‘wfl—I_-—-—'—F—-—~——— '—_. — ~ THE POLITICAL ‘AND LITERARY CAREERS OF E, B. SANBORN .Thuis fat the 009m of Pb. D. MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE > Benjamin. Blakely Hickok I953 “W 1mmmmmmmnmnmnis 3 1293 10747 9911 This is to certifg that the thesis entitled The Political and Literary Careers 0! F.B. Sanborn presented bl] Benjamin Hickok has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. degrafln English Wfljzfl, (7 Major professor March 4. 1953 Date 0-169 i ,- 93 .: i - 1 x.‘ APR 0 3 I989 4,-4 am: M '3': 191M"- '4 ’ r" . "A: .‘x‘nx'i '11:...“5' \ . ‘\. ‘—.~ m PGLITICLL A!!!) 1113331131.? 0&3sz 01' I. 3. smog? | r, i mum 31ml; mam a: t u. l' ‘- hhittd it the label of emu Stat.“ of mania“ flu” canon of Agriculture and Amltod 80101100 11mm mum-m or the minimum- : ' ' tor the dogma at m OF PHILOSOPHY amt iot mm ‘ 2 Your 1953 it I ,V U ‘ W | 5 IL! I: '. It. It: no Politiool and Lita-oar gonor- o! I. I. when ”to tholio in limited to o critical otudy of meom'o‘politicol and litonrr oorooro. .Dividod i‘ntoh oixohaptoro with o prof-Leo, on‘ introdu- tion. AM. o Bibliography. tho othdy inoludoo o diomoaiop of Sembom‘o ooriy iifo, Mo 11“ at Har'yurd, Ilia earner on yteacher, his rolitical «not. hio lit'om'rr cox-oer. Imd hi: punctuality. The aeatoot frofi-lod in writing; o. critical «may of Bambom is the or- canimtion of nun-1&1; Firot. an Sankara was almost totally incapablo a! Mtina trunking which m V411 dramizod, his biograyhoi‘ in forced to or- Mu hio lifo for bill. Booond. mob of the unborn original material has Moo dootroyod or ocdttdrod. Third. onto of tho. San’born rapero oro inaccu— lino. Tho 1o" lottoro and tokono that rooood hotween Sanborn and Ariana Vllkor m. promoolr, oschod in' tho. .c‘omorotonoh in the cablo o! Sanbom'o homo in concord: bio-oomopvondonoo with Edith Burton is. hold by o pri- nto oollootor and '1'; not for miiioatiomf and an unknown mbor of lottoro thick mood totvoon mum. tho othor- ”am of tho Socrot Six. and John 3m voro dootroyod by Subaru ottor Brown'o' capturo ot Harpor'o Torry. Chap"? 1. 'lio 131-11 Lifo.‘ dioouoooo tho innuonco of heredity and environs-outwit tho dovolorinont-of s'anbom'lo political. literary. n11..- douo. and «told. ottitmioo. ond yoytmyo vividly the most ifirimrtant 1n— nmcm tho labor. of it}. mm. in. m." in Emton mu, m. m... lie and printo oducaltion, and 'hi‘o iifo'o meateat passion—Ariana. Walk". Garter II. ‘Hio Life at Harvard” diacuseos his intellfioctmil'environ- lent at douse.“ hio todch'oro... his academic find special activities, his lito mew: tho {mom of Boston and Concord an revealed in his collofio 50w, and his tragic min ndrfimo. Most. of the charter is devoted N. l 54. II .0 hi- ntonry ntivitioo to founder one. oditor of m w W and to on Wool of tho mm "om, critical roviowo. mo, and oditoriol oomot which ho wrote for it. ‘ mm In. 'Eio Caron in o. Teacher,“ roommta his wort: in Eooroon' o m1 ad tho Concord law! of Minor”. i'ho charter is rartinont to thio ow homo. Bubom'o lifo woo intertwined with tho lives of tho Oneal-d (root through out: ootivitioo no hio donoord Dramatic Union, hio ntortoiuooto {or hio oohooi. hio dhily nonlo ot If". Thoreau“, and hio don: niotioaohipo with. tho Alcotto. tho muons. and 311m Channina-I- ootivitioo which may!“ hio litorary can: no their biogrmfl'tor and can». ' ' ' ”I g Mur- !V. 'Eio Political Gogoorfl um of his work in four introv- tolt Mo. no mliod honey. moo, and arm for John Bmwn'o activi- tioo in Kano ond Timon through ‘hio work on ooorotary of tho Hanso— chootto Itoto tum Goo-inn: ho'wroto hiomrhioo of John Brownnnd hittorly dot-add hio am in tho .mhlio rrinto; ho woo oditon—in-chiof of tho lootou antidote” weekly, m Will! mad ho was 3 roliti- 011 ooh-tin for tho Springfiold (Moon) w gambling. for forty-aim m . Mo? 7. 'Rio Literary Career.“ io chiefly concerned with Son‘som' o valuim work oo biogro'phor and editor of Thoreau and no litomry «luniot for tho Springtiold W. to Sanbom'o importanoo to brim “tom “vino ohiofl: frol hio work on shaman. tho anor mtioo of thio who io dmtod to o critical malnio oi‘ Ban'born'o tcto, tho roviowo which thooo moivod tron oontomronry ond Dodo!!! tritioo. old tho 'Wto' which Baotou undo in tmmihing hio mum ”moo. fho root of tho dart” ottoupto to mlmto hio wort: Io tho tiocrophor and oditor of Bronson Alcott. maroon. Parker. Ellery Guanine. ond lowthono: hio work on o writer of "no: hio inborn um um oditor'o! n; W and hio work no tho writor for tho W of twioo-wooklr oohonno of literary new. oomont. history. and oritioi. thofiinolndod on wring mrioty of literary torico. Mtor VI. 'Eio Pommlity.‘ diomoooo Srmhorn'o yoroonoi trait: and ottoolrto to ootimto Bonhom'o inrortonoo to tho world. It now to aid that Benton woo o. romntio miiticiam a. bitter. vindictive.“ oootrovoroiol dotondor of John Brown. o poor scholar. o bod writer. on twin. oditor. ond o oooond—rllto Journaliot. Tot. u Odell Shorord "I. 'Ihoro no in hi- : powor of otoodfaot dovotion and admiration which out!!! for low Moo". Ho oorvod oo o foflootor-oflnwod ond orockod thoth it woo—for loo ond wooon ond "onto that night well. without hint. hovo ton tomttoo or iooo won undmtoM.’ It not ‘0 Bid. howovor. M-“o lotor flair of Sanhorn'o work on ooooiol Mono-nonfiction)!” moron: owlw oorvo no on .tidoto to No m dioiilnoiontu portrait. THE POLITICAL AND LITERARY CAREERS 0F 1'. B. SANBORN By BENJAMIN BLAKELY HICKOX A THESIS Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan state Collogo of Agriculturo and.Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of mC‘I‘OR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of English 19 53 .n I THEE}; ‘- IN VITA Benjamin Blakely Hickok candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosoplv Final Examination: m 4. 1953. 3800-5800 P. l..' be. 212. Uorrlll m1. Dissertation: The Political and Literary careers of F. B. San‘born Outline of Studi es: Major Subject! American Literature Minor Subject: English Literature Biographical Items: Born, July 26. 19134. Oneonta. New York Undergraduate Studies, Bachelor of Arts, Hamilton College, Clinton. New York, 1932-4936 Graduate Studies. Master of Arts in Speech, State University of Iowa, 1939-19uo; Michigan State College, 19h6-1953 Experience: Instructor in niglish, Athens College, Athens, Greece. 1936-1939: Instructor in English and Reading, Foundation School, Baron College. Ber-ea, Kentucky, 19140-1910.: Instructor in English Composition, Speech. and Dramatic Art, Department of English, Berea College, Berea. Kentucky, 19141-19142; Crypto- grapher. Amy Airways Communication System, 1912—19145; Michigan State College: Instructor, Department of Communica- tion Skills. 19h6-19h8; Director. English for Foreign Students, 1945-19)”: Director. Writing Clinic, 1936-19149; Assistant Pro- fessor. 191+S-w . Member of Pi Delta Epsilon O . I f TABLE OF CONTENTS Vit800000Ooooooooeooeoooooeooooeooo ii Preface0-0ooole-000000000000...oooeoo 1V Intmdmtionooooooeoooooooooeooooo CEWTIER I BI S EARLY LIFE 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 1 CHAPTER II HISLIFEATHARVARD................. 5? cmmnx HISCAREERASATEACHER.‘.............. 07 CHAPTERIVHISPOLITICALCAREER................ 126 0?an VHISLITERARYGAREER................. 267 CW”HISPERSONALITYooo................ 11.05 BlbliOgraphyoooooeoeoooooooooooooooeooo hits 111 12 In this preface I would like to thank those who have helped me in the preparing of this critical study and I would like to indicate the attitude I have taken in transcribing my materials. In point of time. I am indebted first to Dr. Claude M. Newlin for suggesting this study. To Dr. Russel B. Nye, my mador professor, and to Dr. Carson C. Hamilton and Dr. Iawrence Babb, the members of my committee. I can now appropri- ately indicate my deep appreciation not only for their criticisms and suggestions for improving my manuscript but for their sympathetic per- sonal consideration and encouragement. I also want to thank Dr. Arnold Williams of the Department of English and Dr. Stuart Gallacher and Dr. William Seaman of the Department of Foreign languages for the help which they have given me on various problems. I owe a special debt to several peeple. To Mr. Francis Bachiler Sanborn I am grateful for his extraordinarily outspoken, vivid, and honest observations of his father and for the warm hospitality which he and Hrs. Sanborn provided me at their summer home in Sea Girt. New Jer- sey. To Mrs. Herbert Buttrick Hosmer I extend my thanks for her innum- erable courtesies to me while I was in Concord, for her notes on Sanborn material and her transcriptions of letters received in the Concord Pu‘o- lic Library after I had completed my research there. for checking occa- sional references and sources, and for her many notes on Concord persons, places, and things. I must thank particularly Mrs. Charles K. Darling 1v Ll of Concord. long a. friend of the Sanborns, for her vivid and intelligent reminiscences and. anecdotes, which have added such a breath of life to the knowledge of Sanborn's personality: Mr. Richard Hooker of Blandi‘ord. Mass" San‘born‘s colleague on the Springfield Republican. for his cour- teous hospitality and his reminiscences of wa0m as an editor and columnist: Miss Dorothy Morris of the staff of the Clarke School for the Deaf for her amusing stories of Sanborn's visits to the school; Miss Clara Endicott Sears. the Fruitlands Museum, Harvard, Mass., for her reminiscences of the Sanborns: and Mr. William Henry Harrison, director of the Museum: and Mr. Francis E. Allen of Cambridge, Mass., for his numerous letters to me in answer to many questions. particularly on matters of Thoreau scholarship. I owe a peculiar debt to Dr. Walter Harding of the Schools of English of the University of Virginia not only for the use of his large collection of Sanborn manuscripts and materials but for his encouraging me in a study that has often proved grim. frus~ trsting, and disillusioning. To Mrs. Kathryn Whitford of Milwaukee I am indebted for her gener- ous offer of her Sanborn bibliography. her notes on Sanborn'e "Our Bos- ton Literary Letter,“ and for a thirty-page biOgraphical sketch. all of which formed what she terms an “aborted effort" at a study of Sanborn. None of her material is included in my main text. however, with the ex— ception of some of her notes on Sanborn's ”Our Boston Literary Letter,” which appear in the last few pages of Chapter V. for these pages formed the cnly portion of my first five chapters which had not been typed when " I‘ her notes arrived. I am also grateful to Mr. Boyd B. Stutler of New York City for notes on Sanborn as a biographer and friend of John Brown, and to Mr. George T. Pratt, principal of the Clarke School, for his notes on the Sanborn letters in the school library. For helpful suggestions and information of all kinds I must thank the following: Dr. Odell Shepard. Waterford. Conn.: Dr. Ralph L. Rusk. Columbia University: Dr. Madeleine B. Stern, New York City: Dr. Henry Seidel Ganby. New York City: Dr. James C. Malin. University of Kansas: Mr. Albert Mordell, Philadelphia: Dr. Edward Spencer Cowles, New York City: Mrs. Frederick Burrougis Smith. Clinton. N. Y.: Mr. Frederick T. McGill, Jr.. the Newark Colleges. Newark. N. J.: Mr. George Sidney Hollowan. Monsey. N. Y.: Mrs. Nilliam Cram. Hampton Falls. N. H.: Mrs. Frank C. Huntington, Oneonta, N.Y.: Miss Josephine L. Sanbcrn. Haverhill, Mass“ Mrs. Beatrice L. Buckman. loburn. Mass.: Dr. 0. 0. Fisher. De- troit. Mich.: Mr. John F. Gough. Jersey City, N. J.: Mr. Theodore L. Bailey. Shaker Heights. Ohio; Mr. William M. Cummings. St. Paul. Minn.: Mr. Stanley W. Atkinson. Cranston. R. 1.: Mrs. Alfred Burlen. Exeter, N. 3.: Mr. William Zimmerman. Jr.. the Department of the Interior, Wash- ington. D. 0.: and the editors of the New York 11335. the New York 1-133- a_1§_~Tribune. and the Antiquarian Bookmgn who published my "author's query,l I think of what the librarians have done for me with affection toward them as well as gratitude. I am tremendously grateful to Mrs. Anne Alubowicz and her staff of the library reference room at Michigan vi Ii. State College for their innumerable services. I am particularly in- debted to the librarians or trustees of the following institutions for their generous kindness and for permission to use rate materials in their possession: Miss Sarah Bartlett and her staff of the Concord. Free Public Library: Mr. Clarence L. Brigham and Mr. Clifford K. Ship- ton of the American Antiquarian Society, Worcester, Mass.: Miss Carolyn Jakeman of the Houghton Library of Harvard College: Miss Margaret Rose and Mr. John H. Humphry of the City Library Association, Springfield, Mass.: Mr. Nelson Coon of the Perkins Institution and Massachusetts Asylum for the Blind. Watertown, Mash: Mr. Stephen Riley of the Massa- chusetts Historical Society, Boston: Dr. Carl M.'White and Mr. Roland Baughman of the Butler Library, Columbia. University: Mr. chtan Horaszti and Mr. Richard G. Hensley of the Boston Public Library: Miss Ruth Kerr of the Watkinson Library, Trinity College, Hartford, Conn.: Mrs. Marnesba D. Hill of the Trevor Amett Library, Atlanta University, Atlanta, Ga.: Mr. Donald 0. Holmes, Mr. George A. Schweguann, Jr.. and Miss Katherine Brush of the Library of Congress: Mr. Tyms G. Harmsen of the Henry E. Euningion Library and.Art Gallery, San Marine, Cal.: Mr. R. N. Williams, II, of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania: Mr. Lester G. Wells of the Syracuse University Library: Mr. Robert I. Hill of the New York Pub- lic Library: Mr. Edward W. l’orbes of the Fog Museum, Cambridge, Mass.: and Miss Esther Usher of the Essex Institute, Salem, Mass. I am part icu- larly grateful to Mr. Rodney Armstrong and the staff of the Davis Library Vii of the Phillips Exeter Academy, Exeter, N. H.. who spent several days in L1? behalf in attempting to find Sanborn material in their library and in searching for material in the public library of Hampton Falls. The following people were most helpful in tracking down Sanborn material: Gladys Hunkins Webster of the New Hampshire Historical Society, Concord: Miss Barbara Simonson of the Yale University Library: Mr. (30an Storm of the William L. Clements Library at the University of Michigan: Kiss Helen M. McFarland of the Kansas State Historical Society, Topeka: Mr. Francis L. Berkeley, Jr., of the Alderman Library, University of Vir- ginia: Miss Mary H. Davis of the Medford Public Library, Medford, Mass.: Mr. Alexander Clark of Princeton University: Marjorie Lyle Crandall of the Boston Athenaeum: Mrs. Alene Lowe White of the Western Reserve Histor- ical Society, Cleveland, Ohio: Mr. George K. Boyce of the Pierpont Morgan Luxury, New'York City: Miss Pauline F. Pulsifer of the public library 01' Haverhill, Mass.: and Miss Helen A. Geffney of the Hamilton College Library, Clinton. N. Y. I would like specially to thank the All College Research Committee 01‘ Michigan State College for its generous award, which allowed me to ob— tain much of my material on microfilm, without which my research would have been immeasurably more difficult. To my wife and children, the widow and orphans of my doctorate, I must acknowledge my greatest debt, for they are the ones who have suffered most profoundly from this long labor. I thank them for their patience end endurance and extend to them the hope and promise of a new life to- fiether. viii The search for Sanborn material has been long an? I ‘rel cu"? there is a great deal more scattered about the country in the files of private collectors and in libraries. I should like very much to know about such material. I would like now to indicate the attitude I have taken in transcrib- ing my materials, particularly Sanborn's letters and other manuscripts. Sanborn's autograph is rather like Emerson's and Thoreau's. though it is much more of a scrawl than Emerson's and shows none of his tendency towand c0pper~plste. From the appearance of Sanborn's autOgraph I pre- mmw.he wrote, as he did everything else, at a high rate of speed. con- necting a string of words together in such a way that the first letter ofnmny words not customarily capitalized seems to be a capital. Though zumt of Sanborn's words can be deciphered. his punctuation offers a prob- lunthat requires that I maintain a consistent attitude. Since Sanborn amyuently did not often pause at the end of a phrase long enough to rate the expected punctuation. he used a great variety of dashes-~long emishort, straight and curved, above and below and in the middle of the 1km. .As no printer's font and no typewriter is capable of reproducing Hume dashes, I have tried to indicate them as best I could by the use Of a hyphen or a dash in its normal place in the line. For purposes of this dissertation, I have attempted to be scrupu- IMmly accurate in my transcriptions of material. I have not knowingly atany thee changed a word or a letter, added or subtracted or changed a maI‘kof'p'unctuation, or changed a capital letter without indicating or ix questioning the. change. I have also trmi 'Lr iii m the use of such academic apparatus: as "Laid," for I feel t2. ,4 it ”fix: gets between the writer and the reader. As I have no desire to rain reputation which Sanborn has for his frightful liberties witr his text: and his "improvements” of his originals. I should appreciate arming >1. any errors no matter how slight. B. B4 1’1. INTRODUCTION lhen F. 3. Sanborn was two and a half he was playing alone one afternoon upstairs in the back bedroom of the family's old farmhome in Hampton Falls. He was seated on the floor by the great. chizm ey entertaining himself with a stick while a thundershower spattered against the windowpanes. A bolt of lightning struck the house. ran down the chimney and diverted itself in the bedroom. His sister rushed upstairs to see what had happened. Placidly looking up. young Ssnborn declared that the great noise had been caused by his pounding on the floor with his stick. "I believed myself already capable," says Sanborn, "of making some stir in the world."1 Though Sanborn did indeed make a great stir in the world, he is tom utterly forgotten. As the secretary of his class at Harvard said of him after he died. "A new generation has grown up which little Eppreciates how large a figure he stands among Harvard graduates who have really done much in their dean's Almost no one excepting those f" Persons who remember him while he was alive and those few scholars “10 have written about his friends can tell you one fact of his unusu— ally full and busy life. W111: Benjamin Sanborn, ”History and Poetry from the Life of J. 3- Ssnborn of Concord. Massachusetts," The Granite Monthlz: £111! “in as ineDvoted toH H.13togz Magi—egg. Literature and g ___. S ate mam mm July. 19013 . 23. ' aEdwin Halo ELM» p. 559 Abbot, "News from the Classes," Harvard Graduates' Bigg- Sanborn himself divided his life into four parts when he wrote in his Recollections of Seventy Years, "In mature life I have had, in A. humble way. four distinct careers--politicel, literary, socially refs-m;- atory. and journalistic or publicist." Yet these two volumes of his autobiOgraphy do not present much of Sanhorn. The first volume, theo- retically concerned with the events of his political career, is in truth a biography of John Brown, though the book narrates in detail Brown's relationship to Sanborn and the Secret Six of the Massachusetts State Kansas Coamittee. its second volume. supposed to focus on Sanborn's literary career, is concerned with half-finished portraits and anecdotes of his famous literary friends. But the volume is such a hash of scra‘cs ‘ and tatters that, excepting its first fifty-six pages. Sanborn scarcely appears in it. His third volume, in which he intended to discuss his career as a social reformer, he never completed, though he was at work on it as late as January, 1916, a year before he died. A fourth volume that would have completed his life cycle-«his career as a journalist and publicist-~he never started, though he doubtless had it in mind. M ’1'} 3Sanborn, Recollections 93: Seventv Years (Boston: Richard G. Bfidqe'er, 18 Gorham Press, 19097, I, ?O, referred to hereafter as Recollections. Con atriting to John M‘ Glenn 0f New York C1 W. San‘oorn in a letter from Wecord dated October 5. 1909- discusses the memoir of Enoch Cobb Wines, gm ts°°1al “fir-”“9“ 'hich Sanbom has Just finished, and continues: "I 50mg :3“, ”met-111115. in a 3rd. volume of my 'Recollectionst concerning my ten get on with prisons. and Shall perhaps use some of the pages here writ- Saangn.Pbesi.ies others not properly admissible here." (Franklin Benjzmin 1e“; taperstfimerican Antiquarian Society, Worcester, Mam.) In another ‘ am . 0 William Bromley, dated Concord, December 16, 1909, Sanhorn say-:4: at '01." on my 3rd volume, to appear next May." (The Thoreau Library 3:11 It seems to me that, 'tl‘xowrh San‘oern divided his life into fear careers, it is more logically divided into three: his political career, I his literary career, and his career as a social reformer. His political and literary careers in a way formed a unit: his career as a social re- former was carried on in a world apart. Therefore I have chosen, for purposes not only of time but of unity. to limit this thesis to a criti- cal study of Sanborn's political and literary careers, his two lives so closely interwoven. In both he knew approximately the same peeple; in both he Operated in the same intellectual environment. In his political career he focused his attention on four important projects: he supplied money, men, and arzns for John Brown's activities in Kansas and Virginia through his work as secretary of the Massachusetts Kansas State Commit- tee; he wrote biographies of John Brown and stanchly defended his memory' in the public prints: he was editor-in—chief of the Boston antislavery weekly, 3L9. Commonleglth: and he was a political commentator in the Weekly columns which he wrote for forty-nine years for the Springfield 981111 Republican. During all but four of these many years, he was a resident of Concord. and through mast of these activities he was sup- Dorted in his principles. attitudes, and activities by his literary M if Dr. Walter Harding, Schools of English. University of Virginia, Char- ottesville. Va.). The volume was, however. not published with the first We volumes in 1909, and Sanborn says nothing more about the projected V01ume mt to Breml 11 as late 33 January 15. 1915. in a government penny postcard Franc: :57 from Westfield, New JBTBBY. where he was living with his son, mm 3 achiler Sanborn: "I am also writing my 3rd vol. of Recollfig. mam on any portion of such a manuscript exists I have not seen it. or . f the correspondence which I have examined does he mention a OJected fourth volume. xiii friends-«Theodore Parker, Ralph Waldo East-son. Bronson Alcott, Henry ' David Thoreau, Ellery Charming, and the Samuel Gridley Howes. Their interests too were focused on John Brown. though they did not work at a desk in the Niles‘ Building in Boston as Sanborn did to put their theories of civil disobedience into practice. By 1890. thomflx most of then had died, their spirit lived on in Sanborn's memory as he wrote his two weekly political and literary letters for the Republican, and the lessons which his heroes had taught him influenced everything he wrote. But in his career as a social reformer. he lived a life that most of his friends knew nothing about. He met-«with the exception of the Bower-an entirely new group of personalities, occupied himself with Practical problems of the imprisoned, the insane. the orphaned, the blind, the deaf, the destitute that did not much concern his friends in Concord, and rushed about the nation to attend conferences and meetings on Problems of social science that Concord knew not of. But it is the career that was most universally applauded, and I intend to complete “‘3" MOgl‘l‘lphir. of which this dissertation is a part, with an account of his work in social reform. 1510 reader will doubtless ask. therefore. why I have included a chapter 0!! Sen'born's career as a teacher.' Sanborn never spoke of this ' as one of his four careers. for it was to him a parenthesis in his polit— 1‘381 and literary activities, and. except for his account of the Concord Summer School of Philosophy, he scarcely mentions his activities as a ‘ “ - ‘~ . ,. I U . ‘ teacher in his autobiography. In his teaching career. however, he was closely associated with many of the Concord literary great. finer-son invited him to Concord to take charge of his schook, and Sanborn as principal and teacher taught Emerson's children. and acne of the children of Hawthorne. Henry James. Sr.. and John Brown. George Luther Stearns, and the offspring of a great many more of his political and literary friends and acquaintances. As a member of the Concord School Committee and years later as a member of the faculty of the Concord School of Phil- os0phy he was intimately associated as a teacher with Bronson Alcott. But during his first seven years in Concord as principal of merson‘s little school, his life was intertwined with the the lives of the Con- cord great and small. His Concord Dramatic Union, his Friday night dances and entertainments for his school. his picnics and skating par- ties at Walden Pond, his daily meals at Mrs. Thoresu's, his rooms at 311917 Chaming's. his dinners. teas. and conversations at the Emerson's “all these activities brought him into daily contact with the famous 11“er lights of Concord and pro-figured his literary career as their editor and biographer. 1'01‘ the person who sets out to write a critical study of Sanhorn th’ 8’08““ problem is the organization of material. I mean this in “70131 different ways. In the first place. since San'born's voluminous "Mines have formed a basis for my work, and since San‘born was almost ' “ ‘fi-i ' - .p totally incapable of writing anything which was well organized. I have been forced to organize his life for him. Out of what his critics have called his "zigzag biographies." his "upside-down histories," and out of the autobiography which Rusk refers to as a "bedlam."51 have tried to construct a consecutive, organized narrative. In another fashion, tracking down the facts of Sanborn's lives and organizing the pieces has been a difficult but interesting problem. I began this study in February, 1951, and after spending a month in the libraries of Harvard, Boston, and Worcester, I made my first trip to concord. Among the first people I interviewed was Mrs. Charles K. Dar- 11115. who was an intimate of the Sanborns for many years. When I asked her if any of Sanborn's three sons were still living, she said, "There is a mystery about Francis-mthe youngest. Although the town committee hero in concord invited him to a big celebration a few years ago, the letter was not returned, nor was it answered. nor did he appear. No one knows anything about him. The first son, Tom. committed suicide, 3°“ know. And Victor has been dead many years.“ Soon after this I received a letter from Dr. Walter Harding. then °f the Department of English at Rutgers, asking whether I knew the 'hereabonts of Francis 3. Ssnborn, because he wanted his permission to Publish three of his father's letters. I replied that Francis was dead. \ 5Pers0nal letter to me from Ralph L. Rusk. Department of English :2; 30mggggtive Literature. Columbia University. New York 27. New York. 3 e . avg.— - ~ . ' A aura-vast;- A ‘ . 1...”.- .P 453' JQKSO‘IL‘PUFIK':LJ _ ‘ ' .2. _ ' .gd .‘ -- v a- .- ..-. A... 4- But knowing that his father had died in Westfield, New Jersey, I wrote a letter to the city clerk asking him to check the death record for the address of his son. I received no reply. Harding, through an error in the lag, had been searching the city directories of Plainfield, New Jersey, in the hepe of finding his men. But as all of Sanborn's obitu- aries stated that he died at his son's home in Westfield, I smggested that Harding look around Westfield. Through the Westfield telephone book, Mr. Francis Bachiler Sanhorn and his wife were discovered very much alive indeed, and I had the opportunity August 28, 1951, of spend- ing a wonderfully pleasant day with them at their summer home in Sea Girt, New Jersey. My conversation with Mrs. Darling and Mr. Sanborn will indicate too why I have had. in the third place. a difficult time organizing; Sanborn's manuscripts, for they are fantastically scattered. Mrs. Darling had been asked to take care of the house after Sanborn's funeral and to make sure that nothing was disturbed. ”I came in one morning," she said. ”and found Miss Josey Leavitt, Mrs. Sanborn's sister, burning a great pile of papers and a lot of books. I felt terribly. I said, '1'“ you are to get out of here at once. Whatever possessed you to do such a thing? I was put in charge here, and above all things you were not to burn anything. nor was anyone else.‘ I think it was a morning or two later." continued Mrs. Darling. "that I unlocked the front door and f WM Francis in the living room negotiating with a book dealer and I D felt badly,s Conversation with Mrs. Darling, Saturday, March 10, 1951. xvii The dispersal of the manuscripts is further explained by what followed. Both Victor and Francis were bored with the literary" activ— ities of what Victor called "My Respected Parent and Horrible Etz‘mmle," and had little interest in preserving or keeping the material. "My brother and I burned practically everything that father left behind." Francis told me, "because we weren't in a position to retain it or ad- minister it.‘ Consequently, what manuscripts were left were disposed of by gift or by sale through Goodspeed, Libbie, Henkels, and other dealers. As far as I have been able to determine after some search, the chief depositories of San‘born's manuscripts are the Concord Free Public Library, the Harvard College Library, the Boston Public Library, the Mossachusctts Historical Society, the American Antiquarian Society, the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, the Huntington Library. Columbia. University Library, the Library of Congress, the Essex Institute at Salem. the Trevor Arnett Library of Atlanta University. and the Kansas State Historical Society, Topeka. But as Sanborn was a voluminous correspondent, and as he lived well into our own century, there are many peOple living who corresponded wi t};- him and who have in their possession letters which he wrote them. I have been able to get in touch with several of these correspondents throush the usual ”Author's Query" in the New York _r_1_m__e_e_, the New York m‘m. '_I‘_h_e Antiquarian Bookmsn, and through the routine pub- lishing of my thesis topic in American Literature. xviii Actmlly. however, none of these problems of organisation is particularly unusual or peculiar. What is really extraordinary is the whereabouts of the rest of the material. In 1880, when Sanborn had been married to his second wife. Louisa Augusta Leavitt, for sir-intent: years and had three sons by her (Thomas Parker, fifteen: Victor Channir-x. , thirteen: and Francis Bachiler, eight) he built a new house at 22 Elm Street. Concord. on the bend of the Sudbury River. Into the gable on the west side he built a stone on which this inscription was carved: 1830 A.R.I.A.N.A. 1880 To the casual observer. if he notices the stone at all, this inscription says nothing, but to Sanborn and Mrs. Sanborn, to their sons and neigh- bors and the townspeople in general it said more than it should. For ARIANA was Ariana Walker, Sanborn's first love and his life's greatest Passion; 1830 was the year of her birth and 1880 was the fiftieth anni— Versary Of her birth and the date the stone was put into place. Into this stone Sanborn placed the letters, Journals, and tokens that belo v- {ran-1 ‘.'- x \e W him and Ariana, whom he had married in 135M, eight days before she died. M least it is believed that Sanborn placed these love letters in M, ...e stone. When Victor and Francis sold the house to Major and Mrs. H erbert Buttrick Hosmer. the present owners, they at first insisted upon Btta t (Ling an entail to the deed which would forbid anv future owners, xix including the Hesmers, from Opening the stone. ~ ‘ £3th 4. :3“: 3h; eel???) Cf it‘d? Comomealth of Massachusetts forbid such entails, the Szu'x'uorxm sold tin; house to the Hoemers and gave them a clear title to the property. Two summers ago at Sea Girt. I asked Mr. Francis Sanborn how he would feel about the stone's removal. "I wouldn't have anything to say about it,” he answered. "But what feeling I do have would be opposed. I do not believe there are any papers in there, and what was there would be a matter of family concern. I am rather apposed to Opening up emo- tional and romantic subjects. But I rather deprecate such things. I think romance is for young people. And I think it's better to forget such things when one is old. But those people bought the house and they can do anything they darn please.” |'iiow do you feel about the papers being removed?” I asked. "1 don't think there's a manuscript there. I doubt it very much. Never heard it mentioned before. We never alluded to it in our family at all, because none of us approved of it." In March, 1951, I first met the Hosmers. As we sat talking in their living room. I asked her what had become of the love letters. "They're still up there in the rock in the chimney," she replied. ”And will stay there,” put in Major Hosmer, "while I live." ”And maybe not, and may . . . be . . . not!" said Mrs. Hosmer slowly, andI could see that, had I brought my hammer and chisel, she would have gone out and climbed the chimney herself. Though the date on the rod: is 1880. Senborn was making type-d copies of the love letters and Journals in 1905. Was he copying from the originals or from copies he had previously made? As the date 188'; on the stone would customarily indicate to most peonle that Sanborn placed the stone in the gable or the contents in the stone sometime that your. could he have taken out the letters in 1905, or did he put thu back in after he had finished his typed capies? Or is the LLIJJJ. stone today a. symbol of something that isn't there? hen there is the question of what became of the Journal or Journ- al: which Sunburn wrote while at Harvard, and the question of what hap— pened to Ariann's. both of which are valuable. A portion of the Har- nrd Journal was published in 1922 in the Contlrz Mggazine, edited by (horse Sidney Hellman. As I have never been able to find the journal. IPfllqud Hr. Hellman might have it in his possession and I addressed a letter to him in July. 1951. asking where it was. He replied in part: l Monsey. New York July 27, 1951 Dosr é Hickok .- I do not recall who is the present owner of the Concord Journal published in 1922 in the Contm Mgggzine. I ob- tained it frm L Sanborn when visiting him at his home “Wt l*5 years ago " it 1' my Opinion that Sanborn's Harvard and early Concord Journal is ”Ml the best thing he ever wrote—the most carefully phrased and '“h the loot precise attention to detail and accuracy-«1nd as his Jour- Isl Within. the most vivid pictures of important persons. places. and th 1“" 1 hone that someone who reads this study will help me discover "'1' lost tresoure-mor treasures. Besides these last manuscripts, there is an [mama-r r.:;az'::“.‘.t; n: material concerning the most intimate details oi" the John Bron; 33m: England conspiracy which can not appear in my etudrr. When John Brown was captured. at Harper's Ferry. Gerrit Smith, one of the conspiratorx, began to show symptoms of insanity. He at once detailed his son-in-lme to get in touch with all the other members of the Secret Six, ti: o admir- istrative group of the Massachusetts State Kansas Committee, and to see that all of their implicating letters were burned. "Not a letter havin any suggestion of the plot." says Gerrit Smith's biographer, "remains 1:. I the files from Brown. San'born or Steema." Sanborn too testified that he Ispent hours . . . searching my papers to destroy such as might com» promise other persons.‘6 I am, however. a. person of sufficientlv sus- picious nature that it is hard for me to believe that all of the con- spirators-88muel Gridley Howe. Theodore Parker, Frank Luther Steer-no. and Thomas Wentworth Higgineon destroyed all of their letters, and I hope that at least part of what must have been a. singularly exciting and im— POMt correspondence will in time be found in some secret hiding place. Nor have I been able to bring together in this study the letters “11°11 Passed ”between Sanborn. Edith finer-son, and Ralph Waldo Emerson. It \ Ell h . (New! P Yolney Harlow. Gerrit Smith. Philanthmist and Reformer om Henry Holt, 19395. p. hos. ‘- W I. 187. must be considered a. verified feet that Seminar!) proooqeo Harrie": t Edith, that Emerson objected vehemently, and that Seahorn in turn been». even more difficult. This correspondence is in the hands of a privy-fie collector, who declares the letters are "not for publication.” These problems have made my life difficult and the discovery of the truth difficult. But both the truth and the life have been interu eating. xxiii CHAPTER I ' HIS EARLY LIFE Franklin Benjamin Sanborn was born on the brisk winter day of Decenber 15, 1831, in the San'born homestead in Hampton Falls, New Hampshire. Situated some two miles from the village center on a little plateau celled “The Hill.“ the old weatherbeaten clapboard farmhouse was ample enougi to hold a father and mother. six children. a grand- father. and two spinster aunts, not to mention numerous relatives who drapped in for hours or weeks to visit, attend services at the meeting- house. or revel at the militia meters. Four children had already, been ‘ born to Aaron Sanborn and his wife. Lydia Leavitt: their first son, Jeresiah, had died soon after birth: their second, Charles Henry, was now ten; Sarah Elizabeth was eight: and Helen Marie. was just a year 013» Two other boys, Lewis Thomas and Joseph Leavitt. followed Frank “thin the next twelve years.1 This same year, when the Jacksonian Democrats had come into power 1" Hampton Falls, Sanborn's father was chosen Town Clerk, an office “11°11 required him to record the township's vital statistics. When he ‘3' that his fifth child was a son, he named it Benjamin for his father and Grandfather, to which Grandmother Leavitt added ”the favorite mid- (Th ”“9 01' 'Franklin' in honor of the great doctor." I‘oreseeing that \ Hi""°11€H=1=1<>m! I 11p v1 t Channi Fem , . . c or ng Sanborn. Genealo of the 51112! Samborne or Sanborn in m land and America, 1121:1838 (Pri- ‘ P mbed. 18995. pp. 295-29 . - | -- ~ "Que-C“ « ‘l the child would be called Frank, he vowed that no son of his, should br‘ known by his middle name. So he strode to his office. took down the ' register of births and wrote. “Franklin Benjamin Sanborn. male." This reversal of the great doctor's names could stand as a symbol of much of the I'upside-dcwn history" and"zigzag ”biography' which Sanborn was to write later. This whimsical act also symbolized his father's personality. Though “upright and charitable,” he was. says Sanborn. “a serious. rather eaturnine person," who in his later years displayed a spirit that was "stoical, with a touch of the cynic." I'Governing his family more by severity than affectiom'I he was ”seldom gracious, except to the poor, and rather severe to his children, who grew up to hold opir- ions quite unlike his own.“ But the trait in the father that seems most openly revealed in the son is that he was “independent to the verge of self-willJZ Aaron Sanborn was, however. a mm of many diversified interests and talents, and he had, says Sanborn, "almost as many arts as a Stoic philosOpherJ He. could make and repair the family's shoes, he molded hi! own cobbler's wax. framed his own carts and barrows, hewed lumber, “ted trees, was a daring horseman. and raised the largest pair of °I€n ever seen in Hampton Falls. As an orchardist he gained consider- abh 1"Putation in New England for having hybridized a new apple called N“ R°°°llections. I, lit-15: Victor c. Sunburn. Sanborn Genealog. ;§.ugl7;22d83anbom. “The New Hampshire Way of Life," Sanborn Genealogy. bun“ . The latter was written by l‘. 3. San'born for inclusion the beltPP- 613 and 628 of this volume, and is. in my opinion. one of P1°ces he ever wrote. ~ at the Red Russet. Though Sanborn inherited from his father none of his manual deftness nor mechanical skill. he did show to a remarkable de— gres his father's tendency to become interested in a wide variety of activities.3 Sanborn's physical inheritance came from his mother, Lydia Leavitt a daughter of Squire Thomas Leavitt of Hampton Falls. the Jeffersonian Justice of the peace, town moderator. and eelectman. She was a woman “of extreme beauty‘m-which he says he did not inherit--endowed with "a fair complexion, good feminine stature, with blue eyes. thick Jet-black hair. a brilliant color. and a most amiable expressionJu Senborn'e paternal grandfather and two spinster aunts also lived in the homestead. 01d "Grandsir' Sanborn was. in his personality. the “reversal of Sanborn'e father. "the type of a smiling English yeoman. full of good will and hospitality. and at peace with all the world.” He was. though seventy-two. the little boy's particular caretaker: they were in each other's company until his death when Sanborn was sixteen. and they slept in the same bedroom off the great kitchen.5 And there were Aunt Dolly and Aunt Rachel Sanborn. On a farm of 3 hundred acres or more where there was much work to be done. maiden aunts were indispensable. As hereon once said when asked what he \- 3?. 'The New Hampshire Way of Life. 1800-1860. I in Victor born. SanbornG ensalog. p. 615: Warren Brown, Histog_ of then“ ”M Falls. Lew H shire. Fr_o_m the Time of the First £19411“ '1thin Its Border—”a: 1 _t__unil E EEnchTter.“ N. 3.. ‘ P- 555: Recollections. I. 15.— ”Brown, Histo ton 23m Falls. p. )419: Recollections. I. 15. W. I, 15; Sanborn Genealogy. p. I$66. “an-av - would have done without his Aunt Mary, "Ah, that would have been a loss.-I could have better spared Greece and Rome.“ Aunt Dolly was "purely domestic: had certain cooking 'resaits,' that had come down to her, and that nobody else could manage." She was a gossip, set in her ways, Puritanical and narrow in her world view. "She had the ways of the last century, just as she had its dishes and warming pans and ideas 'of costume." She "sat in her room, or lay in her bed and knew the ownership of every horse that passed the house, by his step. 'I wonder where Major Godfrey was gwins this mornin':. his horse went down the Hampton read about half-past four. "' Or she would observe to Sanborn at breakfast, after he had returned late the night before from a cooking party with the neighbor boys in the woods, "The clock struck two Jest after you shot the door." Yet she had the hmanity to withhold these revelations. says Sanborn, from the head of the family. Though Sanborn certainly possessed a more intelligent world view than Aunt Dolly, his inherent interest in the affairs and personalities of men was not unlike the curiosity of this t.‘Jr'Pical New Hampshire old maid. Santorn's Aunt Rachel was different. Gentle and unselfish, she 'Pollessed a more sympathetic and attractive character. She was fair and delicate of complexion. blue-eyed. with pleasing features, a "”t- 1'Ii'Cher sad. voice.“ She was skilled in spinning. weaving. and mains. tended her bed of sage, lavender. and old-fashioned flowers h ' “h “he had introduced from the garden of the parsonage of Dr. Lang- do n: the retired President of Harvard. whose botanical knowledge had ‘ab~4’ It 4“ been used in the growing of flowers and herbs in his garden Just across the road. Unlike Aunt Dolly, she had been courted by a romantic youth, who, ”wandering about the wider world little seen by her,“ broke off their engagement. As Sanborn sat beside her in the musty garret read- ing the political newspapers and the Waverly novels kept in the old leather trunk, he sometimes saw the tears falling as she "spun patiently” at her wheel. But she amused Frank with her fund of stories such as the one about the Hampton Falls farm boy who had come back from a term at Phil- lips hater. When, at Dr. Langdon's tea-table he was asked if he pre- ferred cream in his tea, he replied, "No. thank ye, Miss, the superflu— 1ty of cream disturbs the tranquillity of tea, and renders it quite Obnoxious.” She was the philanthrOpiet of the family, a one-woman board of charities. She spent less of her time at the homestead than Aunt Dolly. who was “as much a part of the old house as the oak arm-chair, or the chimney-corner cat.“ She had taken care of Parson Abbot's children: She mothered her sister's numerous offspring after she had made a poor Inarriage. nursed her father. mother, and sister when they lay dying. And when Parson Abbot drowned one dark night while rowing across Wind- ham Pond, she cared for Mrs. Abbot when she was affected with the ' Symptoms of insanity and "became a sort of aunt to the whole familyJ Because of her charitable works. Sanborn saw less of her than of Aunt R113. busy as she "deve10psd her curiosity to a microscopic degree." But his Aunt Rachel, he says, ”impressed my imagination more, and, when ill 0.- shedied, in 18149, I wrote some verses about her that were printed." 'She was gentle by nature and by grace, and deserves,” he wrote half a century later, "not to be forgotten." Difficult as it is to discover any facts that might explain Sanborn's later career in public charities, Aunt Rachel's interests may stand as a most important influence on San- born's deve10ping ideas.6 The farm land on which the homestead stood had been settled by the family's ancestor, the first settler of Hampton. He was the Rever- end Stephen Bachiler, whose non-conforming, independent, lusty, and doggedly persistent ways had brought upon his head the wrath of Governor Winthrop and the lords Brethren of Massachusetts. 30111 in England in 1560, educated at Oxford, he had been forced because of his religious beliefs to forsake his vicarage in Hampshire to become the minister of a group of merchants and husbandmen who had Obtained a large tract of land, the Plough Patent, in Maine, In June, 1631, Governor WinthrOp noted the arrival of their first group. "These were the company called the Husbandmen, and their ship called the P. laugh. Most of them were familists and vanished away.” A year later Winthrop noted that old ”Mr. Batchellor (being aged 71)” and about 31m “other honest men” had arrived with their families. Though Bachiler discovered that his followers had scattered, that his Maine Parish had failed to materialize, and that he had lost a major part of his life's savings, he organized a church at Iynn. Sinborn Genealogy. pp. 621-623- But the General Court of Massachusetts immediately ordered him to 'forbeare exercising his gifts as a pastor or preacher publiquely in our pattent, unless it be to those he brought with him, for his contempt of authority and till some scandles be removed.” For seven years Bach- iler was ordered about from parish to parish until 1638, when he was permitted by the Lords Brethren to begin a plantation at Hampton in New Hampshire, where he Laid out the town with the help of young John Win- throp. The Hampton church likewise was soon torn asunder. As the old man was spiritually sympathetic with such mystics and enthusiasts as Roger Iilliams, Henry Vane, John Wheelwright, and Anne Hutchinson, and as he "did solicit the chastity of his neighbor's wife, who acquainted her husband therewith," he was excommunicated. After long controversy he fled to Strawberry Bank, a Maine fishing village near the original Plough Patent he had hoped to settle, ”fell into the snares" of his housekeeper, “one of Satan's shepherdesses,” married her in his eighty- e1ghth year. After she was convicted of adultery, he sailed for Eng- land, settled his property on his three grandchildren-4m of whom were Sanborns-nand died "peacefully“ in Hackney at the age of 100. M Sanborn, "The Hard Case of the Founder of Old Hampton: Wrongs of Rev. Stephen Bachiler,” Granite Monthly, max (1900), 215-227; Victor C. Sanborn, “An Unforgiven Puritan," Granite Monthly, XLIII (1911), 73- 113: linthropjs Journal, ed. James Kendall Hosmer, 2 vols. (New York: Scribner's, 1905), 1.73, 31. (Sanborn in the introduction to his ar- ticle cited here says, ”The immediate occasion of the following address Vac a desire to make available to the peOple of the five towns originally founded by Rev. Stephen Bachiler...the facts of his life before his foes “Might his name into scandal.... The recent historian of Hampton Falls, hr. Warren Brown (113* cousin), was misled by inadequare papers in his if tel All of the Sanborns in America were descended from this lusty cen- tenarian through his daughter Anne, whose husband was probably William Samborne of Brimpton, 38rk8h11‘0-8 Added to this inheritance were the characteristics of Edward Gove, who, as a leading member of the colonial governor‘s administrative assembly, proved a rebellious and democratic spirit. For inspiring an open but quixotic rebellion of the New Hamp- shire farmers against the Crown in 1683 he was thrown into the Tower of London for high treason. Though the chromosomes for non-confomity do not always conform, Sanborn's voluminous accouts of these two ancestors suggest that he may have inherited certain qualities: admirable determination: courage to the point of foolhardiness: hatred of arbitrary rule by the oligarchy, “—- Possession to revive the scandal in a manner very disagreeable to the Inany descendents of Mr. Bachiler. With this exception,...Mr. Brown's history...“ a very useful and commendable volume." Ep. 215] Victor C. Sanborn in his ”An Unforgiven Puritan,” cited above, gives the reader a choice of interpretations: "Two portraits are offered of him. In one, You may see an erring and disgraced old man, hunted from place to place by his own mistakes, fleeing from England to America and finally hiding in mgland from the results of his senile misconduct. I prefer to see in the other a high-minded but unsuccessful patriarch, with the defect of his qualities, at variance with the narrow and doomed intent of the Bay oligarchs, spending his life in the vain search for religious free- dom and rebelling at the limitations and prescriptions which time was to show were impossible in a free and gradually enlightened democracy. Driven from place to place by the autocracy first of the English church and then of the Winthrop colony, at last he saw triumphant the princic Plea of social and religious enfranchisement for which he spent his life. his means and his best ambitions.“ [p. 113] 8 Sanborn Genealogy, p. 71+. \e whether political or ecclesiastical, and love of its opposite, democracy; independence of mind and a natural tendency to refuse to confom.9 All of Sanborn's American ancestors were born in Bachiler's origi- nal town of Hampton, from which .five towns sprang: Hampton, Hampton mu. North Hampton, Seabrook, and Iensington. Hampton Falls held its first town meeting in 1718 and voted in 1726 to raise its own minister rates and become independent. Located in Rockingham County, in the most southeasterly corner of the state. its village center lay only Ml feet above sea level. or its “(Judo acres, one seventh were salt marsh which had drawn the first farmers there, for in the mud and silt of the marshy flats grew a rich. abundant black grass that fattened the cows and burst l” the haylofts. 10 Hampton Falls was a farming community. In fact. says Sanborn, "For new years the bulk of the New Hampshire people were farmers or farm-~ laborers,-the mechanics, except in the largest towns. worked on their Own fans or their neighbors' a part of the year, and the minister of the parish, the country doctor and lawyer, and the village schoolmaster all had fame large or small. . . . The blacksmith at the corner of the road might also be a farmer. and the carpenters and cabinet-makers. if they prospered at all, became 1and-owners."n _——— Sanborn, "i'he 80-Called Rebellion of 1683,“ Granite Monthly. XXIII (1902), 39-56 and 85-111: J. c. Sanborn, "Edward Gove's Insurrec- ‘iggl-llof 1683-'i'he Second American Rebellion,” Granite Monthly, X (1587), 88. lo Sanborn, "History and Poetry from the Life of F. B. Sanborn of Concord. Massachusetts,“ Granite Monthly, morn (1901;). 20. Brown. History pi Hampton Falls, pp. 13, fill-31¢}. l Sanborn, "The New Hampshire Way of Life.“ Sanborn Genealog, p.615. “‘6...— 10 Everybody at the homestead worked hard to try to make the farm . and orchards yield a profit:L2 As a boy of eleven Sanborn learned all the common activities of farming—driving oxen. riding the horse to plow and rake hay. planting and hoeing corn and potatoes, weedinsr the garden, cleaning the barn, chopping wood.13'l‘he family carted their beef. hay. wool, potatoes, corn, chickens, and Red Russet apples "to the nearer market towns of Exeter and Newburyport,--or rarely Ports- south. fourteen miles off," and sold them or traded them for the sugar. flour. molasses, salt fish, dried fruit, and cotton cloth brought to the country stores by the coastal schooners from Boston. Boston, the fifth largest city in the United States, a metrOpolis of 61,392 pecule. lay fifty miles away at the farthest edge of their universe of import and export trade?” But Hampton I‘alls slept blissfully through the clamor of world Commerce. A dead little place. the prejudiced called it, "a desolate. ' 1 sordid, dismal little place.‘ Indeed, though it was politically aware, “—— It is odd that in his numerous reminiscences. Sanborn never in- dicates the size of their farm or tells whether it did yield a profit. It is the opinion of Sanborn's niece, Miss Josephine L. Sanborn. of 19 Oxford Street, Haverhill, Mass“ that the farm comprised 50 acres. Brown's Histon o_f_ H_a_mgt_og Falls lists the state, county, town, and school tax paid by each inhabitant for various years (pp. 1:69-1:75). This. however, does not say much, for too many variables must be con- sidered. Sanborn's remark in Recollections (II, 297) that while he was. at Phillips Exeter his "means were limited" probably tells us the most. _ 13 1“Sni'ohorn, ”The New Hampshire Way of Life." Ssnborn Genealogy. p.615; 31'0“. History E Ha__m‘_oto£ Falls, p. 3141;. 15From my conversation with Mr. Francis Bachiler Sanborn, third and 0111! surviving son of Sanborn, at his summer home, 10 New York Boulevard, 3” Girt, New Jersey. August 28. 1951. Ir. Sanborn, 80 at that time, appeared young and agile and in full command of his faculties. Sanborn, "History and Poetry.“ p. 29. In my “0'- 11 it was little stirred by economic and social C‘a‘.:¥n(-'§e. It never seemed to prosper, if growth in pooulation, excitement, and thriving industries symbolize prosperity. In 1830 its census taker counted 522 people: in 16 1.8140. 656; in 1350, 6140; in 1860, 691; in 1870, 679: and in 1830, 673. when the family drove to Newburyport to sell their supplies, they drove past Hampton Falls' only store, its sign advertising "Foreign and Do- 1? mestic Goods” rotting into illegibility. 0f local industry there were the gristmill, the sawmill, and the carding, fulling and dyeing mill at the river falls.18Gradually, after 18140, shoe shOps dotted the town, and the "young men and some of their elders made sale shoes for the man- ufacturers of Lynn and Haverhill; the women in the houses 'binding' the uppers before the soles were stitched on." Hills and Sleeper employed a number of men in the room over their store, and it was in such a place that Sanborn learned shoemaking. ”My brother and I learned this art; he to perfection, I rather awkwardly; and it was from the profits Of my first box of shoes that I paid the cost of my foot journey to 19 the White Mountains, in September, 1850.” When Sanborn was nine the Eastern Railroad was Opened for travel. ”Everything was done,“ says the town historian, “to drive it away as ~-'--———------. Opinion, he is extraordinarily outspoken, frank, honest, and objective in his remarks, which at times in their honesty bespeak some sadness and disillusionment in the ideas and activities of his father. He re- members Hampton Falls, however, as it appeared to him when a child. 1 6Brown, History 2; Hampton Falls, p. 114. 1 71mm, '9. 3146. 18 10mm, pp. 335-940. JSanborn, "History and Poetry," p. 86. far as possible. which has since proved a great disadvantage to the town and all who wish to do any business. The value of railroads to the continuity was not at all understood at the time.“ However. he points out. "Many places which before the days of railroads were cen- ters of trsde and business have by change in communication declined.‘ and odds e. trifle sadly. “This has been true to a certain extent of this town. which has not since been nearly as important a point as it see in stage tines."2°8o the people saved themselves from the soot and cinders of the railroad and settled back again to live in the mem- ory of stage times. when Ha-pton rolls was the stage town. when its taverns stabled 125 gleuing horses for the coaches of commerce and travel on the turnpike. the artery between Hampton Falls and the heart or the any. busy world. And the farsers could talk of the day when the stage furnished the- s fine .mrket for their hay and grain at good Prices. ' Yet there were my social activities: town meetings. society .eetings. church on Sunday. Ihe lea Joined the Free Masons and the Odd Fellows end both gentle-en and ladies could Join the Anti-Tobacco Society. he Rockinghnl County Division of the Sons of Temperance was Finely conceived in 18117. and the Cadets of Temperance a year later. But “fr:- sone came." says the town historian. after a few years the hti-iohacco Society burned itself. out and the Cadets of Tuperance. 'like the good little boy In the Sabbath-school book. died young. '22 20"" Iron. p. 39h. Me. F. We 22 I—b-i—d'. pp. #134115. Q n- Al 13 '!he scholar nay read it for himself in these 637 pages: George Ieshington slept here. Lafayette's carriage halted on the main street. GenJinfield Scott stopped at the tavern—spring of '39—and her most distinguished son. the Honorable Mesohech Wears. President of New Hamp- shire. wae honored by the Granite State in 1853 with a monument made free Italian narble that cost the state legislature $2.500. "the ex- 2 posse of the town for grading and fencing [amounting to] $27h.80.* San‘bom obtained his early education from the Hampton Falls Ichools and his brother Charles. Before he was four his sisters took his to the red schoolhouse on the ridge leading to his Grandfather I-eavitt's fam.2h mug. San‘born says that "naturally. in such a com- lunity. the couch schools were good."25a contemporary says I"nmlti- tudes' of the schoolhhuses were pronounced to be 'absolutely dangerous to health and lerals.' and this in the most flourishing villages as ‘ell as in the rural districts.'26 The town at its annual meeting Olected a prulential collittee to hire the teachers. and the commit- tee's choice. we the town historian. 'too often turned on who was 2 co-ittee to hire. and not on the merit of the candidate." 7 h aims" pp. 263-272. huh-mg. 2 Banbon. 'Xistory and Poetry.” 1). 22. 617 Sanborn. 'he New Halpshire lay of Life.’ Sgborn analog. ,0 e asnmrtf L_ the g-issigner o_f (firm on Sch___o___ols. Lew mshire 19W. p. 13. in Janes Truslow Mme. New land in the R uhlic 1 5'13 (Boston: Little. Brown. 192? . p. 335. TSan‘born was about 15 '11!!! this lepert appeared.) 27BN'Is p. 527s sa :‘Iftl‘. "r "9 Hi: '3 1h There were. of course. three academies within walking distance of the homestead: the famous Phillips Academy at Exeter. Hampton MW (tore Rum cbosto fitted for college) and Bockinghan Academy. run by “10 hptloto in Hampton rolls. The public schools were taught in the “Mr bv young college students training for the ministry. or by grad- notes of these three academies?8 Yet a brilliant man of such calibre as Irena. Bowen. then also a tutor in philosophy at Harvard. appeared as one of Santos-11's teachers?9 Down. however. was perhaps the excep- t!” 1‘ "the old-fashioned district school. in which everything '8' ““5“ t° both sexes. from the alphabet upward. and in which there lisht be pup11. on“, years old. taught by a youth of fifteen.“ lev- “flmmt 8Cuborn felt 'its advantages'were obvious: for though the tucher night my. forty pupils and thirtyh-five classes. to be taught in 3&0 limit... at the rate of nine minutes and eight seconds to a “‘“P‘flt the younger learned so such from hearing their elders re- °“°» that as such knowledge. irregularly gained. got into the heads of ”1° bra-sht pupils as is more nethodically insinuated into them now by u” l'lewer nodes of teaching}0 at any rate. before he was eleven he had begun algebra and Latin and read along "by himself‘ for several M 11‘ Hepos. the colloquies of Erasmus. fei'lmceH and .Virgil. lhen ‘% asst-noon, 529.1532 gang, 1). 617; Mollections. II. 257-258. Han” 13°0011ections, II. 258: Samuel Eliot lorison. Three Centuries of \30- a1 33.133 m up. 1936). pp. 290-293. "' Sankara. Sanborn Genealog. p. 618. 15 I“ Is eleven a schoolmaster from nearby lpping induced him to study Greek grammar. but his father put a stop to it. and he Iunwillingly gave it up.“ 3. took up Greek again when he was fourteen. and read it “marl: the rest of his life? sinborn and much of his education to his brother Charles. ten "‘1" his senior. from when he learned the rudiments of Latin and much at ten and Genan at sixteen?2 But Whom obviously gained his greatest knowledge through his ovn Prints reading, extraordinary for one so young. and pursued with ”‘1 ""1 Plea-are among the books in the public and private libraries "-m Village. It was ”random reading. with little method or guidance. but 1! v retuuy. wary,” he says. “it laid a foundation for the Iiscellsneon. knowledge in many directions which I had acquired before entering «11.3., and which gave me in some degree an advantage over other students who had followed the stricter discipline of the class- 1°d Ichools. It also furnished as with much nterial for illustration and r“ ‘hen I became a teacher melf. as I did in a small way. but '1 thout Gollpemsation. while in college.33 I I‘M my political opinions began to manifest themselves at In” N. sight} he says. 'yet w literary life began even earlier. 3\ l the 1, tubers, ”History and Poetry.“ 1). 29; Recollections. II. 257-253 I (1899) . 37- W. 11. 259-260. 32 W’sanbom, em. Charles Henry Sanborn of Hampton Falls.‘ Granite 33 ¥ 16 "Id under influences very favorable to the formation of scholarly hab- its.“ hough the boy had access to the libraries of his father. his brother Qiarles. and his Grandfather Leavitt. he found most important the 11pm“. founded, by Dr. Langdon. the retired president of Harvard. th' library of Parson Jacob Abbot. his successor. and that of the M10“ Sewing Circle of the Unitarian parish? 1h- Reverend Ssauel Langdon. 1:. 13.. thirteenth president of Bar- m. had lived in the old parsonage within a few yards of the home- ‘t‘u-Js He w I“ little qualified for the presidency [as his prede- cessor] either in naming or sense of government.‘ andth langdon hm Pniidsnt in 1771!. "it gave great delight to the sons of lib- mm but a. wueular gratification to the Sons of Harvard. who got 1’“ 0‘ M- as soon as they dered}6 'l'hey dared in 1730. and he preached in the Hampton 19,11. congregational nesting house till.' dying in 1797. 1" “Muted his library to the church 'for the use of the ministry. “in Md collection of Latin. Greek. and English books.‘ “historical “11°" quartos. octaves. and pamphlets.” Parson Abbot. on the other M’ founded the Social Library I'owned in shares by his parishioners and anally kept in the parsonage.“ a collection of beoks"uho11y in mm. and aore popular in its quality}7 hat was contained in the \315 35%.. n. 255; I. 17-18. bony, sahbom. Sanborn Genealog, p. 617. (This disagrees with San- ss'tatenent 'in Recollections. I. 17. his I "Oriana, p. 100. For Sanborn's attitude toward Dr. Langdon. see “I! 1- langdon (1723-1797). of Boston. Portsmouth. Harvard College. “Langptgnreuea Granite Monthlz. mm (1901:). 209-228 [part 1] end 8'!.":1"~><>rn. Banborn Genealog, p. 617: Recollectiong. I. 17. M'I‘i CL- :1111. Lt’ 1? newly started 'Iadies Library! run by the Sewing Circle of the Unitar- 1“ Melt. besides a couplets Shakespeare. Sanborn does not say. But " W safely asme that it housed little of froth and frivolity. for it its 'under the energetic nanagenent of Miss Fanny Caldwell. the sis- t0! and housekeeper of our widowed clergyman. Parson Caldwell}8 All of a”. Personal and public libraries laid “the foundation of a reading and studio” may,” a fact probably common in New Hampshire. It m the firet state to pass a law "authorizing towns to aid in estab— um‘ ”‘1 mintaining public libraries.‘ the first library being as- teblished at Peterboroueh. near Hampton Falls. in 183359 If “born's aenory serves his right. he must have been precocious indeed: his tastes. catholic perhaps by necessity. are characterized in his long, detail“! catalogs of his boyhood reading matter. Typical ""Nu'e mm, nun-net's mammm 93:929.- Mdrldee‘ e 34;; 2; Elena mg. and Howie of Lochgoin's g_o_d_'_e_ m & Pergecutgn. He read the Old Testament through before he m fight. and "this of itself was a literary training to one who was old “Wish to feel the force of its remarkable English style.‘ And a." "re m m and Pope's ELSE 91; at” In the Social Library he found 'books of travel. adventure. and but...” as well as fiction. There he read Marie ldgeworth. Hannah 1101-. ’ find English and mpg-1m poetry. chiefly Burns. Moore. ‘rhonson. % 39\.'R’°Ollections. II. 256. towns—flaw 19“? do. n. 131. We. 11. 255-257. 263-26h. ¥ 18 Campbell. Southey. and Longfellow. But his "greatest find' at the age °f 016M. was a volume of Shakespeare which included gm 2. Richard El. "“1 Q; fill. 'which I almost learned by heart before. at the age of twelve. I got hold of the whole series of the Plus. in the newly started ladies' Library? Of biography he says he 'had. of course. made the cus- ‘an readings in inerioen history end biography in my boyhood. and de- lighted in the ayths of Parson lee-is" and he was “quite as familiar with ha the Iodel blomphy of Franklin. by his own modest and skillful hand." was these early years he saved his money to btv his own library. ‘0 'hich he kept adding during the rest of his life. His first purchase Ill Scott's novels. then 'Manion.‘ Byron's 'Childe Harold.“ and the one- 701‘0 herican edition of all Byron's poems. plme and letters. Carey's hate in the Lsdies' Library and his own Tasso gave him his first taste 1|. °f 1mm literature) “I“! he became fourteen he began to read Hawthorne. Carlyle. and ”Mn. and "perceived that the bent of my mind was with that school of n’iter..e 'smOr Resartus' and Hawthorne's "losses" were the first volumes of these authors that I read: but I came upon Enerson's poems as I! .3 were copied into the newspapers from the M. and the Western .“Qnger' of James Freeman Clarke. where they first appeared. tith- m‘ ‘3' understanding their run import. they addressed in me that fining sentiment which. with no corresponding gift of poetic expres- °“- I shared with him and many others. so early did I begin to RS %%.. II. 259’2570 3%.. n. 263. %.. II. 259. 19 read hersen's writingleeeethat I can hardly remember when I did not know that. in part and superficially. A natural affinity for that school of thought which he most clearly represented. and some- thing akin to his intuitions in my own way of viewing personal and Iocisl aspects. really brought me into relations with him before I ever saw his. or ever heard that thrilling voice. which few could forget who had once listened to its deeper tones. 3' bean this reading of hereon when he was sixteen. for he could re- ..b” 'POming with indignation Irancis Bowen's scoffing review of u” 'Po..." and at seventeen he read ")Iature'I in its new edition of 18149. 3° “Be however. little affected by literary criticism in those m' Though he felt 'indebted to a very different school of authors. the writers for the weekly Boston I'm—st. for much literary news and en- tewumt in their book reviews.“ he derived his keenest pleasure from u“ 1°38 quotations-iron the book being reviewed. ”while the criticism pan“ 1” ‘37 boyish mind. as the idle windfis - h" Were his literary activities and interests merely passive. for ” h' m ”‘Posing verse and dramatising much of his reading with his plus-1;... mid by the time he was 18. and his brother Charles was study- log “01'.“ poetry. Sanborn studied with him. The first piece Sanborn print“! he a version of Dhrger's 'lild Huntsman." which came out in the N" aanpshire Indgendent Democrat when he was seventeen. Sanborn's Car for Verse was keen. and it is quite remarkable how well he could up: vb uh 3-11 hglish such a song as i'hekla's from Schiller's Piccolonini. 16h h° 'rote two years later: 1,5113%" II. 260-262. “flee 11. 29‘s %.. n. 266. '- “.‘e-a . Deep --‘ (9' 9‘ st "lee t... s51 The cloud doth gather. the oak-wood roar. The maiden roams on the green of the shore: The wave it is breaking with night, with might. And she singeth out in the gloomy night. Her eye all beclouded with weeping: 'The heart has withered. the world is void. And giveth nought further to be enjoyed: Thou Holy One. call back thy child to thee! The Joy of the world has been tasteQTby me.-- line was it. living and loving. Soc: t Mlin Benjamin Sanborn papers. in the American Antiquarian "m. 1. Worcester, Mass. The reader might like to compare Sanborn's v on with a literal translation of the poem and with Coleridge's ”'1”. 'hi ch. of course. Sanborn may have seen. There are also lines a“ "rd-rm of diaries Lamb that Sanborn may have studied. Here is a literal translation: Elie oak-forest bellows. the clouds gather. the damsel walks to and fro on the green of the shore: the wave breaks with night. with night. and she sings out into the dark night. her eye discoloured with weeping: the heart is dead. the world is empty. and further gives it nothing more to the wish. Thou holy One. call thy child home. I have enjoyed the happiness of this world. I have lived and have loved. 301% is Coleridge: The cloud doth gather. the greenwood rear. The damsel paces along the shore: The billowe. they tumble with night. with night: And she flings out her voice to the darksome night: Her bosom is swelling with sorrow: I.l'he world it is empty. the heart will die. There's nothing to wish for beneath the sky: Thou Holy One. call thy child away! I've lived and loved. and that was to-day lake ready my grave-clothes to—morrow. 12...: "uni f Th lgrk f r ed rick Schill t onsare ron___e_ s9__ r e er: Historicg Mic? ( London: Bell and Daldy. 18695. pp. 2147-255 and were brought telation by Dr. Stuart A. Gallacher. associate professor in the 1'itlebg;.;“'3 of Foreign Languages. Michigan State College. to when I an filso for critical comments on Sanborn's metrical version. 0“ O. 21 Sanborn says that his "politics; opinions began to manifest them- 8 selves at seven and eight years old.” As a baby he was not much young- ” that: the current brand of Jacksonian politics. That lusty political infant had been born-«the conservatives of New Hampshire declared--by ”1° dark of the moon. Jackson's election in 1828 had been "an earth- quite”! and his inauguration had turned into a drunken brawl. The President's creed was ”Let the peeple rule!”-—a creed that "Mind a great deal to those who were sick of Jefferson's theory that an 0d11¢a.1:ed aristocracy endowed with virtue and talents should rule 3 dmcracy. ”Jackson is one of us." the people said: he believed in ”lineal equality and equal opportunity for all; he hated monopoly and ”1° °°nplexities of capitalistic finance?0 The people elected him “an” they believed that the government of the nation was too central- 1'“' m“ the federal Constitution was being interpreted too loosely; “I" “It the Supreme Court and Congress had erred in chartering a sec- ”‘1 United States Bank. by maintaining a high protective tariff. and by ”“1““ to parcel out the land in the vest in the way the people liked. 1"" "I. of these political acts. they declared. toadied to the bank- 1 a" Mercial. and manufacturing lords of New England. The farmers. ”\hollections. II. 255. Ind a mi material on Jacksonian danocracy is taken from Allan Nevins ea, (run? Steele Conager. The zgcket Histogz g; 3113 United States. rev. °" You, 1951), pp. 133-7177: Charles A. Beard and nary a. Beard. 9am ”to. A: ngggg givili tion (new York. 1931:). I. 5u2-5so: James ”Whirl-«fl... lew land E _t_h_g ismblic: 1776-1850 (Boston: Little. %€), 179—.— 302-37 ; and Marcus I. Jernegsn. "Andrew Jacksonfl'yg- ‘ aherioene. 191:7 ed.. xv. 575-576. “ ”its and Conager. p. 170. tint! zit-nor I“ '7 22 Mimflarly in the South and Host. felt they had been discriminagid lcdnst. Jackson would bring a Utopia where the common man ruled. fhe people in New Hampshire responded to this new brand of demo- ”9Q. fhough political sentiment in the state in 1790 sided with the Ml'l‘lllists. the representatives of wealth and culture. the old order m “hanged. From New Hampshire's earliest beginnings the leading in- dnstry had 1,.“ fuming, and the farmers. the great mass of the people. had deluded g, change. Although they contended. at first. rather mild- 1’ 1‘ P°1ilt1cal affairs. their patriotism was so fired by their ani- '0'“? tom Inglend in the Revolution and the war of 1812 that be- ‘M 1805 and 1816. their candidates had been elected for six terms to “‘9 Moml1gtg| five? Ihen Jackson's victory at How Orleans “gave a lustre to the treaty of Ghent. the defeat of the Federalists was as- Wt§3md in 1816 they not with irretrievable defeat." In 1829. I‘m-W138 Jmun's election. the farmers elected Benjamin Pierce Gov- mor ot the state and free that tine until 1855. excepting for a temp- ”“7 1‘O‘Vex'se in 18%. the people elected Jacksonian Denocrats?‘ “Inn in 18140, when Van Buren was defeated by a great majority. New Hampshire a" “‘1 lore than 6.000 pluralityo's 8gll'liol-n r-embers that his political opinions began to form when he . M 'O‘Ven years old because. he says. 'I certainly took a lively 51.6%“. I. Jernegan. “Andrew Jackson.‘ pp. 575-576. 192.7 .1 J‘mg. rug-bank. colby. ”New Hampshire." hgzclgpedia Americana. 902053' ' xx. 132 and 125. Mir-113050111. New Hampshire: hits-e g; Egpular Government (Boston: 55 c0113, '1" Hampshire.'p. 132. ss‘n'born. Lew £922!!! 11'0. Po 2530 'Q. . OI he. I. 23 interest in lew Hampshire elections in 1839-4403::6 "In. a democracy like Ours (and New Hampshire in my boyhood was more nearly a pure democracy “In any region. not excepting modern Greece. which I have since visited) it is singular how early the political instinct is developed and stimu- 1‘Vhtlfngis instinct for politics was no doubt stimulated by his fami- 1’ history and his early environment. As far back as 1683. his qua- dr‘lple-great-grandfather. Edward Gove. had led a rebellion against the ”b31117 and fascistic rule of Governor Cranfield. Charles the Second's rem lieutenant in How Hampshire. Another ancestor of the same gener- stion equally interested in the early politics of Hampton was Lieutenant John Sambo'rne. leader of its military forces. selectman. and commissioner. “‘3 (Mules II decided to make Hew Hampshire a royal province in 1679. 0" Of the king's advisers wrote to the Lords of Trade that in Hampton 9” 0f the four men 'most eminent and best qualified for His Majesty's “MI [was] John Semborne}8 . But‘ far more recently. on Sanborn's mother's side of the family. h“ “Mather Leavitt "was not only a J effersonian Democrat. but their leader in this region.“ and frequently a member of 63h, legislature?9 “M he was a gentleman of “natural high spirits. and "of a cheerful Recollections. II. 255- E394. I. 20. Saigborn Medea. p. 77. 9 5 Grant 351130111. “mo-as Leavitt and His Artist Friend. James Akin,s rfi £21531. m (1898). 231. Sunbeam. "History and Poetry.“ Granite Monthlz. mm (1901;). 81. a O . . ‘ f -- .5 O .. V ‘ t I! O I s Q \ . . f l ' Q s O Q 'I 0 v t 0 e V C ._.....- . -- . O . ‘. F m I" I u f m be' .4 vr-e Ill 2h turn.l he would occasionally threaten to bolt the party when he thought 110 had been slighted politically. On one such occasion the Hon. Levi 'Mbury. the u. 8. Senator from New Hampshire whom President Jackson “I soon to appoint Secretary of the Navy. in an effort to mollify him. “to his a letter implying. says Sanborn. that “Squire Leavitt had done MI duty in the March election when the Jackson Democrats carried the Itlte by h,ooo majorityJ “Indeed." says Sanborn. "no New Hampshire Mont was more faithful to his party. through good and evil. than 'smre Tom." Grendfather Leavitt was also town moderator. selectman. and the 10M Justice of the peace. ' Prank as a boy many times watched democra- °J at work. for his grandfather held court in his dining room where “he used to sit in his great chair. by the east door. looking out upon his “9‘1“"! and the four great elms that overshadowed the house. El At his Mather-u house and at his own he heard Ithe Jackson and Van Buren “‘1 hm Horton gospel of Democracyszdiscussed enthusiastically while 1‘“ Mather. a fat old man with shaggy gray hair and clear-cut fea- ‘W. Punctuated his points with his gold-headed once?3 ‘I all of Sanborn's relatives were Democrats-oexcepting his Whig “a” 1n Boston—he was "naturally of that partisan faith as early as .15“ "are old.“ One of his mother's cousins. loses Norris. was a concreel-an and later a Senator: his Uncle Benson Leavitt was a senior 1 Sanborn. “Thomas Leavitt.’ pp. 231‘?”- 6 6:8ecollections. I. 21. “auburn. “History and Poetry." p. 82. 0'. u ‘1 .6 25 aMal-Ian and acting mayor of Boston: and the other Leavitts of Pitts- field were vocal in politics. The boy did considerable reading in the political newspapers stored in the garret. His father subscribed to Isaac Hill'- New Hampshire T} triot and low Hampshire Register before Sanbom was born. and these libem .11..“ m' sfmted [his] eager appetite for political fact and fiction." 'hen he was nine."the weekly edition of the Boston 2291 came 1'" ‘ brilliant and unprincipled Journal. very entertaining to a boy.' I’OIitically opposed to these were 'the mild hater yin-m. antif Diocratic. and an occasional Portsmouth Journal. Boston Mercantile m and other Ihig newspapers. which the clerg and wealthier farm- 01‘! and merchants. and my own Ihig uncles. took. who sent copies to their trenchant Duocratic father. the old Squire.“ M's brother Charles was without question the person most in- fluential 1n the forming of his political philosOphy; at a time of 81"“ Political crisis. it was Charles who stimulated him to make the 1’3“" 40¢1sion that was to affect his political attitude for the rest 0‘ 111! life. Though most of the Sanborns and the Leavitts had been hunk united in attitude. “there came a change o'er the spirit of my drm.‘ Sanborn me. ‘he invincible New Hampshire Democrats them- “1Voe (turn-sled. and in 18% our brilliant Congressman. Hale. of Dover. refunegu to so with the inority of his party for the annexation of run" Ihen the ante legislature directed its senators and representa- t . 1'0! to vote for the' measure. 3'10 publicly denounced 1*" Though the ‘65“ We; 1. 20-23. Li Y1 1‘ 15..” I'.’ I!!! 26 hecratic State convention reassembled and struck his name fron their ticket. Hale ran Just the sane—as an Independent Democrat. But as no 080 received a sufficient majority. that section of New Hampshire went “represented for two years. Then. after a whirlwind campaign. known 3' “the Bale eton of 1315,! he was elected representative. chosen Speak- ” Of the House. and later became the first Senator to avow opposition 65 ‘ ‘0 Ilavery. In 18’“. when Hale divorced the rest of the Democrats. Charles. 3““ twenty-two. left the party with his and other important Democratic laden. Ewe years later they carried the state against Franklin Pierce. loses Norris. and 'other eachesis of the pro-slavery Democracy in New Halpshii-aJ In June of that year George Gillan Fogg. editor of the Con- cord £21 endent Duocrat. which had been started the year before “to aid in the political revolt.“ was chosen Secretary of State in New Mm“. He immediately selected Charles assistant secretary. and the latter Icombined work in the state house with a share of the edi- “n‘l tlike at the Duocrat office." Charles worked for the anti- m'“? party for more than ten years. twice representing Hampton Falls ‘n “‘0 Itate legislature. He wee one of the few members of the some 'h° Prevented the Democrats from leaving hr. Hale out of the United States Senate. and helped elect him again the next year?6 “1011 his brother became a leader of the Independent Duocrats. Whom was Just thirteen. He Joined the party with him. though he 737:1; Parker Bale.“ We Americana. 19h7 ed.. Jun. 63-63”. you!!! further? (:18); )m;;1;; Henry Sanborn of Hampton Falls.“ Granite r 27 “I still too young to vote. This “introduced a political schism in both branches' of his family. the Sanborns and the Leavitts. His father 1"Mined with the old party. but one of their cousins Joined the new one Iith them. Cousin loses Norris. the Congressman. and the other Leavitts 01 Pittefield “were active in the pro-slavery Democracy." he schism was never healed. and it was the occasion of much grief and some anger to my father to see his sons arrayed against him and his party at elections. In time. the Boston alderman [Uncle Benson Leavitt] also became wan in his Opposition to the anti-slavery par- t3: so that neither at home nor when I visited Boston did I find 'ylpathy with my Opinions among my elders. This did not shake my youthful enthusiasm in the least. I had Joined the party of youth. I“It! among my schoolmates and younger friends. and in their families. there was much encouragement for my growing sentiments. l'hose sentiments were also encoisiraged by the clergmen whom he met. who 7 "1'0 apt to be anti-slavery men. GTE-nape Leavitt was too old to Join the Independent Democrats?8 "The loss .of his sons. the illness of his wife. and the comparative ”31'“ Of his affairs by his absorption in politics. where he did not find the official promotion he hoped for. had combined with increasing '8' to diminieh hie nazural high spirits." ”Given to bewailing the de- 8mm! of the times.‘ “he continued to have glow anxieties for “10 future of the country from the sectional strife between North and South. the; a comet appeared. in one of his later years.“ eve Sanborn. I - ' he told me. in confidence. that it foreboded Civil lar on account of 0 ”1' “6601's.: 730¢:..___.¢>11ectione. I. 23-2‘1. ”unborn, Union-e Leavitt.” p. 233. Whitman. I'sietoi-r and Poetry.“ p. 81. “libel-n. Irhoeee Leavitt.‘ pp. 233-23h. _¥ L. 28 But the Halo ston. “this apparently trifling contest. was the 801‘- of great events. for Halo was the first Senator chosen on a dis- t1not anti-slavery platform; and the revolt in the New Hampshire De- . 71 m"Stacy prefigured the general reorganisation of parties in 1856." Subaru. excited and influenced by his brother. aligned himself from that ties forward against slavery and sympathised almost without em- °'Ption with the liberal. left-wing party or power. L11 the political literature of the dismal years of the Mexican Var and the territorial agitatione that followed were well known to me in specimens-ufor nobody could possibly read it all: and my hind was fully made up on the main question. That slavery was Wrong. that we of the North were governed by a minority small in nmbers but powerful in wealth and influence. made up of the fllsvoholders and their commercial and manufacturing allies at the North and West. and that the mass of the people must free selves from this dominating aristocracy. were truths that ap- POaled to my naturally democratic sentiments so early that I hardly remember when I thought otherwise. Yet I never gave in t0 the doctrine of the Garrisonians that the Union established by our fathers should be given up; although at times it seated as if only in that way could the evil institution of slavery be “11mm off. I was instinctively of the faith that our national Constitution was an anti-slavery document. as Gerrit Smith and 30hr! Brown declaredm-and as in fact it proved to be. when the "'01“ of the slave States forced upon the nation the alterna- tive of eaenoipation or the destruction of national existence. film this shows the turn of his mind. he had arrived at these conclusions gradually. His thinking had been affected by two or three "‘ng influences.“ One of these was the National 4.212., a weekly Pub“ 11|hed in weehington. in which Harriet Beecher Stowe. whittier. and “'11s!- writere IInaintained the attitude of the voting eaancipetion- 1'"I." Another was Horace Greeley's Tribune. which. 'hil. 61138138 *0 71 W. I. 23- $313!?! ' e a: Ill-33 .. ut- O... Ls eC'ee {Me‘- zziz 3!: f" It 6 e.- I] 29 the Ihig Party as long as it could. dealt 'the most trenchant blows at “10 monster of misgovernment which then controlled affairs in the United States.' a third influence-the strongest--was I'the tenor of all good literature." and he says: L11 literature worthy of the name is and must be on the side of freedom. though it may also be a maintainer of reasonable authority. For without freedom no good literature can be born or long exist. The posts are e the side of freedom and the Virtues and graces are so. too. Paralleling the trend of this bitter political activity in New a"'I’Ihire and the homestead were growing religious agitatione. “My religion. education was hardly so early and continuous.“ says Sanborn. 'se '1 literary studies.‘I His grandparents and great-grandparents had been loyal parishioners of Dr. Langdon. the pastor of the Congregation- al flock. But Grandfather Leewitt, ”more for political than spiritual reasons.“ Joined the ”coding Baptists aid refused to pay the church- rstos assessed by Hampton Falls. He was arrested. a fact that made MI More ._ political leader than before.“ for “while the Congregation- lliete or the “tending order' were generally I'ederalists. the sects ”Quote. Methodists. etc) were apt to be Jeffersonian Republicans."73 3- continued with theee rreewill or Christian Baptists until 18157when 1: ° hailed the movement for a Universalist society in town. Aaron and \2 . MN PP- 30‘31- 73 Ibid., , , 7’4“ I 18-19 Sanborn. “History and Poetry." 1:- 32- 1"”. \e. I ‘nlmle u 's: 2'» £71... I m 2' mos am i 3: :6 " '1... .l N In. 30 his brother became senbers. and old Grandsir Sanborn 'good-naturedly JOined. having already given up his Federalist politics.‘I These Uni- VOl‘salists never settled a pastor. had preaching in private homes and 'choolhouses for a few years. set up a theological library. and» became Unitarian in 1838. But neither Sanborn's grandfathers nor his father or brother often Vent to church. although the women of the households did. and Sanborn '38 not required to go regularly or attend Sunday school. He read the Universalist and Unitarian books. was familiar with the Bible. and. he “no 'at the nature age of nine. after reading how Origen and other Great fathers believed in final salvation for all. I declared myself a Univerlalist.‘ However. he never heard a Universalist preacher until 11° entered Harvard. but had the habit of attending the Baptist. Congre- gationaliet. or other churches. 'wherever there was good preaching and “Mine." Yet. we see how he was often activated by a compulsion for doing 501's work. In later years Sanborn never attended church. but. as a citizen °‘ Moore. belonged to the “Sunday Walkers" or "Ialden Ponliseociationd' 3' Probably irritated the Concord people leee than Thoreau. who made it ‘ P°1nt on Sunday Earning to be walking against the stream of traffic ”'“1‘8 toward church. Sanborn ”never went to church." W0 h“ son. *5 _30¢0110¢tions. I. 19—20. !ah' .sv .kps 31 'He didn't speak much about religion. But I think he felt as I do. that the Unitarian creed is a very satisfying creed because it is free °f I11perstition.zs Grandfather Leavitt's secession from the Congregationalists was ‘ Vibol of the trend of the times. a trend which led to the Tolera- t101:1 Act. passed in new Hampshire in 1319. Ilt provid [ed] that no POrson should be forced to Join any church or contribute to the support °f an: eccieeieetic?’ institution without his consent." Church and ““0 were divorced. lien Sanborn was eighteen he met Ariana Walker. She was Gate Crash cousin from Peterborough. and she had come to Hampton Falls for a visit. The fact of their nesting seems trivial. Yet it culminated in '- Ipiritual bonbehell. in a series of circumstances which brought Sanborn. his greatest happiness and his greatest grief. which he never mud 'riting about. and which affected his so deeply that. I min- tan“ " lay never be able to determine its precise influence upon his life and work. It could be proved. I believe. that his loss of Ariana mm hie life: it could also be proved that it was she to when he "0'1 his determination. his mental stimulus. and his insatiable acti- n" in four careers. 'i'o fileedore Parker he wrote: "Gonna-cation with l'rancis B. Sanborn. August 28. 1951. 1823) 752+ L—mrk- on Line M23 am 2.1: lad (ix-tor. n. m. J’a-es Ii‘ruslow Fin-ms. Lew ME... in the 1_?._epublic. p. 322. i: 2.”. 'b" I l ‘I.-. rm 1'3” :31 ml 3: . 'izzu ‘ ...01 I‘} -—X~ I! 32 Her influence turned the course of my life. I was a boy. untrained. without self-possession or an aim. Iith her. step by step. I know not how. I have come to the larger hepes and richer experience of manhood. Everything I have done. thouglt. studied. loved. has been for her and by neans of her. She has given me hope. courage. fgéth-u-all that I most needed. and when I most needed then. Sunburn has treated no other single episode in his life in such elabor- ste detail. and he continued to write about her in the public prints till the day he died. She was not the first girl Sanborn had met: he says he had been 'Iusceptible to the beauty of girls" and "slightly attached. at school or elsewhere. to this aaiden or that with fine eyes and a social or narrative 31“,? 50 had belonged for two years to the Hampton Falls Anti-Tobacco s°°1°fio 'a rather exacting literary society“ which had been estab— lished in 1813 by the minister of the Unitarian parish. Meeting in "1' upper social hall of the district school. its members read plays. “““ed. and produced a monthly Journal in manuscript called the §_ta_r_ 91% m. which elicited contributions—supposed to be anom— lom"fr¢l its mubers. Some of its literary contributions werethen :- cad “0‘14 at the regular monthly meetings. Sanborn ”early became a g. “ ,°°ncerd. Massachusetts. rree Public Library (hereafter referred 1’“,er z“30rd Library“). letter file 5: letter lumber 8-25. dated 8ft” . New Hampshire. July 27. 1851:. almost four years to the 'hen he met her. Sanborn was not yet on intimate terms with Perl:- do... 1.1.1 ° irate this. as may be seen by the opening salutation: ”w tam... “1:: Feeling sure that you will excuse the familiarity of this \cOllections. II. 268. l“ ,6 OJ ’-. 33 contributor. both in prose and verse." and one of his contributions was a mildly ridiculous burlesque of a dramatic poem then widely read. the 'Festus" of Philip Bailey. Sanborn's verses. purporting to be a newly discovered scene from this work. appeared in the July. 1819. is- sue. and Gate Gram. the editor. carried them and a ballad of his on one of her visits to Ariana in Peterborough. Cate told "Allow—as she was celled-about this 'handsoae boy-poet.“ and Anna. "always inter- ested in poetry and romancejowas amused and intrigued by his perform“ ance. She urged her clasest friend. Ednah Littlehale of hasten. to "it. 't laughing notice“ of the Festus scene. which pretended to be ‘3“ fron the London hguirer. and she followed it by a criticism of the ballad. latumlly. the perpetrator of the first hoax had an interest in ““118 the perpetrator of the second. He first saw this “lovely vis- 1°n 1;: youth and spiritual grace- in the Hampton Falls church July 20. 1850' 5110 two sat opposite and looked at each other across the church. Seated “It to cats. Anna "wrote on her folding fan with a pinéw-‘I 82 ‘03": dare look at Frank Sachs is handsome.-a poetic face.” while he \N 3p” s”null-n. “The Smiths and talkers of Peterborough. Exeter. and ”mud." Granite nonthlz. rm: (1399). 235. 8 an“. born. "History and Poetry from the Life of r. B. Sanborn." W will; mvn (lgoh). 113. (written at the age of 72.) Though pp...1°n"leion on both our hearts...was never effaced.‘I Sanborn's im- in '15: °3 the date as given in this article disagrees with that given 1ths and Ialkers.’ p. 235. which he wrote when he was 67. "313%.?“an Papers. American Antiquarian Society. In Sanborn's 1' 8 and Poetry." p. 112. the text reads. "I don't dare look at “cut 1‘): he has a poetic face.“ (I must again emphasize here the dif- h‘h thehblem the editor of Sanborn faces in choosing a text. I do not °1‘1ginal letters and Journals of Ariana Walker. though I have L o+ oi '\ m cf :31. 3! 1:“! “I ha. II 31. took stock of her in her dark hair and bonnet of French lace with blue strings. He saw her again that night in 'her pink hedge . . . made low in the neck." Who impression on both our hearts.“ he says. 'was instantaneous. and never effaced." 'l‘wo nigits later she wrote Ednah Littlehale: I have seen 1'. 8.. the young poet. a face like the early portrait of Raphael. only Frank's eyes and hair are very dark. ...Ihen we began to talk earnestly I forgot everything else in my surprise and pleasure. I was astonished and delighted. There was a charm about everything he said. because he has thought more wholly for himself than anyone I ever met. . . e In books. too. I was astonished at his preferences. It seemed Itrenge that Shellgz should be the favorite poet of an uncul- tivated. I should say. self-cultivated boy: but so it is. and he talked of him and of the poems as I never heard anyone talk. after his own fashion. . . . He excused himself for staying so 1“.» but said the time had passed rapidly. tints] seemed "17 Inch surprised that he had spoken so freely to a stranger; I think he himself will wonder at it. The conversation covered 3° my subjects that I could not help laughing on looking back upon it: he might have discovered the great fault of my mind. a “it Of method in my thoughts, as clearly as I saw his to be a “at 01‘ hope. But talking with a new person is to me like go- 136 f01‘ the first tine into a gallery of pictures. We wander “on one painting to another. wishing to see all. lest some- thinS finest should escape us. and in truth seeing no one per- fectly and appreciatingly. Only after many visits and long minority can we learn which are really the best. most sug- gestive and lost full of meaning: and then it is before two or that one passes the hours. 80 we wander at first from m toPic of conversation to another. until we find which are \ mt: {fem search. flush of the Walker material appears on typed at 1““ the Sanborn Papers at the American Antiquarian Society. on “fish Ye °he sheet of which Sanborn has typed:'(00pied March 26. 1905)“. ”Pod c 1‘'ion of this material is nearest the original? (1) Sanborn's 31337 at the American Antiquarian Society? (2) His printed version Hoot rellite Month for 1899? (3)3111 printed version in the Granite I 3°? E0137 (:11; His version printed in Recollections in 909 Hon. 1nd the originals I can hope to present no authentic transcrip- . W Vii“ {Em ‘. mm. ‘3 h.“ {.9311 W. $71" on. \ to“. u m}: {gamut L .m- 93 ‘3; wad mm; m: it's-ll: In: :i'c‘. ! t; m ‘3. it II 31". 93.2.: 1‘3. m ‘33; Mittz‘i m We \1 Ni". if. ‘23. it}. a... 32‘ tin“- v.1»; . m d ,‘ \a 5;! I i;. 35 those reaching farthest and deepest. and then it is those of which we talk most. My interest in l'rank 8. is peculiar: it is his in- tellectual and spiritual nature. and not himself that I feel so much drawn to. I can't say it rightly in words. but I never was so strongly gnawed in one where the feeling was so little personal. Their second evening together occurred a week later. after which she noted in her Journal: Last night I. 8. was here again. We had been wishing he would come but did not expect him. He was in a fine mood. but one or two things I regret in the evening's talk. He had spo- ken of many things earnestly. and at last he mentioned J as Richardson's proposal that he should enter the ministry.§3Ve all laughed. I wanted to say something of his future life: but I seemed to have no right. He said What is the last thing I should choose." We." said I. with decision. "preaching is not your mission.“ I felt as if I must go on. but I restrained my— self and was silent. He must have thought we ridiculed the idea of his becoming a minister. because we thought him unequal to the work. I did not feel this so fully then as I did after h. was gone: but it hurts me to have so repulsed him. for I thin]: he wished us to say something more-to tall: with him of himself and of his future. 0 golden Opportunity! I fear it is lost and will not come again. But Ire. Cram urged her to write the following note: ME. sh 'hen you spoke last night of Mr. R.'s proposition that you “Md enter the ministry. I have thought that what I replied “at And most have given you a wrong impression. When I said decision that I did not think preaching your mission. it for not because I feared you would fail in that. or in anything as ‘hieh you should heartily strive; but because it seems to . ‘f" if no one should take such a mission upon himself unless “1a a decided call. and is sensible of a peculiar fitness. \F‘ boat. ”I.“ this single-spaced material concerning Ariana Walker. San- “dude. lipase are indicated by M periods. mine by ungpgoed the [:31th was "a classmate in college of Thoreau....was them or ”her” an pastor in Haverhill. and a friend of Whittier as well as “J (Recollections. II. 23h.) sew! umfimnw \I. ‘!“":L‘. w as t._.».u:g~,t:,‘.u is? I ..‘.:' s m: t r m1: WW“ v Asst: m t. trifle‘ «I ‘r 'u‘. 113'. ft: a "be this: if. t.‘::.‘.n‘. m: ' u. r u s: 25'. t ‘m‘i‘, El‘ 5 . K {fish f: him yer: \‘i 2' \t‘ C. m n! ‘9‘“... , {‘3‘ “m an, a if. \‘ {3‘ 3‘.“ a ‘I'\‘ In... be Oh . Your work in life seems to me more clearly pointed out than that of most men: it comes under that last head in "Representative Men”: we need you as a writer. I know how much of a struggle and even of suffering such a life must contain. but Plato says. 