xt7qjq0stw34_2380 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7qjq0stw34/data/mets.xml https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7qjq0stw34/data/1997ms474.dao.xml unknown archival material 1997ms474 English University of Kentucky The physical rights to the materials in this collection are held by the University of Kentucky Special Collections Research Center.  Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. W. Hugh Peal manuscript collection Edward Verrall Lucas clippings text 43.94 Cubic Feet 86 boxes, 4 oversize boxes, 22 items Poor-Good Peal accession no. 11453. Edward Verrall Lucas clippings 2017 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7qjq0stw34/data/1997ms474/Box_86/Folder_16/Multipage8099.pdf 1901-1938, undated 1938 1901-1938, undated 
  Scope and Contents
  
Peal accession no. 8803.
 section false xt7qjq0stw34_2380 xt7qjq0stw34 E. V. Lucas

V. LUCAS was an extraordinary

man. The massive shouldering

. build, the slow sardonic moods,

the moist evasive eye, a sort of smolder—

ing grimness (like a cornered bull, a

friend once described him) were what

might have been expected in a great
tycoon, an owner
of mines and fac—
tories, a disinher-
ited marquis or
unexpectedly de-
feated prizefight-
er. Some albatross
hung round his
neck, but no one
ever inquired and
those who read
his light and well
bred writings
were unlikely to
guess the savage
quality of the
spirit. Like many
to whom the
emetic epithet
“whimsical” has

been hastily ap- E. V.

plied, E. V. was

master of protective discoloration. Even
his handwriting was a cryptogram. His
essays, ' because they were the merest
fooling, will easily be forgotten; not so
his incomparable anthologies, guide-
books, and the masterpiece—patiently
elaborated through so many years—the
Lives and Letters of Charles and Mary
Lamb.

The old saying would be true in this
case: Lucas knew the Lambs better than
they knew themselves. Here he found a
deep consoling symbolism, in the sister
who was intermittently mad and the
brother who wore the dreadful mask of
comedy. As editor and as understander

1868-1938

Lucas was here supreme. Copious indus—
try to assemble was balanced by beauti—
ful terseness of comment; tingling through
to the gristle of the situation.

Hepatic in mien, but ecstatic in vitality,
loved and feared and marvelled at, mas—
ter of the unexpected kindliness and the
savage phrase, E.
V. was a sketch
for something
very great indeed.
He lived hard;
punished others
as he did himself;
to be thought of
as a humorist
amused him (more
than his humor
amused his read-
ers) because there
is a malicious
pleasure in ful-
filling simple cate-
gories. He was a
great business
man and (from
simple Quaker
stock) loved to
oscillate from so-
cial grade A to very low com-
pany indeed. At both ends of the scale
he kept his own counsel. Using the word
affectionately, he was a perfect snob. He
scarcely ever found anyone good enough
to confide what he really thought.

Lowering, witty, of power unsuspected
by the casual, he would have humphed
with cynical amusement at his Obits.
Only one as lovingly frank as this would
have satisfied his savage passion for the
actual and the absurd. In the phrase he
knew so well, he was an archangel con—
siderably tarnished, but the gold showed
through.

32L iguana/3K

Lucas

C. M.

 

 “IE.‘/f’

Is [)ead

EDITH CHRISTINA jOHNSON

V. LUCAS is dead. His

0 friends echo the lament of
Charles Lamb for Coleridge. For
the suddenness of the event, on
June 26, makes its finality the
more difficult to realize. His last
public appearance was, characteris-
tically, at the weekly lunch of the
Punch editorial staff, just the day
before he knew he was to face the
ordeal of an operation. In less
than two weeks “the largest heart
in literary London was still.”
Three years ago, in his last auto—
biographicalsketch,1 E. V. wrote:
“We ought to go on being well

and strong and fit until three score
years and ten, and then vanish.”
It was two weeks after his 70th
birthday that he himself “van—
ished.”

On the same day his last piece

of writing, “The Wanderer’s
Notebook,” appeared in the Lon—
don Sunday Times. Lucas’ love of
writing was a life—long passion. It
conquered the arduous duties of
publisher when, as the head of the
London firm of Methuen for I4.
years, he remained true to his
creative work. As he said, he loved
writing and could give precedence
to nothing else. In fact his will
leaves, subject to various life in—
1 The Old Contemporaries.

terests, the residue of his property
“one—fourth to the Royal Literary
Fund, and three—fourths to the
Authors’ Pension Fund.”

