'Robert Barnabas Brough: a republican writer of the mid-nineteenth century'

Dr Cynthia Dereli

The subject of this article was not a working-class man in the sense that he did not earn his daily bread by manual labour. He attended grammar school, though not university, and made his living from his education, beginning as a clerk but quickly showing talent as an artist and writer. He made a living from these talents with difficulty throughout his short life. But there is no doubt that Robert Barnabas Brough saw himself as a working man in the field of literature, one who had to work, and work very hard for a precarious living. Among a class of 'working men in journalism',1 by all accounts Robert Brough stood out not only for his talent but also his dedication to work in spite of ill health.

But his history belongs with that of the working-class for another particular reason. He was a republican by conviction, and never wavered from that commitment. These were not just views privately held, but visibly, publicly displayed in his journalism, poetry and writing for the stage. Brough died in 1860 and the high point of Republicanism in England, or perhaps its second high point and final demise might be considered to be the 1870s and the movement started by Charles Bradlaugh. Between W. J. Linton's The English Republic (1850) and Bradlaugh's launch of the Secular Society in the late 1860s, after a period in which republicanism in England has been largely assumed to have been dormant, Brough's work stands out as 'flying the flag' for republicanism, often quite literally as his plays often incorporated a scene in which red flags and caps were prominent. Newspaper reports noted the enthusiasm with which such scenes were greeted by Brough's appreciative audiences.

This article will consider Brough's contribution to the cause of republicanism, through a consideration of his literary work and its reception. His work includes journalism, drama, novels and poetry. In relation to poetry the article does not set out to engage directly with the debates of recent authors on Chartist poetry about the models for conceptualising the nature of such interventions, for instance, as regards the pre-eminence of 'feeling' or political image or 'imaginary'.2 The account of Brough's life and work here aims to foreground the views of one individual, but one significantly in the public eye, with a commitment to republicanism based on a non- sectarian love of humanity. As such, the story of Brough's work can contribute to a reappraisal of republicanism in the mid-century, challenging a view of republicanism at this time as merely an unseen aberration on the fringe of Chartism.3

The early years

Robert Barnabas Brough was born on 10th April 1828 in London. His parents were Barnabas Brough (b. 1796) and Frances Whiteside (b. 1804). In the 1830s the Brough family are known to have been living in Pontypool, where Barnabas was a

1

brewer and wine merchant. Yates wrote that he was the son 'of man engaged in commerce'.4 The exact date of the family's move to Wales has not been identified, though it is known that another son, Lionel, was born in Pontypool, and Jean Webster Brough suggests the family moved from London to Liverpool soon after Robert's birth, and presumably from there to Wales within the next few years.5

It has not been possible to discover any details about the family during their period in Wales. George A. Sala noted that Barnabas and Frances 'had four clever sons and two as clever daughters'.6 The sons are known from their literary and theatrical reputations in the mid-century: William (b. 28th April, 1826), John Cargill (b. 11th February, 1834) and Lionel (b. 10th March, 1836). All acquired reputations in the literary circles in London in the 1850s, and were well-known as members of the Brough family. But the relationships that seem to have been most important for Robert were those with his elder brother William, and with his sister Mary E. C. (b. 1831).

Between 1843 and 1845 Barnabas Brough worked as an auctioneer and accountant in Manchester. The family's move from Wales came about as a result of Barnabas' strange encounter with Chartists during 1839. He recounted the story in A Night with the Chartists, a pamphlet he published in 1847.7 In November 1839, on the night of the insurrection at Newport, Barnabas encountered a group of Chartists as he was returning home from a business trip and was briefly kidnapped by them. Barnabas was not unsympathetic to the Chartist cause and was an old friend of their leader, John Frost. But as a result of this episode he was obliged to act as a Crown witness against his old friend at the trial. John Frost was subsequently deported to Australia. Given the Chartist sympathies in that area, Barnabas's role in the affair ruined his business and the family were obliged to move. By the early 1840s we find them resettled in Manchester.8 There is no documented evidence of the effect of this episode on Robert, though the tenacity with which he remained loyal to his political views may well have been influenced by his father's experience.

As regards the children's education, Yates notes that their father 'gave them a plain English education'.9 Robert and William are known to have been educated at a private school in Newport, and Lionel at Manchester Grammar School and then at Priory School in London.10 It is also known that Robert taught himself French, German and Spanish.11 They did not, as was the case for many of the men with whom they worked later in the London literary circles, have a university education, a fact that regardless of talent, set them apart.12 Robert began his working life in Manchester as a clerk, around 1844. Sala records that he 'tried half-a-dozen avocations before he discovered his real one – Literature', including working as a merchant's clerk and as a portrait painter at Manchester and Liverpool.13

Overall such limited available information on Brough's youth sheds little light on the origin of his strongly held political views.14 Of those friends who remembered him in

2

their memoirs, few commented on his politics. Yates notably did so and threw up his hands in horror at the inexplicable strength of Brough's views.15 But then this comment comes from one of those colleagues who considered himself to be on the inside of the elite literary circles. The evidence from Brough's own writing, as we will see later, suggests that awareness of the political issues of 1848 and a strong instinct for human sympathy and care for others united to form his political convictions.

Early career: from Liverpool to London

By 1845 Barnabas had moved the family to London, where he found a position as accountant to the Illustrated London News, a position which he held until his death in 1854. It is not clear whether his sons William and Robert were living with the family at the time of the move to London. It seems more likely that they had remained in the north of England, as two years later newspaper reports show that they were beginning to make a name for themselves in the literary scene in Liverpool. Here we find the first evidence of the talents of Robert Brough that were to be applied to the cause of republicanism.

The first number of a new journal in Liverpool, the Liverpool Lion, came out on Saturday 10th April 1847. It was run and largely written by the Brothers Brough and was modelled on the London journal, Punch, which had started in 1841, copying its sub-title from Punch: the Liverpool Lion and Lancashire Charivari. From June 1847 through to January 1848 the Liverpool Mercury carried reports of the activities of this new publication. They quoted articles from the Lion and particularly jokes and quips for the entertainment of their own readers. Inspired by what they saw as the hard- hitting approach of Punch, the brothers' targets in Liverpool were mainly local politicians.

One source of information about the kind of activities they were involved in at this time is Robert's novel Marston Lynch, which was described as semi-biographical by some of his reviewers and friends.16 Here it is sufficient to note that the novel clearly does not recount specific events of their lives at that time, but does draw on their experiences of the cut and thrust of journalism in Liverpool in the late 1840s, describing a young man who is fearlessly holding the city fathers to account, heedless of the consequences for his own career. Marston Lynch also provides evidence of the financial difficulties for those starting out in journalism, which presumably Robert also experienced at first hand. Yates describes Robert's work on the Lion as showing all the qualities that were to distinguish his later work: 'the bright wit, the strange quaint fancy, the readiness to seize upon topics of the hour, and present then in the quaintest garb'. He adds that 'the exquisite pathos was not there [yet] nor the bitter savagery, though gleams of this last were not wanting.'17

The last number of the Liverpool Lion came out on February 12th 1848. On February

3

22nd the Liverpool Mercury reported that the Lion was discontinued due to the illness of Mr Robert Brough, and that when recovered he was to go to London. In his short life Robert is known to have had further periods of illness, and though the exact nature of the illness is not known the threat of its recurrence seems to have been a constant feature of his life. In deciding to leave Liverpool, it seems that the brothers were responding to a parental summons, from their father in London.18 The brothers had clearly made their mark on the Liverpool scene in the few years they had been there, as in March the Liverpool Mercury reported that before he left for London, a dinner was to be given for Robert by his friends.

By 1848 the brothers were also turning their attention to the possibilities of the theatre. By August of that year they had a play written and ready for the stage. The Liverpool Mercury announced the new play, 'The Enchanted Isle', a burlesque based on Shakespeare's 'The Tempest', was to be produced at The Amphitheatre in Liverpool. August 25th saw a benefit performance for the authors. The Liverpool Mercury reported that the house had been filled to capacity for the occasion, 'a fitting tribute to the late editor of the Liverpool Lion and his brother'. The brothers were reported to have had acting parts in the accompanying play for the evening. John Coleman recollected that in that year he saw Robert acting on the Liverpool stage as Lampedo in a production of The Honeymoon. He was not very impressed with Bob's acting talents, commenting: 'Poor Bob did not set the Mersey on fire!'19 Their play, on the other hand, was doing well. It was performed in Edinburgh in October, where the Caledonian Mercury gave a detailed account of the transformation of Shakespeare's The Tempest into a play whose language was adapted to the modern days of 'revolutions and barricades'. Like all the burlesques that were to follow, this piece was 'all in verse' and was 'a continual succession of puns, jokes and squibs'. Here also, as in many of his later plays, Robert wove in allusions to the republican cause. Their play's last night in Edinburgh was at the end of October. Then there were six nights in Manchester at the Queen's Theatre and on 18th November the Examiner reported that The Enchanted Isle was to be produced in London at the Adelphi which was then under the management of Mme Celeste. The Brothers Brough had 'arrived' in London. The Enchanted Isle continued at the Adelphi until mid-February, 1849. New productions of the play were also staged in other parts of the country, including the Queens Theatre in Dublin from January to February 1849 and in Portsmouth in April.

Meanwhile the play had come to the attention of Ben Webster, a leading theatre manager, and he undertook the production of their next piece at his new theatre at the Haymarket. Their plays were now to be advertised as 'by the authors of The Enchanted Isle.' In their first year in London the brothers had a number of other successes on the stage. In June 1849 a new play The Sphinx was announced at Haymarket, where Robert Brough was now literary advisor to Buckstone. In April of the following year another production by the Brothers Brough, The Last Edition of Ivanhoe gave the Haymarket another box office success, and in December their production for the Christmas season, again at the Haymarket, was a burlesque The

4

Story of the Second Calendar. Robert Brough's reputation as the talented writer of burlesques was now established.

