University of Virginia Library

Search this document 


  

collapse section 
 1. 
 2. 
 3. 
 4. 
 5. 
 6. 
 7. 
 8. 
 9. 
  
collapse section 
 1. 
 2. 
 3. 
 4. 
  
collapse section 
 1. 
 2. 
 3. 
 4. 
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
 1. 
 1. 
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
 1. 
 2. 
 3. 
R to B Dec. (B, VI, 121-123).
 4. 
 5. 
 6. 
 7. 
 8. 
 9. 
 10. 
 11. 
 12. 
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
 1. 
 2. 
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
 1. 
 2. 
 3. 
 4. 
 5. 
 6. 
 7. 
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
 1. 
 2. 
  

collapse section 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

R to B Dec. (B, VI, 121-123).

Richardson probably answered Lady Bradshaigh's 25 Nov. letter in his of Dec., but only a fragment of that letter is preserved. That fragment (B, VI, 121-123) appears in the undated letter Mrs. Barbauld placed after Lady Bradshaigh's letter of 16 April and is the passage Eaves and Kimpel date [Dec.-Jan.] and place after the letter they refer to as Lady Bradshaigh's [28 Dec.]. Richardson begins it by telling Lady Bradshaigh, "I am at present engaged with a most admirable young Lady of little more than twenty, Miss Mulso, on the subject of paternal authority, and filial obedience." He continues through B, VI, 123 speaking of Miss Mulso and their discussion, and he tells Lady Bradshaigh that "when Miss Mulso and I have got through our debate, I shall long to have your Ladyship's opinion of it." Though Richardson's replies are lost, Hester Mulso's three letters on "paternal authority, and filial obedience" are preserved in the Posthumous Works of Mrs. Chapone (1808). Her three letters are dated 12 Oct. (II, 29-34), 10 Nov. (II, 37-85), and 3 Jan. (II, 89-143). Richardson had not received Miss Mulso's last letter by the time he wrote Lady Bradshaigh since, as he told her, he and Miss Mulso had not yet gotten through their debate. This places Richardson's letter before he would have received Miss Mulso's of 3 January. But Lady Bradshaigh answers Richardson and tells him she "should be greatly delighted to see the correspondence" (B, VI, 52) in a segment of her 6 Jan. letter that she dated 28 December. Richardson's letter, therefore, had to have been received by Lady Bradshaigh after she posted her 25 Nov. letter but on or before 28 December. The possibility of the January dating that Eaves and Kimpel suggest is, therefore, eliminated.

With little conjecture one can also eliminate the possibility of Richardson's letter having been written in late November. Lady Bradshaigh's 6 Jan. letter was begun on 26 December or earlier because she dates an internal section 27 December. Her letter opens with an answer to a question Richardson had asked probably in the letter from which the fragment came. It is highly doubtful that had she received a late November letter from Richardson,


187

Page 187
she would have waited until late December to answer it or had she begun a letter in early December, she would have waited until late December to complete it and early January to post it. When there were lapses of this length in their correspondence, they always faithfully explained the reasons for them. It is fairly certain then that Richardson's passage about Miss Mulso is taken from a letter written to Lady Bradshaigh in December of 1750.