E. V. Lucas’ own literary out—
put was colossal—33 pages of the
British Museum catalogue are re—
quired to list his more than 100
books. If, as some authority re—
marked recently, genius is excess
of energy, E. V. was richly en—
dowed. Much of what he wrote
was of the transient nature of daily
journalism, but for his contribu—
tion in two fields he may lay claim
to immortality, if one may be so
bold as to risk prophecy: he was
a born essayist and a natural
scholar.

Of his essays and sketches, a
small but substantial quantity—-
rare and individual in its essence—-
will remain. He had the keenly
observing eye of the essayist, who
is essentially the poet of prose. Out
of the familiar stuff of everyday
experience he picked the matter of
his essays, indicating its significance
in comment rich in literary con—
tent and alive with the pleasure of
recognition. He wrote always with
a certain felicity, but in his best
work there is the final mark of
genius in the cunningly turned
phrase, the adroit use of familiar

Reprinted from THE AMERICAN SCHOLAR, Autumn 1938, Volume 7, Number 4

4-99

 

 

 The American Scholar

words. There is not only the sud—
den illumination of meaning that
captures the reader’s attention but
the richness of implication that
stirs endless associative currents in
imagination and memory. His
prose, singularly pure in quality,
unmarked by mannerisms or tricks
of style, carries less risk of being
“dated” than the work of many of
his more popular contemporaries.
Its effects are produced mainly by
directness, concentration and un—
derstatement.

E. V. could be as unsparingly
analytical of an idea or a person—
ality as the most forceful of our
modern realists, for he had a cer—
tain quality which Mr. Frank
Swinnerton calls, in his brief but
brilliant tribute,2 “harsh justice.”
E. V.’s record of his first impres—

sion of the poet Swinburne illus—
trates this dynamic realism:

This, my first sight of Swinburne, I
am not likely to forget, since various other
preconceptions instantly crumbled away.
For one thing, though he was as short
as I had supposed, his body was by no
means the inconsiderable affair that, from
many testimonies, one had thought it. On
the contrary, it was marked by solidity,
and below the waistline was not less
ethereal than that of many a trencherman
who had never written at all or anything
but prose. His face, too, which was highly
colored, bore further signs that materialis-
tic interests were not outside his scheme
of life. The eyes were fixed and mirthless.
Above the eyes, however, all was different
and magnificent—a dome, lofty and aloof
as one could ask, curiously like Shake-
speare’s. His hair, a ruddy grey, was thin;

I'In the (London) Observer, July 3, 1938.

his heard, the same color, was fuller than
I had expected. But his whole person was
informed by prandial intentness. It had
neither vivacity nor spiritual suggestion.

Again, E. V. could be finely
meditative and philosophical, as
well as direct and intense—as in
his comment upon the funeral of
W. J. Craig, the English Shake—
spearian scholar, whom Lucas
memorialized and immortalized
in his essay, “The Funeral.”

I found myself meditating . . . how
melancholy it was that all that storied
brain, with its thousands of exquisite
phrases, . . . should have ceased to be.
For such a cessation, at any rate, say what
one will of immortality, is part of the
sting of death, part of the victory of the
grave, which St. Paul denied with such
magnificent irony.

The words might have been
spoken of himself. The firmness
and strength of his own prose de—
rived from the scholar in the es—
sayist.

His was a “natural” scholar—
ship, the product of years of con—
centrated reading: at the British
Museum (“my real Alma Ma-
ter”) while he was still a reporter
for the London Gloée and, for a
few short terms, at London Uni—
versity where he came under the
influence of its professor of Eng-
lish, W. P. Ker. E. V. sometimes
deplored his own lack of a classical
education but many a university
professor might well have envied
him his richly stored mind. His
knowledge was encyclopedic in its
range and amazingly exact and de—

500

 

 

 “IE.\/3’

tailed. Yet he was never pedantic.
His was humanized erudition.