Work on new plays was not the only task he had in hand in 1848. In the earlier part of that year he was one of the team on the new journal the Puppet Show, which was run by the Vizetelly brothers,20 and like much of the comic journalism at this time seems to have been fuelled to a large extent by rivalry with Punch 21 and by the youthful energy and daring of its contributors.22 He was then also engaged by Albert Smith and Angus Reach to work on their journal, the Man in the Moon, which they had originally launched in 1844.23 At first in 1848 he appears to have been 'an outside contributor'.24 In November that year the journal Era reported that the Christmas edition of the Man in the Moon was on its way, with the pictorial department now 'under the direction of Robert Barnabas Brough'.25 In July 1849 it was announced that the Man in the Moon was to become a weekly publication, having until then appeared only monthly. This new undertaking was to be 'guided' by the Brothers Brough.26

In 1851 the Brough brothers married two sisters, Anne and Elizabeth Romer. William's marriage to Anne was the one that gained the attention of the press. His wedding on 27 February 1851 was declared by the Illustrated London News to be the theatrical wedding of the year with Charles Dickens, Ben Webster, Lord Lytton, Mark Lemon, Douglas Jerrold and other literati attending the service at St Pancras New Church. The happy couple were then off to the Isle of Wight for their honeymoon.27 However, it seems likely that the wedding of Elizabeth and Robert, like that of Robert's hero in Marston Lynch, was a quiet affair.

The two brides, Anne (b. 1827) and Elizabeth (b. 1831), were the daughters of Thomas Romer of Liverpool. Their older cousin Miss Emma Romer had made her first appearance on the stage in 1830 and had become a well-known opera singer in London. Another cousin and sister of Emma, Nelly Romer, had married Mark Lemon, who was a playwright and journalist and was by the late 1840s editor of Punch.

It must have been Anne Romer's reputation in particular as well as that of the Brough Brothers that gave William's wedding celebrity status. Like her cousin, Anne was identified early as having talent as a singer. From September 1843 to June 1846 she studied at the Royal Academy of Music. Towards the end of this period she was beginning to sing in public performances.28 In February 1847 it was reported that Anne Romer, a pupil at the Royal Academy,29 'is being taken up by Mr Maddox at Princess' Theatre London'. Probably her other cousin's influence was at work in giving her another good connection in London. From 1844 Mark Lemon and his wife Nelly had become friends of Charles Dickens and the two families were on visiting terms. Lemon was part of the close circle involved with Dickens' amateur dramatics and in July 1847, when Dickens took his company north for a benefit performance for Leigh Hunt in Liverpool, Anne Romer was in the cast. This was the first of several

5

engagements she had in Dickens' theatrical productions.30 There was evidence of Ann's growing reputation when in 1849 the Era noted that their readers were writing in because they were confusing the Miss Romers and the paper carried a note to sort out who's who.31 Finally after several years of working in the provinces, she obtained a place at a London theatre in 1850.32 In December 1850 Anne turned down a place with Dickens when he took this latest production on tour. She was already committed to work at the Haymarket, taking part in a production of The Enchanted Isle, and her wedding arrangements were well in hand.33

Weddings over, both brothers found roles for their wives in their new productions. Elizabeth had a role in Robert's comedy Kensington Gardens (a comedy adapted from the French) which had its first production in May 1851 at Punch's Playhouse and Strand Theatre. This short piece turned topics of the day into 'a sparkling little comedy' performed to a full house, with Miss Elizabeth Romer in the small but attractive part of Claribel.34 For Easter 1851 the brothers wrote a new play for the Haymarket. This was, as their plays often were, a burlesque of a recent operatic success. In this case the Broughs' play, Arline, was a burlesque of The Bohemian Girl. Anne, who appeared in the title role of Arline, had also taken part in the original opera. The Broughs, a viewer noted, had chosen a play that had been off the stage just long enough for it to be burlesqued successfully. For Anne, sadly her 1851 role in Arline was to be her last. She died a few weeks after the birth of a daughter early in 1852.35

In Marston Lynch the hero marries in spite of his financially precarious situation, and then is weighed down by the responsibility for another's life that marriage places upon him. Elizabeth was not long able to continue working as an actress as their children came along. It is not clear how many children were born to them, Jean Webster Brough says four, an obituary records his widow and three children surviving the writer.36 But only two, Fanny and Lionel Robert appear to have survived into adulthood and made names for themselves in the theatre.37 So the pattern of family life for Robert through the 1850s was marked by increasing responsibilities, as well as family traumas of illness and death.38 On top of all this his own health was always precarious. Hollingshead commented that Robert had 'started in life with one of Nature's slop-work constitutions' and that 'he suffered from some internal complaint – more slop-work – and when asked what his ailment was, he always replied 'Devilled kidneys!'.39 There were particularly bad patches. In December 1857, Blanchard records that the vice-chair of the Savage Club, Robert Brough, had been unable to attend the Club because of ill-health.40 This bout of illness appears to have lasted some months and to have interfered with the preparation of his Life of Sir John Falstaff for publication in volume form. The book was advertised as about to be published on 6th September 1857. When it appeared finally in March 1858 it was dedicated to his sister Mary, with thanks for her support through his illness.41 By the early months of 1860 the severity of his illness was very evident. His friends rallied round and collected funds to send him off in what proved

6

to be a futile search for a fresh-air cure.42 He died on 26th June of that year in Manchester, where the family had stopped off on their journey to Wales.

In spite of all the other responsibilities and difficulties he was wrestling with in these years Robert also found time to found a new club, the Savage Club, which was fondly remembered by many as outstanding for its work to help others, particularly struggling writers and their families. Recalling the founding of the Savage Club, G. L. Strauss describes its founder as a man of 'genuine goodness and sterling humanity'.43 Qualification for membership was to be 'a working man in Literature and Art'.44 Hollingshead recorded the strengths of the Savage Club, its theatrical benefit performances and its admirable aims: 'the Savage Club was free from the vices of more pretentious artistic and literary clubs and never degenerated into a Mutual Admiration Society'.45

Obituary writers recorded that just four months before his death in June 1860, Robert had organised and taken part in a successful Savage Club benefit performance for the widow of a fellow writer.46 Obituaries also noted that though Brough died penniless he could not be charged with improvidence.47 Memoirs record how little writers earned for their hard work at that time.48 In fact the Savages also raised funds to support Brough's widow.49 The amount and variety of his literary output is testimony to how seriously he took his family responsibilities. It is, therefore, interesting that he did not appear to be even tempted to compromise his political views for financial gain. This could be attributable either to the strength of his commitment to or the popularity of republicanism or both. A closer look at his career will provide further insight on these issues.

A career in London

Robert Brough's career in London spanned little more than a decade. Those years were filled with activity. As a man with a living to make he does not appear to have felt able to specialise, but continued to write plays, poems and novels, as well as reporting for newspapers and writing for and setting up new journals. This section of this paper will review his work in these different media and consider their varied contributions to his personal advocacy of republicanism.

His journalism is perhaps the most difficult to trace. The extent of his writing can be gauged roughly from the comments in various memoirs that were written by his contemporaries in the latter part of the century. They recall Brough writing for a variety of journals, but actual identification of articles is impossible in most cases as attribution of authors was not common practice. Such was the case, for instance, in relation to the journals Brough contributed to in his early years, mentioned above, the Man in the Moon, and the Puppet Show. It is, therefore, only possible to list some of the other periodicals that Robert Brough wrote for in the next few years and in some

7

instances to hazard a guess at the amount or nature of his contributions. In Marston Lynch the hero is shown as a budding artist in the first instance, and it is only when he realises the difficulties of his chosen trade that he turns to journalism and then to the theatre. This seems to reflect Robert's own experience. There is evidence that undertook artistic work as illustrator early in his career, but little of this work can be identified with certainty, though he does seem to have continued to do such work on occasions alongside his writing.

Other papers Brough is known to have contributed to, but where his input remains unclear, include Diogenes (1853-4)50 and the Comic Times (1855).51 An obituary in the Liverpool Journal in June 1860 listed also as papers Brough had contributed to Mephistopheles, and Pasquin. Jean Webster Brough records his having been 'at one time, Brussels correspondent of the Sunday Times, and Paris correspondent of the Morning Post'.52 He seems to have been a fairly frequent contributor from 1855 onwards to the Illustrated Times where at least some of his work is acknowledged.53 These pieces were reflective poems or translations from Beranger.54 In 1855 the Illustrated Times frequently carried 'Charades'. Authorship of these was not attributed though they are similar to the pieces included in Brough's Christmas compendia of charades, theatricals and jokes which he produced for several years as A Cracker Bon-Bon for Christmas Parties.55 His influence in the paper could be the source of regular reviewing and praising of the new journal the Train in which he was involved from 1856.56 There is a similar pattern at the Atlas from 1855-57, where some leader articles are signed by him, and some poems and translations appear with his initials,57 and reviews of the Train are prominent for a period.58 While the pattern of attribution of material in these journals is patchy we can get a feeling from a general reading of the surviving editions of these journals of the kind of views he was interested in. Tinsley, commenting on the difficulties for those working in journalism, noted of Brough that 'his Radical tendencies were rather strong', giving us at least a general guide to identifying his hand at work on these journals.59

One place where Brough's contributions can now be traced is at Dickens's journal Household Words, since authorships there have been carefully documented for us.60 Between 1855-8 a number of poems and articles by Brough were published there: reflective pieces, and sketches of ordinary life and sympathetic ordinary people.

