Front Page Titles (by Subject) ADDITIONAL EARLIER LETTERS 1824–1848 - The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Volume XXXII - Additional Letters of John Stuart Mill
Return to Title Page for The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Volume XXXII - Additional Letters of John Stuart Mill
The Online Library of Liberty
A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.
Search this Title:
ADDITIONAL EARLIER LETTERS 1824–1848 - John Stuart Mill, The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Volume XXXII - Additional Letters of John Stuart Mill 
The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Volume XXXII - Additional Letters of John Stuart Mill, ed. Marion Filipiuk, Michael Laine, and John M. Robson, Introduction by Marion Filipiuk (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1991).
About Liberty Fund:
Liberty Fund, Inc. is a private, educational foundation established to encourage the study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals.
The online edition of the Collected Works is published under licence from the copyright holder, The University of Toronto Press. ©2006 The University of Toronto Press. All rights reserved. No part of this material may be reproduced in any form or medium without the permission of The University of Toronto Press.
Fair use statement:
This material is put online to further the educational goals of Liberty Fund, Inc. Unless otherwise stated in the Copyright Information section above, this material may be used freely for educational and academic purposes. It may not be used in any way for profit.
ADDITIONAL EARLIER LETTERS
Additional Earlier Letters
TO GEORGE AND HARRIET GROTE1
1st September, 1824
My dear friends,
Not knowing which of you to write to, and being thus placed in the situation of the ass, I am wiser than he, and instead of starving I seize both the bundles of hay,2 and write to you both. Your journal has been received, & read with great interest, but we have been grieved to hear of Mr Grote’s indisposition, and surprised to learn that you have had so much rain. Last week was with us one of the finest weeks we have had this summer, and the harvest-work which has been done surpasses all belief. This week is equally fine, and corn will be excessively cheap—especially as I hear the harvest is as far advanced in Scotland as here.—I suppose you will be more interested by hearing all that has passed in the Utilitarian world since your departure, than by anything else that I can say.—In the first place, then, last Monday week my father and I dined with Hume, where we met Anthony Hammond, and on the whole we are very much satisfied with that personage.3 Without being much of a philosopher, or possessing very clear or definite notions on law and legislation in general, he carries his ideas of reform to a very great extent. He has already consolidated the whole of the Criminal Law, which it is intended to bring into Parlt either as one bill or a series of bills so as to supersede all the present system:4 he means next to go to work upon the civil law, & consolidate that too: but this consolidation he himself declares to be only preparatory to a complete codification of the whole law, common & statute: on the subject of which he has very rational ideas; and he says it would destroy the whole of the system of pleading as at present constituted, and would leave nothing to the discretion of the judge, of the evils of which he has a very strong impression. Hume expressed on the same occasion some most admirable opinions on the subject of charity, which he declared that he had recently adopted, & tho’ they seemed new to Hammond, he came into them tolerably well.—In the next place, William Whitmore has brought his cousin the member to call upon my father at the India House.5 As I was conversing all the time he staid, with Wm W. in a separate part of the room, I heard very little of what passed between my father & the other Whitmore; but my father says that he fully understands the question of the corn laws, which was the only subject on which they conversed: that he understands not only the general principle, but its practical bearings: & he declares himself fully resolved, if the ministers do not anticipate him, to bring forward a motion & force a discussion every session until he succeeds in carrying the question. As there will be an elaborate article in the Edin. Rev. by M‘Culloch to prepare the way before him, it will be of great importance that we should have an article in the Westminster Review which may bear a comparison with it: for this purpose we are anxious to ascertain, first, whether Whitmore can, and secondly, whether he will, write one.6 William W. whom we employed to get us a copy of Whitmore’s pamphlet, as a sort of test of his capability, wormed out of Prescott7 our ulterior designs, & has taken them up with the utmost eagerness.—I dined at Wimbledon with Mr Tooke8 on Friday last, having gone from the India House to his counting house, & thence with him to his carriage at a quarter before five: from which time till near eleven, we were engaged almost without intermission in discussing the exclusion of Irish labourers.9 In the course of the dispute he was driven, among other things, to deny the principle of population. I could perceive considerable annoyance on his part at the escape of Eyton from the paternal apron string: Two or three times he put him down with considerable harshness, & was continually making indirect hits against the dogmatism, & want of candour, of some of his opponents; by which some, he meant Eyton: who took as well the indirect as the direct reproofs, with the most infidel charity & resignation. I contrived, towards the close of the evening to take a turn with Eyton in the garden, and we had some very profitable conversation: he is eager to do whatever good he can, & to qualify himself for doing more.—The Austins are now domiciled at your quondam lodging on Brockham Green: and we regularly walk with Austin on the Sunday when we go down.10 I am in considerable doubt whether the review of Preuves will ever make its appearance, tho’ I am informed by Mrs Austin that he works at it during a portion of every day.11 I wish he could complete any thing, no matter what: as a given quantity of reputation, plus a given number of pounds sterling, would probably supply as great a stimulus, as his mental constitution is capable of receiving.—Charles Austin12 has been laid up, but is now, I believe, at Norwich, whence he goes to Southampton, & returns not till October. Bingham is absent: Graham not yet returned: Ellis fast bound in his new office, so that the Utilitarian community stagnates.13 Our society waxes thin, & but for the approaching batch, I should say it verged fast to decay. Patten has withdrawn: Secretan has tendered his resignation; his brother having been appointed manager to the marine department of the Alliance, the conduct of the business falls wholly upon him, & he says it leaves him no time for attendance on the society, nor yet upon our Pol. Ec. Conversations.14 If he leaves us it is all over with him. En revanche, I can give the most favorable bulletin of Harfield & of Edw. Ellis.15 The former produced at the last meeting of the society an essay on population, which obtained universal, and, considering it as a first attempt, well-deserved applause; in it he kept the promise he had made, of writ-ing sar-cas-ti-cal-ly, and some of the sar-casm was exceedingly good. He complained however that we all laughed at his or-tho-e-py, (vulgarly called pronunciation): and in truth we had good reason: Doane16 complimented him upon having written a ighly-able, a excellent, a admirable, and in some parts, a ironical essay. Edward Ellis is studying political economy with so much ardour and application, as leaves no fear of his ultimate success in that and in every other branch of useful knowledge which he attempts.—Next, as to our occupations: My father is about to open his battery upon the Quarterly Review: I am still upon Brodie: Ellis is upon the Elements of Pol. Ec.17 Of the occupations of any one else among our friends, I am in ignorance, except as to Arfield,18 who is reading I do not know how many books, & writing, or about to write, I do not know how many essays.—A critique on the first number of the W.R. has appeared in the North American Review: They quote largely from the first article, which they applaud greatly, as well as Bingham’s two articles on America (tho’ they say he knows very little about America—as how can he? or any one here:—& that his stateme[nts] are some of them no longer true, & others never were true).19 They also m[ake] an ingenious attempt to shew, that the Whigs & Tories are two [aristo]cratic parties, & that the Edinburgh Rev. only supports the aristocracy [of] the Whigs, instead of that of the Tories.20 But farther this deponent saith no[t.] You have seen, or will see, the attack on the 3d No. & particularly on poor Ellis, in the last Blackwood.21 I have not seen it yet, but am to see it tomorrow. Malthus, it seems, has been puffing himself again in the Quarterly—tho’ I have not seen the article, it propounds what no other mortal would think of propounding, his Measure of Value.22 Not more certainly is our friend Satan known by his cloven foot, than the Rev. T.R. Malthus by this unfortunate hobby.—If any thing was wanting to ensure the success of the W.R. the badness of the Edin. R. would do it. Only contrast the last Edin. with the last Westmr. That miserable stuff of M‘Culloch about primogeniture must be answered23 —& will, I trust, with the grace of my lord the devil, with whose school, I have no doubt, we are already classed by the enlightened Southey,—or, if not now, shall be so classed, as soon as the article makes its appearance on his book of the Church.24 When that time arrives, I shall expect to see our names, or at any rate, that of the review, introduced into his next dissertation de omni scibili,25 with the addition of a few gentle epithets of disapprobation, as ruffian, miscreant, incendiary, & so forth; or who knows? atheist, perhaps: since, as Ellis says, those who are infidels in tithes, are necessarily infidels in all the other doctrines of religion. The Courier has already expressed some inclination to see “a well-seasoned mess of impiety from Carlile, dished up by the Morning Chronicle.”26 By the way, Black is doing admirable service—particularly with respect to the unpaid magistracy; who, I think, must smart under his lash: he is the greatest enemy they have.27 Prescott is, as usual, “writing an Essay for the society.” Doane is, as far as I know, doing nothing; & Place is doing every thing.28 With all our wishes for your welfare, & speedy return, I remain &c
TO JOHN BOWRING1
I leave you the article on Pleadings, cut down to a moderate compass—there will be more of it afterwards for another number if you approve of it.2 —I think it will do much good, & may excite controversy—Grimgribber3 has never been attacked in a periodical publication with any thing like the same severity—or if at all, only in general terms. This is specific, & the lawyers will understand its drift better.
TO JOHN BOWRING1
I send you the article on the Game Laws,2 which I hope is not too long—there is more scratching in it than there usually is in my articles and there will be a great deal of small print—If anything must be left out, I think it should be some of the extracts, however of this you will judge for yourself—I also send a little poem which was written by a niece of Mr Mushet of the Mint,3 and given by him to me for you. All I have to ask is that if it cannot be praised it may not be noticed at all.
Eyton Tooke has finished his review of Lord John Russell4 —I suppose he will send it to you immediately, if he has not sent it already—
Please to send my proofs to Ellis at the Indemnity Office—He comes to Croydon every day—
I should like to suspend a review of Brown’s works and particularly of his Lectures upon this Life of his which has just appeared, by the Rev. Mr Welch.5 You have not had any metaphysical articles yet—It will help to give that variety to the work which has been wanting hitherto—I have heard it suggested that you should have some philological articles—Perhaps James Gilchrist6 (not Borthwick) would write one—I know of no one else who could do it.
Yours very truly
John Bowring Esq.
TO JEAN BAPTISTE SAY1
2d March 1830
My Dear Sir,
You will, I am sure, readily believe with how much regret & sympathy all your friends here have learned the great affliction which you have recently sustained.2 None of them can possibly have so much reason to know and appreciate the greatness of your loss as I have, who had so much experience of Madame Say’s excellence, and have received so much kindness from her. I beg that you will assure the remainder of your family of the part which I take in their grief. My father also is most anxious to assure you how deeply he sympathizes with you and how greatly he esteemed and respected Madame Say. He would have written to you himself long before this if he had not known that I was about to write.
I have myself suffered a most grievous and unexpected loss, by the death of my poor friend Eyton Tooke, who was well-known to you as one of the most excellent and promising of all his contemporaries, and who would have been a blessing to his country and to his kind.3 The loss of such a man will be felt in a thousand ways by persons who never knew him nor were aware what things were to be expected from him if he had lived to pursue the career of self-improvement and philanthropic exertion which he had entered upon; and how admirable a moral influence he would have exercised on all with whom he came in contact, by the unrivalled purity and rectitude of his purposes, combined with the largest and most comprehensive liberality and philanthropy. To his immediate friends, and associates in his labour and plans, the loss is irreparable and to me especially.
