing the letters, 'the fact that the interdict still remains in place cannot do either him or the Messrs Constable any harm'.

Edinburgh. - With thanks for copies of most recent letters between Napier and Ellis.

Edinburgh. - Until 'something is decided one way or another', Ellis & Ellis are right in thinking that 'the correspondence would be a sufficient answer to any application' by Constables to remove the interdict, without Sir Charles Trevelyan filing a bill in England. If a bill is filed, it will not be expected of Sir Charles to get an interim injunction.

Edinburgh. - They have received the copy of Mr Napier's letter; do not consider that this affects 'the position of parties', and think that the application of interdict was warranted. Neither the Complainers [Sir Charles and George Otto Trevelyan] nor Ellis & Ellis seem to have been informed of his abandonment of a general publication and proposal to have only fifty copies printed; this has not been assented to and the printers 'at present stand interdicted from "printing" for "circulation". Proceedings in England will determine whether he is within his rights to have this small run printed for private circulation.

Edinburgh. - Enclosing copies [no longer present] of the application for Interdict; the answers thereto for Edmonston & Douglas and for Thomas & Archibald Constable; and of the 'Copy Interlocutor or order by Lord Ormidale dated yesterday'.

Messrs Edmonston & Douglas 'who it appears had been very recently negotiating with Mr Napier as to the publication of a life of his father) now disclaim any intention so to publish', and the Lord Ordinary has recalled the Interdict against them with expenses. The interdict remains effectual against Messrs Constable until proceedings against Mr Napier in England determine the rights of parties - or unless either the complainants have the interdict declared perpetual or Messrs Constable have it removed. Will be glad to know if it is intended to take proceedings against Mr Napier, 'as the interdict against Messrs Constable stands upon the representation that such proceedings are to be brought.

With copy of letter.

Edinburgh. - The Lord Ordinary has 'today issued an Interlocutor granting Interdict as craved, and ordaining the Respondents to lodge answers within eight days'.

Spring Gardens. - The interdict should be applied for; date of Lord Macaulay's will given.

Edinburgh. - Have received Mr Balfour's opinion on the Memorial which was submitted to him for Sir Charles Trevelyan; encloses copy [no longer present]. Since his opinion is favourable, he has prepared a draft note of suspension and interdict against Messrs Edmondston & Douglas and their printers Messrs Thomas and Archibald Constable; a telegraph should be sent if the interdict should be applied for at once. Date of Lord Macaulay's will also requested.

Edinburgh. - Thanks for the letters and copy correspondence; think they now have 'sufficient information... to get a satisfactory opinion from Mr [John?] Balfour, to whom they are sending the papers today with a request that he give it 'with the least possible delay'. Think that the court will not require the production and discussion of each separate letter but that a 'general assessment as to the character of the letters' should suffice; asks however for the date and place of writing for each letter, for the purpose of identification.

40 Ennismore Gardens. - Has read Ellis' letter, and the copy of Messrs Gibson Craig's. Sets out course he thinks should be followed re Macvey Napier's intention to publish letters of Lord Macaulay. 'It is quite evident that Napier only proposed to publish after he learned of my being engaged [in working on the letters]'

Edinburgh. - Have received yesterday's letter and the copy correspondence accompanying it. Sets out how Scottish law seems to differ from English in respect to copyright, with an extended quotation from George Joseph Bell's Commentaries. They have made enquiries and believe that Edmonston & Douglas are Napier's publishers, and that they are currently communicating with their printers 'with a view to publishing some of the letters [by Lord Macaulay] in question]. To prevent this, 'the legal remedy afforded by our Courts is an Interdict against the Publishers'; 'distinct particulars of the letters in question' are requested in case this course must be taken.

Before taking any definite action, they wish to 'lay the whole matter before some good counsel here, such as Mr [John?] Balfour. They will watch for advertisements put out by Napier.

5 Thistle St Edinburgh. - Would be happy to undertake the 'confidential business of considerable importance with regard to the late Lord Macaulay's reputation' [Macvey Napier's desire to publish letters to his father]; have telegraphed to request papers.

Spring Gardens. - Probably drawn up by George Henry Ellis. Describes the situation between Sir Charles and George Otto Trevelyan on the one side and Macvey Napier on the other over publication of Lord Macaulay's lawyer.

Mr [Horace] Davey has seen the correspondence and given his opinion; it needs to be established whether the courts in Scotland will take the same view as Davey; the next stage is to 'restrain if possible the publication without Sir Charles Trevelyan's consent of Lord Macaulay's letters'.

Sets out the status of Sir Charles Trevelyan, the late Thomas Flower Ellis, and George Henry Ellis in relation to Lord Macaulay's letters

5 Thistle St Edinburgh. - have received letter; will be glad to receive the papers referred to therein.

Sends address of Messrs Gibson Craig, Dalziel & Brodies.

On House of Commons embossed notepaper. - Is told by Mr [Henry?] Campbell Bannerman that Gibson Craig, Dalzell [sic] and Brodie are a 'first class firm'; their connection with Trevelyan's uncle [Lord Macaulay] was so very close and friendly (old Gibson Craig having been his colleague in Parliament and his near friend) that they would exert themselves to the utmost in the matter; suggests contacting the firm.