Brough's influence at the Train seems to have been more extensive. He was again involved in the discussions to start this new journal.61 Blanchard noted that at the Train 'the promoters of the magazine, all working men in journalism, conceived that they would be doing good service by helping to break through the custom of anonymity'.62 As a result in the Train we can identify poems and articles by Robert Brough as well as the instalments of his novel Marston Lynch appearing. The first number of the Train came out on 1st January 1856. Yates notes that this first number contained the first instalment of Marston Lynch and also a story in verse by Brough.63 The serial of Marston Lynch ran through the rest of the year. The Train's

8

journey was not without difficulties. Blanchard recalls various meetings with the Broughs to discuss progress and in May 1856 they were considering whether to continue.64 At the same time, the Atlas, presumably no longer with Brough as editor, was commenting that the Train should 'eschew political topics' if it wants to survive.65 Hollingshead, recalling the team at the Train, describes Robert Brough as 'the genius of this little family', who if he had lived in France, for instance, would have been 'an honoured member of the Academy'.66

From 1859 to the time of his death Brough was also working as editor of the Welcome Guest.67 The first number of this journal in its revised form in 1859 listed Brough as editor with George Augustus Sala at the top of the long list of distinguished contributors. The preface to this new edition notes that the journal has been running already for 75 weeks and that it will be working strenuously to become an even more 'welcome guest'. Brough was clearly strongly committed to attribution of articles, and this became almost a hallmark of his editorship.68 Sadly by the summer of 1860 the journal was carrying an obituary of the deceased editor written by his colleague Sala.69

Looking back at this period, Tinsley reflected on the difficulties that beset the young men working in journalism at that time. He particularly noted the crucial role that financial backers played in the success of any new undertaking:

There is little doubt that if those who started Diogenes had been as fortunate as the founders of Punch in finding a monied firm to help them at the right time, Diogenes would have been the greatest rival Punch ever had; but it died, like the clever little pocket serial, The Man in the Moon, and some other comic serials, more for the want of money than talent.70

While Brough's specific contributions to journals are not always clear, at the very least the extent of his journalistic work is evidence that his name or work were before the public regularly, giving him a reputation in literature that would have ensured his views were widely discussed.

In the theatre, on the other hand, there is no question of anonymity. As one theatrical success succeeded another, each new play was advertised as by 'Mr Robert Brough, author of. . .', followed by a list of the most outstanding plays to-date, and providing evidence of how his reputation on stage was growing. This was, of course, common practice and to say that the plays were indeed a success we need to support this with evidence from the reviews. The British Library lists fifteen plays by Robert alone or written with his brother William, although there are others referred to in reviews not listed there.71 A sampling from the reviews of his plays will be considered below as an indicator to the reputation of the author, which must also be to some extent a reflection of the popularity of his political views as well as his literary achievements.

9

Hudson's analysis of theatre at this time identifies three strands of burlesque one of which is the 'Brough school'. This 'retained only so much of the plot of the original story as secured for the piece interest as a story, while each incident, large or small, was gently metamorphosed by a flash of wit, a humorous twist of thought or phrase, reason, or rhyme, or a lunge of satire.' As well as containing numerous songs set to well-known airs Brough's burlesques were written in verse. This school, Hudson noted, saw burlesque as 'one long unflagging jeu d'esprit, with copious punning, while giving the actor opportunity to develop consistency of the character'.72

H. S. Edwards wrote of the work of the Brothers Brough that they were 'the best burlesques of the period,73 a view which newspaper reviews seem to support. Brough had quickly established his own style and themes which are remarked on by reviewers. Topicality is an essential ingredient and frequently this often means also political and republican.74 Arline took its characters from a recent opera, put them 'into a lower key' and added a good sprinkling of jokes and, of course, a republican figure, 'a Pole, of republican principles';75 the play Princess Radiant by the Brothers Brough, based on a well-known fairy tale, was described as preserving the original story, 'the author having admirably adapted it to the events of the day, so as to enable him to introduce an endless succession of happy hits, which told with immense effect on the audience'.76 As war in the Crimean War loomed, the topical references abounded: reviewing The Overland Journey to Constantinople, which had its first production on 15th April 1854 at the Adelphi, the Theatrical Journal said that: 'To enumerate all the persons and systems that are ridiculed in it 'would occupy all the space the reviewer has at his disposal'.77 Similarly a review of the play Olympus in a Muddle in August 1855 emphasised the play's political content describing its plot as a series of practical jokes which are 'intended as a political slur upon certain events which took place in the Crimea'.78 Another review blamed the censoring of the play for its failure.79 A negative review of the same play from the Morning Chronicle of 24th August testified at least to its controversial content, noting that the hissers and applauders had a contest at the end of the play. Medea, a year later in July 1856, a burlesque of Legouve's opera Medee, was again lauded for its political edge. The Daily News noted that it was 'full of sparkling jokes and crackling antitheses' and noted that 'with the audience last night every line seemed to tell'.80

To illustrate these aspects of the Brough's burlesques two plays will be considered in more detail. The Last Edition of Ivanhoe (1850) set out its agenda in the dramatis personae. Cedric is described as 'a fine old English gentleman' and the characters line up for and against aristocratic lineage, Sir Brian de Bore Guilbert for, and Ivanhoe leading the challenge, with Wamba the jester, deciding to leave 'this abode of tyranny' (Sc. 1). However, there is, as usual, a plot full of action, intrigue and situational comedy, puns and parodies so that the whole remains a light-hearted romp through scenes in this historical setting, with King Richard and King John both putting in an appearance and providing ample opportunity for fun at the expense of the ruling class. After many theatrical skirmishes the play ends with peace all round. This is

10

emphasised with a final tableau - an 'Exposition of all Nations'. As the stage is filled with figures representative of Europe, Asia, Africa, America, Peace and Plenty and so on, the Chorus sings to the tune of 'Rule Britannia', a verse about Britain's friendship with every land, concluding:

'Rule Britannia, Britannia thus behaves Britons send ill feelings ever – ever to their graves!'

A message of international peace and brotherhood is one which Brough returns to in his poetry and which is central to his republican thinking.

Masaniello had its first performance at the Royal Olympic theatre on 2nd July 1857 and ran through to the autumn. Again Brough's play deflates an original operatic plot by introducing low life characters: for instance, the central figure becomes a fish seller, providing opportunities for a variety of puns. Masaniello leads a band of 'conspirators' whose war cry is liberty and freedom, and several scenes are enlivened with the waving of red caps and flags.81 In the opening scene the fishermen list their grievances against the aristocracy. Masaniello's contributions are punctuated with declarations such as: 'This pamper'd Harris-tocracy must down', 'Down with the tyrants' and 'The oligarchs must fall!' as well as a grand speech at the barricades. But when the republicans have Alphonso, the representative of the aristocracy, on the run, they disintegrate into a scramble for honours and titles. A sub-plot around Alphonso's impending wedding ensures the lightness of the whole, along with the usual puns. In this play, however, the ending and the final tableau, with Alphonso apparently back in control, seems less hopeful, as the figures are silhouetted against the background of the eruption of Vesuvius, no doubt with allegorical implications.

On 11th July 1857 the Atlas noted that the Lord Chamberlain had interdicted the play Masaniello over a 'good joke' as being 'indecorous and disloyal'. Since the Atlas's leader on August 1st of that year was signed by Brough, it would seem likely that he was already involved with that journal. But Lloyd's Weekly also ran the same story in its edition of the following day. They also noted that the author has concentrated on giving the piece 'a political colouring' which shows the Lords as 'awful' but also the revolutionaries as equally 'poor'. It would appear that an indirect reference to the Royal family themselves had to be removed so that the play could go ahead. On 1st November Lloyd's Weekly reported the play was withdrawn though adding 'for a short time only we presume'. They noted that Masaniello at the Olympic had had a run of 98 consecutive nights' performances, adding: 'Its success has been greater than that attained by any similar work for ages'.

Brough's success in the theatre was undoubtedly due in large part to his sparkling wit. But his plays could not have succeeded if the whole audience had been averse to the message they carried. Burlesques were supplements to a main play on the bill. Many of Brough's plays contain just a single act. But from reviews it is clear that they were

11

a major attraction and that Brough had gained a high reputation as a dramatist, often called to the front of the stage to receive the applause of his audiences. Brough was well-known to the public of the 1850s. It is now only possible to speculate on how this reputation affected the sales of his other works. What is clear is that his work in different media would all have been contributing to that reputation.

Brough's novels all appeared in journals before being published as separate volumes. Here where authorship is not in dispute, there is ample evidence of the great range of his knowledge both historical and contemporary. His first published novel was a translation from the French, The Alain Family by Alphonse Karr, which was reviewed in the Athenaeum on November 19th, 1853.82 There is then a gap before a flurry of novels came out in the late 50s: The Life of Sir John Falstaff, illustrated by Cruikshank in 1858; Marston Lynch: His Life and Times in 1860; Which is Which?: or Miles Cassidy's Contract. A Picture Story (originally published in the National Magazine) in 1860; Miss Brown: A Romance in 1860. There was also a volume of essays accompanying comic illustrations by C. H. Bennett based on Darwinian ideas and lantern entertainments, Shadows and Substance, published in 1859. Below consideration will be given to the contribution made by three of the novels to an understanding of the influence of Brough's republican views on his work.

