His claims were based upon (1) his being a large landed-proprietor in the district (Mrs Borrow had become the owner of the Oulton Hall Estate during the previous year); (2) the fact that the neighbourhood was over-run with thieves and undesirable characters; (3) that there was no magistrate residing in the district. Lord Clarendon promised his good offices, but suggested that as all such appointments were made through the Lord-Lieutenant of the County, the Earl of Stradbroke had better be acquainted with what was taking place. This was done through the Hon. Wm. Rufus Rous, Lord Stradbroke"s brother, whose interest was obtained by some of Borrow"s friends.
After a delay of two months, Lord Stradbroke wrote to Lord Clarendon that he was quite satisfied with "the number and efficiency of the Magistrates" and also with the way in which the Petty Sessions were attended. He could hear of no complaint, and when the time came to increase the number of J.P."s, he would be pleased to add Borrow"s name to the list, provided he were advised to do so by "those gentlemen residing in the neighbourhood, who, living on terms of intimacy with them [the Magistrates], will be able to maintain that union of good feeling which . . . exists in all our benches of Petty Sessions."
Borrow would have made a good magistrate, provided the offender were not a gypsy. He would have caused the wrong-doer more fear the instrument of the law rather than the law itself, and some of his sentences might possibly have been as summary as those of Judge Lynch.
"It was a fine thing," writes a contemporary, "to see the great man tackle a tramp. Then he scented the battle from afar, bearing down on the enemy with a quivering nostril. If the nomad happened to be a gypsy he was courteously addressed. But were he a mere native tatterdemalion, inclined to be truculent, Borrow"s coat was off in a moment, and the challenge to decide there and then who was the better man flung forth. I have never seen such challenges accepted, for Borrow was robust and towering." {375a}
It is not strange that Borrow"s application failed; for he never refused leave to the gypsies to camp upon his land, and would sometimes join them beside their campfires. Once he took a guest with him after dinner to where the gypsies were encamped. They received Borrow with every mark of respect. Presently he "began to intone to them a song, written by him in Romany, which recounted all their tricks and evil deeds. The gypsies soon became excited; then they began to kick their property about, such as barrels and tin cans; then the men began to fight and the women to part them; an uproar of shouts and recriminations set in, and the quarrel became so serious that it was thought prudent to quit the scene." {376a} "In nothing can the character of a people be read with greater certainty and exactness than in its songs," {376b} Borrow had written. {376c}
These disappointments tended to embitter Borrow, who saw in them only a conspiracy against him. There is little doubt that Lord Stradbroke"s enquiries had revealed some curious gossip concerning the Master of Oulton Hall, possibly the dispute with his rector over the inability of their respective dogs to live in harmony; perhaps even the would-be magistrate"s predilection for the society of gypsies, and his profound admiration for "the Fancy" had reached the Lord-Lieutenant"s ears.
The unfortunate and somewhat mysterious dispute with Dr Bowring was another anxiety that Borrow had to face. He had once remarked, "It"s very odd, Bowring, that you and I have never had a quarrel." {376d} In the summer of 1842 he and Bowring seem to have been on excellent terms. Borrow wrote asking for the return of the papers and ma.n.u.scripts that had remained in Bowring"s hands since 1829, when the Songs of Scandinavia was projected, as Borrow hoped to bring out during the ensuing year a volume ent.i.tled Songs of Denmark. The cordiality of the letter may best be judged by the fact that in it he announces his intention of having a copy of the forthcoming Bible in Spain sent "to my oldest, I may say my ONLY friend."
In 1847 Bowring wrote to Borrow enquiring as to the Russian route through Kiakhta, and asking if he could put him in the way of obtaining the information for the use of a Parliamentary Committee then enquiring into England"s commercial relations with China.
Borrow"s reply is apparently no longer in existence; but it drew from Bowring another letter raising a question as to whether ""two hundred merchants are allowed to visit Pekin every three years." Are you certain this is in practice now? Have you ever been to Kiakhta?" It would appear from Bowring"s "if summoned, your expenses must be paid by the public," that Borrow had suggested giving evidence before the Committee, hence Bowring"s question as to whether Borrow could speak from personal knowledge of Kiakhta.