'When one is attempting noble things it is surely noble also to suffer whatever it may befall him to suffer." I feel that there is that within you which cannot right- fully be hidden: and your success seems to me sure. if you will but bend your whole energies to this end. I wish I were wise enough to suggest something more than the goal to be reached: but I am sure you will have other and more effi- cient friends who will give you the aid of experience. Perhaps you will think I presume upon a short acquaint- ance to say all this: but it is so often given to us “to fore- see the destiny of another more clearly than that other can.“ and it seems to me only truth to strive “by heroic encourage- ments to hold him to his task.” Will you pardon my boldness? 1 Give you God-speed. Your friend. 8’4 you; Before they had known each other two weeks. during which there had. been ”memorable conversations in the owner evenings.“ she produced "a remarkable analysis" of him. an analysis. as Sanborn says. "of a nature m my to read.” m M or r. 3. s. u swarm th I”did analytic. the intellect predominating and governing 10:11am; feelings do not often obtain the mastery. Intel- ”; calm and searching. with a keen insight. equally open to t. and demerits. Much practical ability and coolness of no t Ont. He is unsparingly Just to his own thought. and is at “Wally moved therefrom. With great imagination he is not Vati 1 a dreamer. or if he i_s ever so. his dreams are not seer. RISE. and he has power to make them realities. He is vig- 0 healthy. strong. Calmness of feeling as well as of 5% 853°co11ect1one. II. 271-275. Sanborn. 'Smiths and Walkers.“ p. 236. ‘ ‘ 22%. h t .1 ‘ ‘ & mush! hfiI. fail be El hank how $5152.13: 1m! 2: £9.12. ; ; Lit?” : has! 2-; ‘t‘Ju 1‘ s I“; .I .- 311! a; . ' I 1! .| I.‘ . k, ‘t VI 37 thonat. is a large element in his nature; but there is fire under the ice. which. if it should be reached. would flame forth with great power and intensity. Imagination rich and vivid. yet he is somewhat cold: wants hope. is too apt to look on the dark side of things. Has great pride. It is one of the strongest elements of his character. Values highly independence. and thinks himself cagble of standing alone. and as it were apart from all others: yet in his inmost soul he would be glad of some may upon which to lean. and is influenced more than he is aware by those whose opinions he respects. There is much religion in him. He despises empty forms without the spirit. but has large reverence for things truly reverenceable. He is severe. but not more so with others than with him- self: yet he likes many. endures most. and is at war with f". Bis feelings are not easily moved. loves few-«perhaps £95; with enthusiasm. He is too proud to be vain. yet will have much to stimulate vanity. He fancies himself indiffer- ent to praise or blame. but is much less so than he imagines. He is open. and yet reserved; in showing his treasures he knows where to stop. and with all his frankness there is still much which he reveals to none. Has much intellectual enthusiasm. Loves wit. and is often witty; has much humor too. sees quickly the ludicrous side of things. and though he wants hope is seldom sad or dG'POndent. Has many noble aspirations yet unsatisfied. Still seeking. seeking. groping in the dark. He wants a 512% end for which to strive heartily: then his success game SURE. Much executive power. executes better than D s. Lores the beautiful in all things. He has much orig- ?‘11‘7: his thoughts and tastes are peculiarly his own. I. 1-"'17’8.tient of wrong. and almost equally so of inability. s: Gentle in spite of a certain coldness about him; has 1:an passions in spite of his general calmness of intel- 1" 3nd affection. A nature not likely to find rest. strug- f; 1' its native element: wants a Main. must work. ”adj-11g still is impossible: but he must have a great '. for which to strive. ‘uguet 5. 1850. Many contradictions in this is. but ‘0‘? more than there are in the character ital??? \ 8 \°0 llect ions. II . 277-278. 1c ulzm n. 1". this, 1 $112 122 pt. 'L' r‘.‘b= .‘ 'thsu..- th‘n'h' ' dl." “-- L., .- efl .1 38 Her analyses did not end with this. She seems to have been a reader of minds. a kind of self-appointed psychiatrist. constantly analysing the people she met. trying to determine their thoughts and define their personalities. making inferences as she watched their words. looks. and actions. And she was constantly scrutinizing her- self. questioning her own thoughts and actions. trying to determine the motivations for everything she thought, said. and did. his dominant characteristic—or obsession-may have been born of her invalidism. for she had been ”suddenly attacked" four years before 'with a painful and ill-understood lameness. which kept her . . . from “mung freely. and was accompanied by nervous attacks which often seemed to threaten her life." Sanborn replied to her note with this sonnet: Our life—a casket of mean outward show, Hides countless treasures. Jewels rich and rare. whose splendid worth. whose beauty. wondrou; fair. Only the favored few may see and know On whom the partial Gods in love bestow. 'l'o ope the stubborn lid. the silver key; And such methinks. have they bestowed on Thee. Or shall I say? o'er all things base and low 'l'hou has the blessed power of alchemy. Changing their dress and baseness into gold; And in all vulgar things on earth that be. Awakening beauty. as the Greek of old 'rought vase and urn of matchless symmetry From the downtrodden and unvalued mould. 83 \‘7‘ Sanborn. "Smiths and Walkers." p. 239. Sahara. "History and Poetry.‘I p. 118. written August 6. 1850. k ' ~xood- - m. hie. am ml: 1:: ;:':l‘. i: it :1: ll. '. u‘. ‘12 tile 1 1 first ‘: 1‘1 a It: 39 Sanborn. Gate. and Anna met the evening of August 7. and he was 8 shown Anna's analysis in the presence of the two girls.9 Anna wrote in her Journal August 8: file conversation began by Gate's showing him my Anal- yses. I sat in a low chair at G.'s feet. and watched his face while he read. It was steady: I could not read it. and I admired his composure. because I do not think it arose from a want of feeling.... Then [he] turned to his on [an- alysis]. and began to talk of it; not easily. but with dif- ficulty and reserve.... He said I overrated him: he was quick but confused. and he complained of a want of method. strictness and steadiness of purpose. in his intellectual nature. I thought these rather faults of habit than of na— ture: few minds left so wholly to themselves. with IO little Opportunity. would have been other than desultory. 90 be overestimated. or to feel himself so. is extreme- 1: painful to rrenh. and he constantly referred to it. '1 “1811 not. I think. be inJured by your praises.‘I said he at one time: "I have a mirror always near me which shows me to lyself as I really an.“ In referringto that part of the an- aWills where I spoke of his being less self-dependent than he thought himself. he said. 'Yes. I want some superior mind to whom I can go at all times. and who will never I... m! then talked of his future: I looked at him quietly. and talked more clearly of wheel and college. and all the possibilities which the future held out to him. and the probabilities. I told him it was the discipline he needed most.-- age '0 luch the books he would study as the power he would ° ta1n over his own thoughts. and the Opportunities which 3? a life would open to him. He then spoke of himself. “it! that he feared a sedentary life would 'only hasten \89'.‘ the 11ml“ editing this material for his Recollections. Sanborn omitted ”adulation of ellipsis in such a way that the reader gains the im- mtir, 8 that he was subJected to reading aloud his analysis before the Pp. 275~°V1ng circle on hunt Hill. By comparing the text in Recollections that th 276. with the material in "History and Poetry." p. 118. one sees thee t °hly persons present--they are the only persons mentioned-ware t 7. 9a, and they were at Oate's house. presunably. the evenigg of ¥ u '3; on. “I ,eo- v" ‘ ~ ° N 0'73: Ive - n...‘ s than. tits: “I H ‘4‘. “.t‘ e. e \ .ee . am: this 1‘. rin‘. ‘3: ”Ci M 4 ”he - 11‘s A I Ki. "A ‘. 17.! 11‘. '2‘ us 3'- n i an. n. '32: z;- ‘dfizt. 3K“: LO what would come soon enough of itself.” And for the first tine I observed the hollow chest and the bright color which indicate consumptive tendencies in hil. Health must not be sacrificed: his work in life must not be hindered by bodily weakness: this is an important consideration.... Finally. all solved itself in the question. “what is really my wax-ire in life" Returning to the analysis. she continues: I told his: that it would not bear severe intellectual crit- icism: it must necessarily have many and great faults. He said. I'It is almost perfect. except that you stood at too hid: a point of view. so that some defects were concealed.“ ~and seemed surprised that he should have laid himself Open so far in so short a time. But "I see that I must have done so. unless you have much clearer eyes than most people.“ "lot that.“ said I. “but I have a habit of studying souls: Persons are more to me than to most. I read in them as you read in books. I have seen in you tonight some new traits 01' character.« He then asked me to add them to the analysis: but I would not promise to do so. "I hepe." he said. "that you are not going to conceal anything. Talk to me as if I '0" a chair 1- a table: I can bear any truth.--do not fear '60 wound me.'§0 a“ night she wrote in her Journal a passage typical of her intro- I lpsetive hoods: m” h. was gone I felt so full of regret that I had not Mk“! lore wisely to him that I covered my face with my 3”“ find let the warn tears flow fast.--but it was only °" ‘ lament. I was excited as I seldom am: felt strong mitt-e. and as I looked out of the window had an incli- on to throw Iyself down on the cool grass below. The 5‘31; would not let me tent: they went to their rcoms.-- Mn lay waking all the night through.... H_a_d. I helped hie 1'3- this meeting of ours to have any influence upon this 13.? and if so. would it work for good or evil? was ,1" the beginning or the end of some new life? lastly. "Jud he thought of me? finely end highly. or had 1 .1 poor and bold?... It is true then that he loves fir pri gators. 'Eistory and Poetry.” pp. 113-120. (This is a eur- (‘ihelatiom as Sanborn often spoke of his robust health. was 911Qu°n°k. and lived to the age of 85. his death resulting from com- . of a broken hip sustained in an accident.) '~'.‘.ec- e .‘ ‘2‘ 'b . 1.3"". .MH . ‘ '. 6 hat. the u. 3.. Lia" 1:33.29 $11 I IJOII ‘ ‘i h. U. usualztt as '2'. . tittl‘. W1 ‘1'. s.". Q. . " I- .e‘!‘ m; 1119!: m I t‘e ‘ ‘ . |‘ u .. I N L‘Ntfi. A“. \‘Y: . . H! ‘33 ‘1‘” ‘I e \t. \V‘n‘if‘, J. = 1m: 1. 3 N hgl I hl 1. [Gate]? These and a thousand other questions I went on asking. while the night were away. I rose ill and feeble. and all day have suffered much.... I have written F. a note. the principal object of which is to ask him to tell me hi - self when his decision is made as to his future life....9 Early in September. says Sanborn. “the Sibyl who had thus fore- shadowed my character. after so short an acquaintance. but in virtue of her lively sympathy and the insight of genius. had also. with a calm Judgnent not always vouchsafed to the sibylline class. thought out the practical path for her new friend to follow."2 She extended this advice to Sanboni in a letter to Cate Cram in Hmupton Falls. ask- ing her to show him parts of it. She did not feel that Richardson was a suitable tutor for Sanborn: James Richardson's faults of mind are so exactly those which I. complains of in himself. that I fear he would not obtain from him that discipline which he most needs. There is not enough reality about J. R. to satisfy the wants of a true and strong nature: not that I fear contagion. for Frank has more power of self-preservation than any person I ever met....but his teacher should be a man of strict and accurate mind. with an element even of intellectual severitz in it.--with a soul open to enthusiasm but not possessed by it.--ready and willing to impart its wealth to others. She then made a new suggestion. He should remain at Hampton Falls. and take private lessons Of Mr. Hoyt at heter. during this winter at least. Going into keter once or twice a week would be easy for him. and ‘111 that would be needful in his case. And from all I hear Of Mr. Hoyt he is admirably fitted to be Frank's guide.... \ ’1_Ibid.. p. 120. 9 E.onllectione. II. 2814. (Written when he was 77.) ’C If I were Frank I should go to Mr. H. and tell him Just how it was with me.--that it was the discipline of erynr‘ion that I wanted. and not to be fitted for any particular proteseion; and I should ask hi§.advice as to the studies best to pursue. His course in life. she felt. should be this: To devote the next four or five years to as severe study (and I do not mean by study more getting of lessons) as a strict obedience to the laws of health will allow: to take for this time intellectual discipline as the principal. though not the exclusive and and aim of life.... At the end of those years he may work with his hands at anything he pleases: there is no labor which a noble soul cannot dignify. He shall make shoes or be a farmer. or whatever else he finds easiest.-if he does also his appointed spiritual and intellectual work. ... I would not condemn him to the hard struggles of the merely literary man. even if his physical strength would al— low: for in this moneybloving Yankee land want and suffering are the sure accompaniments of such a life: but I would have him fitted to use to the full those powers of mind“ which God has given him for the benefit of others: and I would have this work of a writer the highest end and aim of life.-al- though other Sghings may be the needful and even beautiful accessories.9 9h After a trip through the lhite Mountains Frank took Ariana's sug- gestion and made the arrangement with Dr. Joseph G. Hoyt of Phillips by which he was to go to Exeter weekly for a year to recite to him in Greek. The weekly trip to Ixeter gave the two lovers "the incidental ad- vantage.“ says Sanborn. “not foreseen by either of us. that I could 93Sanborn. “History and Poetry." pp. 121-122. 9hror an account of this trip. in which he followed the route taken by Henry and John Thoreau in September. 1839. see Sanborn. “Mount Wash- ington in 1850.“ ed. Falter Harding, Appalachia (June 15. 1952). pp.17-20. 9ssanborn. “History and Poetry,‘ p. 123. This was the fall of 1850. and Sanborn was going on nineteen. receive my letters and parcels from Anna. and send my own withou‘ «‘11-'- tracting too much notice from friends and relatives.--who Were germ-rant; excluded from knowledge of our correspondence. This was at Ar'wn's re» quest. her position being more difficult than mine.a Her position was difficult for several reasons. She CCHIIKU“; t. suffer from her long periods of self-analysis in which she wrote wll inous. soul-searching. emotionally overwrought letters. For exam-pin when Sanborn declared his love in November. 1850. she wrote at. great length to say: “Frank. I never dreamed you loved me. . . . her since I saw you on that last nigit at Hampton Falls I have thought that you loved Gate.“ and concluded her long missive with: Prank. is it all real? do you truly love me? Can you say so calmly and deliberately? Think of it. Frank.-all the possibilities and probabilities of suffering and struggle which such a love would bring to you. Ah, you cannot love me well enough to meet them without shrinking. I am not worthy of it. Dear Frank. be patient with me for a little scar-soup” let me have time to know myself.... rrsnkp—I must be sure that you love me. and that you did not speak from a passionate impulse. Think of me.--fee- ble. helpless. bound as I am--with faults that you have not soon. and a nature less rich than you have tho‘ctt it. Can you strive for me.-stg_uggle for me.-suffer for me? can you love me patiently. earnestly. enduringly?... Anna. ...Ah. l'rsnk.--if I should become a sorrow and a hin- drance to you.--then will you not wish that I had never en— tered into your life only to darken it? 97 963scollections. II. 287. 971.51)“. manuscript. p. 76. Senbom Papers. American Antiquarian Society. On p. 77 appears this remark by Anna: 'Ednah spoke beauti~ fully of Frank: she said. 'He is the only one who has loved you to Iii. I could give a; child without regret.‘ ' ~v-‘-A" ‘ I ... . s .... -6 1414 Life for both of them was difficult. In the back of their minds they doubtless feared more than anything else the aggravation of her illness. and she dwelt often on thoughts of death. writing him a poem in March. 1851. that begins: Oh Father. send thy holy angel Death.“ i'hy gentle angel Death. Thy loving angel Death. To set the captive free.98 Her brother George .kept at her. expressing “his fears." as she wrote ldneh. 'that I should love fraud.“ and of “the imprudence of a love 111:. this' and of "the grief it would be to him. and of the separation it s_iflt cause between us. etc. etc." He spoke too “of the uncertainty of what frank might be.-and that even if he had genius. that had proved a painful gift to many.‘' But to George she said: "I ought to say to you that position. etc. would not weigh with me: actual poverty I have no right to choose. but moderate means I have." Perhaps. then. it was pressure which brought her to tell Sanborn that they could be “only friends.‘ And ldnah. I did tell him so.-calmly and gently. but with firmness-u-resisting his agony. his tenderness. his gen- erosity. I was strong in the feeling that hi3 best good was in this. Frank said to me. "Anna. do you know what it is that you have said to me? I think you cannot. or you would not sit there so unmoved." My heart bled. Ednah.—-but than I was firm. Ihen he went from me. he came suddenly back. and said. "...You say you 'give me back my love.'-you cannot give it back; that is a mockery: I shall always love 98933.. p. 57. Sanborn made four copies of this poem of four stanzas. omitting on some of the copies the second stanza. She enclosed it to Gate with a note which asked in part that she destroy it. Sanborn saw it. however. before Anna died. 1*5 you. through time and eternity. I will not take your de- cision tonight; tomorrow you will love me more. think more gently of me: I will not think of this as fina1.'—-end so he went away.... Ihen he came again he was as I never saw him.-— wretched.-a misery finally merged in the dreadful coldness and utterly frozen state of which he speaks in this letter.- yet conscious of its own unhappiness. I was wise at first. Ednah.-gentle. but firm, forcing him.to resist the evil spir- it: but finally. when it was overcome. and he turned towards me as Saul must have done towards David. and the full tide of his love flowed over me.-I was weak.-I yielded. and to his earnest questions I answered that I loved him. But. Ednah. this was only for a little time; before he went away. even. I knew that I had wronged him. and confessed that I had wronged him. and confessed that I spoke from an impulse. and not from th. deep..t undetlone e o o Since then. dear. I have seen frank several times. and have told him how I have erred....but I have permitted him to think that it shall be as he wishes for the present: that we are to write to each other as of old.-—only there is no ex- pectangy (he said ”I cannot say no hope") of any nearer love. Irank says. “Anna. I will not ask anything'more of you than you give me; but if I do not love you. I cannot do my work in the world. I can only come to God through you. Anna.—-have you.not felt that? I have dedicated.myself to His service thro hrogg m. and will you refuse me this help?...' Hrs. Cram says. “Anna. do not refuse Frank now: he has so connected you.with every thought of his new life and hopee.-he has grown so much through his love for you.— that I feel as if it would crush him now to lose all hope. Ivan if you think you.shall not love him. do not say so till his plans are more fixed until life is surer to him“: and I M .h. 1. ridit..u99 In September. following this dreadful uncertainty. Frank entered Phillipe.dcademy as a regular pupil. though he was probably considera- 100 bly older than the rest of the students in his class. The charter of 99mm manuscript. pp. 59-61. American Antiquarian Society. 10°82.an was to be twenty his hext birthday. December 15, 1851. his stay was to be a brief seven months. 9 O ‘Q If ‘46 this academy. founded seventy-three years before by Dr. John Phillips. declared that the school was established for "promoting Piety and Vir- tue. and for the education of youth in the English. Latin and Greek languages. in Writing. Arithmetic. Music and the Art of Speaking. Prac- tical Geometry. logic. and Geography. and such other of the Liberal Arts 101 and Sciences of Languages as opportunity may hereinafter permit." One of the most remarkable features of the school was its demo- cratic spirit: its admissions officer showed favor to no social caste. ”Representatives of distinguished families have studied here. as have m-bers of hmble ones. and wealth or social distinction has counted for very little in papular school estimates. . . . The institution has 102 been essentially and healthily democratic.“ It must have pleased this 103 young man of nineteen who had been so little away from home. who may have smelled a little of the hayseed and the cowbarn. and who had been so deeply involved with his brother in democratic political maneuvers to read on the bronze tablet in one of the halls: '[Phillips Academy] shall ever be equally open to youth of requisite qualifications from lo."'Oscar Fay Adams. Some Famous Anerican Schools (Boston. 1903). p. 170 102mm. 1). 92. 103“ few visits [says Sanborn] to Newburyport and Portsmouth. the largest towns in my region. three visits to Boston among Iv relatives.‘ an early trip with my father to his cattle pasture in Pittsfield. and a walking tour to the Ihite Mountains and the upper valley of the Connec— ticut. returning through Lebanon. Concord and Northwood. in the year 1850~such was the range of my travels at the age of nineteen." (Recol- lections. I. 29) Of course. hater was only about four miles from Hampton Falls. geographically speaking. O. “I .I 3.. fl... ’1 “7 every quarter.“ for democracy. accordigig‘ to its founder. was “1133 £1.29. 29 Ln_d_ Leg; m g; £3129. Moreover these theories were applied in a remarkable way to everyday practices: the trustees re- fused to bar colored students. and its teachers preached the gospel of the honor systu. self-reliance. independence. and hard workfos'zhe boys were placed on their honor from the hour they entered to the hour they left: even the youngest observed this code both in work and in conduct. This meant that they were allowed. under the ”radical change'I instituted by Dr. Souls. the principal. ,to prepare their lessons in their rooming-houses without teacher supervision: in fact. the academy did not have a studybhall. Yet .the motto of this unorthodox school was. "more or less con- sciously." D_i_s__cg .a_u_t_ discede. which the boys in the Latin class trans- lated “Work or Islk.’ and freedom from the tutor's vigilance did not mean that the students were permitted to escape hard work. Further- more. the boys may have had a kind of incentive for study. for Phil- lips already had gained an enduring reputation through such distin- guished alumni as mniel Webster. Joseph Gogswell. John Palfrey. Jared Sparks. ldward lverett. Lewis Cass. John A. Dix. Richard Hildrsth. and 106 George Bancroft. mAdeas. p. 93. 105 Ibid.. pp. 89-914. Charles H. Bell. gistog __f_ gig Town 2; geter. 1191 Mshirs (heter. 1888). pp. 2914-295. ..p a v . 10'] . Of the three teachers at the acadeny. Sanborn mentions only Dr. Souls. the principal and his instructor in Iatin. and Dr. Hoyt. who taught him Greek and mathematics. Though Dr. Souls was a man of lrare natural qualitiss'I and thong: he 'understood well how to appeal to the best instincts of his pupils.“ it was Professor Hoyt who did most for Sanborn. Anna's analysis of the differences in the intellect of these two persons may have been astute. but there was much in Hoyt'e person- ality that Sanborn already possessed or adapted. The Exeter town his- torian. comparing Hoyt to an equally intelligent predecessor. says: He had much of the same impatience with outgrown methods. and much of the same power of impressing his own personality upon his associates and pupils. He was not only not afraid of nov- elties. but courted them. He never half supported a measure: he was for it or against it with his whole night. The schme of allowing greater liberty to the students. and of trusting more to their own self-government. he supported with charac- teristic warmth. He was in the board of instruction for eight- een years. and few of those connected with the academy from the beginning have left a more marked impriag upon its man- agement and character than Professor Hoyt. Sixty years later the pupil was moved to write about "my good old teacher. Joseph Gibson Hoyt of the Exster Academy. to whom I a more indebted for the sender part of w education than to any other teacher."109 Hoyt was. among other things. an ardent abolitionist. He not only influenced the youth's mind in his classes but introduced him to his cir- cls of political friends: Judge French. father of the sculptor: James Dell, 1°7Hecellections. II. 281‘. 1063.11. pa 295s ( £093,550“. Inflow-i and New Hampshire." Mite Egnthlit ILIV 1912 . 107. v t"' ‘ed-‘ 1 '_w:.sI ..-”! I ‘- nus I O , .....- :L‘t , . I“ :..“ I 0' e'ayq D a. I, ‘49 the leading lawyer of western Rockingham County. son of a former governor and senator; Bell's partner in law. the liberal Congressman Amos Tuck: Dr. Gorham. a.c1assmate of Emerson at Harvard; Dr. Perry. Emerson's sen» ior there in surgery and medicine: Dr. Abbot. Soule's brilliant predeces- sor: and Miss Betsey Clifford. who lived in the old Gilman blockhouse that stood above the winding river. She had given Daniel Webster ”some lessons in politeness” while he had boarded in her home as a boy at the academy. She used to invite Sanborn to tea and took "a lively interest.‘I he says. "in my education. urging me . . . to learn Hebrew. whatever else I night study. because it was the language of the Old 'I‘est.‘3unent.i"-10 Sanborn's admiration for Dr. Hoyt was reciprocated. for. after Hoyt left Phillips in 1859 to become Chancellor of Washington university in St. Louis. he offered Sanborn a position on his staff. But “such were my political relations." says Sanborn. “that I knew my presence in Missouri would be an smbarassmsnt [sic] for’my'old instructor. to whom I wished every success in his new field of action}11 though Sanborn says that his academy schoolmates ”were also inter- esting persons." he does little more than name names. .Ls the academy provided no dormitories for its sixty boysflfhey lived in Exeter homes or boarding houses. Sanborn lived in a sort of co—Operative. "which was noHecollsctions. 11. 295-296. InSanborn. “Missouri and New Hampshire.‘ p. 116. On this same page Sanborn.aakes the interesting remark that two years before this he had been offered the headship of Lawrence Academy. which.became later the Uh- ivsrsity of Kansas. an offer which case from Amos Lawrence the younger. 11aneeollections. II. 296. J, 50 s resource for those students whose means were limited. We lived well." he says. “but economically. and had that companionship out of school hours that college dormitories allow. :13 Sanborn records little of interest in his life at Phillips. He read the odes of Horace. and translated some of them into verse. printed s few verses in the newspapers and "composed an ode for a school celebra- tion at hater. which met with some favor from the few who read it." He carried on a “constant correspondence" with Anna. in which they "criti- cised literature. and touched upon all those topics that absorb the thoughts of young lovers.a He did. however. have one most ironical experience. In the spring of 1852 before he graduated. Daniel Webster. a candidate for President. lent Dr. Souls a printed copy of an address. enclosing a letter in which ’10 indicated 'his continued affection for the school.“ Dr. Soule. per- haPI anxious to cmsnt alumni relations. suggested that a committee of "Monte be formed to frame a suitable reply. "We met.“ says Sanborn. .3414 chose a committee from all the classes. and to me. as representing the advanced class. we. assigned the duty of drafting the dominant. It '30 a singular choice. for I had not only been a pronounced opponent of Vebeter. since his~7th of March speech in 1850. . . . but 1 had written Md printed in the Indgengent Democrat a savage attack on Webster in heroic pentametsrs.‘ Sanborn however “produced a letter which was gonor- elly accepted.' and which Webster's private secretary. George Abbot of w 113nm. . II. 296-297. ' s ~ - Q Q . IL ' . .. w . C 9 A s I l r. . ‘ s ' . f I ‘ Q ‘ ' t J O .5 Y ... < . ( Q Q a: v.2 *‘f 51 11h Hampton Falls. said gave “some pleasure" to the elderly statesman. While the relatively short period of his life spent at Phillips heter was not crowded. Sanborn upon graduation could look ahead toward s new opportunity—Harvard College-ate which he was admitted in July. 115 1852. as a member of the sophomore class. 1 1 Recollectigns. II. 301. n5It is strange that Sanborn left so few traces of his life at the nanny. llr. Rodney metrong, the Librarian. in a personal letter to me dated September 15. 1952. says in part: 'Your request [for information concerning his career here at Phillips heter] involved some days of work on your behalf by a number of staff members. We have now examined all the school publications. memora- bilia and ephemera that we have for the period with which you are concerned. We find no reference to Mr. Sanborn's having taken part in any student ac- u'itiol and it was too early for any report to have been made on any ath- letic Il>¢=tivities he might have had: neither do we have any scholastic re— 11:0“ for him except for the fact that he was graduated. I am sure that we 1. 13130110 e competent Job for you in this matter and the unfortunate feet t We do not have anything of interest to you here." G. ;r'- 1' F CHAPTER II HIS LIFE AT HARVARD “I entered Harvard in July, 1852. practically without 'conditions.‘ and with some reputation for scholarship. which caused the high scholars in the sophomore class to have some fears that I might prove a trouble- sone rival in the strife for honors. But I had no such anhition."1 his was the Harvard of the last days of President Sparks. Sun- sing up his adninistration‘ in his resignation. the President wrote: "Order and tranquillity prevail in all the departments: and I can say with entire satisfaction. that. during the four years in which I have mperintended its administration. not a single occurrence has taken Place. which has given as anxiety or uneasiness."2 Hither President Sparks was exhausted by his administrative duties into happy forgetfulness or he was endowed with a unique nervous sys- ten. for during his first year in office Professor George Parkman of the Medical School was murdered, and his body hacked to pieces. and during his second. Professor John lhite Webster. Parmnan‘s colleague and. friend. was hanged for the crime in the courtyard of the Leverett Street 3811. fiecollections. II. 302. Sanborn may have entered Harvard in July. but he was not officially admitted by vote of the faculty until its September meeting. (See Records of the Collegg Lagulty (l3&1355). XIV, pp- 165 and 168, Harvard Archives. 28amuel Eliot Morison. Three gesturies 9; Harvard (Harvard UP. 1936). pp. 281-282. I‘bid. , pp. 282-286. 53 It is strange. too. if President Sparks had felt no "anxiety or uneasiness” during the recent bitter controversy between the Harvard administration and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. in which he had learned that the university must free its government from politics if it hoped to protect the academic freedom of its faculty. Pollowing President Quincy's battle with the Democrats and Calvin- ists. the Corporation of Harvard. all Unitarians. had been at peace with the Ihig political administration of Massachusetts. But the Abo- litionists were angry because Harvard did not preach aboli tion; the Denocrats. because Harvard was a school for the upper classes: the Cal- vinists. because Harvard was living proof of human depravity. Worst of all. Harvard was being attacked repeatedly by those Political groups that felt the college symbolized “old fogrlsm." ”The college fails to answer the Just expectations of the people of the State.“ declared George Boutwell. the Democratic leader then eyeing the Governorship. Harvard should prepare young people to become "Bet- ter farmers. mechanics. or merchants:" it should welcome boys who 'leeh specific learning for a specific purpose:" and it should be an institution where “every student might stfidy what he chose, all that he chose. and nothing but what he chose.‘ The people were demanding vocational training: they were impa- tient with Jefferson's ideal of raising up a learned aristocracy to govern a political democracy. The Indgendent. the newspaper of the N ulbid.. pp. 286~287. ”as“ e n" .l.' | 0‘s! ..n. 5... I I I: as ' "as l m. n I2." a no‘. “A“ (I 5h people. stated tartly that they saw a great wrong “in the tenure by which the dominant sect at Cambridge is holding this child of the Commonwealth in its suffocating grasp. Harvard College belongs to the peeple of Massachusetts and by the grace of God. the people . . . will yet have it and hold it. if not in one way. then in another.“ Boutwell therefore presented a bill before the state legislature to increase "the Harvard Corporation to fifteen fellows elected by the legislature for a six-year term.‘ Boutwell's report was postponed by the political earthquake of 1850 in which the Free-Boilers Joined the Democrats. elected him Governor. elected Sumner to the Senate. and won control of the state legislature and Council. President Sparks at once petitioned the newly elected legislature. defending the rights of the 1 college. The Boutwell measure, by this time modified by a hand sympa- thetic to Harvard. stripped the administration of “most of its politi- cal members.“ and was an ”important step in diminishing church and “ate representation on the Board of Overseers." The college had 1Corned “that to protect academic freedom she must at the earliest op- Portunity free her government from political elements; and that. as a Price of freedom. she must look to her own alumni and to the public. hot to the Commonwealth. for support." Sanbom was admitted into this atmosphere of "order and tran- quillity' by a vote of the faculty September 27. 1852. President Sparks resigned a month later because of 'a precarious state of health." but he 5M0. ”0 288-2930 I.‘ 3.! cmnsanted to continue the work of his office until February. 1853. when fin Corporation appointed Professor*James Walker to the presidency. lalker was “another good man and fair scholar who proved a presi- duwial failure." A.graduate of the Harvard Divinity School. he had been minister for twenty-nine years to the “Harvard” Church in Charles- tonn where he had become one of the leading protagonists of Unitarian- ism. He was i'a famous preacher. cogent. meaty. sententious: it was largely the respect and attention with which his sermons were received by the students that marked him for the presidency." His inaugural ad- dress was one of the ”most solid. sensible. and prephetic orations ever delivered on such an occasion." Though intelligent. President Walker was constitutionally unable to get things done or advance his ideas. In this he did not distinguish himself from his predecessors. Everett and Sparks. The only curriculum change he instituted during his reign 'as to add the first course in music. though’he was as deaf as a post a11d was “totally devoid of aesthetic sense."O Sanborn never mentions him except to say that he was the first cousin of Anna's father. 1hough Sanborn was not related to him by marriage until the fall of his .enior year. we have no record that the two met each other academically. socially. or spiritually. Sanborn felt his Harvard teachers influenced his life and thought but little. “I was more indebted." he said many years later. "to Concord 6Ibid... Pp. 281 and 293-295. 7Sal-morn. 'Smiths and Walkers.” p. 2X45. 56 than to Cambridge for my literary inspiration and training." and he suds. ”with all respect for Harvard College. as it was when I was matri- mflated a student there in 1552. it must be said that I owed more to several other persons than to any of the college Faculty. and more to hereon and Theodore Parker than to all the professors and tutors to- gather."8 Though from various sources we know who some of the teachers were during the period he attended Harvard-Louis Agassiz. Francis Bowen. George Martin Lane. Josiah Parsons Cooke. Francis Child. Oliver lendell Holmes. and Hvangelinus Apostolides Sophocles-Sanborn speaks ofiew. Iith the possible exception of President Walker. Francis Bowen was probably the only member of the faculty whom he had known personal- ]: before he entered college. He mentions returning from a class under ‘Nfiusis. but he writes more fully of two of his teachers. Longfellow Md Sephocles. In his college Journal published after his death he de- 'Oribes an evening spent with Longfellow: Tuesday. {39, lfi, [1855]. Called this P.H. on Prof. Longfellow. where I stayed from five to eight-thirty. I found him alone in the parlor. where a wood-fire was burning in the ample fireplace. It was snowing outside. but within was bright and cheerful and elegant. among the books and pictures and busts in the great parlor. He asked me about lxeter and Andover. wishing to send his nephew somewhere to school. I told him what I knew of the two places. and hoped he would decide on Exeter: but he thought there might be too much freedom allowed there for a boy like his nephew. At six I rose to go. but he urged me to stay. I told him 'young men were apt to receive more pleasure from their vis- its than they gave.‘ He smiled. and said that feeling had Inuvanted him from going to see Goethe when in Germany for- 8Egon llections. II . 313 . the first time. for which he had always been sorry. He was accessible to strangers. particularly to Americans: but Mr. Longfellow thought he should have nothing to say to him. and so did not go. He told me about his life at Bowdoin before he became professor here. and of his first seeing Mr. Emerson. It was on board the boat coming from Portland. Ir. Longfellow had a letter to hereon. and was saying so to a friend, who told him that the man himself was on board. They went a- / cross the deck and found Mr. hereon sitting inside a coil of rope. with his hat pulled over his eyes. They talked of Carlyle. to whom hereon gave Mr. Longfellow a letter. and said he had been sending him some American literature. “I suppose you sent him Irving." said Mr. Longfellow. ”No.” said hereon: "he is only a word-catcher.‘I Ir. Longfellow found hereon's letter a welcome intro- duotion to Carlyle. who spoke in the warmest terms of him and his visit to them (C. a Mrs. C.) at Craigenputtock. . . . At tea I saw lire. Longfellow. whom I admire very much. Afterwards we talked in the parlor about spiritualism and ' ‘5 many other things. and at e. little past eight I came away. he only other teacher whom Sanborn describes is Evangelinus Lpostolides Sophocles. a campus character. A native of Tsangaranda. Thessaly. he had been educated at Amherst. had becomettutor in Greek in 181%} at Harvard. and taught there for thirty-six years. Sanborn 'mx Iithout being a model teacher—for he did not give his Class the full advantage of his remarkable scholarship in his native language—he piqued our attention by his oddities. and stimulated those who wished to learn by his evident in- terest in a careful pupil. His comments. like thou of Pro- fessor lane in the Latin recitatione. were often sarcastic. and generally dry and humorous.... 9senorn. 'An Unpublished Concord Journal." ed. George Sidney Boll-Ian. 2°. Centm Esme. 0111 (1922). 831-832. (In the material quated from this Journal. ced periods indicate Hellman'e ellipses: M periods indicate mine.5 58 He lived by himself in the west entry of Holworthy. and there cooked and spread his frugal meals. and his lexicons and papers and college exercise-books. We used to smile at seeing him gravely pacing the diagonal paths of the College Yard. carrying fruit or loaves. or. mayhap. cheese. beloved of the Greek peasant. tied up in a large handkerchief. He had even then. I think, begun his poyltry-fancying diversion of breeding and feeding fowls in the basse—cour of some friends house. not far from the College.--at first at Miss Fey's, I believe. and afterwards at Mrs. Winlock's. farther away from his ascetic cell in Holworthy. Although Sanborn protests that he "had no ambition," the fact is he lmcame one of the first group of scholars. The faculty at its meeting (fi'November 1h, 1853. awarded a "Detur" to him and four others of his class. the secretary to the faculty recording that he was to receive "Iongfellows [sic] Poems. 2 Vols. l6to Ca1f."11And when Professor Sepho- (flee. in behalf of the committee on the assignment of parts, reported the list of appointments for the May exhibition for 185h, Sanborn was the first on the list for the Junior class. Sanborn'e part was a metri~ Cal version of a portion of Book VI of the Odyssey, which he entitled "Ulysses and Nausicaa." of Ihich the following will suffice as a sample: 10Sanborn. ”A Harvard Ascetic--Evangelinus Apostolides SOphocles," Ilarvard Graduates' Magazine. X (1901). BOY-2&1. ("Evangelinus Aposto- llidee Sophocles." Encvclo edia Americans. 19 7 ed.. XXV. 262. gives this beginning date as 15%.; nnecerd of _t_h_g College Faculty (1850-1855). xtv, 289 and 291 (Her- ‘Vaifl.Archieves7:l A "Detur" is a prize book given to a student at Harvard vfiuenever he makes all A's. Usually the book is one finely printed. or, if DOt finely printed. beautifully bound. 59 The trembling maidens fled afar.-- Nausicaa staid behind: A while in doubt Ulysses stood. irrssolute of mind: Should he implore the fairfaced maid. a supplient at her feet? Or there at distance from hgr stand and courteously entreat? His extra-curricular efforts were chiefly literary. As secretary of Hasty Pudding. he had to keep the records of the society in rhyme in the tradition of Washington Allston. Hasty Pudding's activities in this period were chiefly social. though its initiation was literary in spirit. the candidates being forced to deliver an oration. sing an orig- inal song. and present a Greek. a Latin. and an English essay. Except for singing the song. Sanborn doubtless had little difficulty meeting the requirements. As he had “no tone sense. and didn't know one tune funlanother. though he seemed to know all the words to all the hymns 1n the hymn book.“ the singing must have proved a grave trial. unless his Judges in the feat thought he was trying to be funny.13 Hasty Pudding “sought out the wits of each class. regardless of Sentility. and until late in the nineteenth century remained the prin- Cipal college society to which any bright young man. regardless of 1M BOciel background or money. might expect to be elected." It produced “-— 12 Exhibition and Qmmencement Performances (1851-18514) in the Harvard Archives. 131mm my conversation with Francis B. Sanborn. ll‘Such "bright young men" did not. however. include Ralph Waldo mum‘taon (Icrison. p. 202). l (- its first theatricals in 18%. held mock trials such as “Dido 1g. Aeneas for breach of promise.” debated questions in politics. litera- ture. and morality. and perpetrated a good deal of tomfoolery.15 The only other society to which Sanborn belonged was Alpha Delta PhiTGe social fraternity which had operated secretly on the campus for ten years until in 18% it was officially recognized by the Faculty. One other fact indicates that Sanborn did not always pursue the serious. “Voted." the faculty secretary recorded. “That Sanborn. Jun- ior. for being in the College yard at the hour of midnight on New Year's eve. and Openly encouraging and instigating other students to make a disturbance. be publicly edmonished."17Sanborn's levity in the Yard may cone as a bit of a shock until one compares his act to one Of the nuerous revolutions of President Quincy's time~-to name the worst—when the undergraduates raised the black: flag of rebellion over Holworthy Hall. smashed the furniture and glass in the recitation "as. detonated a bomb in the chapel. and sent a written ultimatm t0 the Board of Overseer:8 Many of Sanborn's hours must have been occupied in writing to Anna. whose conflicts of soul yielded now to her heart. now to the M 152913}... p. 183. 16Sanborn to "Dear Francis and Molly" (Mr. and Mrs. Francis B. San. I301's) around Christmas. 1906. printed here through the generous courtesy Of Dr. Ialter Harding of the Department of English. University of Vir- gnu, marlottesville. 173.com 93; Egg Faculty (Egg-1855), 11v. 303. “Morison. pp. 252-253. v.7“ ....ee . We a H" 0‘- 0-0- 0 Nu J.-_ . .. “I ’11». ' I ~ I 4:9 "I .95. '1 M I N 61 pressure from her father and brother. In August of his first year she had written from Hampton Falls a voluminous letter which began: I must write with a pencil. for they have taken my pen. 10'/2 at light. And you and I have parted. Frank.-I shall see you again. and you will see me.--and yet we have parted. I did not tell you all that I promised my Father. I promised him that. tho' I should continue to hold the rela- tion of a near friendship to you. I would in all things so far as I could.--avoid anything which would excite remark: and I think he felt that. while I should not sedulously a- void 193, I ought not voluntarily and with intention to put wself1§n your way--and that I must give up coming here again. Finally. however. when her brother George realised that Anna's love for Sanborn could not be extinguished. “he adopted the youth. who had so unexpectedly become dear. as a younger brother.“ and we know that her father later gave his blessing to the pair?0 Sanborn wrote a good bit of verse to her during the four years 01’ their courtship. the best of which seem to be his sonnets: I know not. Anna. if I should repine. And sigh because not yet the poet's wreath Is on my forehead. nor a song is mine That shall ring thro' the world and laugh at Death. Time is there yet for me. for Homer's hair was white as his own Nestor's when he sung. And stealthy Age came in disguise of Care. Ire Dante chanted with his golden tongue The psalms of happy spirits: and what fire Burned in the heart of Milton when he stood Sublime old man! uplifted by desire To that grand Heaven. that home of Endless Good. lhereof he spoke to men in words that shame The hissing world and even applauding fame.21 M 1'9b-ped manuscript. p. 69. Sanborn Papers. American Antiquarian Society. Sanborn's transcription of this takes up three typed. single- Spaced pages with the three-eighths inch margins so typical of all his tYpewritten material. aoRecollections . II. 292. 211mm» July 30, 1853: now in the Sanborn Papers. American Anti- quarian Society. (I shall have more to say of his versifying later.) 62 But Ariana was increasingly preoccupied with growing presentiments of death. Just before the opening term of his Junior year. in August 1853. their engagement was made public. She then showed him a long letter she had penned in April and labeled “TO BE SENT AFTER MY DEATH": Do not grieve too much because I am gone home.--do not ‘ thou be in love with Death because that gentle Angel has kissed g1 lips. and taken me away in his arms. See now. my own.-thou must live for g: too.-and none of my hepes in thee must fail. W life has been of so little service to the Father! but do thou labor 3g; me Darling. do not faint or falter! God hath need of thee: it was He who gave, and it is He who taketh away. Gladly would I have remained with thee.-thy true wife. thy helper and thy friend: but He has not so willed it: He knoweth what is best for us. But do not than cease even transiently to live. be- cause I am gone hence. Let thy grief for me be holy. and ' let it only urge thee on to higher and nobler labors; let the sorrowful. the poor. the oppressed. the weak all be blessed thro' the great love which has filled thy heart. and which now flows over thee like a flood. Ah! if thou knowest what it is to feel alone, guard all others from that pain! lbrk. dearest! work for God's sake and for mine.-let thy sorrow only elevate and nerve thy heart! Let me bless thee more deeply than living. and thro' thee let me live still on the beautiful. dear Earth. ...If life should offer thee consolation.-if thou should'st feel. like Dante. thy lonely heart warmed and cheered by some holy presence.-rej set not the comforter. nor blame thyself as false to me: for who knoweth God's wsteries. or how it will be with us when we are angels‘r... During his Junior year he was "often called away by the phases of her illness. which. like everything about her. was strange and unex- Pected. From the depths of what seemed a mortal illness. and which no 221pr manuscript. Sanborn Papers. American Antiquarian Society. Page unnumbered. It is this manuscript which bears the note. "(Cepied {3:31 26. 1905).“ Sanborn made three or four copies of this particular 0 01'. 53 physician thoroughly understood. she would rally to a hopeful prospect 23 of full recovery“ until August. 1851}. Just before school. the and came. To her dearest friend. anah Littlehale. then in EurOpe. he wrote the details: Peterborro' [sic H. H. September 9..185 . Saturday afternon‘n. Dear Ednah: You will know before this reaches you of the death of our dear one.--my love. my angel. my maiden wife. She died in my arms on Thursday the 31st of August. eight days after our marriage. and Just a year from our engagement.... I will tell you something of the closing scenes.-the last week or two of her life. Ever since early in August I have felt that nothing but a miracle could save Anna's life. She grew weaker every day. and nothing could be done for her. She continued to walk about until some two weeks before her death: after that I carried or drew her from room to room. She grew yg_thin. and towards the last her eyes for the most part wore a dull look. showing extreme weakness. On the 23rd we decided to speak to Mr. walker about our marriage.- for it seemed time. I did so. and he approved it most heart- ily. We sent for>Mr. Robinson [her pastor] and were married that afternoon. Anna lay on her new bed in the parlor. sup- ported by pillows. in her night-dress. for she was too weak even to wear her dressingbgown. I sat beside her and held her hand. and we were married. It was a sweet and blessed union: no one can tell how much it added to our Joy. After that I was with her day and night. when she would let me. and I watched with her the night before her death.... She suffered much pain constantly in her back. and much of the time very severely elsewhere.--for the diarrhea con- tinued until a short time before her death. Besides those she had many other pains.-«-indeed she must have suffered 1e;- ribly. Tuesday the 29th George Walker came from Springfield: M 23"History and Poetry.‘I p. 132. Sanborn in a letter to Parker. dated Peterborough. N. 11.. July 27. 185M. said: ”I find since I came here. what I dreaded I should ”9.... She seems now to have the marks Of that dreadful disease. a settled consumption." (Concord Library. 5: 3-25.) 5h he stayed till Thursday morning. when. having urgent business. and all of us thinking he might safely do so. he went home. The Doctor thought then she might live a week or two. and she was as well as for some days before. All day Thursday she continued as well as usual till a- bout four in the afternoon. In the morning she had put her arms about my neck and kissed me. in remembrance of the day of our engagement.-for she had been so weak for some time that she could not easily caress or be caressed. We had talked to- gether more than usual. too. and she seemed.bright. I was with her most of the day.-but a little before four I rose to go up stairs. She said she [wished to?] be moved before I went. and I lifted her up to a position in which she began to cough. This brought on a difficulty of breathing. and I then supported her with pillows. Her breathing grew worse. and she said she should die. I came forward of the pillows. and put my left arm round her: and she lay thus in my arm till she died» She could speak with difficulty. and at last it was a great effort for her. She asked the doctor questions. and was evidently in great pain: she panted for breath and perspired copiously. After an hour or two she said. ”God is with me.-— God—-.--' there she stopped. She spoke little after this till Just before her death: she then asked what time it was? They told her a quarter to eight. She expressed a fear that she should not die before midnight.--and never spoke again. Soon after she drew my right hand across her breast and laid it on her heart. turned her head to my shoulder and looked up with deepest love in my face. A few minutes before eight she grew quiet. and died without a struggle at eight. I scarcely knew when the spirit passed.... She was placed in the tomb here after the funeral on Sat- urday.... Monday she was buried at Springfield. in Mr. Bliss's grounds in the Cemetery.... In the spring violets and roses will be planted there.~-and other flowers. I mean a cross shall stand at the head of the grave.-to be moved between the graves when I am buried there. if possible that I shall be. When you come back. all this will havfi been done.-and the grave will be pleasant to look upon.2 ‘71?— Sanborn adds a footnote: “This was done. and for some years the 'Imt was adorned with flowers and with the murmur and flow of fountains. alkno the valley and below the ridge crowned with trees. But in time the shade and moisture killed the flowers. the fountain ceased. other graves were made there. and a tall shaft replaced the cross. which I then had removed to the cemetery in Hampton Falls where my parents and broth- 91‘8 are buried. My own grave will now be in Concord. with my children and later friends." ' I came directly back to Peterbero. where I shall stay till the 20th: then I shall go home to Hampton Falls. and sometime in October I mean to go back to Cambridge. At present I am busy arranging Anna's papers. books. etc. I have arranged her letters. and yours are to be given you when you come home. She has left some token to you (her copy of Shell”). and you shall have a lock of her hair 1: you wish it. Her'pictures she gave to various friends. and many of her books: the rest are mine. as is the greater part of her property. ...Here was a wonderful life.--a fair poem from begin- ning to end.-with sorrow and Joy. strife and.peace in it.-— but as a whole. sweet and beautiful. All this I mourn for: all that any friend can miss do I miss: and besides there is a deeper grief to me. As I took the rosebuds that had lain on her breast in the coffin. I kissed them with sudden tears: for I thought:-—['] Ye lay where my head will never lie again. -where my own rosebuds would some day lie.” I felt at once all the loneliness of my life.-I who had so longed for love and a home. and my wife's bright face and graceful hand.- now saw all these hopes laid waste. Forty-five years later Sanborn still spoke of her as “the person 'ho had the most inspiring influence on that portion of my life which 26 Preceded my acquaintance with Emerson and John Brown.” “Surely." he M aslyped manuscript entitled 'THE DEATH OF ABIANA WALKER (August 31. 1905). from a letter to Ednsh Cheney in Europe.I Sanborn Papers. American Antiquarian Society. Ariana died August 31. 1851;. and it is interesting to note that in 1905 Sanborn. then almost 7h. was devoting his time to copying out large portions of her numerous letters and Jonunals. Ednah Littlehale. Ariana's dearest friend. married Seth Cheney. the famous American engraver. and became "an author of note” (" Seth v.11. cheesy," Encychpedig Americana. 19147 ed.. v1, R11 and ms). Ior he! Opinion of Anna see figminiscences 9}; £39; 991 Cheney (Born Li ttle- 11.2.13). (Boston. 1902). pp. 57-53. ZGSanborn. Sanborn Genealog. p. 1467. (Our feeling of what her influence was on his later life may. therefore. be modified by the fact that in Recollve'cjvig‘n'g. II. 315. he records that he first met Dnerson in gal-.7. 1853, and in his published Journal he describes a visit to Emerson Jovesnber 2. 1351‘s) 66 wrote to Parker ten days after she died. ”God has some great work for 27 me to do or he would never have given me such ‘ wealth of love.“ The thought of returning to Harvard before the October exhibition was abhorrent to him. but Parker prevailed on him to return sooner. and by the end of September Sanborn wrote him: ”Your letter strengthens in me a determination already formed. . . . I shall come back to college with full health and with a resolute purpose of study—with less worldly ambition than before. and so perhaps a greater ability to do a good work. I must not forget either. that I have the work of two new to fin- 28 ish.‘ Back at Harvard he plunged into his greatest single activity at the college. With two other seniors (one of whom was Phillips Brooks) and three Juniors (one of whom was James B. Greenough) he started a new 2 7Sanborn to Theodore Parker. September 11. 18514 (Concord Library. letter file 5: 8-27). ”Sanborn to Parker. September 224. lash (Concord Library. 5: 8-28). Subaru and Anna had so often “worshipped together“ in Parker's congre- Sation that he enclosed "a note to be read on Sunday. if you think it be!“ in his letter to Parker from Peterboro. September 1. 18514 (Concord Library. 5: 8-26). 'I'en days after this he told Parker that he had heard that 'you read my note yesterday in the Music Hall. I was not sure that you would think it best to do 80.... I know that I was most earnestly r emeHfbered in your prayer.” (Psterboro‘. September 11. 1851* (Concord Library. 5: 3-27). campus publication. The Harvard Magazine. In the first issue. published in December. Sanborn stated the purpose of their magazine in the preface 29 much he wrote: 2?! question is often asked respecting our College. and the good old town in which we students are collected.--some hundreds of’young men. nominally pursuing a liberal education. -uhy they have originated so little. Other universities have led the way in some of the many paths of science: we have Ox- ford classical editions: KBnigsberg. Berlin. and Edinburgh metaphysics: Parisian physics: Thbingen. Andover. and various other theologies: but have we yet seen Cambridge ethics. met- aphysics. physics. or theology? and are we not Just beginning to have Cambridge mathematics? At other universities. men say. systems are developed and.perfected: here they are only criticised. and not always in the most catholic spirit. Nay. it is even said that we cannot start and sustain a college magazine: and we are told that repeated failures have proved the truth of this reproach. Notwithstanding which. we have dared to come forward with this our first venture in a new enterprise: and it becomes us. at starting. to hint at our purposes and our hopes. ...We believe that among the three hundred and fifty stuw dents in college there are many who have something to say to which others will gladly listen. and. in their turn. answer to some puupose. We believe that it is possible for us to ex- hibit some fruit of our studies besides that which our semi- annual examinations and exhibitions and our commencement parts -~—————— 291Proof that Sanborn wrote this and the contributions that follow is offered in 2h2.3arvard Magazine Index. compiled by the librarian of the Harvard Archives. The first (unnumbered) page states: "This index Of'author's names which have been written in the different copies of the Harvard Magazine by previous owners. has been prepared by collating conies of the Magazine which have come to the Library from various Bources from time to time. 'Names which did not appear in the official set. but were found elsethere have been copied into it. IIn the few cases where different authors have been found in GJJTerent copies. both names here been indexed and all copies kept.“ 68 display. We doubt not there are subjects which we may investi- gate and discuss. inquiries which we may pursue. books which we may analyze: and that the result of all this may be of some value when set down in print....0ne has hunted mathematics in- to its lair:...another...metaphysics....Here is one who has drunk deep at the sweet fountain of Grecian poesy:...another shall cut a path for us through the thorny hedge which defends the castle of German literature.... Botanists. chemists. min- eralogists. geologists. even political economists. shall be most welcome to us.... But there are other fair grounds into which we hope to make incursions.-the realms of Imagination. Science and his- tory and philosophy are not everything. and we would not court them exclusively. Egg.omnia pggsumus omnes. We cannot all demonstrate or investigate or philosOphize:--we hope to have some dreamers among us. As a people. we are deficient in the culture of the imagination. As one of our noblest thinkers once said. “Is would give more to see a good crop of mystics at Cambridge. than great naturalists. metaphysicians. or scholars.’ We hope to draw to our pages men of this class.- enthusiasts. men of aspiration. poets. and humorists.-as well as the representatives of positive and conservative requirement. 'lhere there is no vision. the peeple perish": and we fear that. without the help of enthusiastic and imaginative youths. our plan '111 proVO 9330141170.... We open our columns freely to everything that is new. and at the same time worthy of notice. Whoever has new facts or new explanations to offer. throwing light on any unexplored regions into which modern research is penetrating. shall have from us a patient and attentive hearing. We are not of those who reject with a sneer all inquiry of this kind: but would cheerfully help. to the extent of our power. to extend on any side the domain of human knowledge. We believe that there may be new sciences. as well as progress in the old ones: nay. that men.have as yet learned but few letters in the great al- Phabet of nature. In the discussion of all subjects we shall aim to give the greatest freedom. and invite the most apposite opinions. It is the curse of our country that our literary men are. more an in most nations. the slaves of public censure. The fear °f arousing a prejudice or awakening hostility constantly ateases the American scholar. Here. at least. we mean to be dree from it. To whom. indeed. should freedom of thought be ear; but to him whose business is thought?.... t But we may be told that we are issuing a manifesto far ":0 lofty and sounding for the magnitude of the enterprise.... Can only say. we hope not. We hape to make our'Magazine ‘. a noticeaele and dignified representative of the progress of sound learning in our University. worthy of the institution which sustains it and of the young men whose hearts are in its success. to are new at the labor we have undertaken. but we do it with a will. And we call on all our classmates. and the undergraduates generally. to aid us in a work so deserv- ing their efforts. In the name of the Senior and Junior Classes. r. a. gummy, c. 1'. 16mm PHILLIPS moors, J. J. JACOBSEN. .‘I’. B. §nmmouos. gmmms. November. 185k. i. i. FISHER. 30 As one of the six editors he passed Judgemt on the manuscripts of such contributors as Charles Francis Adams and his brother Henry: James Kendall Hosmer. who had probably begun his interest in a history of Ger- man literature alluded to in Sanborn's preface: lilliam Pitt Preble Long- fellow. later to become a famous architect and writer on architecture: Robert Treat Paine. the great philanthrOpist: and Theodore Iyman. who be» came a foremost natural scientist. Sanborn contributed twenty-three items to the first volume of the llenthusiast eight poems. seven book reviews. six essays. one art review. and the "Editor's Table” in one issue?1 As Sanborn contributed eight P06!!! and one long essay on poetry. it might be appropriate to consider “1990 first. His essay entitled “Poetry.” which appeared as the feature am“. in the second issue indicates what he expected from poetry. He considers first the nature and origin of poetry. then its present condi- t ion. and last. its hopes for the future. ‘ "When we speak of this or that \36‘- 31Sanborn, g2 Harvard Magazine. I. 1-3. The Harvard Magazine Index. Harvard Archives. r a J ~ ‘I 70 person as a M,“ he says. "we use the word to denote a certain elevation and subtility of thought. by which the soul. as it were. approaches near- or to nature. and so gives to other souls a truer transcript of what this wondrous play of life unfolds to us. than common spectators could get for themselves.“ Thus. he continues. the poet “seems to create what he only translates out of the unperceivsd wealth of Providence.“ After calling up the names of the great posts of the past, he de- clares that the character of modern poetry is that of a "tiresome medioc- rity: and this is true of England. of Germany. and of America.” Then he considers what constitutes rare poetical genius and "in what way our age will probably be enriched by the labors of a genuine bard“: It is not by ekilful verse-making. or the most careful at- tending to the rules of art, that men win for themselves great fame as posts. It is more than ever necessary. in this materializing age, and especially among a nation of materialists like our own. that we recognize the vital worth of ingiration. All high excellence in art. in eloquence. and most of all in poetry. is the inspiration of God. more or less direct as the work done is more or less perfect.... He who seeks for a less noble active than this. is guilty of a profanation of his powers. a debasing of the divinity with- in him. Before we can attain to greatness in anything. we must first be lifted out of ourselves by an enthusiasm which transfuses us. and for the moment annihilates self. The time for such inspiration. some say is past: some say "the age of 5"“ posts is gone for ever." Be. on the contrary. finds inspiration in the achievements of his own age: Shall the modern knight-errantry of science, the great crusades of commerce. and the matchless conquests of civil- t31:31AM: be left unsung? Can we see nothing inspiring in 9 earth-shaking revolutions of nations: the steady pro- grGas of freedom: the increasing heroism of man? Has our gets). life become all a dusty path of custom. along which no (“tors of poesy can blossoml... Has Nature also deserted us? k'pt 1‘. 7. Are the stars you din? Is the sun less godlike? Are the fields less fair. the flowers withered. the rivers dumb. the mountains dwindled. the skies faded? Is eternity less sub— lime. death lses pathetic and solemn. God more commonplace? one '03-- "no fault. dear Brutus. is not in our stars. But in ourselves. that we are underlings.’ Ihen He appears when God shall at length send to touch our daily life with the poet's magic wand. we shall be astonished at our old blindness.... As our own wisest poet says. “We shall sit in an aurora of sunrise. which will put out all the stars....' l‘or myself. I look for the dawning of a new era in poetry with a longing that cannot be uttered. and a hope that will not be quenched.... Samewhere this chosen seer and singer of immortal lays I shall yet see. Nor does it matter whence he case»... But whoever he may be. of this one thing be sure, he will not deal with Nature at second hand. He mask of cus— tom or falsehood of conformity will suffice to hide realities from his.. .. Does this see- visionary. and are we all tempted to smile when we compare this glowing hope with things as they really are?... Do we measure by this ideal standard the college poets who yearly or half-yearly offer their heads for such stunted laurels as lhir Harvard“ has to bestow? I confess. that. when such a comparison is made. it 23523}; to provoke our hearty laughter. We put our criterion of poetical merit far below what it should be. in Judging of the productions of class poets and college rhymoetere generally. lould it were differ- anti lould that the writing of a poem. to be read bef re the Itudents of the oldest literary institution in America 2were felt to be a serious and earnest matter. requiring no small degree of talent and fidelity in him who attempts it: Until it b. '0. and until a taste for the best poetry is more cul- tivated among us. we shall lack one of the noblest graces of t liberal education. and one of the sweetest delights of 11f..33 2130s ran by the secretary? (florison. p. 183). £2 wnfisins. 1 (January. 1855). ‘49-?» ' ’19 refer here to the Hasty Pudding Club. whose minutes were 72 And on the next two pages Sanborn follows his stirring essay of hope with two of his own verse translations. One must admire his cour- age in offering his own head first to the college critical guillotine. His two poems, labeled “freshman Translations." consist of two excerpts from Horace. which do not. of course. sing of a new era in poetry. Yet much of the original he has rendered very nicely. the substance and spirit of Horace being carried over into good miglish meter: “T 3 f0:- associate 508595, ”1 k THE NINTH om OF HORACE _s_n how Soracte white with snow Stands shining. while the laboring woods Bond with their burden. and the floods l'eel freesing Winter chill their flow. Beap‘well the hearth and melt the cold. My Thaliarch! and bring the wine, That noble four-years-old of thine.-- All that the Sabine vase will hold. Leave other cares to Heaven. whose will calms warring winds and raging deep. lhile aged ashes on the steep, And gloomy cypresses. stand still. Seek not thy future lot to know, And count the gifts of Pets for gain: Nor thou. 0 boy! the dance disdain. Nor scorn to feel love'e gentle glow. While Joyless Age blights not thy flower, 1'0'! in the manly games delight. And love the pleasures of the night.- Idebt whispers at the trysting hour: Th9 gay laugh of the hidden one In Secret corner so betrayed,» ° pledge from arm of panting maid, Or half-consenting finger won. 1:111. critical cement I am indebted to Dr. William M. Seaman. £11 :fgseor of ancient languages in the Department of Foreign Lan- gan State College. I—i‘ 725. THE THIRTY-FIRST ODE. EBA! asks the poet. praying thee. Apollo. lhile the new wine he pours? lot the rich harvests which the ploughshare follow On green Sardinia's shores: lot gold. nor ivory. nor the flocks that feed in Calabria' s sunny land; For fields that quiet Liris kisses. leading His still stream o'er the sand. Prune your rank vineyards. ye whose fortunate valleys hear the Galenen vine! O prosperous merchant. drain from golden chalice {Dry traffic-purchased wine! i'hou to the gods art dear.--they often lead thee Safe o'er the western sea; For me. my olives and light mallows feed me, And pleasant succory. These to enjoy, with health and soul unwarming, Son of Latona. grant! To know no dreary age my spirit staining. Nor e'er the lyre to want. 5 His other verse was of varying merit. some of the best being the following which he had written in one of his love letters to Anna: As calmest waters mirror Heaven the best, So best befit remembrances of Thee Calm. holy hours. from earthly passion free, Sweet twilight musings.-—Sabbaths in the breast. No steeping thought. nor any grovelling care. The sacred whiteness of that place shall stain, Where. far from heartless Joys and rites profane, Inory has reared to thee an altar fair. the fi ‘WW- I January. 1855). 55-56. hose odes from One I.“ b°°k may have been entitled "Freshman Translations" to make mated betsertain and to avoid the inevitable comparison that would be ex- Gen these and the high hopes expressed in his essay on poetry. He 1: Class. e;- bgan a freshman at Harvard but entered with the sophomore k 73 Yet frequent visitors shall kiss the shrine. And ever keep its vestal lamp alight.“ All noble thoughts. all dreams divinely bright. That waken or delight this soul of mine. Even Love shall dare with faltering steps draw near. Trembling and blushing at his own sweet zeal.-- lith face half hidden shall devout lcneel. In timid reverence and in holy fear.3 Though none of these seem great. one or two poems contain fairly vivid imagery. as this sample from "The Pilgrim” may show: TEE way is long. the way is lone. The wintry fields are brown: Full coldly on my frosty path The freezing stars look down. Througi drooping woods I Journey on. lhere never wood-bird singer- The drowsy owl from bough to bough Slow flaps his gloomy wings. 'hile from the pine-tree's waving hair An endless murmur swings. ' In general. one may say that Sanborn's early verse is sweetly pleas- ant. that it has little punch. that it contains a few good images (parti— cularly when he is forced to be more specific and vivid when rendering an— other language into mum). and that it is perhaps most reminiscent of the minor pootu of the magnet romantic and Victorian schools. Besides his essay entitled "Retry." Sanborn wrote five others for the new magazine: sumo 13131,! "his writings of Sylvester Judd.” 'Womanly Version ¥m°u°"' Shanaflard 132522.131. I (March, 1855). 160-161. Another 0 thig, which includes the first twelve lines printed here plus a co .1 he 1:313; ‘Ppears in Sanborn. 'History and Poetry." p. 120, In the latter printed 1...: ‘10 wrote this poem while Anna was still alive: the version . however. would seem to be written to one dead. Lui- - (January. 1855). pp. 65-66. ““--c—- e' id 7’4 Ethics." "Lilian.” and “King Arthur.” the first two being perhaps of 33 most interest. In his essay on £13 2.13.14. he states in a footnote that he has been “chiefly indebted for [his] facts . . . to conversations had with sever- a]. persons intimately concerned in the publication“ of the magazine. and continues. "He may have made mistakes in these facts. but we are confi- dent they are few.” As these conversations were doubtless held with Emerson. Alcott. Thoreau. and Parker. the essay may be interesting and Particularly so for its definition of 'Transcendentalisn" evolved by the person who was later to be called “the last of the Transcendentalists": Judging from the common tons of the newspapers and of society. a Transcendentalist is a sort of chaos of obscur- ity. nonsense. and atheism. To hear the talk of many well- meaning clergyman. one would suppose that Transcendental- ists, and especially German Transcendentalists, are a set of pernicious sophists, who are laboring with all the ingen- uity of the Devil to destroy good morals. uproot piety. and introduce a universal anarchy. We are glad to find. however. that duster views on this point are gaining ground among us. As those who talk thus wildly about Transcendentalism are usually great sticklers for authority. it may be well to begin our definition by stating that Socrates and Plato. and the noble fathers of the Stoic school. were Transcendental- 18tso-rthat Paul and all the Apostles were so. pro-eminently. --that Luther and the great saints and martyrs of the Chris»- tian Church were so too.--thatsll great posts. painters, seulptors. musicians. are of this sect. and will be so till the end of time. For Transcendentalism is neither more nor 1°“ than Idealism.-3piritualism: not in its wretched modern sense.--for our tie-called Spiritualism is but a thin- 1y 'ailed natarialism,~but in its best and highest meaning. a {Transcendentalist believes in what transcends the sen- ”v he belives in inspiration. flowing ever fresh and N 38’ order: 131,989 essays appeared in T__h_s_ Harvard Maggzigg for 1855 in this 159: "no L111”... (March). pp- 128-433: "The Dial." (Apr-11.) 1:10.151.- ‘ZD. 297.3231? Ethics.” (June). pp. 259-262: "King Arthur.’ (July). PP- 345.J56 : and "The Writings of Sylvester Judd,” part 1 (september). e'u'ticlg,8 a find part 2 in vol II (October). pp. 393-“02. the last two Dpefiring after he had graduated. 75 pure from the Infinite Source of all wisdom and power; he be- lieves in the human soul. its power. its divine lineage. and its glorious destiny. He values the past. but he values more the present. and most of all the future.-thet greet promised lend of all our hopes. He does not believe that all truth is enshrined in any book. or any institution. for he holds that men is always greater than his achievements. and God infinite— 1y greater than either our manory or our comprehension. such. briefly. is Transcendentalis- in its most general sense. He then contrasts Transcendentelism with Sensationalism. speaks of the influence of Kent. richte. Jacobi. Hegel. Schelling. Schleiemacher. and others-dilate and the Alexandria“. Plutarch and lpictetus. the sacred books of the Hindoos end the Persians. Coleridge and Carlyle. "Moreen. t‘7"). throng: his lectures and his Nature. had produced a. deep. if not a Wide. effect in New kigland. hereon. indeed is the Representative Man Of American Transcendentelism. nor can we better describe the period of its culmination. in 18% and 18,41. than in his own felicitous words.‘I Sanborn then quotes from hereon in 1h: gi_e_l_z lo one can converse much with different classes of so— ciety in New England. without remarking the progress of a revolution. Those who share in it have no external organiza— 91011. no budge. no creed. no name.... Without concert or pro- clanstion of any kind. they have silently given in their sev- em adherence to a new hope. and in s11 companies do signify 5 greater trust in the nature and resources of men than the 1“" or the popular opinions will well allow. his spirit of the time is felt by every individual with some difference,--to each one casting its light upon the ob— J°¢tl nearest to his temper and habits of thought;-to one. filling in the shape of special reforms in the state: to another. tumdifications of the various ceilings of men. and the cus- tur: °f business: to a third. opening it new scope for litera- £1“th art: to a fourth. in philosophical insight: to a a pro; in the vest solitudes of prayer. It is in everyr form 9'1: against usage. and a search for principles. Es t1; - "“ “lens... on. organization of £12 Dial. which “opened with as b21111.“ d1 3pm of talent among its contributors as any American L “ta- *u- D ‘ . 4. .1 {192? 1 I: 1.1.. n an m n 76 magazine has shown, before or since.“ And he discusses the contribu- tions made by his present friends at Harvard toward the work of the movement and its mouthpiece: herson. Alcott. Parker. Thoreau. J. S. Dwight. and Ellery Ghsnning the younger. "by. then.“ he asks, "did MM fail to succeed? . . . The chief reason was. we think. that it was in advance of the tiaes.‘ And he says: Since 18310. a great change has taken place in New Eng- land. and much in literature that was then laughed at and neglected is now awnired. But then...the freshness of its criticism. the originality of thought manifested in it. its independent opinions. all were forgotten by an undiscerning public. Besides this, it was not managed with the practical skill and shrewdness which. in the recent case of Putnam's sine. have given that such marked success. Neither Margaret Puller...nor Hr. herson. its last editor. was very well fitted for such a place.... But brief as the existence of The Dial was. the influ- ence of the lovenent in which it originated was by no means so short-lived. In who, the Trenscendentalists were a sect neither amorous nor held in such consideration. but since that time their art has been set on the best litera- ture of the country. They have. to a great degree. revolu- tionized the public mind. The effect of their labors may be traced in the higher tone of criticism, and the more gen- srous philosophy, which now prevail. Sanborn's varied interests and the quality of his literary criti- cis- say be typified by noting some of his other essays and reviews. ‘t tines in his reviews he was caustic—~but wittyb-as when he says of the m of Tho-as 11111.. Parsons, ut the present higgo price of pa- p”. it is hard to see why this book was ever published.“ it other \— 39312 Harvard Magazine. 1 (April. 1855). pp. 1511-159- Review of] Poe-s (Boston. 185“). Ibid.. I (December. 1851:). Mt. a '- ~u~m - 77 times, as in his review of Louisa May Alcott's first book. Flosg§_§§f bles. he could speak more gently than the book deserved, perhaps out of deference to his new friend. her father: The children...declare loudly for the book.... But others also can find a pleasure in the love and knowledge of Na- ture which the book shows.... The men and women who write stories for children do a greater work for the world than we are wont to think of. Horace praised poets because they formed the "tender mouth" of children, and turned them from the vile to the beautiful. Miss Alcott does not need to “Claim he, shelter from her sire of an immortal name," for she has earned praises for herself.“1 Indeed, Sanborn's tastes in literature might seem perverted if one stopped reading his reviews after listening to his enthusiasme for such anonymous works as "Lilian" and E3 L521, both of which effected Sanborn's eyes. “which 32314; grow moist" over them? We may be saved from a bad opinion of him as a critic when we witness his even greater enthusiasm for several other superior works of literature, an enthu- Biasm shared by highly competent critics of his own time and ours. For example, of James Parton's £132 9_f_’ Horace Greeley he says, "NO sort of book is so fascinating as a well-written biography,-and eSpecially if its hero be a man of strong and amiable character.” This Life. he says. ”satisfies both these requisites“: to have “pro- duced such a man is an honor to our country.“ for he is "an upright, 150 iJ‘LReview of] Flower Fables (Boston. 1855), Ibid., I (March, 1855), I he[Review of] "Lilian.“ in a long essay of the same title. Ibid., ( (March. 1355). 128-133: [review of] 15321 (Boston, 185,47). 117171.“. I December, 1551:), us. 73 generous. and sincere man,--a democrat to the core,—-a genuine philan- thropist,--a hater and assaulter of all kinds of pretence.“ And he thanks Ir. Parton--"whoever he may beh-for writing the book. He does it. too, in a most readable manner; his style, with- out being faultless. is clear. picturesque. and energetic. Moreover, he is thoroughly independent. He does not glorify his here at the expense of truth, so far as we can see. but he speaks his mind in the frankest way on every subject that comes before him. If you want to know what he thinks of the old political parties. or this nine days' wonder of a new one.-of l‘ourierism. of Spiritualism. of Calvinism. or of any conceivable LE, or champion of it. coming up for notice in this book.-ur. Parton makes a clean breast. and gives you his "screed." Now we like this in an author. especially in an American author. Sanborn then says that "this book suggests to young men like ourselves the gravest questions for discussion” Read it, and it will set you thinking of the organization of 1abor.—that great problem of the age, which it should be America's mission to solve: of People's Colleges. or some other way of remedying the inefficiency of our collegiate system: and of a dozen other reforms which you will find ad- vocated by the editor of the Tribune. Above all. it will fill you with courage and hope.... You will wonder that you ever doubted the capacity of mankind for virtue and heroism. and you will learn to put your trust in the future. for which Horace Greeley so aanfully labors. and ovefi whose destinies the eye of Infinite Love for ever watches. 3 ‘ brief glance at Hilton flower's recent biography olmearton indicates that Sanborn's review was discerning and intelligent. Sanborn's astuteness as a literary critic is perhaps most clearly “hows in his essay on 'The lritings of Sylvester Judd,“ a long essay of 3[Review of] Life of Horace Greelgz (New Y rk. 18 ’4), 11316.. I (Nahum). lie-1'53? — o 5 —’ m'Il.‘|.lton I flower J {9522' Th ~ . . . M . _2 Father 21 Modern Bio ra . (be. as. 1951). pp. 30-33. “m -‘.¥.-au - k 3.. ‘1 I." 79 twenty pages which came out in two installments. If. as Parton once said. "A man is, in a degree. that which he loves to {Erase} this re- view of Jndd's work should tell us much about Sanborn. rirst. Sanborn prophesies that Judd's Marggret will "become a classic.-one of the freshest spring flowers of American literature, in the estimation of all, as now of a few." largget concerns the growth of a girl raised in 'a rude, drunken family" in a small New England town. lhen she asks the village schoolmaster about God, he puts Toollr's mythology into her hand. and she comes to worship a world of nznaphs and dryads. When a stranger comes to town, he teaches her abOut Christ, anz‘ in time, by a series of improbable coincidences. the town is burned to the ground and she inherits two million dollars. She changes her town...into a paradise,-a town fit for the Millennium»... A new church is built.... The neighboring churches are scandalised, the doctrine is so heretical.... Beside the roads and in the woods. statues of Peace, Faith, .R Hope, Love, Truth. Beauty...are set up.... The people all work and all worship: woman has her rights, and is con- tented: the children are well educated. Poverty decreases fast. and crime is almost unknown. Nearly all the base and selfish people in the book live regenerated in this wonder- ful town. 3“ it is Sanborn's criticism of the book which some significant: It has not the merit of a well-constructed plot. There is great improbability in many of the incidents,-great in- consistency in many of the characters. The conclusion, with its millennial perfection....is wholly impossible and imag- inary. Yet. in its subordinate parts. it is managed with great skill usually. and its general effect, one would say. is almost perfect. It is a singular combination of tragedy, \ “51nd. . p. 31. “are, r - L 80 comedy. and idyl, the idyllic element predominating, however, and shaping the course of the story. . . .In power of humorous description and portraiture, we have no hesitation in ranking Mr. Judd with the masters of humorous writing.... Mr. Judd, too, is one of those few wri- ters who have been successful in copying the New England dialect.... Next to the hmor displayed in Margaret, is its vivid descriptive power.... Not even Ruskin surpasses Mr. Judd in this. Here Sanborn gives two pages of quotation which he uses to illus- trate Judd's keen observation and use of vivid details. There is also, Sanborn says, 'a rare and rich beauty in the dreams which visit Margar- et's childish sleep." “They suggest the supernatural," he feels, and impress the reader that she is only half human.. I'Sonething of the same art with which Hawthorne makes the realms of fact and fancy unite, ap- Pears in this dreaming of Margaret." Sanborn is also interested in the ideas which Judd presents: "The Purely theological parts of the book are by no means the best: . . . and though his system converted Margaret, we must say it is somewhat inconsistent and shadowy." And Sanborn feels that "in politics. in re- ligion, and in social philosophy he was far in advance of the mjori ty 0! his countrymen.I Sanbom finally concludes that Mr. Judd's “defects are many and 8131th His chief sin is a total want of taste in selection and Arranguent. His beauties of thought and sentiment are dis.- Ronds in the rough. and gleam sometimes. as we may fancy the Pearls did. Lite; they were cast before swine.... He Jumbles clumsy and graceful, charming and odious, together in a be- wildered aess.. .. -“U'-‘¢:- . 81 These three defects—want of taste, of method, and of accuracy-care the most striking in these books, and from them spring most of those faults which have been commented on by us and others. They effect the stule more thsflethe matter,- that still challenges our admiration and love. It is surprising how Sanborn's remarks parallel those of our com temporary critic. Van 'yck Brooks. The latter of course could pick. no a copy of Marat a hundred years later. Gould Sanborn be expected to see Judd's work with intelligent perspective? The fact is that Brooks' critical comments Justify Sanborn's. Brooks speaks of Judd as "the Hawthornesque novelist," agrees with Sanborn that the novel was “obscure and confused," and the: spends an amount of space equal to Sanborn's to airport his opinion that Many page; and even chapters were vividly picturesque and charmingly written.” It is quite possible, and not at all improbable, I believe, that Brooks saw Sanborn's review. for the two critics see eye-te-eye on the writings of Sylvester Judd. Sanborn's new interests and expanding world view are characterized by one other contribution to 3!. Harvard Maine; his review of five Lem m m. the product of the minds of Theodore Parker, 'endon Phillips, Thomas lentworth Higginson, and Mrs. c. J. H. Nichols. In the third, Infranchisement g women. Sanborn feels that Parker "ably "lpports his position, that women should be freed from all the external “strains which they now complain of. and that to them. as widely as t° Ion, the whole field of human action should be opened." mil—F'ud sine, I (September, 1355) 3,4556 and II (Octo— 7' gang,“ Ema" ”1° “"9“ all..." Maud (n Y rk: Th )5 u on: 1.11, . 1936), 1,!“ng on o e 00. "its.“ In the first, Sanborn speaks admiringly of Wendell Phillips' view and quotes Phillips as saying: “It is no fanciful, no superficial movement, based on a few individual tastes, in morbid sympathy with tales of individual suffering. It is a great social protest against the very fabric of society.“ Of Higginson's M £5}. h_e_1_‘_ M33. Sanborn says: “Mr. Higginson's Essay is written with that earnestness 'hich characterizes all he does and says. He has devoted himself to this reform with the same noble spirit which has already made him one 0! the foremost friends of the slave, the drunkard, and the unfortunate of all classes.“ Sanborn then concludes his review in a stirring statement that 9°13“ Prophetically toward his own long career in the public charities and social reform: V0 confess we do not see how the arguments and appeals of these craters and essayists can be met, or what answer the advocates of things as theyare can make to them. It becomes “9. young man, Just beginning the world for ourselves, to ex- amine into these things, and choose which side we shall take. ... One thing is certain, that the existing social system is sadly imperfect, and allows the perpetration of fearful wrongs. Can '0 not do something to change it?“8 It 1' easy to see from the above that Sanborn bent many of his en- 9131» toward. understanding and promoting Transcendental literature and 1h“- Thifi was due presumably to the fact that he had become a friend 31!: ELBOfiew of] Women's Rigts Tracts: Ros. 1-5, The Harvard Maga- R‘fi’ {Nahum-y. 18555, 100-101. Sanborn reviewedx—H) §peech of m- Ffl? at Worcester, October, 1851: (2) Theodore Parker's Sermon \ the PM Emotion 2.? Woman and (3) Enfranchisement of Woman, re- - ointed fr“! the Westminster Review for July, 1851: i“.— l. Higginson'e $83929: E93: Wishes: and (5) lire. C. J. H. Nichols' The Responsibilities \ Woman. 33 01' many of the great of Concord and Boston. The time he spent at Her- vard, he said many years later, "gave me the Opportunity of knowing the men who afterward had much to do with shaping the policy of the nation." During his first year as a sephomore, he stayed with his uncle in Bos- ton during the entrance examinations and met Harriet Beecher Stowe, then at the height of her fame with Uncle Tom's Cabin, while she was staying with her brother in the house across the street. Later in the year he met the Alcotts and Dr. Samuel Gridley Howe and began a friendship with Theodore Parker. A year later he heard Charles Sumner speak in Faneuil Hall, met Thomas Wentworth Higginson, and called on Whittier in his cot- tags in Amesbury. In July, 1853, he visited Enerson in Concord and made an effort to hear him whenever he lectured. ”Thus,“ 88378 5811170171. "the “"319 01’ nrv political and literary friends was formed in good part dur- ing “0' first two years in college}: At the evening parties and open-houses at Theodore Parker's he heard the endless debate between anti-slavery and pro-slavery factions. By May 30. 185k, the day the Kansas-Nebraska Bill was passed, the dis- 6118810113 in the parlor had grown violent. What angered Sanborn and his f1'1°m‘ls Was that this act stipulated that the Missouri Compromise had been replaced by the Compromise of 1850, which let the people of Utah and 39" Mexico decide for themselves whether they were to have slavery. Most infuriating was the fact that it organized two territories, Ne- bra. \ “a and Kansas, allowed settlers to carry slaves into them. and 9Reco llections. I, 35-117. authorized these settlers to determine whether their states should 50 enter the Union slave or free. It depended on the people of the North to say whether they would, in the words of Webster, ”uphold the interests of slavery, extend its influence, and secure its permanent du- ration," or whether the majority of the peOple of the United States...should carry out that professed object of the Con- stitution of Washington and Franklin. "To establish Justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to themselves and their posterity." These were the great interests really at stake in the political contests from 1851! to 1861, and in the Kansas campaigns of 1856-58. Feeling this as warmly and foreseeing it as clearly in 18514 88 it is now visible in retrospect, and aided in this clear- ness of insight by the remarkable political wisdom of Theo- dore Parker, I announced such opinions in one Of my college declamations, and acted upon them steadily thereafter. 51 Sanborn felt: Sanborn has often been called a hero-worshiper, the Concord Bos- “n' Hero-worshipers are not always dear to their hero: yet Sanborn's ”ml for his senior year at college, and contemporary evidence indi- cate that. the great sought him out. Alcott frequently drapped into his 1‘0 On at college. After he was asked to take charge of Emerson's school at concol‘d, hereon and Thoreau often called on him and his sister at the 1r 1‘Ooms at Ellery Channing's, and Sanborn was often invited to Join \So\ Unite Ouija Nevins and Henry S. Commager, Th____e Pocket History of the \: 1States, rev. ed. (New York, Pocket Books, Inc., 1951),— p. 207. ESIllecollections, I, l«ls-$9. (Such an announcement of Opinions in Sin ho ho.» Ohm. parts or emibition speeches I have not yet found, though I xamined all pertinent copies of Exhibition and Commencement P__e___r- f0 8 Q N in the Harvard Archives.) 52v“ Wyck Brooks, The Flowering 9i New gland, p. 1431. ’N M)”: these figures and their famous friends at dinner and conversation. Thomas Wentworth Higginson reveals, in this personal letter to a member of his family, how one of the finest minds in New England reacted to Sanborn at this time: We had a pleasant visit last week from the most interesting young man of the day, Frank Sanborn, a Senior at Cambridge, and editor of the ”Harvard Magazine." He is three inches above my head and very handsome, a person of great talent and noble character: and did you never hear of his romantic en- gagement, marriage, and bereavement? He is only twenty—three now.5 Sanborn's college Journal is, in my estimation, the best thing he ever wrote. Had he continued it--as he may haven—and had he continued 11? as conscientiously as I believe he did during these college and early Concord days, his mission in life would have been fulfilled. But I do “0" know what became of this Journal or Journals. It is my greatest hope that the originals may be found, for their importance to a study °f the great men and ideas of Concord can not be overestimated. The Journal we have is filled with minutely reported details of 1Del‘aons, places, things, and ideas: who was there, how they looked, where the?’ eat, what they said. Some excerpts will indicate the extraordinary opportunity that befell Sanborn during his senior year at Harvard. In 0119 of his first entries he describes a visit to Enerson in Concord: November _2_, fl. Suddenly I went to Concord by railroad, and getting to Mr. Enerson's house at 2 o' cl'lt, found him Just arrived at home from Keene. We sat by the dining-room fire and talked awhile-oof Stonehenge and of new theories, of '\_—— 53Mary Thacher Higginson, ed.. Letters and Journals of Thomas '\worth Higginson (Boston, Houghton Mifflin, 1921;, p. E5,“ Bossuet and his book, of cones, etc. Speaking of pines, Mr. Emerson said Issac [sic] Porter offered to shew him on his Maine woodlands trees a thousand years old, for there is no limit to the life of trees: they die only by accident. We walked out across the pasture to Walden Pond, and Mr. Emerson spoke of an Englishman, Cholmondely, who had lately come to Concord, a Preel man, a Puseyite, who had been to Australia and written a‘book called “Ultima Thule" thereupon. 'Be is the son of a Shropshire squire, and is travelling during his nonage. He is better acquainted with things than most travelling Englishmen are; they are a singularly verdant Eggg. The Englishman who stays at home and attends to what he knows is one of the wisest of men, but their travellers are most unobservant and self-complacent. I asked this man if he saw any difference between our autumn foliage and that of England. He said no, but all men who have eyes notice it at once: ours is tulips and carnations compared with theirs. So, too, he told me he went to hear a Mr. Parker in Boston: he thought him able, but was shocked at some of his doctrines. He began,“ said Mr. Emerson, 'to talk to me about original gig_and such things. but I said: 'I see you.are speaking of something which had a meaning once, but has now grown obso- lets. Those words once stood for something, and the world got good from them: but not now." Just then we met the mfin himself, and Mr. Emerson invited him to dinner on Saturday.5 . In~amother Journal entry he reports a conversation with Alcott: November g9, 185h. Coming in from Agassiz's lecture, found Mr. Alcott in my room.Talked with him a few minutes and then took him to dinner. There we spoke of Agassiz and science. Mr. Alcott complained of naturalists that they begin with mat- ter,-—they should begin with spirit,--as in the 'Vestiges' the author supposes man developed as a final product from inorgan- ic matter. This is wrong. The Deity does not work in this way, building up man out of matter, but man is rather a link between God and matter. Matter is the refuse of spirit, the residuum hot taken up and made pure spirit. It is like a swarm of bees. They are conical, like the arrangement of things and man. All the bees depend on the queen bee; so all matter depends on man. -a___1r___ 5 These last two paragraphs prove the authenticity of Sanborn's 30usual, for they have been copied verbatim into a letter to Oliver Wendell Holmes, dated Concord, March 20, met. which 1. now in the erg Collection of the New'York Public Library. 