When commissioned by Me—
thuen & Co. (in 1900) to edit an
edition and write a new biography
of Charles Lamb, E. V. in his in—
vestigations instinctively employed
the scientific methods of a modern
research scholar. He visited in per—
son every place in England known
to be associated with Lamb’s life
and history, interviewed those who
owned letters or manuscripts of
Elia, read all that had been writ—
ten by and about Lamb and, so far
as possible, what Lamb had read.
Consequently he had a knowledge
and understanding of his subject
such as no previous editor of Lamb
had possessed. Yet such was his
characteristic modesty that even
today the full significance of E.
V. Lucas as a scholar is far from
being recognized.

This work in nine volumes, pub—
lished over a period of years from
1902 and running into more than
one edition, established Lucas’
reputation as the preeminent au—
thority on Charles Lamb. It was
the first climax of a long literary
devotion, originating in his early
youth and persisting as the domi—
nant motif 1n his life. But a second
and more dramatic climax came in
I9 3 5 when, through the joint ef—
forts of the houses of Dent and
Methuen the letters of Charles
Lamb, collected and edited by
Lucas, were published in three
volumes. This triumphant edition,
the result of years of effort to

Is I)ead

overcome the obstacles of copy—
right ownership and costs of pub—
lication, was the consummation of
E. V. Lucas’ scholarly achieve—
ment. In recognition of this work
Oxford University conferred upon
him the degree of Doctor of Let—
ters in June 1936. Other notable
honors had come to him: election
to the select group—never more
than 50-——known as Companions
of Honor, the degree of Doctor
of Laws f1 om St. Andrews Uni—
versity, appointment to the Royal
Commission on Historical Monu—
ments. But the Oxford distinction
was E. V.’s greatest academic
triumph.
. The three—volume opus contains
I,022 of Lamb’s letters, some 50
or more never before published.
As a result of E. V.’s further in—
vestigation of manuscripts in Eng—
land and the United States——
which he canvassed from north to
south and east to west in a special
Visit for that purpose early in
19 34—the editors’ notes from
previous editions were carefully
revised and coriected. The chrono—
logical arrangement of the letters,
and the expansion of the notes by
the addition of more detailed ref—
erences to many of the personali—
ties who formed the Elian circle,
are in accordance with the editor’s
aim to make these volumes con—
stitute a new biography of Lamb,
definitive and intimate because re-
corded by Elia himself.

His life—long association with
the writings of that earlier essayist

501

 

 The American Scholar

earned for Lucas the affectionate
titles, “the modern Lamb” and
“the reincarnation of Elia.” He
himself was embarrassed by the
comparison, for no one more thor—
oughly appreciated Lamb’s genius.
Most similarities between the two
writers are merely superficial, but
it is interesting to note that each
expressed himself by choice

through two closely related forms,

the essay and the letter. E. V.’s
own publishers will soon give the
reading public an opportunity to
catch that more intimate and com—
plete portrait which his letters af—
ford. Unique in form as well as
content“, they are concrete evidence
of the debt we owe him for having
preserved for our generation in—
comparable examples of “the
gentlest art.”

 

 CURRENT

LITERATURE

MARCH, 1934

 

REVUE AND REVIEWS BY TRAGOS
WITH SKETCHES BY BATT

CHARLES LAMB

E are close on another centenary of a
celebrated literary figure, that of
Charles Lamb, who died in December,
1834, and already have had Mr. A. C.

5,1, Ward’s EVERYBODY’S LAMB, done by George

' Bell in an illustrated edition at 105. 6d, which

we reviewed in our Christmas number: a

handsome selection made of his life/and works

in 554 pages. A further Ward volume is now
issued by Methuen at 63. called THE FROLIC

AND THE GENTLE: A STUDYgOF CHARLES

LAMB, more of a life and a general estimate and

summary of his living, without the letters or

extracts; and also a smaller volume done by

E. V. Lucas with Mdthuen as?" publishers (5s),

AT THE SHRINE OF ST. CHARLES, stray

papers collected for the purpose also of estima-
tion, Lucas having written a‘ full two—volume
biography in 1905 as 'wiell'jas?having—published

books on Lamb’s friends. _ _

1/“ Both of the new volume; are as good as
expected. Ward’s FROLIé is greally a condensed
life for the man in the street, ifwho can get all he
wants to know from this yogume and'form his
own opinion on it without fpedantic direction.
Whether influenced by Carlyle, who thought
Lamb “ a pitiful, ricketty, gasping, staggering,
stuttering Tomfool,” or not, there is material
here for a saner and more free judgment.

