Henry Crabb Robinson, 30 Russell Square, London, to the Rev. John Miller, [Bockleton], 22 November 1856.

 Revd John Miller

London

30 Russell Square

22 Nov: 1856

My dear Sir,

     On my return a few days since after a month’s absence I was met by far the most acceptable of your late communications; It served to soften in some measure the painful impression made by the former – The letter had been forwarded to me, but not immediately owing to a misconception of my directions, but I had no intimation of the book – Otherwise I could not have remained so long without acknowledging the compliment implied in sending it – An admission of the possibility that an admirer of Mr R: might yet not be unworthy to read a composition of your’s

     This is something And I thank you for it – But as to the letter itself I was not anxious to answer it immediately I do not recollect when my vanity ever received so severe a blow –

25th Nov:

     I had proceeded thus far when my progress was stopped by an incident of frequent and always annoying occurrence – I thought your letter was at my elbow and I could not find it nor have I been able to find it since – I am sure to find it one day – but I can delay no longer Indeed I was about writing yesterday but I was again interrupted by a most perplexing event – not concerning myself or any friend of the first degree of intimacy – but still one of great importance by which a fortune of more than 200,000 pounds will probably be thrown into litigation by no fault but the mere accident of untimely deaths I hardly know why I write this – Since I cannot explain it – I may hereafter – “Fact is more strange than fiction”

     Now to recur to your letter, I cannot better intimate the effect it produced on me than by asking you to imagine that you had presented a statue of a dear friend which you expected to see stationed as the ornament of a museum and find it set up in the garden as a scare-crow!!! Even tho’ you should find by the change of place produce a change in your own impression of its beauty, you would still have but one anxious wish—And that is to have it removed from its disgraceful place And returned to you – That is my most earnest request now – I beg you to send me these vols: back They cannot possibly give you any pleasure – They contain you say a few passages with which you sympathise “like Angel visits few and far between” Your quotation not mine – I do not suppose that any two Sermons Vols: could be found without such passages. Even the egregious hero of the Musick Hall Surrey Gardens W— B— must have such – And every other “popular preacher” must have the same – I blush for my folly in having drawn on the honourd memory of my friend this ignominious denomination concerning which I certainly feel as you do –

    Yet there is no imputation to be cast on you, for giving it – It is all my doing – And I beg you will understand that I do not mean to say one word in vindication objectively of these Sermons either as to style or matter – His eloquence may be a “hubbub of wows” – His diffuseness may be “verbiage” he may betray arrogance – vanity – disregard of “authority” – the “judgement of ages” &c &c &c And the more you are convinced ^of all these bad qualities^ the less reluctant unwilling you must be to comply with my request You have suggested tho’ in language somewhat jocular that yet I cannot have any doubt in the main with somewhat of truth – that the only use to which you can put the book ^is^ that it will serve as a “compendium” – or “concentration” I cannot tell which is the word – of all the “extravagances” “wildnesses” – &c of And then follow the names living and dead (about half a dozen) of those theologians who are the objects of your especial dislike as well as writers unprofessional but who yet have incurred your disfavour And you intimate that you have already shewn these Vols: in this spirit to some of your intelligent friends

     Now I am not going to defend my friend against all ^or any of^ these charges – Could I indeed console myself by falling back on this assurance that it is my judgement which is right and yours all wrong which I cannot honestly do – Still I should feel myself equally to blame. I should ^but^ <–> shift the character of my fault – I ought not to have put these writings into the hands of one whose idiosyncrasies would lead him to despise what others honour. Whichever alternative I take I must be to blame – I ought to have known you better And not affronted you by supposing you capable of deriving pleasure from any thing so very bad.

     In speculating concerning the anonymous Sender one of the difficulties in the way lay in the impossibility of supposing that he could have any knowledge of you – This is not without foundation certainly – Tho’ I dare not attempt a justification of my friend lest I make bad worse – I will merely say this in apology for myself subjectively; that is accounting for my mistake which originated in part of my character It is ^has^ always been my habit to recollect what I liked And forget what I disliked – So that I rashly praised gently and too unqualifiedly what I loved And ^when^ I was pressed by palpable & indisputable blemishes I was sneered blemishes I was sneered at for my honest confession – “I had not noticed it”

     Secondly – What I love myself I am most anxious that all ^those^ I esteem should love also – Considering love & enjoyment as the same – This led me to be a sort of martyr – I incurred the martyrdom of ridicule in the cause of Wordsworth, but have been amply rewarded by witnessing ^in old age^ the triumphant of his poetical school. Robertson delivered two lectures on Wordsworth at Brighton – One, I sent to Mrs W. who was much pleased with it Indeed it was ^his^ warm attachmt to Ws poetry which wore on me at first – I am rambling sadly but on this head I meant to say that I sent you the Vols you thou[gh]tlessly and foolishly I own but it was in consequence of the singular enjoyment I had just derived from one or two Sermons ^And which I expected you might enjoy^ – I apologised ^on reflection^ for so doing – You say – it is not an act that requires an apology – I think it does when a layman sends to an esteemed master of an art – a work in that art – he arrogates to himself a power of judging – And how dangerous that is the ^event^ shews – I am glad I did apologise before I knew how the Sermons had in fact impressed you – And tho’ you protest that you had no cause of offence in the sending – And I have perfect confidence in your veracity yet I am led to think I must ^at least^ have written what unwillingly gave offence in making known they came from me.  And I can only be convinced that your forgiveness is cordial by granting my request in sending them back to me –

    I have read your Sermon attentively – but sent as it was – avowedly – to be compared or contrasted rather, with one or more of R’s Or with reference to style to shew how otherwise R ought to have written – I really think it will be safer for me to content myself with the acknowledgement I have already made –

     One remark only I make <–> Every writer writes not says Dr Johnson for every Reader  Nor does every preacher – indeed I may say any preacher – in these days preach for every hearer –

     R: would have supplied fewer materials for an unfavourable contrast in his style, if he had addressed the University of Oxford – And especially its pupils in the style they were led to expect of logical precision – The necessity of adjusting a discourse to the wants of the congregation & its special members constitutes one of the main difficulties attending the pastoral office

     The ritual Service of the Sacerdotal office on the contrary – but I am again falling into the sad error of going beyond the bounds of the occasion/ --

     I beg my best respects to those of the members of your family who are still willing to bear me in their friendly recollection or confer on me their good wishes –

                         I am sincerely & respectfully

                                                your’s

                                                             H. C. Robinson

Revd John Miller –

P.S. I forget whether I have yet apologised for a sad feature in my letters which must grow become larger & more frequent in them – the number of interlineations, erasures &c &c – This is another of the infirmities by which my old age is assailed were I to begin again every letter so deformed, I could never finish – A copy from necessity would be worse than the original –

[1] WLL/2000.24.2.8. Robinson writes in his diary on 22 November 1856: ‘I began a letter to Miller after much consideration, but could not proceed having lost his letter This a great annoyance to me – It destroys my whole plan –’.  On the 25th he returns to the letter, expecting his correspondence with Miller to come to an end with this letter (it will not): ‘... after breakfast I set abot my letter to J. Miller – The main point being that as he found every fault with the Sermons and looked on them as a compression of bad doctrine in a bad sty[l]e An accumulation of wildnesses & extravagances I wrote that this beg the case I hope he would return me the Vols – A man presentg the statue of a friend And expectg to see it the ornament of a museum, would be horrified at seeing it set up as a scarecrow – M treated these Vols as scarecrows – I beg them back – This I pressed in a long letter I doubt the result – But I have for the present got rid of a disagreeable subject – It will very likely put an end to our correspondence – There is no use in keeping it up –’