Gottschalk reminiscence by Charles G. Whiting, with "Corrupt as Lima" quoted from MOBY-DICK

Signed "C. G. W." this reminiscence of the brilliant New Orleans-born pianist Louis Moreau Gottschalk by Charles Goodrich Whiting appeared in the Springfield Daily Republican (Springfield, Massachusetts) on January 29, 1870. Notices of Gottschalk's death in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in December 1869 had reached the United States nine days before, via steamship. Responding to the sad news, Whiting offers a heartfelt tribute to Gottschalk's genius and patriotism, informed by random personal encounters with the celebrated pianist in 1862, while vacationing in Saratoga, New York. Whiting also shares a memorable story (extracted from the report of another, unidentified Saratoga tourist) about Gottschalk's fired-up playing of the Star Spangled Banner in Saratoga, around the start of the Civil War. 

Springfield Daily Republican - January 29, 1870
via genealogybank.com

For Melville fans, another point of interest in Charles G. Whiting's published tribute to Gottschalk will be found in a casual allusion to Moby-Dick, specifically Chapter 54: The Town-Ho's Story. After the Civil War and rumors of a scandalous romance in San Francisco, Gottschalk left the United States for South America, touring in Peru, Chile, Uruguay, Argentina and Brazil. According to Whiting,

"He found more luxurious rest in the city of the Incas, whose wickedness has become a proverb,--"Corrupt as Lima,"--or among the orange groves around Rio Janeiro."

Glossing Gottschalk's warm and apparently forgiving reception in Lima, Peru, Whiting quotes the expression "Corrupt as Lima" as a supposedly well-known "proverb" of sinfulness. However pervasive the association of Lima with immortality may have become, that particular way of expressing it with the simile, "Corrupt as Lima" was always Melville's own invention, creatively inspired by a passage in one of his favorite source-books, A Visit to the South Seas (New York: John P. Haven, 1831) by Charles S. Stewart. Charles Goodrich Whiting would not have found the cited "proverb" outside of "The Town-Ho's Story" from Moby-Dick; or, The Whale in some version or other, as it first appeared in Harper's New Monthly Magazine for October 1851 or later in Chapter 54 of Moby-Dick. 

Transcribed below from the Springfield MA Daily Republican of January 29, 1870; this item was reprinted in the weekly edition of the Springfield Republican on February 4, 1870.

LOUIS MOREAU GOTTSCHALK 

Reminiscences from a Saratoga Season.  

So Gottschalk is dead! The passionate pulse is still, the generous heart is hushed, the poet-soul is fled. Some cannot think of anything in his varied and brilliant life, but one strange episode which banished him from the northern world's regard, four years ago in San Francisco. I knew about this man, though merely by observation, only three years previous to his fall,--if fall it were, and not a fatal mistake of the world's. It was at Saratoga in the hight of the season of 1862. He was of course an object of great interest to all the transient idlers, and I, idle like the rest, was drawn toward him irresistibly the first time I saw him. It was in a church, and a certain reverend beggar, with a wondrous gift of story-telling, was effectively stirring the sympathies of a large audience, even in a sweltering sultriness of air which invited sleep.

The usher inducted me into a pew where sat a young man, whose face would hardly have challenged a second glance, and whose presence even I did not at first heed. When my attention was drawn to him it was by a nervous motion of his fingers upon the seat before him, and I was struck by the rare refinement and delicacy of his hand. Hands have their expression no less truly than faces; Lavater said once that he would venture to pronounce upon the character of each person in a miscellaneous assembly, while passing around a contribution plate, and looking only on the hand as it dispensed or refused the chance of charity. This right hand was not slender, but its proportion and grace would not have shamed the immortality of marble. In its restlessness it showed as supple as silk, yet as strong as steel, and the nails were like shells, transparent and scrupulously trimmed. Then I scrutinized the man. Dark, wavy hair, a low brow, liquid and poetic eyes,--the only really fine feature his face held,--a handsome nose, though thick-nostriled as I once saw in a French sculpture of Apollo, a heavy moustache, a weak lower lip, a chin cleft with a deep dimple, and not too full cheeks,--these made his physiognomy. His dress was rich but not obtrusive or foppish, a large diamond shone on his left hand. It flashed across me, "This is Gottschalk!"

What impelled the artist to such a place, if he was merely a man of luxury and self-indulgence, is an enigma I should decline the attempt to solve. More astonishing than his presence was the emotion he plainly felt as the orator wrought up a painful tale of ruin and shame in the great city. I lost my interest in the story in watching the musician. And a lesser than Lavater would have been satisfied to call him "generous" on the evidence of the banknote he added to the collection of bits and fractions that followed the appeal.

I saw him often after that, and heard, too, many an incident of like tenor, testifying to a liberal, open-handed sharing of his rapidly gained fortunes with the needy; though I confess to having heard unpleasant tales enough about the unchecked riot of his passions. And yet in Saratoga he was the fast friend of the blind preacher, Rev. W. H. Milburn. Both were at the same Hotel--Union Hall--and they were much in each other's society; Mr. Milburn deeply loved music, and for his benefit Gottschalk's improvisations flowed freely. The pianist and the orator joined forces during this season in a charity entertainment, Gottschalk giving an hour's concert, Milburn his lecture on Milton.

I find in a letter written from Saratoga a description of an incident occurring there before my visit, but which I often heard alluded to by those present. It should be premised that the war had then but begun, and the old secesh element had not yet given place to the shoddy in that favorite resort of southern chivalry. Gottschalk was playing at a concert, a rare treat always. He had entranced all with his sensuous, brilliant, dreamy, gorgeous imagery of tone, his mastery of touch,--and now the struck into the "Star Spangled Banner." "The audience hissed him,--a thing unheard of, utterly out of his experience! They hissed him, as I said; the man turned, his face,--not a notable one,--flushed, his eyes flamed, intense scorn vibrated through his frame, he looked a lion! 'Now we shall hear playing,' whispered a friend at my elbow. And we did. He turned to his piano. Such a Star Spangled Banner I never before heard or shall hear again. The audience held their breath, patriots in despite of themselves. There followed Hail Columbia, and an interwoven rendering of other tunes, and mingling therein, still the Star Spangled Banner, glorious, unshaken, triumphant! They'll never try again to hiss down Louis Moreau Gottschalk!" One who never heard Gottschalk play cannot fully understand the possibilities of the piano. There is no one left like him. Sebastian Bach Mills plays mystically, Alide Topp is a marvel of artistic decision and delicacy, Ritter's splendid touch is a mere memory of Gottschalk's own,--but his genius has no successor. His vanity, which was undeniably great, as his kindliness of heart, always led him freely to display his marvelous talent for the entertainment of others. And the piano of Union Hall was a Mecca of music lovers the season through. Amid a society in which I never mingled, to be sure, but in regard to which I was more or less au fait, he was a prince.

A delicate courtesy or an ardent gallantry characterized his manner with women; and I have heard it said that his exquisite refinement rendered him the most dangerous assailant of woman's honor, and that he was not nearly so wicked as he might have been. His passions were like his birth, tropical; I have tried to believe less of their evil results than the gossip-mongers have bruited abroad, but the San Francisco story is not to be hid by any blind faith soever. Gottschalk's friends are said to claim that he was grossly abused at that time, and that all the damning record of lust, abduction, shame and hasty flight before the indignant avengers thereof, was half distortion, half fabrication. But they have not published their defensive version, and certainly since that hour he has never set  foot on northern shores. He found more luxurious rest in the city of the Incas, whose wickedness has become a proverb,--"Corrupt as Lima,"--or among the orange groves around Rio Janeiro.

But how magnificent, how enviable, his death-stroke! Leading a monster concert, stilling a storm of applause with the awful tenderness and mystery of his own inspired "La Mort," and amid the hushed listeners smitten by la mort in verity, and falling there, with a farewell clangor of chords he should never strike again on earth,--could ambition have wished a more ideal end to his life of prodigal passion and glowing genius?

