the sutherland affair and its aftermath

The Sutherland Affair and Its AftermathAuthor(s): Anthony CrossSource: The Slavonic and East European Review, Vol. 50, No. 119 (Apr., 1972), pp. 257-275Published by: the Modern Humanities Research Association and University College London, School ofSlavonic and East European StudiesStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4206529 .

Accessed: 13/06/2014 21:21

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Modern Humanities Research Association and University College London, School of Slavonic and EastEuropean Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Slavonic andEast European Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.40 on Fri, 13 Jun 2014 21:21:36 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mhra

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucl

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucl

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4206529?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


The Sutherland Affair

and its Aftermath

ANTHONY CROSS

The 'Obituary of Considerable Persons; with Biographical Anec? dotes' section of the November 1791 issue of Gentleman's Magazine

reported on the same page the deaths in Russia of Prince Potemkin

and Baron Sutherland.1 Potemkin, not unexpectedly, received not so

much the dubious honour of'biographical anecdotes' as several lines

of innuendo and ultimate dismissal: 'His death, at this period, will

not be of much importance out of Russia. There, indeed, the

Empress may lament the loss of her favourite, and the Grand Duke

may rejoice at the fall of a dangerous rival'; Sutherland, on the other

hand, was simply described as 'banker to the Empress of Russia'.

There is obviously little evidence here to suggest any connection

between the two men other than they both apparently enjoyed the

Empress's favour and trust: Sutherland died in St Petersburg, and

Potemkin far from the capital, in Jassy, and there is not even the

basic biographical information on Sutherland to allow a zealous

reader of the obituary column to note that the two men were coevals, born in 1739 and dying at the age of fifty two. Yet the names of

Sutherland and Potemkin were very much connected at this time in

Court circles in St Petersburg in what is known as 'the Sutherland

affair' (delo Suterlanda).

Sutherland as Court Banker was responsible for administering financial transactions abroad, in particular for attending to the

expenses involved in the running of Russian embassies in the

European capitals. His integrity does not seem to have been

questioned until the late spring of 1791 when complaints about his

administration of finances began to reach the Empress. On 23 May/ 3 June her secretary, A. V. Khrapovitsky recorded in his diary Catherine's displeasure at a letter from Baron Sprengporten in Aix la Chapelle, reporting Sutherland's failure to transfer necessary funds; this is accompanied by the cryptic note: 'Sutherland rebuked'

(Vygovor Suterlandu).2 There seem to have been similar complaints at about the same period from the Ambassador in London.3 These

Anthony Cross is Senior Lecturer in Russian at the University of East Anglia. 1 Gentleman's Magazine, LXI, ii (1791), p. 1064. 2 Dnevnik A. V. Khrapovitskogo 1782-93, ed. Nikolay Barsukov, St Petersburg, 1874, P- 363. 3 Sochineniya Derzhavina, ed. Ya. Grot, VI, St Petersburg, 1871, p. 647.



258 ANTHONY CROSS

incidents were soon followed by an investigation into complaints from the Russian minister at Florence, Count Demetrio Mocenigo, about the loss of 120,000 rubles in a business transaction through the

negligence of Sutherland. Unable to obtain satisfaction from the

departments of Commerce and Foreign Affairs, Mocenigo had

turned to the Empress who, in an order dated 18/29 August, in?

structed Gavriil Derzhavin to 'inspect the documents presented by him [Mocenigo] and to seek the necessary explanation from Our

banker Sutherland, and when the affair was completely clarified, to

report to Us'.4 An account of this and subsequent developments is found in Derzhavin's memoirs, which, nevertheless, suffer from some

confusion of detail and erroneous chronology. Derzhavin suggests that Mocenigo was encouraged in his suit by Princess Dashkova, 'out of her own mercenary motives, without which she did nothing' and describes how he spent the whole of the summer of 1791 making his

investigations.5 He reported several times to the Empress about his

findings but 'since the whole ministry was on Sutherland's side, for

everyone was in debt to him. .., The Empress sent him away in indecision on about six occasions, saying that he was still new to such affairs'.6 It was only in the spring of 1792 that the Mocenigo part of the now much more serious 'Sutherland affair' was settled. Two versions of the settlement exist?Derzhavin's and Khrapovitsky's. Khrapovitsky records that Derzhavin arrived at an inappropriate moment on 2/13 March to report and that the Empress accepted Khrapovitsky's opinion that it was a purely commercial affair and could be easily settled between the parties.7 Derzhavin acted on the

Empress's instructions and Mocenigo was delighted with a settle? ment of 40,000 rubles.8

In the interim between Derzhavin's initial investigations into the affair and its conclusion there had occured the death of Sutherland on 4/15 October, 1791. Khrapovitsky gives no details of the cause of his death, although he notes that a court doctor, Blok, had said that Sutherland had been ill for two years.9 It is Derzhavin who gives a much more melodramatic slant to the event, stating that Sutherland took poison when the Empress ordered a full investigation and

4 Ibid., p. 624, note 5. (On Mocenigo, see 'Graf Motsenigo. Epizod iz pervoy turetskoy voyny pri Yekaterine Uv rasskaze grafa S. R. Vorontsova', Russkiy arkhiv, no. 12 (1878), pp. 413-25). 6 Ibid., p. 625. 6 Ibid., p. 627. Derzhavin, always anxious to present a picture of himself as a man of unimpeachable integrity in his memoirs, fails to mention that he was himself in debt to Sutherland and had received two letters from the banker in 1788 and 1789, demanding repayment of a loan, which seems to have been settled only in 1792 by V. A. Zubov; ibid., V, pp. 755, 77i, 843. 7 Dnevnik Khrapovitskogo, pp. 391-2. 8 Sochineniya Derzhavina, VI, p. 632. 9 Dnevnik Khrapovitskogo, p. 376.



DOCUMENTS 259

giving as causes events which in fact were subsequent to his death.10

Derzhavin's version of Sutherland's death was accepted by Dmitry Kobeko in his study of Tsarevich Paul,11 but is contradicted by other

available evidence. English sources suggest death by natural causes,

although it is probable that the deterioration in Sutherland's health

was accelerated by the events of the middle of 1791. Baron Suther?

land was not refused Christian burial and the register of the English Church simply records the dates of his death and burial.12 There has,

incidentally, been more than a little confusion over the exact date of

Sutherland's death. Grot's footnote to Derzhavin's remarks gives

2/13 October as the date and refers to Khrapovitsky as the source; Kobeko repeats this, although in fact Khrapovitsky gives 4/15

October, a date confirmed by the English Church records. Gentle-

man's Magazine gave 8/19 October, a date not only wrong but poten?

tially misleading for anyone who would seek to prove that the

seemingly earlier death of Sutherland's greatest debtor, Potemkin, on

5/16 October might be connected with Sutherland's, particularly if

the poison suggestion were accepted. On 5/16 April 1792 Catherine signed an ukaz, appointing A. I.

