or evil, for an unborn being of whose opinions he knew nothing." Finally, we learn from Lady Shelley's "Memorials," that Sir Timothy proposed to relieve Shelley's widow from her poverty if she would resign her infant son, the heir to the title and estates, the present Sir Percy Florence Shelley, into his absolute charge; which offer also was indignantly refused, she preferring to earn a hard livelihood with her pen.
3. The separation from Harriet his first wife. Mr. S. says, p. 81: "That Shelley must bear the responsibility of this separation seems to me quite clear." Yet in the Note, previous page, he states: "Leigh Hunt, 'Autob.,' p. 236, and Medwin, however, both assert that it was by mutual assent" And on this same p. 81: "It must be added that the Shelley family in their memorials of the poet, and through their friend, Mr. Richard Garnett, inform us, without casting any slur on Harriet, that documents are extant which will completely vindicate the poet's conduct in this matter. It is, therefore, but just to await their publication before pronouncing a decided judgment." To which we may add that we are at a loss to divine why their publication is delayed so long after the death of Harriet's daughter.
We wished to say something on two or three other points; as on the judgment of Lord Eldon depriving Shelley of the custody of his children by Harriet after her suicide (pp. 93-4); and on the assumption (pp. 182-3) that his practical career was a failure, an assumption, as we understand it, which we certainly cannot concede; but space fails us. In conclusion, we have but to state that, in our judgment, Mr. Symonds' book fairly reaches the high-water mark of cultivated and liberal appreciation of Shelley, as poet and as man, in the present time. The
