Curious Misprint in the Edinburgh Review by Charles Dickens. Short summary

5 seconds

Dickens criticized an article in a famous magazine. In his opinion, the author of that article distorted events and completely misinterpreted the officials’ attitude toward Mr. Hill.

1 minute

The writer criticizes the content of one of the articles that was posted in the famous print edition.

The creator writes about the fact that its author talks about Rowland Hill’s career. The latter, according to the compiler of the article, led a modest life and did not hold any public office, but nevertheless allowed himself to publish a pamphlet in which he proposed to introduce significant changes in the political structure of Great Britain. This member of the Edinburgh Review contends that Mr. Hill’s plan amounts to a revolution. He states that Rowland was not repressed by the government, and, moreover, officials approved the project and allowed it to be carried out. The contributor adds that Dickens calls the authorities of the United Kingdom «sworn enemies of talent» in vain.

The author says that if it were not for Rowland’s strong character, the authorities would have destroyed him long ago. He admits that the typesetter of the article simply entered the wrong name.