Beethoven's Letters 1790-1826 Volume II Part 11

[K.]

287.

TO THE ROYAL AND IMPERIAL HIGH COURT OF APPEAL.

Jan. 7, 1820.

GENTLEMEN,--

On the plea of the Decree A, I sought to have transferred to myself the guardianship of my nephew, Carl v. Beethoven, but was referred by the magistracy to the previous decision. On my consequent remonstrance the same result ensued.

I find myself the more aggrieved by this, inasmuch as not only are my own rights set at naught, but even the welfare of my nephew is thus utterly disregarded. I am therefore compelled to have recourse to the highest Court of Appeal to lay before them my well-founded claim, and rightfully to demand that the guardianship of my nephew should be restored to me.

My reasons are the following:--

1st. I am ent.i.tled to the guardianship of my nephew, not only by his father's will, but by law, and this the Court of Justice confirmed to the exclusion of the mother. When business called me away from Vienna, I conceded that Herr Nussbock should act for me _ad interim_. Having now, however, taken up my residence here, the welfare of my nephew demands that I should again undertake the office of his guardian.

2d. My nephew has arrived at an age when he requires to be trained to a higher degree of cultivation. Neither his mother nor his present guardian are calculated to guide the boy in the pursuit of his studies. The former, in the first place, because she is a woman; and as to her conduct, it has been legally proved that, to say the least of it, she has no creditable testimonials to bring forward,[1] on which account she was expressly prohibited from acting by the Court of Justice. How the Honorable Magistracy could nevertheless again appoint her is quite incomprehensible.

The latter is unfit; because, on the one hand, his office as sequestrator and administrator of houses and lands, occupies his time too much to enable him properly to undertake the duties of guardian to the boy; and, on the other, because his previous occupation as a paper manufacturer, does not inspire me with any confidence that he possesses the intelligence or judgment indispensable to conduct a scientific education.

3d. The welfare of my nephew is dearer to my heart than it can be to any one else. I am myself childless, and have no relations except this boy, who is full of talent, and I have good grounds to hope the best for him, if properly trained. Now I am compelled to hear that he has been delayed a whole year by remaining in his previous cla.s.s, from want of means to defray the expense, and that his mother intends to remove him from his present school, and wishes him to live with her. What a misfortune to the boy, were he to become a victim to the mismanagement of his mother, who would fain squander on herself that portion of her pension which she is obliged to devote to the education of her son!

I have therefore declared in due form to the Honorable Magistracy that I am myself willing to undertake the expenses of his present school, and also to provide the various masters required. Being rather deaf, which is an impediment to conversation, I have requested the aid of a colleague, and suggested for this purpose Herr Peters, Councillor of Prince Lobkowitz, in order that a person may forthwith be appointed to superintend the education and progress of my nephew, that his moral character may one day command esteem, and whose acquirements may be a sure guaranty to all those who feel an interest in the youth's welfare, that he will undoubtedly receive the education and culture necessary to develop his abilities.

My efforts and wishes have no other aim than to give the boy the best possible education,--his abilities justifying the brightest hopes,--and to fulfil the trust placed in my brotherly love by his father. The shoot is still flexible; but if longer neglected it will become crooked, and outgrow the gardener's training hand, and upright bearing, intellect, and character, be destroyed forever.

I know no duty more sacred than the education and training of a child. The chief duties of a guardian consist in knowing how to appreciate what is good, and in adopting a right course; then alone has proper attention been devoted to the welfare of his ward, whereas in opposing what is good he neglects his duty.

Indeed, keeping in view what is most for the benefit of the boy, I do not object to the mother in so far sharing in the duties of a guardian that she may visit her son, and see him, and be apprised of all the measures adopted for his education; but to intrust her with the sole guardianship of the boy without a strict guardian by her side, would cause the irrevocable ruin of her son.

On these cogent grounds I reiterate my well-founded solicitation, and feel the more confident of a favorable answer, as the welfare of my nephew alone guides my steps in this affair.[2]

LUDWIG VAN BEETHOVEN.

[Footnote 1: Schindler states that during these law proceedings the widow of Beethoven's brother had another child.]

[Footnote 2: The Court excluded Carl's mother from all share in his education, and from all direct influence over her son, and again restored to Beethoven the full authority of a guardian.]

288.

TO HIS HIGHNESS THE ARCHDUKE RUDOLPH.

[Music: Treble clef, C major.

Seiner Kaiserlichen Hoheit!

Dem Erzherzog Rudolph!

Dem geistlichen Fursten!

Alles Gute! alles Schone!

alles Gute! alles Schone!

alles alles Gute, alles alles Schone!

alles Gute! alles Schone!

alles Gute, alles Schone!

alles alles Gute, alles Schone!

alles Gute, alles Schone!

alles Gute, alles Schone!]

From your obedient servant,

L. V. BEETHOVEN.

Jan. 12, 1820.

289.

TESTIMONIAL IN FAVOR OF HERR V. KANDELER.

It is certainly the duty of every musical composer to become acquainted with all the earlier as well as more modern poets, in order to select what is most suitable to his purpose for songs. Such, however, not being invariably the case, this present collection of Herr v. Kandeler's cannot fail to be useful and commendable to many who wish to write songs, and also tend to induce more able poets to contribute something in the same direction.

LUDWIG V. BEETHOVEN.--M.P.

I entirely agree with Herr v. Beethoven.

JOS. WEIGEL.

290.

TO THEODORE AMADEUS HOFFMANN.[1]

Vienna, March 23, 1820.

I seize the opportunity through Herr N. of approaching a man so gifted as yourself. You have also written of my humble self, and Herr N.N. showed me some lines of yours about me in his alb.u.m; I have, therefore, every reason to believe that you feel some interest in me. Permit me to say that, on the part of so talented a man as yourself, this is truly gratifying to me. I wish you all possible good and happiness, and remain,

Sir, with esteem, your obedient

BEETHOVEN.

[Footnote 1: It is well known that Hoffmann, in the years 1809 to 1812, wrote the first really important articles on Beethoven's works for the _Leipzig A.M. Zeitung_ on his instrumental music, his trios, and ma.s.ses, &c., &c.]

291.

TO HERR HASLINGER,--ADJUTANTERL.

I request the Adjutant to lend me the score of the Overture in E flat, which I will return as soon as the performance is over. I also beg he will be so good as to send me Kirnberger's work to supply the place of mine, as I am at this moment giving lessons in counterpoint, and have been unable to find my own ma.n.u.script amid my confused ma.s.s of papers. Yours,