3764. Anna Brownell Jameson to EBB
As published in The Brownings’ Correspondence, 22, 179–183.
Ealing
Wednesday– April 16 [–21] [1856] [1]
Dearest Ba–
What shall I tell you and dear Robert of my doings since I wrote to you?– I want to hear from you—to know all that you are about—& I suppose I must earn my wished for letter by telling you of myself– In the first place I went down to Hereford to stay 10 days with the excellent Dean [2] —a visit very agreeable in all respects—he is an educator[,] a philanthropist & a liberal churchman—then I have been very busy etching [3] —but am obliged to rest between whiles, because of my eyes. Then I have been reading the “Memoires de Beaumarchais” [4] —with great amusement & edification—then the new Edinburgh Review in which there is a very severe article on Ruskin [5] showing up his arrogance & inconsistencies but not doing justice to his originality & eloquence—(I am reading his 3d volume) the pamphlet by Montalembert [6] is exciting great attention partly because of its merit & its significance—& partly because of the controversy between Hayward & Croker relative to the translation [7] —I dined with Lord Lansdowne on Sunday & heard it talked over—& the speech of the Duc de Broglie [8] —& the Song by Berenger [9] —all show that in France the pressure of the present system on all literary freedom is more & more felt—at least so we suppose—the article on Montalembert in the Edinburgh is also good [10] —but on the whole this number is heavy—& they want some brilliant articles on Fiction & Art– [11] What else?– O—I am meditating another lecture on the employment of women for social objects—& have been busy with some of our charitable & penal institutions [12] —so you see my time has been well filled—but I lead a life of apparent outward interest & intense inward sadness & solitude– I have not one friend or companion to whom I speak of any thing of deep interest, any thing next my heart, any thing I purpose—or suffer or hope or fear—nothing but the “tinkling cymbal[”] [13] of company talk––on things in general—when will you return to England? & are you near the end of your poem?– I wish to have it—read it, know it as we wish for light or love—it is the fountain of which I wait the unsealing—yesterday I met at Luncheon the family of the new American Minister Dallas [14] —very agreeable people & Miss Dallas spoke of Robert & yourself as so popular & loved & of their hope & expectation of knowing you when you return to England—but perhaps you are tired of Americans!—she told me also that my Commonplace book is popular & to be found of several sizes & editions which I had not expected– [15]
I was glad to see your name to the Woman’s Petition—the flippant article in the Times has damaged it [16] —did you see a letter in the Times—for the 28 March on the subject of the “Traffic in Women”? [17] It produced a series of letters full of gratitude & remedies (—anonymous some & extraordinary)—which the Editor has since forwarded to me—but showing the attention & the awakened feeling which the subject has excited– Tell me of Madm Ristori—are you & Robert as enthusiastic about her as my dear good Lady Monson?—& George Sand[’]s Comme il vous plaira [18] is it out yet?—& of Mad[.] Mohl—and of yourselves—your probable stay in Paris—your Penini—all you can—your affectionate
Anna J–
Postscript–
This letter was begun some days ago—& I went from home & left [it] in my writing table drawer—so now before I send it off I add a few words–
I came to town on Thursday to hear Kossuth speak publickly on the Concordat– [19] I was really wonder-struck—by the affluence of words—brave good English—as well as by the matter. It was very fine—not exag[g]erated—& not got up to please the ultra Bigots of either Church<.> He spoke of himself with reference to Landor’s letter in the Examiner [20] —with very good taste & great respect for his enthusiast friend. There was a densely crowded room to listen to him– Your lover & admirer Bessie Parkes has just published a little poem called Gabriel [21] —shadowing forth in some sort the life & fate of Shelley—according to her own sweet fancies—on Friday I went over the Mary[le]bone Workhouse [22] & there I saw—among many other things, a poor governess who had been sent insane to the Workhouse (from a family where she was teaching)—& now after some weeks recovered—& she was seated in the midst of some poor children, teaching them voluntarily—“She is such a help to us & the Children do so love her & mind her”—said the matron. I cannot get the soft resigned face out of my head– I saw your good dear Sister on Saturday—this is all from your affecte—Anna J
Address: France / Mrs Browning / 3 Rue du Colisée / Champs Elysées / à Paris.
Publication: None traced.
Manuscript: Wellesley College.