The interest of Marston Lynch is now perhaps chiefly for the light it throws on Brough's early life. Though not purely autobiographical, it clearly draws on his experiences in his early years in Liverpool with the addition of a lively plot. However, the narrator sets the tone for the reader's relationship with his characters in a digression on the 'mysteries of the English aristocracy' which he feels is necessary to our understanding of his narrative. This is really about how class division, deference and aspiration permeates English society, though the narrator says he is unable to talk about 'the real crème de la crème' not having met any, adding in parenthesis: 'though there is no telling to what honours a diligent literary career, conducted on principles of becoming deference, may not lead me' (p.43). The novel remains unfinished, a host of complications having been developed and entwined, ready to produce a denouement to the advantage of the hero in the second volume, which was never to be written. The novel does, however, also provide evidence of the human touch characteristic of his work both in the characters of Marston's friends in poverty and in the voice of the narrator depicting these scenes of distress. It is not a sentimental novel. Rather it is full of fun and humour both in the action and in the narrative, but the strain of loving kindness is always in evidence.

More directly relevant to the subject of republicanism is his Life of Sir John Falstaff. Creating a history for Shakespeare's character provides Brough with an ideal vehicle for the analysis and satire of aristocratic pedigrees and their unworthiness. The book was advertised in the Era of 26th April 1857 as about to appear in 10 monthly parts. The preface to the one volume edition is dated March 1858 and it was listed in books received in John Bull on 31st May that year. The publication of this book was an

12

achievement that cost Brough dear, as its production coincided with the period of his illness from 1857-8. In the dedication of the volume to his sister, Brough thanked her for her support, which had made the publication of this work possible. The idea of a sustained attack on the aristocracy may sound all too polemical. This is far from the case, and the reviews noted that his readers at the time were appreciative of his usual varied and sparkling wit and humour. The résumé of the Falstaff family's history in the early pages of the book implies that they were all cheats and hereditary thieves, typical of the upper class (p.7). Another character's views of one of the Falstaffs was that 'he had thought him a true man, but found he was but a gentleman after all' (p.28). Sir John is, of course, to be the hero of the book as the narrative works towards the incidents of his life, drawn from Shakespeare. However, this is given a comic twist by the definition offered of a hero, as 'a man who takes a more than common advantage of his fellow-creatures in the furtherance of his own interests, or those of his nation, county, township, street, row of houses, family or self' (p.50). Of Sir John's fate our narrator tells us: 'Sir John Falstaff won a hero's laurels and attained a hero's ends (which may be briefly summed up as the privilege of doing pretty much as you like at the expense of other people' (p.51).

The pages of this book are filled with such expressions of outrage at the privilege enjoyed by the upper classes through the centuries. The institutions which support this privilege including the writing of history itself all become the butt of Brough's satire. This extends even to the working class themselves, who tolerate this situation: on one occasion the narrator speaks out against 'the contentment with which people of that class will submit to the most incredible hardships rather make an effort to emancipate themselves...' (p126).83 This is a statement worthy of note as it is at odds with views expressed by reformist contemporaries such Dickens, who consistently appeals to the middle classes to take action of behalf of the working class,84 and the history of the Chartist movement itself reveals tensions around this issue.

The last of these novels Which is Which? or Miles Cassidy's Contract is narrated in a quieter tone. Direct references to republicanism are fewer, though we are given ample evidence of aristocratic hypocrisy and their corrupting 'values'. The central figure, Miles Cassidy, is a working man who for reasons which are kept back from us until the end of the novel, has transplanted himself from Ireland to Oxford in order to provide a good education for his two boys. Along the way he shows himself to be totally selfless, always looking to help others. When his business thrives he provides work for others less fortunate. He is trusting and his trust is largely, though not always repaid. His honesty is often contrasted with the behaviour of his 'betters' to the latter's disadvantage. The university education he has provided for his boys almost corrupts one of them, but the father's values finally prevail over temptations. The commentary from the narrator is on the whole restrained, though in this section Brough allows himself to address the reader as one sharing his values. The wayward son Frank is said to be not 'one of those tremendous humanitarian philosophers to whom duke and dustman are alike – such as you and I, Tomkins, for instance, who

13

are both notoriously of that way of thinking. We wouldn't cringe to a lord – would we? Or even dine with one, if he were to ask us?.. ' (p196). It is only when the story behind Miles' arduous life in Oxford is finally revealed that a direct connection to republicanism is made. He is revealed to have been a fighter for the republican cause in Ireland in 1798 at the time of the French invasion, having high hopes of what could be achieved for the people. He reflects: 'Mighty wild dhrames we boys had, to be sure, of what the Rivolushin was going to do for us all - But there – that's politics that is' (p.206). We also discover that the two children he has been caring for are in fact not both his own. His overwhelming selflessness shines out in the novel demanding our sympathy for him and hence ultimately for the figure of the republican, and by contrast condemning the greed and pride of the aristocratic figures.

The strains of republicanism in Brough's work for the theatre and in his novels discussed so far provide evidence of a popular presence of republicanism in mid- nineteenth century England. However, this does not take us very far towards an understanding of Brough himself as a republican. With little contemporary biographical material and what there is coming from those less than sympathetic to his political views, and with only the indirect autobiographical hints from Marston Lynch to guide us, I want to turn to his poetry as a means to provide further insight into the nature of Brough's republican views, evidence which might also offer insight more widely into the place of such views in mid-nineteenth century cultural life.

Robert Brough's poetry falls into two distinct but intrinsically linked groups: poetry that is reflective or focused on ordinary, everyday lives on the one hand and satirical verses on the other. Behind the puns and quips, the satiric images and caricatures of the latter group of poems lies an astute observation of and deep sympathy with society and individuals. The link between the two is what gives them all their power as contemporary critics noted.

In search of his poetry we can look to a number of sources. Some poems can be found in newspapers and journals to which he is known to have contributed, though there must be work in these papers that was not ascribed, as discussed above.85 In the Train, in which Brough was taking a leading role, his translations of Victor Hugo poems appeared in 1856 -57, which were praised as 'finely translated' and 'with exceeding delicacy'.86

Some poems, possibly having already appeared elsewhere in journals, were collected and published in one volume with the short novel, Miss Brown in 1860. These poems are mainly of the first category. They are reflective of a generous and non- denominational Christian love explained in the poem 'An Early Christian', the first line of which encapsulates the sentiment of the whole: 'Christians were on the earth ere Christ was born... ', that is Christian love of one's fellow-human being is not confined to practising Christians but is found all over the world and through time (p.

14

272). The poem 'A Plea for Old Times' which, when it first appeared in a journal accompanied an engraving called 'The Fair Reckoner' was quoted in full by Vizetelly in his memoirs.87 It gives an account as the title suggests of 'the old times' but the last two lines sum up the sentiment that is underlying this reflective verse, and which link it to those other poems where the satire is more directly demanding of action: 'What might we not do! If we could, in their spirit / Think more of our duties and less of ourselves!'

Brough was growing up in the era of the Chartist movement and his father had clearly been sympathetic to their views, yet the links to Chartist thinking are not immediately obvious in Brough's work. The political and satirical vein of his poetic output is most obviously rooted in the influence of the French poet, Pierre-Jean de Béranger. Béranger now long forgotten, was eulogised in nineteenth-century England as well as France and had become a hero for Brough from an early age. In the introduction to his volume of translations he admits that 'for the character of Béranger, as a moral and intellectual whole, I am free to confess to an admiration rather exceeding the ordinary bounds of enthusiasm' (p.ix). Further he admires his 'unswerving and incorruptible honesty of purpose' and in his choice of poetic form: his 'discovery of and adherence to a form of utterance eminently suited to his poetical nature' (p.x). He sees Bérenger's songs as encapsulating a history of France in first part of that century and as still relevant since, he argues, the issues are still with us. The common sympathy with Béranger's work that runs through Brough's varied output is typified in the link from the tableau of all the nations which closes the play Ivanhoe, as noted above, and the poem 'The Holy Alliance of the Peoples' in this anthology, where the refrain which ends each verse conveys the message: 'Form an alliance, Peoples, and unite,/ In Friendship firm, your hands' (pp.59-62).88

Brough was not the first to undertake a translation of Béranger's poems. Phelan, charting Béranger's reputation in England, has also surveyed the appearances of his poetry in translation in English newspapers and journals from the early nineteenth century.89 But to contextualise Brough's translations of Béranger it will be useful to look briefly at the reputation of the French poet in England from the 1830s.

Béranger's first collection of poems was published in Paris in 1815. There, in the renewed political tensions of 1830, a republication of this volume of poems was called for. The circumstances surrounding this were the subject of a review in the Quarterly Review in 1832 by J.W. Croker.90 It charts the history of Béranger's songs and throws light on the origins of the hero status that he had acquired by that time. In 1830 the republication of the songs was called for by a 10,000 signature subscription, which so challenged the authorities in Paris that they finally acted against Béranger's anti-Royalist sentiments. Croker records the argument of the Attorney-General about what constituted a song and how much license a song could be given. Béranger's songs were not to be given such license because:

15

sarcastic impiety has taken the place of national gaiety – provocations to murder have succeeded to jokes and raillery - excesses of every kind have been stimulated by these hitherto innocent incentives, and the Popular Muse has become one of the direst Furies of our civil discords. (p.463)

The advocate for the defence, on the other hand, argued precisely that there was indeed an 'ancient privilege of song' to take license in entertaining. The outcome of the trial was that the songs were banned, but in fact they circulated widely in Paris in the text of the trial proceedings and were said to have had not a little influence on the outcome of political disturbances in that year. Crocker's commentary on these events shows him less than sympathetic to the political position of Béranger. But the article's existence and engagement with the issues indicates that the publication was not to be ignored at that time.