Poor Mr. Tooke, the father, although he has in some degree recovered from the first shock, is quite incapable of writing to you either on his own loss or on yours, and he has entrusted to me the duty of sending to you the enclosed paragraphs, extracted from the newspapers of the time, respecting the particulars of the fatal event.4
I owe you a long debt of gratitude for your kindness in sending me successively the six volumes of your work,5 which I have read with the greatest pleasure and instruction, and which I think is likely to be read by more persons, and with more advantage, than any other treatise on the subject which is now extant. You will hardly be surprised that I should not quite concur in the whole of your strictures on those whom you call the “économistes politiques abstraits”;6 though I am forced to admit that they have frequently occupied public attention, to the great detriment of the science, with discussions of mere nomenclature and classification, of no consequence except as to the manner of expressing or of teaching the principles of the science; and that they have occasionally generalized too far, by not taking into account a number of the modifying circumstances, which are of importance in the various questions composing the details of the science. I have myself derived several most important corrections of my speculative views from your work, and from the reflections which it suggested. I am happy to find that there is much less in your principles, than I thought there was, which is positively at variance with the rigidly scientific economists of this country. I believe that their principles when duly modified, constitute a deeper and more searching analysis of the phenomena of wealth than yours, but that they are not materially different in their practical result. I should wish to see the science taught in both ways; in one for the public, in the other for students: though I sometimes lament to see that the two sorts of teachers scarcely understand the scope or appreciate the whole merit of each other. But the rising generation of political economists in this country are not only capable of unity, but do actually unite both, and you will find when their speculations come before the public, that they have benefitted as fully by your writings as by those of Ricardo, and partake in nothing of the forms or of the spirit of a sect or school.
I consider myself to be discharging a duty towards my friend Eyton Tooke, who would have been so distinguished in this very department of science, in telling you how highly he thought of your work. In one of the last conversations I had with him, he spoke to me of it with great admiration and expressed himself almost enthusiastically on the fine spirit of general benevolence, and devotion to the cause of social improvement in all its branches, which runs through the work, and which distinguishes your writings in so honorable a manner from too many of our English economists.
|22 July ’36||3791.||6.||7||22 July 36||100.||0.||0|
|10 Jany ’37||47.||2.||6||28||1.||7.||9|
|5 Feby||312.||9.||6||18 Nov.||17.||11.||8|
|25 May ’38||95.||5.||0||3 Jny 37||1.||9.||0|
|18 Dr.||94.||12.||0||2 Mar.||4.||4.||2|
|5 July ’39||16.||16.||0||27||9.|
|22 Nov.||94.||12.||0||29 July||21.||0.||0|
|20 Jny ’40||47.||2.||6||8 Aug.||13.||10.||0|
|30 Apr||5.||0.||0||7 Nov.||41.||16.||0|
|8 Aug.||47.||2.||6||14 Dec.||81.||15.||2|
|3 July ’41||47.||2.||6||12 Jny ’38||80.||5.||6|
|26 July||47.||2.||6||18 June||2.||0.||4|
|10 July ’42||47.||2.||6||17 Oct.||7.||15.||0|
|18 July||47.||15.||1||19 Dec.||14.||0.||0|
|20 July ’43||45.||15.||1||5 July ’39||5.||5.||1|
|17 July ’44||45.||15.||1||19 Oct.||7.||16.||0|
|21 Aug.||94.||12.||0||9 Jny ’40||1.||1.||6|
|21 Nov.||13.||10.||0||5 May||1.||10.||0|
|Still to be rec’d||89.||7.||7||22 June||2.||10.||6|
|3 Feby ’41||20.||4.||9|
|10 Jny ’42||10.||14.||0|
|19 Feby ’42||10.||16.||0|
|10 Feby ’43||6.||0.||0|
|6 Feby ’44||2.||0.||0|
TO JOHN AUSTIN1
- India House
My dear Austin
After my interview with you I have never felt much doubt as to what Kindersley’s2 opinion would be; but I should like to know why the Interest is fixed at 4 per Cent, a rate which certainly cd not have been obtained in the 3 per cents, since it implies their price to be 75. When as you are aware they have been during the whole period varying only from about 90 to 100, their present price.
It is necessary also to determine how the Interest is to be calculated. Is it to be made up to the end of each year & added to the principal, i.e. is compound Interest to be given? or, is Interest to be charged upon each item from the date of its receipt? Is a balance in hand to be allowed &c. &c.
TO [JOHN HAMILTON THOM?]1
- India House
1st March 1845
My dear Sir
An elderly lady2 from whom I once submitted to you some manuscripts for publication, which did not suit you, having heard of your new Magazine has asked me to offer to you the inclosed papers for it.3 I have not read them but I know her to be a meritorious person & very much in want of anything, however small, which she might be able to earn by her pen.
Very truly yours
TO AN UNIDENTIFIED CORRESPONDENT1
- India House
26th Augt 
My dear Sir
Having just returned to town I have found your note—written I know not how long ago, as there is no date or postmark. Will you be kind enough to inform me whether the letter you ask me to write will still be useful.
Very truly yours
TO HENRY REEVE1
- India House
[after 24 Oct., 1845]
My dear Reeve
I have quite given up dining out, but I hope to see both you & Beaumont2 at the India House.
I am afraid the letter which will be written to the Govt of India about Capt. Taylor will be virtually this—“do as you please, on your own responsibility. We praised Capt Taylor but we did not mean you to keep him unless you like.”3 However as his removal is suspended, I do not think there is much danger of its taking effect.
Yours ever truly
TO [JAMES?] HUTCHINSON1
- 73 Eccleston Square
June 26 1847
Mr Mill presents his compliments to Mr Hutchinson, & begs to mention that he is much obliged by his interesting work having been transmitted to him, but that Mr Mill’s department being wholly unconnected with the subject, Mr Mill did not immediately direct his attention to Mr Hutchinson’s communication for which he begs that he will have the goodness to excuse him.
TO JOHN WILLIAM PARKER1
- India House
15 Nov. 1847
Not having received any answer to my note of the 27th of last month, I suppose it must have miscarried. If you have received it, I must request an immediate answer to it.
TO THOMAS STORY SPEDDING1
- India House
31st August 1848
I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your pamphlet on the Poor Laws, & of the very flattering letter which accompanied it.2 I am much gratified that you should have found in my Political Economy, or in my other writings, anything which appeared to you to deserve being so spoken of.
Your pamphlet, and particularly the concluding letter of the series, contains much in which I heartily concur, & which I think likely to be very useful.3 Of all contained in it, the thing which seems to me especially valuable is the strong recognition of the very early & very low state of advancement in which civilized society now is, compared with what may one day be realized, & may already be reasonably aimed at. It is probable that a greater amount of alteration in existing opinions & institutions, than you contemplate, would be included in my idea of this possible & desirable improvement; but I am happy to find that we completely agree in thinking that neither individuals nor classes can expect permanently to retain any power or influence except by taking a lead in promoting this great object.
On the more especial subject of the pamphlet, I sympathize entirely in the feelings which make you desire that the conditions of relief should be made less onerous to those who wish to maintain themselves, but cannot, than to those who can, but will not.4 But in regard to the ablebodied I can see at present no means of sifting the one class from the other, except by making the conditions such that no one will accept relief who can possibly do without it. I suspect that the present poor law is the best possible, as a mere poor law; that any nearer approach to abstract justice is not to be had in a poor law, & must wait for a revision of social arrangements more fundamental than poor laws. I think it likely that society will ultimately take the increase of the human race under a more direct controul than is consistent with present ideas; in which case an unlimited “droit au travail”5 for all who are born, as well as many other things, would not be the chimeras which they seem to be in the present state of opinion & feeling.
I am, Dear Sir
TO EDWIN CHADWICK1
- India House
My dear Chadwick
I delayed sending you the notice you asked for because I rather fancied (erroneously as it now appears) that its anonymousness might be inconsistent with the intentions you had in asking for it.
[1 ]MS in the India Office Library and Records. Folded and addressed: George Grote Junr. Esq. / Queen’s Hotel / Edinburgh. Cancelled for: Buck’s Head Inn / Glasgow. Wax seal bears initials JSM. The square brackets in the text indicate conjectural readings made necessary by rips caused by the seal. Published in MNL, XX (Summer 1985), 4-7, edited by John M. Robson.
George Grote (1794-1871), banker, M.P. (1822-41), and, later, historian of Greece; Harriet Grote (née Lewin, 1792-1878). The Grotes were central to the Benthamite group.
[2 ]The donkey, placed equidistant from two bundles of fodder, starves because it cannot decide which to eat. The dilemma, known as asinus Buridani, is traditionally attributed to Jean Buridan (ca. 1290-ca. 1358).
[3 ]Joseph Hume (1777-1855), Radical M.P. for Montrose, best known for his constant attempts at economic reform, close associate of James Mill (1773-1836), whose schoolmate he had been. Anthony Hammond (1758-1838), barrister and advocate of Benthamite legal reforms.
[4 ]See “Report from the Select Committee on the Criminal Law of England” (2 Apr., 1824), Parliamentary Papers [PP], 1824, IV, 39-405; the recommendations, based entirely on Hammond’s testimony and submissions, led eventually to partial consolidation of the criminal code in 7 & 8 George IV, cc. 27-31 (1827).
[5 ]William Whitmore, a young Benthamite, of a family that produced several members of parliament, now less well known than William Wolryche Whitmore (1787-1858), his cousin, M.P. for Wolverhampton.
[6 ]Mill is forecasting the appearance of “Price of Foreign Corn—Abolition of the Corn-Laws,” Edinburgh Review, XLI (Oct. 1824), 55-78, by James Ramsay McCulloch (1789-1864), the Scottish economist who was, in spite of his strayings from pure orthodoxy, closely associated with the Radicals, for example in the founding of the London Debating Society and of London University. Indeed, in 1828 J.S. Mill contributed a note on rent to McCulloch’s edition of Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations (in Essays on Economics and Society, CW, Vols. IV-V [Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1967], Vol. IV, pp. 161-80). The views of the Westminster on the matter were in the event expressed by Mill himself: “The Corn Laws,” Westminster Review, III (Apr. 1825), 394-420 (in CW, Vol. IV, pp. 45-70). Evidently W.W. Whitmore either could not, or would not, write an answer to McCulloch. Mill, however, took the pamphlet mentioned in the next sentence, Whitmore’s A Letter on the Present State of and Future Prospects of Agriculture, 2nd ed. (London: Hatchard, 1823), as the occasion for his “Corn Laws,” in which he argued against McCulloch’s article (without mentioning his name), while praising another of McCulloch’s articles (see CW, Vol. IV, pp. 51 and 53). Mill also there cites Whitmore’s promise to raise the issue in parliament (ibid., pp. 69-70).
[7 ]William George Prescott (1800-65) became a partner in Prescott, Grote, in 1822, and was an original member of the Utilitarian Society, founded by Mill.
[8 ]Thomas Tooke (1774-1858), a banker, was one of the best known economic writers of the period, much noticed by Mill. He had reviewed in the Globe and the Morning Chronicle Tooke’s Thoughts and Details on the High and Low Prices of the Last Thirty Years (London: Murray, 1823) on its appearance, and had just praised it in an article, “War Expenditure,” in the 3rd number of the Westminster, II (July 1824), while apologizing for not reviewing it (CW, Vol. IV, p. 4n). Tooke’s son, William Eyton Tooke (1806-30), known by his middle name, whose views were evidently becoming incompatible with his father’s, was one of Mill’s closest friends in these years. Tooke’s suicide on 27 January, 1830, deeply affected Mill; see CW, Vol. XII, p. 19, and Letter 29.1 below to J.B. Say.
[9 ]The question centred on the increased numbers of Irish migrant labourers who had found quicker and cheaper passage to Britain when regular steamboat services began in 1816, and who were able to obtain work partly because of the reluctance of British workers to migrate for temporary work as they would lose their right to parish poor relief. It was also becoming apparent that the Irish population was growing very rapidly; it almost trebled between 1785 and 1841.