C. G. W.

Springfield, January  28.

As recounted by C. G. Whiting, the hisses Gottschalk got from secesh-leaning listeners in Saratoga motivated a defiant performance of his patriotic composition "The Union: Concert Paraphrase on National Airs," still appreciated well into this our 21st century as A Rousing Anthem of National Unity. A similar anecdote circulated widely in Northern U. S. newspapers after an 1862 performance in Montreal, Canada.

12 Aug 1862, Tue St. Louis Globe-Democrat (St. Louis, Missouri) Newspapers.com

GOTTSCHALK ON THE UNION.-- During the late provincial tour of this celebrated pianist in the Canadas, he gave an exhibition of his patriotism to our neighbors. At his concert in Montreal, the house being crammed to overflowing, loud calls were made for "Dixie" as soon as the pianist took his seat. Such a reception for a moment naturally confused the pianist, but collecting his ideas at once, he faced his audience and sat in silence for a few moments, with folded arms. When the tumult ceased he turned to his piano and, as one of his companions says, played "Hail Columbia," the "Star Spangled Banner," and "Yankee Doodle," as they were never before played on that instrument. The audience was completely shamed, and acknowledging the rebuke, were liberal in their applause during the rest of the evening. It may not be generally known that Gottschalk is a native of New Orleans, and for this exhibition of his patriotism he should have full credit. After the concert, he remarked to a friend that he would have seen the audience in Tophet before he would have complied with their demand.

-- St. Louis Globe-Democrat, August 12, 1862.

In case you're wondering if Melville knew Gottschalk, the answer is "maybe." 

Taylor, Bayard, 1825-1878. A.L.s.(Bayard Taylor) to [Herman Melville];[New York] 24 Feb 1865., 1865.. Herman Melville papers, MS Am 188-188.6, MS Am 188, (339), Box: 7. Houghton Library.

Archived with Herman Melville papers at Houghton Library, Harvard University is an 1865 letter to Melville from Bayard Taylor naming Gottschalk as one of several members of "The Travellers" Club whom Melville might already know and enjoy socializing with. 

No. 139 East 8th St.
(Between B'way & 4th Avenue)
Feb. 24, 1865.

My dear Sir:

On Monday evening next, the 27th, "The Travellers" meet here, and it will give me great pleasure to see you among the guests of the Club. Many of the members are no doubt old friends of yours--Darley, Church, Bierstadt, Gottschalk, Cyrus Field, Hunt, Bellows and Townsend Harris. We simply meet to talk, winding up our evenings with a cigar and frugal refreshments.

Very truly yours,

Bayard Taylor.

-- printed text is available in Selected Letters of Bayard Taylor, edited by Paul C. Wermuth (Associated University Presses, 1997) on page 238; also in the 1993 Northwestern-Newberry Edition of Herman Melville's Correspondence, edited by Lynn Horth on page 696. 

New York Observer - March 23, 1865

Face-time with L. M. Gottschalk and other members of "The Travellers" seems at least conceivable. Newspaper ads confirm that Gottschalk at the time of Bayard's invitation to Melville was definitely still performing in New York City. In late February and March of 1865, "the most brilliant pianist that our country has produced" gave a series of "Farewell Concerts" at Niblo's Saloon. Early in April he would sail for California via Panama. 

As it happened, Gottschalk was still aboard the steamer Constitution when he learned that President Lincoln had been assassinated, as Barbara Cohen-Stratyner has related on the NYPL Blog in a moving 2015 post, An Incommensurable Grief... Louis Moreau Gottschalk on Lincoln's Assassination.

Related posts:

• Charles Goodrich Whiting, author of the memorial tribute to Melville
  https://melvilliana.blogspot.com/2016/08/charles-goodrich-whiting-author-of.html

• Also by Charles G. Whiting: Concerning Herman Melville
  https://melvilliana.blogspot.com/2016/08/also-by-charles-g-whiting-concerning.html

• Whiting on Elizabeth Stoddard and Melville
  https://melvilliana.blogspot.com/2020/07/whiting-on-elizabeth-stoddard-and.html

Prompt behind Melville's invented proverb "Corrupt as Lima" in Stewart's VISIT TO THE SOUTH SEAS Volume 1

 

Here is the source-text or prompt for Melville's invented proverb "Corrupt as Lima," twice uttered in Moby-Dick chapter 54 (The Town-Ho's Story) by one of Ishmael's supposed listeners and drinking companions at the "Golden Inn" in Lima, Peru.

From A Visit to the South Seas… pic.twitter.com/39wZtmQO9F

— Scott Norsworthy 🇺🇸 (@Melvilliana) October 2, 2024

Litanie Des Saints

William Allen Butler's friendly notice of THE HOUSE OF THE SEVEN GABLES

As previously shown on Melvilliana, William Allen Butler (1825-1902) the Wall Street lawyer and genial satirist in prose and verse only served as an "occasional" New York correspondent for the Washington National Intelligencer in 1850-1 and most certainly did not write the long and largely favorable review of Moby-Dick, or the Whale attributed to him since 1953 in published Melville studies.

The real reviewer of Melville's "prose Epic on Whaling" in the regular "Notes on New Books" column of the National Intelligencer (December 16, 1851) was literary editor James C. Welling (1825-1894). 

Although William A. Butler never dreamed of writing the learned and perceptive review of Moby-Dick in the National Intelligencer, he probably deserves credit for another, more ordinary notice in the same newspaper: the friendly and favorable review of Hawthorne's The House of the Seven Gables that appeared on April 22, 1851 under the heading "New York Correspondence." 

Butler's first published letter to the National Intelligencer appeared on July 19, 1850 under the heading, "Cursory Notices of New Books, and Literary and Fine Art, in New York." Dropping Cursory, Butler or his editors gave subsequent letters the revised title, "Notices of New Books, Literature, and the Fine Arts in New York," shortened to "New Books, Literature, and the Fine Arts in New York" (Daily National Intelligencer, February 3, 1851), and then changed again to "Society, New Books, and the Fine Arts in New York" (February 11, 1851). Through February 1851, all of Butler's letters from New York were signed "Jacques du Monde," also Butler's pseudonym in verse contributions to the Literary World and other periodicals. 

The last letter from William Allen Butler to the National Intelligencer signed "Jacques du Monde" appeared on March 1, 1851, under the heading "New York Correspondence." A few more appeared after that under the same heading but without any signature. Several of these closely resembled the contributions from Butler aka "Jacques du Monde" in their contents and style of writing. The last anonymous contribution of "New York Correspondence" in the usual vein of William Allen Butler contains the glowing notice, transcribed below, of Hawthorne's most recent work The House of the Seven Gables. Extant notes to his old classmate and traveling companion George L. Duyckinck at NYPL provide documentary support for ascribing the Hawthorne notice to William Allen Butler.

One mention of Hawthorne occurs near the close of a letter to George L. Duyckinck dated April 3, 1851 and written at Willard's Hotel in Washington, D. C. where Butler had been staying with his wife Mary:

"The Scarlet Letter we have been reading. It is Hawthorne all over, & capital at that. I think it will do more for his reputation than anything else."

The clincher however is this short note dated April 14, 1851 wherein Butler asks Duyckinck to obtain for him a review copy of Hawthorne's latest work, doubtless meaning The House of the Seven Gables.

Citation: 

Manuscripts and Archives Division, The New York Public Library. "1843-1849" The New York Public Library Digital Collections. 1843 - 1849. https://digitalcollections.nypl.org/items/83e4c970-2731-0133-8a0e-58d385a7bbd0 

29 Wall St.

Ap. 14, 1851

Dear Duyckinck, 

Can you get me a copy of Hawthorne's Book? I will read & notice it incontinently. I believe I understood you that you had spoken to Fields about notices for the Intelligencer. If you can get it without any trouble please send it to the office & much oblige 

Yours Truly

Wm: Allen Butler 

By incontinently Butler meant "instantly," "immediately."