If one is nof attracted by Lamb’s writing, no
opinion of him is worth forming, since he was
in fact all that Carlyle left on record, though he
visited him at Enfield as a gueét and should have
shown. better taste in putting it down. In
addition to that, \Charles had been for a short
time in his youth in an asyléim, I796—which is
better than ending in. one like Nietzsche, Comte,
Dean Swift and others; but it is a blow for the
eugenists l His sister”: murdered their mother
with a carving knife, wouq’ded her father badly
with a fork, and when at intervals of her life she
had also to return to the asylum, Charles, walking
cheerfully off with her and being aware that the
institution provided no comfortable strait-jacket,
carried one under his arm. Neither married and
both lived very happily, Charles dying before his
sister, though they had arranged it the other way

round. Mary survived him for 13 years, and was ‘

My * *

amwcnew hunuugg

,(Dent, 7s. Eda), illus—_

twenty-two years older, not 12 as appears by a
slip here, when she died.

As it happened, both Charles and Mary were
particularly gifted. While the former made the
immortal ESSAYS OF ELIA, his sister manufactured
the equally lasting TALES FROM SHAKESPEARE,
and all the time Coleridge of the Ancient Mariner,
Wordsworth, Leigh Hunt, George Dyer, Moxon,
the publisher, Barry Cornwall, Hazlitt, and others
noted and far less noted-people, were in and out
of the house. All but Dyer, who actually as
mad as a hatter and as} blind as a bat, had walked
into the New River from Lamb’s house in
Colebrook Row, ,Islington, thought it worth
whild to write his flife or to continue talking about
him.

We do not suppose any man with a love of
literature cares?" in the least what others think of
Lamb, but this is a recommendation to cultivate
further the acquaintance of one who when De
Quineeyerealled for him
at the office climbed
down circularly from
his exceptionally high
stool, re rking that he
would b round in a
minute, . greeted his
senior ‘director who
admoniihed him for
being ate by crying
stammeringly, “ but see
how early I go,” and
who could hiss his own
play, “ Mr. H.” harder
and more meaningly
than any of the
audience disliking it.
He may be worthy of
more notice in their

spare tim' e. am
*. :1?”

 

_‘ w...

 

ose recent appraise-
me ts off!” Modern
Ger ny,/France, and

Italy§f>fh ave b C en
valuable,\\now writes

MODERNERUSMA

 

 

 

 

REMARKING THAT HE
\VOULD BE ROUND IN
A MINUTE . . .

trated by photographs.

 

 MARCH, 1934 CURRENT LITERATURE

 

O

‘lo'o'o
colon.

‘.
.§
‘1
|
. e:
> §
‘ U
‘0
..
. .;
Q
Q

l a a
l’o‘o.a‘. '.'." ‘o'

o I a o o o a
.,C_ o-v.o_ c n'n'.'.'.’,’

" ' o o ' O C
:0 :0: ‘4 '0 '1 .p '.'.l 1.’ ’0r1‘.'. ', '. O. o‘c’q’a'. ‘r'

. ' .. .
v. "a,“ o'o'a'o'o'.'.’.' ':’o'.‘.".' .'.'.o_'.'.f.f.'f.'.o:.f.‘.gnu; .0.0.-..°.-,n‘.'4'.',:.o_3‘. ‘

' 0 .0094. ‘ "ou‘ ' o0
. u'c'u‘u '.'.'.' 0...».‘""""""'.0'§"."'.' f...

. . ......

DENT’S NOVELS

 

 

flesign for a Staircase GUY POCOCK

‘What a pleasure it is . . . A really delightful book. Thousands
will enjoy every word of it.’-—Compton Mackenzie in the Daily Mail.
‘ A sheer delight . . . A most delicate design, at moments diverting,
at others pathetic. l enjoyed the book greatly.’——Ralph Straus in
the Sunday Times. Second Impression 7/6 net

Scandal of Spring MARTIN BOYD

‘Here we are up against reality. The painful passion of romantic
youth, its extreme and lofty folly, its sad and bitter disappointment,
are presented in a moving tale. This book has a true element of
beauty.’—Gerald Gould in the News-Chronicle. 7/6 net