[10 ]John Austin (1790-1859) and Sarah Austin (1793-1867) were almost second parents to John Mill, who, after his return from France, had studied law under John’s tutelage, and had played with their young daughter Lucy in the gardens of the houses in Queen’s Square Place, where they were near neighbours. The Mills in these years rented summer accommodation at Dorking, in Surrey, where they spent their weekends and vacations; Brockham Green is about two miles east of Dorking, a trivial distance for the perambulating Mills.
[11 ]This is a very early reference to John Austin’s almost complete inability to fulfill the great promise everyone agreed he possessed. He never did review Etienne Dumont’s redaction of Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832), Traité des preuves judiciaires, 2 vols. (Paris: Bossange, 1823).
[12 ]John Austin’s brother Charles (1799-1874) was at this time one of the most outspoken of the young Radicals. He became a very successful barrister, but retired from public life and issues.
[13 ]Peregrine Bingham (1788-1864), a Benthamite barrister, friend of the Austins, helped edit and wrote extensively for the early numbers of the Westminster. George John Graham (1801-88), whose first article in the Westminster appeared in July 1825, later was an official assignee of the Bankruptcy Court. William Ellis (1800-81), subsequently known for his educational and economic views, had just moved to the Indemnity Marine Insurance Co. from Lloyds; he had written in the 2nd and 3rd numbers of the Westminster (for the latter, see n21 below), and was preparing the one mentioned in n17 below for the 4th number.
[14 ]Patten might be either George (1801-65), the painter, who studied at the Royal Academy after 1816, or John Wilson-Patten (1802-92), later Baron Winmorleigh, who went up to Magdalen College, Oxford, in 1821. One of the Secretans is probably John James, author of Epitome of Foreign Stocks, Most Currently Bought and Sold in London (1824), and other works on commercial and financial topics.
[15 ]A James Harfield is listed as one of the members of the London Debating Society, but nothing more has been discovered about him. While no trace has been found of an Edward Ellis, it may be that Mill had not yet learned the spelling of the name of Edward Ellice Jr. (1810-80), son of the well-known M.P., who later was secretary to Lord Durham in Russia and Canada, and was known by Mill; though only in his fourteenth year at the time, he may well fit the description in the letter, for Mill and his friends were certainly not given to discouragement of precocity.
[16 ]Richard Doane (1805-48), Bentham’s amanuensis, had preceded Mill as a guest of the Samuel Benthams in France, and was connected with Mill in all his early endeavours, including the Mutual Improvement Society that was a forerunner of the Utilitarian Society.
[17 ]All three articles appeared in the 4th number of the Westminster, II (Oct. 1824): James Mill, “Periodical Literature: Quarterly Review,” 463-503; John Stuart Mill, “Brodie’s History of the British Empire,” 346-402 (in Essays on England, Ireland, and the Empire, CW, Vol. VI [Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1982], pp. 1-58); and William Ellis, “Political Economy,” 289-310 (a review of James Mill’s Elements [London: Baldwin, Cradock, and Joy, 1821; 2nd ed. revised, 1824]).
[18 ]I.e., Harfield.
[19 ]“Miscellaneous Notices, No. 11. Westminster Review,” North American Review, n.s. IX (Apr. 1824), 419-26. Particular notice was taken of William Johnson Fox (1786-1864), “Men and Things in 1823,” Westminster Review, I (Jan. 1824), 1-18; and Peregrine Bingham, “Travels of Duncan, Flint and Faux,” and “Periodical Literature: The Quarterly Review, No. LVIII—Faux’s Memorable Days in America,” ibid., 101-20, and 250-68.
[20 ]Mill is being mildly ironic, this idea being in fact the central point in “Periodical Literature: Edinburgh Review (Part I),” in the 1st number, 206-49, written by James Mill with considerable help from J.S. Mill (see Autobiography, in Autobiography and Literary Essays, CW, Vol. I [Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1981], pp. 93-5), who himself wrote the continuation of the attack in the 2nd number (Apr. 1824), 505-41 (in CW, Vol. I, pp. 291-325).
[21 ]William Maginn (1793-1842), “Letters to Timothy Tickler, Esq. (No. XVII): To Christopher North, Esq., on the last Westminster Review,” Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine, XVI (Aug. 1824), 222-6, attacking particularly William Ellis, “Charitable Institutions,” Westminster Review, II (July 1824), 97-121.
[22 ]Thomas Robert Malthus (1766-1834), “Political Economy,” Quarterly Review, XXX (Jan. 1824), 297-334. Though he had not seen this article, Mill had written a year earlier an attack on Malthus’s view in reviewing his pamphlet, The Measure of Value Stated and Applied (1823), in the Morning Chronicle, 5 Sept., 1823, p. 2 (in Newspaper Writings, CW, Vols. XXII-XXV [Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1986], Vol. XXII, pp. 51-60).
[23 ]McCulloch’s “Disposal of Property by Will—Entails—French Law of Succession,” Edinburgh Review, XL (July 1824), 350-75, was answered in one of John Austin’s rare articles: “Periodical Literature: Edinburgh Review, Number XL, Art. IV—Disposition of Property by Will [and] Primogeniture,” Westminster Review, II (Oct. 1824), 503-53.
[24 ]James Mill, in “Southey’s Book of the Church,” Westminster Review, III (Jan. 1825), 167-212, made an onslaught on The Book of the Church, 2 vols. (London: Murray, 1824), by Robert Southey (1774-1843), the poet, friend of Coleridge and Wordsworth, who, like them, had deserted early radical views for conservative ones. The term, “the Satanic school,” had been applied by Southey in the Preface to his A Vision of Judgement (London: Longman, et al., 1821) to those “of diseased hearts and depraved imaginations, who, forming a system of opinions to suit their own unhappy course of conduct, have rebelled against the holiest ordinances of human society” (pp. xvii-xxii).
[25 ]“Knowledgeable about all things one can know.” The traditional title of the “900 Theses” of Giovanni Pico della Mirandola (1463-94), often quoted with the tag added by a wit (possibly Voltaire), et quibusdam aliis (“and even a few others”).
[26 ]The Courier and Evening Gazette (founded 1792), a conservative paper, referred, in a leading article of 28 August, 1824, p. 2, to the Radicalism of the Morning Chronicle, which defended the free-thinking Richard Carlile (1790-1843), a target for governmental blasphemous libel charges. The Chronicle replied to this attack on 30 August, p. 2, and the Courier (an evening paper) responded on the same day, p. 2, quoting from both its account on the 28th and the Chronicle’s reply. Mill had himself at the beginning of 1823 written five articles over the signature “Wickliff,” protesting against the prosecution of Carlile, his wife, and sister. Three of these were published under the title “Free Discussion” in the Morning Chronicle of 28 January, 8 and 12 February, 1823 (CW, Vol. XXII, pp. 9-12, 12-15, 15-18). The other two, Mill says in his Autobiography, contained “things too outspoken for that journal, [and] never appeared at all” (CW, Vol. I, pp. 89-91).
[27 ]John Black (1783-1855), who had begun to take major responsibility for the policies of the Morning Chronicle in 1817, was greatly influenced by James Mill, and printed most of the journalism of John Mill in the 1820s. For the latter’s mature confirmation of the early judgment, see Autobiography, CW, Vol. I, pp. 91-3, which includes mention of the attacks on the “unpaid magistracy.” Some of these were, in fact, written by Mill himself; e.g., “Blessings of Equal Justice,” and “Securities for Good Government,” CW, Vol. XXII, pp. 43-6 and 62-4.
[28 ]Francis Place (1771-1854), the “Radical tailor of Charing Cross,” organizing force behind the Radicals’ agitations and campaigns, who had received much of his political education from James Mill, was active at this time, inter alia, in promoting Neo-Malthusianism.
[1 ]MS at the College of Law, Nihon University, Tokyo. Addressed: John Bowring Esq. Dated in another hand.
John Bowring (1792-1872), Bentham’s disciple, was editor of the Westminster Review, 1824-36.
[2 ]George John Graham’s “Law Abuses: Pleadings,” appeared in the Westminster Review, IV (July 1825), 60-88; he continued the attack in “Law Abuses: Pleading—Practice,” ibid., V (July 1826), 39-62.
[3 ]A term adopted by Bentham from Richard Steele and John Horne Tooke to apply to legal jargon: see, e.g., Bentham, Rationale of Judicial Evidence, ed. J.S. Mill, 5 vols. (London: Hunt and Clarke, 1827), Vol. V, p. 344.
[1 ]MS in the Cornell University Library. Dated in another hand.
[2 ]J.S. Mill, “The Game Laws,” Westminster Review, V (Jan. 1826), 1-22; in CW, Vol. VI, pp. 99-120.
[3 ]Robert Mushet (1782-1828), a senior officer of the Royal Mint, was an original member of the Political Economy Club. The niece was probably Margaret Mushet (1799-1885), who later contributed to periodicals; her poem was not noticed in the Westminster.
[4 ]“Memoirs of the Affairs of Europe,” Westminster Review, IV (July 1825), 178-83, a review of the first volume of John Russell (1792-1878), Memoirs of the Affairs of Europe from the Peace of Utrecht, 2 vols. (London: Murray, 1824-29).
[5 ]Mill was at this time (see CW, Vol. I, p. 71) reading the Lectures on the Philosophy of the Human Mind, 4 vols. (Edinburgh: Tait, 1820), by Thomas Brown (1778-1820), Professor of Moral Philosophy at Edinburgh. He did not, however, review David Welsh (1793-1845), An Account of the Life and Writings of Thomas Brown (Edinburgh: Tait, 1825).
[6 ]James Gilchrist (1783-1835), a General Baptist preacher and author of etymological and philological works; Mill distinguishes him from John Borthwick Gilchrist (1759-1841), formerly a surgeon in the East India Company service, then Professor of Hindi at the Company’s College, who wrote on Hindi philology. Neither wrote for the Westminster.
[1 ]MS in the possession of Professor Arnold Heertje, University of Amsterdam. Published in MNL, VIII (Fall 1972), 11-13, edited by Heertje and Evert Schoorl.
Jean Baptiste Say (1767-1832), French economist, visited England in 1814 and met James Mill and Bentham. J.S. Mill was his guest in France in 1820 and 1821, at the beginning and end of his year in France.
[2 ]Say’s wife, Julie Gourdel-Deloche, died on 10 January, 1830.
[3 ]Eyton Tooke committed suicide on 27 January, 1830.
[4 ]Perhaps those on 29 January in the Morning Chronicle, p. 3, and The Times, p. 2.
[5 ]Cours complet d’économie politique, 7 vols. (Paris: Rapilly, 1828-29).
[6 ]See Cours, Vol. I, pp. 125-6, with reference especially to David Ricardo (1772-1823), and J.R. McCulloch.
[1 ]MS at the College of Law, Nihon University, Tokyo. Dated in another hand; verified from the postmark. Addressed: Dr Bowring / No. 5 Milman Place / Bedford Row.
[2 ]In 1830 the Athenaeum Club, founded in 1824, decided to expand its membership by 200 to pay for its new building (still used). One hundred new members, including Mill, were chosen by a committee (on which his father sat); their nomination was announced on 12 June. The second hundred were to be elected by the full membership. Of those Mill lists, Charles Austin, Charles Buller (1806-48), recently elected M.P. for West Looe, and Charles Romilly (1808-87) were successful at this time. Walter Coulson (1794-1860), a barrister and editor, once amanuensis to Jeremy Bentham, Abraham Hayward (1801-84), Tory barrister, whose relations with Mill were seldom cordial, James Booth (1796-1880), a freethinking Chancery lawyer, and William Ogle Carr (ca. 1802-56), another barrister, were all elected to the Athenaeum in the next five years. Never elected were John Sterling (1806-44), the brilliant Cambridge graduate, then becoming a close friend to Mill, and John Samuel Martin de Grenier Fonblanque (1787-1865), brother of Albany Fonblanque, the editor of the Examiner, for which Mill was beginning to write.