57 “This which we are now engaged in," said Mr. Alcott, "is an instance of what I mean by the use of matter by spirit. Out of the food before us each selects what is needful for him, and reJects the rest. So spirit, selecting what is for its use, reJects the rest, and to i£_this refuse is matter.”.5§ . I spoke of A. T. Davis. Mr. Alcott said: "He is a simple, earnest man, but to him matter is every- thing; spirit at its extreme limit is still matter, It is better to say boldly that we are not formed from matter, but' thn+ we ourselves form it, that the eye creates what it looks upon, the desires what they act upon. etc.“ 'This is nearer the truth,“ said I: but Mr..Alcott seemed to imply it was almost the exact truth. Turning to Baxter he said: "We are waiting for you theologians to set forth this view, but you.are slow to do it.” Baxter replied that the maJority of men who listen to sermons would not understand a statement of this kind; ”Shall we preach only to the few while the many go uncared for?“ “Can you ever reach to mgnv at once?" said Mr. Alcott (not in these words?, "and would you.preach to the Irishman on the railroad, with his brain built of potatoes and such things? No, you.must pass by Patrick and speak to men who are before him; they will hand it down until by and by Pat- ridk will get it.“ We all demurred a little to this. I said the greatest minds often found themselves equally appreciated by the high and the low. Baxter spoke of Christ's apostles, who were ”Irishman" in Mr..Alcott's signification. 'th at all,“ said he. “Christ made them what they were, to be sure; but he had good timber to make them of: they were not really common men. It is not the distinc— tions of society that I speak of, but those in the nature of man." Baxter spoke of Dr. Lothrop's congregation. 'They are a sort of human brutes,“ said Mr. Alcott, 'and they say, like peeple. like preacher. How few there are who really hear a man!" he went on. I'Those who do so must dine on him: you.must 222.2l2.22 to get the good of him. Christ's disciples did so. That is the meaning of transubstantiation, nothing else. So nowadays men feed 33 \— 55In these excerpts from the Journal, the ellipses of the original e(Liter, George Sidney Hellman, are indicated by gpaced periods, mine by ‘3 gaced periods. 83 Mr. Parker: he is strong meat to them; and they go away only to come back with appetite for more. 'That was good,‘ they say: 'we must have some more of that.‘ It is not so much so with hereon; he is a finer food. A man who eats meat gets hungry sooner than I do: he has a ravenous appetite." Five days later Sanborn dined at Alcott's home and discussed the Dial with him, evidently in preparation for his essay in the Harvard Mgzine. Saturggy, Egg} g5.... We talked about the “Dial.” Mr. Alcott got his Journal and showed me some memoranda of the “Sympo- sium," or Transcendental Club, of his first acquaintance with Emerson, £c.... He told me the names of most of the writers for the ”Dial.” He showed me also what he called "Tablets,“ extracts from his diaries, arranged in a certain order, un- der the signs of the zodiac. They consist of apothegms, short essays, and the like, and are designed for publication. In this connection.Mr. Alcott told me Emerson's way of writ- ing.. He puts down in his commonplace-book whatever he thinks worthy, and in the fall, when he is preparing his lectures or when he is making up a book, he goes over his commonplace- book and notices what topic has been uppermost in his thought. and arranges his fragments with reference to that. This ac- counts for the want of formal method in his books. They are cl'.‘:V8talli:zations.. Then, too, there seem to have been a great many dinner parties. 'hiCh converged on the Hotel Albion, where Sanborn talked with the great on many tepics. In one such session the conversation was fo- cussed On George Bancroft and Edward Everett: m. 292. g. A little past 3 I went to the Albion. exPecting to meet Mr. Alcott. He was not there, but I found Emerson and John Dwight, H. Woodman and Cholmondely, the “-1 maan. hi About a quarter to four I went for Mr. Alcott and found r m with Kimball, of the last divinity class. He soon get “1d? and went down with me. We sat thus: Alcott, Voodmen Dnerson Cholmondely Sanborn, Dwight ...Woodman spoke of Everett as a Icurse to American scholarship." and this led to a discussion of Everett's merits. I suggested Bancroft as one of our best American scholars. Mr. Emerson laughed, and spoke of his speech in New York the other day, his ”Triune God,“ "arrogant Arius,” “devout Athanasius,I and the like. Bancroft, he said, is not a religious man. To which Dwight heartily assented. They thought this Trinitarianism assumed out of deference to New York sentiment, which is Presbyterian and Episcopa- lian. ”In conversation,“ Mr. Emerson said, "Bancroft will take any side and defend it skillfully: he is a soldier of fortune.“ He thought his speech at the Phi Beta dinner in Cambridge, where Lord Ashburtonwas present, was one of his best efforts. Quincy and Story had spoken, but rather stiff- ly and coldly: Bancroft warmed up the audience. He spoke of Bencroft's ostracism in Boston on account of his politics as an instance of Boston prescription. On another such occasion Sanborn dined with James Russell Iowell, Eberson, one of the Richard Henry Danae, Cholmondeley, Sanborn's best friend at college (Edwin Morton), and two others. Sanborn's entrance brought them to speak of Alcott: Something was said of his meeting Carlyle in England. Emerb son said it was a fault in Carlyle and Browning and the rest that they failed to appreciate Mr. Alcott. Carlyle walked With him through Piccadilly, the splendor of London, as I understand it, and said: "Here, sir, this Piccadilly has existed for ages, and "111 continue to exist for ages after your potato 52523} has 80110 to the dogs." Neither was Mr. Alcott pleased greatly With Carlyle. flu en, after a long discussion of the relative merits of Browning, Ten- 2; m”. and Shelley—whom Sanborn ranked above Wordsworth-«they pulled th eir chairs up to the warmth of the fireplace and “drew closer about th 8 nuts Eund apples and wine." santK>rn sat beside Dana, and they talked about Rufus Cheats, whom Dana th°1¥§ht the Igreatest genius and best logician at the American bar” : 90 He said he never uses a fallacy without knowing it, and never allows his epnonent to use one without detecting it. I spoke of his meretricious oratory. Mr. Dana allowed that to some extent, but said the Judges watched no one so closely as Mr. Cheats, lest something in his argument should escape them. Under this display of rhetoric lay a masterly logic. Dana told a good story of Ghosts. In a case of fraud the other day, perpetrated, or planned at least, on the coast of Suma— tra, Mr. Cheate was examining a witness who was an accomplice with the principal. The witness was telling the argument used by that man to gain his cobperation, such as the distance from home, the difficulty of detection, dc. But there seemed to be something more. Choate insisted on knowing what it was. At last, said the witness: "Well if you must know,” he said, ”even if we were found out. we 'd get Choate to defend us, and we should get off, though they found the money ig_92£ boots.“ Mr. Cheats was a good deal put down by this answer, being sen- sitive on that point. 4 The day after Christmas, Sanborn was debating whether or not to go to East Boston to hear Emerson, but he finally decided to go, and heard him lecture on England: It was full of good things, but I thought not so fine as the lecture of last spring on poetry. It was the first time I had ever heard him before an audience. His manner and voice were much as in conversation, and his appearance was fine, as always. After the lecture I spoke with him, and on the boat he came and took me aside to make me a proposal for teaching in Concord. I got into his carriage and rode to the American House. where he lodged. En91'3011 did not again talk with Sanborn about the school until the tenth °f Mfimh at one of their afternoon dinners at the Albion. Sanborn ”pmmified to take the matter into consideration, for to leave Cambridge “0"." he Writes in his journal, "is contrary to my wishes, however glad I may be to get so fine a situation." By "hitch 28th, however, he was directing the activities of the ech 0°1' wl’lieh he records was 'vexatious, but is getting better every 91 day." He saw considerable of Emerson, Thoreay, and Ellery Channinv, am" he had two long conversations with Enerson about Pascal and Carlyle fru- which he gleaned some thoughts of his own for his commencement oration. It must have been a happy time for him, a time of fulfilment, a conclu- sion to many hopes. One of the last entries in this Journal typifies his motions: long night. [April] ;§ [1855]. Tonight the Ripleys called, and a little past eight Hr. Enerson came in. He stayed per— haps an hour and talked of Pascal and philosophy and other things. Should I have believed three years ago, when I was in doubt and trouble at Bxeter [sic], that in so short a time I should be living here of all places in the world, and that this greatest and finest of all Americans would be making me an evening call? That I should be teaching his children, visiting his house, and drawing new lessons of life from his serene and simple dignity? Truly my life has been a strange one! But there was 315 who read my secret, and brought order of confusion. Does she still watch over and guide me as be- fore? Ihat a pity that we do not have more of this Journal. and what a '1'f01‘tune for American letters that we do not find a continuation of sa-ll'l’tll‘n's desire to be accurate and precise in his recording of details. In MI final entry he writes: I “it all notice of many things which I would gladly have "utter: here,--walks and talks with Mr. hereon, and pleas- “t hours spent at his house,-for they should have been Witter: down at the time, and were not, and I will not in- 9 thu now by recalling them so imperfectly as I should. 56 a" 111' .1nd and art were to change! Could he have remained the Con- co rd “"011, observing and reporting with this loving care all the 1d Gas ”15- activities of his friends. he would have done his work in thi s ”’16.. But, as we shall see. he came to believe himself more than a no "911- His mission, he must have felt, was to improve on his original a“. c s‘nborn, "An Unpublished Concord Journal," ed. Gect'ge Sidney Helb %&azine. on: (1922). 825-835. k 5. A: L‘ 1-1 . 91a 'hen Sanborn accepted Enerson's proposal to take the principalship of his school in Concord, the Harvard faculty at its meeting of March 19, 1855, "Voted that Sanborn, Senior, be allowed to absent himself from College for the rest of the term, in order to avail himself of an advan- tageous opportunity for keeping school, and on presenting himself for examination in the studies of the class to receive marks for the same." He resigisd his Abbot scholarship, permitting the income for the last six months to be given to Merritt, a Junior.7 ktreme busyness must have characterized Sanborn’s last term at Harvard. Just as great activity and a multitude of labors were to char- acterize the rest of his life. Not only was he holding down his new full-tins Job as teacher and headmaster of his school in Concord, but he was able. in the time left to him, to keep up his duties as secre- tary or Hasty Pudding. take part in the May exhibition, 'be elected to Phi Bota Kappa, be rated eighth of the eighty-two in his class, and write and rehearse his commencnsnt oration. Characteristically fight- in; ”10 main current of convention, he declined, as did the first "War. Irancis Barlow, the election to Phi Beta Kappa. "possibly from a dislike of what they may have domed an unjustifiable aristocracy.§8 His dissertation for the Kay exhibition was entitled "The 'Thoughts' of Poem" which quite probably grew out of his conversations wi th Em~ or.“ on I'I’ascal, Carlyle, stc.‘I he mentioned in his Journal entry for April 12th. "hat is the result.‘I he asks, "of this system of Pascal's?" \57‘ m o_f_ i_hg College Realty. 111. 1:00. hog (Harvard Archives). 3" v1fitor Channing Sanboni. "Iranklin Benjamin Sanborn, A.E.,' The Rim land Mice; and Males; 3.9M. m (1917). 291.313 em; is Victor's, not his father's. kk It leads directly to universal skepticism-it is. indeed, only the skepticism of Montaigne. enforced by religious con- viction and fortified by the most rigid logic. But this skep- ticism-this universal doubt, according to Pascal, is the only road to the divine certainty of religion. When man has learned his own nothingness-has abJured his reason and disowned his affections-then the grace of God gives him the sure light of flithe I confess I can look upon these doctrines only with ab- horrence. I find a certain truth in them. but a truth dies torted and terribly perverted. ‘1: Then he continues, "As I have read these Thopghts, I have involuntarily, by the strange association of contrast, compared the book with a very extraordinary one which has appeared in our own sge—-I mean Carlyle's Sorter Besartus.‘I Carlyle dwells on the greatness of hman nature... . He belongs to the party of Hope.... Pascal, on the contrary, assaults and degrades human nature. True, he does it with a noble motive,...but neither our respect nor our sympathy can overcome our aversion to his gloomy system. He belongs to the party of Despair.... But why has Pascal--holding such atrocious opinions and Supporting them with such pernicious logic-«so won for him- self the admiration and respect of the world? Not, I venture to say, because of these opinions. but in spite of them. We admire his wondrous skill in the use of words-—his wit, his 1earning, his e10quence: we venerate his strict morality and MI unbending courage. "It is better to obey God than men" "I the grand truism so often uttered by his lips and so ”va maintained by his life. In the midst of persecution he never gave up his integrity. Pope and Cardinal thundered a€"’~1|~11st his heresies,--Pascal answered calmly, "If my let- “1‘8 have been condemned at Bone. that which my letters con- dum has been condemned in heaven.” I repeat it—it is for his courage and integrity that '1" honor Pascalnnot for his bigotry and misanthropy. But 0:313“! sq I honor him still more for that which was the root bel11. integrity and his courage--his piety. Mistaken as I '0 ’7. him to have been. I must still do homage to that for-- r 0f devotion which. however misdirected, must always com— land the veneration of earnest men. I can conceive of noth- Ilore touchingb-nothing more sublime than the consecration L '-~=—..-‘~ 93 to God's service of a heart however humble, or a life however obscure,--and the testimony of such a consecration I find in the Thoughts of Pascale59 Sanborn's last act at Harvard was the performance of his commence- cent oration at the graduation exercises July 18th. Writing in his Journal for September 15th, and noting the events of the past summer, he said: ”Early in July I wrote my commencement oration. and read it to Mr. Enerson, who praised some and censored some.” Bis tepic was "The Schoolmaster of the Future,“ and was one of thirty-nine orations, dis- quisitions, dissertations, and essays presented to the "Illustrissimo HENRICO-JOSEPHO GARDNER, CUBERNATORI...REIPUBLICAE MASSACHUSETTENSIS." according to the commencement program. Compared with such topics as ”The Jesuits in Paraguay,“ “The Roman Navy." and "Hmnboldt's Aspects of Nature,“ Sanborn's oration was eminently practical. It is not possible, hOWGVeI'e that the listeners could have repeated the theme ideas of the 390601163 if the other thirty-nine were as long as Sanborn's. Sanborn was the sixth speaker of the "Juvenes in Artibus Initiati": within the last hundred years have occurred the most a'Btonishing political revolutions which authentic history racer-den” But the social revolution which has been accom- Pnfihing itself in the same period is quite as remarkable. th°u€h perhaps, less obvious; and the tendency of all these “angers, whether in the church, the state, or the community, 8 been to deve10pe and fortify individual freedom at the expense of established institutions. \\ May 1 “12er and Commencement Performances (18145—1355), No. 32. éOISSS. in the Harvard Archives. The cepy is dated April 21, 1855. Sanborn, "An Unpublished Concord Journal," p. 835. In politics this strong individualism weakens the author- ity of the state. making men revolutionists in EuroPe, and followers of the Higher Law in America; in religion it loosens the bands of the church, giving rise to all manner of protest and dissent; in philosophy it manifests itself as Transcen- dentalism. which is the stronghold of the individual against authority and against numbers. Let me briefly point out some of the results of this same principle in education. No one...can have failed to notice the increasing im- portance of the secular teacher.... Wherever a clergyman main- tains his authority, it is not so much by virtue of his office as by his personal weight of character. None sees these things more clearly than the clergyman himself; and he there- fore either quits his pulpit for the lecturer's or the school— master's desk or assumes a double office. All the week days in the winter months he is a minister-at-large, and rushes from lecture room to lecture room with the seal of an apostle. What ideas he has he puts in his lectures rather than in his sermons. being fully persuaded that his highest duty is to- wards his audience, not his consr: egation. Thus has lecturing become a profession.... In our vil- lages the schoolmaster supplants the lawyer and the clergy- man.-and is become the shepherd of the people.... To what then are we tending? Evidently to a state of individual teaching and discipleship. corresponding to the individualism in politics and religion which I have noticed. Corresponding. and yet leading to widely different results,“ for while the one hastens to dissolve organizations, and to compel each man by himself to his own guidance. the other-- Individual Education-wreunites and reconstructs society. In elralting school-keeping to the rank of a dignified profession, I see that we are preparing for that fortunate time when the cultivated, the earnest and religious men and women shall find 311911‘ proper place as guides and teachers of those around am. e s e I have said that the Teacher‘s office is becoming the “031? important one in the community.... What man holds so re- 813011821ble, so influential. so sacred 9. place, as he who is form the characters of the young.... God forbid that I ”boll-Id. disparage any honest and useful occupationp-but I must say that the ambition which leads so many to the study °f 18»? seems to me pernicious and vulgar. Such, too, is the 9:31 tion of the church at the present day.... But against prfz:e::h::;zhprofession no such objection rises. There the y, there the work is noble, there the field 1' fr'96.... 2' \fi \ Lf‘ Young men who are seeking a path in life--young women, who with the love of God in your hearts, are longing for some pious task to do--I entreat you to come forward, in humiléiy, yet in hope. to the serious. blessed labors of Education. Somewhat sadly Sanborn must have recorded in his journal in Septem- ber that Mr. Emerson "game to hear me deliver [my oration] at Cambridge. but was Just too late."2 Considering that Sanborn was sixth on the pro- gram. Mr. Emerson probably arrived late out of a desire for self-preser- vation. So the members of the class of '55 bade farewell to each other after the exercises, each to go his own way in the world. Two beside Sanborn were to become teachers: fourteen were to become lawyers: and five, preachers-«in spite of Sanborn's farewell oration. Fifteen entered business and banking or sold real estate. and fourteen others became ané‘e'flneers, scientists, librarians, politicians. army officers, farmers. 01‘ architects. Sanborn was eighth in his class. though actually seventh from the toP 0f the list. as two graduates tied for first position. One of these. FI‘zanois Barlow. became the great general of the Civil War and the Secre- tary °f State and Attorney General of New York: Phillips Brooks, one of th° “at preachers of the age: William Pitt Preble Longfellow, an out- standing architect: Charles Ammi Cutter. one of America's great librar- ions; James Reed. an exponent of the teachings of Swendenborg: Theodore Imam a. foremost marine biologist: and Benjamin Igman was to teach for a ti ms '1 th Sanborn in his Concord school and become later one of the World: 3 leading geologists. But none but Sanborn was to become famous 1E ! 1n th w in}. Commencement Performances (lghCrlgfifi) XV No. 1414. ° Harvard Archives. *‘ ' ’ Sanborn, "An Unpublished Concord Journal," p. 835. 06 in four careers. Fifty-five members of the class were accounted for by lhwin Abbot. the class secretary, forty years later. but what happened 'uathe other twentybseven who walked out of the yard that hot July day? 'Philosophers.“ Sanborn said many years later. "who seek to know the causes of things, are apt to be interested . . . in the manifold in- fluences that make men individuals."3 In these first two chapters, I have tried to trace some of the manifold influences on the mind and per- sonality of this young man whom Emerson must have greeted--after the graduation ceremonies-anot at the beginning of one career but at the be- ginning of four. 3 Sanborn, ”History and Poetry.” p. 82. 97 CHAPTER III HIS mm AS A TEACHER When Sanborn speaks in his autobiography of the “four distinct careers" which he had 'in nature life," he does not number among them his career as a teacher. Yet. while still a senior at Harvard he began teaching in Dnerson's school in Concord. In 1379 he was a prime mover in starting the Concord Summer School of Philosophy with Williams Torrey Harris and Bronson Alcott. and from that year till 1888 he delivered may of its lectures. And in this same period he became a lecturer on ”practical social science” at Cornell. Wellesley. and Smith. He was principal and teacher in Enzerson's school for eight years“ from March. 1855. to larch. 1863. when he became editor of the Boston Commonwealth. He could never devote his full attention. talent. and boundless enery to his pupils because he was so deeply involved through- out this period in his activities as John Brown's New England agent. In Spite of the fact that Sanborn considered this first career of little importance. his teaching and his school elicited much praise from many °’ 3" England's most critical minds. Schooiteeehing ran in the family. an of his brothers and sisters ”“3” Lewis became teachers during part of their lives. Charles taught s°h°°1 before he entered politics: Helen Maria taught at the district School in Hampton Falls: Sarah Elizabeth became his assistant in the more Ge a1 a 1:63 N as o . p. . ....I \t t 98 hereon school: and his youngest brother. Joseph. became his pupil in the school. graduated first in the class of '67 at Harvard. returned to the school to teach. and was invited by the future United States Commis- sioner of lducation. William Torrey Harris. to teach in his St. Louis 2 system It was indeed a singular honor mnerson paid Sanborn when he selected hits above all others to teach his own children. The honor was italicized when Sanborn was entrusted with the education of the three sons of Horace Mann. two sons of Henry James. 5:. (Robertson and Wilkie). the children of Judge Ebenezer Hoar. two daughters of John Brown. young Prank Steams, and Julian Hawthorne. On an average. Sanborn and his small staff taught between forty and sixty pupils. 3 One of these-and he was no scholarv—dwas Julian Hawthorne. who has written vividly and at length about Sanborn and his school. He gives us a clear portrait of him in these words: There came to Concord a tall. wiry. long-linbed young scholar Vith brilliant dark eyes looking keenly beneath a great shock or black hair. a quick. kindly. humorous smile brightening "91‘ his thin. fresh-hued face and finely moulded features. uPressive at once of passion and self-control. He walked '1”! long steps and with a slight bending of the shoulders. 33 1f in modest deprecation of his own unusual stature. sanborn's little one-room schoolhouse. forty feet long by twenty Ii d" had a big stove in its center. and three of its walls were panelled 'i th 1’3l-a<.:k1':oards. The pupils sat at desks accommodating two each. the “3" m0o PP. 295‘2969 “71""75- 3mm Lin-180 Hall Tharp. 1h}; Peabody Sisters. of Salem (Boston: Little. ’ 950), p. 305: Julian Hawthorne. 222 Memoirs o_f_" Julian Hawthorne. .d0 *0- m m, 5:; Garrigues Hawthorne (New York: Macmillan" 1933), pp. 77. so. 1. “1d tmony of the latter. I am told. is to be used with caution. as he ° be inaccurate. 99 girls sitting on one side of the central aisle. the boys on the other. Sanborn's desk stood on a low rostrum at the entrance-end of the build- ing. Sanborn took the little red schoolhouse offered him and painted it gray. Perhaps the act symbolizfid a break with New England tradition such as Horace Mann approved of. Sanborn's curriculum and activities were not so radical as Bancroft's in his school at Hound Hill.but they not with the approval of the most critical personalities. Five years after the school opened. Ellery manning wrote Nathaniel Hawthorne. back from his consulship in Liverpool. Hawthorne was remodeling Alcott's old 'Hillside' and was looking about for a school to which he could send Julian. Ghanning wrote: In nmbering over the things that had been added to the town. ‘5' other day. I left out the first and best. which is. the school for girls and boys. under the charge of Mr. Sanborn. '0 words that I could use on this occasion could do Justice to his happy influence on the characters of those confided to him. and more especially of the girls. He has supplied a Want long felt here. and. by having a school for young chil- dren. leaves nothing to be desired. M1113 thougit the mere fact of being able to associate with him and . . ”3°” he has drawn about him.“ was important. He said he‘d never hm Of a. school before "where there was so much to please and so lit- t1. *0 Offend." Wire 91 Julian Hawthorne. pp. 80. 77. M..- In sill-eel Blaine Nye. George Bancroft: Brahmin Rebel (New York: ”I’ 191W). pp- 67-73- 6 n. 263118m Hawthorne. Nathaniel Hawthorne and H__i_s_ Wife (Boston, 1889). them. (1265. C'hanning's letter is dated Concord. September. 1860. Haw- no“ on °¢1ded to send Julian to Sanborn's school, but he did not send Una. though they took part in its extracurricular 'Jollifica- ti 01180 (P. 267). 100 James Russell Lowell also sent Hawthorne advice. but this was to tell him 921 to send Julian to Sanborn's school. Lowell's letter. how- ever. in the light of today's educational theories. compliments San- born's methods and point of view though it indicates why the school would not solve Julian's scholastic difficulties: Any clever man (like Mr. Sanborn) will begin to take what one may call aesthetic views of teaching after being for some time at the head of a school of his own. I mean that he will attach more importance to the general development of his pupils and less to their fitness to pass a special emination such as is needed here. Channing himself had not always been so enthusiastic about the school. He had written Sanborn a letter a year and a half before in which he declared he felt Sanborn had labored under ”peculiar disad- vantages' in his school from a poor choice of teachers. ”who were not adapted by their peculiarly hard and formal characters to be of use to the youngJ But. he hoped. Sanborn would do better with the new: You need flexible. attractive and happy persons about you. 'hO will make a sunshine in that "shady place.“ a school- room: not cold. selfish. icy peeple. who if they were in NOVB Zembla would be only throwing a lower depression into the thermometers. 5° liked. particularly the appearance of Miss Louisa Leavitt. Sanborn's ““8111. and said that he had heard from those who knew that she pos- “ssfid the best ”school-mam quality“: that is. she was “quite taking 8 with the Young people.“ \ 7 "ark “Lowell to Nathaniel Hawthorne. Cambridge. February 26. 1862. in tony Delolfs Howe. ed.. New Letters 9_f_ James Russell Lowell (New Yo _....._. a"! Harper and Brothers. 1935}:- p. 103. 332. (manning to Sanborn. Concord. March 19. 1859 in figsllections. II. Two of Sanborn's class registers for 1859 and 1860 tell us much about the school and its curriculum. though Sanborn's nearly indecipher- able notes may have led to some false conclusions. For t1 e four months between September. 1859. and the end of January. 1860. an averge of fiftybfive pmils attended his school. In contrast to Bancroft's boar-2% ing school. which was for males only. Sanborn subjected his boys and « Q girls to no mile runs through the woods or early risings at 6:00. Classes ran from 9:00 to 12:00 in the morning and 2:00 to 1H30 in the afternoon. with the school in session six days a week. Wednesday and 10 Saturday afternoons being offered as holidays. Sanborn. Miss Waterman. and Miss Leavitt were the principal in- structure. Miss Vaterman taught Latin grammar. Latin reader. Viri Home. Virgil. spelling. ”History M 8: '1‘." Latin composition. Ovid. draw- 1116. and four years of French. apparently meeting all of these classes daily except for the 1:19.! and 2E French.“ Latin composition. and draw- 1‘60 Miss Leavitt evidently took most of the classes in arithmetic and 11 algebra. and the Latin, American authors. exploration. geography. and U' 3: history. Two persons were called in to teach music-“Miss Pratt and M188 Ensign--the former also teaching a class in Locke. If Sanborn 1: fight the classes listed in one of the registers which do not seem to b ° “Signed to any of his assistants. it may be possible that he tamicht ‘\ BNYO. george Bancroft. p. 69. Lib m_ of Lhe Selec“ men (Year Ending ALI-11 2. l__§'.~___6~0) in the Concord. 1!: which is included the "Report of the School Committee of Con-- 001' d to;- the Year Ending April 2. 1860. " 11 what Gifts w01rd ”exploration” here was first read as ”explanation." thong?- her of these "courses” might include is a question. 10 2 Lucretius, chemistry. natural philosophy. Plutarch. geometry. Latin. Greek. “Clark's Algebra.” "Pierce's Algebra." spelling. French. German. Tacitus. and Milton. Listed also in the registers are classes in Shake spears. 'Book-Keeping.‘ mesar. ”Mental Arithmetic." and geologv. Nei- l2 ther parents nor children probably complained of a lack of variety. Sanborn employed a great variety of persons as his assistants: Elizabeth Ripley. Elisabeth Hoar. Edith and Ellen hereon. Alice J ackson. uartha and Anne Bartlett. Caroline Pratt. Mr. whittemore-J the affianced of my cousin Caroline'mand Benjamin Lyman. who became one of the world's _ 13 great geologists in later life. He looked about. too. to find intellec- tual or intellectually prominent guest lecturers: Dr. Elias Jackson. who lectured on chemistry. Dr. Reinhold Solger. his Prussian assistant. “who lectured on history aha geography so well that hereon was going to school again himself}: Alcott. who\ Sanborn insisted should fill the newly created office of Superintendent of Schools. often talked to the 15 pupils. and Louisa found her visits to the schoolhouse a delight. To the exhibitions of his pupils and to their examinations he invited such I5"1'. B. Sanborn / Register / 1859-60.“ in the Sanborn Papers at the American Antiquarian Society. This and another register contain the lists of subjects. their teachers. and the class lists. 13There were several others. See Sanborn to Benjamin Lyman. Con- cord. May 2. 1860 (Lyman Papers. Pennsylvania Historical Society): San- born to Parker. Concord. March 13. 1559 (Concord Library. 5: 3-110): Sanborn to Parker. Concord. February 12. 1860 (Concord Library. 5: 5-51): Sanborn to Parker. Concord. January 21. 1860 (Concord Library. 5: 5-50): Sanborn to Lyman. Ray 27. 1860 (Lyman Papers. Pennsylvania Historical Societ ). and many other letters in these two collections. 1 an s ck Brooks. 2112 Life 931 Emerson (New York: 1:. P. Dutton. 1932). p. 23E. "‘- m lsngports g: the Selectmgp (Year Ending April 2;. £69). “Report of the School Committee of Concord." passig: Madeleine B. Stern. Louisa £13; 12.59332. (University of Oklahoma Press. 1950). p. 82. 103 brilliant minds as Theodore Parker and Sarah Alden Ripley. who cate- chized and questioned?6 And in one letter to Parker he says he antici- pates few pupils for the fall term of 1860 and shall Igive up the plan of lectures from abroad, and contract my canvass in proportion to the ship and the burden};7 When Ellery Channing. once a pupil at Bancroft's school, wrote Hawthorne. “I have never heard of a school before where there was so much to please and so little to offend.“ he regrettably does not com- pare Sanborn's educational theories and methods to Bancroft's. Bancroft set up a "revolutionary“ curriculum. stating in his prospectus that the studies in his school were to be of a “liberal nature.“ He and Cogswell declared. however. that they wanted to give ”a practical character to [their] institution, and educate not for an ideal world, but for the world as it is." Sanborn did not issue a prospectus or advertisement for his school giving its specific purpose and objectives, but his methods were doubtless progressive for the times. Though Julian Hawthorne felt that 'Sanborn's school was certainly a nice place to be in.“ he describes in detail Sanborn's sternest dis- ciplinary measures. Evidently Sanborn was customarily gentle and kind. but not so inmoderately blend es Thoreau, who announced in his school Letter from Sanborn to Parker. Concord, July 10, 1858 (Conccr' Library, 5: 8-39). 17Sanborn to Parker, Concord, March 13. 1859_(Concord Library, 5: 3-K». 10b 18 "he should not flog. but would talk morals as a punishment instead." Since Julian Hawthorne as a lad was strongly prejudiced against Sanborn and came to be perplexed later by the “feminine gentleness” of this 19 “courteous and smiling ogre.“ he was particularly interested when. I'amid the placid tides“ of the school. "the wave foamed and struck”: Sanborn being late in taking his chair one afternoon, suddenly all the pupils started sneezing. Gourgas. a queer- looking chap. of French extraction. looked about with a grin. He took his hand our of his pocket and scattered an ounce or so of snuff.... At this Juncture in must step Sanborn. He halted. like the heroes of Victorian romance, drew himself up to his full height. for a moment was bewildered, and the next moment understood. Poor Gourgas. foredoomed, broke into a guffaw. Upon him Sanborn fixed eyes more terrible than Thoreau's. "Who has done this?” he asked. ”It was me. sir!“ A sin in grammar. to boot! He was ordered into the adjoining room. and Sanborn. ru- ler in hand. stalked stiffly after him. Hhadk--whack-six times repeated. Then a pause. muffled voices: the execur tioner and his victim reappeared. the latter leading. He had stuck one hand in his pocket to hide the palm, reddened and swollen from his punishment. He managed also to keep up his smile-58 manful gesture-snd we liked him the better for his crime. On another such occasion Sanborn wrote to Parker: ISome talk has lately been made about me because I led a truant boy from the school to the boarding house with his hands tied behind him." The boy was ”a troublesome child-full of all wickedness whom I thought to punish in this way.I But the situation was aggravated when "some foolish and 6 lgfienry Seidel Canby. Thoreau (Boston: Houghtcn Mifflin, 1939) p. 70 19Memoirs 9}; Julian Hawthorne, pp. 78. 8h. ”ma" pp. 78-79. 105 malicious person" in Concord wrote to the Boston Hgggld about it. noting that the boy's father was formerly a clergyman at Beavers. "It will be a week's wonder [I] I suppose." concluded Sanborn. "and then be forgot- ten.” His taking the two daughters of John Brown at the school also 21 made some talk against him. But most often discussed by his contemporaries and by twentieth— century biographers of his contemporaries was Sanborn's tremendous suc- cess in making school a delightful experience. In fact. in his efforts to entertain and gladden his students. he amused most of Concord. Julian Hawthorne summarizes Senborn's efforts: Frank Sanborn's little schoolhouse was surrounded by the great. fresh outdoors. and neighboring such abodes of felicity as the Alcotts' house to play and dance in: picnics at Esterbrook Fans, five miles north in the woods: bathing and skating at lalden Pond: the grand masquerade at the town hall: the regatta on the river below the old Red Bridge: a week's encampment on Monadnock lountain-boys and girls. Judiciously selected. but chaperoning themselves on horseback parties. Such diversions are quite as much characteristics of old New England as the school was. 2 Louisa Alcott felt that of all the changes that had occurred in Concord the one that "promised the greatest interest“ was Sanborn's school. She was delighted with his observations on troublesome boys. blooming girls. fencing. dances. and picnics. She was thrilled when Sanborn organised the Concord Dramatic Union. which produced plays in the church vestry and the Town Hall; she agreed “that the stock company Zlganborn to Parker. Concord. March 11. 1860 (Concord Library. 53 8-52 . azuemoirs gilJulien Hawthorne. p. 85. 106 of the Concord Dramatic union rivaled Walpole's amateur group.' She, as "first old womanI in the company. played with Edith and Edward Emerson, George Bartlett. John and Carrie Pratt. Carrie Cheney, and Anna Alcott in his productions of Ellfirfle. 2h: Ming 95;}; 93g 132;, T_r_1_§_ Lady g_f_ _t}_1_g gage. Naval Memento. 33 Cricket 93 the m. '_I'__h_e_ WE Then there were Sanborn's Friday evening parties for his school. They square-danced to music played by the former turnkey of the Jail, who called the figures smartly. Louisa enjoyed dancing to ”Portland l‘anoy‘I or “Steamboat Quickstep" and watched Sanborn's more 'frivolous' guests waltz to “Buy a Broom.‘ On.flonday evenings the Alcotts received. and the favored.boys of Sanborn's school talked with the ladies. played whist. or made poker sketches, and later in the evening drank Mrs. Alcott'e root beer and munched her ginger cake:3 Ivery'year Sanborn dismissed the school for e.nutting expedition in the fall, a party at Conantum on May Day. and a “pic nic' on the 19th of April. 'Ie foundfgolumbine, anemone. shadbush. dandelion. strawberry; andromeda and some other flowers in bloogi' he wrote Lyman one spring. I'besides those I wrote you of in my lest.‘I He rowed Miss Iaterman and Miss Ihiting up the river in his heat. while Edith Enerson rowed up in 2381:9111. Louise 1311 Alcott. pp. 82-109. 2’4 Letter from Sanborn to Benjamin Lyman. Concord, May 2, 1860, (Inna Papers. Pennsylvania Historical society). \' 107 another. and Louise Leavitt arrived in the carryall. “I wish you could be prevailed on to stay all night.“ he wrote Parker. who was coming up on the noon train from Boston to participate in the July examination of his school. ”and go to my pic nic at Ialden on Wednesday-ashore we shall have dancing. singing. swinging and rowing on the pond.“ That evening there was also going to be a dance fer his school at the Town Hall?5 But Sanborn's attentions were not centered exclusively in his own school. As Secretary of the Concord School Committee. he worked stren- uously with Bronson Alcott to improve the rest of the schools in Concord. He wrote long reports annually on behalf of the committee, which consist- ed of two other persons for the school district at the center. and one person representing each of the other six districts. He also helped Bronson Alcott prepare his annual reports of the Superintendent, reports so voluminous that in at least one year they had to be printed in a sup- plementary volume. Though Sanborn was Secretary for four years. his re- port for the year ending April 2. 1860. is perhaps most interesting. Sanborn’s long report was occasioned by an attempted repeal of the District System. to which Concord had “so tenaciously adhered.” that forced a reorganization of the School Committee. This reorganization. he says. possessed novelty and worked well. The town of Concord owned its own schoolhouses and raised its money for schools in the town nesting. but it had for many years-—as in Hamp- ton Falls-entrusted the selection of teachers and the management of the )258anborn to Parker. Concord. July 10, 1858 (Concord Library. 5: 3'39 . 108 schools to the Prudential Committees in the districts. The general School Committee published their views of abolishing the old District System in all their*printed reports. but Sanborn. realising that democ- racy was not Operating in this microcosm. reported that the other side had no such means of publishing its views: The Prudential Committee man. if he make a report. must necessarily do so to the smaller audience of a district meeting. His views and Opinions. however sound and able. do not reach much beyond the walls of his school house. as he has no power or authority to print. and no machinery of a department of the government to spread his reports through the community. Bis views were therefore rarely heard. says Sanborn. and the strength of his view is indicated only when. "by some such legislation as that of last winter. every one of these little democracies. the districts. finds its very existence imperilled': Then with a voice that makes itself heard above the cries of party. and the din of business. and the tumult of society. they thunder out s.!g that compels a pause and a retracing of steps. however awkward or unwilling. "ls are competent. and we will manage our children's schools in our own way.“ swells up from a thousand districts in a roar. like that of the mingled rivulets united in a mighty cataract. To secure the favorable eddies. not to attempt to stem such a current. was the effort of our citizens. and they affected their purpose by a plan which combines the advan- tages of both systems. To do this. the people enlarged the School Committee so that it comprised three members from the district in Concord Center. and one from each of the six outer districts: they authorised the committee to employ a Superintendent at a salary of $100 a year: they recommended that they hold.monthly meetings and appoint a sub-committee for each school of not less than two members. Sanborn was elected Secretary. 12" 109 John S. Keyes. Chairman. and at Sanborn's insistence. Bronson Alcott. Superintendent. and these nine "endeavored faithfully to carry out the other votes and wishes of the town.“ By this plan. Sanborn reported. each district has been represented. its local wants and views made known. its interests protected. and its cohperation secured. The meetings of the committee have been more formal and meth- odical. than when only two or three not together. The sub- committees have felt more responsibility for their own schools. have watched them closer. and kept up an acquaintance more intimate with them. than if they were not expected to report on them at each monthly meeting. The superintendent has dis- charged hie delicate and responsible duties. we believe. to the eminent satisfaction of all with when he has been brought in contact. and the year's work has thus been harmonious and efficient. The revision of the regulations. and the list of text books. and the classification of our schools. have fur- nished abundant work for even the enlarged committee. and our meetings have never failed of interest for want of matter. The whole financial system has likewise been revised. and a better economy introduced into all its departments. Sanborn'e report then records the condition of the schools. the need for salary raises for their teachers. the poor preparation of students who move up into the high school. the “pain“ the committee suffered at the school examinations upon noting that the French pupils were more numerous than those in Latin. Therefore, without neglecting the so-called.practicel stop dies. we should give what aid we can to the study of Lan- guage and Literature not only in our High Schools. but in all the rest. We will not anticipate what the superinten- dent has to say on this point. As for the Intermediate School. which suffers from the presence of "half-apdozen vicious. idle. and dull boys and girls. who get little or no benefit from the school. but are a serious injury to it.” it could be improved by providing a Town Reform School. 110 At one of the Sunday evening meetings at the Town Hall, Sanborn re- cords that Alcott spoke on “Home Culture in its Ideas and Results.“ Em- erson on "The Value of Learning and.Books.' and Sanborn on "The Practi- cal Duties and Relations of’Parents to their Children and the Schools." is for the salaries ich Concord paid its teachers. I wonder whether Sanborn's was half the combined salaries of Messrs. Allen and Shepard for “teaching High School $6M? 60." or did it equal that of Miss Goodall in the North Primary School. who ”received $133 50 for the hl weeks of school”?26 At any rate, he must have felt his salary was good enough to sup- port a wife. for he got married Just before beginning his last year as 27 principal. Earlier. Sanborn proposed marriage to Edith Emerson. Her father refused him her handr-for what reason I do not know. though I can 2 “Report of the School Committee of Concord for the Year Ending April 2. 1860.I in Resorts 23 ghg_§electmen (Year Ending April_g, 1350). Concord Library. 27Several facts make it discreet to include this statement in my biography: (1) Sanborn's proposal of marriage to Edith Emerson was men- tioned to me briefly by a scholar in Boston before my first trip out to Concord; (2) the fact of Sanborn's proposal to Edith and of the letters which passed between them was verified by the person who holds these letters but who declares that they are ”not for publication.” (3) I have corresponded with two leading American scholars asking for verification of Sanborn's relationship to Edith and of Ralph Waldo Emerson's vehement refusal. and they have verified these facts in writing. though they do not want to be quoted. One person has denied the possibility of these facts: Sanborn's son. Francis. lhen I told him what I had learned. he burst out emphatically. “Impossiblel' However. it is rarely customary for fathers who have loved and lost to discuss their former loves with the children of the woman whom they finally marry. ill guess. The letters. which I presume were those Sanborn received from Edith and her father. are held by Mr. George Goodspeed of Concord. who declares they are “not for publication.“ We can only imagine what must have gone on in Sanborn's mind as he determined to take this important step: his life's greatest passion died with Anna: his second love was thwarted by the man he admired and loved. He married his cousin, Louisa Leavitt. one of his assistants at the school. There are no facts which mark the progress of this affair with Miss Leavitt. except several which would seem to forecast anything but the happy outcome. Most of the references which Sanborn makes to her in his letters simply indicate that ”Miss Leavitt is not well." In one other letter. Sanborn writes Lyman: ”Miss waterman is an angel. but she is not strong. and is now recruiting. Miss Leavitt is not an angel 23 and sometimes quarrels with me smartly: but is a good teacher.“ In an- other to Lyman he says: I am having a week's vacation nowb after which Miss Leavitt will not be in the school till September. if she is then. The reason of her going now is the overplus of teachers and the deficiency of scholars -she being the one most easily spared. It is a trial to her and a great grief to her friends here. especially the Emersons who are very fond of her.... It is possible I may begin next September with only Miss Wat- erman for assistant and some 35 scholars— but I h0pe for bet- ter things. as the orthodox deacon said of universal sglvation. My school and myself seem the sport of uncertainties.:2 28 Sanborn to Lyman. March 26. 1860 (Lyman Papers. Pennsylvania Historical Society). He place of writing is indicated, and the date is written by some hand other than Sanborn's. 29Letter from Sanborn to Lyman. Concord. May 27. 1860 (Lyman Papers. Pennsylvania Historical Society). 112 The fact is. however, that Sanborn and Louisa Leavitt were married August 16, 1362, and he reported the haopy affair to Theodore Parker in a letter from Clark's Island, where they were honeymoonlng: Although the dolce {gg_giggtg of this Castle of Indolence is not favorable to letter writing. I shall still send you such an epistle as my dreamy state will allow. descriptive of what has happened since I left Concord. You have heard something, no doubt, of the wedding. for several Concord people wergO there. We drove in from loburn with Caroline and Jennie, and were a little behind the hour appointed so that everybody was there-~perhaps a hundred people - We walked in alone up the aisle and took our places: the ceremony lasted ten minutes.- ten minutes more were consumed in greetings at the carriage door~ ten minutes in waiting at the Old Colony Station- and finally reached P1ymouth.... In the morning we breakfasted. ...end at 5 oclock set sail for this place.... The housekeep- ing is on a good basis. and the garden full of all sorts of dainties including figs and sweet potatoes and Chinese yams. We have sailed and walked and danced, end I have bathed. I have a higher appreciation of women too than ever before, and have begun to doubt some of the severe Judgments which my way of life has led me into of late year;i This will be a plea- sure to you. I know, as it is to me. But to return to his school. What conclusions may we draw of Sanborn as a teacher? It is the Opinion of Sanborn's son that his father was not a good teacher. “He was too conscious of what he knew.” he says. “and too intolerant of pupils who didn't absorb knowledge read- 32 ily. He didn't have the power to impart his knowledge." This Opinion, 3 O . I believe these persons were Louisa Leavitt's sisters. 1 Sanborn to Parker. Clark's Island. August 20, 1862 (Concord Li- brary, 5: 8-5). 2 3 Conversation with Francis B. Sanborn, August 28. 1951. however. in no way agrees with that of Julian Hawthorne. who observed all that Sanborn did-- which included giving Julian the lowest mark in the class in declamation.. Hawthorne speaks first of Sanborn's preoccus pation with national politics: Ihe John Brown episode had Just terminated in that memorable scene where the scaffold once more became the platform of martyrdom. and none among the champions of the martyr had been more ardent and explicit than this young scholar. In him was illustrated the finest type of the pure New England strain. which took so strenuous and unfaltering a part in the process of our national regeneration. By the natural affiliation with one another of magnaninous and patriotic souls. Sanborn became united in purpose and sentiment with the high aspirations and performances of the elder great men of his timeo-with Garrison. and Wendell Phillips. Channing, Emerson. Alcott, and May. But. says Hawthorne. he maintained his independent mind and held his own with these great men. though he at the same time approached them reverently. And Hawthorne concludes with this great tribute: His outward occupation, meanwhile. was. as we know. that of the simple and conscientious master of a country school for boys and girls. but that school became the model. often imi- tated but never rivaled. of advanced educational enterprise; and when after many years. the doors of the little gray schoolhouse on the village street closed forever. the name of Frank Sanborn was known and honored wherever. in New Eng- land. there was appreciation of manhood, fidelity. generos- ity and enlightenment.33 ‘ Though the title of “schoolteacher" applies. strictly speaking, only to Sanborn as the director of destinies in Emerson's schoolhouse, he continued his activities as an educator when he became at fortybseven a founder and a lecturer at the Concord Summer School of Philosophy, which began in 1879. 33 *mfiw 11% In both educational endeavors he was intimately associated with Bronson Alcott. who admired him tremendously. Alcott first met Sanborn at his series of Conversations which a group of students invited him to 31 conduct at the Harvard Divinity School. He was 'a youth of fine genius 35 and great promise.“ Alcott wrote in his Journal at the time. Then when Sanborn began teaching in Concord Alcott wrote of him: He is sensible and manly and commands the respect of all who know him.... He thinks highly of Parker and accepts his meth- ods of thinking and modes of reform. In politics. he is a Republican. and something revolutionary in a quiet waya—per- haps abetting Captain Brown and the Emigrant Aid measures. I think he is brav . and likely to do good service for free- dom if necessary. In 1860 Alcott and Sanborn Joined.Emerson, Thoreau. Channing. Was- son, and Hawthorne to form the Concord Club. which held conversations once a week in the members' homes. In 1876 many of the same figures formed the Fortnightly Club. and in 1882 Alcott and Sanborn. with lillies Torrey, founded a group called the Mystic Club fbr the purpose of reading the work of'Jakob Beeline?8 In Alcott's mind all of these groups pointed hopefully toward a school of philosophy in Concord. 3iOdell Shepard. ed.. The Journals of Amos Bronson Alcott (Boston: Little. Brown. 1938). pp. 263:“? 3. 35Ib1d.. p. 268. entry for April 13. 1853. 361bid.. p, 317, entry for June 9. 1359- 37Ibid.. p. 325. entry for January 11. 1860. 381b1d., p. 530. and Kurt P. Leidecker.‘Yankee Teacher: The Life of , [William Torrey“ Harris (New York: Philosophical Library. 1946). p. 309. ...V H H’ \3‘1 Alcott seemed to depend on Sanborn for the fulfilment of his life's hopes. Once. in 1870. while Sanborn was helping edit the Springfield g3- ouhlican and was living away from Concord. he paid a visit to Alcott. who wrote in his Journal: Sanborn comes and breakfasts with us. His family have left Springfield for the summer. I cherish the hope of his re- turning to reside here in Concord. With Sanborn and Harris as neighbors. what might I not hope for! My cup would ever- fl 0'. Concord. his Journal continued. was the ”proper seat for an Academy of PhilosOphy. Literature and Religion.” and. Alcott declared: Here should be founded the Divinity School to which young men and women might resort for the inspiration and insight which our colleges fail to cherish. And here should the Journals and newspapers representing the freshest and rip- est thought the aspiration and enterprise of the country. be edited.3§ This was in May. 1870. figd with “marvellous persistence” Alcott pursued his idea of a school. Two years later he wrote his other disci- ple. Harris. then superintendent of schools in St. Louis: Sanborn has returned to Concord to reside permanently. And I do not surrender my hope that some day you are to make our little town your home also. A new spirit is awakening here and only the taking things at the turn is wanting to make it a literary and philosophical centre in the future as well as the present. So you see I dream on still as of ”r.. 39Journal.s_ 23; Amos Bron hoLeidecker. Yankee Teacher. p. 368. h 1Alcott to Harris. Concord. September 19. 18?2. in the letters from Sanborn to Harris recently presented by the latter's daughter. Miss Edith Davidson Harris. to the Concord Free Public Library. (It is reprinted in Part in Leidecker. Yankee Teacheg, p. 369.) - n Alcott. p. hos. entry for May 3, 13:10. ‘—-_ .s _—w Alcott's ideal began to take "positive form“ six years later-~1n 18?8-during a first visit of Dr. H. K. Jones to Concord. Jones was a doctor from Jacksonville, Illircis. where. as "the reviver of antique Platonism in his time and land." he held conferences and conversations on Plato?2 'hen he arrived for a second visit. he was accorded a round of social and "Platonic” meetings at Alcott's. Emerson's. Sanborn'e. and Judge Boar's. and the group made earnest plans for the first session of the Concord Summer School of Philosophy. which was to open July 15. 18?9. Senborn wrote to Harris January 12th: Could you come here and teach a class in Speculative Philos- ophy during the five weeks from July 15 to Aug. 20 - not necessarily all the time. but to give ten lessons at about $5 each? Mr. Alcott and I are arranging a course of five professors for five weeks. with a few extras- to a class of about 50 persons in the "Concord Summer School of Philosophy." He then listed the people they had thought of as their lecturers and added. "I am to be Dean of the Faculty-- What think you of a scheme like this?“ The first draft of the prospectus was sent off to Harris confi- dentially. As regular professors. Alcott was to speak on Christian theism. Harris on speculative philosoPhy. Ednah Littlehale Cheney on "The History and Moral of Art.” David A. Wesson on political philosOphy. Recollgctions. II. N85~h86. lBSanborn to Harris. Concord. January 12. 1879 (Concord Library. 11: 8-18). I am indebted to Mrs. Herbert Buttrick Boomer. 22 Elm Street. Concord. for transcribing this letter for me. 11? listed among the "special lecturers" were Sanborn. who was to talk on what had now become his major field. philanthrOpy and social science. and Thomas Wentworth Higginson. who was to discuss American literature. Thomas Davidson was to describe Greek life and literature. and George H. Howison of M. I. T.. philosophy from Leibniz to Hegel. However, by the time the session Opened. Howison's name did not appear. and the program announced that Prof. Benjamin Peirce of Harvard would discuss physical philosOphy: the Rev. Dr. Cyrus Bartel or Eoston, education; Dr. H. K. Jones. Platonic philosophy: and Ralph Waldo Emerson. memory. F. G. 0. Blake. Thorefifi's literary executor. was to read selections from Thoreau's manuscripts. Sadly for Sanborn. however. the duties of Dean did not fall to him. He was appointed Eecretary. “the business man" of the organization. as Harris phrased it. The other officers of the school from its beginning included Alcott. who was Dean. and S. H. Emery. Jr., the director. These three. with Dr. Harris and Dr. H. K. Jones. constituted "the faculty."r The first session opened in the historic old Orchard House. Harris seemed a bit surprised when. instead of the thirty or forty students an- ticipated. over 200 appeared. iiieidecker. 29:11.99. m;.gh.eir. pp. 369-370. and Raymond L. Bridgmn. ed.. Qgpcord Lectures in ghilosgphy: geogrising Outlines of All the lee- tgzgs at thg_Concor§fSnmmer School gg'Philoscrhv-ZETlHEE'(EanbridEE.—Ezss.. 13337. p. 10. Leidecker's carefully documented work—does not agree with Bridgman's list of lectures for the first session. which. according to the title page of this volume were “Collected and Arranged by Raymond L. Bridgman [.] Revised by the Several Lecturers [.] Approved by the Faculty." usLeidecker. p. “03. h6Bridgman. p. 9. Harris stylud himself Ichief consultant." but his biographer says. |'the whole tenor of the School. the type of programs offered. with em- phasis on Hegel. Kant. problems of immortality. the history of philoso- phy and the spiritual interpretation of Dante and Goethe. reflected his mode of thinking.“ Tickets were handled by Sanborn. who also delivered two lectures. The majority of the students were women. most of whom were teachers. and many people considered the School an experiment in co-education. The old and the young sat side by side at the lectures: there were people of nearly every religious persuasion. though the School was notably free from the "mongrel tribe of free-lovers. new lights and persons half in- sane. who prowl around every mavement that holds out the least promise of giving them an entering wedge."7 It was soon clear that the 1880 session would require more space. and with part of the generous gift of $1.000 from Mrs. Elizabeth Thomp- son of New York City. the new Hillside Chapel was built on the sloping lawns toward the back of the Orchard House property. Through Mrs. Thompson's efforts. too. the School was incorporated. Sanborn being among the seven who signed the articles of incorporation. The little brown wooden Hillside Chapel accommodated 150 peeple. In its one room there was in front a low platform. on which stood the speaker's table with its bowl of flowers fresh from Concord‘s ponds and meadows. Placed about the little hall were busts of Plato. Pestalozzi. 7Leidecker. Yankee Teacher. pp. 3?0. hOE-hOS. “- V 1,19 Ralph Waldo Emerson and Bronson Alcott: a mask of Anaxagoras hung upon the wall. Behind the table eat the faculty, Sanborn at the left. Off in the corner sat Emery. gold watch in hand. After waiting five min- utes for the guests to seat themselves on the movable camp chairs and the unpainted wooden chairs. he rose and addressed the speaker: ”The time for beginning has come. Dr. Bartel.“ This was Emery. the director of the School. who had left his lucrative stove business in Quincy. Ill- inois. to devote himself to the life of literature and the immortal he soul. Here eat the students devoted to the chief purpose of the School. which Sanborn aptly stated in his introductory address the sumrer of the Emerson Commemoration: The chief purpose of our School [is] to cultivate in the men and women of our time a serious contemplation of the most serious and lofty questions which confront us in the morring or the evening of our days.-and to approach these problems. not doubtfully and with timid or malevolent apprehension. but with a loving and brave confidence. 9 After the speaker. who always eat during his lecture. finished. Emery presided during the discussion which followed for an hour or more. 'Opinions [were] offered and sustained by reasons. but no attempt [was] made to reach a verdict.'0 Throughout its eight years the School solicited the abilities of some of the best minds in America. There were. of course. Bronson Alcott. 3;219.. p. “06; Raymond L. Bridgman. ed.. ggpcord Lectures Ag mlosophy (1882). p. 9. “ l‘9Bridgman. p. 53. 50mm. . p. 9. 120 “the patriarch. with nimbus of white hair;' Dr. H. K. Jones. of rather ample build, who spoke fluently on Plato and said decidedly and distinct- ly what he thought in the discussions: and Sanborn. who "was ever alert in discussion.‘I and whose ”lectures were appreciated for their factual content and choice wording.” But the man adored by everyone was Ralph Waldo Emerson, who lectured on ”Memory“ at the first session and on "The True Gentleman“ and 'Ariatocracy“ the second summer. The last time he left his home in 1882 was to attend Harris's lecture on gm 59.13335,” _t1_1_s. The rest of the lecturers durirg the years were of my interests and of varied intellectual sizes and shapes. Thomas Davidson. just back from Greece. lectured on Attica. and shocked his listeners with his re— marks which applauded socialism and Emile Zola: Denton J. Snider of Harv vard, also a specialist on Greece, took his audience to Aulis and Chelcis with photographs which he projected dimly on the sheet hung above the platform. .John Albee. who characterized himself as "too philosophical to succeed in literature. and too literary for a complete philosopher.” deliShted his audience with his pleasing “imaginary conversations." Edmund Clarence Stedman. H. G. 0. Blake, Julian Hawthorne. and Julia ward Howe also contributed lectures on literature. The number of clergyman who spoke exceeded those of any other pro- f09910mm group. and their lectures were "of ten more wordy than wise." The most remarkable fact about them was the diversity of their beliefs and “Periences. There were the Rev. Dr. Lyme A. Bartel. who lectured on education: William H. Channing from London. who presented four lectures on oriental ard mystical philosophy: and Dr. Andrew P. Peabody. who talked on “Conscience and Consciousness." Dr. Elisha P. Muli‘ord of Per-.nsyl- vania. a political philosopher in his own right. discussed “The Phil- oscphy of the State.” Dr. F. H. Hedge talked on Kant and "Ghosts and Ghost-seeing." and Dr. John S. Kedney delivered four lectures on "The Philosophy of the Beautiful and Sublime." There were among the clergy not only the usual smattering of Methodists. Congregationalism. and Episcopalians but also the Roman Catholic Brother Azarias, president of a church school in Maryland. and there would have been Protap Chunder Mozoomdar of Calcutta, a Hindu. had he been able to arrive in time for the 188% session. Scientific interests were less well represented. though John Fiske of Harvard spoke on “The Origin and Destiny of Men.“ in which he gave a rather exhaustive explanation of evolution. John Watson appeared from Queens University. Kingston. Ontario. to lecture capably. and Ednah Littlehale Cheney discussed “The Relation of Poetry to Science.“ Next to the clergy there was a preponderance of college presidents and members of the faculty. University Presidents Noah Porter of Yale. James McCosh of Princeton. John Beacon of the University of Wisconsin, and J. H. Seelye of Amherst and Professors Benjamin Peirce and C. C. Everett of Harvard. '1'. Starry Hunt of Montreal. H. S. White. W. T. Hewett. and C. C. Shackford of Cornell. and J. W. Hears of Hamilton 021- 1089 discussed those subjects for which they were famous. chiefly phil— °3°P1V. religion. and ethics. lilliam James appeared in the audience in 1832- His relation with Harris was somewhat strained. as James knew of Herr-18's contempt for empiricism, but Harris enlisted his personal good will. though Janos continued to complain he could not follow the abstractions in Harris's lectures. James, however, was asked to lec- ture. and he spoke the following sunnner. The audience. too. was made In) of "the serious student and people who cared for the School's message.“ There were such intellectuals as Elizabeth Palmer Peabody. who also lectured and took part in the dis- cussions but who had fuzzy white whiskers and tried to get past little Francis Sanborn. situated at the door. without a ticket. There were George Parsons Lathrop. Hawthorne's son-in—law and editor of the Boston m Courier. Chief Justice Durfoe of Providence: George H. Calvert, the mayor of Baltimore and a man of literary reputation: Attorney Gem- eral Ebenezer Hear: and J. C. Bundy. the editor and publisher of the Beligi awe; m. a Spiritualist, who tried to persuade Harris to help. him establish a Psychicsl Research Society in Concord. Both the faculty and its audience included a remar‘cable number of peo- ple of fame and distinction in philosophy. American letters, and public life. Sanborn made many contributions to the thinking of the group in his lectures. which included a variety of topics. In the first summer session he talked on “Social Science“ and ”Philanthropy and Public Char- “in." and in 1330 he discussed ”The Philosophy of Charity.“ In the third Session. however. he discussed "Roman Literature." “English and 69”” Literature." and "American Literature and Life.” In 1382. the year Of the Emerson Commemoration. Sanborn delivered a long ode. "The Po o M 3 Countersign,“ a tribute to his beloved friend. and the address 123 of introduction at the special exercises. Next day he spoke on "Draculsr _ '. Q Poetry Anong the Hebrews. Greeks and Persians. and two '88!!! later he read from Thorsau's manuscript of ”The Service" and lectured on "Creoles 51 of New England.“ Sanborn took his work in the School seriously and he was "understood to have thought the Summer School oi" Philosophy . . . his 53 most valuable literary mosses.“ The importance of the school must be considered. "As an intellec- tual leaven in American life." says Leidecker. the Concord School of PhilosoPhy can hardly be over-estimated.' And he continues: It was so recognized in the SOies [sic]. Without a doubt. there was no university at the time that could have been more serious in its attempt to expound sound philosophy. American philosophy received a powerful impetus. It introduced the deepest thoughts to young students and to the serious-minded laity. Even the §2F_XR£¥_21E§9 acknowledged in 1830 that Concord had become the trysting place of eminent thinkers who. it must be owned. had given transcendentalism a new turn. With the death of Bronson Alcott March 14, 1338. many felt that the School had finished its course. Accordingly. the 1583 session of the School consisted of the Alcott Memorial Service on June 16th. Sanborn delivered the biographical address and Harris spoke on Bronson Alcott's PhllOBOphy. The School had not been a financial failure. for it had bI‘OUght in a net income of 31 cents. which Sanborn says he pocketed as 53 his treasurer's salary. Alcott's dream had come true. N 1 51Leidec‘zer. 12233 W. pp. 1403-1121: Raymond Bridgmxan. cm- £314. Egtjires‘gthhilfipphz, 5-12. 114-17, 53-51;, 81-33, 123-129: Son. 03?". “"1" 93 Eli‘s and Genus. 22°. 929.2112: Estates 22 ....the Lemur. Learn; ‘r W (Boston. 1835). 9 if 5"Ed'win Hale Abbot. ”News from the Classes." mg mdgfl' £331.12 (June. 1917). p. 559. 53 Leidecker. pp. ho7~‘m3. ¥ Of Sanborn's last excursion into education. I can say practically nothing. Though he lectured at Cornell. Wellesley. and Smith, the li- brarians at these institutions report that they hold none of the manu- scripts of the lectures nor any information about their content. One lecture given at Cornell remains in manuscript in the Sanborn Papers at the.American Antiquarian Society. and this consists of some thirty sheets of a carbon copy which evidently he had made of Samuel Gridley Howe's Greek Journal. Around this Sanborn had woven a lecture on Howe's work in public charities. Dr. James Ford in his chapter on social eth cs in Morison's 2&3 Development 2: Harvard university. says. "Recognition that the merits of prevailing ideals of individual and collective behavior are an im- portant subject of study came rather late in academic instruction” at Harvard. Though some attention had been given to these problems in the Departmentsof Education. Economics. Philosophy. and Government. it was not until these social sciences became fairly well developed that Harvard realized a need for coordinating instruction in social policy and purpose with then. The result of this was the founding. by the Rev. Dr. Francis Greenwood Peabody. of the Deparhnent of Social Ethics in 1906. Peabody had begun a course in 1883 which considered problems of charity. labor. temperance. prison discipline. and divorce. But. says Ford. "No other college courses devoted exclusively to these subjects during the early 'eightiss have been discovered. excepting those given by Professor Graham Taylor at the University of Chicago and by Frank B. Sanborn at Cornell.“ Peabody's approach was unique, however. says Ford. “in attenpting to determine the moralzends of social policy before frsm~ 5+ ing measures of social amelioration.” It is difficult to append a fitting conclusion to the discussion of Sanborn’s work as a teacher. There is, however. a.paragraph in Lewis Mumford'e Eh: gglgggflggz that may help us form an Opinion of Sanborn's efforts. Mumford speaks of the aftermath of the Civil War and the bar- barized population which the war left behind. ”All that was left of Transcendentaliea in the Gilded Age.“ Mumford feels. "was what Howells showed in the hero of a Hazard of New Fortunes-a'an inner elegance." And Mumford draws this conclusion: The surviving idealist did not. perhaps. particularly believe in the practical work he found himself doing: but he did not believe in anything else sufficiently to cease doing it. In a qudte simple and literal sense. he lacked the courage of his convictions: what was even worse. perhaps. was that he never acquired any new convictions that might have given him courage. The post-war generation shows us nature-lovers like John Bur- roughs but no Thoreeus. schoolmasters like Sanborn and William Harris. but no Alcotts. novelists like Howells. but no Mel- villas. It is not hard to define the difference: to put it crudely. the guts of idealism were gone.55 E I anes Ford. "Social Ethics." in Samuel Eliot Morison. ghg_ggzglgg- sent 9}; Harvard University Since the Enigmratigg g_f_ President Eliot (1863-1323 , (Harvard UP. 1930). p. 223. 55Lewis Mumford. The Golden 23v: A StuQZLiELAmerican Eroerience and m - m - Grilture (New York: 30211 and L1var1ght.’1'9"25), ”337552136, 126 CHAPTER IV HIS POLITICAL CAREER Sanborn's first important career--the political--divided itself into four projects. He supplied money, men, and arms for John Brown's activities in Kansas and Virginia through his work as secretary of the Massachusetts State Kansas Committee: he wrote biographies of John Brown and bitterly defended his memory in the public prints: he was editon—in—chief of the Boston antislavery weekly, 1h}: Commonwealth: and he was a political columnist for the §pringfield.2§ilzjRepublican. In March, 1855, when Sanborn accepted Emerson‘s offer to become the principal and teacher in the school at Concord, he entered a circle holding political opinions Imuch the same. as his, though “modified by peculiarities of age and native character.’ Within the group were, of course, Emerson, “the calm advocate of principles," Thoreau, 'who went a step farther in his theories of government and society, '1 and two antislavery fighters, Samuel and Rockweod Hoar. Samuel Hoar, as a member of the Massachusetts legislature, had been chosen by his col— leagues in that group to "challenge the constitutionality of certain laws in South Carolina relating to the imprisonment of free negroes," an act which caused the legislature of that Southern state to exclude 2 him ever after from its courts. 1 gecollections, I, 1‘9. 2 "Samuel Hoar,“ lnczclopedia Americana, 1914? ed., XIV, 301. In May. 1856, while Emerson was contributing to the fund for Kansas aid. Josiah Quincy was writing Judge Hoar: I can think of nothing but the outrages of slave-holders at Kansas. and the outrages of slaveholders at Washington:3 outrages which. if not met in the spirit of our fathers of the Revolution...our liberties are but a name. and our Union proves a curse.... The palsy of death rests on the spirit of freedom in the so-called Free States. The tone of Quincy's letter-~"but less despairing. as befitted younger menF-—was that of the circle in which Sanborn lived in 1856. There were John A. Andrew. the brilliant young Boston lawyer who was to become war Governor: Frank Bird. founder of the Bird Club. which met to dine and discuss politics: Senators Charles Sumner. Henry Wilson. Anson Burlingb ems: lilliam 8. Robinson. who as “warringtgn' wrote liberal political columns: James Freeman Clarke. and others. Theodore Parker was organ- izing committees. circulating petitions. working for the Emigrant Aid Company. counseling’politicians. preaching and lecturing against slavery.. “Insurrection.” he said. “must be tried many times before it succeeds.2 Surrounded by such men of action. Sanborn had to act. He was in a difficult position: his first duty was to his school and to the suc- cess of his first Job. But the world was stirring. The Republicans met in Pittsburgh on Vashington‘s Birthday and called for a nagional conven- tion to nominate candidates and draw up a daring platform. Dr. Howe. 3Quincy was referring to Preston Brooks' caning of Senator Sumner. unecollectiong. I. 50-51. 5Henry Steele Commager. Theodore Parker (Boston: Little. Brown. 1936). pp. 2M9. 251- 6"Republican Party,‘ Encyclgpedia Americana. 19h? ed.. XXIII. 392. the famous philanthrOpist. George Luther Stearns. the wealthy. public- spirited merchant of Medford. Gerrit Smith. the millionaire politician and philanthroPist of'Peterboro. New York. and Thomas Wentworth Higgin- son. the fighting pastor of the 'unsectarianP church in Worcester. all had Joined the fight to raise funds and buy arms for the Free-State 7 . 8 Kansas pioneers. among whom now was one of Sanborn's brothers. Committees were important: “The promotion of the gravest possible movements by the agency of committees is a traditional custom of the Anglo-Saxon peeples.' he felt. It was a committee of barons that extorted from King John the great charter of English liberties at Runnymede. It was by committees of Parliament that King Charles was driven from the throne.... The committees of correspondence devised by Samuel Adams in 1772 prepared the American Revolution and gave it unity needful for success.... Since that time almost every great movement in America has been carried on by committees in this manner. and the results of such action. when earnestly taken. are often remarkable. So in June Sanborn became secretary of the Concord Town Committee to raise funds for Kansas. secretary of the Middlesex County Committee in July. and secretary of the Massachusetts Kansas State Committee in August. He took as much time as he dared from his school to carry on 7§gcollections. I. 51. 8Sanborn. “John Brown in Hassachusetts.' Atlantic Monthly. XXIX (March. 1872). 32h. Sanborn does not say which brothEr. and the letter to Parker from Concord. June 10. 1865. mentioning his brother in Kansas. does not help (Concord Library. 5: 5-30). However. Sanborn's niece. Miss Josephine L. Sanborn. 19 Oxford Street. Haverhill, Mass.. in a per- sonal letter to me dated July 27. 1952. says she thinks it was Lewis. who was twentybtwo at the time. 9Sanborn. ”The Virginia Campaign of John Brown.'.Atlantig_Mnnthl , mow (sax-ch 1875). 32%. The reader should note that this is Sanborn telling why he was moved to Join the work of committees through testi-’ mony given 19 years later. We do not know that these thoughts motivated him at the time. 129 all the correspondence of these first two organizations and ride about 10 Middlesex in an effort to organize town committees. He wrote Parker June 10th: We are to have a.Kansas.Aid meeting here on Thursday evening the 12thand would be very glad to get some man to speak who has lately come from Kansas. Conway 1who has gone down to Boston today will get Mr Nutelaif possible - but if there is any other man of whom you.know who could tell us clearly the state of things there. will you not ask him to come- His exp penses we will pay of course. and more if he desires it- I am one of the Committee and have carte blanche to ask whom I please. Mr Emerson and Judge Hoar will speak - also Conway. and Mr Nuts if we can get him. Perhaps other Concord men will also speak We hope to raise a good sum here. as there is much desire to do somethingb It will probably be a great meeting- Should any of the Congressional speakers. such as Galloway. Mr Hale or others be in Boston without engagements they would find this a good place to speakb They are to day at Concord N. H. I believe. But most of all we want recent news from Kansas - Every new dispatch increases the desire in me to gQDsomething- and I have again debated the plan of going myself Armed settlers are needed. and all subscrip- tions hige. so far as I can influence them shall go for that purpose During the first half of his summer vacation Sanborn drove about Middlesex County in a shay organizing town committees and raising money 1QRecollectionp. I. 51-52. 11This was Honours D. Conway. clergyman and author. whol ordained in the Methodist Church. later espoused Unitarianism. was dismissed from his churches in washington and Virginia for preaching against slavery. edited the new Dial in Cincinnati. and worked as editor with Sanborn on the Boston Commonwealth until Sanborn replaced him (Mary Elizabeth Burb $5 Moncure 2. Conley. (18:2-w. (Rutgers UP. 1952). 28.881111. and the laDoubtless this was the Rev. Dr. Ephraim Nuts. Unitarian minister of Lawrence,Kansas (Oswald Garrison Villard. John Brown (1800-1859): a 11m Fifty Years After. rev. ed. (New York: Knapf. T9143). 13- 215). 1'3J'une 10. 1856 (Concord Library. 5: 8-30). 130 as fast as he could for arms and supplies. With what remained of the summer he set forth in August as an agent of the Massachusetts State Kansas Committee on a tour of "inspection and consultation” that took him through Indiana. Illinois. Iowa. and Nebraska Territory. His pur- pose in going. he says. was 'to inspect the emigrant route through IOwa. in order that it might be kept Open for men. arms and ammunition during the autism of 1856.' He was. however. “only to enter Kansas. if there was time for it. or urgent necessity.“ He conferred with the secretary of the executive committee of theONational Kansas Committee in Chicago. with the Governor and the Adjutant-General of Iowa about the loan of some of their State muskets. and inspected the 1100 miles of land route between Mount Pleasant and Council Bluffs by which his group were send- ing emigrants to Kansas.hthe Missouri River route having been cut off by pro-slavery fighters} From August. 1856. the Massachusetts State Kansas Committee be- came 'the working center of aid to the Free-State men of Kansas.“ It was reinforced by subordinate groups—the Middlesex County Committee. of which Sanborn was secretary: the Worcester County Committee. of which Higginson was an active member: and by the Hampden County Commit- tee. of which Sanborn's brother-in-law. George Walker. was chairman. Finally. in November. Sanborn determined to give up his school: he indi- cated his stats of mind in a letter to Theodore Parker: ”‘71:— Recollections. I. 51-72. 131 Hampton Falls Nov 25$ 1856 My dear Friend: Lest you.may think that in deciding to give up my school for the present and devote myself more entirely to the cause of Kansas I am acting in too inconsiderate a manner I wish to explain the why a little more fully than I have yet done. In the first place I attach the greatest importance to the Kansas question as being the point where as often happens the whole moment of a great issue rests amid circumstances in themselves trivial- It is the most practical form in which the issue of freedom and slavery has ever presented itself._ and will Justify any exertion or outlay-- Then the cause has suffered from the beginning for want of men enough devoted wholly to it to give it system and per- petual vigor- and has depended too much on transient excite- ment and activity. All our committees are sad instances of this - so that even my own inexperienced labors have seemed great compared with those of many others. What is needed is men who will make this their study and business and until we can find a dozen such men in Massachusetts we have no right to hope for any great good- Especially at this time- the most critical for Kansas that has been or will be I think. there is need of steady and uninterrupted efforts on the part of the committees - and nobody knows how much they may do if they will- I have found too that I cannot carry on my school and work in this also- if I attempt both I do neither well- It then becomes a question which I shall give up- I greatly prefer my school and the quiet of Concord to any such busi~ mass as this - but when I see how mumh even I may do for'Kan- ass I cannot hesitate between the certainty of a pleasant winter and the chance of serving the country-- I see in almost every person traces of an indecision which is fatal to any good settlement of our difficulties. Instead of coming out and facing the real evil. we are all 7 ] and shooting short of the enemy. being held back every one for some personal reason. I am determined for one tones?) to cut through all these meshes and do thoroughly what I have been so long talking about. I dare say I shall effect nothing but I shall live in a world of realities and not of shadows when I am steadily following this one purpose.15 You may not understand this - for you do not leave so mumh room between the will and the deed as most men do--- 13esides what I may do myself in this way I hope I shall be of N l. ‘ 5Though Sanborn talks about “a world of realities,” was it not a l‘M‘Ier romantic world that he wanted to live in? 132 some use as an example- for when my friends see that I or any one else can leave business and pleasure and work wholly for this cause they will attach more importance to it. and per— haps others may do the same and certainly I have no right to expect this course from others unless I am willing to take it as soon as any. And as I am really ready to give up every thing for this. it does not seem a very violent step to leave my school for a few months- I have not left out of sight the objections which.you make against it - that there are men beiger fitted for it - and that I am fitted for something else But if nobody else appears. and if I cannot be quiet in my own proper work be- cause of this matter is it not a good sign that I ought to try at least? I reason with myself as XenODhon did after the death of the generals in the third book ofgihabasis. guod vide. The river must be got over the ferryman does not ap- pear. and I am not a good swimmer - nevertheless I must some how attempt the passage-- There are besides many objections which are naturally unknown to you.- but having thought of them all for six weeks I have come to this decision at last- My'place in Boston may prove an important one. and it may not: if not I shall aban~ don it to some one else and take some other place if I can get it-~ The State Committee may if all is managed right be- come the head of a great league against the extension of slavery - and it may also fail entirelyb I am sorry to take such a course against the advice of many friends and my own inclinations- but I do not feel able to refuse when there seems such a necessity for it- I wish I could hear your sermon tomorrow and spend the evening with your but I shall not be in Boston till Monday'- and so send this letter to represent me In December. putting a Harvard student in charge of his school for a few months. he took active charge of the office of the State Kansas Committee in School Street. Boston. as its secretary and general.agent. Of’this group George L. Stearns was chairman, Patrick Tracy Jackson was treasurer. and Dr. Howe. Dr. Samuel Cabot. and.Judge Thomas Russell were 18 among its active members. “if“ Sanborn does not say for what work Parker thought him best fitted. 17Concord Library. 5: 8-32. 8Bicenectionl. I. 73. ' 133 Out of this committee work grew Sanborn's intimacy with John Brown. Sanborn's political careeruhis tremendous efforts for freeing Kansas from slavery. his intensely loyal support of John Brown in life and in death-~had officially begun. Sanborn met Brown for the first time a few days after New Year's. 1857. 'I was sitting in my small office." he says. ”when Brown entered. and handed me a letter of introduction from my brother Walker of Spring- 19 20 field.“ and another from Governor Salmon P. Chase of Ohio. It was one of the great moments of Sanborn's life. for Brown became his "life's hero.” and Sanborn became “ever afterward his most ardent Massachusetts 21 friend and defender.‘ He wrote Higginson On January 5th a letter con- taining his first impressions: ”Old Brown' of Kansas is now in Boston. with one of his sons. working for an object in which you will heartily sympathize- raising and arming a company of men for the future protection of Kansas. He wishes to raise $30,000 to arm and equip a com- pany such as he thinks he can raise this present winter. but he will. as I understand him. take what money he can raise and use it as far as it will go. Can you not come to Boston tomorrow or next day and see Capt. Brown? If not. please in~ dicate when you will be in Worcester. so he can see you. I like the man from what I have seen- and his deeds ought to bear witness for him.22 1911551.. I. 75 (George Walker. Ariana's brother). 20Villard. John Brown. p. 271. 21These phrases from Villard (p. 271) constitute a high compliment. 38 Sanborn later considered Villard his rival biographer and rebuked him bitterly. as we shall see later. Villard must have been a remarkably even-tempered. fair-minded person. 228mborn to ’1'. V. Higginson. January 5. 1857. in the Higginson Colo 11”tion. Boston Public Library, reprinted in part in Villard. p. 271. 13h Sanborn introduced Brown to Theodore Parker and Dr. Howe. and soon after this. Brown became acquainted with Patrick Jackson. Dr. Samuel Cabot. Jr.. Amos Adams Lawrence. Judge Thomas Russell. Wendell Phillips and William Lloyd Garrison. the last of whom he met one Sunday evening at Theodore Parker's. Garrison. diametrically opposed to Brown's views "saw in the famous Kansas chieftain a tall. spare. farmer-like man. with head disproportionately small. and that inflexible month which as yet had no beard concealed.'23Brewn had no patience with Garrison. who considered it morally wrong to take up arms in the fight against slavery. and.burst forth with impatience against peeple Iwho only talked and would not shoot.” Parker became one of five persons "who grouped themselves as an informal committee to aid Brown in whatever attacks he might make on slavery.‘' Though he doubted “whether things of the kind will succeed." he added. ”We shall make a great many failures before we discozer the right way of getting at it. This may as well be one of them.3 The State Kansas Committee gave its first practical encouragement to Brown on January 7 when it voted to present him with "two hundred Sharpe's rifles. carbines. with four thousand ball cartridges. thirtybone thou» sand military caps. and six iron ladles.--the same to be delivered to said committee. or to their order. on demand." The committee also aus thorised him to draw on its treasurer $500 for expenses. Brown was to V alilliam Llod dGarrison: the Stogz of His Life Told bz_§_g>0hil- Gran (New York. 1385).—.—~T III. 87- 38. 24; John Weiss. Life and Correspondence of Theodore Parker (New York, 186h). II. 161. 135 report periodically on the condition or disposition of these supplies. bought the previous September by Dr. Cabot ”to be loaned to actual set- tlers for defence against unlawful aggressions upOn their rights and liberties.' On.February 18 Sanborn introduced Brown to the Massachusetts legis- lature at a meeting of the Joint Committee on Federal Relations. The State Kansas Committee was preparing to obtain a State appr0priation of $100,000 on the ground that, as Sanborn said. “The rights and interest of Massachusetts have suffered gross outrage in Kansas. an outrage which is likely to be repeated unless measures are taken by you to prevent so shameful an abuse.“ Sanborn's introduction of Brown was stirring: As one of the petitioners for State aid to the settlers of Kansas. I appear before you to state briefly the purpose of the petition. No labored argument seems necessary: for if the events of the last two years in Kansas. and the prospect there for the future, are not of themselves enough to excite Massachusetts to action. certainly no words could do so. We have not provided ourselves with advocates, therefore. but with witnesses.... Your petitioners desire that a contingent appropriation be made by the legislature. to be placed in the hands of a commission of responsible and conservative men. and used only in case of necessity to relieve the dis- tress of the settlers of Kansas,--especially such as have gone from our own State.... Such an act would both encourage our friends in Kansas and dishearten their oppressors: and the moral effect of it would be greater than any which would follow from the expenditure of a much larger sum. Let it not be understood, however. that the petitioners ask for this as a simple act of charity, or are willing to rest their case on the common arguments for a charitable donation. The question involved is not merely whether the hungry shall be fed. the naked clothed, and the houseless sheltered; it reaches far beyond this: it is the issue between freedom and slavery. in Kansas and in the nation.... Viewed in this light, we feel Justified in regarding our Petition as the most important matter which the General Court luau now to consider.... Is it not true. sir. that yourself amid nine tenths of your colleagues in this body were elected as declared supporters of two all-important measures.-the re-election of Charles Sumner and the establishment of free- dom in Kansas? And do you.believe that the one which you.have so triumphantly accomplished is one whit more dear to the peo» ple than the other?... Can you.hesitate. then. to give expres- sion to the will of the peeple.-not merely in words. which cost nothing and are worth nothing. but in substantial deeds? It has been suggested that some persons doubt the con- stitutionality of the proposed measure. That is rather a question to be decided by the legislature than a point to be argued by the petitioners: but... I have no doubt they can fully show its constitutionality. of which they make no ques« tion. The name of Judge Parker. attached to the Cambridge petition. and the decided opiniofipf several eminent Jurists, confirm their belief. We have invited Captain Brown and Mr. Whitman to appear in our behalf. because these gentlemen are eminently qualified either to represent Massachusetts in Kansas or Kansas in Massachusetts. The best blood of the "Mayflower” runs in the veins of both. and each had an an- cestor in the army of the Revolution.... These witnesses have seen the things of which they testify. and have felt the op- pression we ask you to check. Ask this graybhaired man. gentlemen.-if you have the heart to do it.--where lies the body of his murdered son: where are the homes of his four other sons. who a year ago were quiet farmers in Kansas? I am ashamed. in [sic] presence of this modest veteran. to exp press the admiration which his heroism excites in me. Yet he. so venerable for his years. his integrity. and his cour- age.--a man whom all Massachusetts rises up to honor.-—is to—day an outlaw in Kansas. To these witnesses. whose use sworn testimony'deserves and will receive from you all the authority which an oath confers, I will now yield place. Brown himself then spoke at length. reading from a manuscript which he was to use at Hartford. Concord. and elsewhere. He gave an account of the destruction of life and property by the Missouri invaders in 1855-56, recounted the inactivity of the federal government. described the last attack on Lawrence. but omitted any references to the murders which.he and his men had committed.at Potawatomie and any mention of the Kansas Free State reprisals. 137 Though Sanborn and the Committee considered the appropriation ”the most important matter which the General Court has now to consider.” the legislature appropriated nothing. It remained for the State Comit- tee to keep up the money and supplies.25 Sanborn invited Brown to Concord. Brown stayed with him in the house which Sanborn was then renting from Ellery Channing. the two men dining across the street at Mrs. Thoreau's. There Sanborn introduced him to Thoreau. another kindred spirit in matters of civil disobedience. Ihile Sanborn walked over to his school to settle some matters which re- quired "the gift of authority," Emerson dropped in at Thorean's and was introduced to Brown. Emerson invited him to be his guest that night. and from the conversation that evening there “came to Emerson and Tho- reau that intimate knowledge of Brown's character andwgeneral purpose which qualified them. in October. 1859. to make those addresses in his behalf which were the first response among American scholars to the her— oism of the man who. in Emerson's striking phrase. 'made the gallows glorious like the Cross."26 Brown was invited to speak in Concord. and evidently ”had a good meeting“ with the townspeople. showing them first a Bowie knife and then 8 ”trace-chain with which his son John had been bound in Kansas. and made to keep up with the mounted men who were carrying him to his imprisonment 27 8t Lecompton. 25Sanborn. The Life and Letters of John Brown. Liberator of Kansas gildegart2_ of Virginia (Boston. 1885). pp. “369-373: Villard. Jolzn Brena. 26Recollection_s_. I. 102-105. 2! th 71bid.. I. 108. Sanborn speaks ambiguously here about the date. h °u€J1 he indicates Brown probably spoke from the manuscript of the spetcb e pruzeented before the legislature. At the end of March. after lecturing in various towns. Brown met Sanborn and Judge Martin Conway at the Metropolitan Hotel in New York and proceeded to Easton. Pennsylvania. with them to confer with Andrew H. Beeder. the first governor of Kansas Territory. Their purpose was to induce Reader to return to Kansas and lead the Free-State party there. Nothing came of their pleadings. however. for Reader was unwilling to 28 leave his law practice and his family again. Back in Boston and Concord, the executive committee of the State Kansas group on April 15 Voted. That Captain John Brown be authorised to dispose of one hundred rifles. belonging to this committee. to such Free- State inhabitants of Kansas as he thinks to be reliable. at a price not less than fifteen dollars: and that he account for the same agreeably to his instructions. for the relief of Ken-- sas. At the same meeting it was Voted. That Captain Brown be authorized to draw on P. '1'. Jackson. treasurer. for five hundred dollars. if on his ar- rival in Kansas he is satisfied that such sum is necessary for the relief of persons in Kansas. Brown had by now received so much property from the Committee that he Made out a will "for the protection of [it] in case of accident to him." During these three or four months when hrown was in the East, Sanborn flaw much of him. ”his.“ Sanbom says, ”gave me Opportunity to see him under “and? circumstances. and to fom my opinion of his extraordinary 29 Character-~an opinion that I have had no occasion to change.” \ 28 ...Ibid" I. 115-118: Sanborn. John Brown. p. 387: “Andrew Horatio R E Seder-J Emcyclgpedia Americana. 19 '7 6d" XXIII. 296° 29Lecouections . I . 118-120. 