Brough published his collection of translations of Béranger's poems in 1856. In the dedication of his book to ' Dante G. Rossetti Founder of the So-called Pre-Raphaelite School of English Art', Brough refers to his book as a work 'into which he has at all events thrown much enthusiasm and more labour' (p.vii), and speaks of the translations as a labour of love that a working writer can ill afford. His translator's note speaks of his admiration for Béranger, both his moral and intellectual character, and 'incorruptible honesty'. He feels that he has been afforded the opportunity to bring these poems to the British public by the re-establishment 'of all the petty continental tyrannies', and he praises Béranger for having refused to accept honours from the new regime, for remaining a lone voice still speaking out against those in power. Brough finds here a 'standard of public virtue' which he hopes his compatriots will learn from. His collection of one hundred poems is entitled Béranger's Songs of the Empire, the Peace and the Restoration. Brough notes that these are but a small part of Béranger's oeuvre, and that he has chosen in this first volume to focus on the political poems. Clearly he was intending to publish further volumes in the future, though that was not to be. The collection ranges from poems of utopian vision, as in 'My Republic', a poem in praise of 'Liberty', to story poems such as 'The Little Red Man' where a legendary figure is said to appear to augur the death of kings, a hint of their mortality as an institution. His republican message to his readers is first to recognise the divided nature of their society and secondly not to accept it. This is conveyed through simple stories and images, with a directness that is consistently challenging.

Some of the reviews of Brough's book were very positive. The Illustrated Times devoted almost a column to the work, praising Brough's understanding of the French language and cultural background.91 It should be noted though that Brough was working on this journal at the time and some of his translations of Béranger's work had been published in this journal as well as an article on 'Béranger and the war'.92 Others who reviewed the book included the Athenaeum and the Examiner. The latter also had praise for Brough's work, commenting: 'In the earnestness of Mr Robert

16

Barnabas Brough's good purpose lies his capability' and 'Mr Brough has felt the spirit of the man whom he admires'.93

Phelan's criticism of Brough's translation for leaving in lines of a chorus in the original French as 'limiting its potential resonance in the British political context' seems rather harsh.94 Inclusion of lines of French as part of the joke was quite common in Brough's burlesque plays, and in his own poetry he was to retain a few lines of French on occasions to make the link to Béranger's work and republican ideals.95 A public who were inspired by the action of citizens across the channel would not be deterred from reading by the presence of a French word in a text, while the application of comparisons between the two countries is precisely what Brough tries to use to stir his compatriots to action. Béranger's poetry is relevant in England because the working classes in the two countries face the same problem of power of privilege. This is the undercurrent in Brough's work and part of its international flavour. There has been an assumption that Béranger's reputation was limited to the readers of the working-class newspapers, but the approach that Brough takes seems to me to challenge this assumption. He speaks out through his poetic work and through his stage plays to all those who are not on the inside of the ruling class, very definitely including or especially to the working class. The reputation of Béranger provides evidence of the reality of the breadth of the audience for this message.

Brough's publication of his volume of poems proved to be extremely well-timed, as in 1857 the newspaper interest in Béranger ran high. From early in the year there were regular reports of his role in the politics across the channel. Then in early July it was reported that he was dangerously ill. Such reports were carried by both local and national newspapers. It seems that everyone was interested in Béranger's health. When he died in mid-July the obituaries were lavish in their praise. In the Daily News, for instance, a column headed simply 'Béranger' begins: 'The illustrious Béranger – one of the greatest lyric poets and the greatest song writer whom the world has ever known - has just passed from among us'.96 The Times devoted a long piece to the praise of his life and work, as well as his significance in French national life, noting 'how the soul of his songs was part of her soul, of her own immortal genius, whether she is considered as a race or a a people'.97

In fact before Brough published his volume of Béranger's poetry, he had already shown evidence of the French poet's influence on his own work in a publication of 1855. This was the period of the Crimean War, which from its inception in 1854 had resulted in a growing outcry against the inefficiency of the authorities in their handling of the war effort. It had also seen, however, a concerted and quite effective effort by the establishment press to build a pro-war culture.98 Chartist poets, in whose work themes of the cause of liberty against tyranny were dominant, almost to a man suddenly began to write and publish poetry turning those same images into vehicles of patriotism.99

17

Robert Brough wrote about people and their selfless concern for others in two reflective poems on the Crimea situation in 1855 published in the Illustrated Times of December 22nd: 'A Crimean Soldier's Christmas Story' and 'Christmas Charity: The Hospital Nurse at Scutari'. But his collection of poems published in 1855 was in a satirical vein, and, true to his principles, remained absolutely focused on the role of the aristocracy and the suffering of ordinary people in their service. His satiric verse challenge the system that had sent so many men to their deaths on the plains before Sebastopol. He stands by his republican opposition to aristocratic exploitation which he sees epitomised in the hardship and suffering of the soldiers.

His title, Songs of the Governing Classes, makes a link with the work of his good friend Edmund Whitty, who had published a collection of his journalistic essays, each of which satirised a leading political figure.100 In dedicating the Songs to Whitty Brough wrote: 'I believe in the revolution you have said is coming, however slowly and with precocious eagerness seize this opportunity of tacking my name on the skirts of one, that will be revered ... by future reapers in the open field, as that of one of the first and bravest pioneers to bring an axe into the forest.' He added: 'My modest song book, to your terrible story book aspires to be no more than the fiddle that plays while the majestic panorama is unrolling'.

For the second edition of the Songs in 1890 an extract from Yates' Recollections was attached as an introduction on the life of Brough. Yates was one of those contemporaries who, while admiring Brough's literary skills, could not understand his political position: 'I have often wondered what gave Robert Brough that deep vindictive hatred of wealth and rank and respectability which permeated his life. It was probably innate; it was certainly engrained' (p.vi). These words from Yates reveal just how deep was the prejudice and blindness of the colleagues with whom Brough had to work. Although Brough himself has not recorded for us the incidents or reading that formed his views he had, in the preface to the first edition of the Songs, stated his views clearly, though it seems that Yates could not relate to this.

The feeling of which the following ballads are the faint echo and imperfect expression is a deeply-rooted belief that to the institution of aristocracy in the country (not merely to its “undue preponderance”, but to its absolute existence) is mainly attributable all the political injustice, and more especially the grovelling moral debasement we have to deplore, a feeling by no means recently implanted or even greatly developed in the writer's heart. (p.xi)

So, while some of Brough's songs may contain specific criticisms of the ruling class, they to not belong with that body of literature to which many writers on republicanism now point as indicative of the working class view of the monarchy: a critique of its extravagances not of the institution as such.101 Brough makes it clear that his opposition is to the institution itself.

The appearance of Brough's Songs was widely noted, but reviews were few at this 18

time when all the newspapers were busy waving the patriotic flag. An exception was the Weekly Dispatch. The article began by juxtaposing the well-known satirical skills of the author as jester and the 'large sympathies' and 'deep feelings' that his poetry also shows, as two powerful aspects of the work of the same man. It went on to praise Brough's style as having a 'vigour worthy of Béranger'. In the Songs, it argued, he tackles the creed of the governing classes: 'In the arrogant assumption that the earth is theirs and the goodness thereof, we see the most hateful features of their “position” illustrated.' The review continued in similar vein for its fifth of a broadsheet column, reflecting Brough's republican sentiments throughout, and concluding: 'We warmly welcome this admirable little book.'102

According to Yates, in his introduction to the second edition of the Songs in 1890, very few copies of the first edition were sold. This fact seems at odds with his own choice to bring out a second edition and also with the reputation of the Songs. This is evident in an obituary for William Brough in 1870: 'his brother Robert was a trenchant and sometimes terrible satirist; witness his “Songs of the Governing Classes”'103 and when Robert's son Lionel Robert was making his first appearance on the stage in 1881 when he was referred to as the 'son of the clever writer of the same name, to whom we are owing the famous Songs of the Governing Classes'.104 In his reminiscences Clement Scott also linked Brough's name first and foremost to the Songs: 'Bob Brough, the brilliant writer of the radical Songs of the Governing Classes' and in mentioning Fanny Brough as the daughter of Robert Brough 'the journalist and poet, author of the remarkable Songs of the Governing Classes'.105

This collection of poems contains lilting songs in the style of Béranger, with simple language and use of refrains. The poems are divided into three groups: Portraits; Historical Fancies; Miscellanies. The 'Portraits' are pictures of contemporary, though imagined, figures representative of the ruling class; the 'Historical Fancies' use accounts of famous people from history to elaborate the failings of the ruling class across the ages; the 'Miscellanies' use a wider variety of scenes and characters for the same purposes. So while there is variety in the collection, the theme of exposure of evils of the ruling class is maintained throughout.

As we might expect from Brough the poems are topical. Though only one makes a link to a situation paralleling that in the Crimea, because of the press campaign on the subject of mismanagement of the war in 1855, this was sufficient to link the general message of the whole collection to that contemporary issue. This is the poem 'Return from Syria' where, taking a mediaeval setting, a young nobleman, Dunois, returning from the wars meets a Palmer intent on telling him some home-truths. Dunois is described as 'In glory, over head and heels, but wholly free from scars'. This antithesis between the unmerited praise and rewards heaped on the young man and his actual behaviour in the war provides material for the parallel structures of the verses which drive home the message of injustice: unmerited privilege of the ruling class and the suffering of the ordinary soldiers occasioned by it. Dunois claims to have suffered all the horrors of the campaign but each claim is rebuffed. When he speaks of enduring 19

the cold the Palmer parries with:

Your cloak was lined with sable down Your lady mother sent out furs to warm you while you slept To forage fuel for your tent, two freezing hinds were kept.