[3 ]George Bentham (1800-84), later a distinguished botanist, son of Jeremy’s brother, Brigadier-General Sir Samuel Bentham, was one of the recently elected members. In 1820 he had been Mill’s instructor in botany and much else. William Carr was the son of Thomas William Carr (d. 1829) a friend of Sir Samuel; George Bentham had been enamoured of William’s sister, Laura.
[1 ]MS in the Varnhagen von Ense Collection, Jagiellonian Library, Cracow. Envelope addressed: Mrs Austin / 26 Park Road / Regent’s Park. Published in Victorians Institute Journal, V (1987), 138-9, edited by T.H. Pickett, and in MNL, XXIII (Winter 1988), 17-18, edited by Joseph Hamburger. Mill set out for the Lake District on Friday, the 8th; so this letter probably dates from the preceding Tuesday.
[2 ]Mill’s journal of this walking tour in Yorkshire and the Lake District (8 July-8 August) is in Journals and Debating Speeches, CW, Vols. XXVI-XXVII (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1988), Vol. XXVII, pp. 501-56.
[3 ]Mill is probably referring to his breakfasting with William Wordsworth (1770-1850) at Henry Taylor’s on 27 February, 1831. He saw Wordsworth, then living at Rydal Mount, briefly on 18 July, and spent 4-7 August at Ambleside in order to visit him and his sister Dorothy.
[4 ]Horace Grant (1800-59), like Mill, worked as a clerk in the Examiner’s department at the India Office.
[5 ]Francis Edward Crawley (1803-32), a member of the London Debating Society, had accompanied Mill on a walking tour of Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire, and Surrey in July 1828.
[6 ]I.e., from John Austin’s lectures on jurisprudence at the University of London, which began in January 1831, with only eight students.
[7 ]William Empson (1791-1852), Professor of Polity and Laws of England at Haileybury College, contributor to and later editor (1847-52) of the Edinburgh Review.
[8 ]Lucie Austin (1821-69), later Lucie Duff Gordon, the Austins’ only child.
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/283, pp. 91-[n.p.], India Office Library and Records. See Check List of Mill’s Indian Despatches in CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 46.
William Cabell (1786-1853) was at this time Senior Clerk in the Secret and Political Department at the Board of Control. In August 1839, his responsibility for the Secret Department was transferred to Thomas Nelson Waterfield, but he continued as Senior Clerk in the Political Department. From September 1835 until his retirement in May 1841, he was also Assistant Secretary to the Board of Control.
[2 ]Murchison had explained his conduct in connection with his negotiations with the Ex-Rajah of Kedah in a Political letter from Bengal dated 26 August, 1831.
[1 ]MS in the Varnhagen von Ense Collection, Jagiellonian Library, Cracow. Addressed: Mrs. Austin / 26 Park Road / Regent’s Park. Published in Victorians Institute Journal, V (1987), 138, edited by T.H. Pickett, and in MNL, XXIII (Winter 1988), 18-20, edited by Joseph Hamburger. Dated certainly between January and July 1832, during John Austin’s third series of lectures on jurisprudence at the University of London, which Mill attended. Francis Crawley (see Letter 40.1 above) had attended the lectures in 1831. The reference to Chadwick’s heavy commitment to Bentham’s “affairs” suggests that the letter was written after Bentham’s death on 6 June, 1832.
[2 ]John Arthur Roebuck (1801-79), barrister, disciple of Bentham’s, and intimate friend of Mill’s, M.P. 1832-37, 1841-47, 1849-79.
[3 ]The reference is probably to Charles Romilly (see Letter 31.1), but could be to one of his brothers, John (1802-74) or Edward (1804-70), both of whom were in the philosophic radical circle. The “engagement” was presumably for an article in the Foreign Quarterly Review, edited by John George Cochrane (1781-1852) from July 1827 through December 1834.
[4 ]Edward Strutt (1801-80), Baron Belper, 1856, M.P. for Derby 1830-48, 1851-56, was associated with the philosophic radicals in the 1830s.
[5 ]Edwin Chadwick (1800-90), barrister, close friend of Mill’s, was a disciple of Bentham’s, and an executor of his will.
[6 ]The allusion is to Edward George Bulwer, Lord Lytton (1803-73), novelist, editor, politician, member of the London Debating Society, and author of the popular novel Pelham; or, The Adventures of a Gentleman (London: Colburn, 1828).
[7 ]Her birthday was 21 June.
[1 ]MS not located; typescript McCrimmon. For the dating, see n2.
Henry Cole (1808-82), active in postal reform, member of the London Debating Society, Mill’s companion on the tour to the Lake District described in Letter 40.1 above, and on another later that month; see Letter 54.1 below.
[2 ]Don Giovanni, by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1756-91), was produced at the King’s Theatre, Haymarket, on 16 July, 1832, the role of Donna Elvira being sung by Henriette Méric-Lilande (1798-1867), and that of Donna Anna by Wilhelmine Schröder-Devrient (1804-50). For Mill’s comments on the latter during this season, see CW, Vol. I, p. 351, and CW, Vol. XXIII, p. 465.
[1 ]MS not located; typescript McCrimmon. Dated from internal evidence.
Mill and Cole set out the following morning, 19 July, for a walking tour of Hampshire, West Sussex, and the Isle of Wight that lasted until 6 August. The plan to meet G. and R. (probably Grant and Roebuck) seems not to have materialized. Mill’s journal is in CW, Vol. XXVII, pp. 557-611.
[1 ]MS not located; typescript McCrimmon, who indicates it is addressed on verso: Henry Cole Esq. / 4 Adam Street / Adelphi.
Mill had obviously been visiting the Buller family at Looe before setting out on his tour of Cornwall; for the journal of this tour, see CW, Vol. XXVII, pp. 613-37.
[2 ]Gaetano Marinelli (1754-1820), Italian composer mainly of comic operas, was popular among musical amateurs such as Mill and Cole.
[1 ]MS not located; typescript McCrimmon. Dated from the entry in Cole’s Diary for 18 March, 1833, Victoria and Albert Museum.
[2 ]Mill’s mother, Harriet (née Burrow) (ca. 1782-1854), and his sisters Wilhelmina Forbes (1808-61), Clara Esther (1810-86), Harriet Isabella (1812-97), Jane Stuart (ca. 1816-83), and Mary Elizabeth (1822-1913).
[3 ]Albany William Fonblanque (1793-1872), his wife (née Keane), and her sister, plus Nassau Senior and his sister (Cole’s Diary).
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/289, n.p. (before Bengal PC 1153), India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 58.
[2 ]The note, also dated 4 June, and directed to James Mill by Edward Lawford, solicitor to the Company, follows J.S. Mill’s letter to Cabell in L/P&S/6/289.
[3 ]PC 1153 concerned the dismissal of the Resident at Lucknow, Mordaunt Ricketts, for having taken bribes.
[1 ]MS not located; typescript McCrimmon. Presumably after 15 Mar., 1833, when Cole met Fonblanque at the Mills’, apparently for the first time (see Letter 70.1 above), and quite possibly Friday, 2 Aug., 1833. Cole’s Diary indicates that Mill called on him in the evening; they went to the Kingstons, but as no one was home, they called on Horace Grant.
[2 ]In the early 1830s Cole and the Mill family frequently spent musical evenings with the Kingstons, who are otherwise unidentified.
[1 ]MS in the German National Museum, Nuremberg.
Jérôme Adolphe Blanqui (1798-1854), pupil and assistant to Jean Baptiste Say, Professor of Industrial Economy and History from 1825 at the Conservatoire des Arts et Métiers, in 1833 succeeded Say as Professor of Political Economy at the Conservatoire.
[2 ]J.R. McCulloch was appointed to the Chair of Political Economy in the University of London in July 1827, and held it until 1837; however, he stopped lecturing in 1831 because attendance at his lectures was minimal (sometimes indeed there were no students), and his remuneration was inadequate.
[3 ]Nassau William Senior (1790-1864) was appointed to the Chair in King’s College London (established 1829), but was appointed a tithe commissioner before the College opened in 1831, and consequently never lectured. He resigned in March 1832, and was succeeded in January 1833 by Richard Jones (1790-1855).
[4 ]Henry Drummond (1786-1860) established the Oxford Chair in 1825; for the provisions, see CW, Vol. XXII, p. 327. Senior, who assumed the Professorship in 1826, published An Introductory Lecture on Political Economy (London: Mawman, 1827), Three Lectures on the Transmission of the Precious Metals (London: Murray, 1828), Three Lectures on the Cost of Obtaining Money (London: Murray, 1830), and Two Lectures on Population (London: Murray, 1831). Whately published his Introductory Lectures on Political Economy (London: Fellowes, 1831).
[5 ]Favourable reviews of Senior’s lectures appeared, e.g., in the Westminster Review, VIII (July 1827), 177-89, and, by Whately, in the Edinburgh Review, XLVIII (Sept. 1828), 170-84. Whately’s Lectures were widely praised; see, e.g., Mill’s review, Examiner, 12 June, 1831, 373 (in CW, Vol. XXII, pp. 327-9), and Thomas Perronet Thompson’s in the Westminster, XVI (Jan. 1832), 1-22.
[6 ]George Pryme (1781-1868), M.P. for Cambridge 1832-41, who began to lecture in 1816, was recognized as Professor by the Senate in May 1828 and continued to lecture until 1863, evidently without salary. He published A Syllabus of a Course of Lectures on the Principles of Political Economy (Cambridge: printed Smith, 1816), which went through subsequent editions, to which he added An Introductory Lecture in 1823.
[7 ]Whately privately endowed the Chair at Trinity College Dublin in 1832; Mountifort Longfield (1802-84) was the first incumbent, 1832-34.
[8 ]Some of the lectures on political economy by Dugald Stewart (1753-1828), who held the Chair of Moral Philosophy at Edinburgh 1785-1809, are in Vols. VIII and IX of his Collected Works, ed. William Hamilton, 11 vols. (Edinburgh: Constable, 1854-60).
[9 ]In 1825, during the administration of Robert Banks Jenkinson (1770-1828), Lord Liverpool, McCulloch, with the assistance especially of Macvey Napier (1776-1847), editor of the Edinburgh Review, attempted to have a Chair in Political Economy established. Their Memorial to the Government Concerning a Chair of Political Economy in the University of Edinburgh (BL Add. MSS 38746, f. 219) was unsuccessful, being opposed strongly by Robert Saunders Dundas (1771-1856), Viscount Melville, Lord Privy Seal of Scotland.
[10 ]At the end of 1805 Malthus was appointed Professor of History and Political Economy in the newly founded College.
[11 ]McCulloch’s far from occasional contributions to the Edinburgh Review began with “Ricardo’s Political Economy,” XXX (June 1818), 59-87; his most recent was “Complaints and Proposals Regarding Taxation,” LVII (July 1833), 434-48. He wrote less frequently for the Foreign Quarterly Review, his first article being “Wine Trade of France,” III (Jan. 1829), 636-49, and his most recent the two-part essay, “Prussian Commercial Policy,” IX (May 1832), 455-70, and XI (Apr. 1833), 403-6.