Evidently William Allen Butler got the book with the help of George L. Duyckinck and made good on his promise to "read & notice it" without delay. Five days after requesting a review copy, Butler worked a warm and generous treatment of Hawthorne's new book into his letter to the National Intelligencer dated April 19, 1851 and published there on April 22nd under the heading "New York Correspondence." Reprinted in the weekly edition of the same newspaper on April 26, 1851, this may have been the last of Butler's published contributions as an occasional correspondent of the Washington, D. C. National Intelligencer. 

This item is not recorded in Gary Scharnhorst's Nathaniel Hawthorne: An Annotated Bibliography of Comment and Criticism Before 1900 (The Scarecrow Press, Inc., 1988). 

Washington Weekly National Intelligencer
April 26, 1851 - via genealogybank.com

The House of the Seven Gables, a romance, by NATHANIEL HAWTHORNE. Boston. Ticknor, Reed & Fields.

A greater treat than this volume, fresh from the magic pen of HAWTHORNE and the dainty press of TICKNOR & CO., (a fit conjunction of author and publishers,) has not been given to the reading public for this long time. Mr. HAWTHORNE, after having occupied for a number of years the position of an occasional essayist, writing more from impulse than from any settled purposes or plans of authorship, and appealing necessarily to a limited class of readers, has emerged into a position far better suited to his breadth of genius, and taken his stand in the front rank of that class of writers of fiction with whom fiction is only the medium for the exhibition and analysis of human thought and passion. The Scarlet Letter, published about a year ago, was his first experiment in this new and enlarged sphere. It was a book which no man could read without acknowledging an unrivalled power in the author; a book of intense interest and pathos, not from any startling developments of plot or incident, but from its masterly painting of character and strange revelations of the human heart. It proved deservedly successful, and enlarged Hawthorne's sphere of readers and admirers from a New England to a national circumference. His present book is a pleasing authentication of the success of the former one, and will be eagerly sought after by all who have already made themselves familiar with the author.

The House of the Seven Gables is a New England story, true in all its details and descriptions as to its locale, and yet in its spirit and mode of treatment as far removed from the commonly received notion of New Englandism, and as dissimilar, as the castles of Niederwald are from the factories at Lowell. It is one of the peculiarities of our literature that in the midst and centre of the most practical and least romantic of communities, both in action and thought, we should find a writer like Hawthorne eliminating the elements of a purely imaginative tale from the life going on around him. He is thoroughly native in his taste in almost all his works, taking as their ground-work some local tradition of the old Puritan or Colonial times, and giving prominence to the characteristics and peculiarities of his immediate neighbors as the best material for his purpose. The House of the Seven Gables stands in a street of a Massachusetts town; its occupants are Miss Hepzibah Pyncheon, an old maid of veritable New England stamp, and Phoebe, her niece, and idealized "smart girl" such as one meets with, but entirely unidealized, all along  the valley of the Connecticut. The shadow of a curse has rested upon the old house, and pervaded its dark time-blackened interior, ever since the original Puritan proprietor built it over the spot of ground which he had wrested from the heirs of old Mathew Maule, who had been hung for witchcraft, and in one way or another has darkened the life of all its inmates. Miss Hepzibah Pyncheon is driven by her poverty to the sad extremity of keeping a shop in the once aristocratic mansion, and the story opens with the bitter experience of the worthy dame in this emergency. The old maid and her brother, a man whom an unjust sentence has kept thirty years in prison, and who comes home to the Pyncheon homestead a wreck and ruin, and his cousin, Judge Pyncheon, the respectable and moral wealthy citizen, but in reality the author of the convict's misfortunes, and his deadly enemy, are the principal characters, not forgetting a streak of sunlight, woven through the otherwise dark texture of the tale, in the person of Phoebe, a beautiful and complete character, who is the good genius of the story. The plot is simple, and the thread of the narrative even, its whole power lying in the marvellous chiaroscuro in which the characters are painted, and the subtle analysis presented thereby of thoughts and passions common to the race of man, of which the Pyncheons are only single embodiments and types. I can safely pronounce the House of the Seven Gables the most strikingly original romance of American authorship, viewed as a work of imaginative power, which has yet appeared.

Related posts

• James C. Welling, his Notes on New Books
  https://melvilliana.blogspot.com/2024/08/james-c-welling-his-notes-on-new-books.html

• Unabridged! Welling's review of Moby-Dick in the National Intelligencer
  https://melvilliana.blogspot.com/2024/08/unabridged-wellings-review-of-moby-dick.html

Unabridged! Welling's review of MOBY-DICK in the NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER

"... all the special pleading of a literary devil's advocate cannot prevent a writer of genius from assuming his appropriate place among the auctores classici of his nation and tongue."

My full transcription of the long and mostly laudatory review of Moby-Dick, or The Whale in the Washington, D. C. Daily National Intelligencer (December 16, 1851) restores the ornately fabricated intro figuring the author, any author, as potentially a candidate for sainthood, and the severer sort of critic (not the "bland and benevolent" kind) as a "literary devil's advocate." Everything from "After a saint..." to "the auctores classici of his nation and tongue" was omitted without explanation in the version given on pages 398-401 in Herman Melville: The Contemporary Reviews, edited by Brian Higgins and Hershel Parker (Cambridge University Press, 1995). Although attributed there and elsewhere in Melville scholarship to William Allen Butler, the December 16, 1851 review of Moby-Dick in the National Intelligencer appeared in the regular and highly regarded "Notes on New Books" column by then literary editor James C. Welling. 

Dr. James C. Welling
via National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - U. S. Department of Commerce

Welling's authorship of "Notes on New Books" after the departure of former literary editor Edward William Johnston (in April 1851, if not earlier) was confirmed in a public statement by owner-editor William Winston Seaton, widely circulated in early September 1860. 

Charleston Courier - September 3, 1860 
via genealogybank.com

Seaton's public statement in the National Intelligencer was quoted by numerous other newspapers, for example the Charleston, SC Daily Courier on September 3, 1860: 

National Intelligencer.-- W. W. SEATON, Esq., the venerable survivor of the DAMON and PYTHIAS partnership of GALES & SEATON, announces the connection of JAMES C. WELLING with the editorship of the Intelligencer. Mr. WELLING is thus introduced:

Mr. Welling is no stranger in the columns of the Intelligencer, having been, in different capacities, connected with it for the last ten years, during the first five of which, after the retirement of the accomplished Edward William Johnston from the Literary department of the paper, Mr. Welling had charge of it, and was the author of those "Notes on New Books," which, by the scholarship and ability evinced in their composition, would, of themselves, be a sufficient evidence of the qualifications he brings to the tasks of journalism. But it is just to add that during the last five years he has participated in all the duties incident to the editorship of this journal, and has thus served a noviciate quite long enough to give full proof of his vocation to the exacting career upon which he has entered. Enjoying during this period, in the fullest degree, the confidence of my late lamented colleague, Mr. Gales, he has equally, by his high moral and conscientious character, no less than by his rare attainments, merited my own, and I avail myself of his temporary absence from Washington to make this announcement to the patrons whom it is the honor of the Intelligencer to address.

Most likely penned by James C. Welling, the complete review of Moby-Dick is transcribed below from the Washington Daily National Intelligencer of December 16, 1851. 

NOTES ON NEW BOOKS.

MOBY DICK: or the Whale. By HERMAN MELVILLE, author of "Typee," "Omoo," "Redburn," "Mardi," "White Jacket." New York: Harper & Brothers.

