[ John G. MacWalter, novelist. ] Two Autograph Letters Signed ('J. G. MacWalter') to Archbishop of Westminster Nicholas Wiseman, regarding a new newspaper, and a 'petty war waged against you' by 'Grant of the "Advertiser" and Seeley of the "Herald"'.

The two items each 4pp., 4to, and bifoliums. Both on the same grey paper. ONE: 10 August 1854. Signed 'J G MacWalter' and addressed to 'My Lord Archbishop'. He hopes that the Archbishop's 'health is quite restored and that the petty war waged against you will have no ill effect upon it. I received a long abusive letter on the subject which I boldly refused to insert. In order to qualify the rejection, as the letter was the production of a local Baronet, I cast out all the letters I had on every subject, except those which are to form a feature in the paper.' He thinks that, considering 'the huge difficulties I had to contend with, you will admit I have steered pretty clearly. Not an antipapal sentence from page to page. He discusses the text of the article, and continues: 'I trust the paper is not bad as a newspaper - allow for the errors unseparable from a hastily got up first number we only began to print on last Monday'. He is sending him 'a copy of a magazine in which I had just begun (by ) a tale'. Changing tack, he informs him that 'The post-boy has just brought me a letter from Maguire who it seems has gone back to annoy poor father Oakly [...] Your Eminence has done too much for the cause of truth to be less than a geat obstacle in the way of error. They are however curs that bark, and when I cannot strike at them I must not listen to them.' TWO: 18 August 1880. Aged and creased, with wear at head. Signed 'J. G. MacWalter' and addressed to 'My Lord Archbishop'. He begins by congratulating him 'on the result of htat petty prosecution (persecution) got up against you by my two "friends" (?) Grant of the "Advertiser" and Seeley of the "Herald" (the publisher). I know - for I have good reason to know - that these were the two chief movers in the matter, and will continue to annoy you as long as they possibly can'. He claims that '[t]he whole expense of the Priests part in the matter will be borne by the "protestant alliance"'. He continues with reference to 'the 2nd. number of my paper', 'Williams the Banker', who 'has taken an extensive share in the cancer under the impression that no other paper could out do the Chronicle in Protestantism', and 'Mr. Burns'.?>