1357. EBB to Mary Russell Mitford
As published in The Brownings’ Correspondence, 7, 285–289.
[London]
August 17. 1843.
My dearest friend,
I have two letters of yours to thank you for & to reply to—and my first word must be that I am heartily & deeply sorry the visit in question should ever have been paid to you—and that I should be so, even if the sad catastrophe of your being unwell, had not crowned all which was otherwise disagreeable. I am disappointed & sorry to no common degree—and shall never cease to be so while the subject can recur to me. Certainly it was unwise & inconsiderate in Mr H[orne]. to stay so long & to give so much trouble .. in the way too of such supernumerary things as a bath three times a day. There was a want of consideration which was unbecoming to a stranger in a lady’s house, & which was unlike everything I ever observed in him from the first day of our intercourse down to this morning. At the same time I am inclined to believe that ‘want of consideration’ in the literal sense .. in the sense of ‘want of thought’ & not want of feeling for others, .. was at the root of the evil: and that nothing was really farther from his intention than inconveniencing you or yours by either the ablutions or the determined staying. Recollect my dearest friend, that not once, no, nor twice, not coldly, no, nor indifferently, did you press his coming to you, insist on the honor & pleasure which his presence would do you,—represent in those cordial words, which none use more gracefully than yourself, how your house & carriage were at his service & how likely he was to flourish anew in your air of Arcadia. Recollect that at first he meant to spend only one day with you, & that it was by the force of your own enchantments you determined him to change his plan & go to you in August instead of June, that he might have more time to rejoice in your hospitalities. It seems scarcely gracious to recall these things to you,—and yet there is an obvious justice in doing so—which you will not disallow,—now that the evil & visitor are vanished. I am persuaded in my mind that he believed you wished him to stay,—& I think that he was pardonable, by the memory of your cordial words (and who cd be likely to forget such words?) in his delusion. At the same time I am gravely sorry he should have been induced by any misapprehension to displease & inconvenience you, & render more intense the unpleasant impression which you received from his manners and appearance. When Papa asked me how you liked Mr Horne, I answered cursorily (for I would not tell the whole) that you thought him unpolished, .. & that he had stayed too long for your convenience. Instantly Papa exclaimed .. “There must be some mistake then! for although he is not particularly polished in manner, he is by no means a pushing man—that is certain!” And that is certain, as far as our experience goes. He has rather shrunk before Papa’s advances than even met them. There has been a diffidence, which if he keeps it for us, is an oddity of virtue. For the rest,—accepting your general impressions as sincere & true, .. I cannot but think that in certain respects the feeling of being oppressed beyond patience has weighed you down into depreciation of his kindness, his degree of unselfishness, & more especially of his inclination to honor the genius of his contemporaries. On that last point especially I make a gallant stand … & throw down my silk glove before the three baths. [1] My dearest friend, if he is selfish, self-engrossed, & indifferent to all talent but his own, how is it that some of the most generous critical justice which has been done to the poets of his age has been done by his hand? There is a fact against an impression! Ask Mr Browning, Mr Trench—ask his fellow-dramatists Mr Hunt, Mr Landor, Mr Darley & others if he has not praised them generously! That word “generous” I have seen in Mr Browning’s handwriting [2] & applied to Mr Horne & that he deserves it well from him & others I cannot doubt, judging him “by his works.” [3]
With regard to learning, he may not be critically learned—probably not! and I agree with you in giving honor (of a sufficiently contracted kind however) to the Porsons & their like .. or rather their unlike; for Porson had more mind that [sic] he cd use in his sphere. Perhaps you may be scarcely aware of the limited degree in which even Greek literature is admitted into the universities. There is a story of a professor at Oxford asking with a thunderous brow what a student was reading, .. “Parmenides Sir” said the student—meaning Plato’s mystical treatise. It was a retort—and silenced the questioner, who knew very little more of Plato’s Parmenides than yr self-educated man generally knows of the Greek metres. It is indeed only in a limited way that the literature of the Greeks is studied by the university men. I know an accurate Greek scholar, a Cambridge man, who told me himself that he never read Euripides through: [4] & how many of either the Oxonian or Cambridge men have read Plato through in Greek? If you ask the question of a professor, peradventure the answer wd startle you. Now this is narrow. Add to it the narrowness in matters of general information—in most sciences, in living literatures,—and I for one do not wonder at a little scorn at the edge of the lip of an untrammelled studious man. Our universities are as open to Chartism (at the least) as our government. [5] We require reforming altogether.
