Treasury Chambers.—A regulation is to be made to extend the period for which the Treasury can authorise increases in the fiduciary note issue over the statutory amount.
Has made a contribution on Ammon’s behalf towards the cost of a portrait of the late Speaker (see 1/23). Parliament may be recalled early.
Offers suggestions about ‘pay-as-you-go’ tax.
Treasury Chambers.—Acknowledges the receipt of his letter to the Chancellor (Wood) about ‘pay-as-you-go’ tax (see 3/325).
Treasury Chambers.—Has been on holiday. Will be glad to discuss Pethick-Lawrence’s remarks on ‘pay-as-you-go’ when Parliament reassembles.
12 Buckingham Palace Mansions, Victoria, S.W.1.—Returns thanks for sympathy (on the death of her husband).
Treasury Chambers.—Will discuss the US currency proposals with him when Parliament reassembles.
University of Chicago, Yerkes Observatory, Wisconsin.—Summarises some recent work on the convection zone in stellar atmospheres.
179 City Road, E.C.1.—Praises him for going through with his speech in the House of Commons in spite of his illness. Comments on his own speech and on John Anderson’s reply. Urges the need for a fundamental reform of the India Office.
Praises his book Grey Eminence, and discusses the involvement of mystics in politics. Refers to Gandhi’s inflexibility on certain subjects, and suggests that his policy may result in calamities comparable to those created by Father Joseph.
—————
Transcript
29th. November, 1943.
Dear Huxley,
A colleague M.P. {1} who had read my autobiography insisted that I should read your book “Grey Eminence” {2}, and I have now done so with absorbing interest. The double riddle that you set yourself to solve, first as to why a mystic should engage in politics at all and secondly, why if he did so he should play such an abominable part, is in itself a most fascinating one; and your solution appears to me as nearly satisfactory as any appreciation of somebody else’s pyschology† can possibly be.
I agree broadly with you that it is not the function of a mystic to engage in “activities” at all and that he is wise to refrain from so doing until he has reached a degree of spiritual discernment which enables him to discriminate between good and bad action. I think you are also right in pointing the danger of that school of Christian mystics who transfer their attempt at union with the Central Life to union with Christ (though no doubt some of them believe that this is the same thing). It seems to me moreover that if Father Joseph had concentrated his mind on Christ the Lover of men who suffered little children to come to Him and told us that we must enter the Kingdom as little children, he might not have been so regardless of human suffering as he became in contemplating the sufferings of Christ on the Cross.
Of course it is in general true that a man of some eminence in his own sphere should hesitate before entering a sphere other than his own. I have noticed the unfortunate result of neglecting this in many cases and I have noted also that the most eminent are usually too wise to fall into this mistake.
But for those whose sphere is religion and who have attained to {3} some measure to union with the Central Life the danger is much greater, both for themselves and also for the public who are wont to assume that their saintly life has given them a discernment in worldly af[f]airs which they do not necessarily possess. I was reading in The New Statesman a few weeks ago a remark which it is said was used by Oliver Cromwell to a number of Northern Ireland Divines “I beseech you in the bowels of Christ to think that ye may be mistaken”. The religieus† i4} is apt to assume that he is never mistaken and the words that fall from his lips belong to the category “Thus saith Zoroaster”.
I expect your mind has turned, as mine has done, from the mystic politician of the 17th century about whom you write to the Mahatma politician of our own day. I wonder whether it has occurred to you to write a companion volume dealing with his “activities”? If not, perhaps some future writer a century or two hence will write up the story and sum up the result in somewhat the same way that you have done with regard to Father Joseph.
I do not of course attribute to Gandhi the political malpractices performed by Father Joseph which seem so disreputable to us and even to his contemporaries. I have known Gandhi personally for a great many years and have been a great admirer of him; and I know his meticulous care to be fair and just. Nevertheless the result of his policy may bring upon India and indeed upon the whole world calamities comparable to those which Father Joseph created. I will give you three examples:—
1) Gandhi feels deeply the spiritual wrongs inflicted by Hindu castes on the untouchables and has his own approach to this question. But the untouchables must be saved his way and this makes him very intolerant of Ambedkar the leader of the untouchables. I saw this myself on the Round Table Conference and its sequel.
