Explanatory Notes        Apparatus Notes ()

Source: Harvard University, Houghton Library, Cambridge, Mass ([MH-H])

Cue: "I come before you, now, with the mien & posture"

Source format: "MS"

Letter type: "[standard letter]"

Notes:

Last modified: 2010-05-21T14:04:12

Revision History: Paradise, Kate | RHH 2010-05-21

Published on MTPO: 2022

Print Publication:

This edited text supersedes the previously published text
MTPDocEd
To Ralph Waldo Emerson;
duplicate letters sent to
Henry Wadsworth Longfellow and Oliver Wendell Holmes
27 December 1877 • Hartford, Conn. (MS: Emerson papers, MH-H, UCCL 01184)
To Mr. Emerson, Mr. Lonfgfellow,
& Dr. Holmes:1explanatory note

Gentlemen: I come before you, now, with the mien & posture of the guilty—not to excuse, gloss, or extenuate, but only to offer my repentance. If a man with a fine nature had done that thing which I did, it would have been a crime—because all his senses would have warned him against it beforehand; but I did it innocently & unwarned. I did it as a innocently as I ever did anything. You will think it is incredible; but it is true, & Mr. Howells will confirm my words. He does not know how it can be true, & neither does any one who is incapable of trespassing as I did; yet he knows it is true. But when I perceived what it was that I had done, I felt as real a sorrow & suffered as shap sharp a mortification as if I had done it with a guilty intent. This continues. That the impulse was innocent, brings no abatement. As to my wife’s distress, it is not to be measured; for she is of finer stuff than I; & yours were sacred names to her. We do not talk about this misfortune—it scorches; so we only think—and think.2explanatory note

I will end, now,. I had to write you, for the easement of it, even though the doing it might maybe be a further offense. But I do not ask you to forgive what I did that night, for it is not forgivable; I simply had it at heart to ask you to believe that I am only heedlessly a savage, not premeditatedly; & that I am under as severe punishment as even you could adjudge to me if you were required to appoint my penalty. I do not ask you to say one word in answer to this; it is not needful, & would of course be distasteful & difficutlt.3explanatory note I beg you to consider that in letting me unbosom myself you will do me an act of grace that will be sufficient in itself. I wanted to write such a letter as this, that next morning in Boston, but one of wiser judgment advised against it, & said Wait.4explanatory note

With great & sincere respect

I am
Truly Yours
Sam. L. Clemens
Textual Commentary
Source text(s):

MS, MH-H, shelf mark bMS Am 1280 (660).

Previous Publication:

Smith 1955, plates 2–4 following 156, 164, facsimile and transcript; Smith 1962, 99–100; MicroPUL, reel 1.

Explanatory Notes
1 This is the letter sent to Emerson. Those sent to Longfellow and Holmes have not been found.
2 

Nearly thirty years later, in January 1906, Clemens was reminded of “that thing which I did”—his speech at the Whittier birthday dinner—and on 11 January dictated an account of it for his autobiography. His memory was prompted by a recent letter from Laura K. Hudson, who had read a newspaper printing of the speech in December 1877 and thought it “the best and funniest thing” he had ever written. Having failed to find a text of it, she asked him about the “possible whereabouts of this delightful child of your muse” (AutoMT1, 260–67, 552–56). He replied:

I am forever your debtor for reminding me of that curious passage in my life. During the first year or two after it happened, I could not bear to think of it. My pain and shame were so intense, and my sense of having been an imbecile so settled, established and confirmed, that I drove the episode entirely from my mind—and so all these twenty-eight or twenty-nine years I have lived in the conviction that my performance of that time was coarse, vulgar and destitute of humor. But your suggestion that you and your family found humor in it twentyeight years ago moved me to look into the matter. So I commissioned a Boston typewriter to delve among the Boston papers of that bygone time, and send me a copy of it.

It came this morning, and if there is any vulgarity about it I am not able to discover it. If it isn’t innocently and ridiculously funny, I am no judge. I will see to it that you get a copy. (AutoMT1, 260–61)

The text of the speech that Clemens acquired and inserted into his autobiography was from the Boston Evening Transcript of 18 December 1877. But contrary to his claims to have suffered for “twenty-eight or twenty-nine years,” his chagrin had already abated by 5 February 1878, when he wrote Mary Mason Fairbanks:

I am pretty dull in some things, & very likely the Atlantic speech was in ill taste; but that is the worst that can be said of it. I am sincerely sorry if it in any wise hurt those great poets’ feelings—I never wanted to do that. But nobody has ever convinced me that that speech was not a good one——for me; above my average, considerably. I could as easily have substituted the names of Shakspeare, Beaumont & Ben Jonson, (since the absurd situation was where the humor lay,) & all these critics would have discovered the merit of it, then. But my purpose was clean, my conscience clear, & I saw no need of it. Why anybody should think three poets insulted because three fantastic tramps choose to personate them & use their language, passed my comprehension. (Letters 1876–1880)