[12 ]Thomas Perronet Thompson’s first economic article in the Westmister was “Absenteeism in Ireland,” X (Jan. 1829), 237-43, and his most recent, “Property Tax,” XIX (July 1833), 1-9. (For full lists, see The Wellesley Index to Victorian Periodicals, Vol. V.)
[13 ]Mill is preserving the anonymity of John Pringle Nichol (1804-59), astronomer and political economist, who was unsuccessfully recommended in 1833 by James Mill and Nassau Senior for the Chair of Political Economy at the Collège de France vacated by the death of Say. Nichol’s first article in Tait’s Edinburgh Magazine was “Incidence of Tithes,” I (May 1832), 224-8; his most recent, “Political Economy for Farmers,” III (May 1833), 191-8.
[14 ]In addition to John Austin, whose lectures in Jurisprudence ceased in June 1833, and McCulloch (see n2 above), Mill is referring to John Hoppus (1789-1875), who was appointed late in 1829 to the Chair in the Logic and Philosophy of the Human Mind. His much criticized lectures, which began in 1830, were very poorly attended.
[15 ]The highly acclaimed Professor of English Law was Andrew Amos (1791-1860). In medicine, the professors were John Conolly (1794-1866), on the nature and treatment of diseases, David Daniel Davis (1777-1841), on midwifery and the diseases of women and children, and Anthony Todd Thomson (1778-1849), on materia medica and therapeutics.
[16 ]In November 1833, Pellegrino Luigi Edoardo, Count Rossi (1787-1848), an Italian who had been Professor of Roman History at Geneva before moving to France, was appointed Say’s successor at the Collège de France. One of the unsuccessful applicants was François Charles Louis Comte (1782-1837), a liberal political writer, son-in-law of Say, known personally to the Mills for a decade.
[1 ]MS in the Reed Collection, Dunedin Public Library, New Zealand. Published in MNL, XXIII (Winter 1988), 22, edited by Eric W. Nye.
Fortunato Prandi (d. 1868), an Italian political refugee and journalist, was a member of Sarah Austin’s circle. He was presumably going to France.
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/288, pp. 463-, India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 923.
[2 ]Mountstuart Elphinstone (1779-1859) was Governor of Bombay 1819-27.
[3 ]A jagir was a right, enjoyed by an official (or a family), to collect revenues from specified villages, or districts, in lieu of salary.
[1 ]MS in the Osborn Collection, Yale University.
Effingham Wilson (1783-1868), London publisher.
[2 ]The application was successful: the work by Victor Cousin (1792-1867), translated by Sarah Austin, was published as Report on the State of Public Instruction in Prussia (London: Wilson, 1834).
[3 ]Mill’s authority might have been Harriet Taylor (1807-58), later his wife, whose views on education he much valued. Whether or not he had read the manuscript—and it seems unlikely that he had not—he quickly reviewed the published work, “Mrs. Austin’s Translation of M. Cousin’s Report on the State of Public Instruction in Prussia,” Monthly Repository, n.s. VIII (July 1834), 502-13 (in Essays on Equality, Law, and Education, CW, Vol. XXI [Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1984], pp. 61-79).
[1 ]MS in the India Office Library and Records. Published in MNL, IX (Summer 1974), 3-4, edited by Gerald and Natalie Robinson Sirkin.
Horace Hayman Wilson (1786-1860), in the Indian Government in India, Sanskrit scholar.
[2 ]John Loch (1781-1868), a Director of the East India Company 1821-54, was the Chairman of the Court of Directors at the time.
[3 ]This College,also known as the Hindu College and as the Vidyalaya, was organized in 1816 by a group of leading Hindus in Calcutta for the purpose of teaching English and Western science to high-caste Hindu boys. The College ran out of funds because of mismanagement, and by 1823 it asked the government for financial assistance. The government was soon providing nearly all the required funds, although the administration remained in the hands of the “native managers.”
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/290, pp. 517-, India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 69.
[2 ]Charles Masson (identified only as “a traveller in Central Asia”) was apparently the pseudonym of James Lewis, an authority on Indian inscriptions.
[3 ]The altered paragraphs are in L/P&S/6/290, pp. [510-12].
[4 ]Henry St. George Tucker (1771-1851) was Chairman of the Court of Directors at this time.
[5 ]The names of the Boondela chiefs appear inAppendix No. 29 to the “Minutes of Evidence Taken before the Select Committee on the Affairs of the East India Company,” PP, 1831-32, XIV, 447.
[1 ]MS in the possession of Professor Arnold Heertje, University of Amsterdam. Datedby postmark. Addressed: Dr Bowring / 1 Queen Square / Westminster.
[2 ]Bowring was one of two Commissioners who had submitted a “First Report on the Commercial Relations between France and Great Britain,” PP, 1834, XIX, 1-257; the “Second Report. . . . Silks and Wine,” by Bowring, did not appear until the following year, both as a pamphlet (London: Clowes) and in PP, 1835, XXXVI, 441-697.
[3 ]Nichol presumably wanted the information in the reports as he was preparing “Rae’s New Principles of Political Economy in Refutation of Adam Smith,” Foreign Quarterly Review, XV (July 1835), 241-66.
[1 ]MS in the National Archives of Canada, Ottawa. Dated extract in an unclasped notebook of Harriet Roebuck, his wife.
[2 ]Thomas Falconer (1805-82), a barrister, was brother to Roebuck’s wife. The proposal was probably that Falconer become nominal editor of the projected London Review; he was chosen, and served rather badly as, in effect, sub-editor under Mill’s direction.
[3 ]Not located.
[1 ]MS in the Reed Collection, Dunedin Public Library, New Zealand. Watermarked 1834. Published in MNL, XXIII (Winter 1988), 22-3, edited by Eric W. Nye.
[2 ]For Mill’s journal of his tour of Western Cornwall in 1832, see CW, Vol. XXVII, 612-37.
[1 ]MS in the possession of Professor Akira Tada, Chiba, Japan. Dated from postmark. Addressed: Monsieur / M. Adolphe Thibaudeau / au bureau du journal / “Le National de 1834” / Rue du Croissant / No 16 à Paris. Mill’s letter is written on pages 3 and 4 of a letter dated 11 Sept., 1834, from John Wilson, a Factory and Poor Law Commissioner, and editor of the Globe and Traveller.
Adolphe Narcisse, comte Thibaudeau (1795-1856), one of the editors of the radical Paris paper, Le National, who spent some time in England after June 1832.
[2 ]Wilson was offering three guineas for, at most, two articles per week. He suggested that “minor points of difference between parties in France . . . not be made too prominent,” and that “to censure Louis Philippe & his government as they perhaps deserve would be to play into the hands of the Tories.” He recommended that Thibaudeau treat of “the general relations” and “the state of feeling” between the twocountries, and “the grand continental divisions of interest in which France & this country are opposed to the absolute military powers.”
[3 ]Hippolyte Dussard (1798-1876), another radical journalist.
[4 ]Perhaps Mill was trying to obtain music from the opera, La Niobé (first performed 1826), by Giovanni Pacini (1796-1867).
[5 ]Jean Baptiste Nicolas Armand Carrel (1800-36), the French radical editor whom Mill most admired, was visiting England at this time.
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/293, pp. 49- (before India PC 1411), India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 79.
[2 ]“Engagement between the British Government and the Maharajah Dawlut Rao Sindiah” (22 Apr., 1820), is in L/P&S/6/293, pp. 53-.
[3 ]The paragraphs are ibid., pp. 61-9. The issue was whether the British Government had the right to supply or withold military services at its discretion.
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/293, pp. 73-(before India PC 1411), India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 79.
[2 ]Presumably an engagement similar to that referred to in Letter 125.1 above.
[1 ]MS in the possession of Mrs. Barbara McCrimmon.
Henry Scott Alves (d. 1859), at that time Assistant Secretary to the Board of Control.
[2 ]This formula covers the transmission of Draft Despatches from the Examiner’s Office to the Board of Control; the Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the East India Company’s Court of Directors were then William Stanley Clarke and James Rivett Carnac (1785-1846).
[3 ]This despatch, entitled “North Eastern and Eastern Frontier” and dated 25 Sept., 1835, is given as Mill’s in his handlist; see CW, Vol.XXX, App. A, No. 111.
[1 ]MS in the India Office Library and Records. Published in Journal of General Education, XXIV (Jan. 1973), 231, and in MNL, IX (Summer 1974), 4, edited by Gerald and Natalie Robinson Sirkin.
[2 ]John Loch; see Letter 101.1 above.
[3 ]“Education of the Natives of India,” Asiatic Journal, n.s. XIX (Jan.-Apr. 1836), 1-16.
[1 ]MS in the Varnhagen von Ense Collection, Jagiellonian Library, Cracow. Published in Victorians Institute Journal, V (1987), 139-40, edited by T.H. Pickett (where it is followed by a letter dated 21 June, by James Mill to Sarah Austin), and in MNL, XXIII (Winter 1988), 20-1, edited by Joseph Hamburger.
The Austins were staying at Boulogne, as John Austin’s work in London, both the Inner Temple lectures and his connection with the Criminal Law Commission, had terminated. John Austin at this time was a victim of depression and other ailments, and Sarah Austin recently had experienced a nervous breakdown.
[2 ]Mill was suffering from exhaustion and general debility, and he soon had other symptoms—weakened lungs, a deranged stomach, and a nervous twitching of the right eye.
[3 ]James Mill became seriously ill, probably with tuberculosis, in August 1835, and died 23 June, 1836.
[4 ]James Bentham Mill (1814-62) was on his way to India, where he joined the East India Company’s civil service.
[5 ]Charles Hay Cameron (1795-1880), a lawyer and one of Bentham’s disciples, was on the law commission which was part of the Supreme Council of India. He worked with T.B. Macaulay in preparing the penal code for India.
[6 ]Sarah Austin’s article, “D’Israeli’s Vindication of the English Constitution,” had appeared in London Review, II (Jan. 1836), 533-52.
[7 ]Sarah Austin translated the first two volumes of England in 1835, 3 vols. (London: Murray, 1836), by Frederick Ludwig Georg von Raumer (1781-1873). Charles Buller did not review Raumer, at least not in the London Review, nor did Sarah contribute.
[8 ]Henry Bickersteth (1783-1851) became Baron Langdale in 1836, when he was appointed Master of the Rolls. A friend of Bentham’s, he promoted law reform.
[9 ]Henry Taylor (1800-86), poet, Colonial Office official, author of The Statesman (London: Longman, et al., 1836), which Mill with George Grote reviewed in the London and Westminster Review, V & XXVII (Apr. 1837), 1-32 (in Essays on Politics and Society, CW, Vols. XVIII-XIX (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1977), Vol. XIX, pp. 617-47.
[1 ]MS in the German National Museum, Nuremberg. Addressed: “Monsieur / Monsieur Paulin / libraire / Rue de Seine”. Dated from postmark.
J.B. Alexandre Paulin (1796-1859), publisher and bookseller, was agent for the London and Westminster Review in France.
[2 ]In “Parliamentary History of the French Revolution,” London and Westminster Review, V & XXVII (Apr. 1837), 233-47, Thomas Carlyle (1795-1881), then an intimate friend of Mill and Harriet Taylor, reviewed the published volumes of Philippe Joseph Benjamin Buchez and Prosper Charles Roux, eds., L’histoire parlementaire de la révolution française, which was being published in Paris by Paulin. (It was completed, in 40 vols., in 1838.)
