1502. EBB to Mary Russell Mitford
As published in The Brownings’ Correspondence, 8, 156–158.
[London]
Jan. [9–] 10. 1844 [1]
My dearest friend, I should like much to know that you are well,—& that poor Miss Walters is better—for your last account gives me much fear for her & her friends’ sake. Let me have a word to hear how she is. In consequence of the idea you have given me, I do not like to put any question to Mr Horne. Tell me,—do,—whether the London medical men have any hope at all of her. Despair & hope fall so closely together in cases of fever, & youth & vitality will go so far, that I am resolved to look to the brightest side as long as there is any life at all. [2] Her poor family! I am sorry for everybody—very very sorry!——
Mr Kenyon came to see me yesterday, after his Devonshire journey, & seemed to be glad to be at home. I asked how his brother was; & then he began to tell me that his dream of last year was at an end, & that Mr Edward Kenyon, being a German at heart, & seeing his wife grow paler & paler under the pressure of the social restraints of England, would probably return to Germany without fail, & no later than next summer. You had better, I think, say nothing on this subject to anybody, until our friend shall mention it himself to you,—for he is of course sensitive about it, & it is possible that he may wish it not to be talked of for the present.– Also it is only just to the German wife to say, that she has “used her influence generously”—that is to say, not at all on the side of national prejudice! But the husband is as German as she, from both habit & love,—& then he likes to be generous as a prince & to give away a third of his income; &, here, he must spend it, or be sparing in the luxuries with which he would surround his wife. Altogether there is no hope, I can see, from dear Mr Kenyon’s face, that he can be permitted to dream out his dream of a double home & a dear domestic friendship next door. The bubble has burst. Poor Mr Kenyon!– He bears up, & talks philosophy about the “luxuries of life”—but I see that it is a hard stroke,— & what is more, I feel it must be. Still, what he says, is true,—that anything is better than to be a restraint consciously upon his brother & induce him to remain in England against his own secret wishes. Well!– So dreams dissolve, you see!– This is one of the thousand a minute.
He & I were talking yesterday of Miss Martineau’s book which he admires, only not quite as much as I do. I told him that I differed with you about the letter-question,—you approving of her mode of considering it: & my own words reminded me that I never told you why, or explained in what degree. My dearest Miss Mitford .. and then Mr Kenyon said .. that whether the view were right or wrong, it was a great inconsistency, after Miss Martineau’s personalities in America, which she justified at the time upon principle [3] —and I agreed with him, just as I disagree with her & you—I agreed with him consistently,—because I justify (as you know) both the personal memoirists and the printers of letters, .. always presupposing a discerning delicacy on delicate points. But the squeamishness of this Age, .. this ostrich age .. which exposes its own eggs, & then hides its head in the sand, .. is really to me quite monstrous. The shrieks on all sides because Mr such a person tells the astonished public that Mrs such a person has a nose, could scarcely be louder if he had attacked her character in a public court. And as to the printing of letters, I never will believe (for all Miss Martineau may re-iterate,) that a man or woman either, let them live ever so in perpetual presence of the grand possibilities of Posterity, would write restrained sentences to their very intimate friend,—under the idea that after they are dead their letters will be printed by their executors. Tell me honestly my dearest friend, did such an idea ever restrain a thought of yours,—you, who must be perfectly aware that nobody worthy of your correspondence, wd destroy your letters? Is not the natural thought when the time comes for thinking——“Let whatever is good in me of heart & intellect live as long as the world will let it, for the use & service of the world.”? Is not that the natural & disinterested thought, with which we shd look down from Heaven? Consider,—if everybody had acted as Miss Martineau says she has, .. what a mass of valuable literature wd be swept away for ever from our eyes at this moment. Consider,—you .. who delight in personal memoir & record .. & never say again, oh never say again that you “agree” with Miss Martineau in her view of the letter-question. For my part, just in proportion to my appreciation of Her, was my indignation at this view. As if, .. when we have passed from the world, .. we should be “content to live in decencies” [4] like these, any more! As if .. when we have seen God, we shall care for man seeing us! It is monstrous, I think. For Mrs Hemans, with that conventional excess of delicacy which was the flaw in her fine genius, to exclaim, .. “Do not let them print my letters”, was only a characteristic circumstance & disappoints us in nothing. [5] But for Miss Martineau with her clear & healthful discernment, & capability of generalizing, to do the like,—& what is more, to found the unwillingness upon a rationale, .. makes one absolutely angry, & doubtful of the consistency of mortal judgements.
Tell me if you do not, on reconsideration, move a little round to me! Do tell me! Think of the Sevignés, Deffands, Cowpers, [6] .. take all the unlike! At any rate, .. mind—you may talk,—but practically you will gain nothing by it. You never wd or could invoke away from me the twelve volumes (to be moderate in my calculation) of letters, which people will be reading under the trees a hundred years hence. Oh—there are delicacies to be observed, of course! Let the delicacies have ample room & verge enough, & I make no single objection. But the observation of the most ample delicacies is compatible with a view directly opposite to this of Miss Martineau’s.
May God bless you always. I do trust the eyes are better,—& that they will brighten to tell me good news of Miss Walters.
Your ever affectionate EBB.
Address: Miss Mitford / Three Mile Cross / near Reading.
Publication: EBB-MRM, II, 369–372 (as 9 January 1844).
Manuscript: Eton College Library and Wellesley College.
1. EBB originally dated this “9”; that she started on that day is confirmed by her telling Mrs. Martin in letter 1498 that Kenyon had interrupted her. Subsequently, the date was altered to “10”; this is the date of the London postmark.
2. Miss Walter died on 16 January.
3. As previously noted (letter 1476, note 4), Miss Martineau, in Life in the Sick-Room, had expressed strong feelings about the publication of private letters, and EBB and Miss Mitford held opposing views on this question. Kenyon is critical of Miss Martineau’s stance, as, in Society in America (1837), she had violated the very principles of personal privacy she now so strongly advocated. It is also of interest to record that excerpts from her personal correspondence were included in her Autobiography (1877).
4. Cf. Pope, Moral Essays (1735), II, 164.
5. Both Chorley, in Memorials of Mrs. Hemans (1836), and Mrs. Hemans’s sister, in the memoir appended to The Works of Mrs. Hemans (1839), did quote passages from her correspondence.
6. The published correspondence of Mme. de Sévigné (1626–96), Mme. du Deffand (1697–1780) and William Cowper (1731–1800) showed contemporary society and mores in a clear and penetrating light.
___________________