Vasil'yev, P. I. Novosil'tsov and Derzhavin to investigate Sutherland's

affairs. Derzhavin and his colleagues discovered that sums in the

region of two million roubles had been misappropriated by Suther?

land; he had lent large amounts to many of the magnates near to

Catherine and 'in addition had himself used significant sums for his

own needs'.13 Derzhavin also suggested that sums had earlier been

given to more minor personages as bribes to solicit Derzhavin's pro? tection and goodwill for Sutherland.14 Although Khrapovitsky's

diary laconically records that on 14/25 July 1793 Derzhavin reported to Catherine about the Sutherland affair,15 Derzhavin himself gives a protracted version of the Empress's volatile reactions to his attempts to give a full account of the matter.16 Potemkin, Prince A. A.

Vyazemsky, Count A. A. Bezborodko, Count I. A. Osterman, A. I.

Morkov and the Tsarevich were all deeply in debt to Sutherland.

Potemkin, despite all his vast wealth and possessions, such as indi?

cated in the Gentleman's Magazine obituary, was obviously short of

ready funds and had borrowed 800,000 roubles, but the Empress excused him on account of the obligations of his duties and ruled that

10 Sochineniya Derzhavina, VI, p. 648. 11 Tsesarevich Pavel Petrovich(i'j54-iyg6), 3rd ed., St Petersburg, 1887, p. 380. 12 British Factory in Russia Church Register 1706-1815, Ms. ii,ig2B, f. 126. This register is held, along with other records of the Russia Company, in the Guildhall Library, London.

13 Sochineniya Derzhavina, p. 648. 1* Ibid., 649. 15 Dnevnik Khrapovitskogo, p. 434. 16 Sochineniya Derzhavina, pp. 652-3.



260 ANTHONY CROSS

the Treasury bear the cost; Morkov, who owed 42,000 roubles, had

already been excused, according to an earlier entry in Khrapovitsky's diary; minor debtors were forgiven but others were ordered to repay.17 News of Paul's debts incensed Catherine and she heaped reproaches on his character and conduct, before a silent Derzhavin. Neverthe?

less, with the central figure in the affair long since dead and the

major debtors either dead, like Potemkin, or pardoned, the scandal seemed to be ending quietly, although Catherine was obviously anxious to avoid similar incidents in the future and early in 1794 set

up another committee under the chairmanship of A. A. Sablukov to make further enquiries.18

II

Although existing Russian printed sources allow certain aspects of the Sutherland affair to be pieced together in so far as it affected Russian court circles, little has been known about Sutherland and of the repercussions the affair had on his family and on the English community in St Petersburg. It is now possible with the aid of un?

published records and letters to illuminate this side of the story. Baron Richard Sutherland was the eldest son of Alexander

Sutherland, a master shipbuilder who entered Russian service during the reign of the Empress Anna Ivanovna in 1736. Alexander Suther? land was a Scotsman, despite the indication that he was Dutch and the transcription of his name as Syuterland in the Russian Biographical Dictionary.19 He was put in charge of the shipyards in Archangel and soon transferred to a similar position in St Petersburg. Under the

Empress Elizabeth he was rewarded for his service by promotion to

major in 1741 and to colonel in 1751 and just before his death in 1760 he was appointed to the General Surveyor's Department. He is credited with the building of some fifteen warships during his career in Russia. He had been followed to Russia by a brother, John, whose career was less distinguished. John was promoted to major in 1747 and was credited with the construction of six, mainly minor, ships before his death in 1757.20 John seems to have died childless and his

widow, May Anne, soon remarried in May 1760,21 Alexander, how?

ever, was survived by four sons?Richard, John (1742-73), George (1745-93) and Alexander Hendras (1753-1820); his widow, Mary, did not remarry and died in St Petersburg on 18/29 September 1786, at the age of seventy-six.22

17 Dnevnik Khrapovitskogo, p. 403. 18 Arkhiv knyazya Vorontsova, XII, Moscow, 1877, p. 338. 19 Russkiy biogrqficheskiy slova/, XX (Kraus Reprint, New York, 1964), p. 271. 20 Ibid. 21 Register of British Church, Ms. n,i92B, f. 34. 22 Ibid., f. 92.



DOCUMENTS 26l

Little is known of the careers of John and George; both were

merchants in the family firm in St Petersburg and John was a Free?

mason, a member of the British Lodge 'Perfect Union' from 1771 until his death.23 It was the eldest and youngest brothers who

achieved prominence and distinction, if in different ways. Alexander

Hendras left Russia for England as a young man at a time when his

eldest brother was beginning to enjoy imperial favour and establish

himself as Court Banker, a position which brought him into close

contact with the most prominent members of Petersburg society and

gave him great influence and power. For his services Catherine

created him a Baron of the Russian Empire on 26 November/7 December 1788,24 a title she had earlier bestowed on Dr Thomas

Dimsdale, who had successfully inoculated her and the Tsarevich

against smallpox in 1768. Richard Sutherland was a respected member of the English community in the Russian capital, famed for

the lavishness of his table. James Brogden, young son of a former

consul of the Russia Company, described in a letter how he 'dined

the day before yesterday [17/28 October 1787] at Mr R. Sutherlands, who is a very great man here & lives in a very expensive manner'.25

His expensive tastes in food were well known to Catherine: Khrapo?

vitsky records her remarking on his death 'on dit que c'etait un

grand gourmand',26 'a comment she evidently made widely, as an

entry in the Russian travel diary of John Parkinson, an Oxford don, shows: 'Old Sutherland was very much attached to the Empress who

when he died observed to Whitworth unfeelingly at Court that

Oisters would now be cheaper: alluding to his great fondness for

them'.27 Sutherland was also remembered as the subject of a long,

'laughter through tears' anecdote, recounted in the memoirs of the

French Ambassador, Count Louis Philippe de Segur, who uses it and

similar incidents to illustrate 'le sort des hommes qui peuvent se

croire obliges d'obeir k une volonte absolue, quelque absurde qui

puisse etre son obj et'. Segur relates how after the death of a beloved

dog, belonging to the Empress and called Sutherland after its donor, Catherine instructed her chief of police, Nikita Ryleyev, to have it

stuffed ('le faire empailler'). Ryleyev thought Catherine was referring not to the dog but to the banker, and after some hesitation went off to

carry out his Sovereign's orders. Segur reproduces at length the con?

versation between Ryleyev and Sutherland, who at long last managed

23 'Journal of the Lodge of Perfect Union from the 13th June 1771 to the 30th May 1772', f. 23. Ms. in the archives of the United Grand Lodge of England.