[3 ]The early volumes, dealing with Africa, of Karl Ritter, Die Erdkunde im Verhältnis zur Natur und zur Geschichte des Menschen oder allgemeine vergleichende Geographie, 19 vols. in 21, 2nd ed. (Berlin: Reimer, 1822-59), were issued in Paris by Paulin in 1835-36 as Géographie générale comparée, ou Etude de la terre dans ses rapports avec la nature et avec l’histoire de l’homme, 3 vols. trans. E. Buret. Paulin also published in 1836 the four volumes of Histoire de la Gaule méridionale sous la domination des conquérants germains, by Claude Charles Fauriel (1772-1844), historian and philologist. The notices Mill refers to have not been located.
[4 ]Carrel, whom Mill had met first in 1833, died on 24 July, 1836, from wounds suffered in a duel with Emile de Girardin. For Mill’s tribute, see “Armand Carrel,” London and Westminster Review, VI & XXVIII (Oct. 1837), 66-111 (in Essays on French History and Historians, CW, Vol. XX [Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1985], pp. 167-215.
[5 ]James Mill had died on 23 June, 1836.
[1 ]MS not located; typescript McCrimmon.
[2 ]The reference would appear to be to an economic article in the Guide, a newspaper edited by Cole that began publication on 22 April, 1837, to which Mill contributed; see CW, Vol. XXIV, pp. 793-4.
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/302, n.p. (after Bombay PC 1934), India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 946.
[2 ]James Williams of the Bombay Civil Service was Commissioner in Gujerat and Resident at Baroda. His death precluded his dismissal for general incompetence.
[3 ]James Erskine was the Political Agent at Kathiawar.
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/305, pp. 339-, India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 159.
[1 ]MS in the Prussian State Library, Berlin.
John Robertson (ca. 1811-75), nominal editor (in fact, sub-editor) of the London and Westminster Review from early 1837 until 1840.
[2 ]It is probable that Colonel William Francis Patrick Napier (1785-1860), historian of and participant in the Peninsular War, proposed that he contribute the article that was published as “The Duke of Wellington,” London and Westminster Review, VI & XXVIII (Jan. 1838), 367-436. (Mill appended an editorial note indicating that the views were those of the author, not of the review; see CW, Vol. I, p. 604.)
[3 ]Charles Wetherby Reynell (1798-1892), printer of the London and Westminster.
[4 ]As published, John Robertson’s “Caricatures,” London and Westminster Review, VI & XXVIII (Jan. 1838), 261-93, contains only slight reference to James Gillray (1757-1815) and William Hogarth (1697-1764) on pp. 279-80; evidently what Mill omitted stayed out. See also Mill to Robertson, CW, Vol. XII, pp. 362-3, presumably earlier.
[5 ]William Bridges Adams (“Junius Redivivus”) (1797-1872), “Dr. Arnott, On Warming and Ventilation,” ibid., 345-67. The joke reads thus: “A proprietor who wished much to render his mines available to the public, applied to a scientific gentleman . . . for a certificate of [anthracite’s] durability. He obtained it, to the effect that the certifier verily believed that it would be the last thing destroyed on the day of judgment. About the same period a barn, in which a quantity of the coal was stored up, caught fire, and the part not destroyed was covered by the coal.” (P. 365.)
[6 ]I.e., Mill’s “Ware’s Letters from Palmyra,” ibid., pp. 436-70 (in CW, Vol. I, pp. 431-61).
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/304, n.p. (before India Draft 600), India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 170.
[2 ]Lieutenant-Colonel Nathaniel Alves of the Madras Establishment was at this time Political Agent at Rajputana.
[3 ]Military officers holding civil positions, such as political agent, in which no military duties were involved, had been forbidden to receive their military pay in addition to their civil allowances. This regulation had not been enforced for some years, and then retrenchment, or recovery of monies paid, had been instituted, causing some hardship and much dissatisfaction among the officers affected.
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/307, pp. 387-9, India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 172.
[2 ]Nasir-ud-Din Haidar (d. 1837).
[3 ]James Rivett Carnac was Chairman, and James Law Lushington (1779-1859) Deputy Chairman of the Court of Directors at this time.
[4 ]John Cam Hobhouse (1786-1869) was President of the Board of Control from April 1835 to September 1841.
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/305, pp. 575-7, India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 955.
[2 ]I.e., in the territory of Sayaji Rao, Gaikwar of Baroda, who ruled 1819-47.
[3 ]For the Chairs see Letter 229.02 above.
[4 ]See Letter 212.1 above.
[1 ]MS not located; typescript McCrimmon.
[2 ]Almost certainly a draft of Cole’s “Uniform Penny Postage,” which remained somewhat disorganized when published in the London and Westminster Review, VII & XXIX (Apr. 1838), 225-64.
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/307, p. 313, India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 953.
[2 ]Thomas Love Peacock (1775-1866) had succeeded James Mill as Chief Examiner of India Correspondence in 1836.
[3 ]Wittul Row Dewanjee, dismissed as minister of the Gaikwar of Baroda in 1827, had subsequently been employed by the British Government to administer a sequestered district, and large allowances had been granted to him and his family. On his death, the legality of these payments was called into question, and his nephew and adopted son, Christna Rao, was making a strong claim for their continuance.
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/309, pp. 449-51, India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 954.
[2 ]Cabell’s reply of 28 March follows Mill’s letter in L/P&S/6/309, pp. 453-, and provides a better statement: “My Dear Sir/ The alteration in PC 2072 is, as you justly remark in yr letter of the 26th Instant, rather obscurely worded: Its intention, I have ascertained would be more clearly expressed if it were to run thus—‘& tho’ it might be very desirable, as you state, to induce this Chief to continue responsibility for the good conduct of the Babriawur Villages, we are not aware how this could be allowed, as you have no right to enforce any such obligation now that you have deprived him of sovereign Power over these Villages.’ ”
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/308, pp. 25-, India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 183.
[2 ]Robert Gordon (1791-1847), M.P. for Windsor, was Joint Secretary to the Board of Control from 1835. He had written about the apparently much earlier appointment of George Edward Gowan (d. 1865), of the Bengal artillery, to the position of Commissioner in Kumaun.
[3 ]Alexander Ross (b. 1777) was Member of the Supreme Council of India from October 1833, and Lieutenant-Governor of Agra December 1835 to June 1836.
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/305, pp. 173-5, India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 149.
[2 ]See Letter 239.3 above.
[3 ]Hajee Khuleel Khan, Ambassador to Bombay from Persia, had been killed by a random shot during an altercation between his attendants and some Sepoys in 1802. Since he was deemed to have been under British protection at the time, the Government had offered, as a gesture of compensation, an annual sum of money for purposes of charity, and devotion at his tomb at Mujiff, in Persia. Arrears were now being claimed by his son.
[1 ]MS at the Public Record Office.
James Stephen (1789-1859), Under-Secretary for Colonial Affairs from 1836.
[2 ]With the letter is a “Statement of Facts” of the case, dated at Malta, 23 August, 1838, signed by Diego Arangio, a merchant, the political refugee in question, who had fled to Malta in 1837, where he was refused asylum. Accepted by a French possession in Africa, he subsequently obtained a passport, and returned to Malta to reestablish his business. The British authorities there, under pressure from the Neapolitan Consul, had then tried to expell him. Mill’s “Italian friends” included Giuseppe Mazzini (1805-72) and Angelo Usiglio (1803-75), both of whom were in exile in England.
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/314, n.p. (before India PC 2278), India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 216.
[2 ]Mill was responding to Robert Gordon’s note of 23 Nov., 1838, which immediately precedes this letter in L/P&S/6/314, asking legal assistance with the case of the legitimacy of the children of Francis Steddy, Deputy Post Master at Ryepur, who had died intestate. As Steddy and his wife, who were both Roman Catholics, had married after the birth of their children, an opinion had been expressed that “according to the Roman Catholic religion, children born of parents previous to their marriage become legitimate on such subsequent marriage.”
[3 ]See 20 Henry III, Statutes of Merton, c. 9 (1235).
[1 ]MS at the National Library of Scotland. Addressed: Dr Carlyle / Poste Restante / a Napoli. Postmark: Naples, 27 March.
John Aitken Carlyle (1801-79), younger brother of Thomas Carlyle, was visiting the Continent at this time as travelling physician to the Duke of Buccleuch.
[2 ]The reference is to “Report on the Affairs of British North America, from the Earl of Durham,” PP, 1839, XVII, 1-690. In the previous year, Mill had written three articles in defence of Durham’s policies: see CW, Vol. VI, pp. 405-64.
[3 ]Unit of Italian currency.
[4 ]John Mitchinson Calvert (1801-42) had become a friend of John Sterling when both were wintering in Madeira for their health in the previous year.
[5 ]Anthony Coningham Sterling (1805-71), brother of John, Captain in the 23rd Foot, and his wife Charlotte (d. 1863) apparently met John on the outskirts of Rome on 4 April (see Carlyle’s Life of Sterling [London: Chapman and Hall, 1851], pp. 236-7). Anthony and Charlotte visited Dr. Carlyle in Naples in April, but John Sterling’s plans were altered by the death of his infant son in England on 30 March.
[6 ]Joseph Severn (1793-1879), artist and friend of John Keats, who was still living in Rome at this time, and, presumably, Joseph Wolff (1795-1862), missionary and orientalist.
[7 ]Thomas Carlyle, The French Revolution: A History, 3 vols. (London: Fraser, 1837).
[1 ]MS in the Hollander Collection, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Dated on the assumption that Mill had returned to India House after a lengthy absence, during which Grant looked after his papers; see letter of 18 Oct., 1839, CW, Vol. XVII, p. 1990. The first of July was the Monday following Mill’s return from the Continent.
[1 ]MS in the National Library of Wales, Aberystwyth. Addressed: Edward Scott, Esq., Bodtalog, Machynnlleth, N. Wales. Published in National Library of Wales Journal, XXIV (1986), 354-5, edited by Mary and Lionel Madden.
Edward Scott (1752/3-1842), a friend of Thomas Love Peacock, through whom he met James and J.S. Mill, was interested in Welsh culture.
[2 ]The work has not been identified.
[3 ]In 1789 Scott married Louisa Mary (née Anwyl), widow of comte Louis de Saumaise of the Burgundy family. The family papers presumably came to Scott on her death in 1812. The collection was given to the British Museum in 1839; it includes BL Add. MSS, 11,644-54, and Add. Charters 4608, 4615-4717.
[1 ]MS at Wasada University, Tokyo.
John Mitchell Kemble (1807-57), philologist and historian, edited the British and Foreign Review 1836-44. For the sequel to this letter, see CW, Vol. XIII, p. 410.
[2 ]Thomas Wentworth Beaumont (1792-1848), formerly M.P. for Northumberland, from 1835-44 owned the British and Foreign Review, which supported liberal principles with special reference to foreign countries.
[3 ]“State of the Nation,” British and Foreign Review, IX (July, 1839), 273-319, was written by Kemble, with Beaumont’s assistance.
[1 ]MS in the William R. Perkins Library, Duke University.
[2 ]According to Cole’s diary, he and Robertson first conferred on Thursday, 7 November, 1839, and not again until 20 February, 1840. See Introduction, pp. xii-xiv above.
[1 ]MS in the National Library of Wales, Aberystwyth.
[2 ]Senior was on the supervising committee of the Political Economy Club from 1835-1849, and so would be concerned about the schedule. In the event, the question of Herman Merivale (1806-74), the Drummond Professor of Political Economy at Oxford, was discussed on 5 December, 1839: “What general principles should be adopted relatively to the employment of Paupers, Soldiers, and Prisoners in productive labour?” Mill’s question came forward on 6 February, 1840: “What would be the effect produced upon Wages, if the rich should adopt the practice of expending a large portion of their income on menial servants and retainers, and a smaller portion in the purchase of Commodities?” Senior’s question was discussed on 5 March: “What is the connection between the price of Provisions and the Price of Labour?”