Corner Shop PHILIP KEELEY

‘ I liked it very much indeed. It is a fine and solid piece of work,
the many characters clearly seen and vividly created. Mrs. firemen
is a superb figure.’—Storm Jameson. 7/6 net

Render Unto Caesar MARGOT ADAMSON

‘ Miss Adamson touches the dying Middle Ages into life.’
—G. Macintyre Little in the Scots Observer. ‘ Her colour is rich and
true.'—Helen Simpson In the Morning Post. 7/6 net

Coming in April
Parable tor Lovers
By LEWIS GIBBS

WRAPPER BY REX WHISTLER

O IIIIII

. . . _ . .
‘ . . ' 3 "'0 '0'... '0'. ’0 'o‘o’o'05;‘;':. '0'.‘.' 5...... 0.1.0.. '0 ‘o' ' '0 '. '. "'0 'v'o‘ 'v'a '0 o.

[Kindly mention “ Current Literature " when ordering]

’

I

. , .
5“. o o'a'a'o‘o't'. ’

o . ' O 0 .
a o O '0’... 9.0.“;-

.‘ .o. "-o <
'0‘... ' ’0‘“. o . ‘ .0

o 0 o o .' ' - o
07"}! O o'o'o’ ' ‘ 'o'

a'o'o ... .n.¥‘. 0. -".'o;. , ' '.

O‘O'O;'.'O;I"n’$;¢;l.I.O_.D'I'I ‘1

0.0
O.
. I.

. 5"“). ' ‘g'v";’.':. V.o.¢:o:' 0." o..’:.';'0‘

.
1’.

..,
..-
.Ill -

 

 .WHAT SHALL WE DO NOW?

A Book of Suggestions for
Children's Games and Employmcnts

BY
EDWARD VE RRALL LUCAS

ELIZABETH LUCAS

NEW EDITION

LONDON

GRANT RICHARDS
1901

 

 1-‘1‘ixlfii'1'11ftn', :Ilgq'uxl‘ 1900.

{fr A'iufc‘c/ /):'tu.1n’rr')‘ a 7/1: .mmt "tar.
)

 

 What Shall We Do Now?

 

 PUBLISHERS ANNOUNCEMENT
TWO ANTHOLOIEES COMPILED BY

E. V. LUCAS

I. THE OPEN ROAD: A. LITTLE BOOK FOR
\VAVIMKL‘RS. With End Papers by William
Hyde. l“cap. 8vo, Cloth, 55.; India Paper,
Lambskin, 7s. 6d. Second Edition.

2. A {00K OF VERSES FOR CHILDREN.
\Vith End Papers, Title-page, and Cover, by
F. D. BEDFORI). Cloth, Crown SW), 65.
Fourth Edition.

THREE PICTURE BOOKS WITH
VERSES BY E. V. LUCAS

I. ALL THE \VORI.D OVER. Illustrated in
colours by EDITH FARMILOE. Oblong Folio,
Picture Boards, 65.

2. THE BOOK OF SHOPS. Illustrated in
colours. by F. D. BEDFOKD. Oblong Folio,
Picture Boards, 65.

3. FOUR AND TWENTY TOILEks. Illus-
trated in colours by F. D. BEDFORD. Oblong
li'olio, Picture Boards, 65.

 

THE DUMPY BOOKS FOR CHILDREN
EDITED BY E. V. LUCAS
181110, C lot/z, 15. 6d. eac/L

r. THE FLAMP, THE AMELIORATOR, and
THE SCHOOLDOY'S AI'I‘RENTICE. By the
EDITOR. Fourth Edition.

2. MRS. TURNER'S CAUTIONARY STORIES.
Fourth Edition.

3. THE BAD FAMILY. By Mrs. FENWICK.
S ccond Edition.

4. THE STORY OF LITTLE BLACK SAMBO.
Illustrated in colours by HELEN BANNERMAN.
Twenty-first Thousand.

5. THE BOUNTIFUL LADY. By THOMAS

. Conn. Second Edition.

6. A CAT BOOK. Portraits by H. OFFICER
SMITH. Characteristics by the EDITOR. Second
Edition.

LONDON : GRANT RICHARDS

9 HENRIETTA ST., COVENT GARDEN, W.C.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 W
2 %/¢./ THO

‘ fwd! .1 v "
Obituary / i
MR. E. v. LUCAS
!

