435. Robert Southey to John May, 19 September
[1799]
*
Exeter.
Thursday. 19 Sept.
My dear friend
I should not <have> left your letter so
long unanswered but that for five days I have been walking
round the country. [1] with the
cause of my estrangement from Coleridge originally you have been made
acquainted. I was injured & resented it. in the close of
1796 we were so far reconciled as to resume the common
intercourse of acquaintance. Something was owing to the
interference of common friends, more to our connection by
marriage, & probably what most influenced me was that
habit of mind which induces us rather to remember the good
qualities of a lost friend than his faults, & to select
for remembrances chiefly
what is pleasurable to recollect. With similar pursuits
& similar opinions we differed in practice, − but unless
you domesticate with a man it is
not his inconsistencies are not forced upon
notice. We were on terms of decent civility which would have
ripened into something more, when Lloyd came to
Burton. [2] the
circumstances he related to me of Coleridge were such as to render it impossible
for me, without hypocrisy, not at once to throw off all
acquaintance with him; they represented him as perpetually
by every means & in every place abusing me, &
inventing tales of the most groundless calumny. I believed
Lloyd,
& acted accordingly. When we were at Minehead I received
a letter from Coleridge
[3] complaining of restless enmity in me
& requesting me to make my feelings more tolerant
towards him. my reply retorted the charge upon him –
referring to Lloyds authority for the proofs. this produced a
second letter from Coleridge, & one also from his intimate
friend & neighbour Mr Poole, [4] contradicting, as far
as he could who lived most confidentially with Coleridge, that he ever spoke of me but in terms
regretting our estrangement, & declaring that Lloyd had in his
presence reported, & to his ocular knowledge written the
same kind of tales of Coleridge <me> to me <Coleridge>, that he had of S.T.C.
to me. the conduct of Lloyd to an acquaintance of his in London (Miss Hays) as she
related it to me when I saw her in town had sunk him so
precipitously in my judgement as at once to sink a tottering
scale. It were idle to enter into minute particularities. to
Lloyd I
have not since written, nor am I determined how to write, or
whether to write – from a whole survey of his conduct as
known to me I dis behold a
strangeness, a foolishness, a criminality more explicable on
the ground of derangement than by any other supposition.
You have proposed a great question requesting
the doctrine of rewards & punishment; that man, the
creature of hopes & fears should be worked on by hope
& fear religiously applied seems wisely adapted to our
imperfect generation. but the fact is, as it appears to me,
that men are very little influenced by them, that the
present absorbs us, the wicked acting from the strong
impulse of the moment − & the good likewise; both for
the immediate gratification derived from the act, according
as their habitual feelings are gratified by actions good or
evil. the doctrine seems inefficacious. & for the
picture it holds out of a future existence it is only by an
allegorical interpretation that a thinking mind can
understand it by substituting remedy for punishment.
Socrates was a wonderful man. I read the
Memorabilia [5] at school – not
since. & it was not the book of morals which interested
me most. from Epictetus I derived more satisfaction. the
Enchiridion was long my Manual, my pocket companion. [6] in the Stoical
precepts I found a principle with which I could sympathize,
& the effect of the book has been strong & deep
& permanent upon me. certainly I could detect faults in
the xx system, wrong
reasonings, or wrong conclusion – but still there is a mass
of practical wisdom in the wisdom book, it amalgamated with my feelings
& has often when I was not perhaps aware influenced my
conduct.
I hear of you every where, & always in
one tone, & that always the tone in which I should wish
to hear of you. Mr Philips, [7] Coleridges
brother in law spoke of you. I am sorry we shall not meet
here. but at Xmas will you not be in Hampshire −? & then
tho you will be too far for me who am but a biped, I shall
not be too far for you who may centaurize yourself. I shall
have much to show you when we meet. for fortunately I have
an habitual incapability of indolence.
In this neighbourhood I have fallen into
pleasant society & my time has run rapidly. Edith is
tolerable. she begs to be remembered. believe me
yrs affectionately
R. Southey.
Notes* Address: To/ John May Esqr/ Richmond Green/ Surry/ Single Stamped:
EXETER Postmark: [partial] SEP Endorsement: No 42. 1799/ Robert Southey/ Exeter
19 Septr:/ recd:
21 do/ ansd: 2
Oct MS: Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center,
University of Texas, Austin Previously published:
Charles Ramos, The Letters of Robert Southey to
John May: 1797–1838 (Austin, Texas, 1976),
pp. 47–49. BACK [1] For Southey’s journal of his tour, Common-Place
Book, ed. John Wood Warter, 4 series
(London, 1849–1850), IV, pp. 522–523. BACK [2] Charles
Lloyd had stayed with the Southeys at Burton, Hampshire,
from mid-August to mid-September 1797. BACK [3] Coleridge to Southey, 29 July 1799, E.L. Griggs (ed.),
The Collected Letters of Samuel Taylor
Coleridge, 6 vols (Oxford, 1956–1971), I,
pp. 523–524. BACK [4] Coleridge to Southey and Poole to Southey, 8 August
1799, E.L. Griggs (ed.), The Collected Letters of
Samuel Taylor Coleridge, 6 vols (Oxford,
1956–1971), I, pp. 524–525. BACK [5] The
Greek philosopher, Socrates (469–399 BC) wrote nothing
and much of what is known of his life and thought comes
from the defence of him in Xenophon’s (430–354 BC),
Memorabilia. BACK [6] Epictetus (c. AD
55–135), Greek Stoic philosopher. His ideas were
preserved by his pupil, Lucius Flavius Arrianus (before
AD 86–after 146) in the Enchiridion, or
Handbook of Epictetus’s thought. BACK [7] Jacob Phillips (dates
unknown), an Exeter lawyer, was married to Coleridge’s
half-sister Elizabeth (1751–1815). BACK |
|