Common republican themes are also present. The poem 'Wanted a gentleman' is a cry for a new leader to emerge, and though he is never named this is in essence a second Cromwell that is being called for.106

Above all the Songs are fired by the model of Béranger and Brough's own republican views. The first poem of the collection establishes the link to Béranger, taking its title from one of his poems. Brough has rewritten the 'Marquis de Carabas' as an account of an English aristocrat with recognisable local colour, but he retains the verse pattern of the original and the refrain in French to emphasise the link back to the master of songs and republicanism. Perhaps it is less painful to show the grovelling of the poor in front of the ruling class in French: 'Chapeau bas! Chapeau bas! / Gloire au Marquis de Carabas'.

The poem 'A Gentleman' sets out Brough's view of the upper classes.

There is a word in the English tongue Where I'd rather it were not For shams and lies have from it sprung And heartburns fierce and hot .... 'Tis a curse to the land, deny it who can? That self-same boast, 'I'm a gentleman!'

Each succeeding verse then adds to the catalogue of injustice perpetrated by the race of 'gentlemen'.

A poem that brings together many of Brough's republican themes is a story poem entitled 'The terriers, the rats, the mice, and the cats – a fable'. It tells how the mice rise up and throw out the cats who travel across the channel to seek refuge and ask the terriers how they manage to keep their rats in order. The use of an analogy with the hierarchy of the animal kingdom where the powerful eat the weak encapsulates his view of the predatory nature of a ruling class. In this sense the story is a powerful challenge to the underdogs in England to follow the example of the mice (in France) . However, the poem has a further sting in the tail, with the explanation given by the terriers (the English ruling class) as to how they keep their rats (the poor) at bay. They explain that when things are difficult and the suffering of the rats is particularly hard:

We beckon out the biggest rat 20

And ask him, with a friendly pay To join our band - the merrier. We teach him how to bark, with sheers We dock his tail, and trim his ears Give him some bones, to calm his fears And tell him he's a Terrier.

If we were in any doubt from a reading of the plays as to Brough's position as a republican being clear to his readers, this volume of poems survives to dispel those doubts.

Conclusions

Because of the paucity of information an account of Brough's career does not directly position him in relation to the story of politics and in particular republicanism in the nineteenth century. Attention has now been given to that body of literary work from the 1840s, Chartist poetry, which had not had a place in the canon of literature. Its conceptualisation has been considered in terms of its relation, on the one hand, to the Chartist movement itself and on the other, to the canon of poetic literature, but this does not provide an obvious place to fit Brough into the thinking about the mid- century period. He is not only a poet but a renowned dramatist, novelist and journalist. He is not only writing for the working class but also for more diverse audiences. He is not an advocate for the Charter but an uncompromising republican.107

The evidence of Brough's prominent role in the literary and theatrical life in London in the 1850s examined above needs to be set alongside views on the general standing of republicanism at that time. In this respect Brough fits chronologically between W.J. Linton's republican position set out in the English Republic (1850) and Bradlaugh's writing from 1870s. Weiner, writing on the poetry and politics of the Bradlaugh period of 1865-75, highlighted characteristics of 'antitheism' and 'parliamentary reform' as dominant,108 and Williams has examined Bradlaugh's movement as a middle-class phenomenon.109 Linton's seminal account of republicanism in 1850, on the other hand, emphasised principles of equality, liberty and fraternity, the rule of the majority, the sacredness of the individual and society, and the need for Englishmen to prepare themselves through education for their part 'in the world's work, a place to occupy in the holy alliance of the Peoples'.110 But it was also rooted in a non-denominational religious outlook. The strengths of Brough's position, his unwavering opposition to the institution of the monarchy, his love of humanity similarly rooted in non-denominational religious or ethical principles, and his call for selflessness and duty position him ideologically closer to Linton than Bradlaugh. If Brough's work does not immediately recall Linton's, I would argue that this has more to do with the media in which he works. It seems clear that much of the

21

popularity of his burlesques and other satires derived from those characteristics they had in common with Linton: their underlying human sympathy and belief in equality.

It has been suggested that republicanism had only a marginal status by the mid- century when Brough was writing:

Quite simply, the institution of the monarchy was too deeply embedded within the master narrative of English constitutional politics to be ever seriously threatened. Republicanism remained little more than a minority creed of the cogniscenti, championed by a few at times of radical retreat, but never able to command a mass platform.111

In similar vein Williams has argued that the more ubiquitous radicalism 'was not on the whole republican', that 'Republicanism was only stimulated by foreign influence and then only as the preserve of a small group of former Chartists,' and that 'Harney, Linton and their colleagues were alone after 1848 in seeing the revolutions on the Continent as the harbinger of what would follow in Britain'.112

Taylor has suggested that this dominant view of republicanism in mid-nineteenth century has been arrived at either by working backwards from Bradlaugh as the model, or by positioning anti-monarchist ideas in the 1840s within Chartism, where they are merely a 'tendency'.113 His study sets out to challenge these approaches which always position republicanism on the margins and to show 'that, far from being a rarity, opposition to monarchy was actually a strong feature of nineteenth century movements of political protest'.114

The evidence presented above from Brough's career, his uncompromising expressions of republican views on the one hand and his popularity on the other, provide evidence in support of Taylor's view. This is borne out in some of the surviving views on his work. In the memoirs of his contemporaries, men who belonged to an elite literary class, but who recalled meeting or working with him, Brough's political views are usually secondary if mentioned at all. They remember a good man and clever writer: for Strauss he was a man 'who had room in his large heart for sympathy with the wide world'.115 As well as saying more about his goodness of character several obituary writers made the connection with his political position more clearly as a source of much of his popularity. The Critic wrote of Brough as 'remarkable and remarked for his genius and versatility', and as well as a 'wholesomeness of thought, a purity of ideas', but having also a 'seriousness of purpose'.116 The Liverpool Journal wrote at length of the range of his work, of the views of his friends of his genius and seriousness, but added: 'He was an ardent hater, but only of that which was intrinsically mean and base; his whole nature warmed into fervour under the influence of every generous impulse'.117

Perhaps the greatest testimony to his reputation was the work of fund-raising that was undertaken to relieve the destitute condition of his widow and children. There was 22

plentiful publicity for benefit performances which his friends rallied round to organise. Several in their memoirs record with some pride their share in the undertaking which raised £1600 – no small amount in those days.118 Of course the amount raised reflected the numbers who filled the theatres for the benefit performances. The Times, in whose pages the name of Robert Brough had never previously appeared, not even to mark his death, carried a report, acknowledging that the 'exertions that are made on behalf of the widow and children of the popular writer at once show the estimation in which he was generally held.'119

His later reputation is also relevant to the thesis here of his work's significance for republican history. By the time of the second edition of the Songs in 1890 reviews with the benefit of hindsight point up sharply the political content of the volume. The reviewer in the Pall Mall Gazette felt that the 'colouring now seems overdone'. He describes Brough's view of the ruling class as 'synonymous with all that is worst in human nature', arguing that 'the verses bring home to us the fact that since they were written class-hatreds have moderated.'120 The most thoroughgoing of these reviews was in the Daily News. It began: 'The truculent Radicalism of the middle of the century may be contrasted with the scientific Radicalism of its close with the help of a curious little volume just published.' Brough is said to see 'the working of the curse of class rule in every evil of our civilization', and the reviewer added: 'Brough is a champion who flings his glove full in the face of the adversary, and joins issue on the very essence of the question'. This was one of those books 'in which the classes were sung by and for the masses'. But its sentiments seem so very unlike the present that its age could be a hundred years not just forty. After several lengthy quotations from the Songs and analysis in a similar vein, the writer concludes that 'the order' of the ruling class 'will not perish of hard words' but from our own conviction that we don't need it:

When its time comes, no one need be so cruel as to offer the venerable institution a blow. Analysis will simply loosen it in all its articulations, and it will collapse suddenly, painlessly, one day when, it thinks it is going out for a walk.121

In 1890 Brough's analysis of the cause of social problems as being the existence of the ruling classes was no longer considered relevant. Liberalism, reform and amelioration had taken over.122

Yates reflected in his memoirs that he was puzzled as to what 'gave Robert Brough that deep vindictive hatred of wealth and rank and respectability which permeated his life'. He also recalled warning Brough that the teachings of the Songs 'were dangerous and uncalled for'.123 This statement offers a deep insight into what it cost Brough to remain true to his beliefs, not only tempering friendships, but also as a result excluding him from the opportunities that those upper class connections could have provided. But there is no doubt that he used those opportunities he had to the full, making a great reputation for himself as a republican by conviction, an incisive 23

satirist and a caring human being. His reinstatement in accounts both of the history of ideas and of literature of the mid-nineteenth century would close a gap in our understanding of the popular support for republicanism in the mid-nineteenth century.

