The Henson Journals

[185]

[symbol]

Thursday, November 7th, 1912. Cambridge, Mass.

The sophisms of Columbus were worth more than all the science of Salamanca. The objectors who called him a visionary were in the right, he was obstinately wrong. To his auspicious persistency in error Americans owe, among other things, their existence.

Lord Acton. l.c. p. 61.

I received by the morning post the proof of the interview which I had in New York with Mr Ireland (v. p. 172). It was on the whole a creditable piece of work, but it credited me with 'dark blue eyes'! This is a good illustration of the value of human testimony. We were together more than an hour, during most of which we sat opposite to one another, looked at close range into one another's eyes. It might fairly be presumed that a professional interviewer on duty, definitely designing to give a personal description of his victim, wd. have specially noted the eyes. There cd. be no possible reason for giving the wrong colour: 'brown', 'black', 'grey', or 'hazel' wd. have been equally interesting, equally irrelevant! Yet here a glaring error is made by an honest thoroughly competent man, giving evidence in his own way, with respect to facts within his personal recent knowledge.

I conducted service in Appleton Chapel, gave a little discourse on Habakkuk i. 12–17.

[186] [symbol]

My vigil in Wadsworth House was undisturbed save for the arrival of one visitor – Mr Arthur Beane, who wished to show me 'Phillips Brooke's House', a centre of social work founded in memory of the divine, whose name it bears. I promised to see it on Tuesday.

I preached for the 4th time on S. Paul's Cathedral. The congregation seemed to me less numerous less virile than yesterday. I preached on I. Cor: x. 26, 'The earth is the Lord's the fulness thereof'. It is the case that I have no comfort in preaching in this place. The atmosphere seems unfriendly. Everybody is almost elaborately polite, but there is an absence of genuine cordiality. I noticed not a few persons crossed themselves, when I made the invocation before the sermon. This may, perhaps, indicate the set of the wind. Possibly some of them suspect that they are imperilling their souls by listening to a notorious heretick! The assistant clergy are supporters of Roosevelt, which probably means that they are 'Christian Socialists', in that capacity have their own reasons for disliking me. Then I am actually here to preach in an undenominational University Chapel, and to lecture in a schismatical College!! Is it necessary to speculate on the reasons for an unspoken unfriendliness, which is very apparent to me.

After service I was introduced to Mrs George L. Parker, a congregationalist minister'swife, who brought to me a mother two girls, who, she said, had recently come out from Westminster. Curiously enough, the mother said she had been employed by [187] [symbol] Mrs Kitchin to clean the Deanery of Durham, at the time when the late Dean was appointed. She said it was a very large house.

In the afternoon the rain came on with vehemence, but none the less we drove out to call on the late President, Elliot, whom, however, we failed to see. Then we had tea with Mr Mrs Merriman, who are friends of Baker–Wilbraham. He is assistant–Professor of English History, deals specifically with the Reformation period. He agreed with me in regarding Gairdner's book, 'Lollardy the Reformation', as a very scandalous production.

Dr Councilman came to tea here. I inquired respecting the progress of Psycho–Therapeutics, he assured me that it was a declining movement. The Immanuel Movement had moderated its claims, was now shrinking to very modest proportions. He said that three years ago Dr McCoomb had undoubtedly made much greater claims in its behalf than he did now. I asked whether his statement wd extend to the Christian Science Movement. He said that there cd be no doubt that movement wd decline: though it wd die slowly as it had ample financial resources. But it had been gravely damaged by the publication of a 'Life of Mary Baker Eddie' [sic] by a lady named Tarbell. We spoke of the female suffrage question. He expressed his astonishment that the suffragettes were not allowed to starve themselves. He said that well–nourished young women of the upper classes [188] [symbol] would easily stand fasting for 30 or 40 days: that they (the medical folk of Harvard) were making a study of the metabolism of fasting, found no difficulty in obtaining volunteers to fast for that period.

We went out in a taxi–cab to drive with the Dean Mrs Rousmaniére. The rain was falling in torrents when we started, and when we [were] scarcely half through our journey, the motor broke down, would go no farther. Prof. Moore rushed to an adjacent telephoning station, brought to our rescue a second motor, in which we succeeding [sic] in reaching our destination, arriving more than ½ an hour after time.

I found the dinner bad; the company dull: and the conversation tiresome. Probably the fault was my own, but the most enjoyable moment of the evening was that at which Mrs Moore gave the signal for departure. Even then our misadventures were not quite over: for we drove to the railway station to pick up Dorothea, who was coming from Bryn Mawr to take part in celebrating the silver wedding of her parents, which falls on Saturday next, incidentally to 'come out' herself: her train was 40 minutes late. So we 'kicked our heels' aimlessly for all that time at the railway station. In the end we all returned home about 11 p.m., chastened a little bored with ourselves, the weather, one another.

---

Issues and controversies: female suffrage