[1 ]MS at Trinity College, Cambridge. Dated on internal evidence.
[2 ]“American Philosophy: Emerson’s Works,” by Richard Monckton Milnes, Baron Houghton (1809-85), appeared in the London and Westminster Review, XXXIII (Mar. 1840), 345-72.
[3 ]Carlyle’s Chartism (London: Fraser, 1840), actually appeared in December, 1839. Mill had read it in manuscript just before publication; see CW, Vol. XIII, p. 414.
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/318, n.p. (before India Draft 135) India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 243.
[2 ]Further comments by Cabell on the cession of this territory are contained in his Draft 135, which follows Mill’s letter in L/P&S/6/318.
[1 ]MS fragment in the Pforzheimer Collection, New York Public Library. Dated on internal evidence.
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/317, n.p. (before India Draft 61), India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 228.
[1 ]MS not located; typescript McCrimmon. For the dating, see the Introduction, p. xiv above.
[2 ]Charles Wetherby Reynell; see Letter 227.1 above.
[3 ]The announcement appeared in the June number of Vol. XXXIV, on the verso of the Table of Contents: “The present number of this Review appears under a new Proprietorship and Editorship, but without any changes in the principles, nor, it is hoped, in most of the contributors, among whom the present proprietors had long been numbered. . . . / No one connected with the proprietorship or editorship of the London Review being concerned in the present management, the word ‘London,’ which had been annexed as part of the title on the junction of the London and Westminster Reviews in 1836 will henceforth be dropped, and the Review will appear under its original title of the Westminster Review. / The only new features intended to be introduced into the management are exemplified on the present occasion by the graphic illustrations appended to the article which heads the number, and the miscellaneous notices which conclude it.”
[4 ]The “note” is Letter 277, CW, Vol. XIII, pp. 421-2; the source of the other offer, which was not accepted, is unknown.
[1 ]MS not located; typescript McCrimmon. For the dating, see Introduction, p. xv above.
[2 ]I.e., concerning the transfer of the London and Westminster to Cole and William Edward Hickson (1803-70), educational and municipal reformer.
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/319, n.p. (before India PC 2674), India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 250.
[2 ]Mill had been with his mother and sisters in Falmouth, attending his younger brother Henry; see Letter 284.1 below.
[3 ]Richard Jenkins (1785-1853) was Chairman, and William Butterworth Bayley (1782-1860) Deputy Chairman of the Court of Directors at this time.
[4 ]For Cameron, see Letter 163.1 above. He had been responsible for the “Report . . . of His Majesty’s Commissioners of Inquiry, upon the Judicial Establishments and Procedure in Ceylon” (31 Jan., 1832), PP, 1831-32, XXXII, 119-52.
[1 ]MS at the Wordsworth Trust, Dove Cottage, Grasmere. Addressed: Dr Calvert / Falmouth. Postmark: 25 April, 1840.
Calvert, whom Mill had met in Rome the previous year (see Letter 253.1 above), was staying in Falmouth for ill-health early in 1840, and there met the Fox family and the Mills. In March, Mill had joined his mother and sisters Clara and Harriet, who were attending his second youngest brother Henry (1820-40) in his last illness. The Foxes, with whom the Mills also became very friendly, were Robert Were (1789-1877), his wife Maria (née Barclay) (1786-1858), and their children, Anna Maria (1816-97), Robert Barclay (1817-55), and Caroline (1819-71), for whom Mill prepared a “Calendar of Odours” of flowers (in CW, Vol. XXXI, pp. 257).
[2 ]Probably William McDowell (b. 1794), who practised in Falmouth as a cabinet-maker, upholsterer, and auctioneer.
[3 ]Henry had died of tuberculosis on 4 April, at the age of nineteen.
[4 ]William John Coope (1809-70), rector of Falmouth 1838-70.
[5 ]Mill’s letter to Sterling of 22 April, is in CW, Vol. XIII, pp. 428-9. Sterling had met Calvert in Madeira in 1837.
[6 ]Henry Francis Cunningham (dates unknown, but active in Falmouth artistic circles 1837-43), made portraits of John and Henry Mill.
[7 ]Probably Frederick Charles Bullmore (1801-96), the surgeon who had attended Henry Mill.
[1 ]MS at the Wordsworth Trust, Dove Cottage, Grasmere. Addressed: Dr Calvert / Falmouth. Postmark: May 1840.
[2 ]See Letter 284.1, above.
[3 ]The Club, made up of Sterling’s friends, was founded in 1838 after his return from Madeira; it met monthly for dinner and discussion. A list of forty-one members is given in Carlyle’s Life of Sterling (London: Chapman and Hall, 1851), p. 208.
[4 ]Samuel Wilberforce (1805-73) was then rector of Brixton, Isle of Wight, and later prominent as Bishop of Oxford. His brother Robert (1802-57) was rector of East Farleigh, Kent, and then (in 1840) of Burton Agnes, Yorkshire; he later converted to Roman Catholicism. Neither is listed in the original membership of the Sterling Club.
[5 ]Two of Mill’s Despatches from the Examiner’s Office of the East India Company: “Affairs of the Guicowar” (2 July, 1840), partly printed in PP, 1852-53, LXIX, 259; and “Dispute between the Rao of Cutch and Certain Wagur Chiefs” (8 July, 1840); listed as Nos. 979 and 980 in CW, Vol. XXX, App. A.
[6 ]An allusion to Mill’s well-known articles, “Bentham” and “Coleridge,” in the London and Westminster Review, respectively VII & XXIX (Aug. 1838), 467-506 (in Essays on Ethics, Religion, and Society, CW, Vol. X [Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1969], pp. 75-115), and XXXIII (Mar. 1840), 257-302 (in CW, Vol. X, pp. 117-63).
[7 ]On 6 April, 1842, Mill proposed to John William Parker a collection of his articles; nothing came of it, however, until 1859, when Parker brought out Dissertations and Discussions in two volumes. (A third was added in 1867, and a fourth, posthumously, in 1875.) For his later description of the revisions, see the “Preface” to Dissertations and Discussions, CW, Vol. X, pp. 493-4.
[8 ]Not located.
[9 ]James Stephen, “Works of the Author of the Natural History of Enthusiasm,” Edinburgh Review, LXXI (Apr. 1840), 220-63, is ostensibly a review of Physical Theory of Another Life. By the Author of “Natural History of Enthusiasm.” The invented title is ascribed to Isaac Taylor (1759-1829), engraver and later non-Conformist pastor of Ongar, author of practical as well as uplifting works for the young.
[10 ]As the Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th ed. explains, when potatoes lie above ground, “they become green and have an acrid taste, which renders them unpalatable to human beings, and as poisonous qualities are produced similar to those of many Solanaceae [e.g., henbane, deadly nightshade] they are unwholesome.”
[11 ]Sartor Resartus, 2nd ed. (Boston: Munroe, 1837), p. 285 (Bk. III, Chap. x). The allusion is to Diogenes Teufelsdröckh’s account of the sect of Drudges (as compared to the Dandies), who live on “Potatoes-and-Point.” Teufelsdröckh pretends not to know the meaning of “Point,” which derives from the poor “pointing” with their potato towards bacon, cheese, or other inaccessible extras, and then eating the potato ungarnished.
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/319, n.p. (before India Draft 286), India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 251.
[2 ]The variations appear on pp. [496-500] of PC 2695, in L/P&S/6/319.
[3 ]The opinion of the Governor-General, George Eden (1784-1849), Earl of Auckland, is given ibid., pp. 529-.
[4 ]The Begum had apparently accused Major W. Borthwick; Political Agent for Mehidpur, of misappropriating funds paid to the Government.
[5 ]A copy of the Memorandum from Henry Willock (1788/89-1858) follows Mill’s letter, ibid. Both he and Neil Benjamin Edmonstone (1765-1841) were Directors of the Company.
[1 ]MS not located; typescript McCrimmon. Dated by Cole’s participation in the editing of the Westminster, from which he withdrew after the June number, published on 26 May (Cole’s diary).
[2 ]Mill had not favoured the introduction of the section headed “Critical and Miscellaneous Notices,” though he contributed three notices to the September number; see Essays on Philosophy and the Classics, CW, Vol. XI (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1978), pp. 239-43; Vol. I, pp. 517-21; and Vol. XVIII, pp. 149-52.
[1 ]MS in the Varnhagen von Ense Collection, Jagiellonian Library, Cracow. Addressed: Thomas Carlyle Esq. / 5 Cheyne Row / Chelsea.
Dated from Caroline Fox, Memories of Old Friends, 2nd ed., 2 vols. (London: Smith, Elder, 1882), Vol. I, pp. 203-4, where she describes an evening with the Carlyles at the Mills’ Kensington home on Wednesday, 3 June, 1840.
[2 ]Jane Baillie Carlyle (née Welsh) (1801-66).
[1 ]MS copy in L/P&S/6/318, n.p. (before India Draft 165), India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 239.
[2 ]“Memorandum on the Distinctive Character of the Rampore Jageer and on the Equity and Policy of Resuming or Continuing It after the Decease of the Present Head of the Rohillas, the Nawab Ahmed Alli Khaun,” dated 10 June, 1840, and signed by Edmonstone, follows Mill’s letter in L/P&S/6/318, n.p.
[3 ]James Cosmo Melvill (1792-1861) held the most senior position in the Home Establishment as Secretary of the Company.
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/319, n.p. (after Bombay PC 2726), India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 979.
[2 ]Jenkins and Bayley (see Letter 281.1 above) served for two consecutive years.
[1 ]MS in the possession of Professor Arnold Heertje, University of Amsterdam.
[2 ]The letter from John Pringle Nichol has not been located. During 1840, Nichol was commissioning new equipment for the Glasgow observatory. The matter had evidently been discussed during the Foxs’ recent visit to London. Cf. CW, Vol. XIII, p. 436. Robert Were Fox was an inventor of scientific instruments.
[3 ]Mary Stanger (1804-90), John Calvert’s younger sister.
[1 ]MS at the Ueno Library, Kyoto City, Japan. Dated from Henry Cole’s withdrawal from his association with Hickson in the London and Westminster during July (Cole’s diary).
[2 ]Not further identified.
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/318, n.p. (before India Draft 165), India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 239.
[2 ]See Letter 287.1 above.
[3 ]See Letter 290.1 above.
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/320, n.p. (before India Draft 624, by Cabell, which comments on this letter), India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 260.
[2 ]Sergeant Spankie was Standing Counsel to the East India Company, and George Grey (1799-1882) was Judge Advocate General at this time.
[3 ]Paragraph 64, relating to villages within the territory of Nasir-ud-Daula, Nizam of Hyderabad (ruled 1829-57), in which the chief of “the Bhoonslah family” had hereditary rights to revenue, and the Board’s addition to it, are in L/P&S/6/320, pp. 395-[8a].
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/320, n.p. (before India Draft 624 and Letter 294.2 above), India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 260.
[2 ]See Letter 294.2 above.
[3 ]Raghuji III (1818-53).
[4 ]The first Afghan War, in 1839, had resulted from Lord Auckland’s attempt to restore to power Shah Shuja (1780-1842), the exiled King of Afghanistan. Lieutenant-Colonel Claude Martine Wade (1794-1861) had had singular success in forcing the Khyber Pass and capturing Kabul.
[5 ]Mill is presumably thinking of Akbar II, who was titular ruler of the district 1806-37.