1 Clement Scott and Cecil Howard, Life and Reminiscences of E. L. Blanchard (London: Hutchinson , 1891), p.151. 2 Mike Sanders, The Poetry of Chartism: Aesthetics, Politics, History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), p. 28. See also arguments in: Anne Janowitz, Lyric and Labour in the Romantic Tradition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998); Isobel Armstrong, Victorian Poetry: Poetry , Poetics and Politics (London: Routledge, 1993). 3 Antony Taylor , 'Republicanism reappraised: anti-monarchism and the English radical tradition, 1850-1872', in Re- reading the Constitution: New Narratives in the Political History of England's long Nineteenth Century, ed. by James Vernon (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), pp.154-5. 4 Edmund H.Yates, Edmund Yates: His Recollections and Experiences. Fifty Years of London Life, 2 vols (London: Richard Bentley and Son, 1884), I, p.312. 5 Jean Webster Brough, Prompt Copy: The Brough Story (London: Hutchinson, 1952), p.26. 6 George Augustus Sala, The Life and Adventures of George Augustus Sala written by himself, (London: Cassell and Co, 1896), p.168. 7 Barnabas Brough, A Night with the Chartists Frost, Williams and Jones: A Narrative of Adventures in Monmouthshire (London: W. M. Clark, 1847; repr. London: Garland, 1986). 8 Jean Webster Brough, p.18. 9 Yates, I, p.312. 10 Jean Webster Brough, p.56. 11 Yates, I, p.312. 12 Yates in his Recollections noted of Brough that he belonged to the small group of professional literary men 'who in most cases had not the advantage of that university education in which their detractors gloried', p. . Ralph Straus quotes a verse by Hannay disparaging Brough and Sala for their lack of university education. See Ralph Straus, Sala: Portrait of an Eminent Victorian (London: Constable, 1942) p.112. 13 Obituary headed 'Robert B. Brough' in the Welcome Guest, vol. 2, pp.348-50 (p.349). 14 Jean Webster Brough speculated that the roots of 'his passionate plea for the under-dog' might have come from 'his schoolboy surroundings amongst Celtic colliers and the upheaval of the Chartist riots' (p.27). 15 Yates, I, p.314. 16 On the elements of autobiographical content of that novel see Yates, p314. When the novel was republished after Robert Brough's death in 1860, his brother Lionel wrote a letter to the Morning Chronicle protesting at the advertisement of the book as a 'personal biography' as this would lead the public to suppose 'that it contained a history of the author's life. Such an idea would be utterly and cruelly false', 31 July, 1860. 17 Yates, p.314. 18 Sala in His Life and Adventures noted that the brothers were 'summoned by their sire to the Metropolis' (p.168). 19 John Coleman, 50 Years of an Actor's Life, 2 vols (London: Hutchinson, 1904), II, p.417. 20 Vizetelly comments on the Puppet Show that contributors included from time to time Robert Brough 'then a dyspeptic beardless youth freshly arrived from Liverpool'. See Henry Vizetelly, Glances Back Through Seventy Years: Autobiographical and other Reminiscences, 2 vols (London : Kegan, Paul, Trench, Trubner, 1893), I, p.331. 21 Vizetelly commented: 'The great success which Punch had attained to in 1847-8 produced a crop of imitators...', I, p.323. 22 Vizetelly writes of contributors to the Puppet Show, they 'were very young men' and 'had unbounded confidence in their own opinions, and distributed their attacks with charming impartiality all round', I, p.331. Sanders notes that for a period in 1848 the radical paper the Northern Star was reproducing poetry 'on continental politics' from the Puppet Show, which suggests that for that period at least the Puppet Show was itself quite radical (pp.178-80). 23 A. A. Adrian, Mark Lemon: First Editor of “Punch” (London: Oxford University Press, 1966), p.105. 24 Walter Goodman, The Keeleys on the Stage and at Home (London: Bentley and Son, 1895), p.234. 25 Era,26 November, 1848. 26 Theatrical Programme 23 July, 1849. Brough's colleagues at the time included Reach, Coyne and Brooks, and with some illustrations from Crowquill. 27 ILN, 6 March, 1851. 24

28 Liverpool Mercury 2 January, 1846. 29 Liverpool Mercury, 12 February, 1847. 30 Liverpool Mercury, 30 July, 1847. Era 21 May 1848, reported Annie was to take part in Dickens' new production, which was first performed at the Haymarket in London. By July the production had visited Liverpool, Manchester and Birmingham, returning with £750 for the curatorship of Shakespeare's House: Leeds Mercury, 17 June, 1848 See also Dickens' letters dated 14 April 1848 and 20 June 1848 on this subject: Letters of Charles Dickens, ed. by Madeline House, Graham Storey and Kathleen Tillotson (Oxford: Clarendon, 1965- ). V: 1847-1849: pp. 281; 344. 31 Era, 21 January, 1849. 31 32 Lloyd's Weekly Newspaper, 29 September, 1850. 33 Letter to Sir Edward Bulwer Lytton 10 February 1851: Dickens' Letters, V, p.286. 34 Era, 18 May, 1851. 35 Morning Chronicle, 3 February, 1852. 36 See the Critic 30 June, 1860. 37 See Jean Webster Brough, p.31. She also devotes separate chapters to their careers. 38 He records in a poem the serious illness of his wife Elizabeth in 1859: see 'Dr Johnson' in Miss Brown , 1860. His father died on 30 October, 1854 and his brother-in-law Thomas Romer on 20 May, 1855. 39 John Hollingshead, My Lifetime, 2 vols (London: Sampson, Low, Marston, 1895), I, pp.84-5. 40 Scott and Howard, p.187. Two years later in a diary entry of 20 April 1859, on meeting Brough Blanchard describes him as 'a sad hypochondriac' (p.218). 41 John Bull reviewed the one volume publication on 17 July 1858, noting 'its somewhat fitful appearances' while it was in serial form, now explained by the dedication to his sister. 42 Blanchard, on 11 May 1860 records a benefit being proposed for Robert Brough, 'poor fellow, a long sad invalid, to get him a change of climate': Scott and Howard, p.239. 43 G. L. Strauss, Reminiscences of an old Bohemian, 2 vols (London: Tinsley Brothers, 1882), I, p.297.On the founding of the Savage Club see Strauss, pp.296-7& 300 . Also on the founding of the Savage Club in 1857 see Vizetelly, II, p.40. 44 Jean Webster Brough, p.30. 45 Hollingshead, I, p. 145. 46 The Athenaeum 10 March, 1860 reported the Savage Club's latest benefit performance. An entry in Blanchard's diary for 7 March records Robert Brough's involvement in this amateur production: Scott and Howard, p.236. 47 The Examiner, 28 July 1860, p.470. 48 Burnand records that his contemporaries such as Brough and many others ' had a hand-to-mouth existence as far as the stage brought any contribution towards their incomes'. See Francis C. Burnand Records and Reminiscences Personal and General 2 vols (London: Methuen, 1904), I, p.371. 49 Scott and Howard, p. 243. 50 E. Watts Phillips noted that Brough was working for Diogenes for a time. See E. Watts Phillips E. Watts Phillips: Artist and Playwright (London: Cassell, 1891). Diogenes ran from January 1853 to September 1855, when newspapers announced that Diogenes had expired. See for example, Atlas, 1 September 1855; Preston Guardian 15 September 1855. ee G Everitt English Caricaturists 1893 p.371/ 51 Clement Scott and Cecil Howard, 1, p.138. E. L. Blanchard recorded attending the first meeting of contributors to this new magazine which included the Brough brothers on 15th August 1855 (p.138), and several subsequent meetings. Yates notes that the first number of the Comic Times came out on August 11th and that from second number onwards Robert Brough was contributing a series of sketches called 'The Barlow Papers' which he also illustrated and which became very popular, though the magazine only survived three months (pp. 319-24). 52 Jean Webster Brough, p. 31. 53 G. A .Sala records that the Illustrate Times was a weekly journal which began in June 1855, and the staff included Robert Brough (pp.266-7). Vizetelly also noted that Robert Brough was on the staff at Illustrated Times and said of him he was a man 'whose chronic melancholia never seemed to interfere with the sportive and sarcastic wit that flowed freely from his pen' ( I, p.393). 54 Poems attributed to Robert Brough appeared quite regularly and included: on 26 April 1856 a translation from Beranger; 18 December 'Out in the cold'; 20 December 1856 'Hubert Vaughan: a Christmas Poem'. Vizetelly in his memoirs quoted in full the poem 'The Italian Gleaner' which Brough wrote to accompany the painting of 'The Fair Reckoner' which appeared in the Illustrated Times 30 August 1856 (Vizetelly, II, pp.38-9). 55 Editions of this publication were advertised for Christmas each year between 1851 and 1855 and again in 1857. The breadth of audience Brough reached is evident in these popular publications, as well as in material for children.

25

There were several editions of Funny Nursery Rhymes with illustrations by C. H. Bennett (1857, 1858 ); Funny Dogs with Funny Tales (1857); The Turkish Alphabet (1855). 56 For example the Illustrated Times in 1857 carried articles in praise of the train: 7 February; 14 April; 16 May. 57 The first leader article in the Atlas signed by Brough appears to be on 1 August 1857. Some items with Brough's initials appear in that paper. A poem, 'A word for Nero', taken from his Songs was printed on 2 January 1858 without attribution, whereas a poem translated from Béranger which appeared on 25 July 1855 was signed by him.