§GRACEFUL ESSAYIST OFl
GREAT VERSATILITY i

l

l

AUTHOR OF NEARLY 1dr
BOOKS l

Mr. E. V. Lucas. long famous as one oil
the world’s most graceful essayists. die l
in London yesterday at the age of TO. l

A prolific writer. whose books num—j
bered nearly ltlt). he was above all a‘
disciple of Charles Lamb. Yet: it was
as no mere imitator that he gained the
affection of his readers. V

His style. natural. quite unt.'orced,j
polished. clear. confidential. erudite. wast
that of a master. It gained for him the:
unstinted admiration of great critics andl=
it remained as fresh to the end as it'hadl
been at: the beginning. l

He was extraordinarily informative;
in his writings. but never diadactic, andi
his versatility was astonishing. With itl
went delightful humour. l

-The tedium of writing never affected:1
him. Smoothly and without; apparent
effort or exhaustion he used his pen and
never dictated. for. as he confessed. he
j" liked writing.

MANY HONOURS

Oxford honoured him with a D.Litt.
and St. Andrews with an LLD. In 1932
he was made a Companion of Honour. ‘

For ten years he had been a member off

'the Royal Commission on Historic Monu—

l“

 

 

Mr. l3. V. LUCAS.

lments. and in 1.03:: he became a member"
of t he Crown Lands Advisory Committeeu
He was also chairman of Methnen andi
Co. the publishers. f

Edward \r’errall Lucas was born .ifl
Quaker stock and when he was 16 bea
came an api'n‘entice to a Brighton book-l
seller. There he took every opportunity
he could of l'an‘iiliarising himselt with;
the contents of a big circulating: liln‘aryf

It. was this interest in literziiture which.
inducml an uncle to leave him .L‘Ztitl \‘Jltli
which he was enjoined to attend lectures
at University College. London, for as long
as the money lasted. 1

“ E. \v’. I had just exhausted his funds;
in this way when he went on the staff of
the “Globe." He had previously had;
some experience as a reporter on the‘i
"Sussex Daily News" and his engage—
ment on the " Globe " lasted for several
years.

“SUNDAY TIMES ” ARTICLES 1

Later he went on the Academy,”
after which he joined “ Punch.” Then
began his long association with the‘
“ Sunday Times." wherein appeared his
widely read column. “ A Wanderer":-
Notebook.

His article in yesterday‘s issue an
'Compleat .-\nglers ” was characteristic-
ally charming.

Nearly 4t) years have passed since he
published “The Open Road.” and in 1903
appeared his extremely popular skit—~—
in coniunction with C. L. Graves—~en—
titled. "Wisdom While You Wait."

The next year there followed " High-l
ways and Byways of Sussex." which fill
19236 be revised and enlarged. l

“Listener‘s Lure" followed. and at
the same time he began his “Wan-l
derer‘s ” books. which as the years went}
by c‘*inl>raced London. Holland. Paris.l
li‘lorcnce. Venice and Rome.

PROLIFIC OUTPUT

But, “E. \7. L.'s“' output was so pro-
lific that it was difficult. to keep pace with
‘him. Year after year fresh volumes
were turned Olll‘—SOlTlGilnlCS three or
four in a twelve—month. Notwithstand-
ing this he carried out his duties as
lliterary adviser and a director of the
l Methuen firm. <

When in l924 he succeeded to the

chairmanship on the death of Sir;
Algernon l\ilethuen. he went on writingi
with only slightly diminished vigour. He'
produced " The, Colvins and their
Friends in 1928 at the express wish (,f
his friend. the late Sir Sidney Colvin.
and in steady succession came books cf
essays.