24 Dnevnik Khrapovitskogo, p. 203. 26 James Cracraft, 'James Brogden in Russia, 1787-1788' (Slavonic and East European Review, XLVII, January 1969, p. 232). 26 Dnevnik Khrapovitskogo, p. 376. 27 Entry for 13/24 March, 1794: John Parkinson, A Tour of Russia, Siberia and the Crimea 1792-1794, ed. W. Collier, London, 1971, p. 228.



262 ANTHONY CROSS

to clear up the misunderstanding through the good offices of Count

Bruce.28

Sutherland's wife, Sarah, died on 8/19 August 1787, at the age of

forty-five,29 leaving him with a daughter, Sarah (b. 1766), and a son, Richard (b. 1772). Sarah married, seemingly against her father's

wishes, on 12/23 December 1788, John Browne;30 she barely survived

her father, dying on 25 November/6 December 1791, possibly in

childbirth.31 Richard Sutherland and Browne are, together with

Richard's uncle, Alexander Hendras Sutherland, the main figures in

what might be called 'the aftermath of the Sutherland affair', a pro? tracted and unhappy story, although not infrequently unfolded, in

the letters which reveal it, in a manner reminiscent of the then

popular Kotzebue.

The documents on the affair are preserved in the archives of an

outsider who was involuntarily involved in the wrangling and mis?

fortunes of the Sutherland family.32 Samuel Whitbread (1764-1815), the famous Whig politician and inheritor of the prosperous brewery firm started by his father, Samuel Whitbread the elder, had gone to

Russia in 1785-6 soon after graduating from Cambridge as part of a

European tour in the charge of William Coxe, who had earlier ac?

companied Lord Herbert, the future Earl of Pembroke.33 In St

Petersburg Whitbread made the acquaintance of the Sutherland

family and it was probably the strong impression produced by Whitbread at this period as well as his later prominence as a poli? tician which induced Richard Sutherland to send a series of letters to

him in 1800, appealing for his help. Whitbread retained a lasting affection for his English friends in St Petersburg of whom he had

written in 1786: 'My stay at Petersburg, however, will be remembered

by me with delight, from the pleasure I had in the company of a

select half dozen, who I am proud of calling my friends'.34 He had

long been in correspondence with John Browne, whom he seems to

have recommended to Baron Sutherland as tutor to his son, and the

first of the series of letters in the Whitbread papers which deal with

the Sutherland affair was written by Browne to Whitbread in the year following the deaths of Baron Sutherland and his daughter, Browne's

28 Memoires ou souvenirs et anecdotes par M. le Comte de Sigur, II, Paris, 1826, pp. 249-53. 29 Register of the British Church, Ms. u,i92B, f. 98. so Ibid., f. 109. si Ibid., f. 126. 32 The eight letters which are produced in part in this article are preserved in the

Whitbread Papers in the County Record Office at Bedford as ms. nos. 5699 and 4474-81. I would like to thank the County Archivist, Miss P. L. Bell, for her assistance, and make acknowledgement to Mr Samuel Whitbread, of Southill Park, Bedfordshire, for the privilege of printing the letters. I owe a debt of gratitude to Mrs Julia Cramer for her help in deciphering Sutherland's handwriting. 33 On Whitbread, see Roger Fulford, Samuel Whitbread 1764-1815: A Study in Opposition, London, 1967. 3* Ibid., pp. 20-1.



DOCUMENTS 263

wife, at a time when Derzhavin's committee was making enquiries into Sutherland's affairs. It forms a prelude to the following seven

letters all dating from 1800, of which two are from Browne to Whit?

bread and five are from Richard Sutherland to Whitbread, one of

which by a happy chance includes the text of a letter from Alexander

Hendras Sutherland to Richard, Richard's reply, as well as an ex?

change of correspondence in 1795 between Richard and the English? men in St Petersburg appointed to sort out the affairs of the bankrupt Sutherland company.

It is Richard Sutherland's letter of 16/28 October 1800, described

by him as 'a Pamphlet', which gives his detailed account of the events

of the preceeding years. The account is inevitably exaggerated and

one-sided and we lack the essential counterbalancing testimony of

Browne and of others involved in the affair. It seems that Browne

was made a member of the Sutherland company after his marriage, on the insistence of Richard jr. and against Baron Sutherland's

wishes. Although by 1800 Alexander Hendras Sutherland and Browne would seem to have been on good terms, Richard intimated that Browne's appointment in 1789 was the reason for A. H.'s with? drawal from the company. A further partner, Bock, was dismissed by the Baron and the Company became known as Sutherland and

Company, with the addition of a William Whishaw as a partner, along with Baron Sutherland, his brother George, Richard Rigail, Browne and Richard Sutherland.35 In 1793 further infighting in the firm led to the withdrawal of George Sutherland (who died soon

afterwards) and Richard Rigail. The firm was renamed Sutherland, Browne and Whishaw. Whishaw, who at this period becomes the

principal villain of the piece, then engineered the declaration of the firm's insolvency. Subsequently Richard Sutherland's affairs went from bad to worse and his letters paint an essentially tragic picture of

hardship and persecution, if undercut by hyperbole and a welter of trivia and the implication that his assets were still not inconsiderable.

Although in his last letter to Whitbread, dated 13/25 November 1800, Sutherland described himself as 'a man in a labarinth', he seems to have gained a certain resolution and equanimity; certainly he

recognised that Whitbread could offer him no further assistance. Of Sutherland's eventual fate nothing is known.