58 On 9 May 1858 the Atlas was warning the Train that is needed to be less political. By August reviews of the Train in the Atlas were praising it as an 'excellent' magazine. 59 William Tinsley, Random Recollections of an old Publisher (London: Simpkin, Marshall, Hamilton, Kent, 1890), p.99. 60 For articles and poems by Brough, see list in Anne Lohrli, 'Household Words' (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1973), p.215. 61 For Blanchard's diary entries which refer to Brough's involvement with the Train see Scott and Howard, pp.150-62. 62 Scott and Howard, p.151. 63 Yates, I, 326-35, on the history of the Train, including an account of its birth as a kind of joint-stock company (p.326). 64 Scott and Howard, pp.159-60. 65 The Atlas, 9 May, 1857. 66 Hollingshead, I, p.84. 67 See, for instance,T. Edgar Pemberton, The Life and Writings of T. W. Robertson (London: Richard Bentley and Son, 1893), p.84. 68 Hollingshead notes that this journal had the attraction for contributors that the articles carried their signatures (I, pp. 166-68) 69 Welcome Guest, II, pp. 348-50. 70 William Tinsley, p. 66. 71 Plays not held by the British Library include: Olympus in a Muddle, or Wrong People in Wrong Places, advertised in the Theatrical Journal 20 August, 1855, p.146; the Morning Chronicle of 18 December, 1857 advertised a new play by Robert Brough, Out in the Cold. Blanchard's diary entry of January 1870 attributes a production of the farce Open to Conviction at the Adelphi to 'the late R. Brough' (Scott and Howard, II, p.376); the Era confirms this 8 January, 1871. Cleveland Public Library lists two other plays by Robert Brough: Frankenstein, or The Model Man! by the Brothers Brough (1849), and Jessie Grey (1850) written by Robert Brough with J.V. Bridgeman. Also a play called Mephistopheles is attributed to Brough in advertisements for other plays by him. 72 L. Hudson The English Stage 1850-1950 (London: George C. Harrap, 1951), p.30. 73 H. Sutherland Edwards, Personal Recollections (London: Cassell, 1900), p.137. 74 Topicality in a few of his comedies was primarily about fashions of the time as well as political topics. See, for instance, The Moustache Movement first performed 30 March 1854; Crinoline first performed 18 December 1856. 75 Daily News 22 April, 1851. 76 Theatrical Journal, December, 1851, p. 430. 77 Theatrical Journal, 1854, p.131. 78 Theatrical Journal 20 August, 1855, p. 275. Le Follet of 1 September 1855 introducing their review of the play comment: 'the reformers favourite motto of “the right man in the right place” has been burlesqued'. This was a phrase being used by those demanding reform of civil service, as a result of the incompetence in the handling of the war effort in the Crimea. See Cynthia Dereli, A War Culture in Action: A Study of the Literature of the Crimean War Period (Bern: Peter Lang, 2003). 79 The Racing Times 28 August, 1855, reviewing Olympus in a Muddle at the Haymarket commented: 'It was badly received, and may be pronounced as being next to a failure; but this was no fault of the authors. The piece had a political tendency and we understand that the functionary so obnoxious to the English constitution and the English society – the licenser, or Lord Chamberlain – struck out all the points of the piece before he would grant his license for the performance.' 80 15 July, 1856. Reynolds on 20 July, 1856 described this play as 'abounding with sparkling repartee and lively dialogue' . 81 Mike Sanders, p.187 quotes Harnay's explanation of the adoption of the red flag as a republican symbol, given in an introduction Beranger's poems in the poetry column of the Northern Star in 1848. 82 See also review in the Lady's Newspaper, October, 1853. 83 The range of national newspapers available offers little in the way of commentary on Sir John, though, on 10th January 1858 as the tenth and last part was due out, Lloyd's Weekly Newspaper enthusiastically promised a separate article on 'this remarkable work' as soon as 'it lies in a complete state before us.' 26

84 See, for instance, the ending of Hard Times (1854) or his article 'To Working Men' in Household Words, 10 (1855), pp.385-7. 85 Poems identified by the author so far as by Robert Brough appeared in a range of papers, for example: Theatrical Journal, 1 May, 1851: 'Is Life a Curse?' , a poem signed RB; Atlas 25 July 1857 advertised as especially translated for that journal 'Béranger's “Roger Bontemps”'; Graham's Magazine, December 1853, a parody of E. A. Poe's 'The raven' titled 'The Vulture: An Ornithological study'; Household Words carried several poems – see Lohrli. 86 J. Hain Friswell, Modern Men of Letters, Honestly Criticised (London: n.pub., 1870), p.67. See also a brief review in the Illustrate Times, 16 May ,1857 praising Brough's translations from Victor Hugo. 87 Vizetelly, II, pp. 38-9. 88 Sanders, p.179. 89 For instance, translations of a number of Béranger's poems appeared in the working-class paper, the Northern Star. For the history of Béranger's work in English see Joseph Phelan, 'The British Reception of Pierre-Jean Béranger', Revue de Littérature Comparée 1 (2005), 5-20. 90 Quarterly Review, 46 (1832), 461-77. 91 Illustrated Times, 1 November, 1856. 92 Illustrated Times, 12 April, 1856. 93 Examiner, 11 October, 1856. 94 Phelan, p.19. 95 See, for instance, the poem 'The Marquis de Carabas' in Brough's Songs of the Governing Classes, where the refrain remains in the original French of Béranger although the poem itself is rewritten for the period. 96 The Daily News, 18 July, 1857. 97 The Times, 20 July, 1857. 98 Documented in Dereli, 2003. 99 Dereli, Chapter 5. See also T. Randall, 'Chartist poetry and song' in O. Ashton et al, The Chartist Legacy (Finland: Merlin Press, 1999) on Massey's turn about to nationalism in the Crimean War period, as not untypical of the Chartist poets (p.190); Sanders also notes the poet G. Massey's switch to nationalism during the Crimean War (p.204). 100 Edward Whitty, The Governing Classes of Great Britain (London: n. pub., 1854). It was described as 'a book that caused no little sensation in its time': T. Archer in , The Victorian poets: the bio-critical introductions to the Victorian poets from A. H. Miles's 'The poets and poetry of the nineteenth century' edited by William E. Fredeman, 2 vols (New York: Garland, 1986), p.332. John Cordy Jeaffreson described Ed Whitty as a man 'whose tongue and pen were no less caustic than brilliant': A Book of Recollections 2 vols (London: Hurst and Blackett, 1894), p.136. For information on Whitty's background and radical views see, Francis Espinasse, Literary Recollections and Sketches (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1893), p. 322. On his father's career in journalism, see Margaret Webster, The Same only Different: Five Generations of a Great Theatre Family, (London: Victor Gollancz, 1969), pp. 110-12. 101 Criticism of the monarchy's corruption is discussed by many commentators on the period, for example: Kevin Gilmartin, Print Politics: The Press and Radical Opposition in Early Nineteenth-Century England (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), pp.5-6; Richard Williams, The Contentious Crown (Aldershot: Ashgate, 1997), Chapters 2 and 3. 102 Weekly Dispatch, 12 August, 1855. 103 The Graphic, 19 March, 1870. 104 Pall Mall Gazette, 22 April, 1881. Similarly, when Robert Barnabas Brough's daughter Fanny had become a well-known actress an interview with her in 1895 noted that her father was 'a well-known and brilliant litterateur of his day', not on this occasion referring to the Songs, but still bearing witness to his enduring reputation: Lloyd's Weekly Newspaper, 20 January, 1895. 105 Clement Scott, Drama of Yesterday and Today, 2 vols (London: Macmillan, 1899; repr. The Victorian Muse, vol. 18, New York: Garland, 1986), l1 (1899), pp.28; 343. 106 Anne Janowitz, Lyrical Labour in the Romantic Tradition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1998) speaks of 'the republicans reverence for the memory of Oliver Cromwell' (p.203). See also Antony Taylor refers to Cromwell as the 'main icon' of republicanism in 'a package of notions taken from the Commonwealth' in 1840s (p.160). 107 Writers on the subject of Chartist poetry have identified a conflict between public images and private feeling in the work of Chartist poets (Sanders, p.29). In her study of Chartist poetry Janowitz writes of 'the antithetical mix of self and solidarity' which she suggests has been the standard conceptualisation of Victorian working class poetry. Her thesis is to show 'individualism and communitarianism as integrally related', the individual poet making a career for himself, within a reflective tradition of poetry or the poet writing as champion of his community (pp.11-12). In comparison, Brough's work has a singleness of purpose, because his republicanism is rooted in his values, as a politics of ethically based republicanism. 27

108 Stephanie. Kuduk Weiner, Republican Politics and English Poetry (New York; Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan,2005), p.135. On reform and republicanism, see also Williams, for example, pp.40-44. 109 Williams, Chapter 3. 110 W. J. Linton letter to the Red Republican, 21 September, 1850. See also Janowitz , p.209. 111 J. Vernon, Politics and the People: A Study in English Political Culture c 1815-1867 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press , 1993), p.320. 112 Williams, pp. 26-7. 113 Taylor, pp. 155; 159. 114 Taylor, p.154. 115 G. L. Strauss, Reminiscences of an old Bohemian, 2 vols (London: Tinsley Brothers, 1882), p. 256. Others recording praise of his character include: Espinasse, who wrote: 'of the others (Bohemians), the one of whom I formed the highest opinion was Robert Brough. My only conversations with him were not on politics but on literature and the drama... I found him sensible, thoughtful,and well-informed man' (p.324); Blanchard recorded: 'poor Bob Brough's death universally talked about and regretted' -'he was loved by all who knew him and was the most generous of men' (Scott and Howard, p. 242). 116 See the Critic, 30 June, 1860. 117 Liverpool Journal, 30 June, 1860. 118 In his life of Sala, Straus, recording the death of Brough, commented: 'In June [1860] Robert Brough's last remnants of strength – for some time now he had been in the wretchedest of health – ebbed away. Brough was the most loveable and generous of men: too generous in fact. All his short life he had worked hard, but he had saved nothing at all and left a family almost destitute. It is pleasant to record the fact that Sala, that 'profound cynic', immediately set to work to raise funds.'...... 'It was largely due to his efforts, indeed that an annuity could be purchased for the widow (p.158). See also Hollingshead, I, 85. 119 The Times, 23 July, 1860. 120 26 August, 1890. 121 Daily News ,30 May, 1890. 122 See Weiner's view on how republicanism was tempered into reform (pp.135-46). My analysis of Brough's contribution to the popular experience of republican ideas in the 1850s would rather support a view that some important characteristics of the working class movement get lost in the following decades, which might be linked to socialism's adoption of the liberal position on parliamentary reform. 123 Yates, I, p.316.

28