After a saint has been dead and buried long enough, that is, after his foibles and venial peccadilloes have been almost forgotten, and when accordingly it is proposed to affix his name to the long list of kindred worthies enrolled on the calendar, his pretensions to such canonization, it is well known, must be previously submitted to the ecclesiastical adjudication of the apostolic camarilla; and, still further to guard against the great scandal which might arise from the precipitate bestowal of this saintly investiture on personages whose lives have won for them an unenviable celebrity, and the symmetry of whose character has been marred by any one of the seven deadly sins, the merits and claims of every plaintiff for sainthood are subjected to inquisitorial post mortem examination, much as the Egyptians were wont to do before they would allow the defunct a burial ticket, save that the camarilla buries first and examines afterwards; for we shrewdly suspect that a few of the titled "saints" would never have attained their worshipful dignity if they had not been previously reduced to that condition which enables poets and fish, according to Peter Pindar, to shine with a lustre all their own. Now, in order that the plea for canonization may proceed after due process of law, an officer is attached to the apostolic chamber, known under the complimentary cognomen of the Devil's Advocate, whose duty it is, indeed, in the behoof of the commonwealth of Tartarus, to regard himself as a regularly licensed attorney-general of his satanic majesty, and whose function it is to rake, scrape, and collect all that can be truly or slanderously said, surmised, or thought against the claimant in this suit for an apotheosis among the saints. Thus it is easy to see that the calendar is kept pure, though persons of a cavilling disposition might allege against the equity of this judicial arrangement that, in order to ensure a poetic justice, the devil should be invested with the sole appointment of his deputy, and that it should not be lodged with the court, as is actually the case, without at least his advice and consent. Still, so far as we have read in the "apostolic constitutions," about whose genuineness so much ink has been shed, they contain no proviso of this kind, though it is patent that without it the "inalienable rights" of the aged Nicholas are no more protected than those of South Carolina without such an amendment to the American constitution as shall empower her, in her single sovereignty, to elect a President as well as the other thirty States! 

It is not, however, its political significance that has beguiled us into a reminiscence of this bit of ecclesiastical history; on the contrary, we have recurred to it because the fancy suddenly struck us that there was some analogy between the amiable task of the Devil's Advocate and that sometimes assumed by the critical functionaries of the press; for, as it is the office of the former to pick a deceased saint to pieces in order to preclude his admittance among the elect of the calendar, so also it sometimes becomes the duty of the latter to pluck a hapless wight of an author until he becomes like Diogenes's edition of Plato's man. And if the newspaper critics are not always given to diabolical detraction of the "presentation copies" which  authors and publishers so kindly furnish them, let it not be thought that our analogy fails, for it is hinted that the Devil's Advocate himself, for reasons of his own, has occasionally allowed a candidate for the saintship to pass muster without a very rigid scrutiny. Now, among the reasons which partly tend to induce this suavity of commendatory and stereotyped criticism, we believe there are two worthy of especial mention. In the first place, the critic's "presentation copy" is always fresh from the press, and as he opens it, with  paper-cutter in hand, he finds each particular page still redolent of the paper-mill. The perfume of new books is the critic's peculiar incense, and unless the reader, like that most gentle of men and genial of essayists, Elia, is fond of titillating his olfactory by inhaling the extract of printer's ink; unless, like Charles Lamb, we say, he  considers a new book superior to  any thing of Lubin's, he cannot duly appreciate the kindly and propitiatory influence it experts upon a bland and benevolent critic. And, in the second place, who but the veriest curmudgeon could find it in his heart to indite any thing severe against objects so goodly to the sight as new-bound books, printed, every one  of them, in "the highest style of modern art," and profusely embellished with pictures to match? For ourselves, we can never be induced to say aught against those "illustrated editions," all bound in "cloth, full gilt," or "Turkey morocco, extra." Such books are only intended for the centre table or étagère; and if they are only pleasant to the eyes, it matters little whether or not they are like the apple of Eve, to be desired to make one wise. And occasionally, when dulness entombs itself in the garnished sepulchre of Turkey morocco, we call to mind the provident maxim, nil de mortuis nisi bonum.

Thus it has come to pass, we imagine, that the bibliographical censors of the press are not always strict to mark the sins against Quintilian and Blair which may be detected in the "complimentary copies" laid on the editorial table. The familiar saw relative to the oral examination of a gift horse would protest against any such procedure. Still, it is undeniable that these self-appointed custodians of the world's literature, especially such as preside over the "reviews" and solemn "quarterlies," attend to this matter better; that is, more in the legitimate spirit of a devil's advocate. However much "bated breath" there may be among the changling critics of the daily press, it is always expected that these oracular organs will deliver the most authoritative and impartial responses; their strictures must be terrible, for, as the motto of the greatest of them all asserts, "Judex damnatur cum nocens absolvitur." The same Publius Syrus who furnished the Edinburgh reviewers this haughty motto of theirs, (though  the "smug" Sydney Smith tells us that none of its  founders had ever read a line in his dull works;) this same Publius, we say, has another sentiment that must  have been written for the especial accommodation of the newspaper critics: "Ad pœnitendum proprat qui cito judicat." Yet the great oracles have not always proved true in their critical vaticinations. To drop our persiflage, it may be doubted whether criticism exerts any thing more than a negative influence on the literature of the day. The most that even a sagacious critic can do is to anticipate the favorable or unfavorable decision that awaits some aspirant for transient or enduring literary distinction, provided such a rare work as that which aspires now-a-days to the latter should come within his ken. For, after all, it is the general sense and sovereign judgment of mankind that must put its broad arrow upon all that is noble in literature, while such works as are destined to a nine days' immortality will find their way to the grocery-stores and trunk-makers fast enough without being shown the road. After some luckless member of the literary Sisyphus family has been laboriously trundling his stone up to the summit, for a surly critic to help it to an additional kick downhill is at once most uncalled for and gratuitously malignant. We hope that our readers will not accuse us of unduly magnifying our office when we assure them that in our estimation the critics are at best only a set of literary jackals, appointed to prey upon authordom and cater for that great lion, the universal public.

And how often, besides, has  criticism overshot its mark? How many are the opinions of that megatherium of English literature, "the immortal" Doctor Johnson, which the subsequent  sense of enlightened men has reversed? Who now-a-days would carp at Milton as he did; who would call Gray a "barren rascal," or vote Fairfax's translation of Tasso a bore, or deny to Tristram Shandy the merit of humor? Or, in later times, was not Lord Jeffrey compelled to unsay much that he wrote while editor of the Edinburgh Review? Has Wordsworth any fewer admirers because the Edinburgh Reviewer met the "Excursion," on its first appearance, with the cheerful exordium of "this will never  do!" Is poor Keats less read because the London Quarterly killed him? We trow not. There were many able critics in France during the times of Voltaire, and no one, we presume, has forgotten how the Patriarch of Ferney and his allies in philosophical criticism disparaged a little book over which every reader has wept and melted, the "Paul and Virginia" of Bernardin de Saint Pierre. From these most easily-remembered examples we draw this useful inference, that all the special pleading of a literary devil's advocate cannot prevent a writer of genius from assuming his appropriate place among the auctores classici of his nation and tongue.