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/322, n.p. (before Bombay PC 2954), India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 988.
[2 ]Cabell’s letter immediately precedes Mill’s in L/P&S/6/322.
[3 ]James Sutherland, Political Agent in Gujerat.
[4 ]The matter of the transfer of the zillah, or district, is raised in paragraph 8, pp. 169-, ibid.
[5 ]James Strachan Lang, Political Agent in the Mahi Kantha.
[1 ]MS in the University of Iowa Library, Iowa City.
[2 ]At the meeting, on Tuesday, 15 June, a petition for free trade written by Mill was approved. For the petition, which was printed in the Morning Chronicle on 17 June, p. 6, see CW, Vol. V, pp. 761-3, and Vol. XXIV, pp. 803-6. Mill “had a great share in getting up the public meeting” (CW, Vol. XIII, p. 478), which was described in the Spectator, 19 June, p. 580.
[1 ]MS in the William R. Perkins Library, Duke University.
Richard Bentley (1794-1871), publisher.
[2 ]Nothing is known of Mill’s earlier approach on this matter, and the effort seems to have been fruitless.
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/328, n.p. (before Bombay Draft 356), India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 1015.
Thomas Nelson Waterfield (1799-1862), Cabell’s successor as Senior Clerk in the Secret and Political Department.
[2 ]“Treaty with the Peishwah, Dated 13th June, 1817,” PP, 1818, XI, 346-50, concluded an agreement among Baji Rao II (1775-1851?), Peshwa of the Marathas, Arnand Rao, Gaikwar of Baroda (ruled 1800-1819), and the East India Company.
[3 ]A copy of James Rivett Carnac’s letter immediately follows Mill’s in L/P&S/6/328; the following quotation is on p. 41.
[4 ]“Treaty between the East India Company and the Peshwa, Concluded at Bassein, the 31st December, 1802,” PP, 1803-04, XII, 90-3.
[1 ]MS in the Houghton Library, Harvard University. Dated tentatively by the postscript. Richard Monckton Milnes, known to Mill from about 1840, attended the meeting of the Political Economy Club (of which he never became a member) on 3 March, 1842, when Mill, but not Buller, attended.
[2 ]For Peacock, see Letter 237.2, above. John Forbes Royle (1799-1858), surgeon and naturalist, who shared Mill’s botanical interests, was in charge of East India Company correspondence relating to vegetable production.
[1 ]MS in the William R. Perkins Library, Duke University.
John William Parker (1792-1870), printer and publisher, who had agreed to bring out Mill’s A System of Logic, Ratiocinative and Inductive (published February 1843); CW, Vols. VII-VIII (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1973). Parker remained Mill’s publisher until the business was transferred to Longman in 1864.
[2 ]In his earlier letter to Parker (CW, Vol. XIII, p. 514), Mill mentioned “some 25 or 30 copies.”
[1 ]MS at Kokugakuin University, Tokyo.
[2 ]I.e., the layout of the pages for Mill’s System of Logic.
[3 ]Sheets were sent to Armand Marrast (1801-52), who had edited La Tribune and Le National, but whom Mill correctly thought would not complete the work (see CW, Vol. XIII, pp. 587 and 632). No French version appeared until 1886, when the 6th ed. was translated by Louis Peisse.
[4 ]John Austin, then living in Prussia, had proposed to review the System of Logic in the Edinburgh Review (see CW, Vol. XIII, pp. 527-8); he failed to do so, and no review ever appeared in the Edinburgh.
[1 ]MS in the possession of Professor Toshio Ohfuchi, Nihon University, Tokyo.
[2 ]Apparently Kemble had indicated unwillingness to publish the article, which Mill had forwarded to him (see CW, Vol. XIII, p. 515), by John Phillips Potter (1793-1861). He changed his mind, however, and “The Philosophy of Socrates” appeared in the British and Foreign Review, XIV (Feb. 1843), 289-333. The publisher was Richard Taylor (1781-1858).
[1 ]MS in the Varnhagen von Ense Collection, Jagiellonian Library, Cracow. Dated by the librarian.
[2 ]Mill is replying to Carlyle’s request for autographs, on behalf of Karl August Varnhagen von Ense (1785-1858), Prussian diplomat and biographer. The autographs are, in addition to those identified above, of Henry Peter Brougham (1778-1868), judge and prolific writer; Ram Mohun Roy (1774-1833), Indian reformer, who became known to the Bentham circle while on visits to England; Alexander Burnes (1805-41), a political officer in India who travelled extensively, and was killed in an Afghan uprising; Henry Petty-Fitzmaurice (1780-1863), Marquis of Lansdowne, prominent Whig statesman; and Henry John Temple (1784-1865), Viscount Palmerston, an even more prominent Whig politician.
[1 ]MS in the Hill Memorial Library, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge. Headed in Mill’s hand: “Copy of my letter to Empson in answer to his disclaimer of intention to offend—December 1843.”
William Empson (1791-1852), later editor of the Edinburgh Review 1847-52, author of “Jeremy Bentham,” Edinburgh Review, LXXVIII (Oct. 1843), 460-516, which provoked Mill’s “Letter to the Editor of the Edinburgh Review on James Mill,” ibid., LXXIX (Jan. 1844), 267-71 (in CW, Vol. I, pp. 533-8).
[2 ]Macvey Napier (1776-1847) was then editor of the Edinburgh Review; Mill wrote to him on 14 October, 1843, asking that a reply to Empson’s article be printed (CW, Vol. XIII, pp. 598-9). At the end of the first paragraph of Mill’s article, as printed, appeared: “I mean the late Mr. James Mill, my father.” “Son” does not appear in the article, but does in the accompanying editorial note; see CW, Vol. I, p. 536.
[1 ]MS in L/P&S/6/334, n.p. (before India PC 4194), India Office Library and Records. See CW, Vol. XXX, App. A, No. 374.
[2 ]A copy of the letter from Hugh Stark, Assistant Secretary and Senior Clerk in the Revenue Department, immediately precedes Mill’s in L/P&S/6/334.
[3 ]Above the line, in pencil, is “A,” keyed to a note at the foot of the page, in another hand: “This is, I imagine, a mistake—five per cent is deducted from all salaries on account of the Fund.”
[4 ]In the same hand, interlined in pencil: “then—the other half is given gratuitously—”.
[5 ]Similar interlineation: “because its credit is so bad that people will not lend to it at a lower rate.”
[6 ]Similar interlineation: “rather, which Chundoo Loll, at that time, was willing to promise—”.
[7 ]Similar interlineation over the last sentence: “that is—we should make him pay—consequently we give our guarantee—but these officers cannot be allowed to have the advantage of both Hydrabad interest & British security.”
[1 ]MS in L/F/2/82, No. 31 of April 1844, India Office Library and Records.
[2 ]George Grote Mill (ca. 1825-53), Mill’s youngest brother, who served in the Home Establishment of the East India Company from 1844-48, when he moved to Madeira, on account of ill health.
[1 ]MS in the Reed Collection, Dunedin Public Library, New Zealand. Published in MNL, XXIII (Winter 1988), 23, edited by Eric W. Nye.
[2 ]Mill had offered to Kemble the article that eventually appeared as “Duveyrier’s Political Views of French Affairs,” not in the British and Foreign Review but in the Edinburgh Review, LXXXIII (Apr. 1846), 435-74 (in CW, Vol. XX, pp. 295-316); see CW, Vol. XIII, pp. 627 and 632-3.
[3 ]Mill had earlier written to Kemble to introduce David Masson (1822-1907), a Scot who became a prominent man of letters. No article by him appeared in the British and Foreign Review, though he proposed one on Wallace; see CW, Vol. XIII, p. 628.
[4 ]J.P. Thommerel published in the 1830s and 1840s on English prose and poetry.
[1 ]MS in the Yale University Library consists of a single page, containing two extracts in an unknown hand, headed respectively, as here, “Extract B” and “A” (see Letter 447.2 below), with a page of accounts verso.
[2 ]This square-bracketed note by the copyist refers to the accounts.
[1 ]See Letter 447.1, n1.
[* ]Copyist’s note: There is no other date; but the note was clearly written subsequently to Kindersley’s opinion.
[2 ]Richard Torin Kindersley (1792-1879), a barrister, K.C. 1835, active in Chancery.
[1 ]MS in the Bodleian Library.
John Hamilton Thom (1808-94) had founded, with James Martineau and John James Tayler, the Prospective Review in February 1845. He had previously edited the Christian Teacher, and while that seems an unlikely place for Mill to submit manuscripts, Thom was known to Mill through Joseph Blanco White.
[2 ]Not identified.
[3 ]If the identification of Thom is correct, and if any of the “papers” were accepted, the most likely article is “The White Lady and Undine,” Prospective Review, I (May 1845), 275-82.
[1 ]MS in the Pierpont Morgan Library, watermarked 1844. Since 26 August was a Tuesday in 1845, that is the likely year.
[1 ]MS in the Pierpont Morgan Library. Dated by a letter from Beaumont to Alexis de Tocqueville of the same date.
Henry Reeve (1813-95), nephew of Sarah Austin, was from 1837 an official of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
[2 ]Gustave Auguste de Beaumont de la Bonninière (1802-66), writer on social and political topics, was visiting London for a week or two.
[3 ]Philip Meadows Taylor (1808-76), a cousin of Reeve’s, in the military service of the East India Company, had been Resident in Shorapore after pacifying it in 1841. An unsuccessful attempt was made in 1845 to replace him as Resident by a member of the Company’s civil service. See two earlier letters to Reeve on this matter, CW, Vol. XIII, pp. 680-1.
[1 ]MS, in Harriet Taylor’s hand, in the possession of Professor Arnold Heertje, University of Amsterdam.
James Hutchinson, a surgeon, may be the person addressed; he was author of A Report of the Medical Management of the Native Jails throughout the Territories Subject to the Governments of Fort William and Agra (Calcutta, 1835), which was republished in 1845 as Observations on the General and Medical Management of Indian Jails.
[1 ]MS in the Houghton Library, Harvard University.
On 27 October, 1847, Mill had written to Parker concerning the contractual arrangements for his Principles of Political Economy; see CW, Vol. XIII, pp. 723-4. Another letter to Parker, in CW, Vol. XVII, p. 2006, with the conjectural date of November 1847, is evidently the first of this series, and should probably be dated 25 October.
[1 ]MS in the possession of Mr. John Spedding, Mirehouse, Keswick.
Thomas Story Spedding (1800-70), lawyer, author of Letters on the Poor-Laws (London: printed Odell, 1847).
[2 ]The letter has not been located.
[3 ]Letter VIII, “The Prospects of Society,” Letters on the Poor-Laws, pp. 51-81.
[4 ]See, e.g., ibid., p. 34.
[5 ]Established by the short-lived Provisional Government in Paris after the Revolution of 1848; see Le Moniteur Universel, 26 Feb., 1848, p. 503.
[1 ]MS at University College London.
The paper is watermarked 1848, the year when Chadwick was seeking an appointment for Alexander Bain (1818-1903), Mill’s chief Scottish disciple, to the Metropolitan Sanitary Commission. In the absence of other information it may be hypothesized that the reference is to Mill’s “Bain’s On the Application of Science to Human Health and Well-being,” Examiner, 2 Sept. 1848, p. 565 (in CW, Vol. XXV, pp. 1118-20), a laudatory review of Bain’s On the Application of Science to Human Health and Well-being (London and Glasgow: Griffin, 1848). Chadwick believed that Bain’s work would help establish his credentials for the position—which he did not receive (Bain, Autobiography [London: Longmans, Green, 1904], p. 197n).