One person who emerges from this sorry affair with little credit is Richard's uncle, Alexander Hendras, who is condemned more by the letter he wrote to his nephew than by anything said about or against him by others. When Richard appealed to him for help in 1800, he

occupied a position of prominence in the Russia Company in

35 Information on these and subsequent figures will be given in footnotes to the letters.



264 ANTHONY CROSS

London. His commercial house in London was very active in trade

with Russia and in carrying out commissions from the Russian

government. The Vorontsov papers contain an exchange of letters

between Admiral Samuel Greig, Count S. R. Vorontsov and Suther?

land in 1787-8 concerning the supply of meat and oil to the Russian

fleet and the dispatch of guns from the Carron factory.36 For many

years Sutherland had been a member of the Russia Company's Court of Assistants and in March 1799, had been elected as one of

the four Consuls, an office he retained until March 180137, there?

after he became the company's vice-governor. He was not only a respected merchant, but also a very wealthy one, although in

his letter to his nephew he presents himself as obliged to live 'with

strict and great economy'. His letter is redolent of hypocrisy and hum?

bug, of a 'what's mine is my own' attitude, scandalised by thoughts of

supporting a nephew 'in idleness, ... in Prostitution surrounded by Bastards'. His own 'straitened circumstances' were such that by his

death (21 May 1820)38 he had been able to accumulate an immense

collection of original prints and engravings, which his widow

extended and left to the Bodleian Library.39 In addition to their value as documents specifically connected

with the Sutherland affair, the letters are concerned with aspects of life in the English community in St Petersburg which are virtually unresearched. Little is known about the personalities or about their

activities. Most English travellers to the Russian capital from the

time of Catherine the Great onwards make reference to certain

figures in the community and various generalisations about their

activities and contact or lack of contact with Russians, but it is only from visitors' letters or diaries, which were not intended for publi? cation, that some real impression of their way of life is gained. One

may cite in this category the letters of the Wilmot sisters40 and of

James Brogden, and the still unpublished diary (1781) of Baroness Elisabeth Dimsdale. The letters of Richard Sutherland are, however,

unique, in that they are by an 'insider' in the community. Their

unguarded comments and details, often couched in the most extrava?

gant, colourful and idiosyncratic language, breath life into the

people recorded in the Register of births, marriages and deaths of the British Church in St Petersburg and into the dry records of the

Russia Company. They also provide a commentary on the words of

36 Arkhiv knyazya Vorontsova, XIX, Moscow, 1881, pp. 373-406. 37 Court Minute Books of the Russia Company, Ms. 17741/9, f. 214. 38 Gentleman's Magazine, XIII, i, New Series (1820), p. 570. 39 Catalogue of the Sutherland Collection [compiled by Sutherland's widow], 2 vols. London, 1837 (-1838). See also account of gift in Gentleman's Magazine, VII, New Series (1837), p. 63. 40 The Marchioness of Londonderry and H. M. Hyde (eds.) The Russian Journals of Martha and Catherine Wilmot, 1803-8, London, 1934.



DOCUMENTS 265

Claudius Rondeau, the English Resident at the Court of Anna

Ivanovna: 'There never was an english factory as disunited as this, but I shall do all it is possible to be done to persuade them to live in

friendship, and as countrymen ought to do; but by all I can hear

since my arrival at this place they do their utmost to ruin one

another'.41

The eight letters run to over ten thousand words and it has been

impossible to reproduce them in toto. Every effort has been made to

retain all passages relevant to the circumstances of Richard Suther? land's misfortunes. Omissions, some of them considerable, are indi?

cated by a row of dots in parenthesis. The orthographic features of the originals have been preserved.

No. 1. John Browne to Samuel Whitbread

St Petersburg 6/17 April 1792 (Ms. 5699)

[. . .] I am well convinced that you will be much chagrined to hear that the affairs of the late Baron are by no means so well as they should be? It appears to be my destiny to be involved in difficulties?H.I.M. has

appointed a committee of enquiry to examine the state of his affairs? You well know that enquiry in parliamentary language generally implys suspicion of the soundness of the thing enquired into. Undoubtedly there is ground for enquiry on the present occasion?Yesterday evening part of the Commissioners were here on this most unpleasant investiga- gation?with the politeness of the chief I am perfectly satisfied, as he seemed to feel exceedingly for me, as a man who has had his full share of misfortunes these last six months.42 Had I any domestic comfort this blow would not fall so heavily; now there is only one chair by the fireside

?upon my soul my spirits are almost used up.43 Before I left England I had the greatest expectations, & had things

gone as they ought to have done, I should have possessed at this instant

?ioom?my chief apprehensions are that the sensation (which this

enquiry must naturally cause) will affect the credit of the house of trade with the profits of which I should be much at ease. I have been writing in every direction to do away this impression if possible; & yet have

great reliance on the graciousness of the Empress, who has appointed this committee in the mildest possible way?[. . .]

No. 2. Richard Sutherland to Samuel Whitbread St Petersburg 24 June/6 July 1800 (Ms. 4474)

As poor people dare not write much to rich ones, I only beg leave to

acquaint you that I am at Present so poor I have not litterally Bread to eat?whether you be still friends with Browne or not I know not, but

41 Sbornik Imperatorskogo Russkogo Istoricheskogo Obshchestva, LXVI, St Petersburg, 1889, p. 409. 42 Probably Derzhavin. The other commissioners were Vasiryev and Novosil'tsov.

43 He is referring to the death of his wife, Sarah, in the previous year.



266 ANTHONY CROSS

can assure you I am the Victim of his mad Conduct & all the return for

the Services I have done him, is that which is too bad to express, for his treatment to me has been too bad to make a tale of?I was a boy, he a

madman, my Partners to sly even for him; I am Ruined!?& well remember your words when you was in Russia Viz' that you feared my father's Riches were mere Ropes of sand?they were not Ropes of sand ?but thro' neglect they have proved so?Your horse is as well as ever, but I fear I Cannot keep him above a week more not having wherewith to feed him?Could you find some means of Persuading my Uncle to assist me?you'd bestow a charitable act on one who always was?is? & will be grateful [. . .]


Cecil Street, London 25 August 1800 (Ms. 4475)

[. . .] I am equally surprised & hurt at this extraordinary and irregular application of Dick Sutherland to you to interest yourself with his uncle to assist him in his present distress. His uncle has repeatedly written to him to petition the Emperor, & has made that step the condition on which he was to expect any thing from him. He has as yet absurdly &

obstinately refused to adopt this measure, which (not improbably) would lead to some kind of pension; & if it should fail, would certainly secure his uncle's protection. [. . .] I should tell you that before I left

Petersburg (with much risque to myself) I saved a document out of the

wreck, by which he had between five & six thousand pounds secured to him in the english funds?This sum (it now appears) he is at the end of, or nearly so. That he has so ill husbanded this last remnant of his fortune seems to me to indicate a complexion bordering on insanity.


Cecil Street, London 27 August 1800 (Ms. 4476)

I have just received your packet with the inclosures, & will transmit them to Petersburg by the mail of friday next. As you request it, I shall not mention any thing to the uncle of your assistance to his nephew, &

hope the latter will follow the advice you have given him.