The professional criticism of the present day has run into channels somewhat remote from that which was once considered its legitimate province. It concerns itself not only with the application of critical rules to the judgment of literary productions, in which alone criticism may be said technically to consist, but has gradually developed itself into essay writing, so that our critical reviews, quarterlies, and similar periodical literature have become serial publications of essays on all literary and scientific subjects, the name and work of some author being taken as a mere caption to the articles, and having no more to do with the subsequent matter than the texts of certain clergymen have with their sermons: thus, instead of a critical analysis of Mr. Tennyson’s “Princess,” we have an elaborate disquisition on poetry in its nature and essence; instead of a critical examination of Mr. Macaulay’s History of England, we are treated to recondite disquisitions on the Philosophy of History, until the periodical review has become a pamphlet of essays or a fragment of the encyclopædia. If we were disposed on the present occasion to follow the example thus set us by our betters, we should forthwith proceed, taking “Moby Dick, or the Whale,” as our text, to indite a discourse on cetology. Such, however, is not our intention., Nor do we propose, like a veritable devil’s advocate, to haul Mr. Herman Melville over the coals for any offences committed against the code of Aristotle and Aristarchus: we have nothing to allege against his admission among the few writers of the present day who give evidence of some originality; but, while disposed to concede to Mr. Melville a palm of high praise for his literary excellencies, we must enter our decided protest against the querulous and cavilling innuendoes which he so much loves to discharge, like barbed and poisoned arrows, against objects that should be shielded from his irreverent wit. On this point we hope it is unnecessary to enlarge in terms of reprehension, further than to say that there are many passages in his last work, as indeed in most that Mr. Melville has written, which “dying he would wish to blot.” Neither good taste nor good morals can approve the “forecastle scene,” with its maudlin and ribald orgies, as contained in the 40th chapter of “Moby Dick.” It has all that is disgusting in Goethe’s “Witches’ Kitchen,” without its genius.

Very few readers of the lighter literature of the day have forgotten, we presume, the impression produced upon their minds of Mr. Melville’s earlier publications—Typee and Omoo. They opened to all the circulating library readers an entirely new world. His “Peep at Polynesian Life,” during a four months’ residence in a valley of the Marquesas, as unfolded in Typee, with his rovings in the “Little Jule” and his rambles through Tahiti, as detailed in Omoo, abound with incidents of stirring adventure and “moving accidents by flood and field,” replete with all the charms of novelty and dramatic vividness. He first introduced us to cannibal banquets, feasts of raw fish and poee-poee; he first made us acquainted with the sunny glades and tropical fruits of the Typee valley, with its golden lizards among the spear-grass and many colored birds among the trees; with its groves of cocoa-nut, its tattooed savages, and temples of light bamboo. Borne along by the current of his limpid style, we sweep past bluff and grove, wooded glen and valley, and dark ravines lighted up far within by wild waterfalls, while here and there in the distance are seen the white huts of the natives, nestling like birdsnests in clefts gushing with verdure, while off the coral reefs of each sea-girt island the carved canoes of tattooed chieftains dance on the blue waters. Who has forgotten the maiden Fayaway and the faithful Kory-Kory, or the generous Marheyo, or the Doctor Long Ghost, that figure in his narratives? So new and interesting were his sketches of life in the South Sea islands that few were able to persuade themselves that his story of adventure was not authentic. We have not time at present to renew the inquiry into their authenticity, though we incline to suspect they were about as true as the sketches of adventures detailed by De Foe in his Robinson Crusoe. The points of resemblance between the inimitable novel of De Foe and the production of Mr. Melville are neither few nor difficult to be traced. In the conduct of his narrative the former displays more of naturalness and vraisemblance; the latter more of fancy and invention; and while we rather suspect that Robinson’s man Friday will always remain more of a favorite than Kory-Kory among all readers “in their teens,” persons of maturer judgment and more cultivated taste will prefer the mingled bonhommie, quiet humor, and unstrained pathos which underlie and pervade the graphic narratives of Mr. Melville. Still we are far from considering Mr. Melville a greater artist than Daniel De Foe in the general design of his romantic pictures; for is it not a greater proof of skill in the use of language to be able so to paint the scenes in a narration as to make us forget the narrator in the interests of his subjects? In this, as we think, consists the charm of Robinson Crusoe—a book which every boy reads and no man forgets; the perfect naturalness of the narrative, and the transparent diction in which it is told, have never been equalled by any subsequent writer, nor is it likely that they will be in an age fond of point and pungency.

Mr. Melville is not without a rival in this species of romance-writing, founded on personal adventure in foreign and unknown lands. Dr. Mayo, the author of “Kaloolah” and other works, has opened to us a phantamagorical view of life in Northern Africa similar to the “peep” which Mr. Melville has given us of the South Sea Islands through his kaleidoscope. Each author has familiarized himself with the localities in which his dramatic exhibition of men and things is enacted, and each have doubtless claimed for themselves a goodly share of that invention which produced the Travels of Gulliver and the unheard-of adventures and exploits of the Baron Munchausen. Framazugda, as painted by Dr. Mayo, is the Eutopia of Negrodom, just as the Typee valley has been called the Eutopia of the Pacific Islands, and Kaloolah is the “counterfeit presentment” of Fayaway.

Moby-Dick, or the Whale, is the narrative of a whaling voyage; and, while we must beg permission to doubt its authenticity in all respects, we are free to confess that it presents a most striking and truthful portraiture of the whale and his perilous capture. We do not imagine that Mr. Melville claims for this his latest production the same historical credence which he asserted was due to “Typee” and “Omoo;” and we do not know how we can better express our conception of his general drift and style in the work under consideration than by entitling it a prose Epic on Whaling. In whatever light it may be viewed, no one can deny it to be the production of a man of genius. The descriptive powers of Mr. Melville are unrivalled, whether the scenes he paints reveal “old ocean into tempest toss’d,” or are laid among the bright hillsides of some Pacific island, so warm and undulating that the printed page on which they are so graphically depicted seems almost to palpitate beneath the sun. Language in the hands of this master becomes like a magician’s wand, evoking at will “thick-coming fancies,” and peopling the “chambers of imagery” with hideous shapes of terror or winning forms of beauty and loveliness. Mr. Melville has a strange power to reach the sinuosities of a thought, if we may so express ourselves; he touches with his lead and line depths of pathos that few can fathom, and by a single word can set a whole chime of sweet or wild emotions into a pealing concert. His delineation of character is actually Shakspearean—a quality which is even more prominently evinced in “Moby Dick” than in any of his antecedent efforts. Mr. Melville especially delights to limn the full-length portrait of a savage, and if he is a cannibal it is all the better; he seems fully convinced that the highest type of man is to be found in the forests or among the anthropophagi of the Fejee Islands. Brighter geniuses than even his have disported on this same fancy; for such was the youthful dream of Burke, and such was the crazy vision of Jean Jacques Rosseau.

The humor of Mr. Melville is of that subdued yet unquenchable nature which spreads such a charm over the pages of Sterne. As illustrative of this quality in his style, we must refer our readers to the irresistibly comic passages scattered.at irregular intervals through “Moby Dick;” and occasionally we find in this singular production the traces of that “wild imagining” which throws such a weird-like charm about the Ancient Mariner of Coleridge; and many of the scenes and objects in “Moby Dick” were suggested, we doubt not, by this ghastly rhyme. The argument of what we choose to consider as a sort of prose epic on whales, whalers, and whaling may be briefly stated as follows:

Ishmael, the pseudonymous appellative assumed by Mr. Melville in his present publication, becoming disgusted with the “tame and docile earth,” resolves to get to sea in all possible haste, and for this purpose welcomes the whaling voyage as being best adapted to open to his gaze the floodgates of the oceanic wonder world; the wild conceits that swayed him were two—floating pictures in his soul of whales gliding through the waters in endless processions, and “midst them all one grand hooded phantom, like a snow hill in the air.” This “grand hooded phantom,” thus preternaturally impressed on his mental retina, proves to be Moby Dick, a great white whale, who had long been the terror of his “whaling grounds,” noted for his invincible ferocity and for a peculiar snow-white wrinkled forehead, and a high pyramidical white hump on his back. It is not, however, his prodigious magnitude, nor his strange white hue, nor his deformed visage that so much invested the monster with unnatural terror, as the unexampled and intelligent malignity which he had repeatedly evinced when attacked by different whalers, so that no turbaned Turk, no hired Venetian or Malay, could smite his foes with more seeming malice. Ishmael embarks on board the whaling vessel “Pequod,” whose captain, Ahab, had been previously bereft of a leg in an encounter with the terrible “Moby Dick;” a spirit of moody vindictiveness enters his soul, and he determines to be avenged upon the fell monster that had, with such intelligent and prepense maliciousness, rendered him a cripple for life; the white whale swam before him as the incarnation of all those wicked agencies which some deep men, according to Mr. Melville, feel eating in them, till they are left living on with half a heart and half a lung; in other words, Capt. Ahab became a monomaniac, with the chase and capture of Moby-Dick for his single idea; so that all his powers were thus concentrated and intensified with a thousand-fold more potency than he could have brought to bear on one reasonable object. The “Pequod” encounters Moby Dick, and in the deadly struggle which ensues the whole crew perish save the fortunate Ishmael. On such a slender thread hangs the whole of this ingenious romance, which for variety of incident and vigor of style can scarcely be exceeded.