1'59 Brown had been concerned not only with what would become of the Committee's preperty after his death but with what would happen to his family in such an event. He appealed to Amos lawrence for "One Thou- sand Dollars cash" to purchase ”an improved piece of land which with a little improvement I now have might enable my family consisting of a wife a Five minor children . . . to procure a subsistence should I nevo or return to them." Though he made this appeal March 19. it was not until August that Sanborn. as the agent for Stearns and Lawrence. trav- Glad to North Elba. paid for the purchase and the improvement of the land, and transferred the deeds to the property to Brown's family. The “use was “then not much more than a frame. boarded and clapboarded. and much of it lathed. but with only two or three plastered rooms.“ It “a8 at the edge of the forest in the wildest country. Just east of Lake Placid in a little patch of cleared land: when Sanborn arrived the wom- en 01‘ the household were gathering and drying wild berries for the win—- tar. and Watson and Salmon Brown were busy burning logs and clearing more space for planting crops. Despite their rather primitive exist- 8306 often bordering on starvation. "the whole family seemed to be cheerful in the midst of poverty and anxieties.20 Brown arrived back at Tabor. Iowa. August 7. 1857. and wrote stee-I'ns saying that he had been sick. that he was disappointed at the lac): of funds for his projects. and that he was “in immediate want of I" 1“)“: Five Hundred to One Thousand Dollars for secret service :2 pg \‘ 301212" I. 122-133: vmard. Jan and. pp. 279-281. pg. :0 C) ouestions 953351." He thanked the committee for all they had done to help his family at North Elba. He enclosed a tract written by his new drillmaster. “Colonel” Hugh Forbes. the purpose of which was to win the allegiance of officers and soldiers of the United States Army in Kansas. Sanborn replied that he thought ”the dull and heavy paper” unwise. Brown's pleas for money wereupsetting. for ”it was not easy for any of us in that autumn." says Sanborn.”when business was greatly depressed. 31 to raise money for an object so indefinite." Brown. however. showed little desire to return to Kansas: he gave 1311318 elf and others various excuses for not returning. Higginson became first impatient and then angry. until Sanborn felt called upon to defend the old man. Writing September 11. he said to Higginson: You do not understand Brown's circumstances.... He is as ready for a revolution as any other man. and is now on the borders of Kansas safe from arrest but prepared for action. but he needs money for his present expenses. and active Support. I believe he is the best Disunion champion you can find. and with his hundred men. when he is put where he can raise them. and drill them (for he has an expert drill offi- cer with him) will do more to split the Union than a list of 50.000 names for your Convention. good as it is. What I am trying to hint at is that the friends of Kam- sas are looking with strange apathy at a movement which has all the elements of fitness and success-«e. good plan. a tried leader. and a radical purpose. If you can do anything for it 11, ow. in God's name do it--and 3110 ill result of the new poli- cy in Kansas may be prevented. 2 Finally. in November. Brown crossed into Kansas to recruit men for the Harper's Ferry raid. Though there is evidence that he had discussed \_ 318811110111. £2113 Brown. pp. 1422-123: Villard. pp. 297-298. 32 ‘°h Col 1" 303. Sanborn to Higginson. Boston. September 11, 1857. in the Higgin- lection. Boston Public Library. reprinted in part in Villard. 1h), as early as the fall of 18514 a plan to raid Harper's Ferry? he did not reveal this to any of his men until November. 1857. To Higginson in a letter of February 2. he wrote: I now want to get for the M25 of BY FAR the most _l__!n_- porter}; undertaking of my whole life: from $500. to $800. within the next Sixty days. I have written Rev Theodore Parker. George L. Steams. and F. B. Sanborn Esqur. on the subject: but do not know as either Mr Stearns. or Mr San- torn. are abolitionists I suppose they are. Can you be in- duced to apparate at Worcester. a. elsewhere during that time to raise from Anti-slavery men 8: women (or any other parties) some part of that afiount'i... Hope this is my last effort in the begging 11ne.3 HQ then wrote to Sanborn and the others requesting a meeting of the con- BPilra‘bors at Gerrit Smith's in Peterboro. New York. Brown's anxiety to arrtango this meeting was probably brought on by the subversive activi- ties of his drillmaster. Hugh Forbes. The letter was an Englishman. who had been a silk merchant in Siena. and had commanded trOOps under Geri- belch in 18148-149. Brown had had the intelligence to realize that Forbes might be useful as a military strategist and as a leader of his raw true'13s. The Committee in Boston "had never been consulted by Brown in raga-rd to paying Forbes. nor of course had Brown given Forbes any as- an”Pane” that they would pay him the salary stipulated for his services.“ Th0 members of the Committee were. therefore. shocked when Dr. Howe and Sanborn received letters from Senator Charles Sumner. enclosing two letters Forbes had written him. in which he complained of ill—treatment a t their hands. and holding them responsible for the temaination of his 31 3 John Brown to Higginson. Rochester. February 2. 1853. in the 1. Sginson Collection. Boston Public Library. reprinted in part in Vil- d’ p. 320. 33Yillard. p. 51; labors with Brown. by which. he said. " he had been reduced to poverty." Of course. the Committee immediately wrote Brown to determine the rela- tionship between him and Yorbes. and the "correspondence temporarily 35 closed in January. 1858.” On the evening of February 22. 1858. at Gerrit Smith's baronial estate in Peterboro. Sanborn met and dined with his host and hostess and their guests. Higginson and Parker having sent their regrets. After dinner. Sanborn. Smith. Brown. and Sanborn's college friend. Edwin Mor- ton. who was living with the Smiths as the tutor of their son. retired *0 Morton‘s room on the third floor. ”Here.” says Sanborn. "in the long Vinter evening that followed. Brown unfolded for the first time to me his plans for a campaign somewhere in slave territory east of the Alle- @8111 es“: Now he read us the singular constitution drawn up by him... for the government of the territory. small or large. which he might rescue by force from slavery. and for the control of his own little band. It was an amazing proposition--desper- ate in its character. wholly inadequate in its provision of means. and of lost uncertain result. Such as it was. Brown had set his heart on it as the shortest way to restore our slave-cursed republic to the principles of the Declaration of Independence: and he was ready to die in its execution. Brown asked for only eight hundred dollarso-he said he would feel rich with a thousand-"to carry out this hazardous adventure. Being questioned and opposed. he laid before us in detail his methods of organization and fortification; of settle- Inent in the South. if that were possible. and of retreat through the North. if necessary: and his theory of the way in which such an invasion would be received in the country at large. He desired from his friends a patient hearing of his statements. a candid opinion concerning his plan. and. if that were favorable. than such aid in money and support as we could give him. \ (P 353ggo'll‘e‘ggggnp, I. BIL-135: Sanborn, {9123 333:3, pp. 1325-1433. etier-bore is near Rochester. New York.) 1113 The three men listened until after midnight, pointing out objec- tions and suggesting possible difficulties. Nothing could shake Brown‘s purpose. Every difficulty [he had] foreseen and provided against in some manner: the grand difficulty of all-the manifest hopelessness of undertaking anything so vast with such slen» der means-ihe] met with the text of Scripture: ”If God be for us. who. can be against us?” He had made nearly all his arrangements: he had so many men enlisted. so many hundred weapons: all he now wanted was the small sum of money. With that he would open his campaign in the spring. and he had no doubt that the enterprise ”would p331.“ as he said. We dissuaded him from what we thought certain failure: urging all the objections that would naturally occur to per- sons desiring the end he was seeking. but distrusting the slender meand and the unprepitious time. But no argument could prevail against his fixed purpose; he was determined to make the attempt. with many or with few. and he left us only the alternatives of betrayal. desertion or support. The next day they discussed and argued further. and Brown presented his rebuttal to all arguments. We saw we must either stand by him or leave him to dash him- Bllf alone against the fortress he was determined to assault. To withhold aid would only delay. not prevent him. F1Dally Smith and Sanborn left the group. as the sun was setting over the BumWrcovered hills. and went out for a walk. Smith said to him: You see how it is; our dear old friend has made up his mind to this course. and cannot be turned from it. We cannot give him up to die alone: we must support him. I will raise so many hundred dollars for him; you must lay the case before your friends in Massachusetts. and ask them to do as much. I see no other way. 1' here was little left for Sanborn to do. "I had come to the same conclu- 81'3“.” says Sanborn. "and by the same process of reasoning. It was done 1‘ 19.1. more from our regard for the man than from hopes of immediate success. 1414 But the Lord knows His own soldiers. and the far—reaching results of 36 Brom's action in Virginia are now well known of all men." Brown did not, states Sanborn. indicate that he would start the campaign by seizing Harper's Ferry. Sanborn said good-bye to his friends and set out for Boston. But he had scarcely left when Brown sat down and penned this letter to him: My Dear Friend Mr Morton has taken the liberty of saying to me that you felt 1/2 inclined to make a common cause with me. I greatlv rejoice at this: for I believe when you come to look at the am__p___le field I labour in: 8: the rich harvest which (not only this entire country, but) the whole world during the present & future generations s_nazr sap from its successful cultivation: you will feel that you are out of your element until you find you are in it: an entire Unit. What an inconceivable amount of good you night so effect; by your counsel. vour enamels. Eur encouragement, your rnat___1__.__1ral, 8: aeguired ____1_i_1_:1;abi for ac- tive service. And then howv vegm little we can possibly loose? Certainly the cause is enough t__9_ liv_____e_ for: if not to [word omitted] for. 1 have only had this“ 9319 opportunity in a. life of nearly Sixty years. 8: could I be continued Ten times as long again. I might not again have another equal Opportunity. God has honored but comparatively 3 1231’. email part of mankind with any possible chance for such mighty & soul satisfying rewards. But my dear friend if you should make up your mind to do so I trust it will be wholly from the promptings of your own spirit: after having thorggglv counted the cost. I would flatter no“ man into such a mea- sure if I could do it ever so easily. I exnec: nothing but to "endure hardnessfl but I expect to effect a mighty con- quest even though it be like the last victory of Samson. I felt for a number of years in earlier life: a steady. strong. desire: to die: but since I saw any prospect of becoming a 3 Recollections, I, I’m-1148. "reaper" in the 33% harvest I have not only felt qui to will- ing to live: but have enjoyed life much 8: am now rather anxious to live for a few years more. Your sincere Friend 37 John Brown That this "touching and prophetic“ letter did not draw Sanborn "into the field as one of Brown's band was due to the circlmstance.” says Sanborn, ”that the interests of other persons were then too much in my hands and in my thoughts to permit a change of my whole course of life, except under the most unmistakable direction of that Spirit who governs the fate of nations and of men." And Sanborn then makes an amazing state~ inOnt: "long accustomed to guide my life by loadings and omens from that shrine whose oracles may destroy but can never deceive, I listened in 33 vain, through months of doubt and anxiety. for a clear and certain cell." M 37mm version of the letter from Brown to Sanborn. from Petal-bore. N'Yo 9 February 2’4, 1858. is transcribed from a facsimile of the original 517611 in Sanborn, John Brown, between pp. filth-W45, versions of which much e(lited in their spelling. capitalization. and italicizing may be found in 3;" Atlantic Monthlv (July, 1872). pp. 50-61. in the Atlantic Monthly ' arch, 1875). pp. 323-331, in Sanborn, golln Brown, pummfia printed bersion), and in Recollections (published 190971. pp. 150-151. or San- tan" a liberties with the texts which he quotes-~the work of himself and r 3 Works of others--I shall speak from time to time in this study. The vmer will find it interesting to see the changes he has made in each bgision. Often the change may consist of only one mark of punctuation, tn note the difference in meaning that results when one finds a question Dirk after the word loose in the 1872 £1La_n_t_i_g version and an exclamation saint in the Atlantic version of 1875. Sanborn's editing, suffice it to 313’ at this point, has caused considerable anger. irritation. and discus- On among scholars. (Villard's transcription appears in his John .3539; at Dr. 322 and 323.) 38Sanborn, i"ills Virginia campaign of John Brown." Atlantic @3313, :0“ (March, 1875), 331 (published when he was 143). It is interesting that t- ‘1? first quotation in this paragraph above was reprinted in Sanborn's J. $11 Brown (published when he was 53). p. W5. :1. 1. down through the word Ra f9 ." and the second quotation was reprinted as it stands here. In 31:23.1lectiong (published when he was 77), I, 151. note. Sanborn printed ted first sentence approximately the way it is printed here. but he omit- the second sentence entirely. Many inferences may be made from these pa 8331398. Who the persons were whose interests were "too much in my hands 1‘46 On the day Brown wrote this moving letter to Sanborn he left Peter- boro to visit the home of Dr. and Mrs. J. N. Gloucester, a wealthy Negro couple of Brooklyn. who had accumulated a fortune through hard work and. intelligent investments. To them he revealed his plan. These friends and other colored people helped him with advice and money. and from Wil- liam Still. one of their number. he learned much about Pennsylvania routes and stations on the underground railroad?9 Before continuing to Philadelphia on a mission to enlist the aid of other Negro friends. he made a quick trip to Boston to confer with the Secret Six. as they now began to call themselves. Although the facts have never been clear and Sanborn and his rival biographers spent much in}: making and refuting statements. Sanborn states categorically in his bmaraphy of Brown that the latter at this time “communicated freely" to P‘E'Ll‘lfcer. Howe. Steams. and Higginson "his plans of attack and defence in Virginia." However. he says. "It is not known that he spoke to any but “9 of his purpose to surprise the arsenal and town of Harper's Ferry." and. he continues: \——— i415- thoughts" he does not say. and his correspondence as yet sheds no tight. He was to marry Louisa Leavitt August 16. 1862. four years after 18. and he prOposed marriage to Edith Emerson sometime between 1855 $316. 1362. Whether he was in love at this time or whether someone in his oz‘nily was ill or dying or dependent upon him for support he does not say. it a could infer that Sanborn was a coward. that he feared posterity might 011er why he had not Joined Brown as an active participant in the moron agnt, and had thought to mislead the reader and suggest that some insur- Rountsble obstacle stood in his way. This passage is made much of by P bert Penn Warren in his John Brown: 533 Making 9;. 3 Marty: (New York: etyaon and Clarke. 1929). 3,Villard. John Brown. p. 323. 11;? Both Dr. Howe and Mr. Stearns testified before Mason's commit- tee, in 1860. that they were ignorant of Brown's plan of at- tack: which was true so far as the place and manner of begin» ning the campaign were concerned. It is probable that in 1853 Brown had not definitely resolved to seize Harper's Ferry; yet he spoke of it to me beside his coal-fire in the American House, putting it as a question. rather. without expressing his own purpose. I questioned him a little about it; but it then passed from my mind, and I did not think of it again fig- til the attack had been made, a year and a half afterward. Brown was still anxious that Parker help him compose a ”substitute for an address you saw last season. directed to the officers and soldiers of the United States Army,“ and to Sanborn he appealed for a suitable reading list for his followers. He had written previously: “I want to Put into the hands of my young men cappies of Plutarks lives, Irvings life of Washington; the best Kritten Life of Napoleon and other similar 1 backs. for use at Springdale.‘ Sanborn sent him the desired list but Parker did not reply. Brown needed more money and Sanborn. in a letter to Higginson dated. March 8. 1858, indicated how the group went about this: Hawkins [Brown] has gone to Philadelphia today, leaving his friends to work for him. $1000 is the sum set to be raised harem-of which yourself. Mr. Parker. Dr. Howe. Mr. Stearns and myself each are assessed to raise $100-—Some may do more —-perhaps you cannot come up to that--nor I. possibly~~But of $500 we are sure--and the $1000 in all probability.... Hawkins goes to prepare agencies for his business near where he will begin operations. Dr. Cabot knows something of the speculation, but not the whole. not being quite prepared to take stock. No others have been admitted to a she e in the business. though G. R. Russell has been consulted. 2 Whom, John Brown. pp. 1450—161. Sanborn seems to refute this ataunent in Recollections. I. 153. luBrown to Sanborn, Feb. 26. 1858 (Concord Library. 5: 3-1). to hzsanborn to Higginson, March 8. 1858 (Higginson Collection, Bog- ’1 Public Library). reprinted in part in Villard, p. 325. its! A meeting was called for March 20th at Dr. Ibwe's office to discuss money matters further. Sanborn reported to Higginson March 21st: Mr. Steams is Treasurer of the enterprise for N. E.-and has now on hand $150 having paid H--- $100.... Mr. Stearns has given $100 8: promises $200 more, but holds it back for a fu- ture emergency. Mr. Parker has raised his $100 8. will do something more. Dr. H. has paid in $50 and will raise $100 more.... I paid Brown $25-~my own subscriptionm-but haveth yet been able to get nothing else-though I shall do so. Though by April 1st Brown had received $375. three weeks later he had received only $10 and was pleading for the remainder of the promised I thousand. On May 8th Brown opened his Provisional Constitutional Convention at Chatham. Canada Vest. None of the Secret Six could attend the meeting: they had terrifying problems of their own. Colonel Forbes had been to wMhixlé'gton 'betraying the Virginia plan to Republican Senators. and per-o hi1Pa to members of the proslavery Administration.“ On the second of May, $841130". Howe. and Stems met for consultation and Sanborn reported the result Marsth in a letter to Higginson: It looks as if the project must. for the present. be deferred. f0? I find by reading Porbes's epistles to the doctor that he Owe the details of the plan. and even knows (what very few d0) that the doctor. Mr. Steams. and myself are informed of 0 How he got this knowledge is a mystery. He demands that Em'kzins be dismissed as agent. and grasp}: or some other be Put in his place. threatening othersise to make the business pub11c. Theodore Parker and G. L. Steams think the plan mat be deferred till another year: the doctor does not think 30- and I am in doubt. inclining to the Opinion of the two forflier. O 11 May 7th Gerrit Smith wrote Sanborn: 338mborn to Higginson. Boston. March 21. 1858 (Higginsen Collec- 1'10 n, 3133th Public Library). reprinted in part in Villard. p. 326. '1 ho It seems to me that in these circumstances Brown must go no further, and so I write him. I never was convinced of the wisdom of his scheme. But as things now stand, it seems to me it would be madness to attempt to execute it. Colonel Forbes would make such an attempt a certain and most disas— trous failure. I write Brown this evening. Higginson, always the man of action. had different opinions. and made haste to write them to Parker on the 9th: I regard any postponement as simply abandoning the project; for if we give it up now. at the command or threat of H. F.. it will be the same next year. The only way is to circum- vent the man somehow (if he cannot be restrained in his mal- ice). When the thing is well started, who cares what he says? To which Parker replied. ”If you knew all we do about 'Colonel' Fox-hes. you would think differently. Can't you see the wretch in New York?" At the same time Dr. Howe wrote to Higginson: '1'. P. will tell you about matters. They [the other members of the Six] have held a different view from the one I have taken. which agrees mainly with yours. I think that the would-be traitor is now on the wrong track. I told him some truth. Which he will think to be false (for he thinks evil). and he will probably be bungling about in the dark and hesitating until the period for his doing harm has passed. Forbes has disclosed what he knows to Senator Seward. or says he has. 3°“ had written a masterpiece of deception to Forbes: I Baud to Senator Sumner that I h_a_d mfiyngg in the inter:- m and ability of Captain Brown; but it is utterly absurd *0 infer from that any responsibility for his acts. I have °°nfidence in the integrity and ability of scores and hun- dreds of men for whose words and acts I am in no wise respon- Bu>10. I never made myself responsible, as a member of the KanBaa Committee, or as an individual, neither legally nor m0”filly. for any contract between Captain Brown and you. I :33 an active member of the committee from its formation un- 11 1t ceased active operations (which was long. long ago). 3nd- never heard of any contract with you.... So the brains .re out of that allegation. and I will not heed any ghosts of it which you.may parade before me or the public.... I infer from your language that you have obtained (in confidence) some information respecting an expedition which you think to be commendable. provided 123 could manage it. but which you will betray and dengyngg if he does not give it up! You are. sir. the guardian of your own honor.... In order. however, to disabuse you of any lingering notion that I. or any of the members of the late Kansas Committee...have any responsibil- ity for Captain Brown's actions. I wish to say that the very last communication I sent to him was in order to signify the earnest wish of certain gentlemen . whom you name as his sup- porters....that he should go at once to Kansas and give his aid in the coming elections. Whether he will do so or not. we do not know. I may. perhaps. save you trouble by declar— ing that though I am willing to do my uttermost to aid your family... I will not read letters couched in such vitupera- tive and abusive language as you have hitherto used to Mr. Sanborn and me. I will read only far enough to see the spi— rit of the communication: and if it is similar to that of )flrur former letters. I shall put it in the fire. With this comication. correspondence with Forbes for the most part ceased. Sanborn in the meantime was in communication with Brown. and. take 135 8.11 things into consideration. wrote to Higginson on May 18th: Wilson as well as Hale and Seward. and God knows how many more have heard about the plot from F. To go on in the face Of this is mere madness and I place myself fully on the side 01' P [arker] and S [teams] and Dr. H [owe] with G. S [mith] “10 does count. that Dana says of F's character seems prob. able. urns [teams] and the Dr. will see Hawkins in New York this week and settle matters finally.“ What had particularly alarmed the conspirators was the letter from Se “‘0? Henry Wilson to Dr. Howe: "You had better talk with some few of our 1'11 ends who contributed money to aid old Brown to organize and arm the I.San‘born. John Brown. pp. MES-LEO. (This incident and others in 190 I‘afizive a vpear more sketchily in Villard, . “6-“. and in Recs-l- “11%. I. 15 160.) pp 3C L9 Bid VilfFrom the Higginson Collection. Boston Public Library. reprinted @3533. :rdfisg.)339. (A garbled version of this appears in Sanborn. 2:13.11 k some force in Kansas for defence. about the policy of getting those arms out of his hands & putting them in the hands of some reliable men in that Territory.” and he hdded these underlined words: ”If: is}? should L’é used for other purposes. as rumor says they new 1’2! it might be of disadvantage _t¢_)_ the men who were induced to contribute 1:3 that very foolish movement.” Stearns therefore wrote Brown May 114th telling him that because of the information he had received from Senator Wil- son. ‘it becomes my duty to warn you not to use [the arms] for any other purpose. and to hold them subject to my order as chairman of said com- m1ttee.‘ Stearns wrote Brown another letter the next day requesting him to meet him in New York the 20th. There it was decided "that hereafter the custody of the Kansas rifles should be in Brown's hands as the a— gent. not of this committee. but of Mr. Stearns alone.” After this im- Portant point was made. Stearns returned to Boston and met with Gerrit Smith (who was in town addressing the Peace Society) and the other mom-— here of the Secret Six. Higginson excepted. As they had previously a- greed that the attack must be postponed. and since Steams had solved the delicate problem of the use of the Kansas rifles. ”the questions I“Sinaining were whether Brown should be required to go to Kansas at once... and what amount of money should be raised for him in future.” They re: SolWed unanimously that Brown should return to Kansas at once. that the Wrinted in part from the Mason Report. p. 177. in Villard. 3" 339 L”Sanborn. John Brown. p. 161. 152 attack should be postponed till the winter or spring of 1859. at which time the committee would raise "two or three thousand dollars" for his purpose. When Brown arrived on the 31st he was frightfully depressed. therefore. to hear of these decisions. and to learn further that he was ”meantime to blind Forbes by going to Kansas. and to transfer the prop- erty so as to relieve the KansashCommittee of responsibility. and they 8 in future not to know his plans.” Higginson reported that Brown stated to him afterward that he considered the six “were not mpg 93: action. 1&9 they were intimidated by Wilson's letter &c. 8: overrated the obstacles." Nevertheless. Dr. Howe reported to Higginson that Brown left Boston June 3rd "with five hundred dollars in gold. and liberty to retain all 50 the arms. and that 'he went off in good spirits." Dr. Howe wrote two letters in answer to Senator Wilson's and made these extraordinary statements: (Boston. May 12. 1858] I understand perfectly your mean- ing. ‘No countenance has been given to Brown for any opera- tion outside of Kansas by 211.9. Kansas Committee.... [May 15. 1858] When I last wrote to you. I was not aware fully of the true state of the case with regard to certain arms belonging to the late Kansas Committee. Prompt measures have been taken. and will be resolutely followed up. to pre- vent any such monstrous perversion of a trust as would be the application of means raised for the defence of Kansas to a purpose which the subscribers of the fund would disapprove and vehemently condemn. 5 Whom. John Brown. pp. 162-14614. 1“3v111m-c1, p. 3140. 5oSanborn. John Brown. p. hE-h. 511nm. . p. LL62. 1:3 Accusations of dishonesty and duplicity arose then and later from these activities of the COmmittee; Sanborn himself admitted that ”it is still a little difficult to explain this transaction concerning the arms without leaving a suspicion that there was somewhere a breach of trust.” Villard. who doubtless spent the greatest care in untangling this mess. has this to say in comment: Mr. Stearns had advanced large sums to the Kansas Committee. which had never been repaid. asking at the time that the arms if unused should come back to him. that he might reimburse himself for his outlay. It will be remembered that the Kan- sas Committee had agreed to this by formal vote.... Mr. Stearns now simply exercised this option, and so notified the immediate conspirators verbally. and then presented all the arms, whose possession he had that minute assumed. to Brown. 'AS’Ifor the accusations of "duplicity“ and "gross prevarication" heaped “1302; Dr. Howe and the Committee. Villard says: Technically. the Committee has a valid defence. Doubtless in the business world. and especially according to the stan- dards of certain large industrial concerns of late years. the Committee's strategem is quite defensible as a simple way out cf'a trying difficulty, and an easy method of obtaining for IBrown the desired arms. It cannot be denied that frankness amd.straightforwardnsss would have dictated the notifying of Senator Wilson that the arms had passed into the possession of individual members of the Committee. which would not there- aiter be responsible for them or the uses made of them.... It Inust be pointed out. too. that the decision of the little IBoston group, after giving Brown the five hundred dollars and arms. in 1858. to know no more of his plans. is the first sign of the effort to evade responsibility which became so apparent after the raid. 52 This then was the state of affairs between Sanborn and his col- :leaiiérues in the Massachusetts State Kansas Committee and John Brown r1 fteen months before the attack on Harper's Ferry. There was little f c"’ tile old man to do but to sequiesce: "It was essential that they \“ 59V111ara, pp. 3‘41-3h2: Sanborn. @133 131-0251. p. 165. shld. not think him reckless, & as they held the purse he was powerless without them}.3 So he called his faithful followers together. informed than of the decision of the Six. and told them they would have to seek their own salvations until further notice. As this is a study of Sanborn and not of John Brown. it should sun-”s- fice to record that from the day Brown bade farewell to the Secret Six in Boston in June, 1858, until May 9. 1859. Brown accomplished little. Villard feels that if the Massachusetts friends of John Brown had known fully what little good he achieved after he arrived in Kansgi. they would have disapproved of his use of their cash and weapons: Gerrit Smith “and others” rejoiced in his work in Missouri in a raiding party in which, as Brown wrote. ”Eleven persons are forcibly restored to their way g inalientgig Ell-£9.2- with but one man killed." HOWeVer. with the killing of one man. as Brown said. "Hell is stirred from beneath.“ The act of bringing eleven slaves out of Missouri and the murder of one white master produced war. not peace. between the settlers of Kansas and Missouri at a time when both pro-slavery and &"ti‘31avery factions were attempting to live on the land in some sem— blance of peace. ”Of constructive work." says Villard, "there was no more to his credit than when he left the Territory: in 1356.“ Brown had, however, the great satisfaction of being in Kansas in August when the people voted on the re-submitted Lecompton Constitution. and saw the fi nal defeat of the Kansas pro-slavery forces at the ballot box. \ 5 Libr lfiigginson‘s memorandum in the Higginson Collection. Boston Publfc- aT‘Y. reprinted in Villard. p. 31+O. t; " Villard. pp. 378'379. 155 On March 12th Brown saw his eleven black charges onto the ferry for Windsor. Canada. having carried them 1100 miles throth border ter- ritories in the dead of winter: on April 11th he was in Peterboro with Gerrit Smigg; and he spent his last birthday—thy 9. 1359--with Sanborn in Concord. . Sanborn had been 'fai thfully laboring for him! Forbes had sub- sided: the ruse of sending Brown back to Kansas had worked. for Forbes's truths seemed too fantastic for belief. Villard states that “the other conspirators besides Mr. Higginson were still igiorant of the precise locality Brown had chosen for his ate tMitt but were perfectly aware of its general outlines.‘ Sanborn says that of the @4000 which had been contributed to the secret committee at 193313 .3800 ”were given with a clear knowledge of the use to which it would be put.” Brown met the members of the committee frequently while he was in Boston. As Theodore Parker had been forced to go to Europe in 3 last attempt to stave off his fatal consumption. the burden of the enter‘pl‘ise rested on Howe. Sanborn. and Stearns?8 During his stay with Sanborn Brown addressed another meeting at th' Town Hall. Bronson Alcott wrote in his Journal: ”I thought him K?“ Ibid.. pp. 3143-395; Sanborn. John Brown. pp. 167-14915 56Villard. p. 397. Sanborn. John 12:21:51.. p. 523. SSVillard. p. 397. w: -Jb equal to anything he should dare: the man to do the deed necessary to to ‘39 done with the patriot's zeal. the martyr's temper and purpose." And while in the East he made the acquaintance of John M. Forbes, a public- spirited business man of Boston: Senator Henry Wilson. whom he met at a dinner of the Bird Club; his benefactor. Amos A. Lawrence. whose ar- dor for Brown had nevertheless cooled since the Missouri raids; and John A. Andres, who was so impressed with him that he gave them twenty- five dollars for his work. He made his last public appearance at a meeting of the Church Anti-Slavery Society at Tremont Temple during the 60 Last week of May. but spoke only a few words. Sanborn had had a hard 301’ raising money. but Stearns and Smith contributed largely to the fund Brown needed before starting on the final enterprise. Sanborn "mte to Higginson: "Capt. B. has been here for three weeks. and is 30021 to leave-«having got his $2000 secured. Re is at the U. S. Hotel: and You ought to see him before he goes. for now he is to begin.“ But as Higginson could not get to Boston. Sanborn wrote him June 14th: Brown has set out on his expedition, having got some $800 from all sources except from Mr. Steams. and from him the balance of $9000; Mr. Stearns being a man who "having put his hand to the plough turneth not back." B. Left Boston for Springfield and New York on Wednesday morning at 813* and Mr. Stearns has probably gone to New York today to make final arrangements for him. He means to be on the groxmd as soon as he can-~perhaps so as to begin by the nth July: He could not say where he shall be for a few weeks-«but a letter addressed to him under cover to his son John Jr. \——_ ”,1 59A.Bronson Alcott. NS statement in Mrs. George Luther Stearns' mfncioation Evening Album. owned by the Steams family. reprinted in r in Villard. p. 398. 60Villard. pp. 397-3400. West Andover. Ashtabula Co. Ohio, [would reach him.] This point is not far from where B. will begin. and his son will communicate with him. Two of his some will go with him. He is desirous of getting someone to go to Canada and collect recruits for him among the fugitives. with H [arriet] Tubman or alone. as the case may be. & urged me to go.---but my school will not let me. Last year he engaged some persons 8: heard of others. but he does not want to lose tine by go- ing there himself now. I suggested you to him... Now is the time to help in the movement. if ever, for within the next two months the experiment will be made. To which Higginson replied that he didn‘t feel he could do anything this time. and added: My own loss of confidence is also in the wayooloss of confi- dance not in you. but in the others who are concerned in the measure. Those who were sgleasily disheartened last spring. may be again deterred now. ”It had all begun to seem to me razher chinerical.fl Higginson wrote in 2 one of mg autobiographical essays. By July 3rd Brown reached Harper's Ferry. his objective being to “may the lay of the land and to find a place where his group could live and carry on its operations nearby. Through a chance acquaintanceship '1 th e kindly farmer named Unseld they found the Kennedy Farm. and were able to rent its two houses and pasture from July to March for $35- 3 . ro'n showed the receipt of the transaction to Unseld so that he and the ¢ amers round about might suspect nothing. \fiiT—h: letters in this correspondence are in the Higginson Collec- t 3112:. Boston Public Library. One could infer in Sanborn's letter to Rig:- 0} on that his school formed a convenient excuse for his not going to 131.8. Q. But the inference seems unfounded after reading Higginson's dec- t ion of faith in Sanborn. D. pbsa'flmnas Wentworth Higginson. assign; 199.331.1191.? (Boston. 1393). ‘ ‘- '3 . In chapters 7 and 8 Higginson gives his side of this narrative. k 153 Back in Boston. the Secret Six knew only that Brown was writing- them from Chambersburg. Pennsylvania. and that he needed more money. Excepting possibly Higginson. none of them knew that Brown was focus- 63 sing his attention on Harper's Ferry. “The attack on Harper's Ferry by John Brown and his seventeen men. October 16. 1359. and his subsequent capture by the United States ma- rines under Colonel Robert Lee,” says Sanborn. ”were telegraphed to a startled world the next day or two. and reached me in my quiet school- room. at Concord on Tuesday morning.“ As he had made plans for the ”anv- nual chestnutting excursion” of his pupils on the following Thursday. he had a moment to decide what to do. I He soon found out that an indefinite number of his letters-‘and those of Gerrit Smith. Dr. Howe and othersm-had been captured at the Kennedy Farm. But he did not lcnow how many of the other secret rec- Ords were in the hands of Senator Mason and Governor Wise of Virginia. He consulted at once with Stearns, Howe. and Wendell Phillips and 8133111: Tuesday and Wednesday evenings burning such papers as "might com- promise other persons.” On Thursday he sent his pupils and teachers to the picnic. took achaise and drove to Redford. picked up Stearns there. and drove to Boston to consult John A. Andrew to find out if they were 614 11 able to arrest in Massachusetts as witnesses or conspirators. \Wisgborn. John Brown. pp. 596-529; Villard. p. th. ShRecollections. I. 137-133. On Saturday he wrote Emerson from Boston: Boston Oct 22nd 1359 W dear Friend: I hope you will still allow me to call you so. though my conduct must seem to you for the present inexcusable. At some future time I hope to show you why I must act as I did. for the good of others as well as my own. As it is [.] the heav— iest burden falls on me; but I can bear it. I have done noth- ing of which I or my friends need be ashamed, and I trust [7] to see the day when I can stand up in Concord and. vindicate mself-o For the present I shall have blame enough. then I hope my friends will say what good they can-nor at least keep silence-- You know better than most why my absence is peculiarly hard Just now. My school I hope will go on in other bands-- ... I could not bid you goodbye. or give you a hint of my going: so sudden was the necessityo-Do assure my scholars and their parents that I acted what I thought was best for all- Give my love to Edith and tell her I would have said goodbye to her on Thursday if I could. I hOpe she will be well and happy-- Remember me too to Ellen and Edward and to Mrs Emerson-- For yourself, dear sir. what can I say. Forever and forever farewell. Brutus! If we do meet again. why we will smile:-~ If nOt-—‘ .......... . Yours in truth r. B. Sanborn 5 Yet, somehow. on Saturday the 22nd. he was writing to Theodore Parker from Quebec: Dear Friend: You will be surprised at the date of this letter: but it Will be explained by the news which the papers have already given you of the Harper's Ferry insurrection. Our old friend Btruck his blow in such a way- either by his own folly or by the direction of Providence that it has recoiled. and ruined him. and perhaps those who were his friends. His letters have fallen into the hands of Buchanan. and as among them are My of mine. and I am the agent of others in the matter. I thought it best. and so did Mr [Wendell] Phillips and Mr An- drew that I should disappear for awhile. to prevent getting \lj—S-anborn Papers. American Antiquarian Society. ’4‘ (“I g L) testimony. Accordingly I left Concord on Thursday hoon. no. known to all except my two sisters- reached Portland the next morning and this place this P. M. Saturday. I shall wait here until I see what turn things will take. and then return to Concord or go to hgland as may seem best. So I fear the School has ended. tho' I have written to have it kept up if possible.- and my good name for a while will be under a cloud in N. England I fear too that G-errit Smith and Morton and perhaps others will suffer from it. but this is little com—- pared to the loss of Brown and the premature explosion of the mine. The poor old man fought like a hero. and will die like one - by the rope. it is most likely. Two of his sons were shot by his side and three fourths of his men. There has been nothing so much in the 6gigh Romantic fashion" seen in this country for many a year. Now he lies in a Virginia jail. tor- mented with questions. wounded and waiting his trial for mur- der and treason. What course the Gov't will pursue remains to be seen. but most likely they will follow up the matter as closely as possible. and we shall have plenty of treason trials and bloody threats. and some bloodshed- All this will weaken the Slave Power. and the good of the tragedy will outweigh the evil. no doubt. The Republicans fear very much the effect on their party. but I fancy it will do it more good than harm in the end. It will injure Seward. however. and perhaps make Douglas our next President. My own reasons for taking the very important step which I have taken. and which is likely to ruin my worldly prospects for years to come. besides estranging and shocking my friends. Were these. When I saw that my letters were in the hands of the enemy. I knew that I might be in their power if I staid at home: if not to be tried and punished for treason. yet to be annoyed by arrest and subpoena and forced to give evidence a- againgt my friends. perhaps. If I were out of the way. I new the evidence against them would be much less. and perhaps scarcely any. and in the uncertainty as to what Buchanan will do and how far public rage will go. I thought Canada the best place of refuge. I could not make preparations for flight Without exciting suspicion: I therefore took advantage of a holiday. and was far away before any of my Concord friends knew of it. I shall be much blamed for it all. and that by many Whose good Opinion I value highly. but I believe I did what was best. The emergency wag serious. and I knew it was no child's Play I was going about. m should note Sanborn‘s frequent use of the word "romantic." I). 8131 could be inferred concerning Sanbom's attitude toward the con- ‘ 1‘Eicy from t}; is particular word. ”2 {“3 6(Had Sanborn realized up to this time that the conspiracy was Clild‘e play“? Had this been for him a kird of excitinfl ro—ex.mt~ Hirer. ‘3 of the Scott romances he had read so avidly as a boy? ‘( m You will hear much about this from other correspondents, and you will see the newspapers, no doubt. Possibly you may see me in person when you are in England again. There I might find something to do. which I perhaps cannot here. and you.know I must be earning my bread. Yet I may go back and take my school again- who knows? All is in God's hands, who does not show his cards to every locker on. The news of your improvement, in Miss Stevenson's last letter. and the good spirits of your note to me. are very pleasant things. Nor am I sorry to hear of your resignation- great as the loss is~ for I know your health requires it and has long done so- The winter in Italy I hope may do you as much good as in Egypt- and that you will go on fattening until you weigh as much as an ArchbishOp- ...Mrt Emerson is scarcely any better. and has not a very cheerful winter prospect before him. All were well at the Ripley's when I was there four days ago - and I am in excellent health- He finished the letter next day: I have been today to the English Cathedral and heard the morning service with the prayers for the Queen. the Gov. (3eneral etc and a sermon on keeping the Sabbath. in which one of the most cogent arguments was this; ”If you worldly Inen find it so hard to get thro' a Sunday here, what will ‘you.do when you get to Heaven. where it is all Sunday?" 'This afternoon I went with an English Colonist and his wife to the Plains of Abraham. and saw the place where Wolfe fell. and also where he climbed up. but did 'nt fell-- It is a romantic town» this Quebeo- with its narrow crooked streets and its motley crowd of English French. Yankees. Indians. soldiers nuns. peasants etc. I am at the Metro- jpolitan Hotel, a Yankee house with few lodgers but if I stay long I shall take lodgings in some private boarding ‘house. I have been thinking I may return to Boston. and live there in hiding should it be needful: perhaps in your Thouss. where I could make a good use of your books - but all the future is uncertain. I may live to regret having engaged in such a,plot. tho' at present I only lament its Imfortunate issue. I am now awaiting letters and papers to inform me of the state of things in the U. S. since I ileft there. and whether I may or ought to return. I want ‘to hear how the breaking up of my school has been received. sand how it sounds to be denounced by your friends and know ‘that you in part deserve it. I have also left a great bur— fi-rtiee who have in Massachusetts given aid to a treasonable act consummated in Virginia. would. if indicted. be tried in Meleeechusetts. This is different from the Opinion he gave us gConcord Library. 5: 5-126. in the afternoon [T'mrsday] and on which you based your ac- tion. I send you his exact words. and the whole of his pa- per. that you may have the whole before yous-to see whether you will now change your plan and return. I have marked. at the close. the paragraph specially interesting to you. £9239. A. @212 9112222 (001:. 21. 1859) “In order to constitute the offence of 'lsvying war.‘ there must be more than a mere conspiracy to do it: some overt 9.95. of 3.3.1:. must be committed. "In order to constitute guilt (in any given person) of the overt act. he must be present at its commission. But he may be _<:_opstru.1ctively present, though actually absent: that is to say. he may be remote from the principal scene of action. but performing some auxiliary or ancillary act. --such as keeping watch for the immediate actors. guarding them against surpri so. having at hand for them means of es- cape. or the like; thus performing a part in that which constituted the overt act. or was immediately ancillary thereto. “But a man cannot be guilty of an overt act of levying war, who was not present at the overt act of war; who par- ticipated in none of the transactions of the principal ac- tors at the scene and did not. in any manner, render assis- tones, or attempt to do it. or put himself in a position Where he might do so. if occasion offered at the time. nor perform any part in pursuance and in aid of the ends of the principal actors. anywhere. at the time of the overt act being committed. ”Still, if one Joins in a conspiracy to levy war, and war is. afterwards. in fact levied, and he perform any act. which in the case of a felony. would render one an accessory. he thereby renders himself a principal to the treason. since. in treason all who are guilty at all are principals. Thus-"if he gives arms. ammunition, horses or what not. to aid the war, pursuant to the conspiracy, such tests. when the war has been actually levied. will doubtless be deemed overt acts of treason. in themselves: but the party committing them can only be tried in the District where they were committed. A man who gave a cannon in Maine to the service of the cause of treason could not be tried for it in Texas. merely because it was in Texas. that other men, afterwards. fired it. But I think it would be regarded as of itself an act of treason. the war having been actually levied by other principal conspirators. for which he might be tried in Mains.‘I 25h I asked J. A. A.. "Shall I write him that you think he had better return?" He replied. "Send him what I have writ- ten. and let him decide for himself." You know better than we what the precise contents of your letters were, and so can better Judge: but. as you could not be carried hence as a witness. nor. if Andrew be correct. as an alleged criminal. you may think things are so changed that you'll return. George Stearns went to-day to see Emerson at Concord. They have kept the school going. and it will go ahead for a fortnight or more. awaiting your return. Emerson seemed. from what Stearns told me. to think you had done wisely in leaving. No news to-day...§901d man will probably recover. and I live in hope we'll see him again yet. Be sure we'll leave no stone unturned. If you write home while you deem it best to stay away. send your letters under cover to me. and tell them to send to me any letters for you. that I may mail them hence. It ‘would not do to mail to you. even under an assumed name. or receive from you through a village post office. 0 On October 22nPT’hillips wrote Sanborn again: 3gssa EBIEND: I've not been able to get speech again with your 222%? gallon. but mgasjfir [Higginson] and Dr. Howe and Emerson think there can be no risk to any one in your being here. and urge your imggdiate return. I concur in their opinion, .and write at their request. Emerson says that at Concord they suppose you have gone South to Harper's Ferry. Per- iraps it is as well to let them fancy so. and thus avoid the jpossibility of your absence directing attention to the real lzey of the movement. We are in motion with fresh plans. and need your coun- ael and knowledge of men and means. I wrote you yesterday 'by mail. and to-day telegraphed. No news. \E‘T tie, ere Phillips refers to persons by code name. persons of no cou- quence to this study or. now, to the world at large. 70Recollectlons. I. 187-191. (Phillips did not sign his letter.) 71Sanborn. as we see. wrote two letters on Saturday. October 99, . one from Boston and one from Quebec. Yet Phillips is writing c>rn from Boston on Saturday. October ?2. EgSrq 155 “The real key to the movement." Sanborn explains. ”was in my hands, hp~ cause most of the correspondence with Brown had passed by my hands and those of my classmate Morton. . . .I had foreseen this in my flight in Canada. because I knew that without my answers the correspondence. if in the hands of Virginia, could not well be understood.” Sanborn's sister was meantime watching the affairs of the school and keeping Open the main line of canmunication between him and his fUIH ner world. and on Sunday. October 23rd. she wrote: g? DEAR g, I got your letter last night. As I had previously. on Friday. had a call from Mr. Emerson and Mr. Stearns. who thought the school should by all means go on for the present. I immediately went to see Mr. E. and had a consultation. By his advice. and almost command. I have suppressed the notes to Judge Hoar and Miss Waterman. He having seen Mr. Phillips and knowing Mr. Andrew's Opinion. is strongly persuaded that you can return with safety. and will be here again in a few days. In the meantime the school is to go on with as little interruption as possible. I am to take all the classes I can. and help rule. if need be: Miss Waterman to take all the Latin but Lucretius: Ellen Emerson all the Greek except her own. and the German. It is thought that in this way all the scholars can be kept fully at work; and if this don't do. Mr. Emerson will immediately undertake to get a man-nr. Ab- bot or some one. for a short time. Accepting his advice, and the Opinion of your legal friends. I shall act as if your absence were to be only for a few days: and not at once attend to the various orders you have sent. Your absence thus far has not apparentlycreated any particular sensation. Mr. Emerson's children think you have gone to aid in some way the prisoner. Miss Whiting told me in confidence that she thought you had gone to see Gerrit Smith. Mr. Emerson has promised to see Judge Hoar and confer with him. I have had some letters, all of which. ex- cept one from Miss Stephenson. I have done with as I thought best. after reading them. The one from Miss S. is marked sgyggidgntialf-therefore I neither read it nor send it with- out your order. I have taken care of EIdwin] Morton's 1e.- ters. what there was about. I have ordered the coal. kept up the household arrange» ments as usual. and presented the same face to people as if all was going on peaceably. I am a little confused--stnnned -~at this great and sudden change: but am quite well. and do not bestow a thought on what peeple will say. even if the worst should come. Helen [Sanborn's other sister] is here. and will stay a few days longer.... I shall in a few days send to Charles if he does not come here. I have not seen the Ripleys-~nnd as no one knows that I am in pain. I do not have to submit to consolation. I don't like to have pe0ple think that your own safety was the principal motive for your going away; but if they do. there is no help for it. I have no doubt much good will come out of this to all immediately concerned, and don‘t consider that you need any vindication. I hope you will get through this all without breaking down. We have now and then apprehensions of some- body's coming to disturb things here. but do not believe there is much danger of that. I shall hope to hear from you very soon. Tell me whose writing is this slip-~a friend who knew you first through Anna. He writes without name about some letters of his. Good-bye. S. E. S. Hard upon this letter came a note from Emerson: By all means return at the first hour wheels or steam will permit. I assure every one that you shall be here Wednesday or Thursday. Sunday Night. Yours ever. R. W. E. Seunborn hurried back to Concord at once. "and took up the daily routine Of‘ life as if nothing had happened.” He had not been home more than three or four days when Colonel (Xiarles Miller. Gerrit Smith's son-in-law. appeared at his door to tell him that Morton had Just left Quebec for England. and that Gerrit Smith apers '33 going insane. Miller's mission was to destroy aflAthat might implh cato his father-in-law in the plot. Two days later. November 9. Emerson wrote Sanborn from Boston: g} DEAR gin: Would it not be better that you should take legal coun- sel at this time. by explicitly stating your liabilities. if any exist. to a counsellor? I was talking this morning with Mr. [John M.) Forbes, who looked with some uneasiness at the telegraphic despatch of this morning. and afterward I had a little conversation with Judge Hoar. The Judge does not over— estimate the United States power, yet could answer no ques- tion in the dark. And it is only on the contingency that there may be anything in your case not known or probable to them. that the suggestion can have any importance. I have been talking with a few persons on the possibil- ity of finding any gentleman here who might have private in- fluence with Gov. Wise for Capt. Brown. and am to see others in the morning. YO‘er ever , 72 R. I. Emerson. Though Sanborn preferred to speak to Rockwood Hoar, it was not proper for the Judge to hear in advance Senborn's testimony. and. says. San- born. 'I was not inclined to unbosom myself to any lawyer. in advance 0f some necessity for it. which I did not then see.” Sanborn replied t0 Emerson. speaking particularly about the matter of the envoy to Governor Wi so: There is hope in every effort to save Brown-~but not much. as it would seem. in the representations of a private gen- tleman to Governor Wise, who is in this matter the servant of others. It is the gellua multoru§_cnpitum of Virginia that will execute the sentence if it is done—:— and that 13 perhaps implacable. Eggggg. difficult as it seems. is probably Brown's best chance for life. If a reprieve. or an arrest of Judgment for another month were possible. a rescue would not be so hard to manage. Brown's heroic character is having its influence on his keepers. as we learn: but at present he does not wish to escape. 72Recollections. I. 192-199. 73mm. . I, 192-200. ,J (3": JG Sanborn, James Redpath, Richard Hinton, T. W. Higginson, and John I. Le Barnes had been plotting to help Brown escape. but finally aban- doned their projects November 23. four days before Brown‘s death. tearns had appealed to Kansas;holdest 'Jayhawkers” for help: Iyeanier Spooner of Boston hatched a plan for kidnapping Governor Wise and hold- ing him for ransom. John W. Le Barnes thought up several amazing schemes. in one of which Sanborn was involved. This called for an attack on the prison at Charlestown, and at a meeting November 22 in New York "some German-born lovers of liberty. . . 0 who had fought tyranny in their native land" agreed to take part in the attack. In a short time "a. hundred or more" men were reported to the conspirators in Boston as ready to go as a reinforcement to the groups which were forming under John Brown. Jr. in Ohio. The hundred or more stipulated, however. that if the Ohio group decided not to lead the band, only fifteen or twenty 0f their own force would volnnteer. By Sunday. Novermber 27. the clot- ters had decided to “rendezvous some distance from Charlestown. to mare El cross-country rush on that town, and. after freeing the prisoners. to Seize the horses of the cavalry companies and escape.” This attack was tC> occur November 30 or December 2. the day Brown was to be hanged. But money was needed-«a hundred dollars to pay each rescuer~—and IVrOmises to provide the widows and children with financial security aha hm71in safety. From $1500 to $2000 was needed by Tuesday, November ?%. an<1 from $500 to $1000 the day after. On the day when Le Barnes we: ** determine whether the group were to "go or stay." George H. Hoyt. Brown's °°1Inee1 who use returning to Boston from Ohio, announced that nobody in 160 .1 Ohio had any such plan of rescue. Sanborn wired Le Barnes to 511; u; the plot and return to Boston. and telegraphed Higginscn: I”Object aban- doned.” Then he wrote Higginsoiz "So I suppose we must give up all 7 0 hope of saving our old friend.” During all this time. Sanborn had continued to wonder what would happen to himself. how the law would act. and what he would do if he were threatened with seizure. Then. too. he was occupied with numerous meetings. and with watching the newspapers for reports of develemen‘e. He wrote to Theodore Parker: . th -_ Boston. Nov 25—— 1839 Dear Friend:—-I wrote you nearly a fortnight ago. since when many things have happened--scme of which you will learn from the English and American papers-3rown had then been lately sentenced. and Gerrit Smith just gone to the Insane Asylum: Just afterwards Dr Howe and Mr Stearns thought it prudent to go to Canada to avoid the possibility of an arrest as wit- nesses. It would have been better if they had staid at home. yet such are the laws that they could only have been protect- ed here by unlawful force. I dont think the U. S. will push the matter as far as to arrest any witnesses They may be summoned. but I dont believe our officials are willing to take the risk of arresting them— Sarsborn says his own course will be this: If summoned as a witness I shall refuse to obey and shall tell the officer; if he arrests me he does it at his peril for I will certainly shoot him if I can, and a dozen men in Concord would do the same sooner than see me taken off- This information will probably affect his return on the summons. and I shall not expect to see him with a gapigg, If he comes however. to arrest me. I shall resist to the uttermoet. and probably kill or seriously wound my captorz5 7”Villard. pp. 511-528. particularly 511-517. 7518 Sanborn boasting and strutting here? Could it be said that sanfuorn was bravest "on paper”? I shall then refuse all writs of habees corrus, ard Or ly allow myself to be rescued by force: nor will I allow ery one to give bonds for me, if I can help it- If carried to Va- I s} all refuse to testify-- But I do not look upon any of these things except the summons as probable. In the meantime. he tells Parker, he goes about his business as usual: Last Saturday night a great meeting was held in the Tremont Temple in aid of Brown's family. at which Mr Emerson and Phillips spoke. together with Rev Mr Manning of the Old South and Dr Neale who prayed. You will see the report of the meeting in the Herald- probably- it was very enthusiastic. Mr Emerson has a great admiration for Brown-and has spoken bravely for him. So have some others-—but he has been his own best advocate-and his speeches and letters from Charles— town are the best anti-slavery documents yet printed. I will send you the report of his trial. and paste some slips into it--giving other facts—- He feels that the state of Virginia is in a great panic: 1000 soldiers are at Charlestown to prevent a rescue, and yet every day the town is in mortal fear. A few nights ago a sentinel challenged a cow. who not being able to give the password was shot. Some say it was because she had two powder horns sticking in her head. The rumors of an at- tempted rescue are either wholly unfounded or grossly exag- gerated. Something may be attempted-~but as it now seems With no prospect of success. All sorts of schemes are pro- posed--one by the Plug Uglies of Washington to go and res- cue Brown for $500--another by the Germans offl Y.--Dut I think the old hero will be hanged next Fridaylgiust a week from today-and that day will be the most venerable yet seen in the annals of Slaveryb- Seunborn says that the good results of Brown's activities appear every- Where: The North is strengthened- the South fearfully weakened. Business is embarassed [sic] at the South-~and the wealthy man begin to talk of selling their property and going to Europe- Discussion also is freely proposed--but there is \7—‘- 70 0One might detect here a note of hepe that notling will deprive the conspiracy of its martyr. 171 no such good news yet«- Brown's bearing in prison is tho- roughly nobleu-his answers to questions and every word he says are fatal [arrows?] to the South. It is a great deal better that he was not killed in the attack in the Engine house--as I at first hoped, and as his enemies thought. His trial has aroused a feeling never before known among us-- and which frightens and enragss the South beyond measure?- flo farther disclosures have been made for some weeks impli- cating otherpersons, and the general impression at the North is that few persons knew of the scheme. My own relation to it is hardly imagined by my friends I think-«Probably Brown will die without revealing his plan any more fully»- The fugitives in Penn. have escaped and are in safetyb- The trial of Stevens and Hazlett before the U. S. Court at Stanton.[?] comes in May: before which time much will have occurred, and it is even possible there may be no U; S. to prosecute-- Congress meets in ten days- Mr Sumner has got home and is said to be in good condition. I hope to see him tomorrow or Sunday-« The session will be the most violent we have ever seen- As for the other conspirators. Mrs. Howe has told Sanborn that Dr. Howe should be returning from Canada soon, Gerrit Smith is recovering from his insanity, and Edwin Morton is probably in Europe. On Sunday morning, two days later. he finished the letter. The latest news had come from George Hoyt. Brown’s youthful lawyer. who had given Governor Wise of Virginia affidavits establishing Brown's insanity: [Hoyt] thinks a case can be made out, but of course it will do no good, and Brown w'd feel insulted by such a de- fence. Hoyt also says that the Virginians mean to summon as witnesses, Dr Howe, Mrs Russell. Mrs Gloucester of Brook- lyn, myself and one or two others. and he advises in the name of Montgomery Blair and the Republican party that we should evade an arrest. But I_gh§ll not, and I think one or two others will not. Dr Howe may do so--though I think he will soon return from Canada and go on as usual with his business. I saw yesterday a letter from Mr Stearns. who is with him, hinting that they might not come back very soon-- but I think they will-— I have written the Dr urging it-- and shall write Mr S- todayb-also I mean to see Mrs Howe and urge it on her-the Dr's reputation for courage suffers from his absence-~unJust as I think-but such is the fact. Hoyt thinks there is no chance of saving Brown-othat he will be hanged. 172 various plans for a rescue have been proposed, but none likely to succeed- so strong is the force about him, and the distance to a friendly [countyyi countyl] so great. Wise be— lieves that attempts will be made, and will have 1500 troops about the gallows. .All Virginia. and indeed all the South is still in a panic. and will be for months to come even if there should.be no farther revolts or rescues-- He reports on a call he has paid Senator Charles Sumner that morning, who has recovered fairly well from the near-fatal caning he had suf- fered three years before: He starts for lashington on Wednesdayb-stOpping by the way in N. Y. and,Phila~- He does not mean to speak for the first two or three weeks unless it is forced upon him, but will post himself up on the facts of the Harper's Ferry case before speakingb He says he has promised his physicians not to go to work too hard at first-- He has a full view of the dangers of the coming winterb-the fights and assassinations which may happen there during the session. and is prepared for all e- vents--... Everything shows how greatly this event has strength- ened the North. .After discussing the health of several of the important citizens of Con- cord. Sanborn concludes his long letter: My own health is excellent--and though these affairs keep me busy and.a1arm some of my friedns they do not much annoy me- I go armed.whenever I leave Concord- but I suppose there is really little need of it- We are to have a meeting at Concord tomorraw night to make arrangements for a solemn service on the 29—.Decemberb the day of Brown's execution. His family will be provided for byjthe North-~and his body buried with honor. it is probable. 77Concord Library. 5: S-hS. 173 It was a clear. warm. beautiful day. December 2. 1859, when the sheriff at Charlestown. Virginia, with a single blow of his hatchet cut the rope and the man of strong and bloody hand. of fierce passions. of iron will. of wonderful vicissitudes.--the terrible partisan of Kansas-~the capturer of the Uhited States.Arsenal at Harper’s Ferryb-the wouldsbe Catiline of the South-~the demi- god of the Abolitionists-the man execrated and lauded-c damned and praged for...John Brown. was hanging between heav- en and earth.7 Far away from the scaffold. in Concord. the people had gathered to hear Thoreau read from the poets. Emerson from John Brown's words. and Alcott from the Wisdom of Solomon, the Psalms of David, anvalato. and to hear an ode written by Sanborn for the occasion. Sanborn had also written a dirge which was sung by the large audience. among whom was Simon Brown. the former lieutenant-governor. The townspe0ple still felt that Sanborn was not out of danger and listed his dirge and his ode as written “by a gentleman of Concord.” In fact. only a week later. on the 9th. George Hoyt. Brown's lawyer. after a conversation in which Sanborn “rather slighted his fears" for himself. wrote Sanborn: I feel it my duty to point out the dangers. even if I cannot prevail on you.to avoid them. It is probable you already see the new trap which Senator'Mason has set for you. His reso- lution of inquiry empowers the committee of the Senate to send for persons and papers. Once in the city of Washington. a wit- ness before that committee. it will be easy to take you.into WW _ 78ElizabethPrestonAllan. Life and Letters gg'Marggget Junkin Prep? 0'.“ *- ton (New York: Houghton Mifflin. 1903771). 117. reprinted in Villard. P. 557. 1714 Virginia. If you avoid anything. you must shun the process of this committee of investigation. Mason is an old f01.79 On December 12. John Andrew wrote Senator Fessenden of Maine on the same subject and with the same concern for the personal safety of the conspir- ators. The letter is important. for it seems to defend Sanborn's flight to Canada as a measure which protected political interests in Massachu- setts: I am confident [wrote Andrew] that there are some half dozen men who ought not to testify Mega. and who never will. with my consent as counsel. or otherwise. do so. Not that they knew. or foreknew Harper's Ferryz—but. that their re- lations with Brown were such 8: their knowledge of his move— ments 8: intentions. as a "practical abolitionist." aiding the escape of slaves by force.--even at the risk of armed encounter.-—-that they could not without personal danger say anything. Nor could they be known as having those relations. without giving some color to the charge that Republicans coa- 0perate in such movements. Sanborn's worst fears were realized when. on January 16. Monday. he received a omens to appear before the Mason Committee. I was thus summoned: last Monday I went to the P. O. as usual about 5 1/2 P.l-- As I was looking in the boxes. a man called me by name. I turned and said. 'How do you do?! upon which he handed me the summons. telling me what it was. I looked at it. said. ”You must make your return. air” put it in my pocket and came away. As I turned he said. “Shall I write them you will be there?“ ”Make such a return as you please." said I. and went home. Perhaps if I had refused to go. he might have had the authority to arrest me. but no doubt I could have been set free on a habeasco corpus-u- These proceedings are another step towards tyranny- but we have got very near the end of that- 31 N 79Recollections. I. 203-20h. Bo goJohn A. Andrew to Senator William P. Fessenden. written from . 31: t,on December 12. 1859. reprinted in Villard p. 530. (The original '30 1n the possession of Villard.) 5. S‘glganborn to Parker. Concord. January 21. 1860 (00an Library. . 50 . 175 He was to start January 22nd. "as it is rumored. for Washington. but as some think - for Montreal. where they say I am to watch the course of events at '5 and act accordingly." The day for his appear- ance was fixed for’January 2hth. The summons is a simple subpoena and no attempt was made to arrest me. Should I fail to appear at I3 on Tuesday. it is thought I shall be arrested by order either of the Com. or the full Senate. Two Concord.men- Mr Xeyes and Mr Bull have Just returned from Iashington. and both advise me about go- ing there. but in different ways. Mr Bull thinks the Inves- tigation is to be strictly carried [i] cut. and that they will be rigorous in their search for evidence. and urges me not to go to '8 Mr'Keyes thinks the Committee will be fair and lenient in their examination. and that they will not pur- sue the matter very far- and he advises to go and testify- Mr Sumner is his authority- while Mr Wilson is Mr Bull's- So you see how uncertain everything is.- too uncertain. in my view. to warrant a long Journey Southward- My school has been arranged so that I can be absent for a fortnight and perhaps longer - and that is what I expect now to do.... It is possible I may be kept here by another cause Mrs Ripley has Just had a light attack of vanoloid- and I suppose I was exposed to take it from her. and now is about the time I ought to have it appear§2 Should I be taken with it. I should be excused from attendance on the Committee for some weeks. I presume- ...Realf. Brown's Secretary of State has reached Wash- ington: and was to testify yesterday. His evidence. if be- lieved. will make a sensation. He mentions you.and Higgin-. son as knowing Brown's plan and states that Wilson had rec'd a letter from B- but disapproved the scheme- Ihether Se- ward is to be involved by Hp remains to be seen. Forbes is out of sight. and it is to be heped will stay so- No other witnesses from this way are yet summoned, but Giddings. R. (Plumb?) of Cleveland and John Brown Jr are said to have been summoned in this. and it is said the Marshal had orders to me8t them if they refused to Obey-see There seems no immediate prospect of an organization at lb The Southern men are under pledge to resist a vote on the plurality rule - the only method of choice. nowb And another ballot cannot be got. it is said. Shaman will be 82One can sense Sanborn's hope that he may contract vanoloid. —.~ 176 the man when a choice is made- The Northern members feel plucky (in the House) and there will be some wholesome truth uttered by them when they begin to debate in good earnest- Seward has not spoken. and. it is said. will not. for a while- the same with Sumner- Many say that Seward's chances for the Presidency are ruined: I don't think so. He is stronger in N. 1. than ever. I think--and Banks would give way to him more readily than [7] to another. But a thousand things may happen before that - - Gerrit Smith is at Peterboro. much better though not yet well. Helen Norton is there. and writes me now and then. She says few of his friends have written him letters of sympav thy or congratulation on his recovery. and that in his shat- tered state. this is a great burden to him. He would value a letter from you.very much. I know- Sven a few words.... Morton. as I wrote you is in Englandg Possibly I may be by March 122.but you.must send.my letters here as usual. till you hear I have sailed- Dr Howe was here two days since: he will be in Canada in a week or two. and if'he goes to washington. wait till after the trial of Stevens. which be~ gins,reb 152. I dont believe he will go at 311. Stearns is not likely to be summoned Just yet- but will go away for awhile - Redpaths's Life of Brown is out. and selling fast: it will probably reach over 100.000 and perhaps a quarter of a million in a.year- It is a good book. though hastily written- He will.print another book in a month. containing the speeches of Phillips. Thoreaua Emerson etc - and the Services at our'meeting of the 2§_.Dec in full- This also will have a large sale - The Brown family will realize $10 000 or $15 000 from their fund: the daughters may be at my school. if I am here I have heard nothing directly from you for some weeks.... I am well. and in spite of (rumors? summonsl] and warnings. in a cheerful frame of mind: in fact I was scarcely ever happier. See what it is to have a good conscience! Nor do I feel alarmed at the state of the country. Fermentation is better than putrefaction. and we are in a healthy irritation Just now. that the end will be no one can see: but it must be good at last - -... Worcester's Dictionary is out at last: Emerson's book is not. Mr Hawthorne's. [sic] ”The Professor Story" in the At- lantic opens well. and will be better I think. than any other of Holmes's stories. ...But the world of fiction is a little remote and tiresome at this very real time. - Should I go abroad I should try to be with you in Rome by April— thfin in Germany for three months - but all is un- certain. 8 83021a should note that Sanborn. in this paragraph. sees himself fairly well in relation to the entire picture. Does the reference to Gerrit Smith suggest that Sanborn sincerely believed him insane? 8’4 Sanborn to Parker. Concord. January 21. 1860 (Concord Library. 5: 8-50). 177 Sanborn evidently proposed to Senator Mason that he would be will- ing to testify in Massachusetts. ”through fear of lack of protection in Washington.“ Mason “assured" Sanborn that he would be Ipersonally re- sponsible” for his safety. “I was not so much concerned for that.” says Sanborn. “as resolved never to testify before slaveholders in regard to my friends.‘I He then wrote Mason telling him that if he were seamoned. ”under no conditions“ would he appear before his committee but would lthrowihimself] upon.[his] rights as a citizen of'Massachusetts: re- minding‘him also that he could hardly rely on his offer of protection. since [his] friend. Senator Sumner. had been brutally assaulted a few years earlier. in the Senate chamber itself." Upon the receipt of this missive. Mason reported me to the Senate as a contumacious witness. and my arrest was voted. February 16. 1860. as that of John Brown. Jr.. and James Hedpath was. .A few of the Southern Senators. seeing that my attitude about State Rights was quite similar to theirs. voted against my arrest. and began to send me their polit- ical speeches. Sanborn then left for Canada. ”not choosing to be seized." as he says. 85 ”before I was quite ready." He hit North Elba in his trip toward the border and made arrangements for ten; of Brown's daughters. Sarah and 8 Anne. to enter his school in March. During the period between Brown's capture at Harper's Ferry and the last of February. the other five conspirators had acted in varying Wars. As Villard says. ”None had apparently asked themselves how far "65‘ 86 Such a statement could indicate an amazing conceit. Recollections. I. 206-207. they would be compromised in the eyes of the law when John Brown 87 failed.” Of the six it is Villard's Opinion that Parker and .igginecn alone "stand out as being entirely ready to take the consequences. whatever they might be.‘I .Theodore Parker had. of.course. a legitimate excuse for being in Ehrope. and was there before the attack on Har- per's Ferry. He testified: Of course. I was not astonished to hear that an attempt had been made to free the slaves in a certain part of Virginia. ... Such 'insurrections" will continue as long as Slavery lasts. and.will increase. both in frequency and in power Just as the people become intelligent and moral. As for Higginson. he stayed in Worcester where he could have been taken at any moment. He reasoned that no one who stands his ground.will be molested. I think the reason why'Phillips & I have not been summoned is that it was well understood that we were not going to Canada. Mason does not wish to have John Brown heartily defended before the committee & the countryb-nor does he wish to cause an Smeute. either in Massachusetts or Washington. He wishes simply to say that he tried for evidence & it was refused him. If his witnesses go to Canada or Europe. he is freed from all responsibility.89 Stearns had gone with Sanborn to Boston to consult with.John An- drew four days after Harper's Perry. and Stearns and Howe left for Canada October 25. Stearns “escaped from Dr. Howe.“ as his son put it. on December 2. the day Brown died. and testified before the Mason 87V111ord. p. 523. 8SJohn Brown's ggpeditign. reviewed in a letter from.Parker. in Rome. to Francis jackson. Boston (Boston. pamphlet. 1860). p. 7. re- printed in part in Villa-rd. p0 5299 89Higginson to Sanborn. Worcester. Mass.. February 3. 1860. in the Eigrginson Collection. Boston Public Library. reprinted in part in Villerd. P- 529. Villard says this letter was never sent. 179 Committee in Washington February 2%. 1860. Unafraid through the trial. he said. when asked if he disapproved of the raid on Harper's Ferry. '1 should have disapproved of it if I had known of it; but I have since changed.my opinion: I believe John Brown to be the representative man of this century. as washington was of the last--the Harper's Ferry af- fair. and the capacity shown by the Italians for self-government. the great events of the age. One will free EurOpe and the other‘America.' Sanborn's actions stand somewhere in between the brave. manly words and acts of Higginson. Parker. and Stearns. and what I feel were the despicable activities of Dr. Howe and Gerrit Smith. As for Dr. Howe. who had fought fiercely in the '20's in the Greek army in its war for independence. and who had been imprisoned by the Prussians for five months for distributing supplies during the Polish uprisings. has ac- tions were unbelievable. On November 1h. though he was still with Stearns in Canada. he published a "card! addressed from Boston in which he made several rather credible statements: Humor has mdngled.my name with the events at Harper's Ferry. So long as it rested on such absurdities as letters written tg.me by Col Forbes. or others. it was too idle to notice. But when complicity is distinctly charged by one of the par- ties engaged.[John 3. Cook]. my friends beseech me to define my'position: and I consent and less reluctantly. because I divest myself of what. in time. might be considered an honor. and I want no undeserved ones. As regards Mr. Cook...I never saw him...never even heard of him until since the outbreak at Harper's Ferry. That event was unforeseen and unexpected by me: nor does all my previous knowledge of John Brown en- able me to reconcile it with his characteristic prudence and his reluctance to shed blood. or excite servile insurrection. It is still. to me. a mystery. and a marvel. As to the he- roic man who planned and led that forlorn hepe. my relations with him in former times were such as no man ought to be afraid or ashamed to avow. If over my testimony as to his high qualities can be of use to him or his. it shall be forthcoming at the fitting time and place. But neither this nor any other testimony shall be extorted for un- righteous purposes. if I can.help it.9O This called forth from Higginson a bitter rebuke. and he wrote Sanborn 91 that he regarded Dr. Home's card "as anything but honorable.“ Sanborn steeped to defend.Howe in a statement that aroused Higginson to reply 92 November 17: 'Is there no such thing as honor among confederates?I Dr. Howe took three months to think over Higginson's stern letter. and on February 16 he replied. defending his writing of his card: I was not very decided in the belief of its expediency. It was done. however. in consequence of an Opinion which I held. and hold. that everything which could be honestly done to show that John Brown was not the Agent. or even the ally of others. but an individual acting upon his own responsibility. would increase the chances of escape for him and his companions. Further. Dr. Howe repeated to Higginson that in his last interview with John Brown. the latter “did not then reveal to me his destination. or his purpose. 'e h_a_<_i_ _n__o_ conversation about his future p_l_a3_s_. His ap- pearance at 'Harper's Ferry' was to me not only unexpected but quite astonishing. The original plan as I understood it was quite different 99Published in the New York Tribune. November 16. 1859. and re” printed in part in Villard. p. 531. 9¥A first draft of a letter dated Worcester. November 15. 1859. in the Higginson Collection. Boston.Public Library. reprinted in part in Villard. p. 532. 92A first draft of this is in the Higginson Collection. Boston Public Library. ' 181 3 when Hows ap- 8;) from this one: 8: even that I supposed was abandoned. peered before the Mason Committee. Sanborn said. its questions were “so unskilfully framed that [the witnesses] could. without literal . 9h falsehood. answer as they did.“ Most reprehensible of all were the actions of Gerrit Smith. whose activities following Harper's Perry and to the day of his death seem dishonorable. When the news of the attack hit the newspapers. he began to see his social and political position crumble. ”The outcries against him as an accessory. in the pro-slavery press and by his political en~ amiss. the rumor that the Virginia authorities were about to requisition the Governor of New York for his extradition. and the bloody and futile 95 character of the raid itself. all reduced him to a state of terror.“ Says his biOgrapher: None of these things. talk. spending money or the under- ground railroad. called for real courage. the kind of courage necessary to act and to face the consequences of action. When Smith found his strong talk carried over into action by John Brown. to whom abolitionism meant some- thing mgre than a battle of words. he completely lost his nerve.9 On November 7. five days after John Brown was sentenced to death. Smith. through careful strategy. was admitted to the Utica Asylum for __ 93s. G. Howe to T. w. Higginson. Boston. February 16. 1360. in the Higginson Collection. Boston Public Library. reprinted in part in Villa 1m. p. 532. 9n39¢9119ctions. I. 230. The letter from Sanborn to Parker. Concord. February 12. 186) (Concord Library. 5: 5-51) gives contemporary evidence of the same attitude. 95Villard. p. 535. 963311311 Volney Harlow. Gerrit Smith: Philanthropist and Po‘orvcr (New rare. Henry Holt. 1939). p.‘E21. .34 (3'1 { 0 the Insane. The statements given out to the press and to private per- sons ”suggest that Smith was suffering from an extreme case of what moralists call a guilty conscience and from a terrific nervous strain resulting therefrom?7 Though Dr. John P. Gray. the superintendent of the asylum and Smith's personal friend. wrote a careful and weighty diagnosis of Smith's grave derangeMent of mind and critical organic weakness. Smith's rapid recovery. as his biographer*points out. is incredible. He could not be present. of course. at the investigation of the Mason Committee because Dr. Gray declared emphatically that his illness would not per» mit it?8 And one of the "most baffling aspects of Smith's connection with the Harper's Ferry incident.“ says Harlow. ”was his subsequent de~ nial. emphatic and repeated. of any real couplicity in the enterprise: baffling because the denial is so patently at variance with the facts. and because of Smith's well-deserved reputation-1n all other activities throughout his life-ofor absolute candor and frank. open dealing." He only admitted he was acquainted with John Brown. and that he had given him small sums of money. fBut he most indignantly repudiated the idea that he had prior knowledge of Brown's plans and that he had played an important part in the shaping of these plans.” when a group of Democrats in upstate New York. the Vigilant Com- mittee. circulated a.pamphlet describing the work of the anti-slavery 97Ibid.. p. N11. 981bid.. p. kl}. 133 secret "central association.” Smith sued the three authors $50,000 each. and puhlished.a.pamphlet of his own. two thousand copies of which were distributed to the members of Congress. President Puchanan. and to anyone else of influence in the country when Smith could think of. To compound his felonious duplicity be printed a three-column letter in the New York Eggglg Idenying most emphatically any complicity in John Brown’s plot." and even went so far as to accuse the ggzglg of implying that the Harper's Ferry aifair was 'concocted.under'[his] roof”! When Barlow of the Vigilant Association threatened to prove before a court that Smith ”had counselled. or participated in. movements . . . nearly like those charged.” Smith was in a predicament. Barlow. how- ever. after long consideration. agreed to settle the matter out of court ”and all parties.” wrote Smith complacently. "are entirely sat- isfied with the way in which it ended. It was left to me to prescribe the terms: and they were promptly acceded to. All were deeply and pain— fully sensible of the great wrong done me)?9 when Smith wrote Sanborn in March. 1860. asking him to remind him of what had taken place. Sanborn replied ”that it did not seem worth while to refresh his memory.“ Smith would have been able to piece the 99Ibid.. pp. kin-#20. Harlow has been careful to give us only the facts which he could find to document this aspect of Smith's life. but the inferences one makes seem inevitalle. O. B. Frcthingham did not please the Smiths and Millers in his first edition of the Smith biography. and.the second edition. rewritten by Elizabeth Smith Miller. omitted the offending material. fragments together had not his son-in-law made certain that Sanborn. Stearns. and Howe had burned all of the implicating correspondence}00 Sanborn continued to wonder what disposition the Mason Committee would make of his case. "Mason is a third rate lawyer." he wrote to Parker. ”courteous. vinosus and tobaccochewing. and asks all the ques- tions. while Davis sits at his elbow and prompts him now and then.” ‘thhough Hews ”was enabled to give his testimony without enlightening them or stretching the truth.” says Sanborn. "I could not expect such 101 a special Providence as he had. and shall not go." By the first of April. Sanborn decided the Mason Committee had 102 drapped the matter. Two evenings later. having Just come in from mak- ing a call about nine o'clock. he sat at his desk in his carpet slip- pers. Julia Leary. his Irish servant. had gone to bed. and his sister Sarah was in her room. Someone knocked at the front door. Sanborn walked downstairs. opened the door. and a small man entered. ”Does Mr. Sanborn live here?! 1OOIRecollections. I. 225-2h3. The letter to refresh Smith's mem- ory was dated May 10. 1860. is cited in Harlow, p. hlé. and is in the Gerrit Smith Miller Collection of Syracuse University. 10:8anborn to Parker. Concord. February 12. 1860 (Concord Library. 5: 3-51 . 1ozSuch letters as Sanborn to Parker. Concord. March 11. 1860 (Con- cord Library 5: 3-52): Concord. April 1. 1860 (Concord Library. 5: 8-53); and letters such as Sanborn's to Lyman. Concord. begun April 1. 1860 and finished April 3. 1860 (Lyman Papers. Pennsylvania Historical Society). indicate by negative evidence that nothing very serious was on his mind. as the letter of.&pril 3. for example. discusses the enrollment at the Behool. Edward Emerson's and Annie Keyes' illnesses. and so on. 185 “That is my name, sir,” he answered. putting out his hand to wel- come him. "Here is a paper for you.)I the man said. handing him a note. Sanborn stepped back under the hall light to read it: Sir:-- The bearer. a worthy young man. solicits your aid in procuring employment. Sangue. April 1, 1860 Burrow. When he looked up from the note. three men had entered the hall. One of the: stepped forward. "I arrest you.” he said. "By what authority? What is your name?" uI am from the U. S. Marshal's office.I “that is your anthority——your warrant?‘I "We have a warrant." said one of them. ”Show it! Read it!“ The small man began to read the Senate's order for arrest. At that moment Sarah rushed down the stairs, flung Open the other hall door and began screaming for help. The man hastily folded.up his warrant. Another snapped hendcnff- on Sanborn'e wrists. The four rushed him off his feet. As they reached the door. Sanborn braced his feet against the poets. They forced him through. He set his feet against the support: on the verandah. They fought down the steps and along the gravel walk. The Church-belle began ringing. Peeple were gathering. At the stone posts by the gate. he braced his feet again. They couldn't move him. 186 .A carriage was waiting. The men lifted his off his feet, but he kieked down the carriage door. One of the men. black-bearded. grabbed his feet and held them together. Suddenly Sarah darted forward and grahted the man's beard. He screamed and let Sanborn's feet fall to the ground. 01d Colonel Whiting rudhed up and began beating the horses. Ann Whiting climbed.up to the box beside the driver and shouted she‘was go- ing as far as he did. The horses started up. The peOple rushed at the non still holding Sanborn. Just then J. S. Keyes. Sanborn's lawyer, ran up shouting to him. “Do you.petition for a writ of habeas corpus?“ “By all means.“ shouted Sanborn. Keyes rushed off toward the house of Judge Boat. The Judge had already'begmn filling out the writ. In ten minutes. John Moore. the deputy sheriff. rushed back, demanding the men to sur- render their prisoner. They refused. Moors shouted to the crowd. called together a.p9sse genitatus. His Irish neighbors rushed on the men. and grabbing Sanborn away, punhed then into the carriage which lurehed forward. The neighbors rushed after it. and pursued it as far as Lexington. Sanborn was committed to the custody of Captain George L. Prescott. and.spent the night in his house near the Old Manse. armed with the six» 137 shooter of Mr. Bull. the Concord grape man. The fray had lasted two hour30103 Next morning he was taken to Boston by Sheriff Moore and carried to the State House. When he arrived. a.mcmber’of the legislature. Brown of Concord. was presenting the following resolve to his colleagues in the House of Representatives: lhereas. a citizen of this Commonwealth has been seized and an attempt has been made to carry him beyond the limits of this Commonwealth. under the pretext of a.warrant from the Senate of the United States: and whereas a writ of habeas corpus has been issued by the Supreme Judicial Court...to test the validity of this warrant and the seizure thereon: and whereas it greatly concerns the liberties of this Common- wealth that this question should be thoroughly argued and well considered. therefore Resolved. That the Attorney General is hereby instructed to appear before the Court in said proceedings to aid the pee titioner for said.writ of habeas corpus. and. if he shall deem it expedient. in view of the importance of the issue in- volved. to employ additional counsel to assist him therein: and the Governor is hereby authorized to drew his warrant upon the Treasury of the Commonwealth for the payment of such additional counsel. 103This account is an attempted amalgamation of Sanborn's account (age 77) in Recollectigng. I. 208-218 and the contemporary statement (age 28) signed by Sanborn and presumably written at 11:30 that evening. which was printed. together with the reporter's version. in the American Traveller for Saturday. April 7, 1360 (from the clipping £11. on‘§23i3}£' in the Perkins Institution and Massachusetts Asylum for the Blind. Wat~ ertown. Massachusetts). The account also gives the text of the habeas £33333 signed by E. R. Hoar. the return on the writ by Sheriff Moore. a report of the legislature and court proceedings. and the memorial by San» born. See also Sanborn to Parker. Concord. April 1 and 8. 1860 (Concord Library. 5: 5-23). and Sanborn to Benjamin Lyman (Pennsylvania Historical Society), dated Concord. May 2. 1860. Concord. April 22, and Concord. May 2?. There is also an excellent account in the Alcott—Whitman Papers. (Harvard Library%(Louisa May Alcott to Alf Whitman. Concord. April 5. 13653 and a far fuller account from May.Alcott to Alf Whitman in a letter of the same date. The event is described briefly in Madeleine B. Stern. Epuisa Efi 'élgggfi_p. 97 and Louise Hall Tharp, The Peabody §i§tggg of Salem: 3%. 27..277, The Sanborn "kidnapping" has been recounted from mahyrdi??srent sources in most of the books on Sanborn's contemporaries. One contempora .'8ry reaction to the event can.be seen in Daniel Ricketson's indignant note to Sanborn. pompously condemning the kidnappers. dated New Bedforfi, Mass.. xpril r, IKGO. in the Sanborn Papers. American Antiquarian Society. Brown then told of the incident the previous night. and "his narrative was several times interrupted by loud applause." A lengthy. heated do» bate ensued among the members of the legislature: Mr. Haskell of Ipswich [felt] ...the matter should be left with the Judiciary department.... Mr. Bishop of Lenox opposed the resolve as being a step toward placing the State in conflict with the General Government. The Supreme Court. in his Opinion. was the preper tribunal for the settlement of this question of per— sonal rights. Mr. Tucker of Boston said...he regarded this as a case not requiring any particular sympathy. such as might per- haps naturally be excited in the case of a fugitive slave.... Mr. Eldridge of Canton rejoiced that the issue was met at Concord yesterday by the Democracy of that town. as a similar issue against tyranny was met in 1775. The whole power of the government of the United States was not able to take an unarmed man out of the town of Concord. and he was glad to hear that the whole community. without regard to party. Democrats as well as Republicans. rallied to his defence.... Mr. Stone of Waltham...thought it an attempt to commit the State in favor of resisting the attempt to take Mr. Sanborn at all hazards. and he regretted the introduction of the resolve. ‘ Mr. Hale of Boston said if anything was proved by the recent event. it was the fact that the Concord people were able to take care of this matter for themselves. There is no need of Legislative interposition. Sumpose the Legis- lature had adjourned. Does anybody suppose that Mr. San- born's rights would be any less safe than they now are. Mr. Griffin then arose and was granted permission to introduce a mem- orial which Sanborn had written while this discussion had been taking place. Reviewing the events of the night before Sanborn said that Carleton [one of his kidnappers] did neglect and refuse to give up the body of your memorialist. or remove his hand- cuffs. but your remonstrant was taken forcibly by your Sher- iff from the custody of said Carleton.... All which he conceives to be a grievous violation of his rights as a citizen of this Gammonwealth. After the yeas and hays were taken. “leave was granted by a vote of 70 to lh2. At eleven o'clock Sanborn was taken to the Court House. Chief Justice Shaw and Associate Justices Metcalf. Bigelow. Merrick. and Fear were present. John A. Andrew had volunteered his services as Sanborn's counsel, and he was assisted by Samuel Sewell (Mrs. Alcott's cousin), and E. S. KeyesfouThe U. S. District Attorney. C. L. Woodbury. was ss~ sisted by Milton Andros. who was appearing for Carleton. the defendant. A great crowd had gathered. including “many legal gentlemen.” Wendell Phillips. and Walt Whitman. After reading the documents involved in the case. and after discus- sing the history of the case. Sanborn's counsel. Keyes. said that ”the case presented many grave questions of a fundamental character. but he thought there were preliminary ones arising upon the face of the pre- cept. which must dispose of the matter!’ He stated the preliminary quesw tions. which were: let. that the Sergeant-ateArms has no power out of the limits of the District of Columbia, where the United States have exclusive Jurisdiction. 2nd--That the precept is directed to the Serge.nt~at~ Arms by name. and could be served by him alone. 3rd--That the Sergeant-at-Arms could not depute his power to any other person. and therefore that Silas Carle- ton cannot Justify himself under the warrant produced. 