In .1932 he wrote a highly entertaining
volume of reminiscences. “ Reading.
Writing and Remembering." and among
many other books he produced after“
much labour the first complete edition oft
the letters of Charles and Mary Lamb}
which added considerably to the famcl
he had already gained as a Lamb?
authority. ‘

Mr. Lucas lczivcs a wife and one
daughter. Mrs. Audrey Scott. who is
married to Mr. Harold Scott. the actor
and producer. l\lrs. Scott is a playwright
and an authority on the cinema. She
has just written a novel. " Old Motley”;
which is shortly to be published. 7

Y.‘

 

  

A Modern Lamb

V. LUCAS’S death will be

.0 regretted throughout the
English-reading world because he
was the master of a literary form
, in which few writers excel. There
are so many good English
novelists that it can truly be said
about many of them “They
never would be missed.” There
are, however, not so many great
English essayists that E. V, Lucas
can be easily spared.

Like Lamb, whom he so ably
edited, he possessed a dry and
delicate humour; and his place
in English letters is assured along
with Lamb.

His writings told of his wander-
ings in many cities. What a pity
that on this final adventure he
cannot take his pen with him to

sketch the by-ways of the New
Jerusalem !

 

 

  

 

 

MEMORIES OF OLD CRICKETERS

E.V.’s

“A Hundred Years of Trent Bridge.”

LAST BOOK

Edited by E. V. Lucas. With a Coloured

Frontispiece by Sir William Nicholson and twenty-eight other illustrations. (Privately

printed for Sir Julien Cahn, Bart.)

BY A. R. V. BARKER

Barely a week ago an American
guest of mine told me that 'he had just
come across the writing of an English—
man which delighted him above every—
thing he had previously met. I was

t
surprised to find the writer was E. V.
Lucas, not because of his enjoyment,

but because he had not met him before.
I envied him the feast that he was
promising himself, for he had read but
little.
day I should be reading what must be
the last work of that brilliant pen.
Although this little book he has edited.
and to which he has contributed his own

and cricket, is only privately printed.
and therefore limited in its circulation,
one could Wish for no better place to

say farewell.

***

It is hard to quarrel or to remember
bitterness when the sound of ball on
bat is in our ears. Memories of old
cricketers revived in this little book
are of their pleasant idiosyncrasies or
of their great and happy feats, and if
we can chuckle over the habits of Old
Clarke, so, too, must E. V. have
chuckled when he wrote of him: “ His

Surely I did not think that to—i
li’aulty correspondence course!

 

eating habits were also idiosyncratic-
or so I hope. When playing, he had for

i lunch only a bottle of soda—water
l and a cigar, but in. the evening he ate
Ea whole goose.”

What a hullabaloo
such a diet would cause to—day in those
strange columns which thrive on‘
creating trouble out of the very dust [I
on the ground and whose writers-
have often. it would seem, acquired
their knowledge of the game from a
%_X_*

Soda-water and/or goose Old Clarke

knew his stuff and, though ever to be

. . . . _ 7 . ‘remembered for his bowling, he had ai
writing and hls own enjoyment of lli‘C‘

shrewd word, to say about batting:
“ Lay your bat on top of the ball, and
don’t pull your bat from the ground up
to it. That is not cricket. The bat was '
made to play the ball.” What would
he or Alfred Shaw have had to
say but a few days back—for surely
their spirits must have been there won-
dering at the triumph of the bat over,
the ball? One can imagine the snorts
of him who once said: “If I were to
think every ball the other side
wouldn’t make a run.” Or the con-
tempt with which that master of length

 

 

 

 mag
/

’ I
a

_ Obituaryflfi

MR. E. V. LUCAS

ESSAYIST AND MAN OE
LETTERS

Mr. E. V. Lucas. essayist. man of
letters. and ultimately a publisher, died in
a London nursing home yesterday at the
age of 70. Edward Verrall Lucas came of
Sussex Quaker stock, quiet, if not drab,
personalities. as he said himself, who
eithe‘ banked brewed. Perhaps
he was proudest of his relationship
to Lord Lister. the great: surgeon;
but it was from A. W. Verrall, the
classical scholar. and from Jeremiah
Whitlen. the translator of Tasso. that
Lucas inherited his love of; literature and
his devotion and triumphant patience.

Lucas. who was educated at private
schools, had the bright and elusive type
of mind that does not flourish under
a schoolmaster. In his reminiscences,
“ Reacting. \Vriting. and Remembering,”
he spoke with. regret of having left school
at 16 to be apprenticed to a Brighton
bookseller. This. however, was a most
fortunate circumstance, for that book-
shop had a circulating library with an
enormous stock of: books no longer in
circulation. many of them dating from
the eighteenth century, and there he laid

Of

the foundation of his extraordinarily wide
and profound knowledge ot things out ot
the way in literature.