Review of MOBY DICK-1 16 Dec 1851, Tue Daily National Intelligencer and Washington Express (Washington, District of Columbia) Newspapers.com

Related posts

• James C. Welling, his Notes on New Books
  https://melvilliana.blogspot.com/2024/08/james-c-welling-his-notes-on-new-books.html 

• William Allen Butler's friendly notice of The House of the Seven Gables 
  https://melvilliana.blogspot.com/2024/09/william-allen-butlers-friendly-notice.html 

• Moby Dick widely praised in 1851-2
  https://melvilliana.blogspot.com/2020/02/moby-dick-widely-praised-in-1851-2.html

James C. Welling, his "Notes on New Books" and the 1851 review of MOBY-DICK in the Washington NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER

J. C. Welling
Brady-Handy photograph collection, Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division.

Herman Melville's great American novel Moby-Dick, or The Whale (1851) got high, early praise in the nation's capital and beyond when the influential Washington National Intelligencer, a leading Whig newspaper, called it "a prose Epic on Whaling" by a magician with words. Spellbound, the reviewer marveled over the wizard-writer's "strange power to reach the sinuosities of a thought" and "depths of pathos that few can fathom." This remarkable unsigned review appeared under the heading, "Notes on New Books" in the Daily National Intelligencer for December 16, 1851. Taking Moby-Dick as obviously "the production of a man of genius," the reviewer also commended the author's "unrivalled" powers of description and "actually Shakespearean" depth of character development. Not without reservations, however: Melville ought to have curbed his "irreverent wit" and lewd imagination, especially as displayed in Chapter 40 Midnight, Forecastle "with its maudlin and ribald orgies." Nonetheless, this long and largely favorable notice in the National Intelligencer ended by extolling Moby-Dick as an "ingenious romance, which for variety of incident and vigor of style can scarcely be exceeded." 

Review of MOBY DICK-1 16 Dec 1851, Tue Daily National Intelligencer and Washington Express (Washington, District of Columbia) Newspapers.com
Who wrote so early and well about Melville and his legendarily neglected masterpiece? 

Although confidently ascribed to William Allen Butler in previous Melville scholarship, including the Historical Note for the 1988 Northwestern-Newberry Edition of Moby-Dick, or The Whale, Herman Melville: The Contemporary Reviews, ed. Brian Higgins and Hershel Parker (Cambridge University Press, 1995) and both volumes of Hershel Parker's Herman Melville: A Biography (Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996 and 2002), the eloquent and appreciative review of Moby-Dick in the Washington Daily National Intelligencer for December 16, 1851 is far more likely to have been written by James Clarke Welling (1825-1894). Some time in 1850 or 1851, six months at least before this important review appeared under the heading "Notes on New Books," Welling had replaced Edward William Johnston as literary editor of the National Intelligencer. As reported late in April 1851, Johnston left that paper to conduct the Richmond Whig. 

24 Apr 1851, Thu The National Era (Washington, District of Columbia) Newspapers.com

As shown below, multiple sources credit Welling with authorship of the regular "Notes on New Books" column in the Washington National Intelligencer from 1850 or 1851 to 1856. The span of Welling's known tenure as literary editor and book reviewer for the National Intelligencer encompasses the later review of Walt Whitman's Leaves of Grass in 1856 as well as the 1851 review of Moby-Dick. Both reviews, as Hershel Parker has pointed out in the 3rd Norton Critical Edition of Moby-Dick, feature the distinctive conjunction of sinuosities and thought in the similarly phrased expressions, "sinuosities of a thought" (1851) and "sinuosities of thought" (1856).

James C. Welling's authorship of the "Notes on New Books" column during the period in which both the Melville and Whitman reviews appeared in the Washington National Intelligencer was first made public in late August of 1860, through a statement by owner-editor William W. Seaton that circulated widely in other U. S. newspapers--particularly in the south and west.

Charleston Courier - September 3, 1860
via genealogybank.com

1. Reprinted, for example, in the Charleston, SC Daily Courier on September 3, 1860:

National Intelligencer.-- W. W. SEATON, Esq., the venerable survivor of the DAMON and PYTHIAS partnership of GALES & SEATON, announces the connection of JAMES C. WELLING with the editorship of the Intelligencer. Mr. WELLING is thus introduced:

Mr. Welling is no stranger in the columns of the Intelligencer, having been, in different capacities, connected with it for the last ten years, during the first five of which, after the retirement of the accomplished Edward William Johnston from the Literary department of the paper, Mr. Welling had charge of it, and was the author of those "Notes on New Books," which, by the scholarship and ability evinced in their composition, would, of themselves, be a sufficient evidence of the qualifications he brings to the tasks of journalism. But it is just to add that during the last five years he has participated in all the duties incident to the editorship of this journal, and has thus served a noviciate quite long enough to give full proof of his vocation to the exacting career upon which he has entered. Enjoying during this period, in the fullest degree, the confidence of my late lamented colleague, Mr. Gales, he has equally, by his high moral and conscientious character, no less than by his rare attainments, merited my own, and I avail myself of his temporary absence from Washington to make this announcement to the patrons whom it is the honor of the Intelligencer to address.

2. From the memorial volume by Josephine Seaton, William Winston Seaton of the "National Intelligencer": A Biographical Sketch (Boston, 1871) pages 360-361:

A month subsequent to the lamented death of Mr. Gales, Mr. Seaton announced that thenceforth Mr. James C. Welling would be associated with him in the editorial conduct of the Intelligencer, with which indeed, during the previous ten years, he had been connected; first, in charge of its literary department, after the retirement from that position of the accomplished gentleman and brilliant writer, the late Edward William Johnston. "Mr. Welling," adds Mr. Seaton, "was the author of those Notes on New Books, which, by their scholarship and ability, would of themselves be a sufficient evidence of the qualifications he brings to the tasks of journalism. Enjoying in the fullest degree the confidence of my late lamented colleague, Mr. Gales, he has equally by his high moral and conscientious character, no less than by his rare attainments, merited my own." Most ably indeed did Mr. Welling meet these flattering expectations. To a fulness of matured thought upon every point of theoretical or practical national polity, and an erudition ranging through every field of science and literature, Mr. Welling united a force and readiness of discussion with an appreciation of the conservative tone and dignity characterizing the Intelligencer, which gained the marked approval of the constituents of the time-honored journal, and amply justified the confidence reposed in him by Mr. Seaton.