2) Gandhi preaches the spiritual view of continence. Therefore he will have nothing to do with birth control. But Gandhi’s spiritual doctrine is quite above the heads of the vast mass of his fellow countrymen. Therefore we have the appalling picture of an India already over populated, having some 50 million extra souls to its population in the course of the last ten years.
3) Gandhi has a spiritual conception of the independence of India. This makes him intolerant of any compromise and I think there is no doubt that it was his influence which caused the Cripss† olive branch to be rejected in the summer of 1942. This has resulted in the further drawing apart of the Hindus & British, of the Moslems & British, and the Hindus & Moslems; and though one can never predict the final closing of the gates of mercy, it may prevent a peaceful solution of the Indian problem for many years to come. I think that Gandhi himself has envisaged the breaking out of civil war.
In conclusion may I say once more what a great service I think you have rendered in writing such an amazingly interesting and penetrating book.
I remain,
Yours sincerely,
[blank]
—————
{1} Godfrey Nicholson. See 5/62.
{2} A study of François Leclerc du Tremblay (1577–1638), a French Capuchin monk more commonly known as ‘Père Joseph’ or ‘l’éminence grise’ (the grey eminence). He was the confidant and agent of Cardinal Richelieu, ‘l’éminence rouge’.
{3} Altered from ‘in’. ‘to’, the next word but two, should have been altered to ‘of’.
{4} Typed ‘religieuse’ and altered by hand to ‘religieus’.
† Sic.
House of Commons.—Comments on an enclosure (a copy of 5/61?), observing, with regard to Father Joseph and Gandhi, that ‘self-annihilation may lead to a frame of mind in which not only one’s own sufferings appear insignificant and unimportant, but also the sufferings of others’.
West Hackhurst, Abinger Hammer, Dorking.—His views on the notion of ‘art for art’s sake’ have changed since the war began. Mrs Barger has been ill.
—————
Transcript
West Hackhurst | Abinger Hammer | Dorking
29-12-43
Dear Pethick-Lawrence,
It was very good of you to write and a great encouragement to me. Art for Art’s sake always seemed an empty phrase until this {1} war but I have come to feel that, properly applied, it is valuable and a valuable corrective. I worked the idea out a little further and more provocatively in an article in Horizon which I could show you some time.
My mother joins me in good wishes to Mrs Pethick-Lawrence and yourself for 1944. Mrs Barger has alas been ill with influenza and a threat of pneumonia. I am afraid she developed them down here. I went to see her in her home on Monday and she is convalescent but wont be fit again for a month. I do hope that your household keeps all right. Please excuse this untidy scrawl but the cat would sit on my knee, and returned however firmly I repulsed him.
Thanking you very warmly for your kindness.
Yours v. sincerely
E M Forster
—————
{1} Altered from ‘the present’.
House of Commons.—Thanks him for his letter of congratulation (on his peerage).
Trinity College, Cambridge. - Goldstein's paper for the CPS [Cambridge University Physics Society] has been sent to Hardy by Hodge, and Hardy 'inevitably began playing about with the integrals'. Has no criticisms of Goldstein's 'way of dealing with them - it is straightforward and effective', but 'the following formal connections' may be of interest to him. Extensive mathematical notation and discussion follows, and the end of which Hardy concludes 'So your way of attacking the integral seems, in practise at any rate, much better than mine'. In a postscript he adds 'Some of your formulae set nasty problems for the printers', and suggests some changes.
In pencil; written on the back of what seem to be proof sheets for a mathematical paper by Hardy. Envelope addressed to Goldstein as 'Dr S. Goldstein, National Physical Laboratory, Teddington, Middlesex' and postmarked 'Cambridge 5 15 PM 1 Feb 1944'.