After serving his apprenticeship for two
years, he joined the staff of: the Sussex
Daily News. then edited by Mr. Ha y
Bone. He was happy in his work; he
loved Brighton as it. was in those days. and
he would probably have remained there had
not one of his uncles " acquired a concern,”
as the Quakers say. for his nephew’s future.
This uncle gave Lucas £200 in order that he
might: go to London and attend lectures at
University College as long as the money lasted.

Lucas ame to London in 1892. and from the
first he was a devoted admirer of W. P. Ker.
Professor of English literature at University
College. in " London Beginnings.” a
fascinating chapter in his book of reminis—
cences. the remarkable list of his friends
includes, in addition to Ker, persons like the
Colvins and Sir Walter Raleigh. it is easy to
un erstand how they were attracted by a
young man so modest yet so witty. so unassum—
ing yet so serenely self-confident. Editors
such as Harry Cust‘. of the Pall Mall Gazette.
and Algernon Locker. of the Globe. thought
well of him. and in 1893 he joined the staff of
the latter paper. Among his earliest publica-
tions was a little book of verse. called

I " Sparks from a Flin which bore no author’s
name; About this time also he received his
first commission for a book from the Society

of Friends. it was to write a memoir of

Bernard Barton. the Quaker poet and friend

of Charles Lamb. it led a few years later to a

commission from Reginald Smith. of Smith.

Elder. to edit some newly discovered letters

from Lamb to the Lloyd family. Then came

an invitation from Methuen and C0. to write a

new life of Lamb. and to bring out a new
edition of his works.

Lucas may perhaps be best remem
the greatest authority on Elia: but his work

was as manifold in kind as it was great in

quantity. His insatiable interest in all kinds
of life and is never dulled power of enjoy—
ment poured out of him weekly. almost daily.
in the Press. and in books of many kinds. He
was a regular contributor to Punch. and used
to take the editorial chair when Owen Seaman
was away on holiday. Wide reading and
definite tastes made him '1 master of the
anthology. His travel ks combine the

keenness of the explorer 1 the le ' i

the historian. With or without

Gravzs he produced a series of brilli

satires. beginning in 1903 with " Wisdom

While You Wait." a mock at the advertising

methods adopted to sell t e “ clopaedia

Britan tea." and culminating in Quoth the

Raven." in which the bitter exposure of shams

and pretences of War and post-War, is a con—
trast to the mellow, genial tone that pervades
his work as a rule. in 1909 Lucas brought
out Anne‘s Terrible Good Nature ” and
other stories for children, and “ Over Bemer-
ton‘s." still the most popular of all his novels.

Two ye 1': later Lucas published “ Mr.
lngleside." but wl ‘n " London Lavender”
appeared in 1912 it was clear that he
had discovered a new medium for his
exquisite and graceful genius. It is not one
sto ,. but a dozen stories. and in them appear
old friends from “Over Bemerton's" and

" l\ lngleside.” “ Landmarks " t191 ) is

not a novel. nor is it an autobiography. \et
there are touches in it that suggest a real life;
we feel that it was not the hero. Rudd Sergison.
but E. V. himself who was taken to the great
cricket match and had the glory of a conversa-
tion with Mr. A. N. Hornby. But the book
has neither the beauty nor the wise sympathy!
of "Rose and Rose." with the two adorablel
women. and Dr. Greville with his calm brain
and warm heart. There is a beautiful quality
in " Rose and Rose " that makes it perhaps

the best of all Lucas's work. and more to be .

treasured than those already mentioned or

“ Advisory Ben." “ Windfall's Eve.” and

Verena in the l\ st.” Lucas next became

a playwright. and The King's va’isir was played

at the Palace Theatre in 1912, and some years .
later The Same Smr was produced by‘ the

Leeds Art Theatre. He entered on a new
phase. and proved most successful in it. when,
after having been long conne ted with the firm
of Methuen. he became its chairmt‘tn.

Lucas was an enthusiast for cricket. and
compiled a record of early cricket called “ The
Hambledon Men.” He was a member of Sir
James Barrie‘s team. the Allahakbaris (God
Help Us). with J. C. S