PATRONAGE.
“Above a patron—though
I condescend
Sometimes to call a minister my friend.”
My daughter again applies to me for my paternal imprimatur;
and I hope that I am not swayed by partiality, when
I give the sanction which she requires.
To excite the rising generation to depend upon their
own exertions for success in life is surely a laudable
endeavour; but, while the young mind is cautioned
against dependence on the patronage of the great, and
of office, it is encouraged to rely upon such friends
as may be acquired by personal merit, good manners,
and good conduct.
Richard Lovell Edgeworth.
Edgeworthstown, Oct. 6, 1813.
The public has called for a third impression
of this book; it was, therefore, the duty of the author
to take advantage of the corrections which have been
communicated to her by private friends and public censors.
Whatever she has thought liable to just censure has
in the present edition been amended, as far as is
consistent with the identity of the story. It
is remarkable that several incidents which have been
objected to as impossible or improbable were true.
For instance, the medical case, in Chapter XIX.
A bishop was really saved from suffocation by a clergyman
in his diocese (no matter where or when), in the manner
represented in Chapter X. The bishop died long ago;
and he never was an epicure. A considerable estate
was about seventy years ago regained, as described
in Chapter XLII., by the discovery of a sixpence under
the seal of a deed, which had been coined later than
the date of the deed. Whether it be advantageous
or prudent to introduce such singular facts in a fictitious
history is a separate consideration, which might lead
to a discussion too long for the present occasion.
On some other points of more importance to the writer,
it is necessary here to add a few words. It has
been supposed that some parts of patronage were
not written by Miss Edgeworth. This is not fact:
the whole of these volumes were written by her, the
opinions they contain are her own, and she is answerable
for all the faults which may be found in them.
Of ignorance of law, and medicine, and of diplomacy,
she pleads guilty; and of making any vain or absurd
pretensions to legal or medical learning, she hopes,
by candid judges, to be acquitted. If in the letters
and history of her lawyer and physician she has sometimes
introduced technical phrases, it was done merely to
give, as far as she could, the colour of reality to
her fictitious personages. To fulfil the main
purpose of her story it was essential only to show
how some lawyers and physicians may be pushed forward
for a time, without much knowledge either of law or
medicine; or how, on the contrary, others may, independently
of patronage, advance themselves permanently by their
own merit. If this principal object of the fiction
be accomplished, the author’s ignorance on professional
subjects is of little consequence to the moral or
interest of the tale.