No. 5. Richard Sutherland to Samuel Whitbread St Petersburg 12/24 October 1800 (Ms. 4478)

He thanks Whitbread for his financial assistance and inveighs against the 'purse proud' 'factorial gentlemen' who malign him in St

Petersburg.

[. . .] I am lorded over with enemies on all sides, who see faults in me which I, now, have not?and such as, when I had them, were not observed because I was not?thus it is to fall from affluence to indigence! because I will not Cringe to such as are beneath me, I am left to starve & die of a broken heart?. Yesterday was the tenth year, since my father's death, & today Commences the eighth year of my poverty, tho'



DOCUMENTS 267

it has never been so confined as of this year past?for believe me,

actually, I have not even Bread... I have lost the flower of my life, I am in my nine and twentieth year, & I firm believe in a Consumption from the extreme of my Sufferings for Seven years . . . [missing] & with a prospect before me, that makes me think it would be better were

providence to take me from this world, for [missing?although ?] I have in you a friend I am. friendless. [. . .]

No. 6. Richard Sutherland to Samuel Whitbread

St Petersburg 16/8 October 1800 (Ms. 4479)

This is the central letter in the series, the extensive 'Pamphlet' in

which Richard Sutherland gives his account of events from the mid-

1780's. It was accompanied by copies of a) a letter from A. H.

Sutherland to Richard Sutherland dated 29 August 1800 and b) Richard's reply to his uncle, undated (Ms. 4477). Extracts from

these two letters are given first,

a) A. H. to R. Sutherland.

[. . .] Mr Whitbread is a Gentleman I never spoke to, nay! dont know when I see, & one you have no right to address on such a subject, unless

you think you have an equal right of applying to every Lord or Gentle? man that may have dined at your father's table, & by stating your poverty work on their feelings, & try to get them to recompense you for those entertainments?you have talked much of your spirit?and before

my eyes are your own words?"and to petition like a Beggar I will not" ?I felt for you & admired your pride, tho' seeing the necessity of the

Case, did not approve of it?but what is this pride ? all talk, no reallity-? to Petition a great Prince, whom you have right to lay your case before,44 is no disgrace to you?'tis the path you ought to pursue, & instead of

being Beggarly, is honourable, Creditable, & what no one will think a

jot worse of you for doing?but what are these applications of yours to Mr Whitbread, Mr Harman,45 myself, and Perhaps others I have not

yet heard of? and on whom you have no Claim, what are these, I

say, but the extreme of Beggary & making both yourself & me appear Wretched & Contemptible, and would if I was able to assist you deter me from doing it?If I was as young as you and with my ideas I would turn to any employment, and work in any honest way, however hard, for a living rather than live on Charity, but your pride I see will stoop to let me (who am getting old, infirm, & incapable of great exertion) sup? port you, so that you may live idly, & so great is your regard and affection for me, that altho' I have told you (& will send you a notorial

proof of it if you wont believe me) my income with strict and great economy, is but sufficient for my wants, nor will be that, if expenses of

living here continue as they have these last five years?tho' I say I have told you this, & that I have other claims on me, better founded than

44 He probably had in mind Paul's unpaid debts to Baron Sutherland. 45 John Harman, a London businessman and Quaker, was admitted to the Freedom of

the Russia Company at a Court of Assistants on 23 November 1773: Ms. 17741/7, f. 357.



268 ANTHONY CROSS

yours, because you are young & must work for a living?yet you care not if my wife & myself are put to inconvenience, or give up comforts we have been used to?(without it I cannot allow you anything) so that

you are but supported in idleness, to live in Prostitution surrounded by Bastards?no my dr Sir, their discovery has sickened me?you have now

only to follow the advice that has been given you?& to turn your thoughts to exert yourself for your own support & that of your family? and if you were to save yourself and friends the expense of postage to persuade me to do that, which if I could do, / would without this Circuitous application, it will be better?the time will come (if it is not

your own fault) that I shall prove that I have a regard for you, but while I live let me see you work (as I have done) for your self & my friendship will then be secured [. . .]

b) R. to A. H. Sutherland.

[. . .] As it was our worthy friend Doctor Rogers46 who instigated me to the Crime of ever asking a brass farthing of you, he is equally the fualt of

my recd. from you, so undeserving, wicked, accursed a letter; out of

gratitude for his old standing friendship for our family, I followed his

Counsel, & Strenuously endeavoured, not only to regain your friend?

ship but to hold it. I have done all I could do, I have even made attonement for faults I never Committed or dreamt of, merely, to flatter you & give way to the singularity of your temper?tis your own self have now broken the treaty, by that infernal & Tartarian Script?

?I have enclosed it in a letter to Doctor Rogers humbly beseeching his kindness in endeavouring to persuade you to Comit to the flames, &

yourself burn alive & reduce to ashes that formidable; many headed; irontoothed; severely grinning; ignivomous Hydra, by far too Venomous to be destroyed by any but it's own Creator's hand [. . .] (you always harp on my wishing to deprive you & your wife of Comforts you have become used to, & that *if it is not my own fault' you will be my friend after you are no more in this world?from this day forth believe me! that I wish not to deprive you or her of any comforts whatsoever?& wish you may sprawl with her on a bed of down, whilst your nephew lies shivering on the Cold Stones; only I most humbly obsecrate &

implore your granting me this my last worldly request?If you have

actually intended I should inherit of you a certain Sum?oblige me for this last time I beseech you! Scratch out my name for ever & insert, in

itsp lace the name of Jane Sutherland & my nephew Browne, for my father on his death bed, earnestly desired, & strictly Commanded my taking Care of, & never letting the former want, & in the later I

emphatically read his mother47?let me I implore you, show my

46 Dr Jonathan Rogers died in St Petersburg at the age of 71 on 23 May/4 June *8i 1 (Ms. 1 i,i92B, f. 255). Entered Russian Service in 1774 as surgeon to the Black Sea fleet. After some years in England he returned to Russia in 1803 as Surgeon-in-chief to the Russian fleet until his retirement in 18io. He was well-known for his work Pharmacopaea navalis Rossica, St Petersburg, 1806 Russkiy biogrqftcheskiy slovar', XVI, p. 334.

47 Jane Sutherland is unidentified. She was possibly the daughter of Baron Sutherland's brother, George. *My nephew Browne' obviously refers to the son of John and Sarah Browne, although there is no record of the birth or baptism in the Church register.



