SD565. John Ramsay to James Graham-Clarke
As published in The Brownings’ Correspondence, 1, 341–342.
Pilgrim St. N. Castle
14th Oct. 1826—
Dear Sir
Some time ago I sent a Copy of the little work of your highly gifted, elegant-minded Niece to a literary character in Edinburgh well known to Jeffrey. I did not hear from him till yesterday.– Now tho’ he does not approve of the book being sent to Jeffrey yet as he enters pretty fully upon the Subject of Mind and into the reasons that unfit it to be compressed into didactic poetry I shall transcribe parts of his letter to me.
“I perused with much pleasure the Essay on Mind &ca The whole I consider an excellent production when the age of the Author is taken into account. But I have hesitated to present to book to the Edinr Reviewers– They who remember how Byrons early productions were treated by that Corps will not be surprised that I should entertain doubts on the subject. You know there is no friendship in trade, and if reviewed at all the book must be treated in the usual style of that work—that is it must be left to the poetical department which I believe is not Jeffreys. If read by himself from politeness to me he would either have taken no notice of it, or treated it with that perfect freedom which from the constitution of his mind he can scarcely relinquish, but which I am convinced must in this case have produced painful feelings in the mind of the young author, & which must have proved hurtful to the future progress of her talents.– The subject “Mind” is greatly too extensive, and instead of being exhausted the different departments of the subject are scarcely noticed– Not unnaturally perhaps an author regards authors as the first of beings—Historians—Metaphysicians—Poets—are mentioned and something is said of Science generally– The powers of mind are also divided into Invention, Judgement, Memory, and Imagination– Now all this falls greatly—immeasurably short of the subject. The great actors in Life’s Drama are left out—tho’ surely more illustrious than those who could merely tell or celebrate the story of their effects– Hampden was greater than Hume—& the elder and younger Brutus than the Historians of their conduct– In short the speculative efforts of mind are adverted to but the higher efforts of Will or voluntary energy are overlooked—Warriors, Statesmen, Navigators—Merchants, Inventors of Machinery (Archimedes excepted) who alleviate and almost defeat the doom “in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread”– It might be lawful to forget the Saints—Apostles & Martyrs, Stoics, Essenes, Jansenists, Calvinist &ca but surely it was wrong to overlook the devotedness of your profession in the cause of humanity encountering so many dangers, or the laudable wrestlings of men of my trade in order to evacuate the ill temper and pockets of the Leiges– Mind is too wide a field for a poem—or for a book– In treating such a subject it would be necessary to write de rebus omnibus et quibusdam aliis—from the worm to the Angel, aye and higher than the Angel.– Poetry is unsutable [sic] for the discussion of a subject of such an extent– Begin with the question– What is mind—whence came it & what is its destiny? Then consider its modifications—in animals—in nations & individuals– Its progress historically– Its sympathies, hatreds &ca– The compliment to Jeffrey, I fear, renders it scarcely possible for him to review the poem favourably– Indeed there are too many moderns mentioned– Byron “the Mount Blanc of intellect” Byron had great poetical talents, but he was a conceited profligate, desititute of common sense– This is Gods truth of him and it is truly a melancholly circumstance that it should be so. I was once dragged to hear “Irving” preach– We passed three weary hours listening to an exhibition of Zealously—slowly & pompously delivered nothingness.– Having said so much if you still bid me send the Book to Jeffrey I will obey but I fear the result.”——
So far my friends letter, I have freely communicated his sentiments as you may probably convey them to Miss Barrett– Perhaps my friend is fastidious as he published himself a volume some years ago on “Moral Science” [1] after having given much attention the the subject of Mind. It was published by Longman Hurst & Rees in the year 1805.– Should Miss B. wish to see it and not be able to procure it nearer than N. Castle I shall have great pleasure in sending it– It is full of orginal views.–
I am, Dear Sir, yours truly
John Ramsay
Address, on integral page: J. G. Clarke Esqre / at E. M. Barrett Esqre. / Hope End / near Ledbury / Hereford.
Publication: None traced.
Manuscript: Eton College Library.
1. “Principles of Moral Science” by Robert Forsyth, 1805, 8vo.
___________________