3. From the 1881 Baptist Encyclopædia, edited by William Cathcart:

Welling, James C., LL.D., was born July 1, 1825, at Trenton, N. J. After pursuing his preliminary studies at the Trenton Academy, he entered Princeton College, from which he graduated in 1844. From 1844 to 1846 he was a private tutor in the family of Henry T. Garnett, Esq., of Westmoreland, Va. He afterwards entered upon the study of the law with the Hon. Willoughby Newton, of Virginia, but at the expiration of a year he was recalled to New Jersey by the illness of his father. On the death of his father, in 1848, he became one of the principals of the New York Collegiate School, the oldest grammar-school in that city. In 1853 he resigned this position to accept the associate editorship of The National Intelligencer, Washington, D. C., for which celebrated journal he had already, since 1850, written the "Notes on New Books," which were a characteristic feature of the paper. Dr. Welling, as editor of the Intelligencer during the trying period of the war, conducted it with signal ability. 

4. Biographical Sketch of James C. Welling in Reminiscences of Abraham Lincoln by Distinguished Men of His Time, edited by Allen Thorndike Rice. Sixth Edition (New York, 1888) page 643:

JAMES C. WELLING.

JAMES C. WELLING was born in Trenton, N. J., on the 14th of July, 1825. After graduation at Princeton College, in 1844, he studied law, but renounced its practice to become Associate Principal of the New York Collegiate School in 1848. In 1851, he became literary editor of the National Intelligencer at Washington, D. C., and, a few years later, succeeded to Joseph Gales in the political conduct of that old and influential journal. During the Civil War his relations with the members of President Lincoln's Cabinet were intimate and often confidential. Before, during, and after the war, Mr. Welling stood steadfastly by the Constitution and the Union, without, however, always approving the civil policies of the Administration. He resigned his editorial position in 1865, because of broken health. For several years he was one of the clerks of the United States Court of Claims. In 1870 he was appointed Professor of Belles Lettres in Princeton College, and, a year afterward, was called to the presidency of the Columbian University—an office which he still holds. During his administration of that institution it has received a new charter from Congress, has erected a new University building in the heart of Washington, and has enlarged the scope of its operations by adding a scientific school to the other schools already comprised in its system. By joint resolution of Congress in 1884, he was appointed a Regent of the Smithsonian Institution, and is Chairman of its Executive Committee. He is also the President of the Board of Trustees of the Corcoran Gallery of Art in Washington, and takes a deep interest in the prosperity of that institution—the most richly endowed institution of its kind in the country.

5. Rev. A. J. Huntington in President James C. Welling, LL.D: Memorial Service (The Columbian University, 1895) page 17:

We have not now the time to speak of the parentage and birth of the late Dr. James C. Welling, of his early training, of his college course and graduation at Princeton, or of his teaching for a few years afterward in lower Virginia and in the city of New York. In 1853, some nine years after he left college, he became literary editor of the "National Intelligencer," then published in this city, having been already for some years a writer of book-notices for this journal. In 1856 he became its associate editor, and soon afterward its chief editorial manager; and this position he continued to fill until he resigned it in 1865. The "Intelligencer," both before and after he took charge of it, was one of the leading journals of the great Whig party, and exerted before our civil war a more powerful influence perhaps than any other political paper of the country.

6. Report of S. P. Langley, Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, for the year ending June 30, 1895 (Washington D. C., 1896) page 33:

James Clark Welling, at the time of his death, September 4, 1894, was nearly 70 years of age. Descended from New England colonial ancestors, a native of one of the Middle States, in early manhood a teacher in the South, and for nearly half a century a resident of the national capital, he was an American of the best type, free from sectional bias, personifying the higher traits and tendencies of the nation, loyal to the traditions and aspirations of its founders.

He was graduated in 1844 from the College of New Jersey, studied law, and was admitted to the bar, but soon afterwards entered upon the profession of journalism. He always retained, however, a strong inclination for the study of constitutional and international law, and of politics, and his interest in public affairs was greatly stimulated by his connection for fifteen years with the most important of Washington journals, at that time national in its influence. He became the literary editor of the National Intelligencer in 1850, and was its managing editor throughout the entire period of the civil war. In this capacity he had the privilege of personal acquaintance with all our public men, and confidential access to many of them, including Lincoln, Seward, and Stanton. 

Washington, D. C. Evening Star - November 1, 1894
via genealogybank.com

7. Princeton Alumni Association, tribute "In Memory of Dr. Welling," as printed in the Washington D. C. Evening Star on November 1, 1894:

"...literary editor of the National Intelligencer in its palmiest days."

05 Sep 1894, Wed Times Herald (Washington, District of Columbia) Newspapers.com

8. Washington, D. C. Times, September 5, 1894: 

"Then he became known as a newspaper contributor, and in 1850 he was engaged by Joseph Gales and William W. Seaton as literary editor of the National Intelligencer, then the leading paper of Washington. In 1856 he became associate editor and had chief management of it through the trying times of the civil war."

9. New York Herald, September 5, 1894: 

"He was literary editor of the National Intelligencer in Washington from 1850 to 1856, and editor-in-chief to the close of the war." 

10. William E. Ames, A History of the National Intelligencer (University of North Carolina Press, 1971) page 306:

Seaton’s absence from the Intelligencer probably never would have been possible if it had not been for a highly capable young editor hired in 1850. James Clarke Welling started work as literary editor for the Intelligencer, but before he finished his editorial duties he was the guiding hand behind the newspaper. 

The unique review of Moby-Dick in the Washington, D. C. National Intelligencer was first ascribed to William A. Butler by Hugh W. Hetherington in his chapter on "Early Reviews of Moby-Dick" for Moby-Dick Centennial Essays, edited by Tyrus Hillway and Luther S. Mansfield (Southern Methodist University Press, 1953) at page 106. Promptly but erroneously endorsed by Perry Miller in The Raven and the Whale, the mistaken attribution to Butler was amplified by Hetherington in Melville's Reviewers: British and American (University of North Carolina Press, 1961) pages 214-215. 

As best I can tell, the mistake originated in confusion about the nature of lawyer-poet William Allen Butler's involvement in 1850-1851 with the National Intelligencer. And perhaps in overestimating Butler's gifts as a literary critic. As correctly reported in 1937 by Luther Stearns Mansfield:

"Butler wrote a regular column for the National Intelligencer, "Notices of New Books, Literature, and the Fine Arts in New York," which he usually signed, "Jacques du Monde."

Mansfield, Luther Stearns. “Glimpses of Herman Melville’s Life in Pittsfield, 1850-1851: Some Unpublished Letters of Evert A. Duyckinck.” American Literature, vol. 9, no. 1, 1937, pp. 26–48. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/2920071. Accessed 27 Aug. 2024.

William Allen Butler's signed contributions over the pseudonym "Jacques du Monde" began to appear in the National Intelligencer in July 1850 and only continued until March or so of the following year. His book notices (aptly billed as "Cursory Notices of New Books" in the first letter dated July 13, 1850) during this limited run were generally light and breezy announcements of new works, "cursory" indeed but full of compliments to their authors and publishers. Butler supplemented these typically short-and-sweet book notices with well-informed commentary on recent art exhibits and music concerts, along with the latest local news and gossip. 

Washington Daily National Intelligencer - July 19, 1850
via genealogybank.com

Early on, as Mansfield also reported, Butler had been gently instructed by the publishers not to bother Southern readers with boring literary gossip about the personal affairs of "writers in the North of whom they have scarcely heard." Presumably Gales and Seaton, knowing of Butler's close affiliation with the Duyckinck brothers, wanted to discourage their newest Manhattan correspondent from over-promoting literary stars of the Young America movement--particularly Cornelius Mathews, dubiously crowned the "American Dickens." As Butler explained to his good friend George L. Duyckinck in a letter dated August 24, 1850:

"I wrote a letter to the National Intelligencer in which I worked a little Berkshire experience & spoke of Melville, Mathews, Headley & Hawthorne & in my next note from Gales & Seaton they asked me to permit them to suggest in friendliness that the great mass of their readers could not feel much interest in  the private pursuits habits & whereabouts of writers in the North of whom they have scarcely heard. Cool, wasn't it !"

https://archive.org/details/sim_american-literature_march-1937-january-1938_9/page/36/mode/2up

By his own account, Butler seems to have corresponded directly with co-publishers Gales and Seaton, rather than either the outgoing literary editor Edward William Johnston or his eventual replacement, James C. Welling. I don't yet know exactly when Welling started working for the National Intelligencer, but Johnston's departure as literary editor would not be formally announced until late in April 1851.

