About the Collection
The Marguerite Hicks Collection is one of the first intentional collections of works by and about women from the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries to be gathered by an American collector. In 1971 Oakland University’s Kresge Library purchased the collection 900+ items of seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth-century books, printed materials, and manuscripts by and about British women writers from Marguerite Bieber Hicks, who started building her collection in the 1930s. The Collection features broadsides, novels, cookbooks, political tracts, educational texts, sermons, plays, poetry, and more. Dozens of the items in this collection exist in fewer than ten known copies worldwide, and a handful are uniquely existing copies. The Marguerite Hicks Collection is used in exhibits and research and instruction for undergraduate, graduate, and faculty research across the disciplines at Oakland University.
The Showcase
Lessons for Lovers, 1829
This collection of poetry is written, according to the title page, “by a hypochondriac, an unhappy young lady, and an elderly gentlewoman of considerable experience.” The half-title page of OU’s copy is inscribed “from his sincere, & obliged friend, The Author.” This inscription invites the question of which author signed this presentation copy, and others regarding the nature of collaborative, anonymous authorship. Alternatively, the possibility also exists that the singular “The Author” was indeed a hypochondriac, an unhappy young lady, and now an elderly gentlewoman of considerable experience, combined in self-deprecating, tripartite authorship.
Poems by
a sister, 1812
This collection of poems is authored “by a
sister,” and shares history with the 1815 case
Taylor v Plumer--the details of which formed the conditions for the volume’s publication. Considered a foundational case in reclamation law, the case relates to the misdealings of Benjamin Walsh, former MP in the House of Commons, who was found guilty of fraudulent financialization schemes to support his family following failed business ventures and bankruptcy.¹
​
A venture of the extended family, the book, while long misattributed to Mary Lamb, claims to be written by an “Anne” or “Anna” to generate income for the family of her sister, Mary, the wife of Benjamin Walsh, in the wake of the family’s troubles; the book is published by Benjamin’s brother, Joseph Walsh.²
​
In the preface, addressed to the subscribers, the author “gratefully acknowledges the generous support which has given energy to her exertions, and solace to her suffering,” characterizing her writing as that which “has been written during intervals of pain and depression.” That the subscribers were aware of the function of their contributions is clear: “It is unnecessary to inform the Reader, that most of the Poems were composed under various impressions during a long illness, without the intention of their appearing before the Public; but circumstances of a peculiarly interesting nature have induced her to submit them to the perusal of her friends.”
The extensive list of subscribers comprises nearly a third of the text block. A substantial portion of subscribers reside in Clifton--the city which also serves as the title of one of A.’s poems--and in Clapton, where Mr. and Mrs. Walsh were married. Members of the Stock Exchange figure in the list of subscribers, some of which purchase multiple copies.³
While the set of poems explicitly seeks remuneration, works such as this and Mary, the Osier-Peeler fall short of “professionalization” because they appear to be standalone texts written for the benefit of their conceits. Professionalization of 18th century authors, must attend to a “fuller sociological model” which “takes into account the structural and institutional aspects of the professions, as well as the professional’s claims to offer a specialized set of skills to meet a defined need of society at large, and to be deserving of certain status and economic rewards as a result.”∗ For its candid externalization of the author’s sincerity in the preface--rather than self-deprecation, witticisms, and other rhetorical posturing--Poems by a sister does not engage in the professionalizing activities of a writer seeking critical approval or economic success. The former owner of OU’s copy seems to have understood this, which might serve as explanation for why the copy remains in publisher’s boards with yet-untrimmed pages and generous margins, with a handwritten spine label later affixed.
​
OU’s copy is one of 14 listed in WorldCat.
¹Lionel Smith, “Taylor v Plumer (1815),” in
Landmark Cases in the Law of Restitution, ed.
by Mitchelland Mitchell (Hart, 2006), 39-63.
​
²J. Rogers Rees, “The Lambs in Great Russell
Street,” N&Q VIII (1907) 421-22.
​
³Lionel Smith, “Taylor v Plumer (1815).”
​
∗Betty Schellenberg, The Professionalization of
Women Writers in Eighteenth-Century Britain
(Cambridge, 2005),13.
The court lady; or, the coquet's surrender.
A comedy, 1733.
Written by a lady.
​
Figure of the frontispiece extends an accusatory finger towards the title page.