West Hackhurst, Abinger Hammer, Dorking.—Agrees to talk to the Peaslake League of Nations Union.
—————
Transcript
4–2–44
West Hackhurst, | Abinger Hammer | Dorking
Dear Mrs Pethick-Lawrence,
Thank you for your letter: Mrs Barger and I so much enjoyed coming over to day.
I have been thinking over the invitation from the Peaslake L. of N. U.; {1} my difficulty is that I have not been able to hit on a subject which is suitable. People are more and more inter-ested in the future, and it is a topic upon which I find myself more and [more] {2} doubtful and incompetent. Old age, I suppose!
I should like to come, though, and am free on Friday April 7th (I see it is Good Friday) or later in the year if this date is filled up.—Perhaps I shall be able to think of a subject by then, and perhaps you can suggest one.
Yours very sincerely, with every kind wish,
E M Forster
—————
{1} League of Nations Union.
{2} Omitted by mistake.
Trin[ity] Coll[ege], Cam[bridge]. - Has looked again at Goldstein's manuscript, and suggests changes, with mathematical notation. 'In the aggregate this will save quite a lot of space & look much nice'. Does not think it's necessary to return the manuscript, as 'the changes can be made easily by systematic instructions to the printer - less trouble to me as well as to you'.
Adds postscript asking Goldstein to think of ideas for Cambridge Tracts in Applied Mathematics, for which Hardy is 'editor designate'. Thinks that the present programme includes only his own paper with Rogosinski, Fourier Series, which will appear on 11 February, Smithies' Integral Equations and Copson's Asymptotic Expansions; the last two 'can hardly be got ready until after the war'. Notes that the series is 'by no means strong on the applied side. Of course, what is contemplated is very mathematical applied mathematics - I don't think 'proper physics' would fit in very well'.
Discusses arrangements for Forster’s forthcoming talk at Peaslake (see 1/284).
—————
Transcript
16th. February 1944.
Dear Mr. Forster,
I was so glad to get your most kind letter and delighted that you will come and give us a talk at Peaslake if we can arrange a convenient time for you. August is a holiday month for us. We do not usually arrange any gathering for that month and therefore we should be delighted to fix up an extra meeting to meet you and to consider any subject that you feel inclined to talk to us about. We shall esteem it as a great pleasure and privilege and I will await a note from you fixing the date.
Bank Holiday is on August 4th so I would suggest Friday August 11th or some subsequent date.
With very warmest greetings and many thanks,
Yours sincerely,
[blank]
E. M. Forster, Esq.,
West Hackhurst,
Abinger Hammer,
Dorking, Surrey.
179 City Road, E.C.1.—Returns a cutting about a road programme in India, which he read with interest.
Suggests times when they might meet to discuss the question of electoral reform.
Ritz Hotel, London, W.1.—Appoints a time to discuss the subject of Pethick-Lawrence’s letter (i.e. electoral reform; see 2/314).
(Carbon copy of a typed original.)
Beatrice Webb Memorial, 20 Grove End Gardens, London, N.W.8.—Introduces the Beatrice Webb Memorial Fund and asks them to support it.
(Mechanical copy of a typed original, with typed additions.)
70 Ferndene Road, S.E.24.—Alludes to a difference of opinion between them.
Sends him letters of introduction to Vida Goldstein (see 2/296) and Ellen Davies, his niece.
Introduces the Earl of Listowel, who is visiting Australia with a party of British MPs.
Sends a copy of the suggestions about the White Paper Cmd. 6438 (see 2/220-2, 2/254) which Pethick-Lawrence has sent to Keynes.
(Padmore is addressed as Principal Private Secretary to the Chancellor of the Exchequer.)
46 Gordon Square, Bloomsbury.—Thanks him for his suggestions on the White Paper (see 2/222), which will be carefully examined.