I think it probable that Mr Horne has read more (perhaps among the classics) than many of these accurately learned men. He sent me a critical essay of his, once, upon Albertus Magnus, [6] which gave evidence of very curious reading in lightly trodden tracks. Moreover I am not like you .. for I honor self-educated men. Almost all men of genius, & some men of learning have been self-educated—and if it were not so, the energy which could struggle with & overcome the opposition of circumstances, is highly honorable, I must consider, in itself. Cobbett [7] was not merely self-educated but imperfectly educated—he knew nothing of liberal literature—perhaps he had not imagination enough to take a polish. We must not compare him with the author of Orion—although in certain positions he could strike a blow deeper.
Ah my dearest friend, you say (I think) .. “You are worse than your client. Go away & leave me at peace.” So I go away. I enclose you however in going a very brief brief from my poor client, which I received together with your letter,––to prove the contrariousness of certain impressions as to ‘and fro’!
I have been very dull for some days,—& am glad to hear so much, at least, good news this morning, as that you shd be rather better again. My poor little cousin, Sissy Butler was released last Saturday at Cheltenham from all sorrows of the body .. dying softly & in a moment in the arms of the maid who was carrying her into the drawing-room. There had been an end of hope for long—and on the preceding week it had been thought desirable that the medical man shd inform her of her situation. She bore the tidings beautifully—a slight quivering of the lip being the only expression of emotion,—thanked him for telling her, & said she was very happy. Dear child—she is happier now! Scarcely sixteen & the cup of life at her lips! But she is gone “to drink it new in her Father’s kingdom,” [8] & selfish is the tear which falls for her. She said to George when she saw him a fortnight ago, with her scant & struggling breath, .. “Give my love to Ba”– It touched me much. Her poor sister & my aunt go abroad directly.
May God bless you my dearest friend!
Forgive & bear with me—do not talk of me in hyperboles, but love me! Your most affectionate
EBB.
No. I never heard a word of the Kings from Mr Kenyon or anybody else,—and I am quite ignorant about the German [‘]‘old man’s house.” Mr Chorley wd tell you in a moment. [9] By the way I understood some days ago that in a fortnight he was going on a Rhine pilgrimage.
Address: Miss Mitford / Three Mile Cross / Near Reading.
Publication: EBB-MRM, II, 283–286.
Manuscript: Eton College Library and Wellesley College.
1. A glove was thrown down as a challenge, e.g., by the King’s Champion at a coronation. EBB apparently feels that Horne’s troublesome insistence on three baths a day was outweighed by his praise of contemporaries and by his other virtues.
2. i.e., in letter 1283, lent her by Horne (see letter 1323).
3. Cf. Revelations, 20:13.
4. No doubt Hugh Stuart Boyd, who attended Pembroke College, Cambridge. He did possess a six-volume set of Euripides’ works, whether or not he had read them all (see letter 460).
5. The Chartists advocated further Parliamentary reform, such as equal constituencies, abolition of the property-ownership requirement for standing for membership, and payment of M.P.’s. EBB means that reform at the universities is also required, as Oxford and Cambridge still denied degrees to those not sworn members of the Established Church.
6. See letter 1116.
7. William Cobbett (1762–1835) was the publisher of Cobbett’s Weekly Political Register and Parliamentary Debates (subsequently taken over by Hansard); he was also the author of Rural Rides (1830).
8. Cf. Matthew, 26:29.
9. The references to Kings and the “old man’s house” have not been identified. Chorley was something of an expert on Germany, having written Music and Manners in France and Germany (1841).
___________________