DOCUMENTS 269

generosity to them & act Nobly since you Know not how! & as we are now on a different footing to what we have ever been, let me only beg you to give truce to my restless thoughts, & do not Carry your animosity to the pernicious pitch of hurting my Character [. . .] I have upon honour, but two Copecks in the house, and altho' I want them for my breakfast tomorrow, I would with the greatest pleasure part with them, if I were able thereby to hide you from the Shame of having written so

injurious & unthinking a letter to the son of your Benefactor. I tell you Candidly my dr. Sir that I can well judge of your singular temper, not from heresay, but from your former correspondence with my father?

you mean well all the time, I know you do, but it is not every one who will swallow such pills quietly, & there is not any alternative excepting coming over myself?which is not worth while merely to settle this affair betwixt us. [. . .]

c) R. Sutherland to Whitbread.

[. . .] I have so much to say that I hardly know where to begin, still less, how, possibly, to make sufficient acknowledgement for putting you to the trouble of reading that, which, however I may labour to abbreviate, will, I fear, unavoidably show me inadequate to the task of preserving it's epistolary appellation, & force me to the necessity of permitting it to

appropriate the name of Pamphlet. To give you a faint sketch of my misfortunes I begin my narrative

from the period you sent Browne over, at my particular request, for the

purpose of finishing my Education; he had not long returned before it

pleased God to deprive me of my mother, & * our invincible lord & master Cupid so entangled him in his net, that the obtaining my sister for his wife, so wholly engrossed his ideas & employed his time, that I received little or no more tuition from him.

I loved him as I loved my soul, and my Father by my exhortation, tho' hardly able to subdue the abhorrence in which he held him, being inculcated, reluctantly, to admit of their union, the marriage took place. I was proud of my brother in law, for I adored him, & finding my father determined not to allow him any dowry, I implored him to con? cede to me the permission of my sharing with him my own peculiar Capital, and his become an associate in my Commercial Establishment; this being agreed to he was accordingly nominated a partner bearing the half share of my Capital.

Hitherto our assembly had consisted of my uncles A. H. & G. Sutherlands, Mr Bock, my Cousin Mr Richd Rigail, & myself.48 But no

48 In the minutes of the Russia Company for March 1792 the Company is described as 'Alexander Hendras Sutherland, Richard Sutherland, George Sutherland and Peter Bock Merchants and Copartners' (Ms. 11741/8, f. 347). Peter Bock died on 6/18 February 1808 at the age of 80 (Ms. 11,1926, f. 235). Richard Rigail (b. 1761) was the eldest of six children born to the merchant Jacob Rigail and his wife Mary Anne, the widow of John Sutherland (d. 1757), who was the brother of Baron Sutherland's father. Details of the marriage and births in Ms. 11,1926, ff. 34, 35, 39, 40, 42, 46.



270 ANTHONY CROSS

sooner had my Uncle A. H. Sutherland heard of our Coalition with

Browne, than he removed his share, & withdrew from our society, alleging that he would not be a partner with one, he so much detested and a man of such low extraction, with many other remarks unworthy of remembrance: thus, by him, we lost a principle supporter, & by way of

aggrivation to this loss, we soon met with another, & having pleased my father to expel, withour either Rhyme or reason, from our society, our most worthy and able partner Mr Bock, by which we were also deprived of that Gentleman's share of near 100,000 R??In his place he stationed Mr Whishaw,49 merely as a working tool, he not having any Capital of his own (& would to God this had not ever happened) the firm of the house was then changed to Sutherland's & Co?Consisting of my Uncle G. S. Mr Rd. R1. Browne, Whishaw, & myself. Shortly after this

happened that fatal disagreement twixt my sister & her father which

compelled her & Browne to leave St. Petersburg & which, I am obliged to confess, did not do any honor to my father, they had hardly again returned to Russia before my father was taken ill & died. 'Tis certain that the flourishing & prosperous situation he, as Court Banker occupied, by flattering me with the vain hopes of being Com? mitted to Circumstances, if not more opulent, at least adequate to his

own, seemingly promissed me the fruition of a propitious fate, to the

veracity of this, I think, the vast wealth he left, adjoined to my share in the Commercial establishment, may be subservient, his Death dispersed & chased all these hopes away, inferring as it were, a chain of mis? fortunes & presenting me with those the most oppressive; for to our

Conjunctive prejudice, it appeared, as if, from the untimely & improper use he had made of funds deposited in Amsterdam, government had sustained a heavy loss.

I being, at that time, a minor, there was not anyone to ward off the

blow; everyone endeavouring to lucre himself, no one thought of me besides which, by the Ubiquitary rumour of my father's downfal being, solely from the unity of our surnames, misapplied to me, my Commercial Establishment tho' wholly unconnected with the Bankership, received a severe shock: notwithstanding which, it upheld itself above two years longer, & was again in a flourishing situation, when by the Circum? vention of an insidious partner, it received it's last irreparable Blow; for it betook his fancy to form a Scheme Competent to the purpose of

ridding himself of us all, &, in consequence of some idle tales previously written by him to Messrs. Hope & Co. of Amsterdam, we received a letter from those Gentlemen, implying that, unless we struck out of our

partnership Mr Ge. Sd. & Mr Rd. R1. they would not befriend us any further, & would withdraw a large Capital they had deposited in our hands?their protection was not to be lost, Browne insisted on my

49 William Whishaw by the late 1790s was co-partner in the firm of Whishaw and Henley (William Tooke, View of the Russian Empire, During the Reign of Catherine the Second, and to the Close of the Eighteenth Century, III, London, 1800, p. 529.) He produced nine children between 1778 and 1805 and his daughter Anastasia (b. 1783) married John Henley, widower, injune 1809 (Ms. 11,1926, ff. 62, 66, 69, 73, 78, 81, 100, 144, 218, 245> 282)-



DOCUMENTS 271

Uncle & Cousin being expelled, & I, little dreaming of Whishaw's

scheme, & fully relying on Browne's good sense, was, unfortunately instigated by him to the adoption of that ignoble step, & accordingly they were both struck out of the partnership, & the house then assumed the firm of Sutherland Browne & Whishaw. My Uncles ill state of health was so aggravated by this severe shock that, in less than three months he resigned his breath.50 Whishaw having disengaged himself of a couple, had only two more left to get rid of, this however, could not be

effectuated, by any other mean, than a Contrivance to Compell the Establishment to promulgate it's insolvency, accordingly he pretended that the house was behind hand, & that it would be more prudent to

break, like honest people, before it grew worse. This was in the month of

march, & we had such extensive & lucrative Commissions that, had we even been behind, we should, by the first open water and the Com? mencement of the Shipping season, have, not only retrieved our

deficiencies, but have profited Considerably. In short, Browne was talked over like a feeble minded Boy, & we were, tho' in firm ability of

paying, constrained to proclaim our insolvency. Mr Harvey finding us too worthy to want inspection, could not be prevailed upon to be one of our Curators;51 & those appointed were Messrs. Sn Shairp,52 Ty

Raikes,53 & Le. Brown54?these Gentlemen gave both Whishaw & Browne a handsome monthly allowance, & even paid all their private debts, leaving me, tho' the Chief partner & Capitalist of the Establish?

ment, without any allowance whatsoever, untill my wretchedness became such, that it reached the ear of Sir Charles Whitworth,55 which

worthy Gentleman, after calling on me himself & learning my case, procured me, from them, for the time lost, the scanty allowance of 50 R?

monthly & an Acquital; my private debts are not paid, by those

Gentlemen, to this moment, & that is the true, original, & fundamental cause of my present extreme indigence, as you will learn in the sequence of these my unfeigned lines.