1. Year and closing day provided by postmark of 21 April 1856.
2. Richard Dawes (d. 1867, aged 73) was Dean of Hereford Cathedral from 1850 until his death. According to the ODNB, he “should be remembered for his seminal contribution to the development of applied science in elementary education.” He was the author of textbooks, as well as Suggestive Hints towards Improved Secular Instruction, Making it Bear upon Practical Life (1847).
4. First published as Mémoires de M. Caron de Beaumarchais … contre M. Goëzman … (1773–74) in four pamphlets by Pierre Augustin Caron de Beaumarchais (1732–99), author of Le Barbier de Seville (1775) and Le Mariage de Figaro (1784). Beaumarchais wrote the pamphlets, universally admired for their wit and satire, to defend himself in a legal dispute with a judge named Goëzman and the judge’s wife. More recent editions included all four pamphlets under the title Mémoires de Beaumarchais dans l’affaire Goëzman.
5. A review of several works by Ruskin, including Modern Painters, Vol. III (1856), appeared in the April 1856 issue of The Edinburgh Review (pp. 535–557). The reviewer, identified in The Wellesley Index to Victorian Periodicals as H.F. Chorley, concludes his criticism of Modern Painters, Vol. III, with the following: “It is the worst book of a bad series of books, mischievous to art, mischievous to literature, but mischievous above all to those young and eager minds, animated by the love of art and of literature, which may mistake this declamatory trash for substantial or stimulating food” (p. 557).
6. De l’Avenir Politique de l’Angleterre by Charles Forbes René de Montalembert was published in January 1856. It considered English social and cultural life in broad terms, covering areas such as the aristocratic system, education, and most controversially, religion.
7. A translation of Montalembert’s book, The Political Future of England, was issued by John Murray on 20 March. Two weeks later Abraham Hayward (1801–84) forwarded a letter to The Times from the author and wrote that the translation was “little better than the travesty of a brilliant and thoughtful work” (2 April 1856, p. 12). In his letter, Montalembert stated: “The translation of my book, published by Mr. Murray, although authorized by me, has not been submitted to my revision, and after perusing it I must declare that I cannot acknowledge this translation as a true and faithful reproduction of my essay” (2 April 1856, p. 12). The translator defended himself the next day, signing himself “H.B.”: “I shall be sorry if I find that I have mistranslated any portion of the work. … I endeavoured to accomplish my task with the most conscientious impartiality. … My translation was afterwards overlooked by another and more experienced eye, who corrected a few phrases, but made no change, that I am sensible of, in the meaning” (The Times, 3 April 1856, p. 5). The “more experienced eye” belonged to John Wilson Croker (1780–1857), who felt that Hayward had implied that he (Croker) was the actual translator. This he denied with documentary proof in The Times of 5 April (p. 8). Hayward fired back on the 7th, maintaining that Croker was responsible for the translation and its enormities (see The Times, p. 12).
8. Victor, 3rd Duc de Broglie (1785–1870), son-in-law of Madame de Staël, had served as a diplomat under Napoleon I and as foreign minister in Louis Philippe’s government. His belief in a liberal constitutional monarchy kept him from supporting Napoleon III. Recently elected to the French Academy, Broglie delivered his reception speech on 3 April 1856. The Morning Chronicle of 7 April reported on the ensuing controversy: “In the customary éloge of his predecessor in the academic seat the new member introduced a criticism on M. de Sainte-Aulaire’s ‘History of the Fronde,’ in which he depicted the character of Cardinal Mazarin, in terms that have been eagerly taken up by all Paris as meant for a portrait of the holder of the Imperial throne of France, some glorying in it as a pungent exhibition of the truth, while others admit the dexterity of the intended sarcasm, but deny its applicability” (“Second Edition,” [p. 5]).
9. Sic, for Béranger. “Aux Étudiants,” a five-stanza poem in French, dated “Passy, 20 Mars, 1856,” was published in the 5 April 1856 issue of The Athenæum, in the “Miscellanea” column with this note: “The following verses by Béranger are circulating in manuscript in Paris” (no. 1484, p. 434).
10. Article VIII in The Edinburgh Review (April 1856, pp. 558–590) contained notices of De l’Avenir Politique de l’Angleterre and Charles de Rémusat’s La Réforme Administrative en Angleterre (1855) and L’Angleterre au dix-huitième Siècle (1856). The reviewer is identified as William Rathbone Greg (1809–81) in The Wellesley Index to Victorian Periodicals.
11. In addition to the two articles mentioned above, The Edinburgh Review for April 1856 included notices of works on history, biography, science, and religion. There was also a review of several works concerned with determining the correct text of Shakespeare’s plays.
