The Henson Journals

[119]

Wednesday, August 18th, 1926.

Bishop Talbot fills a column of the front page of yesterday's Times with "A Reply to Dr Henson". It will be eagerly welcomed by many sentimentalists, including all the friends of the Ten Bishops. Partly he misunderstands what I said, and partly he draws a "red herring" across the discussion. I shall not answer him, partly, because his age & distinction entitle him to the last word, and, partly, because he has carried the question into a sphere beyond the medium of newspaper columns for suitable debate. I doubt also whether there is any real need to write again. He has added a new argument to the case of the Ten Bishops, and writes in a manner which discloses considerable dubiety in his own mind as to the wisdom of their intervention.

My letter seems to have arrested attention, pleasing mightily those who agree with it, and exasperating those who don't! I received some letters both of approval and of dissent. Among the first was one from an old clergyman, the Rev. Charles Green, "who this very week passed into his 97th year". It is well composed and well written. He refers to Bishop Westcott's action "for which quite a halo of commendation accrued to him": –

["]This was thought by some of his clergy to be so overdone as to become matter for a quiet laugh. One who felt thus considering himself to be "in the know" as to the exact facts of the case, described it to me in a letter as a success mainly owing to a happy discernment of what is meant by the Psychological Moment.["]

[120]

[symbol]

Harold Cox writes asking whether I wd care to write an article for the October number of the Edinburgh Review with some such title as Economics and Religion. It seems to offer a means of making answer to Bishop Talbot without naming him directly, so I decide to accept. I wrote and despatched the following letters: –

1. To Harold Cox.

2. " Rev. Charles Green.

3. " " Samuel Kearney.

4. " Miss Mills.

5. " Rev. Robert Rudd.

6. " Ven. Archdeacon Charles.

7. " Rev. Archibald Fleming.

8. " " Harry Saxton.

9. " Bishop of Jarrow.

Obligations accumulate quickly, especially those which lie on the border line of official duty. Thus I am pledged to write

α. The Lock Memorial Lecture for October 27.

β. The Earl Grey Memorial Lecture for February.

γ. Address to Diocesan Conference, November 6.

δ. Article for Edinburgh Review (October).

ε. Monthly Articles for the Evening Standard.

These, in addition to my normal work, represent a considerable amount of effort, some reading, & some thought. Yet, as every fresh proposition emerges, I find myself increasingly unable to decline it. Meanwhile, my physical & mental resources are plainly wasting, & I need an undivided application of them to my proper & incommunicable task.

[121]

[symbol]

My dear Cox,

Your letter was sent on to me from Auckland Castle, and only came into my hands last night. Your suggestion that I should write an article for the Edinburgh comes at the nick of time, for it relieves me from the necessity of answering Bishop Talbot's letter in yesterday's Times, and will give me more elbow room for discussing the main question. It is difficult to find a formula which quite conveys one's meaning. In my letter I was careful to point out that economic law "may be, and often has been, disastrously misconceived", adding that "rightly conceived, it is final and inexorable".

Man is an instrument of production, and so far nakedly economic, but he is something more: & to ignore that dual aspect of his nature is to fall into the economic blunder of mishandling your material, and not using your instrument to the best result. It seems to me arguable that in all the sphere wherein man enters, there is no great difference between sound morality & sound economics. Beyond that, economic law is as rigid & inexorable as physical.

So I will try to produce something. I am much better, but must go, like Agag, "delicately" for awhile. However, I return to Auckland Castle on Saturday next, & shall resume duty. Don't fail to propose yourself for a visit if you are in the north.

Yours ever,

Herbert Dunelm:

Harold Cox Esq.

8 Raymond Buildings

Gray's Inn. W. C.

[122]

We had tea with Mrs Mason who lives not far distant. She showed us her numerous pictures, which had been collected by her husband's father. They included two fine Raeburns and two Hop[p]ners: also a Romney of Nelson, in a red coat & unrecognizable! The house contains many other objects of interest, and an unusually well–stocked wine–cellar. I was shown the cellar–book, & noted with surprise that it included port of the 1820 and 1847 vintages. Mine hostess insisted on my drinking a glass of the latter, which was excellent. Mrs Mason has but recently lost her husband, and has a family of 3 girls, of whom the eldest is 15, and a little boy, Oliver aged 7½.

The Dean of Peterborough has a long letter in the Times expressed rather cantingly, & certainly adding nothing to the general discussion. Another correspondent sends a useful quotation from Jowett.

I finished a novel by Philip Gibbs "The Reckless Lady", which deals with post–war society, & contains a good deal of clever writing. It is a relatively wholesome composition, and neither ridicules marriage, nor exalts self–indulgence. Indeed, the hero of the story, if there can be said to be any hero, is the hard old Colonel, who divorces his pretty wife for adultery, spends his life–time in India, is fatally compromised with the English democracy by ordering a "[massanne?]", magnanimously saves his divorced wife from financial ruin, and is finally undone by her extravagance.

---