The Henson Journals

[121]

25th Sunday after Trinity, November 16th, 1902.

I celebrated at 8 a.m. There were 45 commts, including Lord Selborne.

At Mattins I preached and made some observations on the Freemantle episode. There was a fair congregation, save that the Parliamentary seats were distressingly empty.

Baddeley and Fergusson came to lunch. Vesey Knox and his wife came to tea.

[122]

[symbol]

In reply to a second letter from the Bishop of Winchester:-

Nov: 18th 1902

My dear Lord Bishop,

Let me thank you very sincerely for your kindness in finding time to write to me again, & to let me see the enclosed, which (if you will allow me to say so) seems quite admirable. If only it could have been before the public at an earlier stage in the progress of events! I suppose I must have expressed myself cumbrously because friends of mine, entirely accepting my contention, thought that I designed a censure of the Bishop of London, which of course to anyone who knows my personal regard for him is quite inconceivable. I corrected this impression in a short letter published on Nov: 12th in the Times.

No, what was in my mind &, to my knowledge, in the minds of other London clergy was this. We were convened to support the Bill, and the Bishop had made a warm personal appeal to us. Then the Kenyon-Slaney agitation began under the sanction, & indeed, at the bidding of Bishop Gore. The Albert Hall [123] meeting had its character changed, at the bidding of the enthusiasts represented by Lord Hugh Cecil in Parliament. The Bishop's great personal influence was used by a faction in the interest of a factious movement. That seemed unfair: I said it had the aspect of sharp practice. And I do still think it was not straight-dealing, & practically very deplorable. All who feel with me that the right course was precisely that indicated in your memorandum viz: frankly accept the Amendment & make the Trust-deeds explicit, are now compelled to seem opponents of the Bishop of London, whom extraordinary personal fascination exempts from the necessity of seriously arguing anything. In short his whole weight is thrown in effect though not in intention into the scale of an eager, ambitious, & well-organized faction, which sees in this agitation the chance of diverting attention from their own illegalities & precipitating an anti-Establishment movement.

But I must not abuse your Lordship's kindness, so I will say no more, except to add that it is my most earnest desire to avoid conflict à outrance [124] between the lay sentiment & the clerical, which many signs indicate as drawing quickly on, & which must involve immense injury to everything I value.

Believe me,

my dear Lord Bishop,

ever most sincerely yours,

H. Hensley Henson

[125]

[symbol]

Mr Horace B. Marshall wrote to ask me for an "appreciation" of the late Mr Hugh Price Hughes to be published with others in "a little book": to whom I answered as follows:-

Nov: 22nd 1902.

My dear Sir,

I am much obliged to you for your very kind invitation to contribute an "appreciation" of the late Mr Hugh Price Hughes: and, if I decline doing so, it is solely because my personal acquaintance with him was too recent & too slight to make an "appreciation" from me other than an impertinence. It needs no saying that I regret his death very much, as removing a personal force in the main directed to the service of high ends, and capable of great efforts in the future. I hoped to have the opportunity of getting to know the man, & to understand his points of view: & I promised myself much personal pleasure & advantage in doing so, but the opportunity was denied me, & I cannot claim to stand among those who, in the true sense, were his private friends, from whom & from whom alone "appreciations" of the kind indicated in your letter can have any propriety or any value. I am sure you will understand and [126] approve my position.

Believe me,

sincerely yours,

H. Hensley Henson

---

Issues and controversies: education bill