432. EBB to Hugh Stuart Boyd
As published in The Brownings’ Correspondence, 2, 330–332.
Hope End.
Tuesday. Novr 15th [1831] [1]
As you have such a regard for the bishops, you will be glad to hear that Mr Martin has written a letter to the Bishop of Hereford, [2] severe enough, & containing a charge about the state of the surrounding parishes with regard to clergymen. A copy is sent to the Times—therefore dont forget to have his signature ferretted for! No anonymousness! no initials! but James Martin at full length. He will have the whole church militant in this part of the world upon him, Mrs Cliffe as well as his correspondent,—& will be more unpopular than even you were, in your imaginary zenith. You know I have not seen the letter—only heard of it. The spirit of it is likely to be far from the right spirit, & rather magistraterial than theologian,—and yet I am sure you will be more glad than otherwise at its having been written. So much for the mint sauce!– You are exactly in Mr Tone’s [3] humour just now,—who used to bless everybody generally, & .. do the contrary .. to the bishops particularly!——
I got home very well yesterday, in spite of the wind which blew my bonnet into an hexagonal shape—is not that the word? Occyta ran down stairs with a face much brighter than the daylight was then, & gave me such a flattering reception that I forgot all about you for three or four minutes. Afterwards he sate on my knee until one of us was tired,—my gratitude wont let me say which,—& began to tell me all about my squirrel running away, & how he could not stand at my door all day as its guard, because Minny would make him do his lessons. In short he is the dearest thing of the kind that ever was or will be.
No letter from Papa by today’s post! I hear that he has been written to about his sheep & cows which have hitherto remained in the park & are now to be turned out. He must send some answer: and what answer? Well! there is no use in thinking of it.
A better account of the cholera than of the reform bill in today’s paper. Suppose it should be thrown out again! Would not the Marquis of Londonderry [4] have reason to rejoice if he were only thrown at, as a consequence? If such a catastrophe were to occur, nolo episcopari [5] would be more sincerely said than it ever was before. But surely Ministers cannot be quite so linially descended from the saviours of the capitol, [6] as for us to be justified in supposing any such thing. I have been reading an article in the Quarterly Review this morning about the administration, where of course bill the second, is prophetically considered as dead & buried, & Lord Grey turned out. [7] Nothing beats the insolence of the writer except his own folly! All the excitement of the people attributed not to the rejection of the reform bill by the Lords, but to the stirring up, with a long pole, of those “beastises” vulgarly called the people, by the king’s government! If nothing had been said about a second reform bill, we should have been perfectly quiet by this time,—& now we are only waiting for its rejection, in order to become so. Therefore you see you may keep up your spirits!——
Did you know that Dr Wheatly is the new archbishop of Dublin? [8] I did not until this morning, & am most particularly particularly sorry for it, as I am sure you will be. You will recollect that he wrote against evangelical religion, & clenched his arguments by translating Plutarch’s treatise on superstition,—implying of course that Plutarch knew more about christianity than he did!! [9] —— And yet this man is now the archbishop of Dublin!– And he means too to be an active archbishop; & has told his friend Dr Willis (Mrs Martin’s brother in law) that whatever may be the archbishop of Canterbury’s intentions, he will instantly commence a reform of the church in Ireland!—— What kind of reform will it be? An ejection of evangelical preachers,—& persecution of dissenting ministers?——
I have written more than I quite intended,—not that I intend now to make you answer what you may be disinclined to answer—so do’nt think of that!– I miss the squirrel & you very much indeed; but I am modest enough to believe in the possibility of it’s being better for both of you that I should.
May God bless you my dearest friend–
Ever yours affectionately
E B Barrett.
Address, on integral page: H S Boyd Esqr
Publication: Diary, pp. 290–291.
Manuscript: Wellesley College.
1. 1831 determined by the reference to Mr. Martin’s letter (SD748), which appeared in The Times on 17 November 1831 and in the Hereford Journal on 23 November. The letter was reprinted in Diary, pp. 288–290.
2. George Isaac Huntingford (1748–1832), nominated Bishop of Gloucester in 1802 and translated to Hereford in 1815.
3. Theobald Wolfe Tone (1763–98), United Irishman, author of An Argument on Behalf of the Catholics of Ireland (1791).
4. Charles William Stewart (1778–1854), third Marquis of Londonderry, was a strong opponent of Reform.
5. “I am unwilling to be a bishop.”
6. i.e., geese.
7. Charles Grey, 2nd Earl Grey (1764–1845), an ardent proponent of parliamentary reform, had become Prime Minister in November 1830 on the defeat of Wellington’s administration. Although Grey resigned in May 1832, following an adverse vote on the reform bill, he was recalled when Wellington and others were unable to form a ministry. The article EBB mentions, “Letter to the Lords,” appeared in the November issue of The Quarterly Review (No. XCI, pp. 274–312).
8. Richard Whately (1787–1863), a prolific theological writer.
9. EBB refers to his book, The Errors of Romanism Traced to Their Origin in Human Nature (1830), pp. 1–76 of which dealt with superstition.
___________________