3 

The responses to Clemens’s mea culpa were soon forthcoming (all in CU-MARK). Holmes wrote:

My dear Mr. Clemens,

I have just read your letter and it grieves me to see that you are seriously troubled about what seems to me a trifling matter. It never occurred to me for a moment to take offence, or to feel wounded by your playful use of my name. I have not seen Emerson or Longfellow since the dinner and cannot say whether they were more sensitive than I was or not. I have heard some mild questioning as to whether even in fun it was in good taste to associate the names of the authors with the absurdly unlike personalities attributed to them, but it seemed to be an open question. Two of my friends, gentlemen of education and the highest social standing were infinitely amused by your sketch and stoutly defended it against the charge of impropriety. More than this, one of the cleverest and best known ladies we have among us was highly delighted with it. The idea was a very amusing one and with a little less of broad farce about it might have pleased everybody as it did so many. Any man who knows your bonhommie and evident kindness of disposition would never think of supposing you meant to strike anything with the heat-lightning of your wit and humour.

Don’t think too much of this, my dear Mr. Clemens, nor let wife or babe fret under the feeling that you have said anything to be harshly remembered against you. The world owes you too large a debt for the infinite pleasure and amusement you have furnished to both hemispheres to quarrel with you because your invention has for once led you a little farther than what some would consider the proper limit of its excursions.

With the same cordial regards as always, I am

Faithfully yours
O. W. Holmes.

Emerson’s daughter Ellen replied not to Clemens, but to Olivia:

Dear Mrs Clemens,

At New Years our family always meets to spend two days together. Today my Father came last and brought with him Mr Clemens’s letter, so that I read it to the assembled family, and I have come right up stairs to write to you about it. My sister said “Oh let Father write!” but my Mother said “No, don’t wait for him. Go now, don’t stop to pick that up, go this minute and write. I think that is a noble letter. Tell them so.” First let me say that no shadow of indignation has ever been in any of our minds. The night of the dinner, my Father says, he did not hear Mr Clemens’s speech he was so far off, and my Mother says that when she read it to him the next day it amused him. But what you will want is to know without any softening how we did feel. We were disappointed. We have liked almost everything we have ever seen over Mark Twain’s signature. It has made us like the man, and we have delighted in the fun. Father has often asked us to repeat certain passages of “The Innocents Abroad,” and of a speech at a London dinner in 1872, and we all expect both to approve and to enjoy when we see his name. Therefore when we read this speech it was a real disappointment. I said to my brother that it didn’t seem good or funny, and he said “No it was unfortunate. Still some of those quotations were very good,” and he gave them with relish and my Father laughed, though never having seen a card in his life, he couldn’t understand them like his children. My sister says“ When I read the speech I only felt sorry for Mr Clemens, for I was sure that someday he would regret it, and I couldn’t bear to think he would have to.” My Mother read it lightly and had hardly any second thoughts about it. To my Father it is as if it had not been, he never quite heard, never quite understood it, and he forgets easily and entirely. I think it doubtful whether he writes to Mr Clemens for he is old and long ago gave up answering letters. I think you can see just how bad, and how little bad, it was as far as we are concerned, and this lovely heart-breaking letter makes up for our disappointment in our much-liked author, and restores our former feeling about him.

Ellen T. Emerson

Ellen Emerson probably alluded to “Speech at the Scottish Banquet in London,” given on 1 December 1873 in response to a toast to “The Ladies.” It was published in Mark Twain’s Sketches, New and Old (28 Nov 1873 to Fitzgibbon, L5, 487–92; SLC 1875, 213–14). Longfellow also replied:

Dear Mr Clemens,

I am a little troubled, that you should be so much troubled about a matter of such slight importance. The newspapers have made all the mischief. A bit of humor at a dinner table is one thing; a report of it in the morning papers is another. One needs the lamp-light, and the scenery. These failing, what was meant in jest, assumes a serious aspect.

I do not believe that anybody was much hurt. Certainly I was not, and Holmes tells me he was not. So I think you may dismiss the matter from your mind, without further remorse. It was a very pleasant dinner, and I think Whittier enjoyed it very much

With kind regards to Mrs Clemens,

Yours very truly
Henry W. Longfellow

For a full discussion of the Whittier dinner speech, Clemens’s letter of apology, and the responses to it, see Smith 1955.

4 Howells, who had changed his mind and encouraged Clemens to write.
Top