Borrow"s claim against Bowring is that after promising to use all his influence to get him appointed Consul at Canton, he obtained the post for himself, pa.s.sing off as his own the Manchu-Tartar New Testament that Borrow had edited in St Petersburg. There is absolutely no other evidence than that contained in Borrow"s Appendix to The Romany Rye. There is very little doubt that Bowring was a man who had no hesitation in seizing everything that presented itself and turning it, as far as possible, to his own uses. In this he was doing what most successful men have done and will continue to do. He had been kind to Borrow, and had helped him as far as lay in his power. He no doubt obtained all the information he could from Borrow, as he would have done from anyone else; but he never withheld his help. It has been suggested that he really did mention Borrow as a candidate for the Consulship and later, when in financial straits and finding that Borrow had no chance of obtaining it, accepted Lord Palmerston"s offer of the post for himself. It is, however, idle to speculate what actually happened. What resulted was that Bowring as the "Old Radical" took premier place in the Appendix-inferno that closed The Romany Rye. {378a}
Fate seemed to conspire to cause Borrow chagrin. Early in 1847 it came to his knowledge that there were in existence some valuable Codices in certain churches and convents in the Levant. In particular there was said to be an original of the Greek New Testament, supposed to date from the fourth century, which had been presented to the convent on Mount Sinai by the Emperor Justinian.
Borrow received information of the existence of the treasure, and also a hint that with a little address, some of these priceless ma.n.u.scripts might be secured to the British Nation. It was even suggested that application might be made to the Government by the Trustees of the British Museum. {378b} Borrow"s reply to this was an intimation that if requested to do so he would willingly undertake the mission. Nothing, however, came of the project, and the remainder of the ma.n.u.script of the Greek Testament (part of it had been acquired in 1843 by Tischendorf) was presented by the monks to Alexander II. and it is now in the Imperial Library at St Petersburg.
The information as to the existence of the ma.n.u.scripts, it is alleged, was given to the Museum Trustees by the Hon. Robert Curzon, who had travelled much in Egypt and the Holy Land. It was certainly no fault of his that the mission was not sent out, and Borrow"s subsequent antagonism to him and his family is difficult to understand and impossible to explain.
Borrow had achieved literary success: before the year 1847 The Zincali was in its Fourth Edition (nearly 10,000 copies having been printed) and The Bible in Spain had reached its Eighth Edition (nearly 20,000 copies having been printed). He was an unqualified success; yet he had been far happier when distributing Testaments in Spain. The greyness and inaction of domestic life, even when relieved by occasional excursions with Sidi Habismilk and the Son of the Miracle, were irksome to his temperament, ever eager for occupation and change of scene. He was like a war-horse champing his bit during times of peace.
"Why did you send me down six copies [of The Zincali]?" he bursts out in a letter to John Murray (29th Jan. 1846). "Whom should I send them to? Do you think I have six friends in the world? Two I have presented to my wife and daughter (in law). I shall return three to you by the first opportunity."
In 1847, through the Harveys, he became acquainted with Dr Thomas Gordon Hake, who was in practice at Brighton 1832-37 and at Bury St Edmunds 1839-53, and who was also a poet. The two families visited each other, and Dr Hake has left behind him some interesting stories about, and valuable impressions of, Borrow. Dr Hake shows clearly that he did not allow his friendship to influence his judgment when in his Memoirs he described Borrow as
"one of those whose mental powers are strong, and whose bodily frame is yet stronger--a conjunction of forces often detrimental to a literary career, in an age of intellectual predominance. His temper was good and bad; his pride was humility; his humility was pride; his vanity in being negative, was one of the most positive kind. He was reticent and candid, measured in speech, with an emphasis that made trifles significant." {379a}
This rather laboured series of paradoxes quite fails to give a convincing impression of the man. A much better idea of Borrow is to be found in a letter (1847) by a fellow-guest at a breakfast given by the Prussian Amba.s.sador. He writes that there was present
"the amusing author of The Bible in Spain, a man who is remarkable for his extraordinary powers as a linguist, and for the originality of his character, not to speak of the wonderful adventures he narrates, and the ease and facility with which he tells them. He kept us laughing a good part of breakfast time by the oddity of his remarks, as well as the positiveness of his a.s.sertions, often rather startling, and like his books partaking of the marvellous." {380a}
Abandoning paradox, Dr Hake is more successful in his description of Borrow"s person.