13. I Corinthians 13:1.
14. George Mifflin Dallas (1792–1864), former Vice President of the United States (1845–49) under James K. Polk, served as envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary to Great Britain from 1856 to 1861. His daughter Julia Maria Dallas (1819–86), by his wife, Sophia (née Nicklin, 1798–1869), later edited his correspondence from this period under the title A Series of Letters from London (Philadelphia, 1869).
15. An American edition of Anna Jameson’s A Commonplace Book of Thoughts, Memories, and Fancies (1854) was published in 1855 by D. Appleton & Company, New York.
16. An editorial on “The Petition for the Reform of the Married Women’s Property Law” (see letter 3745, note 2) ran in The Times of 2 April 1856 (pp. 8–9). It began with a reference to Tennyson’s The Princess, which “schemed the fiction of a Female Parliament,” then proceeded to discuss “wife-beating” in a light-hearted way. When the editorial writer finally turned to the petition, the title of which he didn’t mention by name, he wrote: “We confess we hardly see how they will improve upon the existing system so far as regards the objects which it [the petition] contemplates. … Womankind in the mass are, and must be, for all material advantages, for protection and personal security, dependent upon men, whether the latter be styled ‘lords and masters,’ or ‘tyrants and despots’; and in no relation is this dependence on one side, and protection on the other, more marked, more real, or more natural than in that of marriage” (p. 8).
17. A letter headed “The Traffic in Women,” dated Ealing, 24 March, and signed “A.J.,” appeared in the 28 March 1856 issue of The Times (p. 8). It was Mrs. Jameson’s response to an editorial on the subject published in The Times on 20 March. Summarizing the problem, she wrote: “Not only is it true that English girls are inveigled out of this country in such numbers that, as I remember, an association was formed in Paris to protect them; but it is not less true that for the same horrible purpose girls are brought over to England from France, from Belgium, from Germany; it is, in fact, a trade under all the conditions of export and import—a trade which, if not legalized, is tolerated; and I have myself heard it, I will not say defended, but accounted for, excused, as the necessary, inevitable result of certain permitted social vices.”
19. A concordat between Pope Pius IX and Emperor Franz Josef of Austria had been signed on 18 August 1855. It effectively relinquished civil control of education, marriage, and censorship in the Austrian Empire (which included Hungary) to the Roman Catholic Church. The Hungarian revolutionary Lajos Kossuth (1802–1894) delivered two lectures on this subject (and on protestantism in Hungary) at the London Tavern, Bishopsgate, on 17 and 18 April 1856. The Morning Chronicle of 19 April carried a brief report of the first lecture: “He spoke for nearly two hours, tracing the history of papal encroachment and domination, and showing that of all European States, Hungary had ever proved foremost and staunchest in opposing the insidious policy of the Vatican. He believed the Concordat to be a blow aimed especially at Hungary, the Pope taking advantage of her present misfortunes to consummate her political enthralment in the meshes of ecclesiastical despotism” ([p. 6]).
20. This letter was the result of one from Kossuth, which in turn had been prompted by a letter from Landor to the editor of The Times, headed “A Plea for M. Kossuth” (24 March 1856, p. 7). In it Landor asked his fellow countrymen to help “the illustrious exile” who was “in straitened circumstances.” He ended with a postscript: “I forgot to say that my subscription of 10l. is ready.” In replying four days later, Kossuth wrote: “Allow me to state in your paper that not only have I had no knowledge of what Mr. W. Savage Landor thought fit to do, but I find no words sufficiently expressive of the deep mortification and regret I have felt on reading Mr. Landor’s appeal. In doing full justice to the noble generosity of his intentions I consider his letter extremely injudicious and uncalled for, inasmuch as, whatever be my private circumstances, I am wont to consider them the sacred domain of family life” (28 March 1856, p. 9). Landor took umbrage at these comments, and in a letter published in The Examiner of 5 April (p. 212) wrote that there were many people “who would have been anxious to assist M. Kossuth. It does not appear to any one but this gentleman that I have been guilty of violating the secrets of domestic privacy.” After expressing further outrage, Landor concluded: “What is certain is this; on no occasion, for the future, will I interfere in the affairs of a stranger.”
22. Between Marylebone Road and Paddington Street. The workhouse closed in 1930, and the buildings were torn down in 1965. The site is now occupied by the University of Westminster (formerly the Polytechnic of Central London).
___________________