10hSanborn in his Egggllgptions, I. 212. says his counsel was Rob- ert Treat Paine. but he confuses this detail with the fact that Paine was to be his counsel in the case of Sanborn vs. his kidnapper. Silas Carleton. which would have been tried in June had Sanborn not dropped the cha§ges. See his letter to Parker April 1. 1360 (Concord Library. 5: 3-53 . 130 Keyes then declared that no law of Congress conferred any power noon the Sergeant-ateArms of the Senate. and then presented decisions of the courts of Massachusetts to prove that "no other person can serve warrants. than the person to whom they are directed.“ Woodbury. for the prosecution. drew heavily on the Opinion. which says. in speak» ing of implied powers of the federal Constitution: There is not a grant of power that does not draw after it others not expressed. but vital to its exercise. though sub- ordinate: and asserts that any argument to the contrary and against the action taken leads to the total abrogation of the power of Congress to maintain its dignity. and secure itself from rudeness. contempt or conspiracy. or protect the sanctity of the law-asking power: and urging that the limits of its powers in that kind are not restricted to the District of Columbia. any more than its legislative powers. Andros. also for the prosecution. read the law of January 2». 1€E?. which spoke of the powers of the House and its committees. and stated that a witness who ”shall wilfully make default or refuse to answer. shall. in addition to the pains and penalties alreadzf in force. be liable to a fine of between $100 and $1000. or imprisonment from one to twelve months. under an indictment in any court of the United States. This law. said Woodbury. recognizes 'as already in existence the powers claimed.“ At half past one. the court took a recess and appeared at four o'clock. Chief Justice Shaw declared that “on account of the urgency of the case the whole court had been called in. and what he was about to state was the result of the deliberations they had had." The question was. whether the arrest by Carleton was Justifiable upon the ground stated. There was no conflict of authority between the Executive of the United States. and the executive officers of this Connonwealth.... 131 It had been agreed to consider first. certain prelim~ inary questions. As regards the first point taken. they were not prepared to say that the Senate could not have its precepts served outside of the District of Columbia. 0n the third point, that the Sergeant-at-Arms could not depute his authority to another person-others was no doubt. and all the Court were agreed that he had no such authority. A warrant of this sort must be limited to the person to whom it is given by the Senate. ”The order of the Court is that the said Sanborn be discharged from the custody of the said Carleton.” .At the giving of this decision there were some "demonstrations of ap— proval. which were speedily checked by the officers." but when the spec~ tators reached Court Square ”they indulged in hearty cheers." And Carlee ton and his allies were speedily arrested. Sanborn was taken by his ”enthusiastic friends” in a carriage to East Cambridge to avoid rearrest in Boston and was put on the train for Concord.105 ”It was but 22 hours." he wrote to Parker. "from the time the wretches appeared at my door. till my return to Concord, set free by the Supreme Court. with the cannon thundering and the crowd huzsaiag about me at the station.I From the station everyone troOped to the Town Hall to hear Dnerson. Thoreau, Alcott. Higginson. and Reynolds the minister vow to "protect“ him henceforward "against any Senate's 106 officer.” It was Sanborn's greatest moment. 105s 106$anborn to Parker, Concord. April 1. 1860 (finished April 3). (Concord Library; 5: 8-53). ecollections. I. 217. 1Q? / Sanborn. however, still had misgivings about his future security and wrote on the llth to Lyman: I slept out of my house last night, and am to do so tonight, but do not mean to leave town, nor to give up going into school if I can help it. There $52 rumors that a force is coming here tonight, with Mc Nair n person, but I doubt it- if so, you.wi ll hear of it by this steamer. The peeple here are all on the watch. and with half a dozen excen tions. all on my side. and this is so generally, throughout the North. Things never looked so good for me and my cause as now, I think-~though many are alarmed at the state of things. I do not much care now if they take me to Washington: for I have wakened people to the importance of the matter, and they will soon put an end to Mason's tyranny. And on the 2?nd he wrote that he had been "warned by timid friends to go to Canada, or elsewhere," but that he saw ”no cause to leave home" where he felt safe. Do not you be anxious about me. for I shall keep in a pru- dent position. I am likely to get sufficient notoriety. A great Rgént has been gained by the successful resistance here-- Sanborn never made the trip to Washington, but his affair provided what the Traveller reported as ”one of the most exciting times that 110 Concord has witnessed for many a day.“ 107Mc Nair was the Sergeant-at-Arms of the U. 5. Senate who had been directed to arrest Sanborn, but who had sent his deputy. Carleton. 108 Sanborn to Benjamin.lyman. Concord, April 11. 1860 (Lyman Papers. Pennsylvania Historical Society). ) 109$anborn to Benjamin Lyman, Concord..April 22, 1860 (Lyman Pap- ers . b 110's1gma.' in the American Traveller. April 7. 1860. quaM a ove. 193 There is little more to be said about Sanborn’s active political career. for I have found little evidence that he took part in any kind of political activity after the kidnapping and trial in Boston. ”Such affairs," writes his son Victor in the Sanborn genealogy. "interfered with the success of the school. and the outbreak of the war so reduced the pupils that in the winter of 1862-163 Mr. Sanborn accepted an offer from the friends of emancipation to edit their weekly newspaper. the Boston Commonwealth. only remaining in that capacity seven months, how- ever." Governor Andrew then ”called him” to be the first secretary of the Massachusetts Board of State Charities October 1. 1863. "Mr. Sana born was thus withdrawn from active participation in the war,” writes Victor. “having the interests of many thousand poor persons to look after.“ And Sanborn himself says, '[I] worked as I have never done. before or since. to understand. explain. and reform the charitable and statistical work of ilassachusetts}11 These statements seem to serve as words of apology and self-Just- ification and to support at least two conclusions which might be drawn from the facts of Sanborn's active political career. If one believes that the death of’John Brown and the publishing of Hinton Helper's 233.3 Igpending 933.113 were the two most important causes of the Civil “her. Sanborn's activities achieve great importance. Indeed. Sanborn I"ox-iced intensely to support the anti-slavery cause. but much of his Work. it could be said. was motivated by romanticism. For example. one ~— 1 11$anborn_Genealogy. p. “69. 19h can see that John Brown was not. for Sanborn. a mere human being: he was instead Sanborn's great hero and God's second son come to earth to redeem mankind from inevitable destruction. Sanborn. too. was more than a secretary in charge of the Kansas State office in the Files Building: he was. in his own mind. a warrior. fighting beside his old hero to down the powers of darkness. He was. however. primarily a war- rior in a war of ideas: he could not think of participating in the skins mishes in Kansas and Virginia. The rifles and ammunition that passed across his lodgers in the Kansas State office were for other men. But this romantic fog in which. it may be said. Sanborn Operated was at times dispelled. When news of Brown's capture at Harper's Ferry was flashed to his schoolmoms in Concord. Sanborn suddenly realized that this was no child's play and that in fact he could be hanged for treason by the government of the United States. Then in the first ex— plosion of reality he penned the note to Emerson and fled as fast as he could for Quebec. There. however. he began to see himself as ”the real key to the movement," as Wendell Phillips said. and. after he returned to Concord and found himself the focus of attention. his romantic illu~ sions began to return. Yet the horrible fact of the power of the Mason Committee and the distressingly unmanly activities of Howe and Gerrit meith disturbed his illusion. By the time of the kidnapping. therefore. 'flben for once he had to fight for his life, he felt perhaps the time had come for him to find some occupation that involved less of the Wav- crly novels and more of personal safety. Such security appeared in the OETPOrtunity that Howe and his colleagues offered him in the offices of tble Board of State Charities. 195 It cannot be declared that. because Sanborn kept out of the actual fighting in the trenches in the Civil War. he was a coward. for many honorable men at the time had no thought of participating. or. if they did. they had the legal right to hire a substitute. Yet. it seems to me. as I have already indicated. Sanborn could be accused of cowardice. And here we could come to another conclusion: that Sanborn in his office and net John Brown. was living a life of reality. and that John Brown. not Sanborn. was the romanticist. But whichever conclusion is correct. it may be said. I feel. that Sanborn's mind was similar to that of Ger» rit Smith's. Sanborn did not 'worry about the possible connection be- tween words and deeds.:12His abolitionism consisted mostly of words in support of principles: when he saw his words translated into blood in the engine house at Harper's Ferry. and when he saw his physical safety threatened. he withdrew from the conflict. So far I have presented a factual narrative of Sanborn's activities in behalf of John Brown up to the time of Brown's death at Charlestown. Sanborn's efforts to help and defend Brown did not. however, step here. Though Sanborn's active career in.politics soon tapered off. he spent the rest of his life passionately talking and writing about his great hero and defending all of his activities. Though I will consider San- born’s literary and Journalistic careers separately in later chapters. 112Harlow. Gerrit Smith. p. “21. 196 it seems apnrOpriate in this chapter to discuss his biographical studies of Brown and his qualifications as a Brown scholar. .Actually Sanborn saw very little of Brown from the day he met him in his office Just after New Year's. 1857. until shortly before June 3, 113 1859. a.period of about eighteen months. Officially. as secretary of the Massachusetts State Kansas Committee. he was associated with him fer four months after that. and he says in his reminiscences: I seem to have known him better. and to have seen him oftener than those who have Journeyed beside me in life's path for sixty years. My actual intercourse with him hardly exceeded a month: my correspondence was some two and a half years (from February. 1357. to September. 1859). and that infre- quent: yet the momentous events in which he had a share give to that brief intercourse the seeming duration of a lifetime.11h From the day Sanborn net Brown in the office of the State Kansas Committee. I'he was ever afterward his most ardent Massachusetts friend and defender" in life and in deathflanly three months after the two met. Brown gave Sanborn a little notebook which contained.his “Articles of enlistment. and.Byblaws. of the Kansas Regulators“ and other’Xansas 116 notes. ”In itself—ofor Brown--.' says one historian. I'the little book no longer possesod a.practical value. but recognizing Sanborn's weakness. 113Villard. pp. 271 and 396: Sanborn. John Egggg, pp. 17. 52h: gecollections. I. 75 and 158. 111‘Becollectiong. 1. 8h. 115Villard. p. 271. 116 - Sanborn. Ithe Virginia Campaign of John Brown." Atlantic Month- 21. XXXV (February. 1875). Zen-233. he sensed that in sealing the affection of this emotional youth. it 117 signified an incalculable investment in sentiment and loyalty.“ Within ten days after he received the little notebook. Sanborn wrote Brown a letter which contained a pledge. to which he held himself for exactly sixty years: Concord.April 2635 1857 I thank you.for remembering me as you have done. and I shall prise anything from you.as a memento of the bravest and most earnest man it has been my fortune to meet. You.need not fear that you.will be reckoned an unprofitable servant. Your name will be handed down as long as those of Putnam and Stark. Ybur friends here all take a deep interest in your fur turs career. and.hope they shall meet you.again in better t1m830 For my own part. I hope so most earnestly. and should we never meet in this world we shall certainly seek each other out in the other: and should you fall in the struggle. I will take it on myself to see that your family is made comfortable and your memory defended against any who attack it-and if I canlig any way serve you. I shall reckon it an honor to do 300 Although Sanborn knew Brown briefly. he was one of the chief con- tributors to what has been labelled ”The John Brown Legend" and never for a moment during the sixty years allowed himself to shrink from de- fending Brown's memory—-which was attacked bitterly and often. A.his— tory of Sanborn's defense has been narrated with meticulous care in what has been called ”the first major contribution in the field by one —w—.- f. 117James 0. Malin. John Brown and thg_Le end pf Fiftfie§15;(Phila- dolphia. The American PhilosOphical Society—1552). p. 3 .. 118 ' From the Trevor.Arnett Library. negro Collection. Atlanta Uni- Versity. Atlanta. Georgia. reprinted in facsimile in Malin. pp. 3h6—3h7. (I also have a photostat copy.) 198 who is primarily a historian.” James C. Malin. professor of American history at the University of Kansas. has written "an exhaustive and rigidly critical monograph-with-documents" for the purpose of estab- lishing the facts of John Brown's activities and throwing out the un- historical materialflgIn the first part of his book. he presents a factual history of Kansas in the 1850's. obtained from a thorough study of contemporary Kansas newspapers: in part two he traces the develop- . ment of the John Brown Legend. as this appeared in the writings of those who wanted a.martyr for the abolition cause. of those who had to have a hero. of those who had to "Justify themselves by Justifying events with which they had been identified. or who for other reasons contributed to the develOpment of the Legend.:201n the third part he re-appraises John Brown in.Kansas by presenting evidence not previously used by Brown's bio- graphers and historians and by re-examining the evidence these same writers have already used. 119Review of Malin's study by J. Gs Randall in the American His- torical Review, XLVIII (July. 19h3),m mg-zzo. Randall also says of ”this study: ”While. therefbre. this book is highly important as to Brown. being the first major contribution in the field by one who is primarily a historian. it is also a significant project in historical criticism. It should claim the attention of Journeyman in the guild. and masters as well. whose interest may‘be more in technique than in the scourge of Osawatomie.... Under Malin's competent hand the legendary Brewn falls awayz... Malin is not writing biOgraphy. He is content with rigorous historical limitations.“ 1zoReview of'Malin's study by Philip M. Hamer in The giggissippi valley Historical Review. XXX (March.l h). 5819582. Hamer says of this work: “In the attainment of the two objectives stated in his preface. to 'establish facts as Objectively as possible' with reference to a most controversial subject and to 'contribute somewhat toward an understand- ing of the larger problem of human behavior.’ Professor Malin has been highly successful.“ 4—H" 199 It is the second part of Malin's study which concerns us. for here he presents a clear. critical account of the feud carried on by Sanborn and a host of others. who. in Malin's opinion. built up. through infer- encs. Opinion. hope. disgust. self-deception or Justification. fiction. or fantasy. a.John Brown whose memory. as Randall says. ’has been less a fabric of‘historical truth than a hodge-podge of hagiology. controver» sy. and emotional retrospection.‘ In this section of 250 pages Malin devotes about sixtybfive to what he calls the "Sanborn Period in John Brown Biography.' Malin's view of Sanborn is not pretty, but it is important for us to inspect his evidence for several reasons: (1) it indicates vividly the development of Sanborn's interest in writing the biography of Brown: (2) it indicates the development of his attitude toward specific details of Brown's activities: (3) it shows Sanborn's qualifications as a schol— ar and biographer: (h) it sharpens our perception of at least one side of Sanborn's personality: (5) it fires Sanborn's place and relative im- portance in a long line of writers on John Brown: and finally (6) it provides many implications for us as we study in later chapters his work as a.biographer of the literary great. as a historian. and as a Journal- ist. Brown's corpse had scarcely cooled before the battle began among those who fought to establish him as a hero and a saint. those who fought to establish him as a murderer and a fraud. and those who said they were willing to accept the truth.about him. good or bad. wherever it might be found. Of course all the factions protested that they were 200 the seekers after truth. among them Sanborn. who was drawn into the battle early. Malin's aim in his book is ”not to prove. to praise. or 121 to condemn: it is to establish facts as objectively as possible.“ It is his facts and opinions about Sanborn that I shall present now. Sanborn had.something to do with the first full-length biography to appear after Brown's death. that of James Hedpath. which was pub- 122 lished January 10. 1860. Says Malin: Hedpath's major offense was not that he was biased in favor of Brown and wrote a eulogy. rather than a biography. The unforgivable in his record was that scarcely anything in his book was true. either in general effect or in detail: that he falsified the documentary record itself. inventing freely'both incidents and details. He was not content with coloring and interpreting facts. he attempted to establish a false record. allegations of fact. as a basis for history.123 Sanborn was enraged when Charles Eliot Norton. in reviewing the book for the March Atlantic. said: It would have been well. had this book never been written. ... [Redpath] has shown himself incompetent to appreciate the character of the man whom he admires. and he has. con- sequently. done great wrong to his memory. lalflalin. p. vii. 12238318! Hedpath. 1133 Public Life 93; Captain John Browg (Boston. 1860). ltOEipp. Malin (p. 299. n. 125 gives as evidence of Sanborn's part in the enterprise a letter from Sanborn to Redpath. April 2, 1878. in the Hinton Papers. Kansas State Historical Society (hereafter desig- nated as KSHS). Hedpath acknowledged in his preface the help of Thom— as B. Webb. Richard Hinton. and his own wife. I have. however. found no other suggestion in any of Sanborn's works or correspondence that would indicate that he had any part in the Redpath volume. 123M311}! . P0 3030 201 Though Norton pointed out that Redpath had not collected all the avail- able letters. his chief grievance was that he had ”written in the worst temper and spirit of partisanship . . . in the spirit and style of an Abolition tract." and had made Brown "little more than a mere hero of the Abolitionistsé” He rightfully'belonged. declared.Norton. "is the same class with Scotch Covenanters and the English regicides.}2 Redpath. Halin feels. had missed his great opportunity to'write a biography of John Brown. and Norton had missed his opportunity to write a review which would.have attacked the book on its merit as history. on the “soundness of its factual foundation.‘ But Norton had missed a far more fundamental idea. Malia says. an idea that was to be missed through- out the factional feud that has been carried on ever since Brown first started West toward Kansas: Norton [says Malin] failed to understand that the thing that gave Brown so broad an appeal as a symbol was the highly contradictory character of his writings. sayings. actions, and the anecdote and folklore that had already come into or- istence. With so varied a material for the imagination to work upon. men of most every shade of opinion might find something from which each could rationalize Brown's career and set up for himself a hero in his own image. Norton failed to realize that Redpath had the same right as himself in this matter. and after all. Norton's review went only a little beyond a contrast of his own heroic creation with that of Redpath. Nor did Sanborn at this time or at any time afterward realize this point: he had also created a hero in his own image. He wrote “a strong letter" to Higginson “condemning the magazine for printing Horton's law—Atlantic Monthlv. v (March. 1550), 373‘331' all 202 review.‘I The letter was not printed. but. says Malia. ”Here is a sig- nificant foretaste of aggressive warfare which Sanborn was to carry on against anyone who dared to differ with his peculiar version of the John Brown Legend.:25 126 Redpath followed his “quickie“ with his Echoes 93: Hamer's Em. published in May. “comprising the best Speeches. Sermons. Letters. Poems. and other utterances of leading minds in Europe and America. called forth by John Brown's invasion of Virginia.}27Among the selections were the ode and dirge which Sanborn. ”the gentleman of Concord." had composed for the martyr service on December 2nd. The next biography to appear was that of an Englishmmx. Richard D. Webb. whose 53;; and Letters 9_f_ Captain {3133 11:09; . . . mg Mice; _{ 3293 i 333.! confederates appeared in London in 1361. As hereon and Her- ton had declared that the public would never be satisfied about Brown until Brown was allowed to speak for himself. Webb called himself “edi— tor.” but his“ facts" were taken from Redpath. whose biography he had heartily condemned. Sanborn therefore had a part. directly or indirect- 128 ly. in the first two full-length biographies. 125Malin. pp. 293-301;. This letter. undated. is in the r. w. Hig- ginson Papers. KSHS. 135m. Boyd 3. Stutler. 530 Fifth Avenue. New York City. one of the leading authorities today on John Brown. says of Bedpath's biography (in a letter to me dated July 1+. 1952): “James Redpath...wrote a 'quickie' to fill public demand - and it had a tremendous sale. It has value in preserving contemporary thought and Opinion as lifted from letters and the newspapers. but also must be used with caution.“ 127mblished in Boston. 1860. 513 P130 12’Sllalin. P- 306- 203 In 1372 Sanborn began his version of the Brown personality and ac- tivities with two articles in the April and July issues of the étlagtig Mggghgg. “It is still too early. perhaps." wrote Sanborn. “to tell the whole of the remarkable story of John Brown. the hero of Virginia in the nineteenth century. as that romantic chieftain of like plainness of name and vigor of spirit. John Smith. was its hero in the seventeenth century.“ and he continued with a sweeping false generalization. ”They exhibited in view of all the world the qualities which all the world with one con- sent. since the world was made. now agrees to call heroic.” He admitted in the sentence following. however. that “their contemporaries did not all have this opinion of them.:29 In the‘July article. as Malin indicates. he stated that Brown's engagement of Forbes “was quite unknown to Brown's Massachusetts friends” until Christmas. 1857. though Sanborn had written to Brown concerning Forbes September 1h: “You say Col. Forbes has a small school at Tabor. do you mean a childrens school. or a school for drilling? I am glad you have so good a.man with you as he is said to be. and hepe his ser- vice may be made available.“ “In this early writing.“ Malia feels. "not only did Sanborn show a lack of candor. but he proved remarkably unfamiliar with his subject in several respects. or else saw fit to create a wrong impression. because. for instance, he stated that John 130 Brown was in Kansas until January 18578.‘I _¥ 12 _ Sanborn!) “John Brown in Massachusetts.“ Atlantic $223212! XXIX (April. 1872). p. M20. Malin makes a slight error in his transcription of the first sentence. 13°5enborn to Brown. September 1M. 1357, in the Trevor Arnett L1- brany.INegro Collection..Atlanta University. Atlanta. Georgia. reprinted 1?.pa§t in Malin. p. 3h8. (I have a photostat cOpy of this in my posses~ s on. A good word. I feel. should be said for the writing in these two articles. however. for it seems careful. with greater attention paid to sentence structure and chronology than was customary in Sanborn's later writings. There is less. too. of the New England antiquarian- iam than one finds later. when Sanborn shoots off into genealogical bypaths that are boring. though he does pleasure himself here in some Sanborn. Higginson. and Parker heredity in a footnote. Sanborn had written the two articles cautiously. writing them in the third person. submitting them for anonymous publication. and re- ferring. for example. to the historic conclave at Gerrit Smith's in Peterboro as “a.meeting in Central New York.“ In a footnote in which he speaks of “Mr. Sanborn“ and “Mr. Edwin Morton.“ he says: Much of the subsequent correspondence with Brown and his friends passed through their’hands. and it is probable they 2:: 3::gmzfleakzg g: anithéng thgi is still unexplained in p a n rown. We can see that Sanborn had been afraid to include the part Gerrit Smith had taken in the conspiracy}3%erhaps because of the libel sudts which Smith had waged in 1360 and 1565-67 against those who claimed he was connected with the enterprise. But Sanborn wrote him October 13. 1372: l 31ESanborn2] “John Brown and His Friends.” Atlantis Monthlv. XXX (July. 1872). pp. 50-61. 13aMention of the name Gerrit Smith occurred in a.passage such as this: “A few friends of Brown were there gathered.[fbr a meeting in Centre1.New York]. among them another Massachusetts man. Mr. Edwin Mor‘ to11....then residing in the family of Mr. Gerrit Smith as a tutor and jprivate secretary.“ (p. 51.) Gerrit Smith's words as given in Recollec- 3!!!§1.II. 1h? are quoted. but Smith's name is not given as the speaker. 205 I have often been urged to publish what I knew of John Brown and his plans. more especially of late. since the appearance of some papers. respecting him in the Atlantic Egpthly,... May I ask if there is any reason. in your Opinion. why the whole truth should not now be told. without respect of persons? We were witnesses. and in some sense participants. in a great historical event. in regard to which the evidence (on which the truth of history must rest) is every year passing away. by the death of persons and the decay of recollections.... Before all the witnesses are dead. would it not be wise to put upon record the sup thentic facts. in time to have any errors in the statement pointed out and corrected1133 Of course. as Smith's biographer has pointed out so well. “one of the most baffling aspects of Smith's connection with the Harper's Ferry incident was his subsequent denial. emphatic and repeated. of any real complicity in the enterprise: baffling because the denial is so patently at variance with the facts.“ Though Smith now had. thir- teen years later. the energy required to be president of a railroad - and to speak at the Republican National Convention. and though his mind 1 h was eminently clear about a host of other subjects.3he replied feebly: From that day [the day of the attack at Harper's Ferry} to this I have had'but a hazy view of dear'John Brown's great work.... Now your bare prOposition to write of this matter has given me another sleepless turn. In every such turn I fear a recurrence of my insanity.... If you.could defer your contemplated work until after'my death...you would lay me under great obligations to your kindness. So. too. you would. if in case you write it before my death [you.should] make as sparing a use of my name as possible._ “This pathetic response.“ says Sanborn. “unlike any that I had expected. affected me deeply. and showed me. to my sorrow. that I had too long delayed to ask the important question.“ He discussed Smith's letter 13JRecollections. I. 230-231. 13hRalph volney Harlow. Gerrit Smith: Philanthronist and Reformer (New York. 1939). p. hlh. See also pp. 39l-422.fiuffi:§32.m 206 with Morton. Howe. and Phillips. who “differed in cpinion as to what my duty was.“ and he answered Smith in a manner that was certainly. in my opinion. better than Smith deserved: I have delayed answering your note...because I did not wish to answer without due consideration. I am not satisfied that the course you.auggest is the wisest or best; but such is my regard for your wishes in the matter...that I am willing to accede to it as far as concerns a 1 mention of yourself.... I cannot pledge myself farther. Though Sanborn visited Smith for two days in July. 187M. “talking with the Smiths concerning the plans and achievements of Brown.“ and though Smith sent him in the next January a “Statement“ in which he said. “I give an account of my acquaintance with some of John Brown's movements.“ Sanborn showed the statement to Morton and then wrote on the back of it these words: “According to the distinct recollections of Mr. Morton and.myself. the above statement is incomplete. and fails to give the more important facts of the case. We can therefore make no public use of it}36 In theiJanuary. 1875. issue of the.Atlantic Sanborn began a new series of five articles entitled “The Virginia Campaign of John Brown.“ As though he were anticipating’flalin's study. Sanborn began: “an"... 135Recollections. I. 231-233. (The brackets in paragraph two of Smith's letter are Sanborn's.) 136Sanborn to Smith. Concord. Fovember 18. 1872. in the Gerrit Smith Miller Collection. Syracuse University. reprinted in Rocolleo- tions. I. 233-23h; also 235-238. It should be noted that. with the exception of added.punctuation in the date line. the changing of one other mark of punctuation. and the changing of an “until“ in the orig~ inal to a “till“ in the printed version. Sanborn published this letter without alteration. [The short campaign of John Brown in Virginia] was the first decisive act of an inevitable tragedy. and such were its ro- mantic features that. in the lapse of time. it will no doubt be gravely expounded as a myth to those who shall read Amer- ican history some centuries hence. There seems to be no reason why John Brown. any more than William Tell. should escape this skeptical and generalizing spirit. which trans- ferms history and even biography into a record of natural science.... Will there come a time when the underground Railroad shall be regarded as typical of some geologic transition. and the foray at Harper's Ferry pass for the legendary symbol of a chemic reaction? Perhaps so: but in the mean time it will be best for those who know the matters of fact. Just as they took place. to put these upon record. in order that this perversion or vaporizatioi 7f genuine history may be deferred as long as possible. And.his view of Brown as the recipient of divine grace is indicated in this passage: The work upon which he had entered was dangerous and even desperate; none saw this better than those who stood with him; but his commision was from a Court that could bear him out. whatever the results.... And can high courage and un- 138 selfish humility be less acceptable to the Heavenly Wisdom? But. Malin feels. Sanborn showed his ignorance of facts. for “he showed his ignorance of Brown's career in Kansas. . . . He mislocated the Brown settlement near Osawatomie in Lykins county. and he had Brown spend three successive summers in guerrilla warfare in.Kansas. 1856. 1857 and 1858. a mistake which his own correspondence with Brown should have cor- rected.“ On the major issue of whether Brown had been present at Pota~ watomis. or had led a group which went on without him at Potawatomie. or whether Brown had himself committed murderu—perhaps the most controver- sial issue of Brown's entire activities-Sanborn at this moment took this view: 137Sanborn. ”The Virginia Campaign of John Brown.“ Atlantic Von‘hlt (January. 1875) XXXV. 16. The four succeeding articles in this seripeople believe. no matter on what evidence. that the Spanish forces in Cuba designedly'blew up our war ship..e%they will not demand money but war.... Not one man in 10 wishes a.money indemnity for an outrage such as the designed destruction of the Maine would at once be seen to have been. Not indemnity but see curity is what men of common sense would call for: this is not a lawsuit. but a case of international mad dog: all 3h; money in Spain is useless if the dog is to run at large.—2 Two weeks later he feared that the democratic process was being pushed aside during the emergency that existed over the Cuba incident. and he warned his readers: 22z’Springfield mil); I_i_e;oublican_. September 30. 1393. p. 9, col. 1-3. 2231b1d0. M83621 5. 1898, pe 5’ 0018. 1-2. 265 We have been denouncing Charles I some 250 years for govern- ing England (very badly) without Parliaments: and now the descendents of his refractory’Puritans are ad§éaing our president to try the same fealish experiment. Sanborn had two pet hates which he voiced often and loudly: one, a hatred of those people. institutions. or forces who did not believe in or practice the democratic process: the second. selfish millionaires. for’he forgave those who used their money to help support his reforma- tory enterprises. In his column for August 3. 1901. he voiced both hates: Timid as a millionaire always is when his gambling'paper stocks are in danger at the market. he is insolent enough at other times.-as the world saw in a flagrant instance. when Rhodes and Chamberlain. in order to exploit the Afri- can gold mines to their fuller advantage. organized the Jameson raid. and set the example for Roosevelt and MdKin- ley to make their equally iniquitous raid upon the Fili- pinos. From the Jameson raid came by due succession this abominable Soumh.African war. in which England. at the be- hest of the millionaires and the London mob.--those fit allies.-is practicing. one by one. all these cruelties of tyranny that one despot after another has invented since Oppression began. She is exiling men by the ten thousand. for defending their native land. as the Persian despots did in their were with.Jew and Greekz...and she is carrying'out in a more detestable manner the deadly policy of Weyler in Cuba against women and children. Our Jingoes in the Phil- ippines have imitated this fashion. at a considerable distance. and with more apparent success.-obut if they ever mean to have permanent peace there. they must do as England is doing in South Africa.-make a solitude and call it peace. One after the other. their falsehoods about the Philippine situation tare getting found out and abandoned.-and. like Jameson in the role of pacificator. they are talking about a peace which need never have been broken but for their own insolent folly and caprice.22 223 Ibid., March 19. 1898. p. 12. cols. 1-2. 22SIbidn August 3. 1901. p. S. cols. 1-2. These few excerpts from some 2,300 political columns which ap- peared up through the end of February. 1917. should present something of Sanborn's political purpose. point of view. insight. and literary ability. Through the years there seemed to be no change in style. tone. or political interests. As Richard Hooker says. ”Some men. as they grow older. grow more reckless in their statements: otheg men grow more cautious. What Sanborn's evolution was. I don't know.§2.As for the ef- fect Sanborn had on his readers. Edwin Hale Abbot felt that “his bitter expressions frequently cut far deeper than he probably was ever aware. The result was that this habit at last stirred up a curious ecstasy of detestation for Sanborn among some even of his classmates.EZZPerhaps lendell Phillips wrote the best comment on Sanborn's long life as a po- litical Journalist. He wrote his comment in a postscript to a letter to Sanborn. he phrased the sentence as though it were a question. but it was constructed so that the reader could anticipate only one answer: '(Is it your advent that lifts the £3232? to such generous brave & use- 228 ful action)". m‘ 26 Personal letter to me from Richard Hooker. 2&1 Park Drive. Long- meadow 6. Massachusetts. 227m,“ 3. Abbot. ”News from the Classes.” 1). 557. ”anneal Phillips to Sanborn. 1868 (Concord Library- 5: 1"“)- 267 MY HIS LITERARYGARm Banborn's importance to American literature stems from his work as biographer and editor of ihoreau. Bronson Alcott. hereon. Bllery Channing. Parker. and Hawthorne. from November 2. 1851:. when he made his first entry in his college Journal after a visit to hereon in Concord. to the hour of his death rebruary 2’4. 1917, he wrote about the literary great and small. He wrote biographies and biographical articles about them for magazines and newspapers: he edited their works: as editor—in-chief and as literary editor of the Boston m M over a period of seven years he was responsible for the first publication of pieces by Thoreau, Channing, the two Alcotts. and others. But he was also prominent in his own time as a poet and as the author of I'Ou.r Boston Literary Letter” in the Springfield 25L]; fiepgblicsn. a weekly column of literary news. history. cement. and criticism that included an amazing variety of literary topics. i'he greatest volume of Sanborn' s work was done on Ihoreau. and one of his major efforts was a biography of Bronson Alcott. but on the rest of his friends he wrote relatively little. his work on In- creon. Hawthorne, and lllery Channing consisting chiefly of small volumes in limited editions and of numerous magazine articles. fhough he dreamed up large proJects around the life and work of i'heo- dore Parker, almost nothing came of them. 291? Sanborn's most important work was done as the biographer and edi- tor of Thoreau» Sanborn knew Thoreau for seven years. Their acquain~ tance. he says. "sprang from the accident of my editing for a few weeks the 'Harvard Hagazine." In it had appeared an enthusiastic review of flgldgg and ggg,!ggg. and to acknowledge it Thoreau called at Sanborn's room in Holworthy Hall one day in January. 1855. Sanborn was at the college library at the time. and when Thoreau.appeared there. someone pointed Thoreau out to him. Sanborn. however. did not introduce him- self. but waited.until his winter vacation to write him the following letter: summon rms, N. s_.. Lan'z 30th. '55. HY’DEAR SIB.--I have had it in mind to write you a let- ter ever since the day when you.visited me. without my knowb ing it. at Cambridge. I saw you afterward at the Library. but refrained from introducing myself to you. in the hepe that I should see you later in the day. But as I did not. will you allow me to seek you.out. when next I come to Con- cord? The author of the criticism in the "Harvard magazine” is Mr. Morton of Plymouth.... Accordingly I gave him the book which you.left with me. Judging that it belonged to him. He received it with delight. as a gift of value in it. self. and the more valuable for the sake of the giver. We who at Cambridge look toward Concord as a sort of Mecca for our pilgrimages. are glad ti see that your last book finds such favor with the public. It has made its way where your name has rarely been heard before. and the in- quiry. “Who is Mr. Thoreau?” proves that the book has done its work. For'my own part. I thank you for the new light it shows me the aspects of Nature in. and for the marvelous beauty of your descriptions. At the same time. if any one should ask me what I think of your philosoth. I should be apt to answer that it is not worth a straw. Whenever again you visit Cambridge. be assured. sir. that it would give me 1This was Thoreau's Walden. published in 185k. 269 much pleasure to see you at my room. There, or in Concord. I hepe soon to see you: if I may intrude so much on your time. Believe me always. yours very truly. 2 E. a. 8mm. 'ith the grace that must have been required to overlook what San- born calls I’the pertness' of his note. Thoreau replied immediately: gm _S_IR.-I fear that you did not get the note which I left with the Librarian for you. and so will thank you again for your politeness. I was sorry that I was obliged to go into Boston almost immediately. However. I shall be glad to see you whenever you come to Concord. and I will suggest nothing to discourage your coming. so far as I am concerned: trusting that you know what it is to take a partridge on the wing. You tell me that the author of the criticism is Mr. Norton. 1 had heard as much.--and indeed guessed more. I have latterly found Concord nearer to Cambridge than I be- lieved I should. when I was leaving my Alma Mater: and hence you will not be surprised if even I feel some interest in the success of the gar-veg} Magazine. Believe me yours truly. £11m! Q. THOREAU. ZSanborn. song 9, Thoreau (Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 1832). American Men of Letters. ed. Charles Dudley Warner. This work is not to be confused with Sanborn's much later biography. 2132 Life 9!. gem David Thoreau. Including Many Essa s hitherto gnpglished and Spas E. count 31; gig Family and Friends Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 1917‘}? 11332 Literary {1335951 3;: 951 Unitgg States. ed. Robert E. Spiller and others (New York: Macmillan. 1913 5. III. 7118. makes no mention of the 1882 volume and confuses the two by indicating that the 1917 volume was one of the American Men of Letters Series. which it is not. A twentieth-cen- tury American Men of Letters Series published by Billion Sloane Associv ates does. however. contain a biography. Henry David Thoreau. by Joseph Wood Xrutch. published in 19,48. a fact which only adds to the confusion. 3219 Writing 95 Henry Dam 3595293. v1. "Fsmiliar Letters.” ed. Sanborn. 'mlarged Edition” Walden Edition). pp. 252-253. This letter and the one describing his trip to Hinnesota (pp. 385-392) "were the only ones I received from him in a friendship of seven years.” says San- born, p. 252. n. l. Sanborn forgot that Thoreau wrote him a short. one- Page letter in pencil. dated “Friday eve.“ which is noted in Francis E. Allen. A Bibliography of Henry David Thoreau (Boston and New York: Bough- ton mrnm, 1908 . p.762. In this edition Sanborn was the editor of VOlume VI only. Six weeks later Sanborn went to live in Concord as the teacher of Emerson's school. and he and his sister toOk rooms at Ellery Channing's. ”Just apposite Thoreau's." Sanborn met Thoreau.”more than once at Mr. Emerson's. and was even beginning to take walks with him.“ his famous long legs being among the few. goubtless. which could keep pace with Thoreau's exacting requirements. The author. however, did not call on the Sanborns until April 11th. when Sanborn recorded in his Journal: Wednesday. April 11, 1855. Tonight we had a call from Mr. Thoreau. who came at eight and stayed till ten. He talked about a variety of things. about Latin and Greek. which he though[t] ought to be studied. and about other things. In his tones and.gesturcs he seemed to me to imi- tate Emerson. so that it was annoying to listen to him. though he said many good things. He looks. too. like Em- crson. coarser. but with something of that serenity and sagacity which Emerson has. Thorgau looks eminently sugar cioum. like a sort of wild beast. He dresses plainly. wears a beard.about his throat. and has a brown complexion. Sanborn mentions another visit from him a month later and expands this portrait: £31g§y. gay 1§. To-night Mr. Thoreau came in as I was reading Demosthenes. and we fell to talking about Greek. Latin. Milton, lordsworth. Emerson. Ellery Channing. and other things. But first of all let me describe Thoreau. since I believe I have not yet done so. The first time I ever saw him was when he made a flying visit to my room in Cambridge last January. and left a book with me for Morton. Then I did not know him. and supposed it might be some book agent or expressman. Since I came here I have often seen him. He is a sort of pocket edition of Mr. Emerson. as far as outward appearance goes. in coarser binding and with 7 Ride. p. 2530 5whether this observation in this passage and the similar compari- . son in the passage for May 18 given below resulted from Alcott'e remark in the Journal entry for Saturday. December 2. 185h. or whether Sanborn saw this too. probably no one can say. 271 wood-cuts instead of the fine steeleengravings of Mr. Emerson. Fe is a little under size. with a huge Emersonian nose. bluish gray eyes. brown hair. and a ruddy. weather-beaten face which reminds one of that of some shrewd and honest animal. some retired philosophic woodchuck or magnanimous for. He dresses very plainly. wears his collar turned over like Mr. Emerson; and often an old dress-coat. broad in the skirts. and.hy no means a fit. He walks about with a brisk rustic air. and nev— er seems tired. He talks like Mr. hereon and so spoils the good things which he says: for what in Mr. Emerson is chgrm- ing. becomes ludicrous in Thoreau. because an imitation. 7 "Cur friendship grew space.” says Sanborn. and "in the following summer I began to dine daily at his mother's table. and thus saw him 8 almost every day for three yettrs.‘l ”I often Joined in his walks and river voyages. or swam with him in some of our numerous Concord waters.” In 1856 I introduced.John Brown to him. then a guest at my house: and in 1859. the evening before Brown's last birthday, we listened tOgether to the old captain's last speech in the Concord Town Hall. The events of that year and the next brought us closely together. and I fbund him the stanchest of friends.9 Just how intimate Sanborn was with Thoreau is difficult to deter- mine. Thoreau's sister Sophia. according to one critic. “with a good deal of Justification. protested that Sanborn had never been close to her brother};0 In all of the great number of letters which I have col- lected. Sanborn refers to Thoreau in only eight of those which.he wrote 6Sanborn. “An unpublished Concord Journal.” ed. George Sidney Hell- man. 2h}; Centugz Maggzine. on: (1922). 831-838. TSanborn. song; 2. Thoreau (1332). p. 199. 8"Familiar Letters.“ ed. Sanborn (Walden Edition. 189u), p. 253. Though most of the biographers and critics of Thoreau.have cited this figure. ”three years." to indicate the length of Sanborn's intimate re- lationship with Thoreau. Sanborn says in his Ben}: 13. 21193533 (1882). p. 199. a reminiscence which should.have been clearer and fresher by some 12 years. "For two years or'more I dined with him almost daily.” Which is the fact? 9531111011). Bang 2. Thoreau (1882). p. 199. 10 Krutch. Hang: pgvid.Thoreag, p. 250. Krutch does not document this statement. m «.1 ru before Thoreau'e death. This could indicate that Sanborn saw so much of him that he did not consider their activities together newsworthy, or it could mean that he saw him so infrequently that he recorded what he saw or heard because it was unusual. At any rate Sanborn mentions Thoreau in the following eight letters. all to Theodore Parker. To Parker he wrote in December. 1855: ”I have seen Hr Thoreau'e Indian 11 booked-they look enticing-«no of them is unintelligible Sansorit.‘ Two years later. in January. 1858, he wrote: On Tuesday afternoon— it the weather in good I ehall give a half holiday and invite the peeple to go and skate with my school on Walden Pond Will you not come up? Mr Stearns of Medford will probably come, and I hope to get Mr hereon and Mr Thoreau on their skatee- You will find it better than electricity- The other :11 letters were written in 1859 and 1860: In March, 1859, Sanborn wrote: “On the 27_t_h_ Mr hereon speaks again [in the Music Hall] . and he hae recommended the committee to send for hr Tho- reau. who read here ten days ago, a lecture on Autumnal Tinte as good as anything he ever wrote.:3 In November Sanborn was writing: "Phil- . lips spoke in praise of Brown at Brooklyn two weeks ago; Thoreau at the Fraiarnity. Nov 1!}. and hereon New 8% all using unguelii‘ied praise.“ Six weeks later he wrote: “Mr Brace came here to speak to our people about hie Children'e Aid movement in H. Y. and did eo last nConcord. December 13, 1355 (Concord Library. 5: 3-29). 12concord. January 17. 1858 (Concord Library. 5: 8-38). 13 Concord. March 13, 1859 (Concord Library, 58 84:0). 1 x4(3oncord. November 11}, 1859 (Concord Library. 5: 3-147). 273 night in the Town Hall. to a good audience. Mr.Alcott and Mr Thoreau dined with him here and discussed Darwin's principle of 'Natural Se- lection' in which 3- just coming from Dr Gray's in Cambridge is much interested.:5 Three weeks later Sanborn wrote that he had been summoned to Washington. 'Should I go abroad." he wrote Parker, '. . . my school will keep up and everybody here is doing what he can.for it. Friends appear in the most unexpected places-— Mr Channing is a great friend of mine. and of much service - so is Thoreau." And in the same let- ter he mentioned the forthcoming printing of Redpath's' E_ch;9_e_s_ of £35- per's Ferry, “containing the speeches of Phillips. Thoreau, Emerson. etc};6 Six weeks later Sanborn reported that “Mrs Ripley . . . has Just been reading Darwin's book . . . and likes it much. as does Thoreau}7 And the last mention Sanborn makes of Thoreau.occurs when he tells Parker of Thoreaufls address at the Town Hall mass meeting which followed Sanborn's heroic welcome from his Supreme Court trial 13 in BO 3 tone It is difficult from these brief scraps of evidence to determine whether Sanborn was close to Thoreau. Yet the brief glimpse we are .aITOrded of Thoreau permitting Sanborn to look into his Indian books. 15Concord. January 2. 1860 (Concord Library, 5: S-h9). 16Concord. January 21. 1860 (Concord Library. 5: 8-50). 1.IConcord. March 11, 1860 (Concord Library. 5: 3-52). 18Concord. April 1 and 8. 1860 (Concord Library. 5: 3-53 . C.) ‘4 gun and of Sanborn's hape of getting Mr. Thoreau on skates may indicate considerable to the seasoned Thoreau scholar. We shall. however, never know what words passed between the two during those two or three years when Sanborn took his meals with Thoreau at his mother's dining table. If they had written to each other more often. we would perhaps know*more about their relationship. Yet, on the other hand. as Thoreau was such a notoriously irregular correspondent. we might know less than we do?9 Thoreau died May 6. 1862. and “before the funeral services were finished in the village church. Emerson had read his eulogy and thus begun the process which was to transform Thoreau from 'a Concord worthy (or unworthy)‘ into a world figure. Other champions. deter- mined that he should be given his due. were’not wanting. Indeed, they were more numerous and fanatical than wise.: Sanborn's precise influence on the growth of Thoreauis reputation is not perfectly clear. Sanborn made an effort to transfonm Thoreau into a world figure. but we can not be sure of the result of his ef- fort. It is easy to collect the critical reviews of Sanborn's work as editor and biographer and to discover the little remarks made pub- licly and privately by his contemporaries and.by ours about his suc- cesses and failures. But we can never collect the reactions of all 19Evidence of his irregularity is given by Thoreau himself in a letter to his sister SOphia. Concord. July 13. 1852. and in his letter to mniel Ricketson. Concord. October 11$. 1861. r rinted in The Port- able Thoreau. ed. Carl Bode (New York: Viking. 137). pp. 688—;mi 6914. aoxrutch. Thoreau. p. 21:9. 275 the persons who read these reviews. Did Sanborn bring these peeple to a greater understanding of Thoreau and his work? What is our debt to Sanborn. if any? Randall Stewart. in sketching the work of several writers "who attempted to present Thoreau favorably to the world.“ omits Sanborn's name from his thumbnail historyfl'xrutch. while noting that Sanborn published an early biography of Thoreau. indicates that Sanborn was "busily engaged in the effort to claim Thoreau for the abolition move- ment to which he himself had been committed.32 A.year after Thoreau died. Sanborn began.publishing his verse. Sanborn had been selected editor of the Boston Free-Soil weekly. Th2. Commonwealth. a position which he held from February 1%. 1863. until October 2. 1863. when he resigned to become the first secretary of the Board of State Charities of Massachusetts. After his resignation. however. he continued as literary editor of the paper until its death in 1867. His work as Thorsau's editor was done. however.‘between June 19 and.November 6. 1863?3 During this period he printed sight pieces of‘Thoreau's verse. “noting that they were from what he termed unpub- 21: .- lished manuscripts.‘ Zi'The Growth of Thoreaufls Reputation.‘l College English. VII (Jan- nary, 1916). 208-2114. 22Krutch. pp. 2149-2550. 23 Henry D8V1 G. Allen. Bibliography_2£WThoreau. pp. 76-77. Carl Bode. The Collected Poems_2£_Henrv Thoreau (Chicago: Packard. 19243) s P- 275s m -J m Four of these eight Sanborn printed in full for the first time: the ”Inspiration” which begins "Whate'er we leave to God. God does,” '“Z'hs Funeral Bell." the ”Travelling" which begins ”Though all the fates should prove unkind.” and "The Departure." ”The Soul's Season” he printed as a complete poem. though it actually formed a part of “The Fall of the Leaf,“ most of which he printed in another issue. "Inde- pendence" and "Greece“ appeared there in full for the first time. though the last fourteen lines of ”Independence” had appeared in 252 Dial and in Miscellanies. and the last four lines of ”Greece" had been 25 used in the Week. Thus began Sanborn's career as an editor of Thoreaufls verse. a function which he performed for fifty-four years. The greatness of this responsibility, as one can see. becomes formidable when one con- siders the books Sanborn wrote or the publications which he edited in which the verse appeared. Besides The gggggnggglth, there were his first biOgraphy of 1382 and the two editions of the Familiar Letters. Hs included Thoreau's verse likewise in his Thg_Personalitv 25.!222223 (1901). and in his autobiography, Recollections 93; Seventy Yggrg ("1909). and in his final biography of Thoreau which appeared in 1917. He also fl 2 Hon David 5Allen, Bibliograng 9E Thoreau. pp. 76—77 and Bode (in the ten- tual notes given for eachfipoem . The poems appeared in this order: June 19, July 3. July 2h, August 28, November 6 and October 9. October 30. July 214. There are two poems entitled ”Inspiration.” and two en- titled “Travelling." 26Sanborn, The Personality 91 Thoreau (Boston: Charles E. Good- Speed). 71 pp.. Giza a limited edition of 515 copies by D. B. Updike. _ The Merrymount Press. Boston): Sanborn. 1h_e_ Life 93: 1339sz David 319.33%. Including Man? E33. '45. iiihgtg Unpublished and Egg gggg‘gi 9: His Eggy 1.3:; 333 Friends (Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1317),"5112 pp. acted as editor of a series of beautifully printed limited editions for the BibliOphile Society of Boston: The 12.113 and £932 Journe s ...." h a. Biwiu (1905). Godfrey 2;: Boulov'ne (1907). and its 1909 edition of M537 Nor does this list include the poems or numerous lines from poems. sometimes printed for the first time. which he published in his articles for magazines. in his biographies of other Concord worthies. and in editions of their works, such as his edition of Ellery Channing's Thoreau. the Poet-Naturalist. Sanborn's method of editing is therefore of considerable import- ance. Unfortunately. says Bode. in his Collected Poems of Henri Thoreau. "Sanborn's editing of the text of the verse conforms to a methOd no longer fashionable. It is a method that needs discussion in the present edition because of the fact that by far the largest preportion of the posthumous verse to see print (except for that in 23 the Journal) has done so under his supervision.“ As Bode's “announced aim was to prepare a critical variorum edi- 29 30 tion of the poems” “as they finally left Thoreau's hand.“ and as his “textual notes are models of thoroughness and monuments to the schol- 31 arship that went into time." it is important to present his more E m 278811130131). The First and Last Journevs 91 Thoreau. Latelz 21?.“ covered Arnong His unpublished Journals and Manuscripts. 28Bode. Collected Poems. p. 273. 29Carl Bode. 'Rejoinder.” American Literature. m1 (HHS-1&6). 268. 30Bode. Collected Poems. p. 276. 1Raymond Adams. review of Carl Bode. Collected gangsta in 21’s,. £93. EI‘hlglsmg1 flrterlz. XVII (March. 191411,). 116. Adams says further. "Sure- y the entire output of no other American poet has received as careful examination as have these verses of Thoreau.” N N 0:. significant facts and opinions on Sanborn's work. however we must bear in mind this statement by another outstanding student of Thoreau in his review of Bode's volume: The editor's interest was the establishment of the texts of the poems. not the establishment of their poetic value. This yielding to authenticity throws the poems which Thoreau himself published to the front of the book. and the volume is off to a good start. But the middle section. with menus script evidence for every line but without Thoreau's sifting. suffers unevenness. Taken direct from manuscripts. they also suffer another disadvantage. They are printed with all their manuscript errors intact: the absence of apostrophes (in lfzg_and.gfg§, for example). the irregular margins. the careless lack of capitalization. and the obvious errors of spelling. The editor has reacted too violently to the loose editing of “Thoreau improver" Frank Sanborn half a century ago and leaned too far in the opposite direction.... Once grant. however. the compiler's first concern with textual criticism and collation. and this volume takes on real in- portance.33 Sanborn's ”handling of the text has been severly criticized.” says 33 IBode. ”The best that can be satd for it is contained in a.paragraph 'the publishers added to his last life of Thoreau. The paragraph deals with Sanborn's general method, but every word holds true for his treat- 3h :nent of the poetry too." This famous paragraph. about which I shall say more later. declares: “ 3211316.. . pp. 115.1160 33'I‘he most severe criticism. Bode feels. appears in an unpublished master's thesis by Maude Ethel Cryder (University of Chicago. 1990): £551 Eggmination 2£_the Biblionhilg Edition 22.xhpreauflg Walden. Bode is 3111 staken. however. when he adds that “Dr. Raymond Adams sums up the <=}1arges in the edition of walden that he himself prepared (Chicago. 1930).“ abllough Adams does synthesise certain.pages of the thesis. the rest of M1 ss Cryder's thesis will have to be discussed in this study in its ap- Propriats place. 3nBode. p. 273. 279 Mr. Sanborn was not a slavish quoter. and in dealing with Thoreau's Journals and those other of his writings which Thoreau himself had not prepared for publication. he used the privilege of an editor who is thoroughly familiar with his author's subjects and habits of thought to rearrange paragraphs. to omit here. to make slight interpolations there. and otherwise to treat the rough and unpolished sentences of the Journals. letters. etc.. much as it may be supposed the author himself would have treated them had he prepared them for the press. If. therefore. the reader finds occa- sional discrepancies between the extracts from Thoreau's Jour- nals as here given and the forms in which the same passages appear in the scrupulously exact transcript contained in the published Jgprnal. he is not to set them down to carelessness. but is rather to thank Mr. Sanborn for making these passages more orderly and readable.35 Sanborn's changes of text differ in quantity and kind with each poem and with many of his editions of each poem. Though I feel it is not necessary to indicate here each change that he made. I think I should make important generalizations and give the more illuminating 3particulars. The curious reader may then refer to the textual notes in Bode for Sanborn's rendering of other texts. As Bode points out that Sanborn ”kept more closely to Thoreau's :own readings in Th9 Qgpponwealth than he did.anywhere else or at any iother time.261et us consider first the quality and quantity of his ed~ 1ting for that newspaper. As my study will document so much.evidence (sf'Sanborn's radical editorial changes. it seems equally important to ‘75.. Sanborn. Life gf_Thoreau (1917). pp. xiv-xv. 36Bode. p. 275. As Bode has. to save space in the printing of his textual notes. replaced titles of books. names of libraries and Iilluaumscripts by symbols. I have had to expand the symbols to the things lszrmbolized for the reader‘s convenience. If this at times fails to 3leprove Bode's diction. the reader will understand. For these symbols £3150 pp. 271-273. Collected Egems. - o; (7‘1 0 indicate how little he changed the texts of many originals. In Tho- reau's poem. "The Departure.“ for example, he made three changes. all of which appear in the lines belowb-which I print with others to indi- cate the meter: Basic Text g3 Given by Bode: And at night they did spread o‘er him What by day they spread.be- fore him. - C O O O O O O O O O O 0 To the coast of this far Finland. 0 O O O O O O O O O O 0 And still the more he stayed §anborn's Version 13_The Commonwealth And by night they spread o'er him Ihat by day they spread be- fore him. 0 C O O I O O O O O O 0 To the coast of that far Finland. And still the more he staid In the next to last line given here. though Thoreau had changed the ‘3hig to that and then cancelled it so that this was his preferred text. Sanborn kept that. In “Independence" he changed the line "Even the nobles of the land! to read "Even the noblest of the land“ in the following context: Be sure your fate Doth keep apart its state- Not linked with any band- Even the nobles of the land In tented fields with cloth of gold- no place doth hold But is more chivalrous than they are. And sigheth for a nobler war. In “Greece” Sanborn made no changes whatsoever. The progressive editings through the years of “The Fall of the Leaf" elicit considerable comment. however. from Bode. These progress- 3117s changes may be best shown by'referring to a later volume. Poems 2;. 1E6 231 Hat-are. An editor's note in this volme-owhich Sanborn edited with Henry 8. Salt thirty years later—says: The first four of these stanzas {moaned by Thoreau} were published in the Boston Commonwealth in 1863. under the title of 'The Soul's Season.’ the remainder as 'The Fall of the Leaf.‘ There can be yttle doubt that they are parts of the same poem {77}. Bode says of this: The editorial Judgment of Sanborn and Salt. as exhib- ited in Poems g_f_ {122.159, is frequently suspect. The present case offers no exception. First of all. Sanborn. by impli- cation. admits having invented a title for the poem. Sec. ondly. he and Salt say in the editors' note that the re- mainder of the text in Poems g§_Nature was published in the ggmnonwealth_as "The Fall of the Leaf.‘ This is not quite correct. Poems gghflature has three additional stanzas at the end. besides the stanzas that constituted the Common- wealth version of ”The Fall of the Leaf.' In the Commonwealth. Sanborn heads “The Soul's Season“ published manuscript.“ What has become of Sanborn's origi- nal the present editor does not know. Home of three related manuscripts in the wakeman catalogue seems to fill the bill. Humber 1035. ”The Soul's Season.“ is described as having nine quatrains: number 1036. “The Fall of the Leaf." is de- scribed as having twenty-one quatrains; and.number 1037. also entitled 'The Fall of the Leaf" is described as having forty- two quatrains. The sample stanzas given for the first two items are included in the version used by Sanborn in the ‘ggmmonwealth. The sample stanza given for number 1037 is not included. but is-incidentallyb-included in the verse printed in the present edition as Hintington Library manuscript 13201 ‘Esee‘Appendix.A}: pointing out the ultimate repository of this poetry. .After consideration. however. of the various factors Just outlined. the lead of the editors of Poems gf_Nature is followed: andighe basic text is the one they first offered to the public Sanborn's evidence is accepted by the pres- ent editor not because it is good evidence-the flaws in it 3 37Henry David Thoreau. Poems of Nature. "selected and edited“ by 8‘5th S. Salt and Frank B. Sanborn mndon: John Lane. The Bodley Head: Boaton and New Tom: Houghton Mifflin. 1895). p. 77. The square brack- 0:8 printed here thus: { 3» indicate brackets by Sanborn but. unless 1'lerwise signified. will in future indicate notes by Bode. 38mm is to say. in The ggmnonwealtli. have already been noticedP-but because it is about the only evidence available. In such a situation it has seemed rea- sonable to givg Sanborn the benefit of the doubt and feline fie precedent. . As for ”Inspiration." Bode found no manuscript authority for the basic text. but referred to several manuscripts and texts. including The Commonwealth for June 19. 1863. Emerson's edition of the poem as it appears in his Letters tg_various Persons. and three other Sanborn ver— the 1917 biography): Sanborn says of the present basic text that he printed it “Just as it was left by the poet“ «~{Qgitig. March 26. 1881}. {As was noted earlier he headed the version in the ggggpp- wealth. "from an unpublished manuscript.“ Yet of the slight- ly different version in his 1917 biography. Sanborn also says ---£page 267‘} that he there printed the full poem as Sophia Thoreau gave it to him for this same Consovwcalth in the spring of 1863. wholly. he thinks. in Thoreau's handwrit- ing and in Thoreau's own arrangement. The variations in the poem. then. as Emeison publishedhgt may be Thoreau's or may be Emerson's. Sanborn conclides. Although we are discussing Sanborn's editorial habits when pub- lishing'Thoreaufis work in his newspaper. it might be interesting to :note Emerson's editorial method in this connection. 0f Emerson's work Bode says in general: Emerson felt free to make at least slight alterations in the texts that he printed. In addition he condensed some of the poems by omitting stanzas. However. the authenticity of his texts has been given the benefit of the doubt: and their variations have been refigrded in the same manner as those of Thoreau's proven texts. 39Bode. Collected Poses, p. 335. holblde. Po 3330 h11bid.. pe 27he 253 As there is no manuscript authority for the basic text of “Inspir- ation.“ it is only possible to show how Emerson differed from that ver- sion first given in T§g_Commonwealth by Sanborn. If I interpret Bode accurately, Emerson changed eight words. added one. interchanged the ~1§g_and -g§_endings of three words. capitalized one word, and changed eleven marks of punctuation. Sanborn did not necessarily stand by his original text and in later editions of the same poem he made at least twentybfive changes for his version in Eggpg g; EgtgggDand at least five changes for his version in his 1917 biographyouz As for the other two poems. Sanborn first printed in The Common- !gglth. he made these changes. In I"I'ravelling" he printed lines one through six only. prefacing them with two other lines; yet he had the authority of a manuscript now in the Morgan Library for so doing. He made two changes in this printing. of which one was quite probably a misreading.~ I do not know what changes were made in “The Funeral 1&3 Bell.” Sanborn did not stop at this first effort to publish the work of his friend. but next began to help others in theiineffOrts. According to twaEersions which he gives us of these details. a plan had been ‘- 11fault}... pp. 333-33h and contrast the versions in Poems of'Nature. p. 3 and dill 1. Ii___f__e Of Thoreau (1917). pe 267s u3Bode. pp. 211. 292. William Ellery Channing. Thoreau: the Poet-Returalist. with Me- !!22121, erse , new edition. enlarged. ed. Sanborn “(Boston: 0. 2. 000.3. Speed. 1902 . pp. ins-xvi: ggcoljgctiens. II. 385-396. formed in 1853 for collecting a '.series of walks and talks about Con- cord and its region. in which Emerson. Thoreau. Channing. and Alcott should be the recorders and interlocutors' and Channing the editor. For this work Channing had cepied many pages from Thoreau’s Journals for the last ten or twelve years of his life. Very few of these pages had been published. though Thoreau.had printed a few in his contribu- tions to the Atlantic Monthly. and Emerson had used some in his eulogy. By November 1863 Channing had composed 13h large.manuscript pages of his biography. at which time he wrote Sanborn: By plan is to prepare a sketch of Hr. H. D. T.'s life.- perhaps to make a book of 300 pages. I am very unwilling to ask your aid in this undertaking. but I cannot see my way without aid. and I have thought perhaps we might find a publisher in Mr. Redpath. I feel entirely certain that you.will always afford me all the aid you can. but it does not diminish my unwillingness to ask it. There are many reasons why this is a matter of confidence that I cannot explain. I suppose I could complete this so that it might be printed in.January (lSéh). perhaps. lhat I need. for any alacrity in the task. is some friendly guarantee of pushing on the enterprise. and I have no one now to confide the mat- ter with but you. . . . That Justice can be done to our do- ceased brother by me. of course. is something I do not think of. But to you.and me is intrusted the care of his immedi- ate fame. I feel that my part is not yet done. and cannot be without your aid. My little sketch must only serve as a note. and.[sic] advertisement that such a man lived.-that he did brave work. which must yet be given to the world. In the midst of all the cold and selfish men who knew this brave and devoted scholar and genius. why should not you be called on to make some sacrifices. even if it be to publish my sketch? There might be persons who. if they were to surmise that we two had this object in view. would hire sons liter- ary Jackal to dig up and befoul our brother's corpse. With this. then. let us conclude: About January let orpect the sketch.-with no sflgdow of patronage or request in it but your own and mine. 5Recollectiong. II. 386-387. (The ellipsis is Sanborn's.) R) N K} | alarming was appealing to Sanborn, who was at this time literary editor of the Boston mwggfih. "The tone of this note." as Sanborn says. "was probably sharpened at the very unhandsome criticism of The-- reau by Lowell. and by a fancy that his publisher might employ Lowell to forestall the promised biography with one which should have the same #6 twist." Though fifteen years had passed since Lowell had let fly his bitter barbs in his Fable for Critics. Channing's and Sanborn's mental wounds were doubtless still fresh from these pointed lines; There comes [Charming]. for instance: to see him' s rare sport. Tread in Emerson's tracks with legs painfully short: How he Jumps. how he strains. and gets red in the face. To keep step with the mystagogue's natural pace! He follows as close as a stick to a rocket. His fingers exploring his pmphet's each pocket. l'ie. for shame. brother bard: with good fruit of your own. Can't you let Neigxbor Emerson's orchards alone? Besides. 'tis no use. you’ll not find e'en a core -- [Thoreau] has picked up all the windfalls befors.h7 Ibid.. II. 387. (See also Sanborn's entry in his Journal for Saturday. March 10. 1855. in ”An Unpublished Concord Journal.‘I ed. Hellman. Centm Hggzine. pp. 831-838.) h7This version is taken from James Russell Lowell: Representative Selections. 133; Introduction. Bibliograghz.g_n_d Notes. ed. Harry Hayden Clark and Norman Foerster. Amsrican Writers Series. {New York: American Book Company. 19147). p. 90. The words "Charming" and ”Thoreau" have been substituted for the original s-..s in Lowell. Sanborn in his in- troduction to William Ellery Chsnning. Poems 93: Sixty-Five Years (Phil- adelphia and Concord. J. H. Bentley. 19025 and in his TEE—Personality 9: Thoreau (Boston. Charles E. Goodspeed. 1901). pp. 2-3, positivelyjden~ tifies the opening blank as referring to Charming. the second blank. to Thoreau. Austin Warren interchanges the names in his “Lowell on Thoreau.” EB. XXVII (July. 1930). him-1:61. Sanborn's version of these lines does not agree with most of the versions of this poem. Sanborn leaves out lines three and four as printed above and makes other changes in p‘JLCtlllt* tion and capitalization. The changes in punctuation and capitalization should not. however. be held against Sanborn as bad editing. as the ver- 81 one of these lines given in three standard. scholarly texts do not .... 286 There was of course. as Sar Iborn says. "very little public interest in Thoreau or his manuscripts” at this time. But. as Redpath was en- Joying considerable financial success with Louisa.May Alcott's Hospital Sketches. which had first appeared in May. 1863. under Sanborn's edi- torial eye. Channing perhaps hoped the two publishers might offer a 8 magic formula for the success of his enterprise. Sanborn acquiesced with the ”expected aid” and began to print tbs work. copyrighted in his own name. in weekly numbers early in 1861‘. After several weeks. Sanborn omitted a weekly chapter to give his limited space to other contributors. and “the sensitive author.“ he says. “took offence. and agree with each other. (See the Clark-Foerster edition of lowell. p. 90. Bong David Thoreau: Representative Selections. with Introduction. Ribliggraphy. and Notes. ed. Bartholow V. Crawford. Amsrican Writers Series (New York: Amsrican Book Company. 19314). pp. xi-xii and The Poems of James Russell Ewell (London: Oxford University Press. 1926). p. 17343- For a further discussion of Lowell's and Stevenson's damaging influence on Thoreau's literary reputation. see the Thoreau. ed. Barth-p olow V. Crawford. pp. xi-xvii and Krutch. Thoreau. pp. 2H9-2514. the essay by Austin Warren cited above in this footnote. and the essay by Stewart, no 22. As for Sanborn' s promotion of Thoreau's literary reputation. I do not know that it was immediate. One's conclusions must be made from the evidence in this chapter and from such remarks as appear in San- born's Personality 93: Thoreau. pp. 1-2. in which he says: "But it did not occur to his friends in those years before the Civil War that he would so soon pass from our sight: nor. in fact. did many of us then appreciate. to the full. his remarkable gifts and their rare and orig- inal quality.“ The use here of the editorial 11‘s; might be twisted to imply almost anything. h86hmning—Sanborn. Thoreau. the Poet-Naturalist (1902). pp. ir-rvi and Recollections. II. 385-396. h {Lida p. x. though this does not agree with Sanborn's date in Recollections. II. 387. wnich says ”about Christmas." (U (Q N recalled his manuscript. so that the work remained a fragment for ten “8 years. During the decade much of the unprinted Thoreau manuscript was published by others and stimulated an interest in the author. though it greatly decreased the value of C‘z.1anning's material. By 1371. however. Sanborn had induced Roberts Brothers to print an edition of 1500 copies. which “in twenty years.“ says Sanborn. ”was so completely sold out that it was with difficulty the publishers procured for me a single cepy for 51 presentation.“ Sanborn's own effort toward perpetuating Thoreau's fame resul ted in 1882 in his biography entitled Bean 2. Thoreau. one of the American Men of Letters series published by Htughton under the editorship of I Charles Dudley Warner. A work of 3234 pages. it required about a year 52 to write. I infer from letters from Sanborn to Warner that the latter ..._ 50It was finally published as Thoreau: the Poet~}__lat1ralist. with Memorial Lersqs (Boston: Roberts Brothers. 18 7 ). 357.— pp. Hereafter the books will be carefully differentiated by author. editor. and date. 51 Channing-Sanborn. Thoreau: t__~3__2.e Poet-Hsturalist (1902). p. xi. Though Sanborn modifies this statement by saying that the book "sold moderately well. “ it cannot be considered a best seller. If 1500 cepiss were sold in 20 years. this would mean a sale of 75 capies a year. SESanborn's letter to Warner. Concord. May 7. 1881. would indicate that Warner had not yet decided to edit the series. and therefore he could not yet have determined that Sanborn should write the volume. Says Sanborn: "As to the Houghton biographies. I hope you will edit than $9.21; %. " The biography must have been out before July 10. 185’" .c . because Daniel Ricketson thanked Sanborn for a complimentary copy in a letter to him of that date. (Sanborn's letter to Warner is in the Wat- kinson Library of Trinity College, Hartford. Conn. The letter from Ricketson to Sanborn is in the American Antiquarian Society. Worcester.) had approached him about writing the biographies of both Parker and ‘3 J... Thoreau for the series. Warner was not the first person to as}: Sanborn to write a life of Thoreau. In May. 1581. Sanborn wrote Warner: "Roughton himself asked me—-after a fashion-alast December. to write a biography of Thoreau for his series. and I have a preposition fram Roberts to pub- 5 lish a larger life of ‘1'. with letters. poems. etc.“ At this time. Sanborn as usual had a multitude of other irons in the fire. He told Warner that he expected to bring out in July an edition of Parker's “Prayers. with a memoir of thirty pages by Louise Alcott. and that his Autobiomhz of Parker he hoped would appear on the market for Park- er'e birthday. August euth. before another biographer. the Reverend _- _‘ 53Sanborn's letter to Warner. Concord. May 7. 1881. says: "Now as to my writing a life of Parker for Houghton. if JLulius] H. W[ard] is quietly hushed up. I will not now refuse. but I should doubt if Himightm} would give me margin enough a I don't mean in pages, but in treatment. If he will stay abroad until Osgood and Howells have forgiven him. and will leave the whole thing in your hands. I will consider. Thanks for your suggestion of it." Sanborn in his letter to Warner for May 18. 1881 says: "Yen: position in regard to the Editorship is the true one. and I shall be glad to confer with you.about Parker and Thoreau. but I suppose I must go forward in the meantime with my Parker matters. which are a little involved: but not so as to complicate your affair. if you «some to a decision before.August l [sic] .... Parker's Journals...have laow come into my hands. The manuscripts in general are at the Library 11ers.” It is possible. of course. that Warner was seeking Sanborn's zidyice as to the best person to write the Parker biography. though bio- Agraphies by 0. B. Frothingham and.John Weiss had already appeared. 5hSanborn to warner. Concord. May 7. 1831 (Watkinson Library). I'J Ch; \2 \n \n Julius 3. Ward. ”got round with his brush and dust-pan.“ In the light of his preoccupation with these other "irons” some may feel that the faults in Sanbom‘s first biography of Thoreau are excusable. Sanborn obtained his material for the biography from various sources. Thoreau's Aunt Maria provided the Thoreau genealogy directly in a letter to Sanborn which he prints in full in his book. and. in- directly. in other reminiscences ghich Thoreau had Jetted down in an 5 entry reprinted from his Journal. Sanborn also dwelt at length on Thoreau's "maternal grandfather. from whom he is said to have inherited many qualities.'I a brief sketch of whom the old gentleman's widow had 5'! written for Dr. Ripley. For oral and written anecdotes. observations. reminiscences. or testimony he depended chiefly on Enerson. Daniel Ricketson. Bronson Alcott and his diary. and Ellery Charming and his Thoreap: the Poet- 8 Naturalist. which proved ”a mine of curious information.” He also made 55Ibid.. and Sanborn to Warner. Concord. May 18. 1881 (Watkinson Library}. In the letter of May 7 Sanborn says: "I ought‘to say to you what perhaps you know. that the Reverend Julius H. Ward says that he has arranged with Houghton to write the book. and has been to me to see whether such a book would interfere with any plans of mine. I told him go. that the more lives of Parker. the better-abut I then and there re- solved that I would have an Autobiography of Parker out before J. H. W. at round with his brush and dust-pan.“ I do not know and Sanborn does not explain what he means when he says that Houghton asked him “after a fashion” to write the life of Thoreau. 56Sanborn. Thoreau (1882). pp. 2. 5-8. 57Ib1a.. pp. 9-10. sglbidu p. 11. rm "3 I some use of letters. as in chapter nine. where he depends almost en- tirely on the correspondence between Thoreau and Horace Greeley to indicate their relationship. Into other chapters he worked additional letters by Margaret Fuller. Daniel Ricketson. Charles Lane. President Quincy of Harvard. Sephia Thoreau. and others-letters both relevant pend irrelevant. Though he made several fairly long extracts from essays which Thoreau wrote while at Harvard. he does little more than mention such works as Eglggg_and ghg_flggg_by their titles. and records almost nothing from the Journal excepting the genealogical excerpt already mentioned. This. I might add, may be symbolic of Sanborn's interests. Of course. Sanborn reported many of his own personal observations 0 sun of Thoreau and his family while he was ”for a time domesticated there. Daniel Ricketson. writing to thank Sanborn for his complimentary cOpy. said: It is. I think. the most Thoreaurlike of any of the memoirs I have seen of our friend. by which I mean. the truest. most familiar. and life-like portraiture of him. It is more than a Thoreauana as I thought it might be when reading the proofs you.aent me. I doubt not. that in common with the friends of T. I feel much obliged to you for the fai ful and skillful manner you.have accomplished your work. The leading reviewers were. however. not entirely enthusiastic about the book. Most sharply critical was The Nation. the best critical 59Ibid.. p. 30. 6ODaniel Ricketson to Sanborn. New Bedford. Mass.. July 10. 1882 (Ameri can Antiquarian Society). 291 El literary Journal of the day. In his lengthy review. the critic said. "Eh. §ANBORR'S volume may be considered as a vindication. a criticism, a eulogy. or a biography: and in no one of these aspects is it a very successful literary performance." Then it continued: Thoreau's life was absolutely without incident. and where it might gain interest from an account of the lives of men with whom he was thrown. Mr. Sanborn fails to take advantage of his opportunities. He has a chapter. indeed. called ”Friends and Companions.“ in which he undertakes to introduce the reader to Emerson. Hawthorne. Margaret Fuller, and Channing. but it is a bare introduction. We know very little more of them at the end of the chapter than we did at the beginning. Another chapter. on ”Concord and its Famous People." produces exactly the opposite effect upon the reader from what the author evidently intended: the impression. namely, that Con- cord is a very stupid and provincial New England village. and that its celebrities must have owed their fame rather to the prevailing dulness than to anything that would elsewhere seem like remarkable brilliancy in themselves. The reviewer then proceeded to attack Sanborn as a critic. .As such. he said. ”Mr. Sanborn fails. because he does not succeed in giv- ‘ing us a clear picture of Thoreau. either as an author or as a man." He has accumulated a great deal of testimony to show that his friends liked him; but this might be inferred from the fact that they were his friends. and also that they thought him a genius and.poet and a remarkable man in many ways. More- over. this we knew before. Not a single trait of Thoreau's character. except. perhaps. his capacity for enduring suffer- ing. is brought out with any distinctness. This must be Mr. Sanborn's fault rather than Thoreau's. for every one is a- greed that he was a man of marked character. whatever that was. Mr. Sanborn.attempts to vindicate Thoreau from the charge of moroseness and aversion to human society-~a diffi- cult task at best. considering what his career was. and that he himself speaks of his life at Walden as 'a.protest against society.“ alfrank Luther Mott. A History g_f_ American Magazines (1865-1835). (Harvard up. 1938), III. 331. 232. 233:" Mr. Sanborn's ”vindication does not.” continued the reviewer. "make us feel that Thoreau. as a casual companion, would have been at all an agreeable or sociable person to meet." is for Sanborn's effort as a vindication. he said. 'A.vindication which does not vindicate could hard- ly be of much use as a eulogy“: Mr. Sanborn. in his desire to be fair, fails to inspire us with any enthusiasm for his subject. Surely it is unneces- sary. in giving an account of his personal appearance. to say that it was a "common mistake“ to take him at first sight for a peddler. This may have done something to make him seem more human in a New England.village. but in the world of let- ters it is hardly of sufficient importance to excuse its in- troduction. But the truth is. that at bottom Mr. Sanborn him- self thinks a little better of a genius for being as common— place in appearance as possible. It makes him more Yankee. more true to New England life.... The art of eulogy lies in knowing how to magnify a man's greatness and importance with- out seeming to do it: but the extreme of commonplace is as bad as that of exaggeration. The critic then discussed Sanborn's attempted analysis of "The causes and meaning of the Transcendental movement." This is really the most important branch of his subject: for. whatever else Thoreau was. he was a Transcendentalist. It is very necessary for any one who undertakes to explain Tran- scendentalism to the reader of the present day that he should appreciate much more fully than Mr. Sanborn appears to do the difficulties the subject presents. Everybody is perfectly willing to believe that the Transcendentalists exerted a great and good influencelnwntheir contemporaries: that they recalled a sordid and material generation to a recollection of the supreme importance of the things not of this world. But what any one who looks into the subject finds it diffi- cult to believe is that their talk about the ”Superhumani- ties' and “Stellar duties“ was feunded on any philosophical system. or grew out of any intellectual opinions really de- serving the name. To the worldlybminded the movement was always rather a subject for merriment: but now that we are all willing to take it seriously. what is needed is that it should be made. if’possible. more intelligible. Was it an in- tellectual revolt against Convention and Form. connected and allied with the great modern revolutionary movement in poli- tics? Was it an accidental local fruit of German philosophy? Was it a sort of New England Christian Platonism? I‘d \43 be Mr. Sanborn. the critic declared. does not throw any light on these points. except to suggest that the basis of it was "a certain inward tendency of high Calvinism and its counterpart Quakerism. always well- ing forth in the American colonies.“ He undertakes to show [the critic continued]. by a few extracts from their writings. how such Calvinists and Quakers as Wheel- wright. Sir Harry Vane, Anne Hutchinson. William Penn. and Jon- athan Edwards "prefig‘ured the mystical part of Concord philos- Ophy." It is surely an instance of the sarcasm of destiny that Jonathan Edwards should be held in any way accountable for a movement which was a rebellion against everything he had taught. and the promoters which in his day he would have had great satisfaction in driving out of Massachusetts. It is on- ly on the principle that extremes meet that we can trace any connection between linerson and Edwards. Mr. Sanborn's ex- tracts only prove that in New England Christianity there was always a recognition of the existence of a principle of faith transcending human experience and knowledge. It is a good deal easier. to be sure. to show that this was true of the Quakers than the Calvinists. In the case of Edwards. the evi- dence produced by Ir. Sanborn is more than suspicious. for it consists of a description by him. when a boy of twenty. of the charms and attractions of a young lady to whom he was very much attached. and who seemed to him to have an interior beauty of character and mind quite transcending anything he had ever dreamed or imagined. As for Thoreau as a post. the critic declared that "Mankind seems to be gradually settling down to the conclusion that the sum and sub- stance of the Transcendentalist philosOphy was that its votaries looked at the world essentially as poets.” Mr. Sanborn. the critic complained. ”has a high Opinion of Thoreau's poetical performances. but the speci- mens he gives are all more or less Open to the charge of a want of orig- inality.” Sanborn had said of ”Smoke”: "Indeed. what Greek would not be proud to claim this fragnent as his own?" How could Mr. Sanborn be so naive. asked the critic. ”All the early specimens of his writing. both prose and poetical. given by’Mr. Sanborn. are imitative: and in prose he seems to have followed the footsteps of Carlyle in adopting. in mature life. a manner of writing which has little or no relation to his early style.“ The critic then returned to the philosOphy of the Transcendental- ists as reflected in Thoreau: But. imitative or original. he was. like the rest of his school. an idealist: and...we believe it will be found that it was their idealism. their antagonism to the material. which in a material age and country gave the Transcendent- alists their importance. They came to recall New England. and through New England the rest of the country. sunk in a sordid self satisfaction produced by its material prosperity. to the fact that there is something higher and better than money and money-getting. or the contented formalism of an outworn creed: that the pursuit of truth and beauty was all that really made man's life better than that of the beasts of the field. They put aside worldly ambition and desire as truly as ever did any mediaeval monk.... The result was almost startling. Their Yankee audience at first ridiculed them as dreamers; but when they found that what the Tran- scendentalists actually recommended was dreaming. then ridi- cule changed to wonder. and finally to a sort of awe-struck admiration.... The Transcendental gospel was not a new re- ligion. but the New England apostles of the ideal. like Tho- reau, impressed the imagination of their contemporaries as. in a different day and generation. the heralds of a new gos- pel might. Their'message was the battle-cry of a spiritual warfare for what:ever was true and lovely and of good report. against the sordid subservience to material convenience and utility which the intellect is always basely suggesting to the conscience and heart. The effect and value of a battle- cry cannot be measured by intellectual tests. 62”Sanborn's Thoreau." The Nation. mv (July 13, 1882). 3L35. Francis H. Allen. A Bibiigmg 2; Henry David Thoreau. p. 126. Says the author of this is A. G. Sedgwick. Two weeks later The Critic spoke. Its reviewing was "usually hrigfit, incisive. and impartial. with a tendency to be conservative and not vary 63 profound.“ Its reviewer noted that "The critics have been rather hard on Mr. Sanborn's 'Thoreau,‘ and not without provocation.I and he contin- ued: There is no denying the fact that he exaggerates the im- portance of his subject. or that the petty and irrelevant details with which his book is padded tend to depreciate the reader‘s cpinion of the man whom it is designed to commemorate. This is. of course. doubly unfortunate: it increases the distance. already too great. between Thoreau and the general reading public: and it discredits the ser- ies of biographies whichnwas so suspiciously inaugurated.by Mr. warner's 'Irving' and Mr. Scudder's 'Noah Webster.‘ It was intended. no doubt. that the American Men-of—Letters Series should be a series of standard works; this volume will never be accepted as a standard biography.... The task might much better have been entrusted to Mr. Burroughs than to Mr. Sanborn-~or. indeed. any other writer whatsoever. The reviewer then declared that "Mr. Sanborn should not have placed the 'poet-naturalist' on so high a pedestal. He should. moreover. have winnowed his wheat more carefully; The bodk would have better answered its purpose if it had contained two hundred. or two hundred and fifty pages. instead of three hundred and six.“ The critic then became much kinder. continuing: “But having said thus much in condemnation of the work. we are disposed to assume another tone.” -_ 5149 Eran}: L. Mott, A History of American Magazines (186 ~13?S). III. M \g) C“ 1 hr. Sanborn‘s amiable hero~worship is infinitely preferable to the attitude of coarse contempt for Thoreau assumed by those reviewers who would deny his right to consideration in this series of lives. He. at least, errs in the right direction. As for Thoreau's imitation of Emerson. “It was not because he was $133 Emerson. but because he was Thoreau. that he commanded the attention of cultivated minds both within and beyond the precincts of his native town. This point Hr. Sanborn duly enforces. He also shows us a more human side than is generally accredited to the recluse of walden Pond.” In conclusion the critic said: "As we have pointed out above. the present volume has radical faults: but we would advise peeple to read it. It will enable them. despite Mr. Sanborn's indiscreet lauda- tion. to form a fair estimate of Thoreauis actual position as an Amer- ican man-of—letters: and it will give them a very good idea of a village which has become famous . . . as the chosen place of some of America's most distinguished sons.” These leading reviews were followed by other mention in such pub- lications as the Atlantic Monthly. In two sentences-—of his three- sentence notice-~the critic for the Atlantic declared: At last we have the material from which to form a notion of the strange personality which has so piqued curiosity. Thoreau's books have disclosed something of the man. but the biographical details which Mr. Sanborn has collected in his interesting volume were needed to enable one to get an external view: the subjective portrait of Thoreau to which we have been accustomed can now'be compared more closely with the actual original. 5 ‘- 193 Shear. Sanbornts IThoreau," The C_ritic. II (July 29. 1882). 197.. 65"Books of the Month.“ Atlantic Manthlv. L (August. 1889). 235. I do not know what Sanborn intended to do in his first biograahy. and he makes no statement of purpose or point of view. I infer. how- ever. that he intended to present Thoreau as (l) the man in his envir~ onment. (2) the writer of prose and verse. and (3) the thinker or man of ideas. The result. however. is a portrait-or rather a preliminary sketch-of Thorsau.as the man and.the author. In Thoreau.the thinker. Sanborn. I believe. never had much interest; he certainly evinces no interest in his ideas in this volume. Perhaps Sanborn may have felt that his probable readers had little interest: or it is possible that Sanborn at this time may still have considered Thoreau's philosophy “not'worth a straw.“ I believe. however. that Sanborn took whatever matter was at hand and threw it into this first biography. This work is. in my opinion. a.hodgepodge. Sanborn's efforts have produced merely a literary grab bag: it is a work utterly lacking in focus and organization. It is. however. a work not without value. for in it are collected.materials about persons. places. and things which would have been irrevocably lost had Sanborn not gathered them for us. The book does not focus--though it sheds-olight on its subject. As a work lacking organization of any kind. it stands as a symbol of all the 'zig-sag'histories” and "upside-down biographies” that Sanborn wrote later. For example. Sanborn had on hand material which he chose to use concerning Thoreau's friends and companions. Instead of work- ing'this material into some kind of co-ordinated unit. he spreads it out over three chapters which do not necessarily follow each other 293 nor pertain to each other. In Chapter III. containing thirty-three pages about ”Concord and Its Famous Peeple,' Sanborn:ievotes fifteen to anecdotes and genealogy of Dr. Ezra Ripley. ”the parish minister and county Nestor.” eight pages to Daniel Websterw-of all peeple-who "was never a lyceum lecturer in Concord. and.[who] did not often try cases there. but [who] was sometimes consulted in causes of some pe- cuniary magnitude." and the rest of the chapter to the genealogy of little-known persons. Had Sanborn painted these citizens for us. he would have given us considerably more of Thoreau's environment. but so much of his writing is typified by information such as this: Rev. Peter Bulkeley. the founder and first minister of the town. was a near kinsman of Oliver St. John. Cromwell's so- licitor-general. of the same noble English family that. a generation or two later. produced Henry St. John. Lord Bo- lingbroke. the brilliant. unscrupulous friend of Pope and Swift. Another of the Concord.ministers. Rev. John Whiting. was descended. through his grandmother. Elizabeth St. John. wife of Rev. Samuel Whiting. of Lynn. from this same old English family. which. in its long pedigree. counted for an- cestors the Norman Conqueror of England and some of his tur- bulent posterity. Emerson. the two Alcotts. Hawthorne. and Ellery Channing are mentioned. and the village is dismissede-as far as its natural scenery is concerned -with a word about its elm-lined streets. though its spirit. of course. Sanborn had intended to portray in its leading citizens. In (mapter IV. entitled ”The Inbattled Farmers.“ Sanborn says in his opening sentence: IT was not the famous lawyers. the godly ministers. the wealthy citizens, nor even the learned ladies of Concord. who inter- ested Henry Thoreau specially.-but the sturdy farmers. each on his hereditary acres. battling with the elements and enjoyb ing that Open-air life which to Thoreau was the only existence W0 rth having. This leads him to his main point: To show what sort of men these Concord farmers were in the days when their historical shot was fired. let me give some anecdotes and particulars concerning two of the original family stocks.