Copy by Henry Crabb Robinson of a portion of a letter by William Wordsworth to Dorothy Wordsworth, May 1812.  

  I shall without preface come to the point upon which our attention ought to be fixed.

       I solemnly deny that I gave to R. a Commd to say any thing whatever to C. from me All that I did say had a reference merely to an apprehended Connectn between himself & M nor did it wch I was convinced must prove injurious to both nor did it ever enter my mind that by any possibily what I then mentioned cod any way affect the friendship & intimacy between C & me. Of course & inclusively ^And that I may meet C’s statement in detail^ I solemnly deny that I gave to M or C commissioned M. to say to C. that I had no hopes of him I also solemnly deny that I sd C. was in the habit of running into debt at little Pot-houses for Gin In the manner I do also affirm as sacredly that tho’ in some of the particulars enumerated by C. as havg wounded his feelings there is something of the form of truth, there is absolutely nothing of the spirit in any of them. As for instance that I asserted that C. had been absolute nuisance in my family. It is little less than morally impossible that I should have used ^utterd used^ used these words, but it is absolutely impossible that either by these words, if used, or by any resembling them, I cod mean to expression the impression of my mind & heart concerng C. As that I cod have meant more than And the  As the feelings of my family in respect to him So that in every Sense in wch the parlars <–> enumerated by C. & the whole of them conjointly could as evidences of unworthy behaviour on my pt give pain to C., if he <–> knew what I said, under what circumstances I spake, with what motive & in what spirit, I do give a most solemn denial to the whole. 

      I have with the utmost severity of Self examination looked into my own heart & Soul upon this occasion And I stand on stand acquitted before my conscience of all blame, except that I freely acknowledge an error of judgemt in having suffered myself from any motive however kind to the parties whomever pure to speak to a man upon so delicate a subject whose conduct is so little governally [sic] by the universally admitted laws of Friendship & regulations of Society in similar cases

       Hoping to rec[eiv]e from C. an assurance of his entire & absolute faith in this my disavowal I have to add that I fully believe in the truth of his statemt as an expression of his Convictn that M did say all he has ascribed to him But wher the agitation in wch C. states ^represents^ himself to have been may from the from the first moment M touched upon this business, may not have occasioned him to mistake it in some important points Or wher M may not have mistaken me; Or how the misapprehension which actually subsists, originated: — These are points which I do not deem it necessary to enter into The Love & Affection wch I entertain for C. and wch I trust he entertains for me do not need and require a solution of these difficulties

       If however C's mind ^is^ still <–> doubts & troubled by doubts & misgivings as to the part I have taken my The The sincerity simplicity & integrity  I ^dis^avowel what I have hereby made I must then in satisfn of my ^own^ honour require his consent to the first proposed interview between M & ourselves, tho’ aware that this wod of necessy lead to an opening of the points in difference between himself & M.  Which I think ^in itself^ very inadviseable

       Shod this however be rendered necessy by the state of C’s feelings I beg that no further steps may be taken till he has closed his lectures which he is as the point of commencing.[1]

[1]  Robinson recorded his account of the episode between Wordsworth and Coleridge in his diary on 8 May 1812:

   I delivered C’s message to W. and this led to a long conversation, And to a commission which W. gave me. viz. in answer to C’s message to say to him the following:        

   1. That he W. denied most positively having ever given to M – any commission whatever to say any thing as from him W. to C – that he said nothing to M. with any other than a friendly purpose towards both C. & M. that he was anxious to prevent C’s going into M’s family because he knew that such an intimacy would be broken as soon as it was formed And lead to very painful consequences.  Under this impression only he spoke with M. But he takes blame to himself for being so intent upon attaining this object as to forget that M. was not a man whose discretion could be safely trusted with even so much as he did say to him. 

   2. He denies having ever used such a phrase as rotten drunkard, such an expressio he could not as a man of taste, merely, have made use of. 

   3. Neither did he ever say that C. had been a Nuisance in his family. He might have in the course of conversation And in reference to certain particular habits have used the word nuisance which is a word he frequently makes use of, but he never employed it as the result or summary of his feelings towards C. He never said he was a nuisance.

   4.  Further he wished me to inform C. that he no longer wished to confront him & M. He was content to leave undetermined who had erred, but he expected from C. that when he, W. had made this declaration, he, C., would give him credit for the truth of it and not continue to use that language about him which he had done. 

       These points I distinguish from the rest of W’s statement because they are those I did afterwards repeat to C. Except perhaps the conclusion of the last which I might not distinctly state to C. 

       W. added other remarks which I was careful not to repeat as they could not tend to the reconciliation so desirable, And perhaps so important to the future happiness of C.  W. did not deny having said he had no hopes of C. And with respect to the phrase   rotting out his entrails by intemperance   he does not think he used such an expression, but the idea might be conveyed in what he said   And M. might give that as the conclusion from all he said  W. also denied & indignantly that he ever meant to drive away C. by indirectly informing him though M. of what he did not chuse to communicate himself.  This I also stated to C.  W. did not deny having said,   I have no hopes of him   I have long  had no hopes of him. But I would not say so to C. because I would not act as if I had hopes. Besides he has lately done more than I expected And exerted himself beyond my hopes.  On my observing to him that C. possibly might require that W. should make his election between him & M. W. replied he could not do this. He had never acted on this principle And had he done so he should have quarrelled with every friend he has – but added he if M. should assert that I said those things which I now deny then I will never speak to him again. Excepting the last line [remainder of sentence marked through] W. observed that C. had probably been so much pained by being forced to contemplate certain truths respecting himself that in refuge he sought to load him, W., with the blame. C’s habits had in fact been of a kind which he, W. could not have endured but for the high estimation he had formed of C.  W. with no faint praise then spoke of C’s mind, the powers of which he declared to be greater than those of any man he ever knew. From such a man, under favourable influences, everything might be looked for.  His genius, he thought to be great but his talents still greater. And it is in the union of so much genius with so much talent that C. surpasses all the men W. ever knew.  In a digression to which this remark led, W. observed of himself that he on the contrary has comparatively but little talent, Genius is his characteristic quality.  If Genius (in this relation) be creation & original production from the stores of individual mind And talent shew itself in the power of appropriating & assimilating to itself the product of foreign minds & by so imbibing & adding to it’s own possessions the attainments of other minds – then I have always given to W. and C. the respective superiority in Genius & talents. W. also wished to inform C. that he had not opened his letter because it was written before he had sent to C. that he wished to receive from him a dry statement of the assertions of M.  And he wished to be spared all other subjects (This I did repeat And I stated also to C. that W’s manner was not insulting or unfriendly when he said this, for I found that C. had so interpreted W’s former message & note to C. L. to this effect)  W. also intimated no objection to see C. but would rather not see him alone  he was fearful of those bursts of passion – or rather weakness of which C. is capable.  On one occasion, he stated, that in a large company Sir Henry Englefield attacked him C. in a gross way on his lecture at the Royal Institution against Lancaster, C. instead of defending himself burst into tears.  (This led W. to observe on the false sensibility & tendency to tears in the present age. What, said he, would our glorious ancestors have thought of a First Lord of the Admiralty who cries in the House of Commons when he speaks of the Lives lost on a Shipwreck Or of an Attorney General who when prosecuting men for high treason (the Soldiers taken in the East Indies) is so affected that he can not proceed). 

            These are a few only of the many things said to me by W.

Text: Wordsworth Trust and Museum, Grasmere, WLL, Wordsworth, W and D/ 4/236 and 236.1.