The Covent-Garden Journal (modernised as The Covent Garden Journal) was an English literary periodical published twice a week for most of 1752. It was edited and almost entirely funded by novelist, playwright, and essayist Henry Fielding, under the pseudonym, "Sir Alexander Drawcansir, Knt. Censor of Great Britain". It was Fielding's fourth and final periodical, and one of his last written works.
The Journal incited the "Paper War" of 1752–1753, a conflict among a number of contemporary literary critics and writers, which began after Fielding declared war on the "armies of Grub Street" in the first issue. His proclamation attracted multiple aggressors and instigated a long-lasting debate argued in the pages of their respective publications. Initially waged for the sake of increasing sales, the Paper War ultimately became much larger than Fielding had expected and generated a huge volume of secondary commentary and literature.
Further controversy erupted in June, when Fielding expressed support for a letter decrying the government's 1751 Disorderly Houses Act 1751 (25 Geo. 2. c. 36) in the Journal. His remarks were viewed by the public as an endorsement of the legality of prostitution, and it soon became common opinion that the letter, initially attributed to a "Humphrey Meanwell", was in fact written by Fielding. Fielding refuted this assertion in the 1 August issue of the Journal, while labelling prostitutes a source of social evils.
The final issue of the Journal was released on 25 November 1752. In its last months, poor sales had resulted in a transition from semi-weekly to weekly release. Ill-health and a disinclination to continue led Fielding to end its run after the Number 72 issue. He died two years later while staying in Lisbon, Portugal.
Background
The first mention of The Covent-Garden Journal dates to 5 December 1749, when a broadsheet pamphlet was printed with the title "The Covent-Garden Journal. No 1. To be published'd Once every Month, during the present Westminster Election by Paul Wronghead, of the Fleet, Esq." It was organized as a standard paper, with sections called "Introductory Essay", "Foreign Affairs", "Home Affairs", and "Advertisement". Published with a list of fake printers (T. Smith, R. Webb, and S. Johnson), it claimed that the sellers were "all the People of London and Westminster". It was later revealed that the paper was created as a hoax by the Duke of Bedford to mock Sir George Vandeput, 2nd Baronet and his supporters during the 1750 Westminster by-election.Battestin and Battestin 1993 pp. 491–492
The printer, Richard Francklin, ran off 13,000 copies on 5–6 December, only one of which still survives. Although the true author of the pamphlet remains uncertain, it was believed at the time to be Fielding's work. Later critics, such as Martin and Ruthe Battestin, cite a letter written on behalf of the Duke of Richmond that was used as evidence of Fielding's involvement.Battestin and Battestin 1993 p. 492
Dated 7 December 1749, the letter states: "The enclosed is a paper generally given to Mr. Fielding, as the author. The humor that is in it is at least akin to his. It may possibly divert you & your company."Battestin and Battestin 1993 qtd. p. 492 Fielding's authorship would have been limited to the paper's introduction, which was used to target prominent Tories such as Paul Whitehead: a minor poet who had pseudonymously attacked Fielding before and was vocal on political issues.Battestin and Battestin 1993 pp. 492–493
In late 1751, just before the publication of his novel, Amelia, Fielding began plotting his next literary work. He expressed a desire to use a periodical to promote the Universal Register Office – a business which connected service providers with consumers – and his other activities and views. Alluding to the earlier publication, he gave it the title The Covent-Garden Journal, and announced in The Daily Advertiser that the first number would be issued on 23 November 1751. The release was delayed until January because of work related to the publication of Amelia.Battestin and Battestin 1993 pp. 499, 532–533
At the time of the publication of the journal, Covent Garden, although formally associated with the theatre industry, was more widely known as London's red light district. Fielding had earlier written The Covent Garden Tragedy, a mock-tragic play concerning the tale of two prostitutes.Paulson 2000, p. 89–91
Content
The first number of the periodical was published on 4 January 1752,Lawrence 1855 p. 303Cleary 1984 p. 291Battestin 2000 p. 25 and sold at a price of three pence.Dobson 2007 p. 94 For most of its run, the journal was issued twice a week, on Tuesday and Saturday.Andrews 1999 p. 140 Each number consisted of an introductory remark or essay (written by Fielding), domestic and foreign news with annotations, advertisements, an obituary, a births and marriages panel, and other sundries.