Very likely Welling either had not yet been hired, or had not yet been tasked with resuming Johnston's column of "Notes on New Books," when "Jacques du Monde" began submitting his weekly series of "Cursory Notices" from New York City. Gales and Seaton would have valued the book notices in Butler's New York correspondence all the more as a stopgap, until their new-hire Welling could get himself "trained in" and ready to produce book reviews for the National Intelligencer. One early sign of the transition then impending or already underway: "Notes on New Books" in January and February 1851 were reprinted from the New York Evening Mirror, evidently as a sort of placeholder. 

Lots more investigative work remains to be done. Good!

Dated February 22, 1851, the last letter from Butler signed "Jacques du Monde" appeared in the National Intelligencer for March 1, 1851 under the heading "New York Correspondence." The next under the same heading, published on March 25, 1851, is unsigned, but the tone and contents resemble those in previous letters from William Allen Butler. Another unsigned item of "New York Correspondence" appeared on  April 1, 1851, likewise similar in style and substance to earlier letters signed "Jacques du Monde." Aha! Here's something good and unexpected. The unsigned letter dated April 19, 1851 and published in the National Intelligencer on April 22nd under the heading "New York Correspondence" contains a glowing notice of Hawthorne's The House of the Seven Gables. Unrecorded in Hawthorne scholarship? I'm guessing this letter in the Daily National Intelligencer for April 22, 1851 might represent William Allen Butler's final report to Washington, D. C. on literary and cultural happenings in Manhattan. 

Another, later review of Hawthorne's "NEW BOOK" House of the Seven Gables appeared on page 2 of the National Intelligencer for Monday, April 28, 1851, over the initials "P. S."

One short item of "New York Correspondence" dated May 1, 1851 and published in the National Intelligencer on May 3rd gives news of Jenny Lind and is subscribed with an asterisk. No books are mentioned in "New York Correspondence" published in the National Intelligencer on June 18, 1851. And no books receive notice in "New York Correspondence" published July 2, 1851 over the initials, "S.K.S."

When hired by Gales and Seaton (in 1850? or 1851?!) James Clarke Welling had been living in New York City, employed there as Associate Principal of the New York Collegiate School. Evidently he continued living in NYC for some time while reviewing books for the Washington D. C. newspaper. Perhaps he did other editorial jobs for Gales and Seaton before taking over "Notes on New Books." However it happened, Welling made a bold entrance on page 2 under the familiar old heading, with a blistering criticism of Yeast: A Problem by Charles Kingsley (Daily National Intelligencer, Tuesday June 24, 1851).

To wrap up for now, the main point here is that William Allen Butler, during his short stint as a New York correspondent of the National Intelligencer, contributed comparatively brief "Notices of New Books," never the weightier "Notes on New Books."

Many years later Butler recalled Jenny Lind and Barnum as highlights of his writing for the National Intelligencer:

"Jenny Lind's first concert was given--of all places in the world--in Castle Garden! It was, of  course, a great event. I was there, and wrote an account of it for The National Intelligencer of Washington, for which I was an occasional correspondent. I think the audience hardly equaled in numbers Barnum's expectations, but believe the results of the Jenny Lind concerts, as a whole, satisfied the showman. However, he afterward wisely confined himself to wild animals and the ring." 

As stated at page 234 in A Retrospect of Forty Years, edited by his daughter Harriet Allen Butler (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1911) William Allen Butler was only ever "an occasional correspondent" for the Washington, D. C. National Intelligencer. Butler the industrious lawyer and good-humored satirist both in prose and verse did not write the regular column of "Notes on New Books" for the National Intelligencer and never reviewed Moby-Dick for that or (as far as we know) any other publication. 

In a subsequent post I hope to give the full text of James C. Welling's splendid review of Moby-Dick.
Update - done, here:

• https://melvilliana.blogspot.com/2024/08/unabridged-wellings-review-of-moby-dick.html

Including the opening, demonstrably penned under Melville's spell but omitted in Herman Melville: The Contemporary Reviews. When I say "demonstrably," I mean this bit about the Devil's Advocate

"whose duty it is, indeed, in the behoof of the commonwealth of Tartarus, to regard himself as a regularly licensed attorney-general of his satanic majesty, and whose function it is to rake, scrape, and collect all that can be truly or slanderously said, surmised, or thought against the claimant in this suit for an apotheosis among the saints.

sounds very like Melville giving his whale Extracts, conceived to have been painstakingly compiled by a "poor devil of a Sub-Sub" librarian and

solely valuable or entertaining, as affording a glancing bird's-eye view of what has been promiscuously said, thought, fancied, and sung of Leviathan, by many nations and generations, Including our own. 

Turns out, I'm not the only one impressed by the reviewer's appropriation of Melville's language and style in Moby-Dick. On Christmas Day 1851 the Richmond Watchman and Observer reprinted a long section of the first paragraph under the heading, "How Saints are Made," and credited the piece to Herman Melville himself. 

Richmond Watchman and Observer
December 25, 1851

How Saints are Made.

BY HERMAN MELVILLE

After a saint has been dead and buried long enough, that is, after his foibles and venial peccadilloes have been almost forgotten, and when accordingly it is proposed to affix his name to the long list of kindred worthies enrolled on the calendar, his pretensions to such canonization, it is well known, must be previously submitted to the ecclesiastical adjudication of the apostolic camarilla; and, still further to guard against the great scandal which might arise from the precipitate bestowal of this saintly investiture on personages whose lives have won for them an unenviable celebrity, and the symmetry of whose character has been marred by any one of the seven deadly sins, the merits and claims of every plaintiff for sainthood are subjected to inquisitorial post mortem examination, much as the Egyptians were wont to do before they would allow the defunct a burial ticket, save that the camarilla buries first and examines afterwards; for we shrewdly suspect that a few of the titled "saints" would never have attained their worshipful dignity if they had not been previously reduced to that condition which enables poets and fish, according to Peter Pindar, to shine with a lustre all their own. Now, in order that the plea for canonization may proceed after due process of law, an officer is attached to the apostolic chamber, known under the complimentary cognomen of the Devil's Advocate, whose duty it is, indeed, in the behoof of the commonwealth of Tartarus, to regard himself as a regularly licensed attorney general of his satanic majesty, and whose function it is to rake, scrape, and collect all that can be truly or slanderously said, surmised, or thought against the claimant in this suit for an apotheosis among the saints. Thus it is easy to see that the calendar is kept pure, though persons of a cavilling disposition might allege against the equity of this judicial arrangement that, in order to ensure a poetic justice, the devil should be invested with the sole appointment of his deputy, and that it should not be lodged with the court, as is actually the case, without at least his advice and consent. Still, so far as we have read in the "apostolic constitutions," about whose genuineness so much ink has been shed, they contain no proviso of this kind.

--from the Richmond, Virginia Watchman and Observer of 25 December 1851; found on Virginia Chronicle, The Library of Virginia. 

 Related posts

• Unabridged! Welling's review of Moby-Dick in the National Intelligencer
  https://melvilliana.blogspot.com/2024/08/unabridged-wellings-review-of-moby-dick.html

• William Allen Butler's friendly notice of The House of the Seven Gables
  https://melvilliana.blogspot.com/2024/09/william-allen-butlers-friendly-notice.html 

• Moby Dick widely praised in 1851-2
  https://melvilliana.blogspot.com/2020/02/moby-dick-widely-praised-in-1851-2.html