60 George Sutherland died on 20 June/1 July 1793 (Ms. n,i92B, f. 138). 51 Thomas Harvey was a partner in the firm of Paris, Warre, Harvey and Co. (Tooke,

View, III, p. 527). 52 Stephen Shairp was a son of Walter Shairp, who was Consul-General and Agent to the British Factory in St Petersburg from 1776 until his death in 1787. Stephen obtained his freedom of the Russia Company by patrimony on 20 November 1778 (Ms. 11741/8, f. 8). He was head of the firm Shairps and Company in 1795 and soon afterwards, in 1796, became Consul-General, a post he held until 1807 (D. B. Horn, British Diplomatic Repre? sentatives, 1689-1789, London, 1932, p. 118). 63 Timothy Raikes, jr. was a prosperous Petersburg merchant who had been admitted to the Russia Company in 1759. He married Mary Cavanaugh in 1776 (Ms. 11,1926, f. 59) and produced numerous children. The Wilmot sisters were much in the company of the Raikes family and Catherine Wilmot wrote in 1805: *Mrs Raikes is a young woman, married to a blind cleaver little Witch of a Man (Timothy so call'd) of between 70 and 80' {The Russian Journals of Martha and Catherine Wilmot, p. 175). Raikes died 30 December 1810/11 January 1811, aged 80 (Ms. 11,1926, f. 252). 54 Lawrence Constable Brown (d. 1814) was a partner in the firm of Anderson, Brown and Moberly (Tooke, View, III, p. 524). Married Ann Sanders in 1802 (Ms. 11,1926, f. 187). 55 Sir Charles Wentworth (later Earl Whitworth) was British Envoy Extraordinary in St Petersburg between 1788 and 1800 (Horn, op. cit., p. 119).



272 ANTHONY CROSS

[Browne quarrelled with Sutherland and left Russia for good,

having cout of madness locked all the doors, even the privy; &

thrown the Keys God knows whither?some say, into the River'.]

[. . .] He had not been gone long, before, Government enforcing it's pre? rogative, confiscated & seized, not only my father's but even my own

peculiar property, my Cloaths, my bed, were taken, my dinner thrown out of the saucepan and the Kitchen fire extinguished?amongst my father's house my own peculiar house was sequestered, for I had bought it of my Uncle after my father's death, & altho' it cost 68,000 R? it was afterwards purchased by Mr Warre,56 in the public sale, for 22000?I had a sum in the English funds, which when drawn in by me, produced, owing to the unfavourableness of the exchange, at that time, only 37000 R?, & this owing to the unsettled dispute of my Commercial

establishment, I did not get for upwards of two years, during which time I was entirely supported by the Noble generosity of Mr Henry Fock,57 & consequently it became my duty to repay that worthy Gentleman as soon as my ability permitted me, besides which my Curators had left me onerated with near 25000 R? debts collected whilst I was in oppulence.

I laid out my Capital in the following manner, I purchased for

24560 R? a landed estate of 130 men, & 136 womensouls, containing 9800 acres of land & paid off so many of my debts that I had not any money left to build a house upon it.58 accordingly I applied to a friend who seemed so warm that he promissed me the loan of 15000 R? for that

purpose. I hired workmen & set off with them, but faith, when I had built to the amount of 13000 R? (this in my great & irreparable folly) & the work piople were to be paid?no one farthing could be extracted from my friend?& I was under the disagreeable necessity of selling my library, having retrieved it from government Sequester by the exertions of a Russian Gentleman & Sir Charles Whitworth?now having sold the best part of my library, my Electrical & Phneumatic Machines, for a sum adequate to the purpose of discharging the work piople?I, Still, found myself in a dillemma?for old Debts blended with new hindered

my retiring to the Country, I became more & more envolved in debt & molested, & Continue so to this moment, having even sold the last of my furniture & Scarcely having a Chair left to sit a friend on.

My Curators pretend that altho' they have paid Browne's & Whi- shaw's debts, they have not any reason to pay mine, & give for reason that it is solely, by their lennity, I have been put in possession of the Sum

56 Thomas Warre was admitted to the Russia Company in 1775 and was at this period a partner in Paris, Warre, Harvey and Company. Warre is referred to on several occasions in the letters for he was entrusted to pass on Whitbread's letters and gift of money to Sutherland.

57 Of Fock nothing is known, except that his sister, Constantia Cecilia, married William Whishaw on 1/12 June (Ms. 11,1928, f. 60); and another sister (?), Charlotta Amelia, married Francis Gardner (1745-1813), the founder of the St Petersburg English Club, on 24 October/4 November 1779 (f* 66). 68 6aron Sutherland's Russian title passed down to his son, who was thus entitled to buy serfs and land.



DOCUMENTS 273

I drew out of the English funds & that they had a right to it, as belonging to the Mass of the Commercial estate of Sutherland Browne & Whishaw, 'tis true that Mr John Harman, in whose name it stood in the funds, was of the opinion?& he wrote to me that unless the Curators did not Claim it he could not, on justice, give it up to me?this Caused my writing a letter to those Gentlemen on that Subject, the exact Copy of

which, with their answer, I here subscribe Viz

[These two letters, both dated 21 December 1795/1 January 1796, are omitted. Catherine had apparently allowed Sutherland to receive the money in question 'as a gift from Her'.]