​
Because of the presence of a dramatis personae in the prefatory materials of the book, the editors of the Biographia Dramatica, a companion to British drama, assume that the play was performed--“though,” they saltily add, “we imagined without success.”¹ The Court Lady features a particularly striking satiric preface, addressed, “To a Certain Great Lady at Court”:
​
Madam,
​
Since Slips are grown so common, no One can blame the Coquet’s Surrender. You have a sufficient Title to Virtue, although your Virginity’s lost; for no One dare to censure the Actions of the Great, nor will any Body upbraid you, since you are enriched by, if they should stare ‘em in the Face, and shew ‘em You are not ashamed of it….
While the compilers acknowledge that this dedication must indicate some historically-bound, well-known court intrigue, their evaluation is that “the piece in itself has very little merit, either in plot, language, or character.” The compilers continue, writing that the authorial “humorous punster,” who constitutes a main character in the play, is “perpetually running into the absurdity of pun and quibble; but whom we may safely acquit of the charge either of humour, or even common sense.”²
​
¹Biographia Dramatica; or, a Companion to the Playhouse: Containing Historical and critical Memoirs, and original Anecdotes… volume 2 London (135, David Erskine Baker).
​
²ibid.
Poems by Mrs. Trench, 1815-18
This volume contains four poetry collections bound in leather with a gold-lettered spine label reading “Poems by Mrs. R. Trench.” The poetry collections contained within include:
​
-
Campaspe, an Historical Tale and Other Poems. Southampton: Printed by T. Baker, 1815.
-
Aubrey, in Five Cantos. Southampton: Printed by T. Baker, 1818.
-
Laura’s Dream: or, the Moonlanders. London: Printed for J. Hatchard, 1816.
-
Ellen: A Ballad: Founded on a Recent Fact. And other poems. Bath: Printed by Richard Cruttwell, 1815.
​
Their unnamed author, Melesina Chenevix St. George Trench, was born 1768 in Dublin. Mrs. Trench would experience the death of her parents and a series of aged guardians as a child, and as an adult, her first husband and four of her nine children would precede her in death. Trench uses poetic engagement to reckon with personal mourning, drawing in themes from Irish folklore and the Spenserian tradition.¹ Recent revisionist scholarship based on archival records has corrected the sanitizing, revisionist biography of her letters constructed by her son, Richard Chenevix Trench, which lessened the emotional duress of the loss of her children and omitted certain celebrity relationships.²
​
While Trench’s name is withheld from the title pages of these poetry collections, given the highly autobiographical nature of her early poetry, it is likely that Trench neither sought to obfuscate nor capitalize on her authorship.³ In the New York Public Library copies of Trench’s poetry, many are noted “Not Published” in Trench’s hand; in 1820, excerpts of Laura’s Dream: or, the Moonlanders made a cameo in Literary Gazette, which noted the collection had been “printed about three years ago, but for private reasons, we understand, withdrawn from circulation.”∗ Despite the limited circulation of Trench’s poetry, the editors go on to note that the collection “possesses considerable merit.”º Laura’s Dream has since been read as science fiction for its depiction of a lunar society through the conventions of the pastoral, predating Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.ª
Pictured to the right is marginalia added to the poem “On the
Loss of Elizabeth Melesina Trench, an only Daughter, in her
fifth year,” dated in manuscript November 3, 1816, from Ellen,
reading: “There is no suggestion in the account of the deep
loved subject of the following lines, but no attempt is made
to paint her heart, for, disposition at which were so engaging
as entirely to elude description.”∠The series of poems
included in Ellen also contained substantive alterations to the
printed text: the first printed lines of Kresge’s copy,
for example, read:“Sleep her sweetest opiate shed,” but
replaced by handwritten corrections:“The sweetest dews of Sleep are shed.”
The letters of Mary Leadbeater, a personal friend of Melesina, note that
Trench’s “personal trials did not cause her to relax in her consideration
for others. She applied the profits of the sale of her beautiful poems of
‘Ellen’ and ‘Campaspe’ to acts of benevolence, by assisting some
charitable friends in England; and our poor people also partook of her
bounty.”∪ Indeed, the title page of “Ellen” notes that the ballad is
“sold for the benefit of the House of Protection.”
​
OU’s copy has been cobbled together, evidenced by its discontinuous
pagination and distinct coloration separating the disparate poems.