-the Hosmers. who first settled in Concord in 1635. with Bulkeley and Willard. the founders of the town: and the Barretts. whose first ancestor. Humphrey Barrett. came over in 1639. Except for the fact that Thoreau's "favorite walk . . . passed by the great Hosmer farm-house." and the fact that Squire Barrett was "for some years president of the Middlesex.Agricultural Society (before which. in later years. Emerson. and Thoreau. and.Agassis gave addresses).' and except for the fact that 'Thorsauis special friend among the farmers was another character5Edmund Hosmer. a scion of the same prolific Hosmer stock. who died in 1881.. the chapter does not mention Thoreau.by name and is pointless. Chapter VII. entitled 'Friends and Companions." focuses a little more on Thoreau. though he plays only a supporting role. Sanborn pre. sents us. for example-and in the following sequence-a passage by Channing on Thoreau as a friend: a.passage on Thoreau's ”earliest con~ 1panion.' his brother John: some verses by Thoreau on his brother's £ngs‘by Sanborn of Channing's verse: a passage in which.A1cott extols the “great and genuine“ friendship that was possible with Emerson and horeau. followed by a passage from Egg in which Thoreau extols "one of the last of the philosOphers.” This is followed by a list of the homes where Thoreau participated in Alcott's Conversations. and two passages in which Thoreau and Charming I'commemorate" Hawthorne. On the next page Thoreau and Hawthorne die and are buried. Then San- born says. “Of Thoreau's relations with Enerson. this is not the place to speak in funk-though I find after a careful reading of the suc- ceeding pages that he speaks but little of Enerson or of their relation. He then gives us a list of the persons who met at Enerson's in May. 1811;). to converse on ”the inspiration of the Prophet and Bard. the nature of Poetry. and the causes of the sterility of Poetic Inspiration in our age and country.” This he follows by the statement that 31.9. 11:33. "this earliest of his volumes. like most of his writings. is a record of his friendships.“ Sanborn then mentions ”that high-toned. paradox-4 ical essay on Love and Friendship" which appears in it. and presents Alcott's familiar statement in his Journal that "presently the press would give [him] two books to be proud of-énnerson's 'Poems,‘ and Tho- reau's Week." This is followed by a letter from Emerson in England describing $2.2 Atlantic. the magazine which was to have been started there in 181%. and expressing the hepe that Thoreau and the other Con- cord literarygeat would contribute to its American edition. Sanborn then presents a brief anecdote of the fugitive slave who spent a week in Concord with Thoreau. then an account of his own acquaintance with Thoreau-which I have already treated in full in this study--and the chapter concludes with a passage from mnerson's eulogy at Thoreau's fun oral- KM O H To say that this typical chapter is utterly devoid of organiza- tion is not to say that it contains nothing of value. It is. as Sanborn said of Channing's biography. ”a mine of curious information.” The last three chapters of the volume are perhaps the best. Ino deedffthese chapters-“Personal Traits and Social Life." I'Poet. Moral-— ist. and Philos0pher.' and ”Life. Death. and Imortality"-Sanborn says much that is touching and of great interest. It is. however. typical of Sanborn's mind that he presents in the very last chapter what might have proved a unifying and practical outline for his book. ”The life of Thoreau." he says here. ”divides itself into three parts: his Apprenticeship. from birth to the summer of 1837 . . . : his Journey-work (Wanderjahre) from 1837 to 181:9. when he appeared as an author . . . : and his Mastership . . . of the trade and mystery of writing." In one of these last three. “Personal Traits and Social Life." he quotes suitable passages from Channing. Ricketson. and a “lady who knew [Thoreau] whenshe was a child. from the age of six to that of fifteen moreparticularly.‘ These passages portray-for the first time--his physical appearance. defend him against the accusation of ”churlishness‘and cynical severity." and tell of his delight in music. Sanborn then discusses Thoreau's career as a lecturer and as a man who believed in the dignity of physical labor. There is much of merit in this chapter. Though Sanborn doubtless intended to save his chapter on "Poet. Moralist. and PhilosOpher" for a full discussion of Thoreau as a poet, he had already scattered his more important evaluations of his verse through previous chapters. However. he begins this chapter by saying: TEE character of post is so high and so rare. in any modern civilization. and specially in our American career of nation- ality. that it behooves us to mark and claim all our true poets. before they are classified under some other name.-as philosOphers. naturalists. romancers. or historians. Thus Emerson is primarily and chiefly a poet. and only a philoso- pher in his second intention: and thus also Thoreau. though a naturalist by habit. and a moralist by constitution. was inwardly a.poet by force of that shaping and controlling im- agination. which was his strongest faculty. His mind tended naturally to the ideal side. He would have been an idealist in any circumstances: a fluent and glowing poet. had he been born among a.people to whom poesy is native. like the Greeks. the Italians. the Irish. As it was. his poetic light illur mined every wide prospect and every narrow cranny in which his active. patient spirit pursued its task. It was this in- ward illumination as well as the star—like beam of Emerson's genius in “Nature.“ which caused Thoreau.to write in his senior year at college. ”This curious world which we inhabit is more wonderful than it is convenient: more beautiful than it is useful." and he cherished this belief through life. In youth. too. he said. ”The other world is all my art. my pencils will draw no other. my Jack-knife will cut nothing else: I do not use it as a means.“ It was in this spirit that he afterwards uttered the quaint parable. which was his version of the primitive legend of the Golden Age:-- ‘I long ago lost a hound. a bay horse. and a turtle dove. and am still on their trail....' In the same significance read his little-known verses. ”The Pilgrims.I .After presenting the sixteen lines of what he entitled "The Pil- grims.“ the curious editing of which I shall treat later. he recounts Thoreau's methods in writing verse: It seems to have been the habit of Thoreau. in writing verse. to compose a couplet. a quatrain. or other short metrical expression. cepy it in his Journal. and afterward. when these verses had grown to a considerable number. to arrange them in the form of a single piece. This gives:his poems the epigsam- matic air which most of them have. After he was thirty years old. he wrote scarcely any verse. and he even destroyed much that he had previously written. following in this the Judgment of Mr. Emerson. rather than his own. as he told me one day during his last illness. 7n. JV He then discusses Thoreau’s indebtedness to the English and Greek poets: He had read all that was best in English and in Greek poetry. but was more familiar with the English poets of Milton’s time and earlier. than with those more recent. except his own townsmen and companions. He valued Milton above Shakespeare. and had a special love for AEschylus. two of whose tragedies he translated. He had read Pindar. Simonides. and the Greek Anthology. and wrote. at his best. as well as the finest of the Greek lyric poets. Even Emerson. who was a severe critic of his verses. says. "His classic poem on 'Smoke' suggests Simonides. but is better than any poem of Simonides.l Sanborn then notes that no complete collection of Thoreauis poems has been made. and declares that. "amid much that is harsh and crude. such a book would contain many verses sure to survive for centuries.” Of Thoreau's verse which Sanborn quotes in other pages of the tart. he is most enthusiastic about "Sympathy.“ which he discusses in Chapter VI. ”Early Essays in Authorship": The measure of ”Sympathy" was that of Davenant's ”Gondibert." which Thoreau. almost alone of his contemporaries. had read: the thought was above Davenant. and ranged with Raleigh.and Spenser. These verses will not soon be forgotten. Sanborn seemed to exercise a good deal of critical acumen in his selec- tion of Thoreau's verse for this volume. It seems significant that he chose “Smoke.“ “Sympathy.“ "To the Maiden in the East." ”The Departure." "Brother Where Dost Thou Dwell.” and "Prayer.“ as six of his seven ex~ amples of Thoreauis verse. six pieces that are often picked by twen- tieth-century anthologists and Thoreau editors. When. for example. ‘Bartholow V. Crawford chooses ssven.poems for his volume of represents— 66 tive selections. four of them are among the above. 6EgBartholow V. Crawford. Hengz David Thpreag: ngresentativg §§7 lections. pp. 3h2-3‘ . Crawford selects “Smoke." "To the Maiden in the East." "Sympathy." and.”Prayer.' I I I I ‘ull II III I III III III... I . I IIII III IIiI.II . I!I I I IIIIIIIII .. I I I. I I 1 I. n. r o ‘ . e . Is '\ a C O f O ' II V ' .‘ '1 ’\ I f O u . , Q . O s t ~ I I v o O I . II ' I J a 9 f p 1‘ ' O O l O. . Q 4 ( _ s 9 . a II 0 A ( V. C O a vl » I u . 1.. w .\ r w 9 VI v A O O I ~ . P r a\ , v I l — I. — . f s 30h Sanborn's editing of these verses is. however. amazing. The trust- ing and uninitiated reader presumes. of course. that he is reading Thoreau's verse as Thoreau intended him to read it. Such is not the case. and the nineteenth-century reader of Sanborn's literary prcduc— tions little realized how much the master work had been tampered with. It is a little like listening to Stokowski's ”transcriptions“ of Bach. with all the liberties that those transcriptions include in both orches- tration and performance. For example. as Carl Bode points out in his precise and scholarly presentation of the original manuscriptsé7the poem which Sanborn calls ”The Pilgrims” is edited as follows. Sanborn lifts sixteen lines from the original 82 which Thoreau.entitled "The Hero.' Beginning with line 62 in the original. Sanborn has included the twelve lines that follow—cancelled by Thoreau-and then chops off the last four lines of the original. He then changes punctuation and language as he wills. as may be best shown by printing these resulting sixteen lines in parallel columns: 7Collected Poems of Henry Thoreau. ed. Carl Bods (Chicago. Pack- gig-82g Company. 19E35. pp. 161-163. with notes on pp. 3l6~318 and J Original Thpreau.genu§gript When I have slumbered I have heard sounds As travellers passing Over my grounds- 'Twas a sweet music wafted them by I could not tell If far off or nigh. Unless I dreamsdit This was of yore- But I never told it To mortal before- Fever remembered But in my dreams What to me waking a.miracle seems 305 Sanborn} s Transcription .When I have slumbered I have heard sounds As of travelers passing These my grounds. 'Twas a sweet music Iafted them by. I could not tell If afar off or nigh. Unless I dreamed it This was of yore: I never told it To mortal before. Never remembered But in.my dreams. What to me waking a.miracle seems. This version. according to Bode. found its way also into Volume I of the Walden Edition of the complete Thoreau.Writings. published in 1906 ‘by Heughton Mifflin. volume VI of which contained the "Familiar Let- ters" edited by Sanborn. Whether Sanborn had any influence on the ed- itors of the other nineteen volumes in this edition I do not know. Of course. Sanborn is granted the usual.privilege permitted to editors or critics to “quote brief passages in connection with a re- view written for inclusion in magazine or newspaper.” as the publishers 68 say. but his editing of these excerpts goes beyond this license. As I shall.consider Sanborn‘s editing more fully later in this chapter. suf- ‘fice it to say here that. except for ”Implacable is Love.” Sanborn's _- 8The reader may at this point desire to compare "Sympathy" (San- born. 16h) with Bode. 6h-65: ”Implacable is Love" (Sanborn. 167) with 30616. 71-73; ”Low in the eastern sky“ (Sanborn. 165-167) with Bode. 3s- 39: 'Where'er thou sail'st who sailed with me'(Sanborn. 175) with Bode. 29: ”Brother. where dost thou dwell" (Sanborn. 176—177) with Bode. 151-152: ”The Departure“ (Sanborn. 282-283) with Bode. 209-210; and ”Susan (Sanborn. 287) with Bode. 27—28. \JJ L"? Ch editing of the other poems in this 1382 volume consists chiefly of minor changes in capitalization. punctuation. and words. Sanborn also discusses in this 1882 biography Thoreeuls prose gifts. In doing so.it seems strange that he concentrates most of his attention on Thoreau's college essays. Whereas more recent critics such as Mark Van Doren. F. O. Matthiessen. Norman Peerster. or Henry Seidel Canby allude to these early essays. they spend more of their time in their analyses of the major writings. About one of these college essays. Sanborn exclaims: "Here we have a touch of fine writing. natural in a boy who had read Irving and Goldsmith. . . . But how smooth the flow of description. how well- 69 placed the words. how sure and keen the eye of the young observer!" As for his method of writing. it was. says Sanborn. peculiarly his own. l”though it bore some external resemblance to that of his friends. Emerson and Alcott“: Like them he early began to keep a Journal. which became both diary and commonplace book. But while they noted down the thoughts which occurred to them. without premeditation or consecutive arrangement. Thoreau.made studies and obser- vations for his Journal as carefully and habitually as he noted the angles and distances in surveying a Concord farm. In all his daily walks and distant journeys. he took notes on the spot of what occurred to him. and these. often very brief and symbolic. he carefully wrote out. as soon as he could get time. in his diary. not classified by tepics. but Just as they had come to him. To these he added his daily meditations. sometimes expressed in verse....but generally in close and pertinent prose.... From these daily entries he made up his essays. his lectures. and his volumes: all being slowly. and with much deliberation and revision. brought into the form in which he gave them to the public. After that he scarcely changed them at all: they had received the last imprint of his ybnd. and he allowed them to stand and speak for themselves. ngPage 155. 337 Sanborn also shows the reader how Thoreau took notes: He had gauges for the height of the river, note-d the temper- ature of springs and ponds. the tints of the morning and evening sky. the flowering and fruit of plants. all the habits of birds and animals. and every aspect of nature from the smallest to the greatest. Much of this is the dryest detail. but everywhere you come upon if; strokes of beauty. in a tangle word-picture. or in a page of idyllic descrip- ticne And Sanborn follows this with two passages. the one on the confiding heifer and the apostrophe to the Queen of Night. Sanborn then con- eludes the chapter by burying Thoreau for what is new the third time and by appending what most readers would presume was a quatrain by Thoreau. I was considerably surprised to discover by accident. there- fore. that these lines—-if the index to the volume is correct-«ore written by Sanborn's oldest son. Thomas Parker Sanborn-.12 If Sanborn's purpose in this volume was to stimulate the public to read Thoreau, it seems rather doubtful that he succeeded. The pover- ty of Sanborn's comments and his failure to allow Thoreau to speak for himself do not overwhelm the reader until he looks into such excellent analyses of Thoreau's tyle and content as are provided by Van Doren and 73 Matthiessen in their essays. 7JPeges 257-258. (Observe that Sanborn's treatment Of this topic occurs in widely separate sections of his volume.) 728“ page 260 and the Index (under 'Poems'). p. 322. The motive- tion for including this quatrain is not clear to me. Perhaps Sanborn hoped to promote his son's career as post, for these lines were written when Thomas was 17 (or younger). Thomas was very serious in his poet-iv.- 1ng. and his tragic suicide in March. 1889. was attributed by some to the fact that he was not chosen class post at Harvard. (He was born February 23, 1865. and died in March. 1889.) 73mm Van Doren. Hengy David Thoreau: _A_ gritical Stud; (Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin. 19167. 138 pp. F. O. Matthiessen. wrigg-L Renaissance: Art and Eggprsssion in the £59 9_f_‘_ Emerson and Whiter-9n Egan;- 173145: Oxford University Press. @1115, pp. 3-119. Earlier in this discussion I observed that Sanborn seems, in this biography. less interested in Thoreau's ideas. He does, however. devcie a chapter to “The Transcendental Period.” and he makes other observa- tions on Thoreau's mind and art. Sanborn chooses to look for his ideas chiefly in the college essays. In one Thoreau recommends “keeping a private Journal:' in another he discusses ”simplicity of style;” in a others. he takesAnovel,view of punishments. or looks at the effect of story-telling. or speaks originally of the need for American independence of fereign opinion: We are. as it were. but colonies. True. we have declared our independence. and gained our liberty. but we have dissolved only the political bands which connected us with Great Brit- ain: though we have rejected her tea. she still supplies us with food for the mind. Provided. too. are excerpts from an ”elaborate paper" on.Milton's L'Alleggo and 11_Penseroso. from an essay on the source of our feeling of the sublime. and from another on Paley's Common Reasons. From one we see ”the earliest record of the day's observations” of nature. and from the following Sanborn feels there is to be found the “keybnote of Thoreau's whole after-life”: Meet of us are apt to neglect the study of our own characters. thoughts. md feelings. and. for the purpose of forming our own mind.s, look to others. who should merely be considered as different editions of the same great work. “To be sure. it would be well for us —to examine the various cOpies. that we might detect any errors: yet it would be foolish for one to borrow s_work which EEDppssessed_himself. but had not perused? . I iuPage 151. 309 As though to defend Thoreau from further charges of imitating hereon. Sanborn emphasizes that Thoreau I'brought to his intellectual tastes an originality as marked as hereon's. if not so brilliant and star-like» a patience far greater than his. and a proud independence that makes him the most solitary of modern thinkers.” and gives these early essays. written before hereon's m. as his evidence. Though Sanborn pro- vides no analysis. at least he allows Thoreau to be represented here in part. Sanborn's editing again doing grave injustice to Thoreau's liter- ary skill. as we shall see later. Sanborn's chapter on ”The Transcendental Period.‘ which the critic for m m severely castigated. begins well. In fact. I feel that in its first two pages Sanborn's writing some extraordinarily good: it promises much. But the chapter soon turns into interesting. though un- enlightening. anecdotes of the 'pious egotism and the laughable vagaries of Transcendentalim.‘ A minister of Maiden tells in his diary about his trying experiences with a “one-horse Shun" nnsrson writes Thoreau of a call from Albert Brisbane. during which the latter discoursed on "the self-augmenting potency of the solar system. Emerson writes Thoreau about Alcott and Lane's plan for Pruitlands: Lane writes Thoreau of their plans for this enterprise: herson describes with regret the withdrawal of 'many intelligent and religious persons” ”from the common labors and competitions of the market and the caucus:' Dr. lzra Ripley writes Dr. William Ellery Channing a and letter bemoaning the lack of “common sense ' among the Transcendentalists and bewailing "that superiority which places a man above the power of doing good to his fellow-men." Sanborn characteristically closes the chapter with: Twenty years after this pastoral epistle. there came to Con-- cori another Christian of the antique tyne. more Puritan and Hebnaic than Dr. Ripley himself, yet a Transcendentalist, too—~and JOHN EROWN found no lack of practical good-will in Thoreau, Alcott, Emerson. and the other Transcendentalists. The years had I'come full circle." the Sibyl had burnt her last prephetic book. and the new seen was about to Open with the downfall of slavery. What must be said in conclusion about this biography? When Herb nan Foerster reviewed Sanborn's biography of Thoreau that appeared in 1917. he complained that it was "full of digression and prosy circum- stantiality: more full of them than Sanborn's smaller biography of 75 thirty—five years ago." Though Daniel Ricketson said in his letter to Sanborn: “It is more than a Thoreauana as I thought it might be when reading the proofs you sent me.” Ricketson's first thoughts while proofreading were. in my Opinion. more nearly correct than he cared to admit. This work is. as Foerster says of the 1917 volume. "a treasury of Thoreauisms.‘ Whether it can properly be called a 'Thoreauana' is Open to question. for the suffix -ana usually denotes "a collection of material pertaining to a given subject.I As Sanborn's subject was Henry David Thoreau, and the major portion of the volume does not pertain to him. one stretches the term ”ThoreauanaP to make it fit Sanborn's volume. Sanborn is a rememberer of things past. a geneaIOgist. a New Eng- land antiquarian. and a collector of material in general. But, as a collector of material. he has done honorable service. for the editors and writers who have followed him have made good use of this literary 75Norman Foerster. Yale Review. new series. VII (January. 1913). h30-h31. grab bag, though. as Odell Shepard declares. ”My experience with his work has bred a sort of irritation.zb As Sanborn's son said to me: ”Father wrote biographies. But the trouble was he admitted subjects of interest to him, but I think of doubtful interest to the general reader. Be tackled a subject the way he wanted to. even though it didn't necessarily appeal to anyone else." Had Sanborn bestowed on this work the precise care that he em- ployed in his Harvard undergraduate days writing his entries in his college Journal and organizing his critical essays for 2112 mg Magazine. hewould have produced an important literary work. for few men have had the Opportunities which Sanborn had to sit at the feet of the literary gods and record their words. Sanborn's next major effort to perpetuate Thoreau's fame resulted in 139M in an edition of his letters. The history of the printing of these is somewhat tangled and confused. Francis E. Allen in .5 M1;- Qm 9_f_ Henry: David Thoreau states that "the first regularly collected com to Aedlilffibon of Thoreau's writings" was The Writings 9_i_'_ Henry David Thoreau. 77 11111 libllpgrgphical Introductions g_._n_c_1_ Full Indexes. published in 15.491; Personal letter to me from Odell Shepard. Jordan Cove, Waterford. Connecticut. February 9. 1951. 77Francis H. Allen. ._i_ Bibliography 91 Henzy David Thoreau. p. 51. Actually Allen does not sayvtllis. but gives the title as gglficte-d Works. This full title 1: given in Thg_Liter§£z History of the United séatgg, III. 7M2. The full title appears on the half-title'ofneach d? the orig“ 11181 ten volumes; it does not appear on the title-page. ll? by Houghton. Mifflin as the Large-Paper Edition, limited to 150 n‘JH';".‘9Pkl cepies. Printed that same year from these plates was the Riverside Edi- 78 tion. Both editions contained ten volumes with introductory notes pre— 79 pared either by Horace E. Scudder or H. G. 0. Blake. Sanborn's volume. Familiar Letters 91 Henry David Thoreau, Edited. with 29. Introduction and Estes. was published by the same firm first in 80 the Large-Paper Edition. limited to 150 cepies. Four months later apc- peared the Letters in the Riverside Edition. the plates of which had 81 printed this Large-Paper Edition. Familiar Letters. "upon its appear- ance in 1891i. was added to the Riverside Edition as an eleventh volume. being brought out in uniform style. though it lacked the half—rtitle 82 ' with the volume-number." The volume of Familiar Letters in the Large- Paper Edition was. I infer. added as volume eleven to the Large-Paper 33 Edition. “Allen, p. 52. 79Ibii.. p. 51. 3°1bii.. p. 32. 519.29.. as 82 Ibid.. p. 51. 83‘1’he Literary History 91 the United States (hereafter referred to as LHUSrh-as added even greater confusion to the history of these edi- tions by stating in III. 7142: “In the same year [1391‘] Frank B. Sanborn edited Familiar Letters .... which was added as Vol. XI. and the set 11017 issued (1891-) as the Cambridge Edition. reissued. Boston. 1932." Francis H. Allen. in a personal letter to me October 10. 1952. says he never heard of a Cambridge Edition. The Thoreau section of the Liter- m Historv 23'. the United _S_t_ates is filled with such errors. 313 Sanborn's volume superseded the rather small Lettggg,tg.Variqu§ Persons which Emerson had edited in 1865 for Tickngr and Fields. and 8 it “has remained the standard edition ever since.” Some indication of its contents may be gathered from these comments by the critic who reviewed the volume for Thg_Nationz EH. §ANBOHN'S edition of Thoreau's letters includes appar- ently all the letters in Emerson's edition of 1865. and how much added.matter he has given us may be reckoned from the pages of his book. It has “Sh to 207 of Emerson's. the amount of matter to a page being about the same in sash§5 Sanborn prefaced the 130 letters and fragments of letters with a statement that his intention was ”to give the world . . . a fuller and more familiar view of our friend" than Emerson's collection had allowed. To do this. he said. he had chosen ”many letters and mere notes. illus- trating his domestic and gossipy moods . . . and even the colloquial vulgarity that he sometimes allowed himself.“ As the reviewer in The Nation said: Hr. Sanborn's matter is of two kindse-letters of Thoreau's not hitherto published in a book. and a good deal of editor- ial matter. rich in personal recollection and the fruit of much research. amounting to a brief biography. It gives the order and connection of Thoreau's life. accounts for his presence in this or that place and his flittings to and fro. gives some account of his friends as one after another of then appears upon the scene. explains various circumstances and obscure allusions. and. taken altogether. is a very real and palatable addition to the feast spread by Emerson and the fresh dishes from Thoreau's larder which have been added thereunto. 8iWalter Harding. "Franklin 3. Sanborn and Thoreau's Letters.‘ Thg_Boston gublic gibgggz’ggggterlz. III (October. 1951). 288. 85:22_Nation. LIX (October 18. 139h). 291-292. \JJ '4‘: Though the volume was doubtless of great value. the wretchedness of Sanborn's editing has been demonstrated for all time by Walter Hard- ing, secretary-treasurer of the Thoreau Society and long a student of Thoreau. who is now at work with Carl Bode on a definitive edition of the Thoreau letters which should reach the public next year. Referring to Sanborn's preface quoted above. he says: One might expect from this announcement a fairly accurate edition of Thoreau's letters. But a comparison of the original manuscripts. where they are extent, with Sanborn's editing reveals quite a different picture. "No better example.' he continues. "can be found than Thoreau's letter to Horace Greeley of May 19. 13143.! And to dramatize Sanborn's work he sets the text of this manuscript alongside Sanborn's transcription: Original Manuscript Concord. May 19. lShS My Friend Greeley. I received from you fifty dollars today.-- For the last five years I have supported myself solely by the labors of my hands - I have not received one cent from any other source. and this has cost me so little time. say a month in the spring and anoth- er in the autumn. doing the coarsest work of all kinds. that I have probably enjoyed more leisure for literary pursuits than any contemporary. For more than two years past I have lived alone in the woods. in a good plastered and shingled house en- tirely of my own building. earn- ing only what I wanted. and sticking to my proper work. The Sanborn's Transcription Concord. May 19. lShS. My Friend Greeley. - I have to-day received from you fifty dollars. It is five years that I have been maintaining myself entirely by manual labor. - not getting a cent from any other quarter or employment. Now this toil has occupied so few days. -- perhaps a single month. spring and fall each. -- that I must have had more leisure than any of my brethren for study and literature. I have done rude work of all kinda. From July. lSUS. to September. 18h7. I lived by myself in the forest. in a fairly good cabin. plastered and warmly covered. which I built myself. There I earned all I needed. and kept to my own affairs. During that time my weekly outlay was but seven- fact is man need not live by the sweat of his brow -- unless he sweats easier than I do -— he needs so little. For two years and two months all my expenses have amounted to but 27 cents a week. and I have fared glorious- ly in all respects. If a man must have money, and he needs but the smallest amount. the true and independent way to earn it is by dayblabor with his hands at a dollar a day - I have tried many ways and can speak from experience. - Schol- are are apt to think themselves privileged to complain as if their lot was a peculiarly hard one. How much have we heard about the attainment of know- ledge under difficulties of poets starving in garrets - depending on the patronage of the wealthy -— and finally dying mad. It is time that men sang another song. There is no rea- son why the scholar who profes- ses to be a little wiser than the mass of men. should not do his work in the ditch occasion- ally. and by means of his super- ior wisdom make much less suffice in. A wise man will not be un- fortunate. How then would you know but he was a fool? This money therefore comes as a free and even unexpected gift to me - My Friend Greeley. I know not how to thank you for your kind- ness -- to thank you is not the way -- I can only assure you.that I see and appreciate it -- To think that while I have been sit- ting comparatively idle here. you have been so active in my behalf! You have done well for me. I only wish it had been in a better cause -- Yet the value of good and-twenty cents: and I had an abundance of all sorts. the human race perspire more than I do. there is no occasion to live by the sweet of their brow. If men cannot get on without money (the smallest amount will suffice). the truest method of earning it is by working as a laborer at one dollar per day. You.are least dependent so: I speak as an expert. having used several kinds of labor. Unless Why should the scholar make a constant complaint that his fate is specially hard? We are too often told of “the pursuit of knowledge under difficulties.” -- how poets depend on patrons and starve in garrets. or at last go mad and die. Let us hear the other side of the story. Why should not the scholar. if he is really wiser than the multitude, do coarse work now and then? Why not let his greater wisdom enable him to do without things? If you.say the wise man is unlucky. how could you distinguish him from the foolishly unfortunate? My friend. how can I thank you for your kindness? Perhaps there is a better way. -- I will con- vince you that it is felt and ap~ preciated. Here have I been sit" ting idle. as it were. while you have been busy in my cause. and have donehmuch for me. I wish you.had had a better subject: but good deeds are no less good deeds is not affected by the unworthiness of their object. Yes-«that was the right way. but who would ever have thought of it? I think it might not have occurred even to somewhat of a business man. I am not one in the common sense at all - that is I am not acquainted with the forms. I might have way-laid him perhaps. I per- ceive that your way has this advantage too. that he who draws the draft determines the amount which it is drawn for. You.prized it well. that was the exact amount. If more convenient the mains article might be printed in the form of letters; you have only to leave off at the end of a day. and put the date before the next one. I shall certainly be satisfied to receive $25.00 for it - that was all I ex- pected if you took it -- but I do not by any means consider you bound to pay me that -- the ar— ticle not being what you asked for. and being sent after so long a delay. Ybu shall there- fore, if you take it. send me 25 dollars now. or when you.have disposed of it. whichever is most convenient - that is. af- ter deducting the necessary expenses which I perceive you must have incurred. That is all I ask for it. The carrier it is commonly who makes the money - I am con- cerned to see that you as car- rier‘make nothing at all -- but are in danger of losing a good deal of your time as well as some of your money. So I got off - rather so I am compelled to go off mutter- ing my ineffectual thanks. But because their object is un~ worthfiro Yours was the best way to collect money. -- but I should never have thought of it: I might have waylaid the debtor perchance. Even a business mar might not have thought of it. ~- and I cannot be called that. as business is understood usually, - not being familiar with the routine. But your way has this to commend it also. -- if you make the draft. you decide how much to draw. You drew Just the sum suitable. The Ktaadn paper can be put in the guise of letters, if it runs best so; dating each part on the day it describes. Twen~ ty-five dollars more for it will satisfy me; I expected no more. and do not hold you to pay that. -- for you asked for something else. and there was delay in sending. So. if you use it. send me twenty-five dollars now or after you sell it. as is most convenient: but take out the expenses that I see you must have had. In such cases carriers generally get the most; but you. as carrier here. get no money. but risk losing some. besides much of your time: while I go away, as I must. giving you unprofita« ble thanks. Yet trust me. my pleasure in your letter is not wholly a selfish one. hey my believe me, my Friend. the good genius still watch over gratification which your letter me and my added wealth affords me is not wholly selfish. Trusting that my good genius will continue to protect me on this accession of wealth, I re- main Yours Henry'Thoreau P. 3. My book is swelling again P. S. - My book grows in bulk under my hands, but as I have as I work on it: but soon I leisure I shall see to those shall get leisure for those shorter articles. So look out. shorter articles you want, - then look out. Harding's comment on Sanborn's transcription is this: Such 'editing' scarcely needs comment. Thoreau's pithy and masculine style is corrupted until it is hardly recognizable. It has become a typical piece of Victorian sentimentalism in style it not in meaning. Notice the refinement of perspiration for sweet. Yet Thoreau.preferred the letter word. and indeed later lifted the whole sentence from this letter and placed it in Walden: "It is not necessary that a man should earn his livigg by the sweet of his brow, unless he sweats easier than I do.” Furthermore, Harding declares that small changes, not always of vital importance, are frequent. For example. Thoreau's letter to the Emersnn family3 written from Staten Island. July 8. 18h}, shows at least 110 changes in punctuation, grammar, spelling. and wording in Sanborn's version. Then. too, Sanborn not only took liberties with his texts. says Harding, but he was careless in his editing: 86(Boston: Ticknor O Fields. 1351*): P- 77- 87Familiar Letters (189M), pp. 109-113. The manuscript, says Harding. is now in the Berg Collection of the New York Public Library. k)! He occasionally dated the same letter differently in different printings. as for example the letter of February 12, 18L}, from Emerson to Thoreau, which he dated correctly in an arti- cle in the Atlantic Monthly_but which hg misdated February 16, 18h} in Bronson Alcott 53_Alcott House.°81n Familiar Letters he quoted a portion of a letter of December §:—l§37:'f?om Emerson to Thoreau.and a.part of another letter of March 25, 18MB, entering them together as one letter dated February. lshs, halfway between the two.89He was also careless with names. For example. in his 1882 biography of Thoreau. he as- serts thgg the letter of July 21, 18h}, was written to Sophia Thoreau, when. as he correctly states in Familiar Letters; it was written to her sister Helen.9lBut perhaps the outstand- ingkxample of this sort of carelessness is the letter written to Thoreau.by'James Elliott Cabot on.May 27. lsh7. which San- born gives in two entirely different versions one in Familiar Letters92and the other in his 1882 biography.9 he two overlap in parts, but each contains material not in the other, and what should be identical sentences vary considerably in their wording. Since the manuscript has disappeared, one can only wonder what was in the original letter. Harding feels that perhaps the spirit of “refinement" so common in Sanborn's age may explain, if not excuse, his editorial method, and that he was only one of the many editors of his day who felt they must'pretti~ fr" their texts. Harding concludes: —___ 88Sanborn, “The Emerson-Thoreau Correspondence,“ (May. 1892). p. 20. and Sanborn, Bronson Alcott at Alcott House, Epgland, and.Fruitlende, mun-m..— NeW'England (Cedar Rapids, Iowa: The Torch Press. 1908 , p:_3l. 89F’amiliar Letters (189h), pp. Ins-IRS. 903ml}: 2. Thoreau (1882). p. 216. 91Familiar Letters (189h), p. 113. 921bid.. pp. 156-157. 93139221 P.- Thoreau (1882), p. 2141+. He performed a major service by preserving in print many Thoreau manuscripts which have since disappeared and which would otherwise have been totally lost. But one should approach his work with caution. realizing that the proguct is not pure Thoreau. but rather a Sanbornized Thoreau./4 Several things seem extraordinary to me when I study these parallel columns. What seems most extraordinary is this: though Sanborn. in my cpinion, wrote few quotable sentences after he left college, he had tie supreme self-confidence that allowed him to rearrange the sentences and the sentence structure of one of the best sentence-writers in the Ease lish language. Sanborn wrote such sentences as this: In these majestic lines, suggestive of Dante. of Shakespeare. and of Milton. yet fitting. by the force of imagination, to the simplicity and magnanimity that Thoreau.had displayed, one reads the secret of that character which made the Concord recluse first declare to the world the true mission of John Brown. whose friend he had been for a few years. -~ hich is certainly one of Sanborn's better sentences—«or this one, which any habitual reader of Sanborn will recognize as typical: James Hosmer, a clothier from Hawkhurst in Kent. with his wife Ann(related to Major Simon Willard. that stout Kent- ishman, Indian trader and Indian fighter. who bought of the Squaw Sachem the township of Concord. six miles square). two infant daughters. and two maid-servants. came from Lon- don to Boston in the ship ”Elizabeth.“ and the next year built a house on Concord Street. and a mill on the town brook. Yet in this edition of Thoreau's letters he could edit the sentences of a man whose writing was infinitely better. Thoreau's sentence. ”It is 14 9 Harding. pp. 288-29}. (Footnotes 86 through 93 are Harding's or are based on Harding's footnotes.) 953511.151 9.- 21.03.2332 (1382). 139- 135 and 98. time that men sang another song“ is Sanbornized into the trite "Let us hear the other side of the story.” Thoreau's "mass of men" is Latinized into "multitude" and where Thoreau talks about "work in the ditch." Seen born corrupts it to "coarse work.“ This process of Sanbornizing is bad enough. certainly. but what is more unfortunate is that Sanborn seems to have learned nothing about prose from his master. Thoreau. as Matthiessen points out, hated writ- ers who used “torpid words. wooden 6r lifeless words. such words as 'humanitary.‘ which have a paralysis in their tails.” And he praised Quarles for pressing "able-bodied and strong-backed words into his ser- vice. which have a certain rustic fragrance and force.“ This leads me to wonder whether Sanborn had read Thoreau and to speculate on what Thoreau.might have said to Sanborn had he lived to see his letters smas— culated. Furthermore. if seven years were not enough for Sanborn to get Thoreau's point. he had twenty more years to learn it from his friend Emerson. who used 'bellyful.‘ “stinking." 'drivelling." "slut," "sot," “vomit." "sweat.’I and "swinish." and who said: II confess to some pleasure from the stinging rhetoric of a rattling oath in the mouth of 98 truckmsn and ‘tes'tmstereflI 9 Matthiessen. America; ggnaissance. pp. 86 and 110. 97Theodore Benson Strandness. ”Emerson's Sensory Relations with Nature," (University of Minnesota: unpublished Master's thesis. 19h3), PP. 13-17. This thesis eXplores much of the same territory discussed by Matthiessen. pp. 3-75. ggqpoted in Matthiessen. p. 35, from The American Scholar. u a V r x V ' 1 I . o How does one explain Sanborn's "improving“ of Thoreau? Was San- born tone-deaf? Two summers ago, when I talked with his son Francis. I said, “I've been troubled that your father never mentions the word £3333. Did he enjoy it?" To which Mr. Sanborn replied: ”He didn't know one tune from another. No tone sense whatever. He seemed to know all the words to all the hymns in the hymn book. but had he tried to 99 sing one he'd have fallen down lamentably.' If, then, he was tone-deaf. did his reading of Homer, Virgil, Milton, Shakespeare, and a thousand others teach him nothing? Sanborn knew Emerson's 233353 and he should have absorbed such lessons in diction and linguistics as this which are found there: Every word which is used to express a moral or intellectual fact, if traced to its root, is found to be borrowed from some material appearance. Right means straight; :rgng means twisted. §pirit primarily means wind: transgression, the crossing of a line: guperciligus. the raising g£_the eyebrow. ... Children and savages use only nouns or names of things, whichlssey convert into verbs, and apply to analogous mental Bets. Sanborn may have been tone-deaf, but he was not deaf to noise or rhythm. Even while in college he could write these lines. which, though they have none of the punch of sentences by Thoreau or Emerson, do demon- strate a feeling for words: 991 have since found a reference-«in a letter to Theodore Parker»- to his joy in listening to a performance of Beethoven's Fifth. 10oFrederic I. Carpenter, Ralph Waldo Emerson: Representative Se- lections. with Introduction. Bibliography) andfihotes, (New Yong?“ ZEtru ican Book Company. l93h), American Writers Series. p. 21. \J( h See how Soracte white with snow Stands shining. while the laboring woods Bend with their burden. and the floods Feel freezing Winter chill their flow. These are pale words and smell of lavender and old lace. But they are for the most part.Anglo-Saxon words. and if Sanborn could write these he should have been able to see that it would be better to hire some responsible boy in the Concord High School to capy Thoreau's letters accurately than to tamper as he did with the originals. Of course the reviewers of Sanborn's Familiar Letter§_knew nothing of Sanborn's unfortunate habits. and we must look at their reviews as critiques of a queer amalgam. They were in the position of judges who must decide which of the Siamese twins has better blood. The reviewer for The Critic felt that there was Iprobably no one living who could edit better the letters of Henry D. Thoreau.than his companion and friend, Frank B. Sanborn,” and he continued: The letters which Emerson collected some thirty years ago showed. as one might expect and as Mr. Sanborn points out, only one side of the poet-philosOpher's character. Mr. Sanborn has gone farther. He has given us an insight into the interesting, Open-hearted home life of the man, has shown us the lighter side of his nature, when he could write in chatty mood of domestic trials and comforts. and when he did not hesitate1 even. to Joke and to make puns as the spirit moved him. The critic in Th3.Natiog.was also enthusiastic. After discussing (4 contents of the book,,he praised Sanborn for his success in fulfilling his ”purpose in undertaking a new collection, namely, to show Thoreau in a less aloof and stoical aspect than Emerson deliberately singled out." 101Charles E. L. Wingate, "Boston Letter," 222 Critic, (Number 657, September 22. 189D). p. 106. \os' x L: Thoreau's sister Sophia objected to the one-eidedness cf Emerson's choice, and cherished a hope for something differ- ent and more complete which Mr. Sanborn has now pionsly fulfilled. The letters which do most to correct the stoic- ism and the didacticism of the earlier collection are those written by Thoreau to Emerson when he was in Europe. or elsewhere away from home. and Thoreau was living under his roof and looking out for things about the house and garden. The critic then went on to show how keenly he too enjoyed the volume, and how much he learned about Thoreau's genius and character from reading his letters. There were his "close and beautiful friendship" with Mrs. Emerson, his "genial and pleasant“ relation to the children. The letters showed too how "Thoreau's misanthrnpic bark was much worse than his bite,” and how "he was nothing if not hyperbolical.' And the favorite subject of his exaggeration was his indif- £erence to mankind, his contempt for his contemporaries. Practically he liked many peeple. and some very much.... He is never happier in these letters than in describing one person and another. He had the keenest eye for character and its expression in the human face. Most interesting to the critic was Thoreau's emergence as a "chameleon” in the correspondence: He knows well enough that neither Emerson nor Greeley would tolerate such pyrotechnics as he fires off in his letters to his friend Blake of Worcester. To read some of these is very much like filling one's belly with the east wind, but they contain passages of rare and tremulous beau— ty. some of his funniest exaggerations, and unquestionably some forms of expression concerning the deep things of God that cannot seem otherwise than irreverent and blasphemous to the conventional and traditional mind.... In his first letter to Emerson, he appears to be trying hard to be more Emersonian than he. but it is not long before he discovers a more excellent way, and when writing him is at his simplest and his best. The critic then disinterred the old question of Thoreau's originality and its relation to Emerson's genius. and said at length: The right answer probably is. that thong: the influence of Emerson upon his youthful mind was very great. he could hardly have helped being much what he ultimately was if he had never known any such influence. There is much in his books that we could spare because we have it in Emerson in a much saner. sweeter form. But there is much more, es- pecially of the concrete of nature, that is all his own, and there are sentences of such large and striking s. irit- ual significance that beside the best of Emerson's they suffer no injurious reflection on their quality. These reviews demonstrate some of the great success which greeted Sanborn and his volume and stimulated its publishers to issue the Man- uscript Edition of Thoreau's works in twenty volumes in 1906. This edition. based on the Riverside Edition of 1891:, was limited to 600 numbered capies. and the first volume of each set contained a piece of 102 Thoreau's autograph manuscript bound in before the frontispiece. From these same plates were printed The Writings gf_Henry David Thoreau in the so-called "standard” Walden Edition most often used by Thoreau scholars. Both the Manuscript and the Walden Edition included. of course. as its Volume VI, the Familiar Letters edited by Sanborn. He 102 Francis H. Allen in his A Bibliography of Henry Ds_vid Thoreau pp. 52-53. gives the details of this volume. The major changes in- cluded the omitting of the four volumes of journal extracts edited by H. G. 0. Blake in the 189” volumes and the adding of the complete journal in fourteen volumes edited by Bradford Torrey. The collection of poems in Volume V was enlarged by "the addition of a number of poems taken from Poems of nature." edited by Sanborn and Henry 8. Salt in 1895. a volume which I shall discuss presently. As for the original autograph manuscripts bound into the front of the first volume.‘they i'vary in interest. some of than adding materially to the value of the sets. Some of the sets. issued in fine bindings. have two frontispiecee to each volume. a carbon.photograph of a flower and a colored photo— gravure. The edition was printed on a specially manufactured paper with 'Thoreau' in the watermark." .ad "enlarged" the present volume, he said in his introduction, "Chis 2y additional letters to Ricketson. and all those to C. H. Greene.” Fe .rcorporated the Ricketson letters in their chronological places in tie :ert, but the letters to Calvin H. Greene of Rochester, Michigan, and :he two to Isaig3Hecker plus his comments on all of these he incorporated Ln an appendix. From the plates of this Walden Edition, too. came the five-volume edition. Thoreau's Complete Workg. edited by H. G. 0. Blake 1nd issued by the same publisher in 1929 as The Concord Edition. With :he re-issuing of the original 189M volume in 1932. Sanborn's work has :ome down to our own generation. and is still, in January. 1953, the ’definitive' edition of Thoreau's letters. Knowing what I do about Sanborn's editorial propensities. I am at I lose to know’what to think about some of the above critical reviews. is I have said before. the reviewers of Sanborn's volume were unwittingly oeviewing the work of a team of writers. Whose writing were the critics reading? Was it Thoreau's or Sanborn's or a mixture? If it was a mix- :ure. how rich was the mixture: that is. how great was the percentage if Thoreau? Do these critical comments by reviewers from two of the .eading'periodicals raise our opinion of Sanborn as a writer? Or do :hese reviewers make us marvel even more that Thoreau could thrill his :ritical readers with the power of his language in spite of Sanborn's 'Orruptions? 10 3For the collation of the Manuscript Edition of the Collect.c l Ofkfl see Allen, pp. 52-53: for a collation of The Writires of, mar? fizi__Thoreau/ Familiar Letters/ Edit ed by F. B. Sanbcr;7 H £21 :8} cition77nev1co/7Bo stem and New York/ Houghton mm}. in and Company ' LCCCCVI/ see Allen. p. 33. The Walden Edition, says Allen. also in luned the same illustrations as the Manuscript Edition. These are not the last of my speculations. Is it pessille to determine whether Sanborn's prettifying made Thoreau more acceptable or less acceptable to the succeeding generations who read these re- issued editions? If. as Harding feels. Sanborn translated Theresa's style into ”a typical piece of Victorian sentimentalism." perhaps San- born. if he tampered with the other letters as he did with this. at- tracted a multitude of readers who would have gagged on a dose of Thoreau undiluted. Perhaps. then. for a succeeding generation. Sanborn hindered Thoreau's pepularity-hindered it. that is. if the literary public was influenced to accept or reject Thoreau as a personality re~ vealed in his letters. Of course. until Harding and Bode publish their new edition of the letters. we shall not know to what degree each letter was Sanbornized. When we do know this. we shall probably find it dif- ficult to determine to what degree Sanborn should be praised or damned. nor'shall we know precisely whether his editorial meddling hastened or delayed Thoreau's fame. Perhaps this will be a study in itself. Or, perhaps the question is no longer of any importance. And why did none of the critical Journalists between the day of jpublication of Sanborn'e biography in 1882 and the day of Harding's article in 1951 check Sanborn's scholarship? I leave the reader to speculate on this dismal thought. It should be added in conclusion. however. that the work. with all ‘its faults. has some importance. and such a student of Thoreau as Francis H. Allen declares that its “connective tissue of biographical and,expflbnatory matter was a valuable addition" though he agrees that 327 ”Mr. Sanborn went out of his way to paraphrase-~and to paraphrase in- 104 accurately--what might better have been quoted as written.” In 1895. the year after Sanborn saw the first edition of his Familiar Letters through the press. he collaborated with Henry 8. Salt ‘— '—_ 105 in editing a volume of Thoreau's verse entitled Poems 2£_Nature, Salt was a British devotee of Thoreau's who had published a Life of the au- thor in 1890. A modest little book-its second edition containing only 208 pages-~it so impressed its readers that one Thoreau editor as late as 193% could write: IBy some scholars regarded as the best of’all the 106 biographies because neither opinionated nor adulatory.I How Sanborn and.his rival biographer came to collaborate on this volume I do not know. According to Bode. Salt edited the volume in England from manu- 107 scripts which Sanborn and others sent him. The unsigned Introduction to the volume states: ___ 101‘I'rancis H. Allen. Thoreau's Editors: History and Heminiscence (The Thoreau Society. Booklet No. 7. Monroe. N. 0.. The Nocalore Press. 1950)! PP. 12.13. 105Selected and Edited by Henry 5. Salt and Frank B. Sanborn (Lon- don: John Lane. The Bodley Head: Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin. 1895). 122 PP. l 06Bartholow V. Crawford, Thoreau. p. lxii. Falter Harding of the Schools of English. University of Virginia. in a personal letter to me. April 29. 1952. also says: '1 think 5311: gets closest to the spirit of T. but he is rather outdated.“ 1O7Bode. Collected Poems gngenrz Thoreau. Po 27h. 328 The fiftyogpoems here brought together...ars perhaps two~ thirds of those which Thoreau.prsservsd. Many of them were printed by him. in whole or in part. among his early contri~ butions to Emerson's 255i. or in his own two volumes. 223_ Mg and Eliza. which were all that were issued in his life- time. Others were given to Mr. Sanborn for publication. by Sophie Thoreau. the year after her brother's death (several appeared in The Boston Commonwealth in 1861): or have been furnished from time to time by Hr. Blake. his literary exec- utor.109 ccording to Allen. ”except as otherwise noted. these poems had been reviously published.in the Week. Valden. Excursions. and.giscellanigg. at very often without titles.‘ The exceptions were these: six were ublished for the first time in this new volume: eight Sanborn had rinted for the first time in The Commgneg§;£g_while he was editor: one ,e had printed for the first time in his 1382 biography: and one he had 110 rinted both in his biography and in The Commonwealth. In discussing their selection the editors say in part: It has not been attempted to make this a complete collection of Thoreau's poems. because. as has been well said. 'many of them seem to be merely pendants to his prose discourse. dropped in as forcible epigrams where they are brief. and in other instances made ancillary to the idea Just expressed. or to perpetuate a distinct conception that has some vital connection with the point from which it was poured forth. It is. therefore. almost an injustice to treat them separately at all. 111 108Actually. there are R9 in the volume itself and one other in- edded in the introduction. 109The preface, printed in italics. is transcribed here in the 9118]. £011 t 0 110mm, A Bibliograpl“ of Hem“ David Thoreau. pp. 3’4-35. M. 6-77 and Bode. Collected Poems “of Hengthhogg 3 under the separate itles. (”To My Bro her" was first published in the 1882 biography. nd "Th; Departureu appeared both in that biography and in The Common- 881th. llyArticls on iThe Poet of Thoreau.‘ by'Joel Benton. Lippin- ott's Magazine. 1883—” mborn's footnote.) 329 In discussing Thoreau's attitude toward his verses. the history of Emer- son's hypercritical remarks upon his poetic endeavors. and the truth of Emerson's remark that Thoreau's “biography is in his verses.” the edi- tors give a clear and accurate history of Thoreauls verse writing. Then they try to determine Thoreau's merit as poet: If metrical skill be insisted on as an indispensable condi- tion of poetry. he can hardly be ranked among the poets: nor, where this criterion was dominant, wailit surprising that, as one of his contemporaries tells us. 2with reference to his verses in ghg_Dial, 'an unquenchable laughter, like that of the gods at vulcan's limping. went up over his ragged and 'halting lines.‘ But in the appreciation of poetry there is a good deal more to be considered than this: and. as the same writer has remarked. there is 'a frank and unpretending nobleness' in many of Thoreau's verses. distinguished as they are. at their best, by their ripe fulness of thought. quiet gravity of tone. and epigrammatic terseness of expres- sion. The title of post could hardly be withheld from the author of such truly powerful pieces as 'The Fall of the Leaf.' 'Winter Memories,‘ 'Smoke in Winter,‘ or 'Inspiration.‘ They then point out the fact that Thoreau.was always regarded as a poet by his friends and associates: 'Poet—Naturalist' was the suggestive title which Ellery Channing applied to him: and Hawthorne remarked that 'his thoughts seem to measure and attune themselves into spon- taneous verse, as they rightfully may, since there is real poetry in them.’ Even Emerson's final estimate was far from unappreciative. 'His poetry,' he wrote in his biograph- ical sketch. 'might be bad or good: he no doubt wanted a lyric facility and technical skill. but he had the source of poetry in his spiritual perception. His ownnverses are often rude and defective. The gold does not yet run pure—- is dressy and crude. The thyme and marJoram are not yet honey. But if he want lyric fineness and technical merits. if he have not the poetic temperament, he never lacks the causal thought. showing that his genius was better than his talent.’ 113mm,; wens, g; the Christian Examiner, 1865. (Sanborn's foot- note.) 330 The editors feel that what Thoreau said of Quarles, one of the poets whom Thoreau.most admired. might be most aptly applied to him- self: It is rare to find one who was so much of a poet and so little of an artist. Hopelessly quaint, he never doubts his genius: it is only he and his God in all the world. He uses language sometimes as greatly as Shakespeare: and though there is not much straight grain in him. there is plenty of rough. crooked timber. They point out how Thoreau's style has an inherent likeness to that of Herbert. Donne, Cowley. Iand other minor Elizabethans," and that the "Sic Vita” might ”almost have a niche in Herbert's Temple.” Summing up his work as a writer of verse and.prose, they declare: It must be granted, then. that Thoreau. whatever his limitations. had the poet's vision, and sometimes the poet's divine faculty: and if this was manifested more frequently in his masterly prose. it was neither absent from his verse nor from the whole tenor of his character. It was his des- tiny to be one of the greatest prose writers whom America has produced. and.he had a strong. perhaps an exaggerated. sense of the dignity of this calling. 'Great prose,' he thinks, 'of equal elevation. commands our respect more than great verse. since it implies a.more permanent and level height, a life more pervaded with the grandeur of the thought. The poet only makes an irruption. like a Parthian. and is off again. shooting while he retreats: but the prose writer has conquered. like a.Roman. and settled colonies.‘ If. therefore, we cannot unreservedly place Thoreau among the poetical'brotherhood. we may at least recognise that he was a poet in the larger sense in which his friends so regarded him—~he felt. thought. acted. and lived as a poet. though he did not always write as one. In his own words- 'My life has been the poem I would.have writ, But I could not both live and.utter it.‘ Such qualities dignify life and make the expression of it memorable, not perhaps immediately, to the multitude of read- ers. but at first to an appreciative few. and eventually to a wide circle of mankind. The high merit of this preface, only part of which has been re— nrinted here. can best be seen by comparing its view of Thoreau's verse with the views of our twentieth-century critics. Bode's introduction to his Collected Poems adds little to this, and Crawford says in his introduction to his group of representative selections: The literary world has, however. been of one mind in rele— gating to an inferior position most of Thoreau's verse. ”Smoke” finds its way into the usual collections of American lyric poetry. and particular poems have their enthusiastic admirers. but so far there seems no renascence for Thoreau. the poet. The creative impulse. though fairly violent while it lasted, was short-lived. Looking back regretfully upon his youth, Thoreau once remarked that some of the verse Emerson so summarily a>ndemned with it's author's approval was perhaps better than they had thought it. Nothing that we have seen leads us to lament Emerson's decision. The editors of The Literagy Historyw g the United §tates feel that “both in composition and iAreception, Thoreaufis poetry has had a checkered career": Because of its unevenness, because his friends. when their first enthusiasm faded, persuaded him that prose was his higher medium, his verse had been relegated to a place of little importance. But the second quarter of the twen» tieth century has witnessed a revival. Thoreau's poetry, say its recent advocates. belongs not with the past but with the present--has no kinship, in its conscious and mil- itant heterodoxy. with standard.patterns such as Whittier. Longfellow, Bryant. and Lowell established. ”Thoreau, like Emily Dickinson....anticipates the bold symbolism, airy im- ‘pressionism, stringent realism, and restless inconsistencies of twentieth-century poetry.” Like these scholar poets. he too was searching for suggestions from all sshools and times which he approved of.... Certainly. in the brief period during which he wrote it, Thoreau was deeply in earnest over his poetry. It is valid to argue that much of it is better than his own day supposed: 113Crawford, Thoreau (published in 193M), p. li. 332 that had not Emerson's advice turned him from it. Thoreau's poetry might have attained further importance. As it is. many readers will probably prefer to agree with Emerson's dictum: "Tbs gold does not yet flow pure. but is drossy and crude...."11 Bode. in his Collected Poems of Henry Thoreau. gives three major reasons why most peeple have ignored Thoreau's poetry: The first in importance. perhaps. is its uneven quality. The second. and related, reason is the fact that he himself lost enthusiasm for the poetic medium: the quantity of his production quickly dwindled. The third is the mistaken be. lief that the verses are mere fragments woven into the prose, especially in the Week, and inseparable from it. This third reason. says Bode. “was given its fullest expression in the preface to the little volume of Thoreau's poetry. Poems 2£_Nature.” Because the view of its editors "must be faced by anyone compiling a fuller edition of the poem." he asks: "Was their stand well taken?“ As many of the poems in the Week had already been separately pub- lished. as many more had been composed separately in his Journal and then inserted in the Week. and as his fragments are often parts of longer poems. Bode concludes that the editors‘ argument is invalid. "The great number of his poems can stand as entities and by themselves. . . . The glowing lines and the quiet. the prosaic and the Transcen- dental--they are all here. Almost all have at the very least the large. 115 astringent force of young genius.“ 11h Vol. I. hie—1:11 (published in 19147). The mus does not, un- fortunately. contain footnotes. and I have not been able to find out who wrote the quoted statement. 115Bode. pp. ix-xii. 333 For obvious reasons. we shall probably never know precisely which change was made by which editor in 222E§.2£.§§£E£2' but knowing the high quality of Salt's biography and the curious editorial philosOphy of Sanborn. inferences seem inevitable. In this volume they printed for the first time-but not necessarily in fullo-sixjpoems: "Nature.” “The Auroga of Guido.” 'A.Winter Scene." "Poverty." "Ding Dong.“ and "The Them?"1 The first two lines of ”The Thaw” had appeared in a slightly dif- ferent form in Excursions. and ”Ding Dong.“ called in the original man- uscript “The Peal of the Bells.“ is published here ”somewhat revised and without the last stanza.:17 Again the two editors made changes of varying kinds in their volume. In ”The Aurora of Guido,” for instance. they made the following: 116 Allen. A Bibliography 91 Henry David Thoreau. pp. 314—36. 117These texts may be compared by looking at Bode. pp. 107 and 111. ' and Poems 9'1: Nature. pp. 89 and 119. x»: x» 4: Lumen seam 1‘.in ens- Less n: 5222023 am. an m 33 2.0.4.9.: Poems of Nature: GUIDO'S AURORA THE AURORA OF GUIDO A FRAGMENT The God of day rolls his car up The God of day his car rolls up the slepes. , the slepes. Reining his prancing steeds with Reining his prancing steeds with steady hand. steady hand: The moon's pale orb through The lingering moon through west- western shadows grapes. ern shadows gropes. While morning sheds its light While Morning sheds its light o'er sea and land. o'er sea and land. The early breeze ruffles the The early breeze ruffles the poplar leaves. poplar leaves: The curling waves reflect the The curling waves reflect the washed.[?] light. unseen light: The slumbering sea with the The slumbering sea with the day's impulse heaves. day's impulse heaves. While o'er the western hills While o'er the western hills retires the drowsy night. retires the drowsy night. The sea birds dip their bills The seabirds dip their bills in ocean's foam. in Ocean's foam. Far circling out over the Far circling out over the frothy waves.-— frothy waves.- 118 The poem, I'Nature." appears in two versions in manuscripts pre- served at Harvard and the Morgan Library. 0f the following version jprinted as the basic text in Bode. the Harvard manuscript includes only lines 9-10 plus four extra lines not given here: 1lgln the stanza omitted here. a semicolon follows the last word in the third line in the Sanborn volume: no mark of punctuation appears in the original. (Bode. p. 217: Poems g£_Nature. p. 19.) B s Tex‘ 2.3. Given 131 £919. 0 nature I do not aspire To be the highest in thy quire. To be a meteor in the sky Or comet that may range on high, Only a zephyr that may blow Among the reeds by the river low. Give me thy most privy place Where to run my airy race. In some withdrawn unpublic mead Let me sigh upon a reed. Or in the [7] woods with leafy din _ Whisper the still evening in. For I had rather*bo thy child And pupil in the forest wild Than be the king of men else- where And most sovereign slave of care To have one moment of thy dawn Than share the city's year for- lorn. Some still work give me to do Only be it near to you. ‘14 \N U1 ..Saabsra __and.- an an is Poems of Nature 0 nature! I do not aspire To be the highest in thy quire.-« To be a meteor in the sky, Or comet that may range on high: Only a zephyr that may blow Among the reeds by the river low; Give me thy most privy place Where to run my airy race. In some withdrawn, unpublic mead Let me sigh upon a reed. Or in the woods. with leafy din. whisper the still evening in: Some still work give me to do.-- Only-~be it near to you! For I‘d rather be thy child. And pupil. in the forest wild. Than be the king of men elsewhere, And most sovereign slave of care: To have one moment of thy dawn. ‘Than share the city's year for- 10m. 119 It is possible to argue whether the two editors harmed Thoreau's 'verse by their punctuation of his lines. Certainly. I feel. the mean- ing is unimpaired by their punctuation. though I admit it may add over- tones--or undertones-for one reader that it does not add for another. 'But it is difficult to believe that the editors improved on the origi- nal when they transferred its last two lines-which to me seem to fur- :nish.a quiet. simple completeness-use that they now appear as lines 13 and 1h. Nor did the editors in this instance improve Thoreaufls meter 'hy changing his line ”For I had rather bo'thy‘childP to ”For I'd rather be thy child.“ We need not go into the changes in the rest of the poems. ‘but shall let this serve as a typical example. 119Bode. p. 216. and Poems g£_Nature. p. l. 336 Salt and Sanborn little realized when they estimated Thoreau's output how much he had actually written. Though they thought they had printed two~thirds of Thoreau's verse, they had in truth published only a quarter of it. for Bode's edition contains 20% poems. To conclude my criticism of’Poems 9f Nature. I quote Francis H. Allen's brief esti- mate of the work: Their selection of fifty out of seventy-five or so poems that Thoreau.had.preserved was Judicious and omitted much verse that adds no lustre to its author's reputation. The Introduction says. "In the present selection a return has been made. wherever possible. from the emendations intro- duced by Thoreau's editors to the original text.‘ What emendations were referred to I have not ascertained. Alas. how often one wishes that Sanborn's $58 emendations could be similarly detected and discarded! Good or bad. Sanborn and Salt's volume remained the only separate vol- ume of Thoreau's poems for almost fifty years. Sanborn's third extended sketch of his friend. The Personality gnghoreau, appeared in 1901 in a limited edition of 500 copies on French hand-made paper and 15 on Japan paperleghg_§§tigp_was the only critical Journal of first rank to take extended notice of this little volume. The reviewer pointed out that this was Sanborn's third at- tempt tociescribe Thoreau. and. ”although the briefest of them all. is the most satisfactory. mainly for the reason that it confines itself more closely to direct personal impression than the 'Life' of 1882 or Francis H. Allen. Thoreau's Editors: History and Reminiscence. p. 130 121It bore the imprint of Charles E. Goodspeed and D. B. Updike. The Merrymount Press. Boston. 337 the 'Familiar Letters' of lSBh.“ Noting the contents of the volume. he says: He have at the outset a rejection of the too common notion that Thoreau.was a deliberate copy. which only succeeded in being a caricature. of Emerson. Their minds were of one family. but of external resemblance there was little beyond that of the handwriting. Still. can Lowell and others have been so much mistaken here as Mr. Sanborn thinks? It is true. as he says. that it is difficult to cOpy Emerson. but it is less difficult to take on something of his form through vital sympathy. Sanborn's account of the Thoreau family is “vivid." says the critic. and “has the accent of complete sincerity with its items of Mrs. Tho» I reau's social tartness and her husband's genial assumption of a worse defect of hearing than he had. in order to escape responsibility for the harsher sallies of her wit.“ Then he says: Mr. Sanborn's earliest note on Thoreau's appearance re- marked “a huge Emersonian nose.“ for which the wage held Thoreau responsible. and “his collar turned over like Em- erson's.” The character of his walks. which Mr. Sanborn shared. is distinguished from that of Emerson's and Ghanning's in a do- lightful manner. He did not trust his memory of natural ap- pearances. but made his notes ”with his eye on the object.“ Thoreau's singing of "Tom Bowline' is. perhaps. the most sur- prising of Mr. Sanborn's reminiscences. The most pathetic passage is that touching Thoreau's partial alienation from Emerson; the most instructive that on Thoreau's classical scholarship. "better than Emerson's. Channing's. or Hawthorne's.“ and not inferior to Lowell's. each Judged in middle life. The critic then concludes his review by declaring: ‘A book about Thoreau limited to five hundred cepies seems a queer paradox. when one thinks of the unsold cepies of 'The Week' dumped on the author's hands. This hock is beautifully got up in every respect. but it is a pity that its cost will make it the collector's trophy. when it should be widely read. Why should not Mr. Sanborn treat Emerson. Ellery Channing. and Alcott in this concise and personal manner. and.put the four 333 studies into one democratic book? We do not advise the in- clusion of Hawthorne. who. forlgél his Concord residence. was a spirit of another color. This enthusiastic review indicates quite well the merit and scope of the volume. Sanborn relied on many of the same sources which he used in his 1882 biography. adding some new quotations and anecdotes. Many anecdotes he merely repeated. some he expanded. and others he re— told with variations. Compared to the 1882 biography. this is an im- provement in that Sanborn focused his attention on Thoreau and omitted to a surprising degree irrelevant digressions. Its organization is much better. though this does not mean its organization is all it should be. The volume gains importance. too. in its reprinting in fac- simile and for the first time Thoreau's poemJPray. to what earth does this sweet cold belong.“ and. also in facsimile. a list Thoreau had made of his reading during Th; 21;; period. As Crawford says. the vo 1- ume “fills out the picture with additional narrative bitsjz} To me one of the most interesting items in the volume is Sanborn's editing of the passage from the letter of Thoreau to Horace Greeley of Jay 19. 18148. which we have already quoted in full. As one looks at he three columns below. one wonders what the implications are of San- orn's present transcription. Has Sanborn now after seven years re-read .3 version of the letter in the 18914 volume of Familiar Letters and de- ded that Thoreau's use of language is better than he thought? Here a Sanborn's two versions of one passage: 12222 £222.22. um (Mm-y 6. 1902), m. 123Bartholow V. Crawford. Thoreau. p. lxii. 339 .ns .mm .9 .AHomH .mmoam pasoahuaoz was .oxacao .m .n .cooamvoom .m cadence “acumomv awesome.wm Hagan isompom may .mhopmmm use ommimww .an a.maooaoq o.ameao;e one muopqmm .m mexsmaha .msuoumm oom #NH paoom o as: on can toqx_5oh came: some tonII.0pmmpauomqa op a0: Had: sea oma:_< .aua how ceammsm mama some ease some“: moaneman was we eases an use .hHHodOHo immooo undo on» a“ ume: a“: op com cafiomm .:08 mo name 050 non» sweat oHaaaH a on on commemoum on} .umnomee on» as: scenes on ma enema .mmom heavens meme mos has» sea» .a an .ooa moses aaass can use .hnvamot emu no smooch» ton on» so mmacsoamc .epouaom a“ wdubhdus oaoom H0ll.00duafiodhmdd hflfig OMUOHspOfi MO UHTOS OI 0.26am nuns tom .oso osss_haseasoaussa .0 Maw.» #OH HHOfi Md Id oGHGHnH 3800 0v U0M0Hflbflh9 nob m n Mfldfiv 0v val OhG DHIHWAOMOSP “Howdy obese ho h £9 vmflsommmww mummeMIl am «open [nanomqp hnmeaaoom on» scum sag aofiswsapoae so» canoe son .hxoaaq: ea one seat ogp.hom nos an humans» noose“: as on awn cameos some“: aoaoeaw man and you an: poem» use to: mac: enamoo op .ouapfluaaa on» son» new“: haaooa on on Ma .aoaoaom one ac: masons has .haouo on» mo scam segue one use: on pea .ono use was om used no no .epouamm ma apnoea use omouooa so unease swoon wonllc.m0avdfio lummdd been: owvoalonx HO udflm lhflmfngunvho dMOn flwuwo.oou mud .Huw Dean vcfiv vadMWHMMOMMQmH 006% has peaches on» edao peace a a. an: azmwa I ”“0.“90 V a“.mmwwmwmmmmMWWfiWMMMIltit a UHCD «13' :NH saoom e not on «on roux .floh case: mom» tom .oemnuu lacuna op ac: Had: use on“: 4. .3“: now oeaMHne enoH muss egos some“: uoaaeapm can no names hp one .hand Imoaeoooo gonad on» on mac: can op pod cdfioao .sea me some one some you“: oapuaa s on on eomuoaoam on: noaonom on» war common on ma enema .mmom someone made use can» mafia ea on .dma woman haasmdm one is amends: one we omosoupom on» no mounds“ led :: epoausm a“ wmaeuoom oaooa so soasasosasas soon: oweofiuosu ac paoaaaoups one agape enema or mama some pom .oao when aaamfiflsomm a as» 90H smog» a“ as adsaaaoo o xaagupOMowmwfiamag nopfloaSog» as .323 3140 Sanborn still can not bring himself to accept Thoreau's “work in the ditch," but he has now decided to go a little farther than his first translation of the phrase into ”coarse work" for the Egmiliar Lsttegg and transcribe it as "work in the dirt." His changing of Thoreau's restrictivs'clause in “There is no reason why the scholar who professes to be a little wiser than the mass of men” to a non-restrictive clause. presents an entirely different meaning to the sentence. and reflects Sanborn's oft-repeated hatred for college professors rather than the attitude of Thoreau. To conclude. the seventy-one pages of 91.9.. Personality 23 Thoreau do as much as the 1882 biography-wand perhaps they do more-to clarify and portray the character of Thoreau. Sanborn's next five more important projects were the preparation of limited editions of Thoreau's works for the members of the Biblio- phile Society of Boston. 111 of these volumes were beautiful specimens of the printer's art. They were richly bound: they were usually printed on Holland handmade paper or Japanese vellm. which often bore the watermark of the Bibliophile Society; and they usually contained fac- simile reprints. photographs. or original etchings especially prepared for these editions. The quality of what was printed on these beautiful pages, was. however. quite another matter. 3141 First. in 1902. Sanborn edited Thoreau's The Service. which was 125 published for members only. in a limited edition of 520 cepies. Though this was the first time the essay had been printed in complete form. Sanborn had read aloud extracts from Thoreau's original manuscript at the Concord School of PhilosoPhy August 2. 1882. and a portion of it had been printed in the Riverside Edition of the Miscellanieg in 1893. and in the Walden Edition of 9323 §_o_d_. g_n__d_ Miscellanies. Then too. as Allen points out. most of its contents could havesbeen found scattered 12 about in the earlier pages of Thoreau's Journal. Thoreau had sent the manuscript to Margaret Fuller when she was editor of _'I_'_h_e_ 9.13.1: during its first year. its first number having ap- peared in July. 1810. She held the manuscript until December 1 of that year. says Sanborn. and finally refused it in this note to the author: Last night's seconds-ceding only confirms my impression from the first. The essay is rich in thoughts. and I should be pained not to meet it again. But then. the thoughts seem to me so out of their natural order. that I cannot read it through without pain. I never once feel myself in a stream of thought. but seem to hear the grating of tools on the mosaic. It is true. as Mr. Emerson says. that essays not to be compared with this have found their way into”!he Dial." But then. these are more unassuming in their tone. and have an air of quiet good-breeding. which induces us to permit their presence. Yours is so rugged that it ought to be commanding. 1 251913 title page bears the inprint of Charles E. Goodspeed. Bos~ ton. 1902: verso. this statement: "A limited edition of 500 copies of this book: was printed on French hand-made paper. and twenty copies on Japan paper. by D. B. Updike. The Merrymount Press. Boston. in March. 1902. . . . " 126Francia E. Allen. 5 Bibliography 93: Henry David Thoregg. pp. 37.78- 3‘42 This may imply that Bnerson thought it could bear publication: yet he did. not publish it when he became sole editor of the paper. Sanborn says the manuscript then came to him around 1882. from Emerson's portfolios of papers written by their various friends. It was ”an essay of twenty-two full manuscript pages. in the familiar script of Thoreau, tied together with knots of faded pink ribbon. like his College Commence- ment 'part.’ but with no numbering of the pages.« As for the content of the essay. Sanborn feels that. "more than any of [Thoreau's] published writings. it displays that taste for para- do: which often is found in authors of a singular originality. and of such a profound imagery as Thoreau had.‘ Its form [says Sanborn] was perhaps suggested 1) the dis- courses on Peace and Non-Resistance which in 18 were so numerous in New England: while the native pugnacity of Thoreau provoked him to take up the cause of war and persist in the apostolic symbolism of the soldier of the Lord. and the Middle-Age crusader. Human life is his tspic. and he views it with an Oriental scOpe of thought. in which dis- tinctions of Time and Space are lost in the wide prospect of Eternity and Immortality. At variance with this. Sanborn feels. is his play upon words. while “his wonderful glances at outward nature. always interpreted symbolic- ally of the spiritual life. indicate how early and how intense was that perception of the aspects of the universe which first (and perhaps chiefly still) awakened an interest in Thoreau's pages." Characteris- tic. too. Sanborn feels. are Thoreau's ecstasies over music. "of which he was ever the enthusiastic votary.' In this whole essay. says Sanborn. one feels “the spirit of youth. “its confidence in itself. its haughty scorn for the conventional and 316 customary.—-e. singular blending of the aristocratic and the democratic in its tone towards other men.--v:ho are at once the dust of the earth and the superiors of the stared]?7 Sanborn's effort aroused little notice in the principal critical journals. Though The 933119. merely noted its publication in its “Book- Buyer's Guide.'1'2 £113 1.323.129. commented. "Now the stone which the lapidar- ies rejected has been set in a manner equal to. if not beyond. its Just deserts.u ”It will add nothing to Thoreau's reputation.” the critic continued. "but it will furnish the critics of Transcendentalism with one of their most striking illustrations of its occasional extravagance.- Here is a kind of writing that makes the most unintelligible passages of the earlier Enerson seem miracles of clarity.']'29 Nevertheless the value of Sanborn's publishing of this work can best be understood when one considers Mark Van Doren's critical comment: “Perhaps more of the essential Thoreau can be seen in 'The Service' than 130 in any other twenty-five pages of him.“ Second. in 1905 Sanborn edited for the Society The First and Last Journeys o_f_ Thoreau Lately Discovered Among His Unpublished Journals 127Sanborn. «Introductory Note." The Service. pp. vii-xi. 123393 Critic. m (December. 1902). 578- 129312 Nation. Lm (August 7. 1902). 117-118. 130mm David Thoreau: A Critical Study (Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 1916). p0 HE. and Manuscript; in an edition limited to 1189 c0pies for members only. The Society printed the manuscript through the courtesy of W. K. Bixby of St. Louis. impressively asserting that it was ”a valuable contribu- tion to the literature of our country" and "a work that will arouse a lively interest among collectors of First Editions." Henry H. Harper, the president of the society. declared in his prefatory note: When an ”unpublished manuscript" of Thoreau was first an- nounced. it created somewhat of a sensation. and many admir- ers of this great poet-naturalist and philosopher ventured to assume that ”it can't be so; it must be a forgery.“ But. he stated. there could be no doubt about the genuineness of the originals. “for every line is in the autograph of the author himself." Of the work of Sanborn. the editor. continued Harper. "It is indeed fortunate that the present manuscripts came to light in time to permit us to avail ourselves of the sound scholarship and thorough conversance of one who spent many years in personal contact and close followed; mi th their distinguished author.” The two volumes consisted of mterial from a large collection of unpublished Thoreau manuscripts which had been presented to the society through the ”liberality and kindness” of Mr. Bizby. The first Journey was the one Thoreau took on the Merrimac and Concord Rivers in Septem- ber. 1839. which he described in his Journal and the Week: the last was his trip to Minnesota with young Horace Mann in 1861. The volumes con- tained also some fragments of his Staten Island Journal of 18h} and a portion of an essay on Conversation; the addendum to Volume I comprised portions of Journals and other writings including a number of Thoreau's \ )4 .5' \JT poems not previously published. The connective tissue simplied by banborn clarified and explained the material and produced a connected narrative. Though the volume bore the date 1905. it was not actually distri- 131 buted to the members of the society until 1907. It received no notice from reviewers in the principal critical magazines. but a recent critic. Crawford. feels that it is "particularly valuable because of the detail with which it fills out the sad. lonesome. but characteristically reso- 132 lute Journey to Minnesota." Also in 1905. along with its Firs}:= and Last Jqurneyl. the Biblio- phile Society published Thoreau's essay entitled Sir Walter Raleigh. This too was ”Printed Exclusively for Members of The Bibliophile Sociew,” and this was the first time the essay had been published in complete form. This manuscript also came to the Society through the courtesy of W K. Bixby; its title-page stated that it was edited by Henry Aiken .retcalf. and that the introduction and notes were by Sanborn. To Bixby. Metcalf said. the members of the society were "indebted for the privi- lege of possessing such an exceedingly rare item of Americana.” and. he declared with great solemnity. ”This is a veritable treasure wherewith still further to enrich the bibliography of the publications of our So- ciety.” As this volume was being simultaneously issued with the 3.13.3.3 131Henry H. Harper. 'Prefatory Note." and Sanborn. "Introduction. I . ix-x and I, xi-mix: Allen.A Biblio a h of Henry_____ David ThoreauI Bode. Collected P_oems. pp. 273-27W— and his notes on each of pp. 38-340, the poems first published in —these volumes. 1320rawford. Thoreau. p. ‘11. 3% 1nd Last Journeys. he continued. "We are therefore permitted to bring out. as companion pieces, first $33013 of the first inedited [sic] important manuscript written by Thoreau. and also this narrative of his Western Journey.“ Bowing low to the writer of its introduction and notes. he continued: "We are fortunate. moreover. in having a special introduction to each of them prepared by Franklin Benjamin Sanborn. the greatest living authority on Thoreau. of whom he was a life-long friend 133 and neighbor.” Sanborn in his introduction told the history of the manuscript and of Thoreau's interest in Ralegh. The subject. he said. "lay along the lines of his earlier readings after leaving Harvard College." The essay. though not written so early as The Service and those parts of The Wee}: that first came out in The Dial. belonged to "that active and militant period of his life.“ It was written for The Dial. Sanborn presumed. and would have been published there “had not fate and the lack of paying subscribers" intervened. Sanborn then discussed Thoreau's sources for his essay. and showed how the finished essay grew from the Ralegi ma- terial Thoreau had cepied into his scrapbook. material he later adapted for The Week. Sanborn then voiced the cpinion that Thoreau “seems to have been guided in his Judgment of Balegh as the real author of disputed poems. by his inner consciousness of what the knightly courtier ought to have written.“ This observation gives Sanborn the Opportunity to indicate 133Pages xi-xii . 3’47 his own attainments as a scholar in a page that contains unquestionably the most recomdite and scholarly passage Sanborn ever wrote. Surpris- ingly enough. according to one student of Ralegh. Sanborn knew most of i L the important Ralegh scholarship that had been published up to 1905. Sanborn's fourth production for the BibliOphile Society may be dismissed with the comment made by Bode on his editing. The volume was the Unpublished Poems by Bryant and Thoreau: “Musings.” by William Cul— len Bryant, and "Godfrey g; Boulogge." by; Henry 2. Thoreau. Limited to 1470 copies. with the introduction to the poem of Thoreau written by Sanborn. it appeared in 1907. “Few other poems cast as unfavorable a light on Sanborn's manner of editing." says Bode. According to Allen. "The most ambitious. if not the most important. piece of editing that [Sanborn] did on Thoreau-ml had almost said per- petrated on Thoreau-was the edition of Walden in two volumes printed for the BibliOphile Society in 1909 but never—perhaps fortunately-~ 135 regularly published ' Raymond Adams. in his introduction to his edition of Walden. calls this edition a I'monument of editorial stupidity." and tells how the books happened to be published: ‘13?” To Dr. Arnold Williams. associate professor of English, Mich- igan State College. I am indebted for this cpinion. l 35Fmancis H. Allen. Thoreau's Editors: History and gang'isgg’n‘gg (Monies. N. 0.: The Hoosiers Press for The Thoreau Society. 1955), p. l . K»! t. 00. Thoreau's cullings made during the eight years he spent in polishing Walden were. like many scraps of his manuscriot. preserved and came at last to Mr. W. K. Bixby of St. Louis. who gave the Bibliophile Society of Boston permission to print the material. some twelve thousand words. in any way it saw fit. It saw fit to turn the material over to Mr. F. B. San- born. an acquaintance of Thoreau during the latter years of his life and a very inaccurate editor of Thoreau's writings. Mr. Sanborn accepted these obviously inferior passages as an integral part of the original Walden which had been omitted because. as he says. it was "the wish of the publish- ers not to have the volume of 1851: any longer." Thoreau him- self corrected the proof sheets of Walden in 185,4. Had twelve thousand words or twelve words been omitted because of any wish of the publishers. Ticknor and Fields would not have published that book. Sanborn. completely losing the spirit of Walden. decided to incorporate the material into the reguéar text and issue a New and Unabridged Edition g_f_' Walden.3 Actually. the edition itself contains. as Allen points out. "two quite 137 different stories of its origin and composition.” Henry H. Harper. in his 'Prefatory Remarks.“ says: Readers will be astonished to learn. however. that the original MS. of Walden. which has but recently come to light. contains upwards of twelve thousand words omitted from the printed editions. It has commonly been supposed that the original MS. was destroyed by the publishers of the first edition at Boston in 1851:. and it was not known until lately that Thoreau retained the original draft in his possession. After its discovery among a mass of papers left by Thoreau in an old chest. it passed directly into the hands of Mr. Bixby. who with characteristic generosity turned it over to The Bibliophile Society to print for the members. The authenticity of the MS. is unquestioned. as it is entirely in the author's handwriting. At the time Walden was first printed. Thoreau was un- known to fame. and the publishers may have ”cut" his manu- script deliberately. in order to get it into one convenient- l 8 3Raymond Adams. ed.. Walden: 9}; Life .i_1_'1_ the Woods (Chicago: The Lakeside Press. 1930). pp. xiii-xiv. 137n16n. p. 1“. 3H9 sized volume. Whether or not the MS. furnished them was destroyed for the purpose of preventing the author. or future generations. from later comparing and discovering the omissions is left to conjecture. Although the proof- pages were sent to Thoreau to read, it is doubtful if he either compared them with his own MS. or noticed the omis- sions. Even if he did. he was perhaps no less anxious than the publishers to keep down the cost of comaosition. for he had lost a gonsiderable sun on his first publishing venture. The Week. 3 As Allen points out. Harper's main points are three: (1) the manuscript was a complete entity written by Thoreau: (2) it contained some 12,000 words of matter not printed in the original edition: and (3) it may have been cut by the publishers. Harper infers, to fit it into a volume of convenient size. Sanborn. on the other hand. in his “Introduction to the New and Unabridged Edition of Walden," emphasizes that the collection placed in his hands was a miscellany: When Mr. E. H. Russell. of Worcester. inherited from his intimate friend. Mr. Harrison Blake, the Journals and other manuscripts of Thoreau, which Mr. Blake had received from Miss Sephia Thoreau at some time prior to her death in 1876. he held them for some years. with the hOpe of editing ' them himself, as Mr. Blake had partially done. Finding this hope not likely to be realized. he began to dispose of the USS by gift and by sale; and one of his first sales was of a large bulk of manuscript sheets. which apparently had not been very carefully examined either by Miss Thoreau or by Mr. Blake. but remained much as they were packed together in a large box by Thoreau himself. These manuscript sheets. says Sanborn. included "many pages torn from the original Journals. and others re-written from the Journals which in " """133' " Henry H. Harper. ”Prefatory Remarks." Walden: ...... 2.: ......Life a. 2;: Woods (Boston: The Bibliophile Society. 1909. "Printed for Members Only"). pp. ix-x. some form or other went into the two volumes published by the author in his lifetime.” There were also many pages "evidently intended" for those volumes. or for Thoreau's accounts of Canada. Cape Cod, and the Maine Woods: these pages did not. however. get into those volumes nor into the magazine articles "that preceded the posthumous publication of the books themselves.“ But, says Sanborn. of particular importance to this edition of Walden was some of this material. which he describes: The largest single collection of these sheets. whether brought together by Thoreau himself or by some one of his posthumous editors (Emerson, Sophia Thoreau. Ellery Charming. and Harri- son Blake). was of some material evidently intended for the Walden volume.--oftentimes in more than one draft. and all in Thoreau's handwriting,—-—-but very differently arranged from that form given the book at the time of its publication in 18514. Passages that then appeared in the earlier chapters were in the USS. assigned to a much later position. and vice versa: and there was no systematic division into chapters. Some of the sheets were evidently the beginning or the con- tinuation of lectures in which he had given. before audiences at Concord or elsewhere, portions of his story of Life i_n the Woods. which. whether as lectures or in the volume. was at once attractive.... There was also a blending to some extent of the USS. for T_h_e Week with those for Walden: and an in- troduction here and there of verses which were but sparingly admitted into the printed volume. though given in full in the sheets. Altogether. the omitted passages would have made between sixty and eighty additional printed pages. Probably one reason for their omission was the wish of the publishers not to have the volume of 18514 any longer than the 357 pages which it included. Other omissions were the result of re-writing. or advice from others. or of a wish to exclude personalities. dates. etc. Oftentimes no reason can be assigned for the omissions: and it sometimes happened that the omitted form was better, both in style and thought. than the printed one. The remarkable thing was that the author. in this. as in other writings. should have carefully cherished and preserved the original and the amended forms. --scn.etimes to the number of four or five separate drafts. This must have been his own act, and is in contrast with the complete destruction by him of many of his earlier manuscripts.139 139wa1dan, Bibliophile Edition. I. xxv-zxvii- 351 Sanborn then describes the extraordinary edi torial method which he pur- sues in this edition: I have gone carefully over the entire collection. and have assigned the various parts to their prOper places in the original Waldeg work. so far as this could be determined. To this remark. however, there are some unimportant and one or tw0 serious exceptions. The last relate to the order of the early chapters. which. as Mr. Fortescue says of the Memoir}; of Thibaudeau. a faithful chronicler of Bonaparte's sayings and doings. "in the original seem to be thrown to- gether quite irrespective of chronology." Thus I have made Thoreau's Second Chapter the First. and have replaced in the First those parts of the immoderately long chapter on ”Econ- cmy“ with which all the former editions Open. Some parts of the eighty-eight pages of ”Economy” have also been trans- ferred to later chapters. in which they find a more fitting place. In this way the length of the eighteen chapters has been more equalized, and the connection of topics made more evident.... The shortest of his chapters in Walden as he left them. was ”The Village:” his longest.”Economy; but much that the inordinately long one contained related tiusThe Village.” and some of it has now been placed there. Adams' comment on this editorial method is as follows: The Bixby manuscript does not suggest these rearrangements. 