"His figure was tall," he tells us, "and his bearing very n.o.ble; he had a finely moulded head, and thick white hair--white from his youth; his brown eyes were soft, yet piercing; his nose somewhat of the "semitic" type, which gave his face the cast of the young Memnon.
His mouth had a generous curve; and his features, for beauty and true power, were such as can have no parallel in our portrait gallery."
When not occupied in writing, Borrow would walk about the estate with his animals, between whom and their master a perfect understanding existed. Sidi Habismilk would come to a whistle and would follow him about, and his two dogs and cat would do the same. When he went for a walk the dogs and cat would set out with him; but the cat would turn back after accompanying him for about a quarter of a mile.
{381a}
The two young undergraduates who drove in a gig from Cambridge to Oulton to pay their respects to Borrow (circa 1846) described him as employed
"in training some young horses to follow him about like dogs and come at the call of his whistle. As my two friends {381b} were talking with him, Borrow sounded his whistle in a paddock near the house, which, if I remember rightly, was surrounded by a low wall.
Immediately two beautiful horses came bounding over the fence and trotted up to their master. One put his nose into Borrow"s outstretched hand and the other kept snuffing at his pockets in expectation of the usual bribe for confidence and good behaviour."
Borrow"s love of animals was almost feminine. The screams of a hare pursued by greyhounds would spoil his appet.i.te for dinner, and he confessed himself as "silly enough to feel disgust and horror at the squeals of a rat in the fangs of a terrier." {381c} When a favourite cat was so ill that it crawled away to die in solitude, Borrow went in search of it and, discovering the poor creature in the garden- hedge, carried it back into the house, laid it in a comfortable place and watched over it until it died. His care of the much persecuted "Church of England cat" at Llangollen {381d} is another instance of his tender-heartedness with regard to animals.
Borrow had ample evidence that he was still a celebrity. "He was much courted . . . by his neighbours and by visitors to the sea- side," Dr Hake relates; but unfortunately he allowed himself to become a prey to moods at rather inappropriate moments. As a lion, Borrow accompanied Dr Hake to some in the great houses of the neighbourhood. On one occasion they went to dine at Hardwick Hall, the residence of Sir Thomas and Lady Cullum. The last-named subsequently became a firm friend of Borrow"s during many years.
"The party consisted of Lord Bristol; Lady Augusta Seymour, his daughter; Lord and Lady Arthur Hervey; Sir Fitzroy Kelly; Mr Thackeray, and ourselves. At that date, Thackeray had made money by lectures on The Satirists, and was in good swing; but he never could realise the independent feelings of those who happen to be born to fortune--a thing which a man of genius should be able to do with ease. He told Lady Cullum, which she repeated to me, that no one could conceive how it mortified him to be making a provision for his daughters by delivering lectures; and I thought she rather sympathised with him in this degradation. He approached Borrow, who, however, received him very dryly. As a last attempt to get up a conversation with him, he said, "Have you read my Sn.o.b Papers in Punch?""
""In Punch?" asked Borrow. "It is a periodical I never look at!"
"It was a very fine dinner. The plates at dessert were of gold; they once belonged to the Emperor of the French, and were marked with his "N" and his Eagle.
"Thackeray, as if under the impression that the party was invited to look at him, thought it necessary to make a figure, and absorb attention during the dessert, by telling stories and more than half acting them; the aristocratic party listening, but appearing little amused. Borrow knew better how to behave in good company, and kept quiet; though, doubtless he felt his mane." {382a}
There were other moments when Borrow caused acute embarra.s.sment by his rudeness. Once his hostess, a simple unpretending woman desirous only of pleasing her distinguished guest, said, "Oh, Mr Borrow, I have read your books with so much pleasure!" "Pray, what books do you mean, madam? Do you mean my account books?" was the ungracious retort. He then rose from the table, fretting and fuming and walked up and down the dining-room among the servants "during the whole of the dinner, and afterwards wandered about the rooms and pa.s.sage, till the carriage could be ordered for our return home." {383a} The reason for this unpardonable behaviour appears to have been ill- judged loyalty to a friend. His host was a well-known Suffolk banker who, having advanced a large sum of money to a friend of Borrow"s, the heir to a considerable estate, who was in temporary difficulties, then "struck the docket" in order to secure payment. Borrow confided to another friend that he yearned "to cane the banker." His loyalty to his friend excuses his wrath; it was his judgment that was at fault. He should undoubtedly have caned the banker, in preference to going to his house as a guest and revenging his friend upon the gentle and amiable woman who could not be held responsible for her husband"s business transgressions.