Because of the difference in order of the poems and the difference in
emendations bound into volumes, it is likely that these composite
volumes were “prepared at different times, perhaps for different
purposes, “and very likely without Trench’s access to copies of the
notations and alterations she had inserted in other copies.”×
Hand-corrections of the Princeton Library’s copy of Laura’s Dream,
for example, available in Google Books, contain emendations similar to
but not verbatim of those found in OU’s copy. Alternately, New York
Public Library’s volume of Trench’s poetry contains the four poetry
collections plus four other pamphlets.∇
​
¹David H. Radcliffe, "Laura's Dream; or, the Moonlanders,"
Spenser and the Tradition: English Poetry 1579-1830,
http://spenserians.cath.vt.edu/TextRecord.php?action=GET&textsid=37330.
​
²Katharine Kittredge, “Missing Immortality: The Case of Melesina Trench (A Neglected,
Celebrated, Dismissed and Rediscovered Woman Poet of the Long Eighteenth Century.”
ABO: Interactive Journal for Women in the Arts, 1640-1830, 1 (2011).
​
³Trench would go on to write….
​
∗Laura’s Dream; or, the Moonlanders,” The London Literary Gazette and
Journal of Belles Lettres, Arts, Sciences, Etc. June 24,1820, 403-4.
​
º ibid.
​
ªKittredge, "Missing Immortality."
​
∠For more on women writing within the Romantic tradition, see Stephen C.
Behrendt's British Women Poets and the Romantic Writing Community. Johns Hopkins UP, 2009.
​
∪The Leadbeater papers; The annals of Ballitore, by Mary Leadbeater,
with a memoir of the author: Letters from Edmund Burke heretofore unpublished:
and the correspondence of Mrs. R. Trench and Rev. George Crabbe with Mary Leadbeater. 359
​
×Stephen C. Behrendt, “Regency Women Writers, the Archives, and the Task(s),”
Keats-Shelley Journal. 55 (2006): 48–53. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/30210642.
​
∇ibid.
Mary, the Osier Peeler, 1798
This philanthropic text, authored “by a lady,” was printed in Wisbech, Cambridgeshire, and is the only known and existing copy in the world. The author retains her anonymity, and, similar to Poems by a sister, situates her writing in a specific rhetorical purpose, as this 18-page ballad was written and sold “for the benefit of the distressed family described therein.” The advertisement preceding the poetry, which also appears in The Analytical Review, contextualizes the Cambridge County cash crop, the osier:
It may be requisite to explain to those, who are not acquainted with the produce of Cambridgeshire, and the manners of the people, that rearing Osiers for making baskets, hats, &c. is a profitable branch of trade, and peeling them for use, a favorite employment of the young women at a certain time of the year. When they have completed their work, they go in processions, dressed in their holyday [sic] clothes, decorated with the strips peeled from the rods; they collect contributions, and with them make a feast and a dance.
The delicate Willow Hats, of late so fashionable, are made of Cambridgeshire Osiers.¹
​
This gesture from the author to familiarize her audience with Cambridgeshire suggests that her intent was for this charitable text to travel beyond the confines of its county of origin, as Cambridgeshire is home to the book’s regional printer in Wisbech and the distressed family of the text.
​
¹The Analytical Review (Dec. 1798): 592.
Photographs by Lizzi Deneen, research and essays by Emily Spunaugle, 2017.
The court lady; or, the coquet's surrender.
A comedy, 1733
Written by a lady.
​
Figure of the frontispiece extends an accusatory finger towards the title page.
​
Because of the presence of a dramatis personae in the prefatory materials of the book, the editors of the Biographia Dramatica, a companion to British drama, assume that the play was performed--“though,” they saltily add, “we imagined without success.”¹ The Court Lady features a particularly striking satiric preface, addressed, “To a Certain Great Lady at Court”:
​
Madam,
​
Since Slips are grown so common, no One can blame the Coquet’s Surrender. You have a sufficient Title to Virtue, although your Virginity’s lost; for no One dare to censure the Actions of the Great, nor will any Body upbraid you, since you are enriched by, if they should stare ‘em in the Face, and shew ‘em You are not ashamed of it….
While the compilers acknowledge that this dedication must indicate some historically-bound, well-known court intrigue, their evaluation is that “the piece in itself has very little merit, either in plot, language, or character.” The compilers continue, writing that the authorial “humorous punster,” who constitutes a main character in the play, is “perpetually running into the absurdity of pun and quibble; but whom we may safely acquit of the charge either of humour, or even common sense.”²
​
¹Biographia Dramatica; or, a Companion to the Playhouse: Containing Historical and critical Memoirs, and original Anecdotes… volume 2 London (135, David Erskine Baker).
​
²ibid.