[. . .] It is inconceivable to me how they can be so very inconsistent with justice & Common sense, as, now, to plead, in excuse for not

paying my debts, the renunciation of a sum, they have themselves

acknowledged they could not ever claim, in Consequence of never

having belonged to the Estate. & tho' I have every right of Compelling them, by law, to pay my debts, it is not my extreme indigence, alone, which prevents my taking that step, which, Certainly requires money at

Command, but that no poverty shall Compell me to Carry on hostilities

against Mr Shairp, whom, altho he has been very Rough on this

Subject, I cannot help esteeming. [. . .] I bought, last winter, another, but smaller, Estate for R? 10,000, nearer to Town, & bearing the

advantage of a Water Communication, thinking thereby to profit & extricate myself from my debts. In order to purchase this I was obliged to pawn, Conjunctively, my large & Small estates, for R? 19500 to a

person to whom the large estate had, long before, been Pledged for 9500, & who would shortly have deprived me of it (& that a year ago, had not he been Combated in his design, by my worthy patron the present Court Banker?Baron Rogovicoff59) had I not renewed the mortgage

by this Circumambulating Stratigem. [. . .]

I frequent not anyone, & only have the frequence of a few indigent but worthy friends of my fathers; this vexes many; tho' in fact they know me not, they Pronounce, Conjointly with my Uncle, who, still less knows me, that I have Squandered away my money & that I am a libertine?in answer to which I am obliged to appeal not only to Conscience & reason but to Common Sense. For, I received from

England R? 37,000 at a time I owed at least, 27000 (for I owed two years support to Mr Fock besides the debts the Commercial Establish? ment had left me enburthened with)?with the 37000 R? I, not only Paid off many debts but purchased an Estate for 24560 R? & laid out, in buildings, on it 13000 R? to which adding the Estate of 10,000 R? swells the sum to 47560 R?. I have not, yet, lost either of these Estates, tho' if I meet not with assistance, I soon shall?I am offered, in a hurry, 59 Nikolay Semenovich Rogovikov (d. 1809), the son of a rich Moscow merchant, was

appointed as one of three Court 6ankers by Paul I in October 1798 and was created a 6aron of the Russian Empire in 1800. He was the father-in-law of the playwright Denis Fonvizin,



274 ANTHONY CROSS

for one 35,000 R? & for the other 12,00, which makes 47000 R? & I have little doubt that, if I could take my time in selling them, I might obtain

50,000 R? for them; altho' if I am oppressed & hurried, I shall be

obliged either to forfeit them both, at 19,500 (as, I believe, in three months will be the Case) or sell them even for less than 34000 R??for, 'tis too true that when people see a man is in distress they offer little or

nothing for his property? Certainly I owe, all in all, an immense sum, amounting to nearly

40,000 R? i.e. surely on the otherside of 37000?But how does this

happen ? I begun indebted 25000 R?, & tho' I paid off some, I was

obliged to renew & add interest to other bills, & Compelled to mortgage my Estate & pay very high interest (as 30pr: Ct:) to Userers, for the

money, & obliged also to maintain myself. My Estates bring in, now, annually, about 4,000 Rubles, tho' when I

purchased them they only produced 1200 R??Out of the 4,000 R? I

only receive 1600 R? in Clear Cash, the rest in products, as Oats, hay, Flax, linnen, eggs, Fowls, Sheep, Calves, &c. & if I was Clear of Debts & able to look, more narrowly, after them, they would produce double. But as matters are, at present, tho' I have been diminishing Debts on one

side, they have by addition of interest &c, increased, so fast, on the other that I am envolved over head & ears?

Many of my Creditors have Cheated me dreadfully, & would, I dare

say, take half if properly managed with ready money. I have endeavoured

here, for years, to persuade monied people to take my Estates in

Security for 3 or 4 years at once for a Sum adequate to the purpose of

entirely extricating me, & have offered them io & 12 Pr: cent?all to no

purpose, they will not meddle with landed property, altho' it is, a vast deal, safer than any other, for the value must, yearly, encrease as the

people, on it, populate. Could I have found a person to do this, I am

firmly, Convinced I could repay them with thanks & ease in four Years ?& supposing even I could not do this out of the income, I should then as every honest man must, sell them & repay my friend?but at present I, only, find assistance from Userers who lend me but a trifling sum, & that on the mortgage of six months or at most one year?all which only drives me deeper in the mire, & I shall lose my Estates & be imprisoned for my other debts?But on the Contrary if I only owed one person & was free to act, I could by Cutting wood alone, raise perhaps the whole sum equal to the payment of the loan?but wood cannot be Cut &

transported 200 wersts without Some money to Commence with?40 wersts from Petersburg I have a remarkable fine stone quarry?this can? not either be worked withour money. I knew, very well, what I was about when I bought the Estates, but I little suspected I should be so void of friends?when they see a poor devil exerting himself, in all

possible directions, to get his bread honestly & in a Gentlemanlike manner.

I have been guilty of absurdities & I cannot deny it?but is that a rule I should always be guilty of the like.?I never was a Spendthrift in all

my life, my absurdity Consists in my having built to so, very large, an



DOCUMENTS 275

amount on my Estate?&. surely, no poor devil has ever suffered more bitter pennance than I have for that Confounded lapse, but, as I have before mentioned I little thought I was so void of friends, besides which a person had promissed me money for that purpose?I have built but a very small house for myself?the rest is an immense Farm in the

English style, Certainly I have been a Confounded ass! for such a Farm

requires a vast stock of animals to fill it?but it was in the heat of youth I did it & I think, I would pardon such a Crime if I saw one repent his

folly & feel his mistake by the bitterest afflictions [. . .]


St Petersburg 19/31 October 1800 (Ms. 4480)

[Sutherland managed to incur the wrath of Thomas Warre, the

merchant who was acting on Whitbread's behalf. Sutherland once

again tries to justify himself.]

[.. .] Mr Warre believes people who are my bitter enemies & that makes him act so?those same enemies have tried to poison Baron Rogovicoff 's esteem for me?they have not been able to do it?Why! because

Rogovicoff sees me & speaks to me & Warre does not?I am sorry your Kind meaning to me has fallen into the hands of my enenies?will you not for Christ's sake, justify me for not buckling to Mr Warre, more than one Gentleman should do to another?am I to be Summoned at a moments warning as it were, to the bar, because you have shewed your friendship & feeling for me ? am I to lose that friendship without Rhyme or Reason, because others are angry to see it ? [. . .]


St Petersburg 13/25 November 1800 (Ms. 4481)

[. . .] I am so envolved that I am like a man in a labarinth, who walkes, unguided, up & down, to seek his weariness; & no sooner has he

measured, with much toil, one Crooked path, in hopes of getting his

freedom; but it betrays him to a new affliction. I am determined to follow the advice you have extended to me, but

you must be sensible that I cannot step in that path untill the tempest has blown over & the sky becomes, somewhat more serene.



the sutherland affair and its aftermath

Documents