88an thought he knew better than Thoreau how Walden should have been written and proceeded to re-write it. He omitted passages: because he had a predilection for the periodic sentence he made many of Thoreau's sentences per- iodic; he wrote transitional passages to introduce the scraps from the Bixby manuscript. and finally produced. in 1909. two volumes which he hoped would become the authorized Walden, a book with scarcely an unmutilated page. and the whole no longer Thoreau's Walden. One cannot excuse or con- done such editing; one can but be thankful1 hat Thoreau and not Sanborn read the proof sheets in 185’4. The specific details of Sanborn's editorial "method" or 'phllOBOphy'” in his BibliOphile edition are discussed in an unpublished University of worms” I. xxvii xxix. lullteymond Adams. ed.. Walden, p. 11v. 352 l‘df: Chicago master's thesis by Maud Ethel Cryder. Miss Cryder's work shows considerable labor. but her transcriptions from her sources are so it} filled with errors. her thesis is so filled with typOgraphical errors, and so much of her writing is so ambiguous that. after spending weeks in an attempt to check her evidence. I find the major portion of her thesis incomprehensible and useless. However. in order to preserve tte most important material in her thesis. I have made an effort to plow through her Cryderization of the Sanbornization of Thoreau. Tm heads. it scans. set to work on Thoreau's box of manuscript Sanborn. who is listed on the second preliminary leaf as "the pages: editor." and Henry H. Harper. the president of the BibliOphile Society. Harper's "Prefatory Remarks” occupy the first twenty-three pages of volume one. and he acted--to use Allen's phrase-mas the deus gag machine“ of this literary enterprise. Harper. after telling how the Bibliophile Society came by the "mass of papers left by Thoreau in an old chest.” declares: . not It has.been deemed advisable to interrupt the harmony of the pages by indicating specifically, through the intro- duction of a different style of type, the words and passages 1M2 ”An Examination of the Bibliophile Edition of Thoreau‘s Walden." 1920, 56 pp. 1243 For example. on page 18. in two transcriptions from Sanborn. she makes. in her first. three errors in a passage of 22 words: in her second. four errors in a passage of 29 words. On page 21. where she prints parallel columns of Walden from page 3 of the Everyman edition opposite page 5 of Walden in the BibliOphile edition. she makes twelve errors in the transcription of Thoreau and three errors in the trans- One wonders if Sanborn's editorial habits are cription of Sanborn. epidemi c. u: k h KN restored from the MS. It is sufficient to say that in order to make a c0py of the previously printed edition conform to the text of the original MS. it was necessary to make changes in nearly three hundred pages. and in so 6 places the restored parts extend to from one to four pages. Such a statement. says Miss Cryder. ”would fill with enthusiastic anti- cipation the mind of any lover of Thoreau or of any student of the art of writing" who believes with Dr. Johnson that "it is pleasant to see great works in their seminal stage pregnant with latent possibilities of excellence: nor could there be any more delightful entertainment than to trace their gradual growth and expansion. and to observe how some- times they are suddenly improved by accidental hints and sometimes slow- In such a definitive edition of the ly improved by steady meditation." Walden manuscript-J such as the preface leads the reader to think is coming"--several things. says Miss Cryder. would be expected: Every effort would be made to keep clear the differences The between the regular edition and this edition of the MS. older order of arrangement in the MS. would be scrupulously left unchanged so that the author's process of thought in regard to this might be followed. If the work were orginally [sic] without chapter divisions. it would be left so in the new editions. in order that by comparison of eliminated por— tions and new chapter introductions in the revised work. the rhyme or reason for the final divisions might be determined. In “no case would any effort be made to smooth the rougher draft. or make it more interesting. or more intelligible. by the insertions of extraneous matter written indeed by Thoreau Such emendation would be both but for some other purpose. The completed. perfected product is unwise and unnecessary. at hand in the regular editions. No apology or improvement 1%. H. Harper. Walden. BibliOphile edition. p. 1. Harper in a note in I. 1149. states. however. that in the text on pages 1149-151 only the editors have used italics to indicate the new material that was added by the editors from the original Thoreau manuscripts and small capitals to indicate words that have been changed. 3534 is needed. The incomplete. more chaotic. less polished work is of interest for the very reason that it is incomplete. chaotic, unpolished. Likewose [sic] notes of merely bio- graphical interest would seldomfind place in a work of this description. though discriminating critical notes would be of great value. It might be added that all statements of matters of fact would necessarily be made with the greatest care and accuracy. The above is what would be expected. it might be said. demanded. But such expectations were not met. As Miss Cryder says. Mr. Sanborn did not labor under the fear expressed by J. M. Manly in his introduction to the second volume of his Pre-Shakesperean Drama: "I may plead in general that I feared to overstep the bound separating the functions of an editor of texts from those of literary adviser to the author." Miss Cryder's criticism of the editing falls under three distinct heads. but I shall present only the two which I understand. The first has to do with "careless. ambiguous. and inaccurate sistements of fact as found in the introduction and the critical notes}; 5In this category she includes such an ambiguous statement as this in one of Sanborn's notes: We have inserted here from the MS. several quaint passages not foitflg in print. and the paragraphs are divided differ- ently. “Differently from what?” she asks. ”Does he mean he changed the para- graphing? In general. the paragraph division of the BiBliOphile edi- 1 7 Later Sanborn tion varies greatly from that of the regular editions.“ says 2 1 isclvder, P. 60 luEWalden, Biblioph11° 9d" I’ 6’ 1h7cnder’ p. 60 355 manuscript. Ikrethetrhfiers omitted this passazgzin Thoreau's copied from some sketch of Mirabeau. V She wonders here whether Sanborn meant the publishers rather than the printers. ”Or does he really mean the printers left it out and no note If this last. how of it was taken when the proof shefits were read? 1 9 She indicates too how similarly does he know this to be the case?" careless notes confuse Sanborn's textual arrangement with Thoreau's arrangement in the printed editions. For example. Sanborn states in a footnote: The bulk of Thoreau's peculiar view of Philanthropy has been transferred from the long Chapter II on Economy. where it hardly belonged. to the comments on the poorlgsish family at Baker Farm, to which it has much pertinence. "But." she says. ”the long Economy Chapter is Chapter I of the regular editions and only becomes Chapter II under editorial manipulation in the BibliOphile Edition.“ Hence. she declares: This section was certainly not transferred from Chapter II It is possible that Mr. when it had never been part of it. Sanborn placed it in Chapter II at one time and then re- transferred it. If this was the case. the editor here. as above. confuses his 0E1 and the author's arrangement in p the printed editions. Of the famous ”hound. bay horse. and turtle-dove" passage of which Van Doren makes so much in his critical study. Sanborn says in a footnote: _ 1148 Walden.BibliOphile ed.. II. 2141+, note. 14 1 9Cryder. p. 7. 150 Walden. BibliOphile ed.. II. 81$. note. 15101'yder. p. 8. KN \J'I O‘\ "The following note by Thoreau. omitted from the printed editions. 9.336 152 peers in the MS.” Miss Cryder points out that "it is true this passage was omitted from the printed editions as a note, but Mr. Sanborn fails to make any statement of the fact that it was incorporated in the text of another chapter, nor does he introduce it there as is his usual cus- 153 tom.” The above serve as examples of Miss Cryder's findings in this cate- gory: others of her complaints are equally Justified, though still oth- ers, one of which she calls ”the most amusing and surprising of all," are not Justifiable in the light of subsequent research. In discussing her second main point, "that relating to liberties taken with the text in the way of rearrangement,“ several things ”of much more serious moment." she says, ”must be considered." Here she presents a table which shows how Sanborn rearranged Thoreau's original text for his BibliOphile edition. In the first column of the table she presents the page numbers of the BiblioPhile edition in their re ular Opposite, in the second column, are "those pages in the Every- order. man's Library edition from which all material (except that introduced from the MS.) was drawn." She uses the letters 3, a, and b, I presume, to refer to the tap, middle, and bottom of the page. 152Wa1den, BibliOphile ed.. II. 182. 15301.3,(181'. p. 90 Bibliophile Chapter _I_ First paragrafih Pp- 19 2: 3o " 5[m] to 11 11m to 12m 12 to 19 19‘u320 20‘M>22‘b 22b to 26 t 26 m to 3ltm 31 m to 56 Chapter _I_I_ pp.56tto§7b 57 b to 73 t 7gtto7ht 7 t to 92 b 9h t to 102 m 102 to 112 b 113 b to 117 t 117 t to 119 t 119 b to 127 t 127 m to 129 b found Found Evemsnen' 8 pp. I pp. 1 t to 2 t ' 13 to 17 ' 78 b to 79 t i an to 39 I intakes ' M6 b to “8 b ' 56mt058b ' 50 b to 55 t Chapter II except one paragraph. pp. 2 t to 3 ' 3 b to 13 m p- 15 pp. 17 m to 23 b ' 28 b to 3h b 39 to M6 b 1514 As Miss Cryder indicates in her table, “Mnsanborn took every liberty with the arrangement of old material." But as Miss Cryder takes liberties with her own table in her explanation of it which fol- lows. I shall not confuse confusion by presenting her statements. Just as Sanborn "took every liberty with the arrangement of old material," there is no reason to assume, says Miss Cryder, "that he was more particular with regard to the new." , 15“: 1a., p. 114. His trying to assign " the various parts to their proper places” [she continues] means no more than the placing of them in logical connections, never, necessarily the placing of them where Thoreau meant to have them. That he often attains a better arrangement than that of Thoreau cannot well be denied, yet there is no point in this. To a student of Thoreau what is the value of 313:. Sanborn's legic? The disastrous result is that for study so far as basis of organization and arrange- ment is concernedw-an important point in this technique of an author-this work becomes of practically no value. His use of this new material is ”inconsistent and confusing," she feels: Part of this new matter is to be found in the main text, some of it in notes. and some of it the editor seems to have omit- ted altogether. That the intention was to put the new matter in the main text rather than anywhere else seems evident not only from the fact that much of it finds place there buEBglso from statments [sic] made in the preface and elsewhere. Actually, says Miss-Cryder, two—thirds of the new material which Sanborn found in Thoreau's original manuscripts are put into the footnotes. Sanborn does not indicate that such a procedure is to be part of his editorial method, though Harper does: In a few instances omitted or changed parts have been sub. Joined in footnotes, either because they would seem to dis- turb the continuity of the text (which is perhaps one reason why they were originally left out), or for the reason that they were printed in a changed form. To speak: of these instances as ”few" is to misrepresent. says Miss Crrder. what Sanborn actually did. For. she declares, "by careful computation it is easily established that over 14,000 of the 12,000 words of new material is I: sic] introduced thus in notes." Other material, as she points out, is placed, for example, at the end of volume one, where Sanborn has tacked on several paragraphs in a footnote without any 155Ibid.. p. 18. 359 indication of where these paragraphs should 8.13361? in his edition. hiss Cryder finally suspects that "there is evidence that matter from the NS 156 a suspicion verified as fact by Odell has been omitted altogether,‘ Shepard, who says: Take, for example [Sanborn's] “Bibliophile Edition of Walden, in which he asserts that he includes all the material of tee original MSS not finally printed in the first edition. Well, in reading through the five manuscripts some years ago I ghousands of words which I“. B. S. had silently found many1 left out! Sanbom's edition, it must be said in conclusion, is indeed "a monu- and deserves this closing comment by Allen. ment of editorial stupidity." I confess that I have never been tempted to read this San- bornized Walden, and so can form no opinion of it as a Perhaps I am prejudiced. but I have the tour de force. impression that there has been little demand for its substi- tution for the book that Thoreau himself fathered. But it What was a characteristic performance for Frank Sanborn. delight he must have taken in improving on so great an author a s Tho reau! 1 6 5 Cryder, p. 18. Personal letter to me from Odell Shepard, Jordan 3 Cove, Water- 157 ford, Conn... February 9, 1951. 158 Allen, Thoreau's Editors: History and Reminiscenfi, po. lit-18 \A (3} LJ If Sanborn can be said to have written "a masterpiece," it is perhaps 313 life 9: 139113 David Thoreau published by Houghton Mifflin in 159 May, 1917. In his own eyes and in the eyes of his publisher, the book was to be the definitive volume on Thoreau, and it received for the most part fairly good reviews. Sanborn' s hope that the work would prove definitive is suggested by such statements as these which he wrote for the preface: Other letters and fragments may come to light: but so careful has been the search (and the price paid for his manuscripts so high, though he was much neglected in his lifetime), that few can be now in existence, outside of well-known collections. Their stores have mostly passed through my hands for editing or for examination.... Almost every page of his manuscript of which he left enough to fill at least twenty-five volumes, has now been searched out and printed. Sanborn seemed to anticipate that the public might wonder at his writing still another biography of Thoreau. for he felt called on to explain: A FINAL Life of Thoreau from my hand has this peculiar claim on the reader's attention, that it includes memoirs of his ancestors not before given to the public: and also, in their complete form. many essays written in his early youth.--all that the care of his kindred had preserved.-besides what 160 escaped from their research, verses, letters, and memoranda. Then he stated his purpose in the last chapter of the volume: My purpose in this volume has been to show how he cooperated in his own posthumous fame; how he built himself up in lit- erature from boyhood, and that without beinging a pedant, or trying to form a school, or even a class. l . 59The Life 21 Henry David Thoreau Including Many Essa_y_s_ Hitherto Unpublished and Some Account 93; His Familv and Eriendg. 160Pages v and ix. 161Page #98. Recounting at length in the preface Thoreau's "constant growth" to» ward literary fame, Sanborn said that this growth ”has finally called forth from my portfolios his earlier writings (chiefly college essays)," where he had kept them since writing his first biography in 1882. San— born considered these essays so important that they occupy with his notes one-fourth of the 533 pages of text. But the book contains other chap- ters narrating his careers as schoolteacher and pencil-maker, his jour» neys on the rivers and to Minnesota. and his relation to John Brown and slavery. Other more general chapters contain, as one reviewer felt, "in- teresting discussions'of Thoreau.in literature. of his symbolism and paradox, of Thoreau as friend, neighbor, citizen. man of letters. and man of affairs. "Particularly rewarding." said the reviewer. was the chapter of ”Village Sketches, chiefly from the Journals.:621n the appen- dix Sanborn added a list of the books in Thoreau‘s library. a list of authors “read or to be read by H. D. Thoreau.” three sections on family genealogy, and a letter from one of Sanborn's colleagues in prison reform commenting on the philosOphic insight which Thoreau displayed in a college forensic on "The Comparative Moral Policy of Severe and Mild.Punishments.” Francis H. Allen, who had the "not unmixed.pleasure of seeing this lxaok through the presS.' was faced with the problem of what to do with Sanborn's textual liberties. He wrote to Sanborn asking him if he would nmflce a statement in his preface “which would explain why his versions of 162W" Books Reviewed," North American RevieW. CCVI (Auzusto 1917). 308-3110 36:? matter already printed differed from previous forms." Sanhorn "consented. apparently without reluctance and in writing," says Allen, but he never sent the statement to Allen, and he died on the day when Houghton Mifflin mailed him the galley proof of his preface. "The preface,” says Allen, is “always the last of a book that the author sees in proof and now his last chance of keeping his promise.” This, Allen explains. left the company in a hole: My loyalty to Thoreau and my conscience as an editor wouldn't allow me to let things go as they stood. but it was Mr. San- born's book and it seemed to me that his publishers owed it to him to carry out his expressed intentions in regard to this statement in such a way as to present the matter entire- 1y from his point of view. So Allen added below Sanborn's signature a statement of this situation and the long paragraph which we have quoted on page 279 of this study which stated in part: Mr. Sanborn was not a slavish quoter.... If, therefore. the reader finds occasional discrepancies between the extracts from Thoreau's Journals as here given and the forms in which the same passages appear in the scrupulously exact transcript contained in the published Journal. he is rather to thank Mr. Sanborn for making these passages more orderly and more read- able. And in telling of this incident many years later, Allen added: "Peppy- cock. you say, and I quite Egree with you. In fact. I consider it my 1 3 masterpiece in that field.” 16 3Allen, Thoreaur'g Editors: Histogz and Remihiscence. pp. 15-16. In an essay chosen at Endom-w“ Characteristics of Milton's Poesy," which Sanborn prints on pp. 93-97. I have compared the part of Sanborn's transcription that lies between the beginning of the essay and the bot- tom of page 95 with the original Thoreau manuscript now in the Houghton Library. Harvard University. In this passage of about 820 words, Sanborn \493 ON \ N The volume for the most part received fairly good reviews. For example, the North aperican Review summarized its Opinions in these words: As compared with earlier memoirs--with Salt's Life of T1oreau with Channing's The Poet-Naturalist, and even with Mr. Sanborn's first biography, published in 1382--this new Life...Justifie8 itself as a needed and definitive work.... It is a little to be regretted, perhaps, that the Life as a whole is not more consecutively interesting: yet the materials contained in it, if presented rather dryly and with many digressions, are handled with skill and uniform good taste. Though one craves occasionally a little more illum- ination—-a little more sense of reality as distinct from facts-—the knowledge that the work as a whole is substantially complete, and that every statement and allusion has been un— derstandingly weighed by a friend and contemporaryefif Tho- reau compensates for any slight literary defects. The Outlook, not as fine critically as some of its contemporary literary journals, felt that “Mr Sanborn's post:humous contribution to the world's knowledge of his friend will probably furnish his own surest claim to remembrance in the future," and added that "it will certainly be made about 80 changes in punctuation, 3 changes in capital letters; he changed 7 words, omitted a portion of one sentence, transferred a 'phrase to precede rather than follow an adjective, and removed or added italics in h words. As a sample of Sanborn's editing, I print here Thoreau's original text for the paragraph which begins at the bottom of p. 91+ in Sanborn: Next rose Belial, second to none in dissimulation, 'nor yet behind in hate.‘ With a fair outside all is false and hollow within. As is often the case, his faint heart suggests a wise and.prudent course: but he is none the less a devil, though a timid one. Difficulties and dangers innumerable beset his path, he deals in hypotheses and conjectures, counts what is lost, and thanks his stars that so much yet remains,-dwells upon the evils to be apprehended from obstinately persevering in a 'bad cause, and closing, touches u :on tl:e effect of submission to appease the victor. 16hVelume CCVI (August, 1917), 308-311. if“ 20" indispensable to the student and lover of the rarely individual man of 105 genius whom it seeks to portray.” Norman Foerster in the Yale Revieg_began with an interesting remin— iscence and personal portrait of Sanborn: It is not easy to view Sanborn's new Life of Thoreau with the detachment that is as essential, in criticism, as sym- pathy. The last follower of the “practical-mystical philoso- phy miscalled Transcendentalism” died while the book was in press, and more vivid than the book itself is the memory of the man himself, even the physical man-ta11, almost towering. and thin, yet surprisingly erect; gray, yet with the gray of youth rather than of age; and with those sparkling, compre- hending eyes that one who met him could never forget. One thinks of him as the genial host of the riverside house in Concord amid all the relics and.memories of a day that is gone, and refuses to judge his book impersonally. Yet, Foerster had to confess, "It is not a wholly satisfactory piece of writingb-it is by no means the 'final and definitive biography' that the publishers proclaim it to be." And he continued: Authority it has, of course, and the mellow charm of a vigorous individualist in his old age. On the other hand, it is full of digression and prosy circumstantiality: more full of them than Sanborn's smaller biography of thirty- five years ago. .As for its organization and its focus on Thoreau, Foerster felt: The new matter has been wedged in, in great blocks, rather than incorporated. Thoreau does not get born till page 35. and all of these first pages are given to his ancestors, who are dealt with again in a later chapter, and once again in the appendix. Foerster felt too that a disproportionate amount of space was given to :repudntingb-though "with very readable running comment"-the themes 165"A New Life of Thoreau." Outlook, CXVI (June 20, 1917). 301- L03 0' \ \Ti Thoreau wrote at Harvard. Serious too is the fact that Seniorn sgefifs so much time on the youth of Thoreau yet fails to present a "clearly- focussed picture of the kind of boy he was and the home life in which he found himself, or of a clear account of his education.” As Thoreau's chief purpose in life was to "observe the outward and experience the inward,” Foerster considers Sanborn's success in pictur- ing this: Of the outward, there is an adequate description in its human aspect (the friends and the former acquaintances), but out- ward nature is virtually ignored, doubtless on the assumption that on this tOpic nothing new was to be said.... Of the in- ward, there is a good deal that is valuable and interesting -fresh insight into Thoreau the author, much detail regard- ing his intellectual life such as lists of books read, a stirring relation of how his moral constitution was revealed by the slavery problem and John Brown's death: yet nowhere is there a critical analysis of his "philosOphy,” either of man or of nature. For these reasons, said Foerster, "Sanborn's Life is less satis- factory than Henry Salt's, which has the virtue of prOportion, emphasis. focus, definite purpose; is less satisfactory, in some respects, than the earlier book by Sanborn.” Yet Foerster conceded that the book had merit. "Of little use to one who does not know Thoreau," he said, ”it is a treasury of Thoreauisms to those who already know him well," and he felt that the book ”deserves pre-eminence among the books about Thoreau in this centenary year.” Concluding his review, Foerster wrote a para- graph that might sum up-with obvious modifications—-Sanborn's importance to the world of literature: KAI C“ 0‘! No one else, save perhaps Dr. Emerson, can write about Thoreau and the old Concord with so constant a sense of reality. Frank Sanborn has for many years had a way of giving out parenthetically precise information of a remin- iscent kind: letting it, so to speak, utter itself in whis- pers while he was engaged elsewhere. This habit manifests itself in his last book charmingly. We do not feel that we are reading a book, we are holding a conversation, or rather listening to a diverse monologue, embroidered with images and events of a bygone civilization, enriched with wise com— ment and application, very much as if we sat, once more, before the peering eyes6gf the author himself in his house by the silent Concord.1 Though Sanborn knew Alcott, Emerson, and Ellery Channing much longer than he knew Thoreau, he did far less to perpetuate their fame. The product of his combined literary efforts in their behalf appear, therefore, as a sort of postscript to the great body of work which he jproduced as Thoreau's editor and bingrapher. It was Alcott's hope for many years that Sanborn would be his 'biographer, and he expressed his wish in an entry in his Journal for October 29, 1873: Evening... I have thought it might fall to Sanborn, when events may call for it, to write my biography, and remember that, some years since, I intimated the like and made a minute to that effect in my Diary at the time. The other evening Emerson intimated his intention of do- ing the same, since none but himself, he said, could do it fit Justice. 16F * “Thoreau and Old Concord," Yale Review, VII, n.s. (January, 1918). 1:30. h K»: (7‘. ~J Yes, Emerson for the ideas, and Sanborn for the facts. But one must ascen -for one friend or other to tell the whole story fully. When he was 80, it was made clear to him at a birthday party at Sanborn's that the latter had begun taking notes on his life, and Alcott wrote of the event: A new surprise awaits me. I am invited to meet my friends and neighbors, and members of the Fortnightly Club at Mr. Sanborn's. I am greeted as I enter the room on having reached my 80 years, with powers of body and mind unimpaired and the prospect before me of future years of service: asked, moreover, to give some sketch of my life, as a.proper use of the occa- sion. Mr. Sanborn reads, by way of introduction, some notes of sayings of mine taken some years since, and after my sketch, which occupies the evening till a late hour, requests in the name of the Club the favor of sitting for a head of myself to our young artist, Mr; [Enniel Chester] French, whose head of Emerson is pronounced an admirable likeness. At all of which I am too happy to be silent.168 Nine years later, on March h, 1888, Alcott died, and within three years Sanborn was writing to William Torrey Harris about his preposed Life of 169 their friend. However, six months later he told Harris he was having 170 difficulties with the Pratt family, who did not want him to write it. 167Journals QELAmos Bronson.Alcott, p. ”#1. Alcott was nearly sev~ entybfbur, Sanborn nearly forty-two at this time. Shepard says in a ‘footnote to this page: WAccording to F. B. Sanborn, Emerson kept for years a special notebook of memoranda for the biography of Alcott he ex- pected to write after his friend's death.” Emerson, however, died six years before Alcott, though he was four years his junior. 168Ibid., p. 51h, entry for November 29, 1879. 16 9Sanborn to Harris, Concord, July 23, 1891 (Concord Library, 11: 5-83). 170 Sanborn to Harris, Concord, January 9, 1892 (Concord Library, 11: 5-810: Sanborn to Harris, Concord, February 27, 1892 (Concord Libra.~ ry, 11: 3-87): and Sanborn to Harris, Concord, July 18, 1892 (Concord Library. 11: 8-85). I l , ( O . C ‘ r O f . , f I I C O ‘ I P ' ! 1 s . f ' t I a " C ' ' J ‘— V I f ' — t I r ' ' . 1 . f f ' . v 9 O O f I 0 v 4 e f l' 0 ' e r ‘ .. . u w t . I ,— ' p f r _ ' I But the book appeared, with Sanborn as author of twelve chapters of "facts“ and Harris author of the "ideas" in Chapter XIII, "The Philos- . 171 ophy of Bronson Alcott and the Transcendentalists.” One of the most interesting contemporary reviews of the work ap- peared in the London §pectator, for it displays not only an attitude toward Sanborn's work but an attitude toward American philosOphy and philosOphersz' It is difficult for English minds to grasp the importance that America attaChes to her latter-day philosophies. It has partly, no doubt, to do with the age of a nation and its history. America is young in somewhat the same sense that an undergraduate is young. America has the youthful- ness of speculation, the youthfulness of aspiration, and a certain youthful absence of balance and want of proportion in dealing with the things of the present in relation to those of the past. ‘ The Memoirs g£_Bronson.Alcott, the critic avers, shows this to a remark— able extent: At times we are tempted to ask if the book is written in good faith for busy men and women of to-day. It reminds us of what might have been the outcome of provincial intel- lectual life fifty years ago. That it could be written by hard-headed Americans in a time when the best literature is in every one's hands, and when the questions of the day are burningly practical, shows such a touching ingenuousness that it can only be explained by a certain youthfulness of outlook on the part of its authors. However, continues the reviewer, the book has in general "far graver faults than ingenuous youthfulness. It is, unfortunately,supremely dull. It is neither one thing, nor the other. It is not religious, it is not practical, it is not literary.” l71é, Bronson Alcott: His Life and.Ph11080phz (London: T- Fisher Unwin: Boston: Roberts Brothers, 18935. 2 vols., 679 pp. If ever there were priggishness in thought and expression, we have it in Alcott's doings and sayings. Wisdom is justi— fied of her children, but wisdom is not justified by Mr. F. B. Sanborn writing a book which it is almost impossible to read. Perhaps a certain amount of amusement, which is aroused by the naivete of the writing, does something to condone the book. Mr. Sanborn gives himself away with de- lightful simplicity. After inflicting endless letters of Alcott on the much-enduring reader, he quotes the follow- ing remark of Emersons:-- "When Alcott sits down to write, all his genius leaves him: he gives you the shells and throws away the kernel of his thought. And yet, complains the critic, Mr. Sanborn compares Alcott to Milton and Socrates. “Can youthfulness," he asks rhetorically, "go further even in an American author?“ It is Just this want of proportion in judging their philo- sephical writers which makes it so difficult to read American critics with seriousness or sympathy. That Emerson, Thoreau, and others, including Alcott, have a place among thihkers, we may grant, though Emerson stands far and away first in a not very great community; but their sole merit is a certain free- dom of thought and expression. What they write-”and this is specially true of Alcott-is new neither in matter nor in method. Its merit-~small at best--is that it is allied to a sturdy independence of word and action: and of the extraor— dinary want of both humour and proportion in this school of American philosOphy reaches a climax, when we find Emerson gravely comparing his clever old aunt, Mrs. Mary Emerson, to Dmte. The critic nevertheless admires the "complete absence of conventional~ ity which gives a realistic note to American theory." .As thinkers they [the Americans] are neither deep nor wide, but they had the remarkable merit of being willing to act out their own phi1030phy. And this is hardly true of any 'philosopher since Di?§enes. Otherwise, Alcott's life was commonplace enough.. . Simple-minded and enthusiastic, but not wise, Alcott played his part among the Transcendental- ists of Concord,-—a fairly united coterie of friends imbued 'with a strange unfailing appreciation of their own import- 8.11080 17égpeaking of naivete, I note the critic referes to Alcott's debts ‘which he contracted “at home and at college" (p. 275). ' 7 O . . , . V I u f O ‘ . . , _. v . ‘ I 0 . ( f F O . r e ' r ' c f . I 7- a . l . . . - . ‘ I f t . I t I t —_ 4". ...— r l C ‘ ' . n ' ‘ , . 3?0 As for the Transcendentalists, furthermore, "A little wider vision, an ounce of self-distrustful humility, and the work of the American Transcendentalists would have left a very different result." That they have left some mark upon American literature may be granted,--the same quality of mark that a very intelli- gent childhood or'youth leaves upon a grown man, but it is such a mark that no one but an American would think of com- paring to that made by the mightgsages of European thought. Anyhow, they were honest men after their own fashion, and if their philOsOphy is vague and self-conscioum, it is at least genuine in the simplicity of its ignorance. And in a cer- tain childlike spirit that we find in Alcott we have the germ of the freshness and genialit that delights us in the writings of his daughter Louisa.17§ 17h Thg_Nation and Thg_0ritic paid little attention to Sanborn's work. The Atlantic Monthly, however, devoted six full pages to its review, which states that ”It was the ambition of Mr. Alcott's life to be taken seriously, and his two biographers, both of whom were his disciples while he was on earth, have taken him very seriously and at considerable length." And the review continued: The editors do indeed.present the raw material from which a correct view of Mr. Alcott is to be gathered, and their work is done with much literary skill and with a becoming modesty on their own part; but nevertheless it is not easy to dis- cover what manner of man Mr. Alcott was, nor to explain the glaring contradiction between.Mr. Alcott as he appeared to the select few and Mr. Alcott as he appeared to the many, more especially as it is the latter appearance which seems to be confirmed by his published works. The critic then attempts to determine Mr. Alcott's merit, indicating how .Alcott was the "single subject upon which Emerson permitted himself to 'be extravagant." 173 17h The gpectator, (London) LXXII (February 2h, 189k), EYE-275. The Critic, Nr. 533 (May 27, 1893), pp. 3h3-3h9. 371 "Moreover,“ continues the critic," we have a singular and weighty piece of testimony concerning the slightness of the contribution made by Mr. Alcott to the world of ideas." He then tears apart Alcott's ”inventory of his spiritual real estate," ar inventory, says the rev viewer, which ”even under Professor Harris's own analysis . . . shrinks into small space." The only ideas which.Mr. Alcott ever had...were first, the Platonic notion that knowledge is mainly reminiscence; and secondly, the related idea (of “lapse"), expressed in Wordsworth's Intimations of Immortality, that man is a being who existed in some anterior state of perfection. Margaret Fuller, continues the critic, soon noted “the paucity- we do not say poverty" ofolcott's ideas. _But to Alcott's credit was his ”wonderful, childlike faith in the omnipotence and omnipresence of good, in a stream of tendency not our- selves, that makes for righteousness.” Perhaps. continues the critic, Emerson's faith was as strong as Alcott's, "but it was cold and intel~ lectual, whereas Alcott had a fervor in his belief at which Emerson warmed himself as a half-frozen man might warm.himself at a fire." And the critic paraphrases a remark by Henry James, Sr., to the effect "that Mr. Emerson treated his friends like lemons--he sucked them dry of what information they had, and then put them aside." Then the critic concludes: Was there, then, no element of greatness in the man? ... Was there no such Alcott as Emerson imagined? To believe that would be to make a worse mistake than is made by putting him upon the false pedestal which Messrs. Sanborn and Harris have constructed. Mr. Alcott's character was in some import~ ant aspects so good as to make him great. None but a pure and single-minded.man could have loved truth so passionately and pursued it so unceasingly as Mr. Alcott did.... He possessed the three cardinal virtues of courage, sincerity, and charity.... 3"?" But how many...clever, successful men [the finished product of school and university] could have endured with cheerful serenity what Mr. Alcott endured: could have re- tained inviolate their faith in God and man despite personal failure and humiliation?....After all, if the true object of philosOphy be to possess the philosOphic spirit, then indeed we can assert that Bronson Alcott was a great philosOpher. He was not, as Mr. Sanborn seems to think, a second Plato: nor need we fondly linger with Professor Harris upon ”the insights which he had at the time of his illumination.” Mr. Alcott's true epitaph and epitome will be found in those burning words of his famous daughter: “His dress was neat and.poor. He looked cold and thin as an icicle, but serene 83 God.”17 Sanborn's second book, a modest little volume of 103 pages, came out in 1908, and as none of the nation's leading critics considered it worthy of review, I do not need to occgpy the reader's time except to 17 say that it rounded out the portrait. Doubtless the soundest criticism of Sanborn's work on Alcott is presented by Odell Shepard in his forward to his biography of Alcott which appeared in 1937. Shepard refers to the sources which he used for his biography and says: My main authority will be the private Journals of Bronson Alcott himself.... I believe that I am the first person who has read them thoughtfully through since Alcott laid them down. Franklin B. Sanborn had access to them when he wrote his Memoir of Alcott over forty years since, but he did not use his opportunities to the full. Having the advantage of a long and intimate personal acquaintance with his subject, Sanborn wrote a good book, but the impatience, not to say the arrogance, of his brilliant and overcrowded mind is as evident in this book as in the rest of his always valuable, 175Atlantic Monthly. mun (April. 1891*). 518-555. 176Bronson Alcott §t_Alcott House, England, Egg Fruitlands, New IEngland (18h?-18HU§, (Cedar Rapids, Iowa?“ The Torch FFEts. 1908). Sanborn also edited Alcott's autobiographical poem, New Connecticut (Boston, 1887): his Sgnnets gpd Canzonets (Boston,188é7: and introduced Clara.Ebwing's The Alcotts a§.I_Knew Them (Boston: C. M. Clark, 19”?). never quite dependable work. A man of many keen interests and large activities, he did not take time to master the JOurnals. When he quoted from them he often altered the text, silently, to suit himself. Moreover, he addressed a public different from that of to-day. I have used his book, therefore, with gratitude and with caution, correcting and extending and deepening his estimates, whenever possible, by recourse to the manuscripts that shiuld have been, but were not, his constant source and guide. 77 Though Sanborn knew Emerson intimately for twenty-nine years--from July, 1853, till the 25th of May; 1882, the day Emerson diedo-he did relatively little to immortalize him, when we consider the number of volumes on Thoreau which poured from Sanborn's pen. That Sanborn knew Emerson intimately there can be little doubt. Though Rusk'e monumental volumes of Emerson letters show a few letters which passed between the two men, and though Sanborn mentions Emerson in some thirty letters written while Emerson lived, nothing is proved except the fact that the two men knew each other very well, that Sanborn admired Emerson, and that Emerson admired Sanborn during the early days of Sanborn's school. He did not, as we have seen, admire him enough to allow him to marry his daughter. Of those letters I have collected in which Sanborn speaks of Emer- son while the latter was still alive, one is about the same as another in flavor, character, and importance. Perhaps this statement epitomizes all of them: 177 Pedlar's Progress: Brown, 1937), p. xiii. ronson Alcott (Boston: Little. d- I: (D H P“ re (‘0 ”3 tr! l l m ' Mr Emerson in running down Wachusett a few days ago, with his nephew Charles, sprained his foot badly, and is new con- fined to the house. and walks with a crutch,- but I believe it is nothing very serious- The whole family go to Waterford, Me, in about a week- to remain there until the early part of September: where the girls are to do the family work - cook— ing and so forth, Edward, who is today 15 years old, is to pick berries. bring water and so on; and Mr Emerson free from social cares and "devestators of the day” is to read and write unmolested. From the material in Rusk's edition of the Emerson letters, we learn little that has not already been discussed in this study. Of chief interest is Emerson's expression of admiration for Sanborn is a letter to William Emerson: I am not quite sure that you have ever met Mr Sanborn, who is quite too important a person to old as well as young Concord, than that you should have missed him if you were both here at the same time. In another letter which Emerson wrote a week after Sanborn was kidnapned, Emerson said: "Sanborn seems quite clear headed, &.to be also well ad- vised.}801n the Rusk volume and in those letters I have collected so far, the general tone is one of intimacy: however, I find no indication of what Emerson thought of Sanborn after the latter's early years in the school. Sanborn's first material on Emerson was his essay written for 223_ two other essays by Sanborn on Holmes and Lowell, an essay by H. N. POWers i S h anborn to Parker, Concord, July 10, 1859 (Concord Library, E: s- 3. 179Ralph Waldo Emerson to William Emerson. Concord. March 18. 1335- in Ralph L. Rusk, ed.. The Letters 22 Ralph Waldo Emerson (New York: Columbia UP. 1939). V. 15- ” 1301b1d., v, 120. 5.. \ 14 w \f‘ ‘. .-*-‘ o .4-4 on Bryant, and two by R. B. Stoddard on Lona gfellow and W ittier, Kart he contributed an ode, "The Poet's Countersign,“ to Bronson Alcott's little volume, Help Waldo Emerson: an Estimate oi' His Geniu§_ip'§££:£ 18? and‘ Jerse, in which appeared Alcott‘s“Ion: a Monody.' Three years later appeared Sanborn's edition of all the essays and poems which were read in the special course entitled "The Genius and Character of Emerson" held at the Concord School of PhilosOphy the summer of 188“. Besides acting as editor of this large volume, Sanborn contributed a long ode and his lecture, "Emerson among the Poets." The volume contained the lectures and poems of several distinguished figures of the time, including’Julia Ward Howe, Bronson Alcott, Ednah Littlehale Cheney, Julian Hawthorne, Elizabeth Palmer Peabody, Emma Lizarus, Ellery Channing, George Willis Cooke, and William Torrey Harris.83 But Sanborn's two chief contributions to the Emerson literature were his modest little books, Ralph Waldo Emerson, which appeared in 18h 188 I 1901 as one of the Beacon Biographies, and The Personality 22_Emerson, which matched Sanborn's The Personality 2£_Thoreau in format and purpose. The Beacon volume was, for its editor, M. A. DeWolfe Howe, a ”dis- he appointing performance," andAsays further: 181New York: D. Appleton. lgeBoston: A. Williams, 1882. 183Sanborn. ”Odelof 1882, ' pp. 22M—2 31, and "Emerson among the IPoets," pp. 173-21h, The Genius and Character of Emggggp: EEEEEEEE at. the Concord School of PhilosOp_y‘(Boston, 1885f— 18hBoston: Small, Maynard. lSSBoston: Charles E. Goodspeed, 1903; a limited edition of Fég' copies by D. B. Updike, The Merrymount Press. the Us k): I comforted myself with the thought that the publishers of the series, and not I, asked Sanborn to write it--the single instance of its kind in the production of the thirty-one volumes in the series. The publishers, let me add, had every reason to expect something better. A re-rcading of the book to-day might show me that I underrated its value at the time of its appearance.18 Th; Nation's criticisms of the volume should suffice to indicate value of the hock: [This volume] differs from nearly all the other "Beacon Biographies”...in being deeply colored by the personal inti- macy of the writer with his subject. Hence less of vague generalization, more of remembered incident and speech. There is the usual over-emphasis on the earlier life, as if Mr. Sanborn were not conscious of his restricted space until his book was half written and the story of Emerson's literary career hardly begun, with the beginning of his own acquain- tance with Emerson far in the future. But, happily, there are many reflections back from this upon the earlier years. These and the later recollections give the sketch its prin- cipal importance.18 Of the second work, The Personality g£_Emerson, The Egtion felt that it was equally a revelation of Sanborn's own personality and per- sonal history, "which supplies the chronological progression of an otherwise rambling discourse, with some repetitiousness." But, it added, "The lights and sidelights on Emerson, however, are numerous, and the 188 essay'will be prized.” The Critic added the final note in its one-para- graph review: 186Personal letter to me from M. A. DeWolfe Home, 6 Union Street, fBristol, R. 1., August 11, 1951. 187NNOt98." 222_Nation, LXXIII (July 189 1901): 52- 188"Notes,' gallstion, LXXVI (June 11. 1903). 1471+- K a! -.‘J -~.I The seer as here seen is not otherwise than as re have long known him; but it is well that those who knew him best should record their impressions of him, .nd readers of to~dny as well as the future historians of Transcendentalism in New England will find substantial value in these intimate yet reverent pencillings. The book-~a small one-~does credit to the Merrymount Press.18 Of Sanborn's work on the rest of the Concord worthies, there is little to tell. He took care of Louisa May Alcott, doubtless Concord's most popular literary figure, in one or two articles in current maga- zines, and he wrote of Margaret Fuller and the other “Women of Concord" in a series 6f articles in The Critic and in his Recollections 9£_Seventy Years. He did more for his intimate friend, Ellery Channing. In 1902 he brought out a new, enlarged edition of Channing's Thoreau, the Poet— Naturalist, with Memorial Verses, which Goodspeed published in Boston; the same year he selected and edited a large quantity of Channing's verse. in the volume entitled.Poems g£.Sithffive Yearg_published by Bentley in Philadelphia. In this Sanborn included a critical biographical intro- duction. Three years later he wrote four articles about Channing for The Critic, However, none of these received attention from the reviewers in the nation's critical Journals of first rank. For the one remaining Concord resident, Nathaniel Hawthorne--who was of course not a true member of the Concord group-~Sanborn wrote the volume entitled hawthorn§_and His Friends, a book in its appearance and 189The Critic, XLVI (January, 1905), 93. (Sanborn's only other contribution to the Emerson literature was his edition of Emerson's Tantalus, published in 1908 at Canton, Pennsylvania, by the Kirgate Press, for which Sanborn supplied a memorial note.) k»: «J m nuroose similar to his Personalities of Thoreau and Emerson but published by The Torch Press of Cedar Rapids, Iowa. The work was of imnortance in filling in the details of the portrait of Hawthorne, but since Sanborn knew Hawthorne for only four years-after Hawthorne returned from his con- sulship in Liverpool-Sanborn cannot be said to have been at all intimate with the noted author. Though Theodore Parker did not live in Concord, he was spiritually a part of the group there. It may seem strange that Sanborn did so little to perpetuate the memory of his beloved friend. But there is a reason for Sanborn's silence. When Parker made his will on the 25th of May, 1857, he appointed Sanborn one of his three executors, and in a codicil which he appended January 3lst, 1859, he bequeathed to Sanborn his gold watchngFurthermore, he informed Sanborn ”privately“ that the latter was "to take charge as literary executor, of the publication of his MSS. after his death.” ”And so I was ready to do," says Sanborn, in May, 1860, when he got word that Parker had died in Florence. But Mrs. Parker had dif~ ferent ideas, and as the matter had been left up to her, she chose Joseph Lyman, who had become intimate with Parker in his last years, to under— take the work. From that moment a battle ensued: A controversy had sprung up in the last year of his invalid life [writes Sanborn] between the Apthorps and some other friends of Parker, who objected to Mr. Lyman's choice of John Weiss as his biographer, and refused to allow him the use of their letters from Parker, very numerous and intimate. 1 O 9 John Weiss, ed.. Life and Correspondence 92_Theodore Parker (New York, last), II, nus-uu7. These friends were earnest that I should assert my claim as executor, against the choice of Mrs. Parker.... I could not endure the thought of a public quarrel over the gresh grave of Parker, and declined to be any party to it,--honing better from the work of Lyman and Weiss than others did.191 In Sanborn's eyes, Lyman had no talent for editing and he produced ' relatively nothing. Mrs. Parker, though a woman of intelligence, took leave of her senses, worked industriously and spent "thousands of dol- lars" to have her husband's correspondence c0pied. ”But," says Sanborn, "with a singular lack of foresight, she destroyed most of the originals in Parker's difficult handwriting.“ .As a result, Weiss's Life and Corb respondence gf'Theodore Parker, which appeared in 186M, was, in Sanborn's cpinion, filled with “countless errors of the press, which could not all be corrected, because the text had been lost.” Mrs. Parker was so dis- satisfied with Weiss's work that she quarreled with him and employed Octavius B. Frothingham to write a new biography. This, says Sanborn, “will be the standard for Parker's life and Opinions," a judgment sus— 192 tained by the Literary History 2: the United §tateso Mrs. Parker, without notifying Sanborn, in her will left all the manuscripts, printed papers, andextant copyrights to him. But it was too late, says Sanborn, to "bring the matter before the world,” and there was "no fund to meet the cost of so doing.” He therefore granted permis- sion freely to editors and biographers and to a committee of the American 191Egcollections, II, 556-557. 192Volume III, 679. Unitarian Association, which brought forth in fifteen volumes ”he W~rhs _f_Theodore Parker between 1907 and 1913. This Centenary edition “is not complete, but it is well edited,” each volume being supplied by a preface and notes}93Sanborn supplied a preface to the volume containing Parker's "The Rights of Man in America," and other volumes were edited by such persons as Thomas Wentworth Higginson, Samuel A. Eliot, George W. Cooke, Samuel B. Stewart, Charles W. Wendte, and James Kendall Hosmer. Aside from this Sanborn did, therefore, relatively little for Par- ker. And this relatively little consisted of a new 1882 edition of Parker's Prayers, for which he wrote a memoir, and for which Louisa Al- cott wrote the preface. Only one more book needs to be mentioned and that is Sanborn's second volume of his autobiographical Recollections 2:.Seventy'Years, published in 1909. It is appropriately mentioned here because it was a conglomeration that included many odds and ends of fact about his il- lustrious friends that he had not used before as well as some other material about them he had hashed over previously. The critic in 1g; Eatigp_hit the nail on the head when he said, "Considering the number of times that [Sanborn] has raked and reraked this field, it is sur- prising that h. has still some fresh gleanings to offer." The real in- terest of Sanborn's reminiscences, as the critic said, was not so much in his own achievements "as in his contact with one tremendous historic episode and in his intimacy with two or three great American writers.” 193Ib1d., III, 678. \JJ ("1 .4 And the critic summed up the importance of his second volume by declaring that “it is when he is Boswellizing about Concord that we listen to him most gladly." He then summarized the importance of the volume in remarks that may stand as one of the best estimates of the merit of the man and his work: Mr. Sanborn says somewhere that he had a passion for knowing men: that he gratified this passion appears on every page. His interest in his fellowbbeings is as insatiate as a savant's curiosity. He knows all about the humblest dweller in Concord...not less than about the celebrities. And he knows equally well what flowers or birds are to be found in the Carlisle Woods,...or along the shores of Walden Pond. He produces the effect of a glorified gossip, or garru— lous town-pump. To him no item comes amiss: by him nothing is forgotten. There is a lack of perspective, a tempera- mental inability to coordinate and to generalize. Hention the name Hosmer. or Bartlett, or Barrett or Buttrick, and he reels off the proper genealogy, with some anecdote of every member of the family whom he mentions. This results in a sort of Pepysian disconnectedness, but it has also the Pepy- Bian ‘3th Of r931 ~11f€oeoo Despite its formlessness, and the rather too frequent resort to scissors and.paste, the book is very readable. It will be one of the permanent sources of information for those whosmudy John Brown and the Concord Group. To the student of social manners and customs, it will be scarcely less valuable, because it gives a hundred short-range glimpses of Yankee village life during the second and third quarters of the nine- teenth century--that life which is as obsolete to~day as is the Boston of Cotton Mather. It is plain enough that some of the Concord egoists, who thought themselves geniuses, and ab- solved from the duties common to civilized men, were thinly disguised, or undisguised cranks. Their verses and their lucubrations, and their diaries filled with anaemic intro- spection, will impose on nobody to-day. But the true Concord community--with Emerson, and Hawthorne. and with Thoreau, too --can no more lass its significance for Americans than Weimar can for Germans. These recollections by Mr. Sanborn contain much authentic news of it.195 195‘w "Frank Sanborn's Reminiscences," EDE.N3t1Q§’ LXXXIX, (July 9?, 1909). 75-77. And now to close this long chapter on Sanborn's literary career only three things should be mentioned further: his writing of verse in the years after he graduated from Harvard, his efforts to publish the work of important literary figures in The Commonwealth, and his long career as a literary columnist for the Springfield Daily Reoubliggfl, ”Indeed," said the writer of Sanborn's obituary in the Republican, he was "never a literary artist like Thoreau and Emerson.” "But there was one field of literature where he might have achieved a finer artis- try,“ he continued. This was in the writing of verse, "for the few verses he wrote showeag.grace of expression with a spiritual signifi- cance which give him a place with the poets of transcendentalism. Some- times a fragmentary record of feelingggmong these would be fit to set beside those of the Greek anthology.” Charles Wagner in his Harvagd: Four Centuries and Freedoms_speaks of him as a post but places him within a group of writers that does not do great credit to Sanborn: Poets like B. F. Sanborn [sic], Trumbull Stickney, Cabot Lodge, Edwin Ford Piper and Hugh McCulloch could not long take the harsh turn of lyric affairs. There was no longer a Julia Ward Howe to run to in Boston and, for the more robust, there was always resentment that poetry was now the darling of women's delight. Santayana himself had to run off every few years and renew his ardors on the Continent. _~l96“IBath of F. B. Sanborn," Springfield Sunday Republican, February 25, 1917, p. 1, col 3 and p. 13, cols. l-h. ( Aha he then speaks of the "stronger voices": Robert Frost, Edwin Arlington Robinson, Bliss Carmen, Wallace Stevens, and many more who passed across the Harvard poetic panoramafgdAn unknown assailant hurled the cruelest phrase at him in a letter printed in the Boston Eggalg. Whoever it was called him "one of the women in breeches poets of Massa— 19S chusetts.' Yet Sanborn continued to write verse from the time he left Harvard till his last days, and he was often called upon to deliver an ode or a sonnet or a few stanzas at public connemorations, patriotic exercises, and services, or at private anniversaries, celebrations, or parties. Two of his earliest attempts at occasional verse were his EZEE.£2.E£ Sun: £3 the Music Hall, printed as a broadside in Boston, and his dirge intoned at the memorial exercises in Concord, both in honor of John Brown. Typ- ical of his writing for dedicatory exercises is the long "Soldier's Mon- ument" in the Sanborn.Papers in the Forbes Library at Northampton, Mass. In 1359, the Fraternity, the young men's group of Parker's Twenty-eighth Congregational Society in Boston, published his "America,” which he had read at the Opening of their lectures. Representative of his writing which honored the great or famous is his "Ode of 1382," reprinted in The Genrug and Character 9: Emerson published by the Concord School of 197Charles A. Wagner, Harvard: Four Centuries and Freedgpg (New York: E. P. Dutton, 1950), pp. 183-187. 198This comment appears on a notecard probably written by Oswald Garrison Villard in the John Brown Papers (folder II), Special Collec- tions, Butler Library, Columbia University, New York. But the card gives the source as "Boston letter in Herald-Hov. 20-p 1- col h.” The year is omitted. Philosophy in 1885. Typical of his verse written in honor of his frisnaa and acouaintances are his Lines W ittep {gr the Silver Wediigg g: Hon. Elgar}; Mn, which he privately printed in Concord. Curious, however, is the collection of his manuscript verses among his papers at the American Antiquarian Society in Worcester. In this box of papers there are about fifty-two poems including two contained in an enve10pe addressed to Ariana Walker, six in an envelOpe marked "Mis- cellaneous Poems,” a poem entitled ”Apollo" in an enveIOpe labelled “Con- cord Verses," and an env010pe containing six verses by Ariana, Ednah Cheney, and Sanborn, and a small sheaf of probably twentybnine poems, including a prologue of approximately 175 lines entitled "Ovid's Meta- morphosis: The Abode of Envy (Translated in verse by Tfihomas PEarker] Sanborn 1878).” But most curious is an envelope marked "Cat Poems,” which contains four odd creations perhaps inspired by the to-the—louse- andpmouse poetry of Robert Burns. Though none of them can bear reprint- ing, they present a side of Sanborn that is rather interesting. One of them begins: The Humble Cry and.Purrtition of Biddy Muffin to Her Gracious Mistress And another is inscribed: lg Memogigm Brigittgg'Muffinis, Felis‘infelicis, Post Cares Multas Nunc, Eheui lp_Pacei ‘- This group seems to describe the frustrated love of one Toughynne de Boots, who dwells at the Hotel des Sciences, for Bridget Muffin of the Hotel des Chats, and one of the poems contains these melancholy lines: Ah, Bridget! how can I, Of lineage so high, Sixtieth in blood from famous Puss in Boots,-- Keep company with thee, whose roots Spring from some cat that littered in a sty? But at the apposite extreme of Sanborn's poetic endeavors were those verses which were honored when Edmund Clarence Stedman printed them in his A2,America§ Anthology (lZSZ-IQOO), a work today criticized 199 however for "too great catholicity." One of these two poems, "Ariana,” hi was based on two lines which Alcott gavehghile he was composing his own Sonnets and Canzonets, which Sanborn was editing. Sanborn was now fif~ ty. had been married to Louise Leavitt Just twenty years, and had three sons, Thomas Parker, seventeen, Victor Channing, fifteen, and Francis Beehiler, ten: §FEET saint! whose rising dawned upon the sight Like fair Aurora chasing mists away, Our ocean billows, and thy western height Gave back reflections of the tender ray, Sparkling and smiling as night turned to day:-- Ah! whither vanished that celestial light? Suns rise and set, Monadnoc's amethyst Year-long above the sullen cloud appears, Daily the waves our summer strand have kissed, But thou returnest not with days and years: Or is it thine, yon clear and beckoning star, Seen o'er the hills that guarded once thy home? Dost guide thy friend‘s free steps that widelv roam Toward that far country where his wishes are? 199"Edmund Clarence Stedman,"Encyclppedia Americana, 19‘47 ed..:m,s€1. 2OOEdmund Clarence Stedman, Ag American Anthology (llSZ-IQOO):§£E:£7 tions Illustrating the Editor's Critical Revie1_2£_American Poetrvugg 3L2 Nineteenth Century_?§3ston, 1900), p. 3?6. This version of the poem dif- ?s}s from the later version in Sanborn's Recollections, II, 99h in there details: In the later version he changed two capital letters, eight marks of punctuation, the italicizing of one word, and "kissed" to "kist." 356 The other poem in the anthology was written in honor of Samuel Hoar, who was a famous lawyer and.Senator who had challenged the con~ stitutionality of certain laws in South Carolina which allowed the im- prisonment of free negroes: A YEAR ago how often did I meet Under these elns. once more in sober bloom, Thy tall. sad figure pacing down the street,- But now the robin sings above thy tomb. Thy name on other shores may ne'er be known, Though austere Rome no graver Consul knew: But Massachusetts her true son doth own: Cut of her soil thy hardy virtues grew. She loves the man who chose the conquered cause, The upright soul that bowed to God alone, The clean hand that upheld her equal laws, The old religion, never yet outgrown, The cold.denecnor and warm hear beneath, The simple grandeur of thy life and death.201 In spite of the fact that Sanborn wrote considerable verse during his life, and in spite of the fact that he seemed to write his verse with greater care than he did his prose, in my cpinion he cannot be said to have been a poet. Even these two selections. which I presume Sanborn submitted to Stedman as his best work, are, I feel, third rate, and rank with the rather pale, washed-cut verse of the minor poets of the Romantic and Victorian periods. 201 “Samuel Hoar,” p. 326. Since Sanborn speaks of Hoar as having died a year before, and since he died in 1856, this poem was presumably written in 1857. 337 ‘Little further space need be given to Sanborn's work as editor of ’- ne gogggpggglgh. we have already viewed his political theories as they were expressed in his editorial columns and we have seen the type of political material he printed. But he also raised the literary tone of the paper by his printing of the work of some of the best writers in New England. Besides the work of Thoreau.which he published for the first time from the original manuscripts. and besides his printing of Louise May.Alcott's “Hospital Sketches." which established her as a writer worthy of consideration. he published the work of many other writers- embryonic and established. A.brief catalog of the pieces he published during his seven and a half months as editor will exemplify what he did during the rest of his four years as literary editor. In his first issue he printed Ellery Channing's 'Epithalamiun,” lilliam Dean Howells' “A Post." chapter four of "M. L..' a.novelby Louisa,May Alcott. a literary review of the Atlantic Monthly for February, and a "Chorus.” from the 15155 of Sephocles. which I suspect was his own verse translation. In later issues he printed or reprinted Thoreau's “The Landlord." Harriet Beecher Stowe's “The Old Meeting House.“ Julia.Ward Howe's ”The Sieve at New’Orleans.' Channing's "Vernon.“ and 'Qpatrains' by Ralph Waldo Emerson. Bronson Alcott's Conversations on great reformers were presented in min- ute detail. and there were Moncure Conway's letters from Europe. There were. too. discussions of such subjects as the ”Philosophy of the Abso- lute.‘ reprints of such verse as Tennyson's ”The Laureate's Ode on the Royal Marriage,“ Robert Herrick's ”The White Island.“ and Ehvid,wasson‘s ”A Letter to Thomas Carlyle.” Translated especially for the paper was \M (A 02 “Quintin Messie," from the German of Caroline Pichler. The paper seemed to make a point of indicating that many of its contributions were written '§2£;thg.Commgngealth.' Sanborn himself, I suspect, contributed several of the anonymous verses and probably most of the verse translations from Uhland and Heine. Though principally a political sheet, the paper owed much to Sanborn for the encouragement. hospitality. and publicity he gave to so many important literary figures. lhen one is foolish enough to attempt to indicate what Sanborn wrote as a literary columnist on the Springfield Daily Republican. he finds his task of sampling the material overwhelmingb-to put it mildly. As I have said, Sanborn wrote two columns a week. one political and the other literv ery. Though in 'Our’Boston Literary Letter' he theoretically set about writing on literary topics. his column usually contained some material on politics or social reform. His political column. "Our Weekly Boston Let- ter,‘ in like manner sometimes contained literary news, comment. and criticism. Therefore. the person who describes Sanborn's work as a lit- erary commentator must sample two columns written each week of the year for fortyanine years. and he contemplates the task with the same emotions that filled the mosquito in the children's story who promised his mother he would drink the sea. First, I would like to say that if one is to do a thorough Job of digesting all that Sanborn says in.his bi-seakly columns, he should read the columns in such a library as that of Harvard. There he may surround himself with encyclOpedias, readers' guides. biographical dictionaries. literary'histories. atlases. cumulative indexes, Harvard class notes. New England town records. annual reports of state institutions, almanacs. boxes of original manuscripts. card catalogs, and bibliographies of bib- liographies. He may then hope to keep himself oriented to the swift- moving Sanborn mind. For Sanborn not only observed the passing scene for material-ens I indicated in my comments on his political column-~but he added to this an unbelievably vast knowledge of books. When George H. Sargent. a reporter for the Boston Evening Transcrip . attended the sale of the American portion of Sanborn's private library which was dispersed at the auction rooms of C. F. Libbie and Company of Boston in October, 1917. he wrote. “Anyone who has been a constant or occasional reader of the multitudinous books. pamphlets and articles written by the late F. B. Sanborn. the last of the 'Concord Sdhool.‘ can realize what a hodge—podge of literature is to be found in the catalogue of the sale.I The Sanborn library, he continued, only a part of which was to be sold at that time. I'will furnish interest and some amusement for book collectors. For the library was like one of Mr. Sanborn's articles in the Springfield Repub- lican.' The late Mr. Sanborn [the reporter continuedlwas not a book collector in the ordinary sense of the word. He had, indeed, a remarkable collection of backs. relating to American his- tory. But apart from a few notable exceptions, the catalogue does not contain the titles of the great ”nuggets" which are so eagerly sought by collectors. Mr. Sanborn bought books to use them, not to show to other bibliOphiles. Then Sargent reported some of the books he found. There were volumes on crime. Indian literature. trials. witchcraft: there were early engraved music books. more than a hundred chapbocks. prints and lithographic views. Lincolniana (including fifty-four newspapers relating to Lincoln's assassination. funeral. and the trial of the assassins). social science documents and monographs. antislavery pamphlets. and a great mass of material by and about Concord worthies. None of this was surprising. But there was a great bundle of rare books and early pamphlets on shorthand and phonetic spelling: the Pirate's 2:3.ngk, considerably worn; the Phallic publication of Shgzggggg, ghg_Masculine Qggss and Ancient Sex Worship, the gatrimonial_Preceptor, 2:, ipgtructive hints £2 edition of the Decameron. There were 138 lots of genealogies. some of which were extremely rare. and the Confessigpg. Trials and Biographical Sketches 9f the m g_o_l_<_i_ Blooded Murderers who have been executed i3 thig Country {593 itg_§iggt_8ettlement. published in lShh. Sargent also found books on angling. bees. birds. California. Christian Science. Mae sonry. naval affairs. Quakers. railroads (including rare Massachusetts pamphlets). the lhite Mountains. Yale College (including the scarce 2213 College Scrgpes). and.more than 700 almanacs. But the nuggets in the Sanborn sale included the only perfect cOpy ever offered by auction of’Jonathan.Hitchel's Propositions gggggggigg 352 Subject 21.Baptism gag Consociation 25.0hurches Collected and Qggy $5334 2111 23: 313 1931. 9; 93d . . . . Printed in 1662 by Samuel Green. with the same border that was used for the Eliot Indian Bible. the cepy had belonged to both Increase Mather and James Russell Lowell. .Aleo for sale was an exceedingly rare copy of Edward.Johnson's The gandegefiorkimg Providence. another copy of which had brought $315 in lalh. And Sanborn 391 had collected cepies of the extremely rare Peters' Genegal History of "-0“. -O-J*. m Connecticut: Jonathan Dickenson's figmargablglneliveraggg.9§_Robert Bar- "3 - 3"“ ”.D m (printed in 1792): Wigglesworth's 5933. 933 9}; _t_h_e. Egg. in the fifth edition of 1717; a first edition of the first book of poetry printed in Connecticut. Robert Walcott's Eggtigal_ueditations: and several editions of the New England Primerfoadll of these sundry volumes. 1 repeat, formed only a.part of the American portion of Sanborn's private library in his home in Concord by the Sudbury. The mind that assimilated such quantities of miscellaneous informa- tion was the mind of the man whom Charles Francis Adams. Jr.. referred to as I"iihe walking EncycIOpedia.' This was the mind that wrote the Boston literary letters. which. says Van lyck Brooks. ”with their news and gos- sip of the literary world. were a staple of conversation in the Berk- shiree.§03 What does Sanborn talk about in his columns in the Springfield DailyRepublican? I have sampled approximately 325 columns written be- tween 1873 and 1917 and have been.permitted to use the notes taken by 2014 Mrs. Kathryn lhitford on about eighty columns written in 1376-79. I do “— 202George H. Sargent. “FrankrB. Sanborn's Jewels and.Junk.' Boston Evening granscrtpt. September 19. 191?. part two. p. h. cols. l-Y. 2°31? England: Indian Summer (New York: I. P. Dutton. 191:0), p.60. 2ouKathryn lhitford (Mrs. Philip J. lhitford). u657 North 117th Street. Hilwauhee 26. Wisconsin. took these notes for what she terms her own ”aborted effort" toward a critical study of Sanborn. She has very generously permitted.me to use than together with her bibliography and a thirtybtwo-page biographical paper. However. I did not have this material until the week of January 19. 1953. so that I have not introduced any of her other evidence into the part of my thesis written before these pages which concern the literary columns. \A \O (‘J not find in his literary columns a.pervading philosOphy or point of view. though Mrs. Whitford found the following statements in which Sanborn presents two criteria for book-reviewing: The ideal of bookoreviewing of course is that it shall be done by'a competent person. in all cases.-that he shall read the book. and then clearly. fully and fairly tell the public about it. Hush criticism. in fact. is more advertising and serves to keep a book before the peo810.-in this case praise or blame can be quite indifferent.2 5 As Sanborn commented on every conceivable subject-~oven if one limits the definition of‘literature to belles lettres-it is difficult to make any valid generalizations. However. a few statements may be made. First. I can say that probably few new books escaped his notice. Often these served as a basis for his articles. The reader of his col- nmn often begins a long essay--recondite. scholarly. of varying degrees of interest--on Lady Mary Wortley Montagu; Gilbert White and Henry Tho- reau: the rainbow in verse and art: John Bunyan and his contemporaries: Aaron Burr and Fenimore Cooper: fiction in France and.America: the Old Testament writers: the Latin.play at Harvard: Wellington. Walter Scott, and the Shelleys: General Meade as a.man of letters: Plutarch. Du Bose. and Ridgway: the library at St. Johnsbury. Vermont: late Latin poetry: capricious modern verse: England in the eighteenth century: the wit of Savile. Marquis of Halifax: masters and disciples in Roman verse: Lowell and Emerson in.Paris. The reader then may discover that this disquieition is in fact a long resume'of a book Sanborn has Just read. Usually Sanborn _ “— 205July 23. 1873. 393 then proceeds to render Judgment on the volume and attempt to foretell its probable place in letters. and often he continues at length to cor- rect the author's facts--though the author might be considered a leading specialist in his subject. Second. that Sanborn was considered capable in his criticisms can be inferred from statements made about his critical remarks. For exam- ple. Horace Traubel reported a conversation whitman had with Sanborn the one time he traveled to Concord. Whitman told Traubel: 'I asked Sanborn that time at Concord who of all men of Concord was most likely to last into the future. Sanborn took his time in replying. I thought he was going to say Emerson. but he didn't. He said Thoreau. I was surprised-«looked at him- asked: 'Is that your deliberate Judgment?‘ and he said very emphatically: 'Yesi' I thought that very significant. Con- sidering who Emerson was. Thoreau was. Sanborn was. very. very significant.” It is significant too that Sanborn thought well of Whitman: in fact. during Whitman's one visit to Concord he stayed at Sanborn's house. it a time when to admire Whitman was for many literate people madness or per- version. lhitman said: 'I always hold Sanborn. Frank Sanborn. to be a true friend9~to stand with those who wish me well. He has always treated me royally when I have been up his way. I believe Sanborn was instrur 206 mental in having the Vhitman head established at Concord.’ Edmund Clar» ence Stedman points out that Sanborn Joined such British critics as Swinburne. Dowden. Symonds. and Clive in their praise of Whitman and that such American critics as Sanborn. Conway. Linton. Whiting. Benton. and —._‘ 206Horace Traubel. With Walt fihitman ip Camden (Boston: Small, may. hard. 1906). I. 213. 285. 391* Burroughs "guarded [Whitman's] rights or ministered to him." and that some of these critics had done so “with a loyalty unprecedented in our literary annalsjo‘, Stednan also thought Sanborn's early Judgnent of Emerson's poetry was later Justified. 'Common opinion.“ wrote Stedman. ”Justified Mr. Sanborn's fine paradox that. instead of its being settled that hereon ‘ could not write poetry. it was settled that he could write nothing elseft‘s Though in w opinion Sanborn wrote third-rate verse. I imagine he was considered a fairly astute critic of the verse of others. For ema- ple. it is Odell Shepard's opinion that Alcott's Sonnets _a__n_d_ fizgfl and 1131 Connecticut. which Sanborn edited. "show [his] smoothing and ca- pable hand.509 To be specific. Sanborn wrote about everything. First. he talked a great dealkbout his Concord friends. Already I have turned up many interesting details. and the careful search which I must make of the rest of his columns should yield innumerable details about the Concord group. For example. in his column of Kay 28. 1873. he tells of the honors paid to Ralph Waldo Dnereon and Julia Ward Howe the day before. It was Mrs. Howe's fifty-fourth birthday and it was herson'e triumphal return from Europe. Docking at the Boston wharf at 10:00. hereon and his daughter 207Edsmnd Clarence Stedmsn. Poets gidmerica (Boston, 1885). p. 3'60. 208mm. p. 136. 2 _ 09Pedlar's Prom”. 13. 505. toOk the afternoon train out to Concord. Emerson knew nothing of the reception awaiting him. and was surprised to find some 200 school chil- dren and as many adults. with the village band and carriages and flowers. drawn up in front of the railroad station to cheer him. {Accompanied.by Miss Emerson.[Sanborn reports]. he was led through the lines of children to a barouche. drawn by a pair of handsome black horses. in which he took his seat. and. without tedious delay. preceded by the Concord band of music and followed by'a long line of carriages and.pedestriane. he slowly rode through the main street of the village to his. home....Across the turnpike. and under the trees in front of the house. an arch decorated with flowers was thrown for the returning traveler to pass under as he drove into his own gate. The children were drawn up along the road on both sides of the arch. and sang the familiar stanza of Payne's song,“ 'Mid pleasures and.palaces though we may roam...“ No one made any speeches. Sanborn reports. but Iwith much delicacy“ left Emerson alone with his family. unburdened by the duties of a public re~ caption. But. as a.pleasant surprise. the house itself had been complete- ly rehabilitated since the fire of the year before: lhen he left home in October little had been done toward re- building it. and his library. pictures and furniture were scattered about in various places. where they had found shel- ter at the time of the fire. All these have been brought together in the new house. and Mr Emerson's study was wait- ing for him exactly'as he left it the night before the fire. The book-shelves were in their place. the Fates of Michael Angelo being over the firedplace: the portrait of Carlyle on the opposite wall. the round table. for books and.papers and the ink-stand. stood in the center. and all the furniture was placed as it was wont to stand. The rest of the house had been restored in like manner,...but the study was identi- cally the same except the mantel-piece. the walldpaper and the carpet. Mrs Emerson with her children and grandchildren were at the door to receive him. and the rooms were gay with flowers and cheerful tokens of welcome.210 31%» 23. 1373. p. 8. col. 1. \N U.) C": Though this sort of reporting may not add to the world's ideas. it is a picture that adds to our pleasant appreciation of Emerson and of a world and a time that could have a parade for a thinking man. Sanborn did.a great deal to raise the standards of taste and to stimulate interest in American literature. Of some of the more import- ant writers of his day. he gave opinions which subsequent critics have justified and some which they have not. For example. of Poe he writes: His genius was morbid. and a little too quizzical: his taste was by no means faultless. and there was much provincielism mingled with the broader qualities of his intellect. He may easily appear greater than he was; but he will always pass. probably. for a man of peculiar genius. whose story is worth telling and whose bookg contain some grains of gold amongst much chaff and droee.2‘1 Speaking of William Dean Howells' latest novel. Sanborn discusses first the difference between fiction and what he calls '11ctition.‘ Fiction. Sanborn says. is "the image of nature.‘ a definition which sets it apart from 'Fictition.' which is “a kind a writing in which all re- semblance to nature is lost.” Then he says: In.Mr>Howells' “The Lady of Aroostook! one scarcely notices the resemblance to Hawthorne's style of writing which once was observable in Howells'. He has developed fully his own manner. which is at once more minute in detail and more dre- matic than Hawthorne's. without that broad sweep and deep grope of imagination which is peculiar to Hawthorne among modern authors. It is hard to say whether Hawthorne'e books are fiction or 'Fictition.'-but with Howells there is so much realism that neither term can be applied to his stories. His characters actually walk about in the picture diminished in size but clear as life itself.... This power of condensing the multum into the parro is an enviable one. and.Mr Howells possesses it in great perfection?12 allihitford notes. July 30, 1373. 2123333.. January 21. 1379. In another column Sanborn says that he has been looking through some old copies of an annual. the 23532. and has come across some early verses of Holmes and two stories of Hawthorne. This leads him into di- gressions on Elisabeth Palmer Peabody (whom someone. he says. selected to marry Emerson). to a discussion of Walt lhitman. Emerson. and Eggggp 21195533. which leads him to speak of Taine on La.Fontaine. Then wind- ing back to Hawthorne's two contributions to the 29532, he says that ”The Haunted Quack“ and I'Lord Vaporcourt' have escaped the attention of all of Hawthorne's biographers. and he wonders why. as they formed the 1 first rough and satirical sketches for two later stories of importance?l; Future biographers of Whittier should also take note of the fact. he says. that an Amesbury’painter'has "lately revealed to the peeple of California. where he is living. that he once shot Whittier. by accident. through.the fence that separated his father's garden from Whittier‘s at Amesburyt' This leads Sanborn to report also that somebody has been questioning the descent of Whittier from one of the early New England magistrates. Christopher Hussey. This remark sends Sanborn off into a dozen of his 138 lots of genealogies. which bring him to wade knee-deep in the antiquarian salt marshes of Hampton.Falls. and he completes the circle by dating the shot that hit lhittier and pointing out that “the authentic biography of Whittier will doubtless take note of all these 21h things. and is soon to be published.” 213March 10. 189h. p. 9. cols. 1-3. 1h — March 17. 189h. p. 9. cols. 1-3. 393 In his review of Louise Alcott's End 3’3 3 gilggg. he says that in this as in her other works he sees her father's transcendentalism despite the fact that they seem to have none of it. This novel he finds to be moral. but the story. he feels. moves freely and without the strait- laced moralizing of Maria Edgeworth. In his reading. too. of the recent Poganuc People of Harriet Beecher Stowe he finds a faithful. vivid re- 215 production of life in Gunnecticut fifty years before. {A recent trip Westo-probably to a national conference of charities and correctionr~brings him to speak of the merit of Edward Eggleston: Mr Eggleston's novels come out as fast as Bulwer's used to: but do not resemble them.in the least. except that they are good. His third one. "The Mystery of Metropolisville.” Just concluded in Hearth and Home....is finished better than either of the former ones. and has less of the preacher and more of the novelist in it. Like them. it is a humble western story. with a slender plot. and characters. that do not take us through a wide range of human experience. There is little incident. and such as we have is rather tamely managed: but the persons are all natural and well drawn. the conversations are probable and not stiff. and no doubt the book will have great pepularity. I found. the other day. that the two pro- ceding stories are sold extensively to railroad travelers: and passing through the region where the "Hoosier Schoolmaster' is supposed to here lived. it was easy to see persons who might have sat for the characters in these novels. Even in March the “Shaker bonnet” made its appearance on the train where I was. and the manners and dialect were recognizable. also. It is delightful to find that the prairies have at last found their novelist. and that the life of the western farmers is to be extended in fiction beyond its own era. Mr Eggleston is perhaps to be warned against writing too much: though he does not yet show any signs of repeating himself: indeed. one great merit of his books is the delicacy with which the dif— ferent types of character are so drawn that theg do not repeat each other. and yet belong to the same 01888.21 215wh1trord notes. October 17. 1378. and.June 26. 1878. 216:9.11 15. 1873. p. 5. col. 6. In saying that this work *1. fin- ished better than either of the former ones.“ Sanborn perhaps forgot this novel was Eggleston's fifth publication. 3‘39 Sanborn considered Henry James' Pensigngenurenns “an entertaining cegeful of i’ocls'I and said that “possibly this may explain why Mr’James' fiction does not leave us with the most agreeable sensations-charming 217 as it is. We like to think well of ggmg_fellow creatures.“ And he gave some concluding general criticisms of America's younger novelists when he said: what is 1acking...in most of our younger American novelists. is a serious conception. either through the reason or the imagination. of what human life and its possibilities are. Everything with them is light and transitory. capable of amusing...but incapable of stirring the sources of thought and emotion. which the great masters of fiction reach without effort. MrmAldrich. Mr Howells and even Henry James have this [transitory] turn of mind. which is becoming crystallized into a school of minor novelists. The women who write novels in this countgyéavoid this fault. though they have their own shortcomings. Commenting on George Santayana's §gg§gtg egg 93h g Eggggg_he feels that none of the recent Harvard graduates who have attempted verse—vnot even George lbodberry--shows “such an easy mastery of poetic numbers as this Spaniard. to whom English rhythm is so native. and at the same time so expressive of high thought.“ Sanborn then illustrates from "a trite theme” 2 Columbus found a world. and had no chart. Save one that faith deciphered in the skies: To trust the soul's invincible surmise was all his science and his only art. He then says: ”There are finer and more obscure things in the little volume. but this will prove how fluent and perceptive the poet is. He 217%1tford not”, March. 12, 1879' 2181bid.. July’9. 1878. hCO has some touches of that affectation which is the bane of poets and era tists in this egg of the world.-but less than most. and is not too old to outgrow it.§1’. These brief quotations may be concluded.by adding that sometimes Sanborn reviewed his own books. as for example in his notice of his eleventh volume of the Familiar Letters which Boughton. Mifflin was add— ing to its ten-volume edition of Thoreau's works. But his notice merely repeated what he had said of the letters in his preface to the volume. that they would exhibit Thoreau ”in more sportive and trivial moods." adding that many of Thoreau's letters he knew were still uncollected and that he would be glad to receive cepies of any of them that hsd.never been printed?20 Sanborn took equally extended notice of British literature. and his knowledge of the most minute details of major and.minor persons. places. and things in the literature is amazing. In a review of the Egg 9: 238.3 Stanley. he compares its recounting of petty bigotries of the Pusey and.Hampden period with the work of the Hindu Mosoomdarbothe same gentleman whom Sanborn had invited to lecture at the Concord School of Philosophy. In his zhg'gpizit'2£_Qgg;hozoomdar. Sanborn felt. had written “the most religious work that has been printed in this city for many a long year.“ ZISApril 21. 189k. 20 February 10. 189h. p. 2. col 6. p. 3. col. 1. uni Here is no question of bishops or creeds [he continues]. no squabble about where the altar shall stand. and what petti- coats the priest shall wear. or how often he shall change them; but from beginning to end one warm. high strain of religious truth and charity.221 Another current biography. The Life g£.His Royal gighness the Prince Coneogfi, he found to contain ”many tiresome commonplace comments of Queen Victoria and Louis Napoleon and other great personages upon each other.‘' though he admitted the author's account of the Crimean War was well worth 22? reading. Since Sanborn considered biography second to poetry as a "delight 223 of the mind.‘l he spent much tine reviewing the latter. Of Chaucer he said in one column: [He was the] first great comic poet of England. and none who came after him-Shakespeare always excepted. have come near him in their wit and good nature. while most of them have em- ceeded him in coarseness and the political turn of their sa- 2?k tire. This is the blemish on that famous comic poem. 'Hudibras.‘ In two other columns he castigates the poetry of Swift and presents an astute evaluation of the work of Thomas Moore: [Moore's] best verses are. of course. his songs. some of which will live forever. I suppose: although if I were asked about the immortality of his large poems-even of 'Lalla Roollm.‘l which is the best. I should...ansm.er'no."22 221February 2h. 139k, p. 9. cols. 1-3. 222lhitfbrd.notes. Harsh 17, 1878. 223Ibid.. January 29. 1378. m 22h Ibid.. February 17. 1879. 225 Ibido. Hamh 27. 18730 no. . C. In a voluminous review of William Morris' Sigur1_the Volsnng_an1 -—- 1"“: m " :52 .Esll.2£ the Niblungg, Sanborn declares that Morris is “certainly an inducv trious poet”: He thinks no more of throwing off a trifle 10.000 lines laugh-that is to say a poem as long as the AEneid of Virgil.- than other men do of writing an occasional poem to be read after dinner.... And this new book...runs to nearly 10.000 long lines. One feels like crying out. with the shepherd in Virgil:- “Claudite Jam rivos. pueri! sat prata biberunt,“ which. being interpreted with the freedom that Mr Morris uses. would read:- “0 dam your water-courses. boys! shut up! Too much the meadows tipple at your cup.“ Sanborn then quotes Carlyle's remark that the writer of the German lay was “a true old singer. and taught of Nature herself!“ Morris. says San~ born, has marred this simple strength and unconscious beauty by his pe» dantries and mannerisms. but he has added a grace and tenderness which was not in the original: In the best passages he has risen above his usual vein of cloying sweetness. and struck armors manly chord, as he could not well fail to do in following such a.masculine author as the singer of the old Saga. “Sun—myths” and “moon-myths? history and legend. and a host of other ales ments. says Sanborn. are hopelessly entangled in the work: To these also Mr Morris has added his own individualityb~ giving a sort of reproduction. in literary walldpapera. of the same aesthetic effect which the wall-papers that go by his name have in house-furnishing. The grand result is something that never can have the effect of reality but may be much in fashion for a time-ass the poems of Ossian and the classical fancies of the French painter David were. This prettiness of Morris often relives the ghastZJiness of the old legends. which in their antique form could never win general ‘ll ' ‘llsllv. I ha} attention again; while his diligence in 1"restoring" the old pictures. though he adds his own coloring. is indicative of great intellectual talent and industry. The trouble seems to be that nobody can possibly read the whole that he writes. except as a special task,-«any more than he can now read the volumes of verse that were written in continuation of the old poems of Homer and Hesiod. Those poems remain. and al- ways will. though it is more difficult to read them with interest than it was formerlv.-«but the continuations are forgotten. Who knows or cares aboug gounus or Quintus Smyruaeus. or Apollonius of Rhodes? 2 From biography and.poetry Sanborn passed at times to history. and his remarks on Fronds may indicate the quality of his criticism: fir Fronds remarks.... "I have called this work a 'sketch' because the materials do not exist for a.portrait.' What necessity Mr’Froude has for authentic “materials” when he has shown such eminent ability in manufactur}ng History out of nothing. I do not quite understand.22 More often. however. Sanborn commented on English novels. In one review. in which he praised 1113 3232131“. 2}: the. m at some length, he spoke particularly of Hardy's “power of description." his "intimate know~ ledge of feminine character.“ and.he concluded: Hardy has little incident. but much invention and bybplayb- so that the reader's interest is constantly kept up without the devices of high rank or desperate misfortune or thrilling adventure to which William Black resorts.228 And his general attitude toward the novel seems to be summed up in this comment on Jane Austen: fi— 226January 18. 1377. p. 2. col. 6. 227Ihitford notes. May 28. 1379. 228 Ibid.. “arch 21. 1873. If ambitious novelists would carefully study Jane Austen or Miss Charlotte M. Yonge. and see with how few ingredients a really good story can be made. and how little what Scott called the I'hig bow~wow” style is needed. when an author has the gift of putting together a few strong instincts by a few plain rules. and of managing conversation so that all charac- ters will not talk aéike.--they would learn something greatly to their advantage.2 In general I feel that Sanborn's criticisms were eminently fair and that his loyalty to the cause of the new literature springing up in Amer- ica was important and merits our admiration. Particularly admirable was his encouragement of the American.writers when we know what he felt. This we know from a comment which he made after reading several anthol- ogies of English verse: ”So much wealth.[in England] and so much poverty here is depressing to think of. But then the length of time must be taken into account. and the fact that we do not hear much about the worthless verse that was written in England from Chaucer's time to 2 Milton's."3O 22 '_ 9Ihitford notes. June 10. 1379. 2301bid.. December 18, 1879. CEAPTER'VI HIS PERSONALITY When Julian Hawthorne was nearly seventy. he met Sanborn again “after what an interval!“ The time must have been about 1916. and the place was Sanborn's library-J those book-covered walls rich and inexhaustible” win his red brick house on the bend in the Sudbury. "That great cordial hand went out in greeting." says Hawthorne. 'and the smile flashed out and the eyes sparkled with the old brilliance under the wavy mass of hair. abun~ dant as ever though now grayed by time.“ The room became crowded with the figures which Senborn called back from the dead. "They moved upon a current of comment and reminiscence which was radiant with insight. sympathy. wit. and often a gleam of kindly satire." But the satire had changed in quality and quantity between the days of the youthful schoolteacher and these last days of the sage of eighty-four: It was a gift in him. [says Hawthorne] and he had used it with the skill of a master swordsman. It was mellowed now. and rather caressed than cut. Men who reach wisdom are not harsh. but gentle. Sanborn had never ceased to grow and had there- fore kept his youth. Like the noble elms which give native grandeur to Concord streets. his roots penetrated deeper. his branches spread wider. and bore fuller foliage than of yore. The two men sat in their life's afternoon while Sanborn “Opened many a door in the rich recesses of his mind. from which stepped the figures 1:06 of the vanished worthies in their habit as they lived." Even to have jotted down the highlights of this conversation. says Hawthorne. would have required unlimited space. for the conversation for four hours ”flowed upon its way like a careless and sun-flocked river.“ "Several volumes.” says Hawthorne.'upon the life. activities. and thoughts of this remarkable man would hardly encompass them."l Apparentky. to Hawthorne Sanborn spoke the volumes that were warm. nostalgic. pleasant. Indeed there was much of Sanborn's public and private world that was filled with the sensations of the pleasurable. but half of his volumes contained other matter. if not bitterly remem- bered by him. by those with whom he had been associated for eightybfour years. Though indeed. as Hawthorne says. volumes can scarcely encompass Sanborn's thoughts and activities. this chapter must attempt to summar- ize his personal traits and to try to indicate Sanborn's importance to the world. I took my first trip to Concord in March. 1951. to work in the Concord Free Public Library. "I understand from Mr. Odell Shepard." I said to Miss Bartlett. the librarian. I'that Sanborn was not popular in Concord. I'd like to know why.” "The sewer case." she said. “That made people mad.' If’you go to Concord today. you.will find that Sanborn-~1f his name is recognized at all-~is remembered for his activities in the sewer #— ]Memoirs 9.1:. Julian Hawthorne. pp. 90-93. l+07 case. Even his son Francis told me. "The most revealing event was the sewer case--because it showed.up his peculiarities.” The court action brought by the People versus Sanborn and his sewer in itself symbolized the hatred and the meanness of four of the town autocrats but it also carried with it the implications of the peeple's anger at his other activities on his property, namely his land reclamation.proJect. In a few words the people's action against his philosophy of the use of sewage is summed up in the contemporary account of the trial reported in the Boston Transcript; Frank B. Sanborn. historian. essayist and last of the Concord school of’philosoPhers. was fined $50 yesterday in the Concord District Court for failing to connect his house drain with the State sewer. He appealed from the sentence. which was imposed by Judge Reyes. and was held in $200. Bail was furnished. - Mr. Sanborn was his own counsel. but he did not begin. his defence: "I. Frank B. Sanborn. pro se." in accordance with the Dewey formula. Instead. he referred to himself as ”my client.” The defendant did not deny the facts in the case. but relied on his contention that the statute which the State seeks to enforce is unconstitutional. ”I appear here as counsel for the defendant. of the same name." said.Mr. Sanborn. ”in accordance with Section 12 of the bill of rights of the constitution of Massachusetts. which declares that 'every subject shall have a right to be fully heard.in his defence. by himself. or his counsel. at his election." Continuing. the defendant maintained that the statute. under which the prosecution was brought 'in the usurped name of the Commonwealth.