Unfortunate remarks seemed to have a habit of bursting from Borrow"s lips. When Dr Bowring introduced to him his son, Mr F. J. Bowring, and with pardonable pride added that he had just become a Fellow of Trinity, Borrow remarked, "Ah! Fellows of Trinity always marry their bed-makers." Agnes Strickland was another victim. Being desirous of meeting him and, in spite of Borrow"s unwillingness, achieving her object, she expressed in rapturous terms her admiration of his works, and concluded by asking permission to send him a copy of The Queens of England, to which he ungraciously replied, "For G.o.d"s sake, don"t, madam; I should not know where to put them or what to do with them."
"What a d.a.m.ned fool that woman is!" he remarked to W. B. Donne, who was standing by. {383b}
There is a world of meaning in a paragraph from one of John Murray"s (the Second) letters (21st June 1843) to Borrow in which he enquires, "Did you receive a note from Mme. Simpkinson which I forwarded ten days ago? I have not seen her since your abrupt departure from her house."
It is rather regrettable that the one side of Borrow"s character has to be so emphasised. He could be just and gracious, even to the point of sternly rebuking one who represented his own religious convictions and supporting a dissenter. After a Bible Society"s meeting at Mutford Bridge (the nearest village to Oulton Hall), the speakers repaired to the Hall to supper. One of the guests, an independent minister, became involved in a heated argument with a Church of England clergyman, who reproached him for holding Calvinistic views. The nonconformist replied that the clergy of the Established Church were equally liable to attack on the same ground, because the Articles of their Church were Calvinistic, and to these they had all sworn a.s.sent. The reply was that the words were not necessarily to be taken in their literal sense. At this Borrow interposed, attacking the clergyman in a most vigorous fashion for his sophistry, and finally reducing him to silence. The Independent minister afterwards confessed that he had never heard "one man give another such a dressing down as on that occasion." {384a}
Borrow was capable of very deep feeling, which is nowhere better shown than in his retort to Richard Latham whom he met at Dr Hake"s table. Well warmed by the generous wine, Latham stated that he should never do anything so low as dine with his publisher. "You do not dine with John Murray, I presume?" he added. "Indeed I do,"
Borrow responded with deep emotion. "He is a most kind friend. When I have had sickness in the house he has been unfailing in his goodness towards me. There is no man I more value." {384b}
Borrow was a frequent visitor to the Hakes at Bury St Edmunds. W. B.
Donne gives a glimpse to him in a letter to Bernard Barton (12th Sept. 1848).
"We have had a great man here--and I have been walking with him and aiding him to eat salmon and mutton and drink port--George Borrow-- and what is more we fell in with some gypsies and I heard his speech of Egypt, which sounded wondrously like a medley of broken Spanish and dog Latin. Borrow"s face lighted by the red turf fire of the tent was worth looking at. He is ashy-white now--but twenty years ago, when his hair was like a raven"s wing, he must have been hard to discriminate from a born Bohemian. Borrow is best on the tramp: if you can walk 4.5 miles per hour, as I can with ease and do by choice, and can walk 15 of them at a stretch--which I can compa.s.s also--then he will talk Iliads of adventures even better than his printed ones.
He cannot abide those Amateur Pedestrians who saunter, and in his chair he is given to groan and be contradictory. But on Newmarket- heath, in Rougham Woods he is at home, and specially when he meets with a thorough vagabond like your present correspondent." {385a}
The present Mr John Murray recollects Borrow very clearly as
"tall, broad, muscular, with very heavy shoulders" and of course the white hair. "He was," continues Mr Murray, "a figure which no one who has seen it is likely to forget. I never remember to have seen him dressed in anything but black broad cloth, and white cotton socks were generally distinctly visible above his low shoes. I think that with Borrow the desire to attract attention to himself, to inspire a feeling of awe and mystery, must have been a ruling pa.s.sion."