One section, entitled "Covent Garden", concerned Fielding's position as a magistrate at Bow Street. The column ran in every issue until 27 June 1752, appearing irregularly thereafter. It dealt with crime and legal matters and provided insight into the cases that Fielding dealt with on a regular basis, but the presentation was less organized and more informal than standard legal records. Most of the information on the cases was provided by Joshua Brogden, one of Fielding's clerks.Bertelsen 2000 pp. 14–15
Particularly in the opening comment and the news, Fielding injected a degree of wit or "liveliness" not seen in his previous publications. He stated in the first number that he planned to avoid the "dullness" seen in other contemporary periodicals:Wright 2006 p. 47
Discussion in the Journal was chiefly concerned with matters of literary criticism, and "the social and moral health of the body politic". Most of the opening essays took a decidedly unpolitical tone. Exceptions were those in numbers 42, 50, and 58. Number 42 mocked the Country Tories by imagining how an Ancient Greek or Roman would react to party politics: "... convey [him] to a Hunting-Match, or Horse Race, or any other Meeting of Patriots. Will he not immediately conclude from all the Roaring and Ranting, the Hallowing and the Hazzaing, the Gaming and Drinking, ... that he is actually present at the Orgia of Bacchus, or the Celebration of some such Festival?"Fielding 1915 Vol II p. 2 Number 50 blamed the growth of the London mob on poverty laws. Number 58 targeted the "Independent Electors of Westminster".Cleary 1984 p. 294
In his literary reviews, Fielding often wrote with a biased hand. For instance, he gave immoderate praise to Charlotte Lennox's The Female Quixote and Charles Macklin's two-act comic play The Covent Garden Theatre, or Paquin Turn'd Drawcansir. Lennox and Macklin were long-time friends of Fielding, and Macklin's play was based on Fielding's life. Fielding had a noted tendency to be prejudiced toward certain authors too – Rabelais and Aristophanes were always met harshly, while Jonathan Swift, Miguel de Cervantes, and Lucian were praised as a "great Triumvirate".Battestin and Battestin 1993 pp. 543–544, 554, 557–558
Samuel Richardson's Clarissa – published in 1748 and one of the longest novels in the English language – is a noted exception: it was received well, even though Fielding considered Richardson a literary rival,Rudnik-Smalbraak 1983 p. 46 and despite Richardson's calling the periodical "The Common Garden Journal". Fielding lauded the work of friend William Hogarth and poetry by Edward Young. He also promoted plays involving David Garrick and James Lacy, among others.
Fielding frequently used the periodical to respond to criticism for his latest novel, Amelia, which was published in December 1751. The 25 and 28 January issues featured a section in which Amelias most outspoken critics were depicted on trial and in which Fielding systematically repudiated their respective complaints.Battestin and Battestin 1993 p. 537 "Councillor Town", the fictional prosecutor, summarised these complaints in saying, "The whole Book is a Heap of sad Stuff, Dulness, and Nonsense; that it contains no Wit, Humour, Knowledge of human Nature, or of the World; indeed, that the Fable, moral Character, Manners, Sentiments, and Diction, are all alike bad and contemptible."Fielding 1915 p. 179 In his reply, Fielding posited a paternal relationship with Amelia, though conceded that it was not without flaws: ... [N]ay, when I go father, and avow, that of all my Offspring she is my favourite Child. I can truly say that I bestowed a more than ordinary Pains in her Education ... I do not think my Child is entirely free from Faults. I know nothing human that is so; but surely she doth not deserve the Rancour with which she hath been treated by the Public.Fielding 1915 p. 186 Fielding's efforts only attracted further criticism, eventually resulting in his promise "to write no more novels".Pagliaro 1988 p. 189
Paper War
The first four numbers of the Journal featured Fielding's contributions to the "Paper War",Battestin 2000 p. 136 a conflict he instigated with writers of other contemporary periodicals to generate sales.Rawson 2007 p. 119 In the first number, along with the promise to avoid the dullness of other periodicals, Fielding confronted "the armies of Grub Street" and proclaimed his disdain for the literary critics of the day:
"As to my brother authors, who, like mere mechanics, are envious and jealous of a rival in their trade, to silence their jealousies and fears, I declare that it is not my intention to encroach on the business now carried on by them, nor to deal in any of those wares which they at present vend to the public." Also given in the inaugural number was "An introduction to a journal of the present paper-war between the forces under Sir Alexander Drawcansir, and the army of Grub Street",Lawrence 1855 pp. 303–304 written in the tradition of Jonathan Swift's Battle of the Books.
The main response to Fielding's words came from John Hill,Lawrence 1855 p. 304 an English author, botanist, and literary critic who wrote a column called "The Inspector" in the London Daily Advertiser.Paulson 1995 p. 283 Hill used this column approximately one week later to attack Fielding and criticise Amelia.Battestin 2000 p. 78Lawrence 1855 p. 306 Fielding replied in much the same fashion in the second issue of the Journal, while attempting to defend his novel. The two engaged in a sustained dispute, as each used their respective publication to joust with the other.
Several others were quick to join Hill in his criticism of Fielding and the Grub Street campaign. Bonnell Thornton, a poet and essayist, was responsible for Have at you All; or, the Drury Lane Journal, a production that satirised Fielding and his works. Particular attention was paid to Amelia in Have at you All; the fifth number, for example, featured "a new chapter in Amelia, more witty than the rest, if the reader has but sense enough to find out the humour."Lawrence 1855 p. 302