‘ was in violation of fundamental law. which reads: I"whenever the public exigencies require that the property of any individual should be appropriated to public uses he shall receive a reasonable compensation there- for.” "This suit has been inadvertently'brought to compel my client to expend the sum of $80 or thereabout. as testified by-an expert in such work. in order to connect his private sewer. a.part of his estate. with the public sewer: and by hos that connection to lose the profit which he has for thirty- four years derived from the sewage therein. used by him to fertilize his garden and improve his estate. To this suit we demur. and ask to have the question of constitutionality decided by this court or some superior court. before further proceedings are had.” Sanborn's argument. reported the Boston Hgggld, was “elaborate," its early portions being enlivened.with “characteristic and quiet humor.'3 One understands this legal action better when he knows that it was instituted against Sanborn by his bitterest enemies in Concord. Judge Hoar and.Judge Prescott Keyes--men. in the Judgment of some. as I arrogant. vindictive. and.prejudiced as he. though less capable. Judge Keyes‘ vindictive mind operated in such a way. for example. that he at- tended a.meeting of the Concord Social Circle one evening. while his wife lay at home in her coffin. to blackball a candidate for membership. At another meeting of the Social Circle. Judge Hoar approached Sanborn and said: 'Let's let bygones be bygones.” “very'well.' said Sanborn. 'but for this night only.I And they shock hands. thereupon.Judge Hoar asked for a basin of water. 808B: and a towel. and proceeded to wash the hand that had shaken Sanborn's. 9 2'Frank Sanborn Fined: Concord Philosopher Denies Constitutional- ity of Statute Requiring Him to Connect with State Sewer....' Boston Eganscript. November 17. 19lh. (Sanborn within a month was to be eightybthree.) 3"Philos her’Pleads His Own Case: Fined $50.” Boston Herald. No- vember 17. 191 . ”Conversation with Mrs. Charles K. Darling. Concord. Mass.. March 10. 1951. (All the Darling material used in the remainder of this chap- ter was taken down during this conversation and further references to it will not be feetnoted when the source seems clear.) But Sanborn had reasons for doing everything he did and a week after his court appearance he wrote to a sympathizer in Salem the pre- cise details which motivated his defense in the sewer case: Now as to my sewer and the stupidity of the Concord people and the rest of the Americans. which you sarcastically set forth. It was and is a sin of ignorance and thoughtless- ness: and I doubt if there are four persons in.Massachusetts more ignorant and thoughtless on the utilizatiOIIof sewage than the four who are pestering me with.prosecutions.... They are not farmers. who know the value of fertilzere [sic]; they are leisure or professional men. who give a languid at- tention to public health problems a few days in a year. agree on a report of some sort. and for the rest attend to their own private business or pleasure. You.and I have had our attention directed to this subject. and for more than 50 years I have been observing and studying it. His theories of the use of sewage on his own property. he said. stemmed from his study of the problem while on the Board of State Charities: I looked after and in some degree directed the use of the sewage of the state hospitals. almshouses. etc. The old theories about poisonous sewage had to be modified or given up. and it is now recognized on all the state farms that to lose the sewage. without fertilizing with it. is a serious loss to the state. I suppose the sewage beds on the state farms now save to the treasury $20,000 a year. at least. Then.he told.his correspondent of his work in reclaiming the land from the Sudbury and of his theories which he was now applying at home: I bought my land here in 1879. when it had.been for a cen- tury a waste morass. partly filled in with sand near the street for building purposes. In the price I paid for what was but little more than an acre of upland. I secured hOO loads of sand with which to fill in around the heavy stone walls my house was to stand on. Since 1880. when I moved into it. I have purchased probably 1500 loads of sand and loam; my neighbors have given me 3000 more loads of ashes. sand. bricks. broken stone and mortar. which they had to get rid of; and with this and $1.000 worth of paid labor. and another thousand of my own labor for 35 years. I have trenched and filled in the morass; and now have nearly three acres of upland. planted with trees. sown with grass. and cultivated as a garden. in spots. every year. 1:10 His theories of his use of sewage he then explained: To fertize [sic] this I have also bought much manure: but I so constructed.my private sewer. which has now cost me $150. that I could utilize it to the value of $5 [sic] a year or more. in raising vegetables. -chiefly tomatoes. beans. beets. carrots and sweet corn. As for the attitude of the town officials and his Concord neighbors. he testified: No drop of'[sewage] has ever reached the river. on whose banks I built. and no neighbor or town official has ever complained of my sewer as a nuisance. For more than ten years no public sewer existed: and long after it was built I was allowed to use my own sewer without interference by the board of health. meeting a mile away. half a dozen times a year. Meantime my land. which if taxed at all before I bought it. could not have been valued at $500. new pays a tax on $6,000. and a water-rate of $25 a year. from which. in the last 20 years. I suppose $N00 has gone to help pay for the building of the public sewer; which simply wastes the public sewage. to the value. I suppose. of some thousands of dollars yearly. My land. which was a.huisance before I bought it. has been brought by my labor and cost into rather an ornamental state. Sanborn then tried to indicate why he thought he was being persecuted in court by Judge Keyes: I am not conscious of having inJured any fellow-citizen in body. soul or estate. in the half-century I have lived here: have paid my debts t.) given entertainments. and in my small way contributed to the good name of the town. Why I am se- lected. after such a record. for this persecution by petty suits. I have never been told. I suspect it may have some- thing to do with the indictment of a,public thief. (a tax? collector) who some years ago stole $15.000 or more from the taxrpayers. rich and poor. and ran away. He came back. and the question was what to do with him. Knowing the facts from information that came to me without my seeking it. I went to the town-meeting and obtained on my motion a vote. all but unanimous. that he should be indicted and'brought to Justice. This was done. and.he went to prison. The Judge who sentenced me the other day. and his cousinsgerman. the chief prosecutor. were active advocates for a.milder sentence for this offender than he got.-but I allowed Justice to take hll its course without further intervention. Since then. I be- lieve these two cousins have looked on me with enmity. What that should have to do with the care of my garden I fail to see.5 For*years. I am told. Sanborn was periodically placed under arrest and.hauled in before the Concord District Court until District Attorney Corcoran nol prossed the case against him. accompanying his action with a scathing denunciation of the Concord Board of Health and other offici- als of the town: After having received numerous complaints...that Dr. [sic] Sanborn was beinngersecuted for political reasons and not in good faith by the Board of Health. I went to Concord with a sanitary engineer and was fully satisfied with condi- tions as we found them. and I so notified the Board of Health. This prosecution should never have been begun against him. Mr. Sanborn was the only survivor of a distinguished group of men that made the town of Concord what we like to think it is. and the authorities of that town might be engaged in far bet- ter business than in the prosecution of a citizen who has brought a great deal more stinction to the town than most of its present inhabitants. To have a theory is one thing; to put that theory into everyday practice is quite another. particularly when that theory concerns the use of sewage. The practical aspects of this theory. as Francis Sanborn 5Sanborn to l. 8. Nevins. Concord. November 23. l9lh. from the San- born.Papers in the Essex Institute. Salem. Mass.. to whom I am indebted for permission to use it. 6"Holt. Pros Case inst 'Sage of Concord.'-Dist. Atty. Corcoran Denounces Board of He th That Brought Sanborn Charges." (This clipping. dated Cambridge. March 29 [no year]. is in the Quinqusnnial File of the class of 1855. Harvard Archives. The paper from which the clipping is taken is not indicated.) . .According to another clipping in the same file. Sanborn was sum- moned seven times in eleven months. Though no year is indicated on the clipping. nor the newspaper from which it is cut. the clipping is anti» tlsd I'Sage of Concord ' in Court Today--Sanborn. for Seventh Time. Is Summoned in Drain Case.“ Ina told me. devolved.upon.him and his brothers. 'The Indian grave we called it-two brick. horizontal.vau1ts into which the sewage was dis- charged. My pleasant task and.my brothers' was to pump the sewage onto the garden." As for the prosecution. he added. "We had a lot of fun about it." As Francis Sanborn said. the sewer case revealed much about his father's personality. It revealed. for.one thing. his attitude toward his principles. "Whenever his principles were concerned.” said Francis. “he'd stand up for them. even if he were burned at the stake. I think." His attitude toward Judge Prescott Keyes was also typical. "The highly placed and the arbitrary." said Francis. ”he detested. The more modest he never quarreled with.“ But the case symbolized his love of controversy. According to Mrs. Hosmer. he was the one person in Concord ever to have been.kicked out of the Social Circle. chiefly because he was everlastingly promot- ing his opinions and insisting that no one else should be permitted another’point of view.7 He carried over this attitude. as we have seen. in his defense of John Brown against all comers. And he maintained this same attitude toward his famous friends in Concord. He became the self-appointed guardian of the New England hierarchy. and to those who ers. Herbert Buttrick Hosmer. 22 Elm Street. Concord. in a letter to me dated November 18. 1952. in which she states the fact was supplied to her by Dr. William B. Bartlett. who has been secretary of the organi- zation for twentybseven years. There is. however. nothing in the records of the society regarding the circumstances. 1413 had the temerity to differ with him. he indicated that his Opinions on all matters which concerned them was final. For example. when Mark Van Doren published his important study of Thoreau in 1916. Francis H. Allen evidently wrote Sanborn asking him to review it. Sanborn. in a bitter and impertinent reply to Allen. said in part: I have never had the least intention of reviewing vaLn] Doren's skit on Thoreau: it is such as college profes- sors used sometimes to write. but 50 years ago. Lowell. who had at least as much knowledge of Thoreau as this man. tried the experiment of demolishing Thoreau soon after his death; and I cannot see that he had any success with sensible read- ers. I consider it time wasted to write such books. to read them. or to do anything with them. at the present high price of white paper. than to grind them right over again in the mill that first turned them from pulp. The author should keep a copy to remind him how foolish a young American when Roosevelt. with equal vafln]ity was reelecting Wilson. could be. in the contemporary field of literature. {A time may came. after he has read my book. when he will have some conception of the man a[n]d.the school he is chatter- ing about. I do not despair of his conversion: but have writ- ten all I shall to contribute to it. 'They have Moses and the prophegs: nor would they be converted though one rose from the dead. ' To those who sent him their books for review he oftentimes re- turned equally caustic and sneering letters. For example. when Albert Mordell published his pamphlet. The Shifting 2; Literary 231393. he received.praise from Sir Arthur WinglPinero. Bliss Perry. George Neod- berry. and Arnold.Bsnnet. But when he sent Sanborn a copy of his work he received the following: ——_ 16 8Sanborn to Francis H. Allen. dated Westfield. New Jersey. January 9 1917. hlh I received your brochure some days ago. glanced at it, and to night.[sic] have read some parts of it more care- fully....It...adcpts a positive tone in regard to many sub- Jects and authors concerning which the enlightened.part of mankind are by no means unanimous.... Mr. Emerson. (a very wise man. and a greater admirer. and I suspect. reader of Plato than you.seem to be.-) once said to me in conversation. ”Immoral conclusions spare us a great deal of trouble in examiLn]ing the argument.“ I suspect that in later and more mature years. and.perb haps with a humility that the mortifications of life are apt to teach. you.will find moral objections to some of the conclusions you now put forward more confidently than I. at 80. could venture to do. {All wisdom is seldom granted to one person. or one age: the changes you notice (by no means for the first time in the long history of the world) are apt to be slight corrections in the overweening conscious- ness of men reputed brilliant or experienced.... Instead of broad. sweeping general statements. such as the young are fond of making. often without having col- lected instances enough to generalize from; it would be well to take some special. even trivial tOpic. and expand on that the research and reflection that real thinking re- quiréfleg Sanborn at times carried this same spirit into his professional duties. For example. when Dr. Allen of the board of state charities in Boston was being questioned by Senator Stedman. the chairman of the committee which was carrying on the investigation of the Tewksbury Almshouse scandal. Sanborn interrupted Stedman's cross-examination to correct some statements and to ask the witness further explanatory ques- tions. Senator Stedman. according to the reporter of the scene. several SSanborn to Mordell. Concord. September 5. 1912. I am indebted to Mr. Mordell. now of 16 South Broad Street. Philadelphia. Penna.. for drawing this letter to my attention and for providing the photostat copy. times reminded Sanborn that he wished he would not interfere and told him to sit down. Finally. Senator Stedman became so exasperated that when Sanborn again attempted to make a statement. the following took place: Mr. Sanbo rn--Mr. Chairman. Mr. Stedman~-I don't wish you to interfere. Mr. Sanborn--Hr. Chairman. Mr. Stedman-- [rising excitedly from the chairman's seat]--You!d better take this chair and manage the inves- tigation yourself. I do not think another man could be found in the COTBonwealth so impudent. impertinent and over- bearing as you. The effect of all this controversy is perhaps best summed up by Sanborn's class secretary. Edwin H. Abbot. Sanborn's habit of using harsh epithets. he said. stirred up a ”curious ecstasy of detestation for*[him] among some even of his classmates.” Afterwards. "his per- sistence in it aroused like emotions in not a few of the best and kind- liest and most excellent citizens of Boston.“ The prOper’Bostonians. epitomized by Howells' Mr. Arbuton. Isimplyabhorred Sanborn and all his ways during the first twenty years of his activity.“ Yet. in spite of the fact that a host of peeple loathed Sanborn he was loved and admired by an equal number. This is shown by Abbot. for example. in his completion of the above statement: [Those traditional Bostonians] never were. then. and their spccessors still are. quite unable to acknowledge the real service Sanborn rendered to the blind. to the insane. and to the prisoner. and to the great army of desolate and Oppressed. l 0"The Tewksbury'Almshouse Investigations-Senator Stedman and Frank Sanborn.“ Boston Qgily’égyertiger. March 1h. 1876. p. h. col. 2. (The square brackets appear in the original news item.) MIG They seem quite ignorant of the extensive regions in this country where Sanborn's name will long live in grateful remembrance for the good he did. and for the seeds of char- ity and goodrwill he has sown. Mr. Arbuton never went West .... Yet. if [he] ever should explore these unknown regions of his country. he will find Sanborn more admired there than even the Good Samaritan. Sanborn's kindness of heart and readiness tillend a helping hand never failed: and it grew With time. Mr. Clarence Brigham of the American Antiquarian Society seemed to add further light when he told me: “Everyone would like him who met him socially. but in a dispute. boy! youfid have to watch out!” And Brigham remembered.that Sanborn spoke in an Ieasy cultured.voice'-his impression was that it was deep-and that he possessed great charm of 12 manner. Apparently. he spoke much better than he wrote. ”with a racy touch of humor. a quick glancing from topic to tepic. a warm and.human quality that are somehow less striking without the voice and gesture of the man to give them life.“ Musing over this Opinion. the critic who delivered it continued: Most of his literary labors were confined to editing other men's work. or relating other men's lives. and he had a strong faculty for putting a.personality into words: but original work was not his gift except when talking. Then. listening. you.wondered why he. too. had not made his name known wherever Concord was spoken of. an equal to any in the group.13 1LEdwin H. Abbot. "News from the Classes.“ p. 557. 12Conversation of July 3. 1951. 13"Last of Concord Group Depicts Thoreau.“ New'York Times. May 27. 1917. Section 7. p. 1. (This is a fullapage feature review of Sanborn's 1917 biography of Thoreau.) in: One. I feel. would have to acceat on faith that he possessed a l ”charming . . . irresistible humor" if one looked for it in his writing. For. excepting his political columns in the Springfield Republiegn and an exceptional strain of humor in some of his letters to Charles Dudley Warner, there does not seem to be much carry-over of this humorous ten- dency from his speech to his writing. As it is important to see Sanborn when he was charming and.pleasant. it is interesting to watch his special effort to be amusing when he wrote to Warner. I offer no explanation of the presence of humor in these letters except the obvious one. that he was stimulated by the humorous character of his addressee. Typical is this penny postcard: Dec 27 Thanks to our admirable P. O. arrangements I have Just received yours of’Nov 13. which has been only uh days in coming 120 miles. or at the rate of a mile evegy 8 1/2 hours. You.may expect a reply about valentine's day.1 On another occasion. after Warner had sent him a copy of his latest book. Sanborn replied: Thanks for your “linter on the Nile.” which has given me much entertainment and instruction. Mrs Sanborn agrees with me that the portrait of the author (full length) is by no means a flattering likeness. How are your'poor feet? In this engraving they look frost-bitten-yet this could hardly have happened in the mildness of an Egyptian winter. Perhaps ilk Alexander'Johnson. "An Appreciation of Frank B. Sanborn," The Survey. XXXYII (March 10. 1917). 657. 15Sanborn to Warner. [Concord7]. December 27. [1873?] in the Watkinson Library of Trinity College. Hartford. Conn. a hippopotamus trod on your instep before you stood for this photograph. Or am I mistaken? A.glance at the rotund countenance (ore rotundg) makes me misgive that it is not you. but isrevised statute of Chaps the inventor of the pyramids. Humor is ephemeral and what is humorous to one age is often not to another. There is nothing in these two examples which would compare with the humor of warner's neighbor. Sam Clemens. but the difference be- tween Sanborn's humor in these letters and Clemens' humor is as great perhaps as the difference between the humor in this bundle of letters and the lack of it in Sanborn's other correspondence. But that Sanborn was "full of Jokes" and that he ”was very witty and always laughed very heartily at his own amusing stories'llre Opinions submitted by those who knew him most intimately and attested to by many others. Most surprising in Sanborn's letters to warner is the fact that he mentions his wife. Louisa Leavitt Sanborn. three times during the thir~ teen-year period covered by these letters. This is surprising because. except for the letters he wrote Parker describing their wedding and honeymoon. these are the only references Sanborn makes to her in the large number of letters I have collected which he wrote during the fifty- five years of their marriage. I presume he wrote her frequently. though __T Sanborn to Warner. Concord. October 16. 1876. also in the Watkin- son Library. 17Conversation with Francis B. Sanborn and a personal letter to me from Sanborn's niece. Mrs. William Cram. Hampton Falls. May 21. 1952. (All of the material from Francis B. Sanborn was written down during my conversation with him at his home. 10 New York Boulevard. Sea Girt. N.J.. August 28. 1951. and further references to it will not be footnoted when the source seems clear.) 1419 only four letters addressed to her have turned up so far. Considering the fact that Sanborn does not mention her once in his two volumes of autobiography except in the caption of a photograph nor in all the mil- lions of words which he published during his lifetime-ethough he pub- lished forty-four'pages about Ariana Walker in his autobiography alone; and considering that one cannot find one statement in anything he wrote disclosing the fact that he married a second time and had three sons by this marriage. one finds it necessary to inquire into Sanborn's home life and domestic arrangements. As we already know. Sanborn had three sons: Thomas Parker. born February 23. 1865 in Concord. Victor Channing. born in Concord April EM, 1867. and Francis Bachiler. born in Springfield February 5. 1872. during the four years Sanborn was a resident editor of the gepublicag. George Santayana has provided us with a vivid portrait of Tom. for the two knew each other intimately for four years as members of the Lagpoon board at Harvard and as companions in this closed little circle of four or five who ate their meals together. Through the phenomenon of the alphabet. they sat next to each other in several classes including Natural History M. where Professor Shaler set forth "all the geology necessary to a gentleman.” The two had separate chairs but shared one long desk. which allowed them to look at each other's notebooks and amuse themselves matching triolets. Sanborn [says Santayana] was a poet of lyric and modest flights but gpnuine feeling. not naturally in harmony with the over-intellectualized transcendentalism of Concord. Massachusetts.... There was more of Chaucer in him than of “90 Emerson or Wordsworth: even Shakespeare--except in the songs-~ he found too heavy and rhetorical. These exclusions were involuntary: he was not in the least conceited about them. but on the contrary felt that he was a misfit. shy. ungainly in appearance. and at a disadvantage in the give and take of conversation or action. These maladjustments. a few years later. led to a tragic end. His father had found him a.plane in the office of The §pringfield Republican. That town of- fered little to keep up his spirits. He fell into rather un- desirable company. as at College he had sometimes succumbed to drink-~not often. yet ungracefully. I think I understand the secret of these failings. gross as they seem for a man of such delicate sensibility. He was unhappy. he was poor. he was helpless. The sparkle of a glass. the glitter of a smile. the magic of a touch could suddenly transport him out of this world. with all its stubborn hindrances and dreary conven- tions. into the Auberge Verte. the green paradise. of his dreams. Yet this escape from reality was necessarily short- lived. and the awakening bitter and remorseful. The strain was too much for Sanborn. His discouragement became melan- cholia and began to breed hallucinations. He knew only too much about madness. as everybody did in old New England. and he feared it. He cut his threat in his bath with a razor. and we buried him in Concord. in sight of the optimistic Emerson's grave. after a parlor funeral. with the corpse vis- ible. at which his father read a few not {cry pertinent pas- sages from the Upanishads and the Psalms. 8 19 Santayana composed a 'gracefulhy touching obituary notice“ for the Harvard.Monthlz. and saw him laid to rest beneath a tablet of Pentelic marble. carved in Athens and inscribed with its “emblems of aspiration and genius" and a line of Greek verse copied from an ancient tomb in 20 Thebes. -—_._ 18George Santayana. Persons and.Places; the Background.g£;gz Life (New'York: Scribner's. 1953). pp. 195-197. lgGeorge W. Hewgate. Geor e §§ntayan§_(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.Press. 1938). p. 61. 20% Mo 139- 573-579- 1#21 Various theories are presented today in Concord to explain Tom's suicide. Mrs. Darling believes that "one of the causes of Tom Sanborn's death is that the girl that he wanted wouldn't have him." But his brother Francis says: He was different from other boys-~he was left-handed. awkward. didn't know how to play. He was not exactly an- tisocial. but he didn't amalgamate. His desire was to pure sue literature. but not in a way I should think that would lead to very much. .As a reporter he wasn't much of a suc— cess. Bowles terminated his work with the Springfield Ref publican. I think he felt that everything seemed to conspire against his success and I think he thought he was better to be out of it. I played with a very different set of little boys. got a very good health out of it. and learned to get along with other people. I imagine he wanted to get married but couldn't interest the girls. No. I don't think he was homosexual. But he was simply not gaited for this world. If he could have been a librarian or a scholar I think he would have been a very useful member of society. Then too he had a bitter disappointment in not being elected class poet at Harvard. Instead he was elected class odist. a rather insignificant role. and I think this bit into him deeply. The other two sons were more practical. Victor. though he intended to enter Harvard. in 1885 went to Cornell with his father. who was lec- turing there on practical social science and taking his classes to the jprisons. insane asylums. and reform schools near Ithaca. But after staying at Cornell only one term as an unmatriculated student. he began office work in Omaha for the Burlington and Missouri River Railroad un— der'the auditor of freight and.passenger accounts. After serving six ;years as assistant or chief clerk in the passenger department of the Chicagns Burlington. and Quincy Railroad. he left it in 1898 and pursued a highly lucrative position as a deve10per of the real estate and renting business in the booming suburb of Kenilworth, Illinois. where he died in 199?. He is survived by two daughters. one of whom is married to an architect who--it would not have pleased Sanborn to know-~is at present an intimate of Colone1.McCormick of the Chicago Tribune. He inherited from his father a lust for genealogy. at an age as early as seventeen searched the Hampton and Exeter records for his family history. pursued his investigations of the English Sambornes in a trip to that country. and was the author of the family genealogy. This Th3, E22122 referred to as a ”stupendous volume" which it could ”conscientious- 1y place . . . in the front rank” of American genealogies.21 Francis too was of a practical turn of mind. Though he wanted to go to Harvard. his father would not hear of it: "Harvard is a sinkhole of vice.” he declared. ”No other son of mine shall go there. You.can go to Cornell and take any course you.choose.' Francis rode to Cornell with.his father to look the place over. then told him he still wanted to go to Harvard. But as his father was adamant. Francis went nowhere. "I 'wouldn't have gone to Harvard." said Francis. “unless there'd been money enough to go through-~and I think there would not have been. My mother wanted me to go to Massachusetts Institute of Technology. but I did not relish the four years I would have had to go through before I could get going in something." 21 [Review of] Victor Channing Sanborn. Genealogy of the Family 9: inflame. 2: m in Be m- MIX (October 12. 135957234-255. to} At seventeen. herefore. he moved West to enter the passenger service of the Chicago. Burlington. and Quincy. After two years of this. he returned to Concord at his father's request to help him with the typing of the Alcott biography. A.year later he entered the em- ployment of the Crane Company. manufacturer of plumbing fixtures. where he rose to the position of assistant superintendent of branches. He resigned from Crane. and after a brief period in which he worked with Chicago. Baltimore. and.New York manufacturers of piping. tube-boilers. and fire riveted.p1ate. he spent the remainder of his business career with Crane.2arrancis married Mary De Courcy of Bangor. Maine. and they have one son. who lives in Oak Park. Illinois. and works for Sears Roebuck. When I asked.Francis why he did not pursue a literary career he replied: “Poverty. When I was a boy. when.I wanted a bicycle. I had to buy it myself. earn the money for it. It was a horribly slow process for a little boy. I determined to make money and.have the things my father could never provide.” I Sanborn. his son averred. was “indifferent to affairs of money.‘I and. except for some shares in the Springfield Republican. he never made any investments. He was. however. ”by no means lacking in acumen. al- though many of his parallels were drawn from the Classics." He displayed 22 Sanborn Genealo . . 80-F81 1 . August WIT—....fl PP 5 J and 1111 conversation with him hf“): this acumen while he was President of the Board of Corporators of the Clarke School for the Deaf when the elder Morgan was pursuing his cam- paign to merge into the New Haven Railroad the packages of railroads. steamships. and utilities. a campaign which proved a disaster. There was vigorous Opposition in New England.[said Francis]. and as New Haven stock was an important part of the Clarke endowment fund the investment was many times considered by the Board of Trustees. My father told me that while the stock was quoted around 200 he continually urged that it be eliminated from the portfolio. but was unable to carry his point. My impression is that it was finally disposed of for a few dollars pgr share. resulting in an impairment of the school's funds. 3 2 One can speak of Sanborn's financial condition by repeating the phrase of his class secrfitary at Harvard: ”He never yearned at any time for large wealth."2 But since Sanborn was never supported as were many of his contemporaries by family riches. he doubtless always felt the need to make money. During those years when he was Secretary of the Board of State Charities and Inspector of Charities he was of course supposed to receive a stipulated salary. But when General Butler. his mortal enemy. was finally elected to the Governorship of the state on the Democratic ticket. one of his first acts was to attempt to remove Sanborn from public office. To do this he withheld his salary for sev- eral months. When the boys in Francis' school got wind of this they would holler in chorus. ”All I want is my salary!” 23Personal letter to me from Mr. Francis Sanborn. 10 New York Boulevard. Sea Girt. New Jersey. September 1. 1951. 214Edwin H. Abbot. "News from the Classes." p. 556. ‘ "3 He was therefore always on the lookout for some literary gold mine. His two weekly letters to the Republican, says Francis. "brought him in a modest sum." and his innumerable books and his articles for the paying magazines added to his income from time to time. But. says Mrs. Darling. he was "an inveterate book borrower, and when he got his hands on some~ thing. he often did not bring it back. After Mr. Sanborn died. Dr. Emerson wanted to get in. I think. to get back some of the books Sanborn had borrowed. but he couldn't get in. One day. however. I found a note on the window-sill. and it said: 'Beware! The cord is broken. Your arm will be hurtl' I know that Mrs. Pratt. Mr. Alcott's daughter. wouldn't allow Mr. Sanborn alone in the house. for she always said he'd take any- thing of value. So she always made someone stay in the room with him. for she feared he'd find some Alcott memento or record and run off with it.“ His friends in Concord believed too that he was moved to invite the aged Ellery Channing in to live with him and his family in the hOpe that Channing might prove to be a major American poet whose papers would be left to him as literary executor. In 1908 he was offering C. E. Good~ speed. the Boston book-dealer and.publisher. six of Thoreau's earliest college themes at $20 apiece. five later essays-“in respect to charac- ter somewhat superior to the $20 essays. but less rare'o-for $15.each. and the longest of the essays. Thoreau's ten-page review of Henry Nel- son'Coleridge's book. Thg_§tggy’g£_the ggeek Classic Eggtg. "At the rate you.sometimes charge." he wrote Goodspeed. this would be worth $190; 95 but I mark it only $19," Francis' comment on this was. "My father's relationship to some book dealers was that of the sucker to the profes- sional. My father believed everything some of them told him and got good and trimmed.“ On the other hand. Sanborn could be shrewd. On one of his trips to Italy he picked up a brochure on the cover of which was written ”Galileo Galilei.” He paid a quarter for it. This he sold to a man in St. Louis for $200. Mrs. Sanborn. however. according to Francis. was "financially minded. and through Ellen Emerson was able to get advice from Will Forbes and through that means was able to invest her household money in AT&T and such things in which the Forbes had made considerable money.” Sanborn was invited. says Francis. to become one of the directors of Bell Tele- phone and one of the stockholders. but he turned it down. "Had I ex- pended my talents on making money." Sanborn told Francis. "I would have been a rich man." ”I was not able to agree." said Francis. "Money he thought was a useful tool but nothing to concentrate on. We always felt} that had he piled up some competence it would have been better for us."db It is rather difficult to discover exactly the relationship between Sanborn and his wife. The portraits we have of her are few. "She was affectionate. sympathetic. adaptable.” says Francis. ”She saw the good points in everybody. and she was fortunate in her friends: Elizabeth 2 5Sanborn to Charles Eliot Goodspeed. Concord. September ll, 1908, in the Berg Collection of the New Yerk Public Library. 26Mr. Sanborn then added: ”Of course. I think prosperity is more important than anything else. Of course. this is a materialistic doc- trine." h27 Ripley. Mrs. Forbes [Faith Emerson]. and Mrs. Edward Hoar. My mother was practical: my father was not. They thoroughly admired each other, but I don't think they understood each other. My mother made friends easily. my father not so easily. The family is a very good institution and harmony a very great thing. and it upset mother when these families with whom he had feuds were upset. She wanted harmony and she didn't enjoy it when he attacked the families of those with whom she was inti- mate and whom she loved. Mother used to take me down to Judge Hoar's to play whist with him. and I think Father thought this a bit disrespectful to him. The New England character is very rugged and peculiar but has many virtues.“ She was. according to one reporter. not a beautiful woman-as Ariana was. As there seem to be no photographs of her except in a dis- mally foggy group snapshot in the Recollections. we have only the verbal picture of her given us by Mrs. Francis Sanborn. She was forced to sub- stitute for Sanborn one evening in one of the homes in Concord where he had agreed to lecture. and we see her sitting there in her lavender dress and sweet peas talking intimately about the famous people of Con- cord. ”She hadn't any looks." says Miss Clara Endicott Sears. ”Ariana was beautiful. I remember one of the pictures of her that was piled up on the trash after Mr. Sanborn died-~a picture of a beautiful. beautiful girl. He wasn't in love with [Mrs. Sanborn]. She was charming. but not 27 one to be in love with.“ A 2 7Conversation with Miss Clara Endicott Sears. Hotel Vendome. Bos- ton, March 11. 1951. The rumor persists today in Concord that Sanborn and his wife did not speak to each other during the last ten years of their life but com- municated by writing notes. Yet when I reported this to Mrs. Darling. who knew them both intimately as friends and neighbors. she said, ”Why. that seems incredible. I never would have suspected it. though it may have been so.“ As for their compatibility. she declared that they got along very well. ”They were devoted to each other. She kept to the house a lot. I think she rather enjoyed.poor health. I think most women did in those days.“ Francis says that their relationship was "about what you'd expect in those last years. They both had specific talents but very different talents. My mother inspired affection and my father didn't. He was strictly an individualist. He didn't care about inspiring affec- tion." Of course. one can only speculate on what must have gone through Mrs. Sanborn's mind when Sanborn named their new house "Ariana." and placed the stone inscribed to her memory in the gable and. supposedly. filled it with their love letters and intimate papers. ”It was like throwing a bucket of water in her face.” says Francis. ”to put that stone in the house. . . . He would have done very well to have forgotten all about that. to have cherished the memory but kept his mouth shut." Yet Mrs. Sanborn had the most remarkable gift of forbearance. for she always spoke of Ariana. says Miss Sears. as ”our dggg.Ariana." "I don't think she relished all this.” says Francis. "Yet she would say. 'Miss Walker was a beautiful woman." As for the Ariana stone and all it must have symbolized to Sanborn's wife and three sons. "We never alluded to it in our family at all.” says Francis. "because none of us approved of it." Though Mrs. Sanborn bore more than her share of crosses. she also had to put up with the invalid Ellery Channing. who spent the last ten years of his life living in a room on the third floor. Sanborn. in a curious document entitled "Dates and Circumstances in Regard to the Com- ing of W. E. Channing to Live with F. B. Sanborn.'2§eclares that "Mrs. F. B. Sanborn invited him to come to her husband's house to be cared for.” If she did-~and the fact is extremely doubtful--she should have been canonized. for Channing. says Francis. "proved an awful curse.” He came to them old and sick. but refusing the aid of a nurse. and San- born moved him in. books. bags. and baggage. "He would have starved to death." says Francis. ”if my father had not yanked.him in to live with us. He was completely ill-mannered and whimsical: frustrated. bitter. and utterly unreasonable. He had no business living on this planet.” And.the rumor persists that Sanborn and his wife never spoke to each other after Channing moved in. Channing lived in a room that was fitted off for him in the third floor in the gable that housed the Ariana stone. The room was furnished with a.fireplace. walls of bookshelves. walnut paneling and a cast-iron safe recessed into the chimney which ran up through the clothes closet. This. the Hosmers presume. was to contain the treasures of Channing's Pen which Sanborn hoped would prove a gold mine. But the most interesting object in Channing's apartment was an ”earth closet," a great wooden toilet that stood in the center of the 8 2 In the Sanborn Papers. Concord Library. to \J; C) room. The seat was about five feet long and two feet wide and was con- structed of alternating stripes of white birch and dark oak with an arched back of similar design five feet high. When Channing wished to sit down. he raised the cover of this great seat, at each side of which were lockers of sand. When he urinated. he opened up the door at the back of the throne and. when he had finished. dumped in more sand. As Sanborn is referred to as an "inventor“ in one of the obituary notices?9 and as the objects of his invention are not mentioned. I wonder if the writer of the comment believed. as the Hosmers do. that Sanborn invented this utilitarian obJet d'art and whether he considered this Sanborn's chief claim to the title. The house Sanborn built in memory of his first love to shelter him- self and his family was. however. most pleasant. and had about it an air of elegant spaciousness. Though classifiable as "Early McKinley" in its architecture. it was relatively simple in design and free of gingerbread. The windows and ceilings were high. and as the river could be seen on three sides from its spacious living rooms and the large upstairs bed- rooms. the family may ave felt as though they were living in a modestly luxurious Victorian houseboat. This house was the scene of much quiet hospitality. Julia Ward Howe was a frequent visitor and always carried with her a c0py of her ”Battle Hymn of the Rapublic.” Harriet Tubman. the Negro ”Moses of Her JPeople." was a frequent caller. and one evening a.handful of Negroes 290'Death of F. B. Sanborn." Springfield Sunday mvublican. February 95, 1917. p. 13. cols. l-h. h71 came out to the house to serenade Sanborn under his window. The Alcotts too called often. ”What I couldn't understand." says Francis. ”was my father's respect for Bronson Alcott. He was just a doddering old fool. with a large round head and face, long white whiskers. and a gloomy and boring way of talking. And he talked about things I didn‘t understand and wouldn't have cared about had I understood. We boys in Concord were eminently practical and detested.Alcott because he allowed his daughter to support him and his wife to work like a slave. And he would sit in our parlor and propound great philosOphic truths. 'Cheese.' Mr. Alcott would say. 'Cheese will digest everything but itself.'" One day when Louisa Alcott came to the house. she said to Mrs. San- born. "I have white gloves for the first time in my life. And you and Mr. Sanborn are the only people in Concord on whom I might call.“ For friends such as these Sanborn would bring forth the Marsala from the small cupboard in the chimney of the diningbroom fireplace. Then on the horsehair sofa by the dining-room windows they would sit to converse. Once in a while. on a Sunday afternoon. Mr. Channing was helped down from the attic. and the two men would heat a kettle of mulled wins over the glowing logs and reminisce over the spirits of the past.30 Sanborn took no interest whatsoever in food. In fact. says Francis. he had no idea what he was eating. "I never eat cheese." he said to Mrs. Darling. "But I've been fixing it for you for years between crackers With your beer.” “Oh?" said Sanborn. ”Well. it's awfully good." he said. 30Conversation with Mrs. Charles K. Darling and Mr. Francis B. San- born, and laughed. Francis became much disturbed while his father lived with them in Westfield. "For heaven‘s sake, why don't you eat?" he would ask him. "At my age." he replied. "you don't need much.“ "I think he ate when he felt like it.” said Francis, “and when he didn't. he didn't indulge himself." Miss Morris of the Clarke School for the Deaf tells how he used to sit in the dining-room with Miss Yale-~the principal-and her staff. “He would hold people spellbound. taking a piece of bread and just hold- ing it. He wouldn't talk about himself. but he would ask someone. 'Well. what part of the country are you from?‘ They'd reply. and then he'd be off. You.never. however. got the feeling he was trying to show off. but he held the stage. He knew so many peeple and he brought into his conver- sation the names of the great. But he would sit there holding the piece of bread while the principal. the staff. the teachers in training. and the children waited for him to finish. Eating was not his chief inter- est.” Sanborn had to come up to Northampton twice a year for the meetings of the Board of Corporators. and he always stayed in the guest room in Rogers Hall the night before the meeting. On one such occasion one of the teachers down the hall from the guest room had been very ill and Miss ‘Yale had employed a night nurse for her. In the middle of the night the nurse awake to discover*Mr. Sanborn in his long white nightgown and his long white hair towering above her.. She Jumped out of bed. guided him back to the guest room, and tucked him in. I'He awoke next day." says Miss Morris. ”in all his dignity--he never was one to Joke about mundane things-~and he never knew.” p“, DJ M "The children at the school thought he was a wonderful person. a wonderful man." says Miss Morris. But his attitude toward them was dif- ferent. for example. from that of Dr. Alexander Graham Bell. who was crazy about every child. "Sanborn liked them more ideOIOgioally. and he 31 didn't seem particularly interested in them.” As Francis says. ”He had very little play in him.“ He would take the three of them for a walk every Sunday afternoon. "Now.” he would say on the way home. ”we will all guess the time for a.penny.' And they would guess what time it was. That was the nearest he ever got to play --except that he used to play whist. “But he was an atrocious player." both Francis and.Mrs. Darling declare with feeling. ”He violated all the rules." So Sanborn continued to live his many lives into a vigorous old age. Old he was only in years. however. for he still had ”great muscular strength and great bodily health." says Francis. and at seventy-three he was still walking to Walden Pond as often as he could for a swim.32 ”Though he was always talking of things of the past." says Mrs. Darling, "he worked hard in the present." He spent his brief hours at home writing his books. articles. and columns and filling in the back of Conversation with Miss Dorothy Morris. Clarke School for the Deaf. TNorthampton. Mass.. July. 1951. 32tJ. H. Atkinson]. "The Nomad.” Boston EVening Transcript” June 25, 1917, in.the Sanborn Papers. Perkins Institution. x’A. ,na'.‘ ‘1‘ $.45.” bin his preperty--Justifiably so. say the Hosmers. I'i‘or it was an awful mess. half in and half out of the water." "I'm going till I get two acres.“ Sanborn told Mrs. Darling. ”I have a right-~a legal right-~to go to the middle of the stream.” But his thoughts were not confined by Concord. When the question of woman suffrage became a hot issue. Mrs. Darling told him it was ridicu- lous for women to be given the vote. "It will mean that elections cost the government twice as much and that the expense will only bring about a show of additional ignorance and twice over.” “No." said Sanborn. "every living person of intelligence ought to have an Opportunity to run the government." The attitude of the peOple toward him never seemed to change. ”I think many people admired him.“ says Francis. “but I don't think there was much affection for him. And I doubt whether he expected much. He was too uncompromising to expect much affection." Explaining this. Francis says. "My father was not thoroughly human— ized. He had no toleration for the mistakes of the weak. I wish he had ‘had.a.few vices in his youth; they would.have humanized him. When he spoke in town meeting the concensus was generally against him. But he turd a slant on everything and he intended to pursue that slant. He lived ‘qp to his principles and you can't help respecting anybody who does that." Though Sanborn was vigorous and. for the most part. probably quite optimistic in his outlook. there were occasional premonitions of death. .L'.’ K)! ‘..’§ particularly in his letters to William Bromley. In one letter. after discussing the health of two old friends who had been battling heart trouble. he said: This limit of threescore years and ten. or some shorter time. is indeed a sad break-off in our earthly career. es- pecially when it brings ill health. failure of mind and the other woes that wait on age. But we believe the spirit to be finally victor over these trials of the body: and what may await us in the boundless age of the universe. who can say733 However. he little anticipated what finally occurred. In November. 1916. when he was eightybfour. he went to Westfield with Mrs. Sanborn to spend the winter with Francis and.Molly. On January 18th he was injured in an accident. which. typically. he reported some weeks later in his literary letter for the Republican: On this particular day. I no more wished to fall or to avoid falling than on every other day of the present winter. I have thought of this casualty every day on set- ting foot upon the soil of New York or New Jersey. in which I have walked many miles without accident. I went through the street difficulties of New York. got upon a swift- moving express train in the subway. and went up to East Twenty-third street. There my object was to pass an hour or two with my friend. Hastings Hart. from whom I get much good information and sound advice on our old questions of public and private charity. I now went up to the Grand Central hotel for luncheon. after which I pushed out among the dangers of Forty-second street and Fifth avenue. which ‘were considerable on account of crowds. I found my way to the art shop of Lawrence & Simmonds. who here for sale five ven Dyke portraits not before offered in this country. Two of them are good bust portraits-~Gharles I and his Queen Henrietta. fit for‘any gallery in America. The third is a.full-length portrait of James Stuart. duke of Richmond. who holds his place in history from his devotion to his two sovereigns. There are two other Van Dykes. noticeable but no t important. N 33Sanborn to Bromley. Concord, September 6. 1908. in the Thoreau Library of Walter Harding. University of Virginia. 4x6 Having done all this. besides one or two calls in the morning, I said. ["] It is time to go back to Westfield and be taken care of.? I left New York soon after h and reached Westfield at 5.15 p. m.. but was asleep at the time. and did not discover my arrival in time to leave the train. I got off at Plainfield. where I had been before. and bought a re- turn ticket for a train leaving Plainfield at 5.1+o p. m. for New York. which would leave me at Westfield. The train for New York came in. and I moved along slowly to get on board at the door nearest to Philadelphia. that is. the rear of the train. A.heavy baggage truck seemed to be moving a little before me toward a door in the train where I supposed baggage was to be taken off. or put on board. It did not seem to in- terfere with my course of action: but when I got near the rear door this heavy truck rolled forward. struck me in the hip or side. and laid me flat on the stone platform near the train. I saw at once that my hip was probably broken. and I cried out to be picked up and.put on board the train which would leave me at Westfield. But it was not possible to do this. and after considerable delay and talking. the ambur lance of the Plainfield hospital came up. took me on board with more or less discomfort and carried me in about 25 min— utes to my son's house....where I was unloaded into my own bed by my two ambulance attendants and by my own doctor.... who has taken good care of me ever since. There has been but little severe pain. and that little has diminished considerably within the past week. There seems every reason to hape that the knitting of the broken bone has gone quietly forward and that I may find that the severe lameness which I anticipated will not occur. My sleep and.my digestion has been fairly good for a fortnight and.my recovery has proceeded quite as fast as I could have expected. My doctor and my visiting friends are confident of my recovery. and I must belifive with them until there comes some proof to the contrary.3 This account Sanborn wrote February 8th and its cheerful. breezy tone suggests nothing but confidence in his recovery. What was really on his mind. however. may have appeared four days previously in a letter 3 Sanborn. "Will and Responsibility." Springfield Deilv Reoubliggg. February 10. 1917. p. 9. col. 2. to Zebulon Brockway: "The doctor is hopeful. almost confident. for he has seldom seen an old man so vigorous. but I know my possibilities 35 better.“ Though it was said later by a reporter for the Republican_that the ”effects of the shock began to enhaust his vitality” around the 11th. one could never detect it in his columns. While nature took her course, he was writing his two columns a week with undiminished zeal and dictating the last pages of his final biography of Thoreau to Molly. According to her. "He was partly unconscious when he was writing the last biography of Thoreau. I was typing it for him. He would lapse into drowsiness for five minutes. then rouse himself. Then he would continue precisely where he 18ft Off.“ But the public never knew this. for. in fact. on the day he died. February Euth. the Republican carried his column as always. dated from Westfield February 22nd. In it he discussed George Washington's mili» tary difficulties. Frederick the Great. and the share which World War Germany had had in its own afflictions. He concluded his last column with these paragraphs: Comparatively a few years ago. everybody seemed to be in favor of a high class peace.-~that is to say. everybody was ready to see Austria give way to France. and France to Russia and Russia to Poland. The theory seemed to be that when one of these countries moved upon another. it was in good faith and that each would assist the other in its diplomacy. But how unlike this was to the actual fact! The 35Sanborn to Brockway. Westfield. N. J.. February h, 1917. in the Sanborn.?apers. the Clarke School for the Deaf. Northampton. I am in“ debted to the principal. Mr. George T. Pratt. for his transcription of this letter. J4 object of the great nations really was to get each other caught by the leg in these endless battlefields of EurOpe. and employ them there until they had exhausted the fighting force of their respective nations. Practically this has been done: and while there is much fighting machinery left in EurOpe. I can see nowhere much of the fighting spirit.-still less of the food and other materials that is to carry Germany through even a six-months' campaign. We are beginning a little on the spring battles. but with a singular omission of all fighting in Thessaly. Greece and Macedonia. Something must have been happening in these regions to excuse so much lack of fighting; but I see no exw planation of it in the newspapers. We all hope it is a great gain on the side of peace. the only good cause in the field Just now. What has become of the old.advices from Greece? And especially from Thessaly. that most interesting country of all the big provinces? Where are the Greek reporters. who should be in Thessaly. either about the seaports. at V010 and Salonica or up among the mountains. where everything is so majestic. and I hepe the people are not starving to death. There is a Journal of the Near East. established at Athens within a year past. which could give us a good deal of in- formation if it would. What is the British legation in Greece doing? What are the British and American schools doing? A few words from them every week would be of great value. Ehe absence of them may indicate a whole string of miseries.3 And with his thoughts on two of the tepics he loved best-~Thoreau and Greece-~Sanborn died. General and.Mrs. Darling in Concord were immediately notified and they began to arrange funeral services for February 26th at 3:00 in the First Parish (Unitarian) Church in Concord. I'He was officially a mem- ber,‘ says Mrs. Darling. "but I had never seen him there once." Sanborn's wife. who had broken her hip two years before. could not make the long Journey to Concord. but she asked Mrs. Darling to take care of the flowers. 6 3 uLiteraryand Practical.” Springfield Daily Republican. February 214’ 1917. p. 9. C0180 2’1‘l'0 " b ‘7 ’4 These duties the day of the funeral. says Mrs. Darling. provided "one of the wierdest experiences. There was a kind of parlor upstairs in the church. and he had been placed up there. and the coffin opened. I end- denly heard a dreadful groan. I am not superstitious. but I stood still, terrified. I didn't know what to do. But I climbed the stairs. the groaning continuing. When I got up to the parlor. I saw--after looking about-that a blind on rusty hinges had got loose and was groaning back and forth.” She then went downstairs to the cellar to get some baskets for flowers. As she was searching for the baskets. she suddenly saw two great eyes peering in through the cellar window. "I screamed. and then realized it was human eyes of a living person. It was Mr. Trotter. the lflerary secretary for the colored in Boston. and he wanted to know where I'd placed a wreath of red roses the society had sent so that he could tell them. The colored.people adored.ur. Sanborn.” It is not necessary to catalog the names of those who attended the funeral nor to present the numerous eulogies of those ministers who were called on to say a few kind words. Considering the accuracy of what was said by some of these well~meaning clergyman. it is indeed surprising that Sanborn did not rise from the dead to correct them. The town of Concord and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts acted at once to honor him. and Sanborn would have been pleased to read in the columns of his old.paper the order adopted by the House of Representa- tives: hha Ordered. That the House of Representatives hereby ex" prceses the sense of loss felt by the commonwealth in the death of this great man who. conscious of the voice of duty. asked only to be guided aright and courageously undertook all risks in the great cause of emancipation. PhilosOpher. philanthropist. sociOIOgist and man of letters. in the ser- vice of the state and in private life. by reason of his fealty to the truth. the strength of his intellect. his in- terest in the diseased. the unfortunate and the despised. he lent distinction to every cause which he championed; and a grateful commonwealth hereby pays its tribute of respect; be it further Ordered. That the sergeant-at-arms be requested to maintain the flags of the state-house at half-staff for the next three days: and be it further Ordered. That the foregoing be made part of the records of the House and that a copy be sent to the bereaved family.37 He would have been pleased too that the flags of Concord were at half-staff and that. at his request. the church bell was not tolled while the funeral procession was passing to Sleepy Hollow cemetery. There in the warm days of the spring he was buried beneath a small boulder which an admiring Concord farmer had asked the privilege of providing.388anborn had picked a.plot a little above the graves of Emerson. Thoreau. and Hawthorne. so that he could have a good view of his beloved friends. The services for Sanborn were not concluded. however. with the fun- eral. for a memorial service. in which the churches and the people of Concord united. was held in the Trinitarian Congregational Church on Sunday evening. March 16th. The lengthy address. delivered by Butler 37"In Honor of Mr Sanborn.” Ibid.. February 27. 1917. p. 11. col. h. 3SPersonal letter to me from Mary D. Sanborn (Mrs. Francis B.). 10 New York Boulevard. Sea Girt. August 29. 1951. hhl R. Wilson. a Boston Negro lawyer. was both a tribute to Sanborn and a rather curious and vehement defense of Negroes. In speaking of his debt to Sanborn. Wilson said: Mr Sanborn was never a pacifist. He was a radical-a radical in thought and method. His love for freedom-physi- cal freedom. freedom of mind and conscience-owes deep-seated and intense.... It is a world custom to erect monuments to heroes and great men. and I presume that at some time. and very fitting- ly. the peOple of Concord will erect a monument to this chief man of the village. There may be some difference of cpinion over the kind of memorial-~some will incline to stone. some to bronze and some to a memorial budlding.... In choosing your memorial to Mr Sanborn you have it ready at hand. He gave the best years of his life to the cause of the colored peeple. and he never failed them.... The Negroes idealized him. and their progress vindi- Gates him. 0 o e “If ye love me. keep my commandments." If we seek to honor Mr Sanborn and perpetuate his memory. we can do it in no better way than by carrying on his work until every man in America. regardless of race and color. shall be judged by his merit. and every child be given the opportunity to develop to his best possibilities.39 But no monument-stone. bronze. or building-~has ever been erected to his memory in Concord. and the citizens of the town scarcely remember his name. It seems to me a sad fact that no epitaph could be found that is more applicable to Sanborn than the words pronounced over the corpse of Caesar: The evil that men do lives after them; The good is oft interred with their bones. I do not believe Concord knew the good the man did for the world outside Concord, more good. actually. to the peeple of the middle or 39"To F. B. Sanborn.” Springfield Weeklngepublicgg, March 22. 191?. If noorer classes han Emerson, Thoreau. or Alcott ever did. For while they were busy philosOphizing on the nature of God and man. Sanborn was healing the sick and afflicted. and though Emerson's and Thoreau's mission was everlasting. Sanborn's efforts in prison and insane asylum reform alone may make him immortal. There are. I presume. various grades and levels of immortality. but I am sure the wretched souls in Tewkshury Almshouse got more good from Sanborn's efforts there than they did from Emerson's essay on the Over-Soul. though the memory of Sanborn's efforts died with them. and Sanborn today is remembered in Concord because of his trouble over the sewer. Speak well of the dead. says the old proverb. but many of Sanborn's eulogists displayed feelings that were mixed. “Franklin B. Sanborn played.many parts." said the Boston Herald. '-«too many to play them all well. perhaps. But long after he has been forgotten as a journalist. as a philosOpher. as an historian. perhaps even as an administrator of state charities. he will be remembered as the last surviving reporter of the great Concord group. and as one of the most interesting of all its reporters. There is someting a little saddening in the thought that with him goes the last living link with the most distinguished circle of our literature and thought." The paper then spoke about the fact that in the biography of Julia Ward Howe it is told.how she wrote Sanborn for the source of a classical QUOtation. remarking that she always sought of him thougnswer to difficult questions. "We all do!" remarked Wentworth Higginson. ¥ “O'Concord's Minor Prephet." New York Evening Post. quoted in the Boston Herald. February 28. 1917. \A An editorial in the Boston Transcript said: It is wonderful enough. of course. that one man. even in so long a life. could play so many parts. and play them well; but that he could play them so long with undiminished. indeed with increasing distinction. is the special wonder of Frank Sanborn's life-record.... More than half of the nineteenth century, with all its revolutions in government. social and religious thought. discovery and invention and material expansion. he was com- menting on. and helping or Opposing. as to him seemed right. all of the great movements. as a man of the highest moral ideals. that have ushered in and established tBi modern world's institutions as we inherit them today. Perhaps most illuminating is the eu10gy by a man who said. ”I do not even pretend to have liked him.” but who spoke out forthrightly and hon- estly in the Harvard.§lumnipBulletip; [His] death gives a chance. not only to pay the respects unquestionably due a graduate of such unblemished character and scholarly attainment. but to say something long on my mind in regard to the various claims which the reputations of our own alumni have in our esteem. Thousands of us are spread the whole world over. acquiring honor and wealth. re- fleeting credit on the college. and adding each year to perb sonal reputations. This is all as it should be. Institur tions and national life must be worthily upheld by those who have the will and the power to succeed in the terrestrial meaning of the world.... But there is another type of graduate of which not so much is said. Dr. Samuel E. Morison has recently pointed out that one of them has been wholly ignored by the college that bred him. Not only is the memory of Wendell Phillips sedu- lously ignored by Harvard College. but there are others of her sons. of whom possibly we are not quite so proud as we are of the more solid and robustious sort. The venerable mother patiently toils from year to year to replenish the earth with successful graduates. and grandly does she succeed. But once in a while from her mighty loins comes forth an individual of a different type. Such a man was Henry Thoreau. another was William Ellery Channing. the poet. and greatest of all was Emerson. To this class of rari- fied.personalities Frank Sanborn belonged. August 7-12, 1882 (cont'd): [Children's Aid Society], 15h-155. [Treatment of Infants], eon-907. [Discussion of Insane Paupers], 236-239. [Separation of Chronic Insane from Those More Recently Insane], 19?. [Inadequacy of Mr. Brace and the Children's Aid Society to Meet the Need], 15h—155. Sept. 2h.3o, 1883: [Remarks on the death of Dr. Harvey B. Wilbur], xxx. [Acceptance of the Mayor's Speech of Welcome], 6-8. June u-lO, 1885: With Charles S. Hoyt, Hastings H. Hart, A. G. Byers, Cadwalader Biddle, and A. 0. Wright, ”A Report on the Statistics of Pauperism and Insanity," 383-387. "The Prevention of Pauperism: Report of the Standing Committee," hoe—1:06. [Tribute to the Memory of Prof. George I. Chace], 291. July 15-22, 1886: "Response of F. B. Sanborn" [to the Introductory Address], 10-11. "Migration and Immigration," 253-25 . "Care of the Chronic Insane in Families," 260-267. [Report from Massachusetts], 321-322. 148:2 Natior 1R1 Conferer as of C arities and Correction, Proeeoi’**s (cont'd.} August 25-31, 1887: "Address of F. B. Sanborn," 12-13. "Work Accomplished by the State Boards: Report of the Standing Committee on State Boards of Charities,” 75-105. “Education of the African Race," 170-172. "Regulation of Ehigration," 212-21h. [An amusing impromptu speech], 276-277. [Tribute to the Memory of Miss Dorothea Dix], 308-309. July 5-11, 1888: [Informal Report for the State of New Hampshire], 355. Sept. 11-18, 1889: [Treasurer's Report], 3u2-3h5. May 1h-21, 1890: "Indoor and Outdoor Relief," 73-80. ”Outdoor Relief in Greece and Italy: A.Letter to the Conference,” 9M—99. (Written during one of two trips to Europe.) May 13-20, 1891: "Response [to the Opening Addresses by the Governor and Mayor] of Mr. F. B. Sanborn," 7-8. "Public Charities in Europe: An Address Given Before the Conference on Sunday'Night, May 17," 167- 186. (Bound in with the Harvard College cOpy of A.Lemorandum on the Prisons ar d Reformatories c‘ the United States and A Plan for“ Reorgannizing+the State Depart- ment of’Charity and Lunacv. ) "Discussion on Hospitals," 356. [Prohibition of Immigration], 388. LLLDIJI‘III. 'I’“ kg} National Conference 2: Charities and 99 rection, Prggggdjnvs (cont'd.) June 23-29, 1892: "Immigration and Interstate Migration: Report of the Standing Com- mittee," 76-89. "Report of the Committee on Rules of Procedure," 337-338. June 8-11, 1893: [Reaction Against Extravagant Buildings for the Insane], 27. May 23-30. 1895: "The Increase of Insanity," 186-19h. "Supplementary Report,” 366. [Remarks on the Death of the Hon. George S. Robinson], h8h-h85. [Remarks on the Death of the Hon. H. H. Giles], h86-h87. [Remarks on Interstate Migration], h88-h89. Julv 7—1h, 1897: [Reports from States:] “Western States," 373. May 13—25, 1898: [Introduction edited by F. B. Sanborn], xxxix-liv. “The Advantages of Strict Settlement Laws," 231-236. ”Insanity and Immigration," 268-275. May ls-eh, 1900: "State Care Versus State Custody," 93-105. "Response of Mr. Sanborn [to the speech of welcome], 392. June 3, 1902: ”Discussion on Almshouse Hospitals," 52h-526. [Quotation of an unpublished address of Sanborn's in a speech by Julie C. Lathrop, Hull House], 196-197. "Discussion on the Care of the Insane," 509-510, Fetiennl Cenference of Charitieg £22.§QEZS£}109A Proceedircs (cert'd.) May 6-19. 1903: [On the Percent of Colored Criminals], 590-59]. June 15-22 , 1901;: [The Difference Between Manual Training and the Teaching of a Trade], 513-519. [Discussion on Defectives], 599-550. [Concerning Mrs. Hayman's Progressive Methods], 592. [Concerning Zebulon Brockway], 59h-597. [Discussion on State Supervision], 599. [About the Province to Be Served by the National Conference of Charities and Correction], 613-SIU. [Resolution on the Deaths of Four Officers], 558. June 12-19, 1907: "Past and Present Care of the Insane in Private Families," hug-M52. May 6—13, 1908: [Report on the Insane], 22. June 9-16, 1909: “The Progress in the Treatment of Insanity During the Past Ralf- Century," 67-77. [On Life Insurance], 381. June 7-1h, 1911: [Sanborn Speaks upon Being Introduced as the Oldest Living Ex- President of the Organization], 1172. [Discussion:] "The Recreant Husband and Father," ugh. use; National Prison Association, Remorts (From the Index) "District Prisons: Resolution," (1870), M70. ”Indeterminate Sentence," (1883), 97-59. Irish Convict System: "Answers to Questions.” (1870), h76, M79. "How Far Is the Irish Prison System Applicable to American Prisons?” (1870), h06. Johnson, Mrs. E. C., memorial remarks on, (1899), 120. "Juvenile Reformatories,” (1870), n7u, ugh. "Massachusetts Penal Institutions,” (1873), M00. Mrs. Johnson's Success in Reforming Criminal Women, (1899). 63. ”Pardons," (1889), 51. "Prison Discipline: Report of Standing Committee," (187M), 59, "Prison labor,“ (1883), hl-he. "Reformation of Prisons. Historically Stated,” (1898), 395. Remarks on Zebulon Brockway at His Memorial Service, (1899), 121. Remarks on Fred H. Wines at His Memorial Service, (1899), 116. "Reminiscences of Prison Reform in America,” (1898), 72. "Requirements of’Prieon Science," (1899), 58. "Visits to Prisons," (1896), 391. “Three Main Classes of Offenders," (1898), 396. The New England Magazigg "General John Sullivan and the Rebellion in New Hampshire," n.s., XXIII (Nov., 1900), 323—33 . (Whitford notes.) ”The Home and Haunts of Lowell," V (Nov., 1891), 275-302. "The Portraits of Emerson," n.s. XV (Dec., 1896), hMQ-h68. hag ‘1' Few Tarpshire Historical So ci_t 3 ___.£. .. 996.91Ies * -' - . "General John Stark: is Genibs and Achievements as Factors in the Accomolishment of American Independence," III (March 8, 1899), 39l-hlh. ma—u- w~ "Ohio Researches into Archaeology," XI (1903). 151-152. (First printed in the Springfield Dailv Reenbiicsn.) §9£19293f9.829£9$z ”The Homes and Haunts of Emerson,” XVII (Feb., 1379), h96—511. Springfield Dailngepublican (To present a complete bibliography of the articles which Sanborn wrote for this newspaper would require listing the title and the date of publication of two articles a week for forty-nine years, al- most without interruption. As such a task is impossible within the limits of time needed for this dissertation, I list here only the dates of those articles which appear in the footnotes of my main text.) June 26, 1878 July 9, 1878 March 28, 1873 April 10, 1873 Feb. 10, 189h Feb. 2h, 189M April 15, 1373 July 30, 1878 March 10, 189M May 28, 1873 Oct. 17, 1878 March 17, 189M Jan. 11, 1877 Jan. 21, 1879 Anril 21, 189M Jan. 18, 1877 Feb. 17, 1879 March 5, 1898 Feb. 1, 1877 March 12, 1879 March 19, 1898 Jan. 29, 1878 March 17, 1878 March 21, 1878 March 27, 1878 Sunde V'Magazine M "The Real John Brown, By His Friend, Frank B. Sanoorn," (Ju1y219, 1906). May 28. 1879 June 10, 1879 Dec. 18, 1879 Sept. 30, 1893 August 3, 1901 Feb. 10. 1917 Feb. en, 1917 L87 BCTION III. SECONDARY SOURCES (In this section of the bibliography I am particularly indebted to Francis H. Allen, é;Bibliggrgphy of 33253 Davi§_Thoreeu. I am also in- debted to Mrs. Herbert Buttriok Hosmer. 22 Elm St., Concord, Mass., for permitting me to use her Scrapbook of Sanborn clippings. Though I am in- debted to her for many of the articles given here, I list the Scrapbook as a reference only when bibliographical data on an item are incomplete.) Abbot, Edwin H. Anocrypha Concerning the Class of1855 of Harve.rd College, and Their Deeds and Misdeeds During“ the Fifteen Years Be- n..—‘u- tween July, —1885, and July, 1880. Boston: Alfred Mudge, 1880. . "News from the Classes," Harvard Graduates' Magazine, (June. 1917). pp- 555~5 59- Adams, James T. New Eng1snd in the Republic,1776-1850. Boston: Little, Brown, 1926.— Adams, Oscar Fay. nge Famou§_émerican Schoolg: Boston: Dana Estes, 1903. Adams, Raymond. Review of Carl Bode, Collected Poona of Henrv Thoreau. mg, XVII (March, 19th), 116. Adams, Raymond, ed. Waldgg: 23.Life in_the Woodg, Chicago: Lakeside Press, 1930. Albee, John. "Channing's Life of Thoreau," Springfield Republican, (Feb. 1, 1903). (Review of Sanborn' 3 edition of Thoreau: the- Poet- Natural} 31; . ) Allen, Francis H. A Bibliogrenhv of Henry David Thoreau. Boston: Hougrton Mifflin, 1908. _ . Thoreau!§_Editors: History“ and Remi Discerce. The Thoreau Society, Booklet No. 7. Monroe, N. C.: Nocalore Press, 1950. "Arrest of F. A. [sic] Sanborn of Concord, Mass.," [Publication unknown]. Hosmer Scrapbook. c); "Arrival of Sanborn. A Meeting Held," [Publication unknown], Concord, Mass. (April 5, 1880). Hosmer Scrapbook. LAtkinson, J. H.] "The Nomad" LRegulsr column], Boston Evening Tren- script (June 25, 1917). Bacon, Leonard Woolsey. Review of Life and. Letters of Jor:n Brown, New Englander and Yale Review: complete series, XLV (April, 1838), “‘5-.. 289-3 0?. Bartlett, George 3., ed. The Concord Guide Book. Boston: Lotiflron,l880. (Conte.ins a brief biography of Sanborn and material on the Concord School of PhilosoPhy. ) Beard, Charles A., and Mary R. Beard. The Rise Lf American Civilization. New York: iacmillan, 1933. 2v. in l. Bell, Charles H. Historv g£_the T332,92.Exeter, New Haggehire. Exeter, 1888. "Bitter Words," Boston Dailv Globe (April 9, 1895). Concerns Sanborn's fight against Sanford, the Concord embezzler.) Block, Louis J. "Thoreau's Letters," The Dial, xvii (Cot. 16, 1893), 28—230. Bode, Carl, ed. The Collected Poems g§_Henrz Thoreau. Chicago: Pack~ ard, 19h}. , ed. The Portable Thoreau. New York: Viking, l9h7. . ”Rejoinder," American Literature, XVII (l9h5—h6), 268. "The Book-Buyer's Guide," The Critic, XLV (Sept., 1908), 285. (Review of Sanborn's New Hampshire: 93 Egitome 2£_ngular Government.) Boynton, H. W. "Mr. Torrey's Thoreau," New York Times (Oct. 20, 1906). (Review of the first ten volumes of the Walden Edition of the Writings g£_Henrv David Thoreau.) Bradley, William Aspenwnll. ”Reminiscences of Seventy Years: Mr. F. B. Sanborn of Concord Tells Many Anecdotes of His Old Friends and As- sociates in His Notable Two-volume Valedictory,” [Publication and date unknown]. (Newspaper clipping in Sanborn Papers, American Antiquarian Society.) Bridgman, Raymond L., ed. Concord Lectures Ln PhiloSOphv: Comprising Outlines Lf All the Lectures Lt the Concord Summer School Lf Prwil hv in 1882, with an Historical Sketch. Carbridge, Mass.:w . ”oses King, 1883. Brooks, Van Wyck. The Flowering of New Enaland. New York: Modern Li- ”f — ...-.--. —Mw brary, 1930. . The Life 2£_Emersnn. New York: Dutton, 1932. . New England: Indian Summer. New Yor‘: Dutton, 1940. Brcwn, Warren. History of the Town of? amntcn F3113. New Hem3shire, From the Time of the First Settlement Within Its Borders: 1090 urtil 1 'L. }lanCheSter-: No Ho. 1900. Burke, W. J. and Will D. Howe. American Authors and Books. New York: Gramercy Publishing Company, 1953. Burtis. Mary Elizabeth. Moncure Conway (lsjg—IQOZ). New Brunswick. H.J.: Rutgers UP. 1952. ”Bust of F. B. Sanborn for Kansas." Boston Transcrigt (Dec. 3, 1902). (Describes the details of the Elwell bust of Sanborn Which Sanborn presented to the Kansas State Historical Society in Topeka.) Canby, Henry Seidel. Thoreau. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 1939. Carew, Haro1d D. "Frank B. Sanborn," Boston granscript (Feb. P8, 1917). (Verse in honor of Sanborn after his death:) Carpenter. Frederic 1.. ed. Ralnh Haldo Emerson: Representative §glg£¢ tions, with Introduction. Bibliogranhv. and Notes. American Writers Series. New York: American Book, 193 . Chamberlin, Joseph Edgar. John Brown. Boston: Small, Maynard, 1899. Channing. William Ellery. ggpreau: the Poet-Na turalist, with Memorial Verses. Boston: Roberts Brothers. 1873. Cheney, Ednah Dow. Beniniscences g: Ednah 23!.Chenez (Bg£§.Littleha1§). Boston: Lee and Shepard. 1902. Clark, Ha.rry Hevden, and Norman Foerster. ed. James Russell Lovell: Renresentative Selections. with Introduction, Biblioeranhv,m and Notes. American Writers Series. New York: American Book, 19 CE . Clement, E. H. "An Appreciation of Sanborn....." Boston Evening Tran- scriot (Feb. 29, 1917). (An appreciation of Sanborn at the time of his death.) Colby, James Fairbanks. "New Hampshire," Encyclgpedia Americana, 19h? ed. , xx, 123-131;. I'll ‘Llyllll, had Coolidge, Louis A. "Benublican Party." E cgglo:odiq Anericgzg, 19h? 9d,, XXIII, 391-3?9 Commager, Henry Steele. ”heodorg Parker. Boston: Little. Brown, 1936. "The Complete Thoreau." Chicago Evening_Post (Jan. 19, 1907). Review of the Walden Edition of the Writinrs 9:.ggngy David Thoreau.) Conant, Wallace B. Paner on Franklin Benjamin Sanborn Written and Bead bv fiallace B. Conant Before tie Concordia Groun, Concord, Messaciu— setts, Pebrusrv 2&31255- (Concord Free Public Librarv.) "Concord and Thoreau,” Boston Literarv Lorld, XIII (July 15, 189?), 297-228. (Review of Sanborn' s Hengz D. Thoreau.) ”A Concord Arrest in 1860." Eiddlesex Patriot (March 29, 1901), p. 1. "The Concord Excitement,“ [Publication and date unknown]. (Concerns Sanborn's kidnapping.) Hosmer Scrapbook. "A Concord Fight," Boston Herald (April 5, 1860). Hosmer Scrapbook. "Concord Flags DrOp as Sage Goes to Grave," Boston Herald (Feb. 27, 1917). "Concord.Pays Tribute to Sanborn's Memory," Boston Herald (March 19, 1917 ) "Concord Sage Talks Frankly About Authors,--Frank B. Sanborn Gives Twen- tieth Century Club Snappy Personal Impressions of Famous Men," Bos- ton Herald (Jan. 5, 1916). "The Concord School Recalled. Mr Sanborn Speaks at Greenacre on Thoreau and William T. Harris." Springfield Daily Republican_(Aug. 31, 1905). "Concord's Minor Prephet," Boston Herald (Feb. 28, 1917). Connelley. William Elsey. John Brown. Topeka, Kans.: Crane, 1900. . "Personal Reminiscences of F. B. Sanborn," #Kansas Historical Collections. XIV, 63-70. Crawford, Bartholow V., ed. Henri David Thoreau: Representative Selec- tions, with Introduction, Bibliogranhy, and Notes. American” Vriters Series. New York: American Book, 193E. Cryder, Maude Ethel. ”An Examination of the Bibliophile Edition of Thoreau's Walden." University of Chicago: unpublished master's thesis, 1930. R91 LCurtis, George Jillian} Pevien of Saxthorrfl s H mj1_ D. Thirsnu, Hfirgirflg Monthlv, va (Sept., 12s2), 631-632 "The Death of Dr. Franklin B. Sanborn." The Institution Quarterlz_[0ffi- cial Organ of the Public Charity Service of Illinois], VIII (June 30, 1917), hh-h6. "Death of F. B. Sanborn," Springfield Sunday Republican (Feb. 25, 1917), l, 13. Dubois. William E. B. John Brown. Philadelphia: G. W. Jacobs, 1909. Dunton. Edith Kellogg. "An Old and a New Estimate of Thoreau," The Dial, (Chicago). XXXIII (Dec. 16, 1902), h6h-h66. (Review of Sanborn's edition of Channing's Ehgreau: the Poet-Naturalist.) Emerson, Ralph Waldo. ed. Letters to Various Persons. Boston: Ticknor and Fields, 1865. ”Examination of‘U. S. Officers." Boston Herald (April 7, 1860). (Con- cerns the Sanborn kidnapping.) L. F. "The Concord Embezzlement." Boston Advertiser. (Written Feb. 20, 1895. its date of publication is unknown:) Hosmer Scrapbook. "F. B. Sanborn's Funeral Services Held in Concord,” Springfield Bail" Republican (Feb. 27, 1917). 11. "P. B. Sanborn's Reminiscences on Friendships of Hawthorne," Boston Advertise£_(July 8, 190h). Flower, Milton E. James Parton: the Father 9£1Modern Biography; Durham, N. 0.: Duke UP. 1951. Foerster, Norman. "Thoreau and Old Concord." Yale Review; n.s., VII (Jan.. 1918), h3o-h31. "Frank B. Sanborn," Boston Transcript (Feb. 2h. 1917). 8. (An obituary.) "Frank B. Sanborn Dead.” Boston Transcr pt (Feb. 25. 1917). "Frank B. Sanborn Funeral Todav. " Boston Advertiser (Feb. 26, 1917). "Frank B. Sanborn Is Eighty." Boston Transcript (Dec. 16. 1911). w'w—w "Frank Sanborn Fined: Concord Philosopher Denies Constitutionality of Statute Requiring Him to Connect with State Sewer-He Appeals Fine and Is Held in $200," Boston Eranscript (Nov. 17, 191k). "Frank Sanborn to Be Buried at Concord Today," Boston Ferald (Feb. so, 1917). "Frank Sanborn's Reminiscences," The Nation, LXXXIX (July 22,1909, 76-77. (Review of 222211991199§.2£.§219931 :22£§-) V Frothingham, Octavius Brooks. Gerrit Smith: 1st ed. New York: G. P. Putnam, 1878. iGarrison, Wendell Pl1illips and Francis Jackson Garrison]. William Llovd Garrison, 1so55__10;l the Story of His Life Told bv His 0111- 9332. New York: Century. %5-1359. Genzmer, George Harvey. ”Sanborn, Franklin Benjamin,” DAB. XVI. 326. Gilmer, Albert H. "To F. B. 8.,” Boston Transcrigt (Feb. ?8, 1917). (Verses in his honor written at the time of his death.) "Great Excitement at Concord, Mass.,” Boston Journal (April [h?), 1860). (The article is dated from Concord. April 3, 1860.) "The Greenacre Lectures. A Reunion of the Concord School of Philosoply,” Boston Transcript (August 1h,1897). (Contains the report of San- born's address on "Walks and Talks with Emerson and Thoreau.") "The Greenacre School: Emerson Day," Boston Transcript (August 15,1896). (The report of an address by Sanborn.) ”John Parker Hale,” Encyclopedia Americana; 19h? ed.. XII, 633. Hamer, Philip M. Review of James 0. Malin, gghn_Brown and the Lecend of Fifty-Six. Mississim 1 Valley Historical Egyiew, xxx‘?1§fi- , 581-582. Harding, Walter. "Franklin B. Sanborn and Thoreau's Letters," Boston Public Iibrarzvggw rterlg, III (Oct., 1951), 288-293. Harlow, Ralph Volney. Gerrit Smith: Philanthrogistiand_Refqgneg. New York: Holt, 1939. Harvard College. Exhibition and Commencement Performances (m 55- ~18fiL). (18h5-1855). _(Barva.rd Archives.7' . Records of the College Facultv (1850-1855), XIV. (Harvard Archi ives.5 . The Harvard Magazine Index. (Harvard Archives.) Haskell. Daniel 0., compiler. A Check Lie t of Cumulative Inclr3:es to Individual Periodicals in the New 1ork Public Litrarv. New York, __1;7-_ Hawkins, Walter. Old {ghn B3333. London: Charles E. Kelley, 1913. ;quthorne, Julian]. T‘rxe Kenmlre of Julian Ffzrt‘f‘w‘ir13; ed. Effith Gar- ‘- -a.~'~-- rigues Hawthorne. New York: Macmillan, 1938. Hawthorne, Julian. Nathaniel_Hawt:ogn§_and Eli Wife. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1889. 2v. "He Dwelt with Emerson," Boston §3gfigz Globe (Dec. 27. 1896). Higginson, Mary Thacher, ed. Letters and Journals_9£_Thoma§_Wenthrth Higginson. Boston: Boughton Mifflin, 1921. Higeinson, Thomas Wentworth. Cheerful Yesterdazg, Boston: Boughton Mifflin, 1898. Hill, Edwin B. "Thoreau’e Biographer," The Friendlz_ggill, VI (June, 19MO), [3-5]. (Reprint in part of a bitter attack by Mrs. Jean Munroe LeBrun against Sanborn for maligning Mrs. Thoreau. This aopeared originally in the Boston égyertiser [Feb. 1h, 1883] and was reprinted in the Concord Ereeman IFeb. 2 , 1883].) Hinton, Richard. John Brown and His Men: aith Some Account_g£ the Roads They Traveled to Reach Harper's Ferzz. New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1895. "Hoar, Samuel," Enoyc10pedia Americana, 19h? ed.. XIV, 301. Hosmer. James Kendall, ed. Winthrog'g.Journal. New York: Scribner's, 1908. 2v. Howe, M. A. DeWolfe, ed. New Letters g£_James Russell Lowell. New York: Harper, 1932. Howgate, George W. George Santayana. Philadelphia: University of Penn- sylvania.Press, 1938. ”In no Years-~Harvard '55 Has Done Some Handsome Things.-—A Splendid List of Men Headed by the Late BishOp Brooks." Boston 22$l£.éi££££l§2§ ”In Honor of Mr Sanborn: Resolution Adapted in House-State House Flags at Half-Mast," Springfield Daily Republican (Feb. 27, 1917). "In Sanborn's Memoryh‘Union Service Will Be Held in Concord Church Sun- day Evening," Boston Transcript (March 16, 1917). «L:anvier], T. A. Review of Sanborn's Henrz 2, Ehoreau. ggerican, IV (July 15, 1882), 213. "“ A‘ ugh . vs _ ‘.‘,.... l‘ ,1 Jernegen. Marcus w. "Andrew Jacxson," :ncvclonedi§_Amer1cana, 1947 ed.. SYN-577. Johnson, Alexander. "An Appreciation of Frank B. Sanborn," The Surzgz, XXXVII (March 10, 1917). 656-557. "" Jones, 3. A. "A.Notable New Book," Detroit Journal (May 22, 1902). (Review of The Service.) . "Thoreau and His Works," The Inlander [Ann Arbor, Rich.) IV (1891:) , 23u-2uo. G. S. K. "Mr. Sanborn's Courage," Boston Advertiser (Feb. 19, 1895). Karsner, David. John Brown: Terrible "Saint,“ New York: Dodd, Mead, 193k. Krutch, Joseph Wood. Henrv David Thoreau. American Men of Letters Ser- ies. New York: Sloane, 1938. "The Last Concord Fight. The Recusant Witness, Sanborn, Before the Supreme Court," [Publication unknown], (April 7, 1860). Hosmer Scrapbook. "Last of Concord Group Depicts Thoreau: A Comprehensive Biography by the Late Frank Sanborn Celebrates the Centenary of the Famous 'Sage of Walden." New York Times (May 27, 1917), Section 7. p. l. "The Late Mr. Sanborn," Boston Transcriot (Feb. 27, 1917). (From the Springfield Republican.) Sanborn Papers, Perkins Institution. LeBrun, Jean Munroe. Henrnghoreau g Mother. Ysleta, Texas: Edwin B. 3111, iguo. Le Gallienne, Richard. Review of Poems 9£_Nature, London Star (Jan. 23, 1896). Leidecker, Kurt F. Yankee Teacher: the Life of William Torrev Harris. New York: Philosophical Library. 1940. Lewin, Halter. Review of Salt's Selections from Thoreau, Academv, (May u 1895) 377- leyuoldt, F., ed. The American Catalogue. New York: A. C. Armstrong, 1380'”. "The Listener." Review of The Life of Henrv David Thoreau (1917 ), Boston Transcript (March 7, l91_). 1495 "The Listener." [0n the death of Sanborn], Boston Trcvscr‘rt (Julv 3, 1917). Av Vision of Sir Launfa1,A Fab1—fore Critics, Under tie n’illows, The Biae1_ow Paners, ”and Other Poems. London: Oxford UP, _192 6. Lowell, James Russell. The Po ms of Jarzes Russell Lowell Containing The Malin, James C. John Brown and the Leeend.9£.Fifty-Six. Philadelohia: American Philosophical Society, 194?. Matthiessen, F. 0. American Renaissance: Art and Expression in the A.e 9£_§merson and Whitman, New York: Oxford UP, 1941. "Memorial of F. B. Sanborn to the Senate of the United States,” Boston Traveller (April 11, 1860). Morison. Samuel Eliot. The Develooment of Harvard Uhiversitv Since the Inauguration of President Eliot (18394— M9 9). Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1930. " _. Three Centuries of Harvard, 1635-1936. Cam- bridge: Harvard.UP, 1936. [Morse, J. T.) Review of Sanborn's Life and. letters of John Brown, Atlantic Monthly, LVII (Februarv. “1885).2 272—275. Mott, Frank Luther. American Journalism: aHistorv of Newsoaners in tre United States Through 260 Yearsz‘169og to 1955T"EEw Yor :: Macmillan, 1950. . A Histqulof American Me2azines (leéfirl 895). Cam- bridge: Harvard UP. 1933. "Mr. Sanborn's Case," Boston Journal, (April 5, 1860). "Mr. Sanbornu. urhoreau,tu The_Critic, II (July 29, 1852), 197-198. Mumford, Lewis. The Golden Day: aStudv in American Ernerience and Culture. New York Boni and ELiveright, 1920. Nevins, Allan and Henry Steele Comma2er. The Pocket Historv of the United States. rev. ed. New York: Pocket Books, 1951. "New Books Reviewed,” North American Review, CCVI (August, 1917), 303- 311. Newton, John. Captain John Brown 2§_Haroer'g Ferrv. London: T. Fisher "N01 Pros Case Against 'Sege of Concord,‘ Dist. Atty. Corcoran Denounces Board of Health That Brought Sanborn Charges,” LPuhlication untnoxn} (March 29, [ 7 ]). (Quinquenniel File, Class of 1855, lnrvsrd Ar- chives.) Norton, Charles Eliot. Review of James Redpath, The P1blic Iife of 092- tain John Brown, Atlantic Monthyx, V’(March,1860), 378-331. Notice of The §ervice, New York Evening Post (May 16, 1902). ”Fotes," The Critic, n.s., XI (March 9, 1889), 123. (An account of the death of Thomas Parker Sanborn.) "Notes, N ghg_Nation, LXXIII (July 18. 1901). 52. "Hotes," The Nation, LXXVI (June 11. 1903). “7“- Nye, Russel Blaine. George Bancroft: Brahmin Rebel. New York: KnOpf, lghh. "Passing of Frank B. Sanborn ...,” Boston Evenins Ergnscript (Feb. 2M, 1917). "Pay Tribute to Frank B. Sanborn: Simplicity Marks Funeral Service,” Boston Advertiser (Feb. 27, 1917). "Philosopher Pleads His Own Case; Fined $50," Boston Herald (Nov. 17, 191M). LPicture of] F. B. Sanborn. Boston Evenin Record (Feb. PM, 1917) or Boston Transcript (April 15, 19155. Quinquennial File, Class of 1855, Harvard Archives.) [Picture of] F. B. Sanborn "from a bee-relief by Victor D. Brenner," from the cover of The Survgz (June 16, 1917). [Picture of] "The House Where the U. S. Officers Were Concenled.P3evious to Proceeding to Arrest F. A. [sic] Sanborn,” Frank Leslie‘ 3 Illus- trated ne wenacer (April 21,1860). Powers, H. N. Review of The Life of Henry David T‘noreau (1917),” in Dial (Chicago), III (August, 1332), 70-71. Purves, James. Review of Sanborn' 3 Henry D. Thoreau, Academv, XXII (Oct. in, 188 ), 271-272. Randall, James G. Review of James C. Mslin, John Brown and the leased g; Fiftv-§i§, American Historical Review, XLVIII (1933). 819-890. MR7 Reénath, James. The Piblic Life of 0999 John Brorn, with an Au to—hio9ra- ”ND—— UhZ.Of His 0111 ‘ood eri.Y~1“ Baeton: Thayer and niiiiqre. 13:0 . "Report 01 the School Committee 0‘ Concord for tr 9 Year Ending April 2, 1860, " Reoorte of the Select: en (Yer.r Erdin5.Aeri 1 2,1}FO). Con- cord Library. Review of Sanborn'- A. Bronson Alcott. The gcadegz, XXIX (Feb. 90, 1896), 192-12h. Review of A. Bronson_A1co§£, Atlantig_Mont}1v, LXXIII (April, 1893), 5h9-5 c3'5- Review of g, BIQHSEE éggott, Boston Herald, (May 22. 1863). Review of 5, Bronson Alcott, The Critig_(May 27, 1893), BUS-3&9. Review of 5, Rronegg Alcott. The §pectator'[London], LXXII (Feb. 9h. 189h). 27E3275. Review of R, Bronson Alcott, Unity (August 3, 1893). Hoemer Scrapbook. Review of Sanborn's Familiar Letters of Henry David Thoreau, Tie Nat io n, LIX (Oct. 18,189L), 291-202. Review of Sanborn's Familiar Lettef‘e, The Truth Seeker (June 2h, 1893). Review of Henri D. Thoreau, Harper's Me9azine, in tie Editor's Eesv Chair, va (Sept., 13325:“631-532. Review of Renrv 2, Thoregp, gpe Truth Seekeg, xx (June 9M, 1393), 393. Review of T§§_Personalitz_g£_Emeregn, The Critjgo XLVI (Jan., 1005), 93. J Review of The Personalitx 2£_T§ggggy, The Nation. LXXIV (Feb. 6, 190?), 11h. Review of Poems g£_Neture, Athenaeng_(00t. 17, 1899), 517-518. Review of The Servige, The Critig, XLI (Dec., 1902). 573. Review of The Service, The Nation, LXXV (August 7, 190?), 117-1131 Review of The Service, Boston Transcrigt_(May 21, 1902). Review of Sanborn's edition of Channing, Thoreau: t}e Poet-N ;tw, alis Athenneum (Jan. 17, 1903). 3. o \ ‘ Q' 1 'I" w ‘_ o .u‘ '3 . ‘ p E; &\ fl " .4 ‘1': ‘ ' fl 9 ‘. Z'LGV’lé‘H C1 061.1111 (22.1. ' S {‘3 1 L 101; C1 vaL-Jlnzi" I hl'mu: £41.33 1' ..vgt‘l... 91.195.415tg . A Pl“ T The Enticn, LEW (Lov. O, 13.20.: , . 40"). Review of' Victor C. Sanborn, Gen€¢1o:r" of t1:e meilv of 51216Yn0 0r Sanborn, The Notion, LXIX (act. 12, 180 9). eafi-fi Rusk, Ralph L., ed. TLe Letters of Ralnh W31 d0 Egegggg, New York: Columbia UP, 1539. 3;:” ”'Sage of Concord' in Court Todav-—Sanborn. for Seventh Time, is Sum- nzcned in Drain Case." LPublication unknown], (June 25, [ T J). (Quinquennial File, Class of 18 V5) Harvard Archives.) "Sage of Concord is Fined $10-—Sanb0rn Appeals Court Decision in Sewer Case," [Publication unknown] (July 9, [ 7]). (Quinquennial File, Class of 1855, Harvard Archives.) Salt, Henry S. "Thoreau and the Simple Life," Humane Review (London), (Jan. 1907). 202-208. . "Thoreau in Twenty Volumes,” Fortnightlz Review, n.s. mm (June, 1908), 9911-10011. ”The Sanborn Case," Boston Weekly Journal (April 5. 1860). "Sanborn Defends Himself: an Episode in the Charities Conference at Louisville, Ky.." Boston Herald (Sept. 30, 1883). "Sanborn, Franklin Benjamin," Encyclopedia Americana, 1917 ed.. XXIV, 2M7. "Sanborn, Franklin Benjamin.”E§t10n81 gyclgpedia.2£,American Bioeranhxy VIII, h66~L67. "Sanborn, Franklin Benjamin,” W10 Was W‘Io 12_America, (1391“1CL2)9 1» 1075-1076. ”Sanborn Subject of Paper Read at Meeting of Local Study Group," Con- cord Herald (March 1,19h5). Sanborn. Victor Channing. English Ancestry of the American Sanborns; a Sunrlement Eg'the_ Se.mborne-S.°rborn Genealoiv. Kenilworth, 111., 1916. ififi . "Franklin Benjamin Sanborn. A. B.," The New Englan§_Historical and Genealogical Register, LXXI (Oct., 33:73:. 291-?95. “(Contains most of the material appearing in Sanborn, V. 0.. Qgggglggg.) (Reprinted as Memoir of Franklin Benjamin Se.— born, 1, 2, Boston: F. H. Gilson, 1917.) "' b9? ' v I- {'141P\ \. "Sanborn's John Brown," The Nation, ALI (Oct. 13, 1343,, 329-395. "Snnborn's Thoreau," The Fetion, XIXV (July 1}, 1¥F?), Bh-Zb. Senteyene, George. Persons and Places: the B,¢Vgrouzd Q£_Jv Life, New York: Scribrer‘s, lghfl. Sargent, George H. "Frank B. Sanborn's Jewels and Junk," Boston Everine Transcrigt (Sept. 19, 1917), part 2, p. h. . "Thoreau's Personality," Boston Transcript (Dec. 13, 1901). (A.review of The Egrsonalitx_2£.Thoresu.7 Scliller, Frederick. The Works of Frederick Schiller: Historic ard Brom- etio. London: Bell and Baldy, 1369. Shepard, Odell, ed. The Journel§_2£ Amos Bronson Alcott. Boston: Little, Brown, 1938. 2V. . Pedler'g_Progress: the Life g£_Bronson Alcott. Boston: Little, Brown, 1937. Spiller, Robert, and others. Literary Historv of the United States. New York: Macmillan, 19kg. 3v. “Soohocles, Evengelinus Apostolides," Encyclopedia Americana, 19h7 ed.. XXV, 262. Stanwood, Edward. "Memoir of Franklin Benjamin Sanborn," Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Societv (191 -lQl?), LI, 307-311. "State Honor for Mr Sanborn," Springfield Dailz 3gpublicsn (March 1, 1917). (An editorial reprinted from the Boston Transcrigtf) "Stedman, Edmund Clarence," Encyclopedia Americans, 19u7 ed., XXV, 561. Stedmen, Edmund Clarence, ed. An Anerican Anthology (1281-1000): lections Illustrating the Editor's Critical Review of kneFiCPn: Poetrz ig_the Nineteenth Centurz. Boston: Hougrton Mifflin,1900. . Poets g£_Americe. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1885. Stern, Madeleine B. Louisa May Alcott. Norman: Oklahoma UP, 1950. Strsndness, Theodore Benson. "Emerson's Sensory Relations with Nature." University of Minnesota: unnublished master's thesis, 19h9. I . I P v u d V v I . s D . t I r- ' . o f Y C o . I <‘ t H- O . A 4 n ( ’ ‘ I . . v f Snorexne Judicial Court, M=ssachusetts. In t e Izette: o‘ F. §_ Ssr.‘3nrn. on Eebeas Cornus. Brief of Covnse1_ for Silos Certhon. n.t.p. (TnHtE1e Jidener Librart.) Swn3ne, Josephine Lstham. The Story of Concord: 2nd efi., rev. Boston: Meador, 1939. Swift, Lindsey. "Frank B. Sanborn, the Individualist, " L~rvard A1n§£i_ Eglletig (March 8,1917),hh9-L50. T [Horace Traubel] "Thoreau," The Conservator (Philadelphia) (Jan., 1903), 171. "The Tewksbury Almshouse," Boston Daily Advertiser (March 3, 1876), 2. "The Tewksbury Almshouse Investigation--Senator Stedman and Frank San- born," Boston 2gi$g.Advertiser (March 19, 1876), M. Tharp, Louise Hall. The Peabogv Sisters Q£_Sa1em. Boston: Little, Brown. 1950. "Thirtv-Sixth Congress ... First Session. Mr. Sanborn's Case Before the Senate," Washington [Publice.tion unknown] (April 10,1860). Hosmer Scrapbook. "Thoreau,” Indengggggt. LIV (Dec. 11,1902), 2959-2960. (A review of Sanborn's ed. of Channing‘s Thoreau: the Poet-Naturalist. ) "Thoreau as a Poet, " London Daily Chronicle (Nov. 9, 1895 ). (A review of Poems of Nature.) "Thoreau: His Personality as Mr. Sanborn Remembers it," New York Times (Jan. 11, 1902). "Thoreau the Poet-Naturalist," Boston Transcri23_(Nov. 12. 190?). (A review of Sanborn's ed. of the Channing work.) "Thoreau's Bright World," Boston Transcrigt (March 16. 1907). (A review of the Walden Edition of Thoreau's Writings.) "Thoreau's Example," Spectator. LVI (Feb. 17, 1883), 239—290. (A review of Sanborn's Hengz 2. Thoreau.) "Thoreau's Verses," Saturdgx Reviey. LXXXI (Jan. 18, 1396), 55. (A re- view of Poems 2: Nature.) Trsubel, Horace. With Walt Whitman in Camden. Boston: Small, Maynard, 1906-191h. 3v. ' ' 1.22.3... l—Ko’ Lflflmzumkx 9'. 14‘.“ ‘7 "An Jnrublished Essev by Thoreau," BL .tm Yor Timec Sdtzr?:y Qeriew, (may 31, 190?). (A review of The Service. 3 Yen Dor en, Herr. Herrv Druid Thoreeu: g Critjcel Studv. Boston: Hodghton Mifflin, 1515. Villard, Osweld Garrison. John Brown (l’OO-IZGQ): §_Biogrenhz YeJrs After; rev. ed. New York: Knopf, 19E}. I: f 7 . Review of James 0. Malin, Join Brown ard the Legend of Fiftv-Six, Saturdev Review of Literature, XXVI *(Jurefi 26, 19E35 Wagner, Charles A. Harvard: Four Centuries and Freedogs. New York: Dutton, 1950. Warren, Austen. "Lowell on Thoreau," §§, XXVII (1930), MMQ—hél. Warren, Robert Penn. John Brown: the Makinggfi g Mertvr. New York: Parson and Clarke, 1929. Webb, Richa.rd D., ed. Life and Letters of Cant. John Brown Who Was Executed at Cherlestown, Virginia, Dec. 2. 1859, for an ArJed "At— tack uoon American SlaveEE; with Notices -2£.§292M2£“ His Coriedernte London: Smith, Elder, 18 «'eiss, John. Life and Correspondence of Theodore Parker, )‘inister of the TwentVbeirhth Congregational Society, Boston. New York: D. Appleton, 186E. 2v. White, William. 5 Henry David Thoreau Biblioggeogx:(1903-1037). Boston: Faxon, 1939. "Widow of Frank B. Sanborn," Boston Traneoript (Feb. 27, 1918). (On the death of Mrs. Sanborn.) Wilson, Butler B. "To F. B. Sanborn," Springfield Weeklv ReJublicrn (March 92, 1917). (A tribute given at the Concord Memorial Meeting;. ) Va.de, J. S. A Contribution to a Bibliogranhz from 1009 to 1936 of Ben rv De.vid Thoreau. Renrinted from Journal a: the New York Entorolor cpl EQEESEZA XLVII (June. 1939). 163-203. [Watts, Theodore] Review of Henrv D. Thoreau. Atheneeum. II (Oct. 93: 1332), 558—560. Wilson, Hill Peebles. John Brown: Soldi§;:g£_Fortune: §_Critioue. Boston: Cornhill Company, 1918. Winyate, Charles E. L. "Boston Letter," The 931313 (Sent. ??, 129M), 106. (A review of Egg.Writigg§,g£_figggx_ggx£g Ehgzggg.) "Wrath and Fun," Boston Journal (August 6, lsgh).