by T. S. Eliot
TO The Editor of The Nation
Published 9 November 1918
Sir,
As an American of some years’ residence in this country, I feel impelled to call attention to the conflict actually taking place between President Wilson and his domestic opponents. The information obtainable through English newspapers is meagre and the importance of the issue may easily be overlooked. It bears not only on the coming peace conference, but on future Anglo-American relations.
The Republican party, now the opposition, has for some time past applied itself to the publication of its grievances against the party in power. Many of these grievances, including charges of administrative incompetence, concern the American people alone. Many are quite likely to be well founded; with the exception of a small number of men close to the President, the Democratic party is probably inferior to the Republican in the quality of its leaders. More recently, however, the Republicans have not confined themselves to criticism of internal policy or internal blunders; some of their spokesmen have attacked Mr Wilson’s foreign policy, or maintained tenets wholly opposed to that policy.
The effect of this campaign will soon be patent, if it is not already visible, in this country. So long as it was supposed that Mr Wilson was unanimously supported by his own countrymen, his policy was acclaimed with universal approval by the English Press; now that domestic dissension has asserted itself, we may expect to discover who are and who are not Mr Wilson’s sincere supporters in England.
You have stated in The Nation that ‘The old guard of the Republican party, with Senator Lodge at its head, is undoubtedly opposing, as openly as it dare, the whole League of Nations idea.’1
An examination of some of Mr Lodge’s speeches confirms the accuracy of this allegation. The attitude of Senator Lodge and his friends will not find favor with those elements in this country which have favored President Wilson’s peace programme. My question is, whether it should commend itself to any English opinion whatever.
Henry Cabot Lodge has been senator from Massachusetts for some years, and he has the best connexions in Boston society. He belongs to a section of the American public which has loyally supported Great Britain from the beginning of the war. And his peace programme certainly appears to offer as much material advantage to England as England could ask. He would seem, in short, to be at least as good a friend to England as President Wilson is. But his policy is potentially even more nationalistic than it is at present pro-British.2 The ‘Old Guard’ of his party is traditionally associated with a high protective tariff, and Senator Lodge is traditionally associated with the Old Guard. The history and composition of the Republican party and the present emergencies of its more conservative elements do not encourage one to believe that it would sacrifice business interest to international amity.
It would mean universal disaster if the participation of America in the war does not lead to closer friendships and understanding, to freer intercourse of ideas, between America and England. No understanding based on economic interest alone could survive; even the legitimate interests of the two countries may cause delicate situations; the economic interests of America and England are compatible, but not identical; there are difficulties to be solved, and suspicions to be dispelled. Should affairs be simultaneously directed by Extremist factions in both countries, it is hardly to be expected that the extremes would meet.
Nothing but ideas can bind the two countries together. Since the entry of America into the War, the Republican party has not yet succeeded in producing a single idea of importance. The question whether America should not have entered the war earlier is now a dead issue. The policy of President Wilson is the only one which offers any security for the continuance and development of Anglo-American harmony.
Yours, etc.,
T. S. Eliot.
1–‘Events of the Week’, N. 24 (2 Nov. 1918).
2–Henry Cabot Lodge represented Massachusetts in the US Senate, 1893–1924. As Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he successfully led the resistance to US participation in the League of Nations advocated by President Wilson, arguing in 1919 that entanglement ‘in the intrigues of Europe’ would endanger American moral leadership in the world.
TO Mary Hutchinson
MS Texas
9 November 1918
18 Crawford Mansions
Dear Mary,
Jack has I hope explained to you that I did not get your letter. I had been away from the bank for two weeks and my letters had not been sent on as I was expected in; and I only found it yesterday.
Under the circumstances, which I will explain, I should probably not have been in a frame of mind to be an acceptable guest, but I hope you will forgive and invite us later! (I forwarded your enclosure to Vivien).
I had been begged by the Navy Intelligence to leave the Bank and join them, as they greatly needed my services. They supposed that they had authority to enroll me, and did not discover that they did not until they came to do so. Then they cabled Washington, kept me hanging about for two weeks – until I cut the matter short by returning to the Bank, as there was no prospect that the Navy would pay me for the lost time. I have got out of them a letter apologising for the blunder, but I was very angry at their incompetence. Perhaps it is too early to say that it was a lucky escape –
I’m glad you like Webster1 – but I think the first of the lot is the best!
Received a v. dull book of poems from Aldous.2 I wonder what you are doing – in hiding, or with a houseful of visitors. Do you remain enough aloof from politics and war to be able to put your mind on worthy matters? I can’t – I have even been ‘impelled’ to write to the Nation. Lewis, who has been trying to regain health in the country, writes me that the medicine he needs is peace. And freedom from interruptions, as I believe! He is really very seedy.
Sincerely
T.S.E.
1–‘Whispers of Immortality’, which opens ‘Webster was much possessed by death’ (Little Review, Sept. 1918). The ‘first’ of the four poems published there was ‘Sweeney among the Nightingales’.
2–AH, The Defeat of Youth and Other Poems (1918).
TO Hugh Walpole1
MS Valerie Eliot
10 November 1918
18 Crawford Mansions
Dear Mr Walpole,
The reason for my not having answered your letter before is simply that it was forwarded to Lloyds Bank. I have not been there for two weeks (until yesterday) as I was on leave of absence trying to get a position promised me by the U.S. Navy – and which, owing to red tape, has not materialised.
So that I hope you have not given me up quite, but are willing to arrange another meeting. I am now taking up some new and rather intricate work at my bank, so that lunch time is brief and unsatisfactory. Would it be possible for us to dine together? Or I could probably arrange lunch on Saturday.
My wife is returning to town some time this week, and I know would be very glad if you would dine with us next week (if we cannot meet sooner), as she has just read The Dark Forest2 with great pleasure.
I should be interested to know your opinion of my latest stuff in the Little Review. It isn’t so much more time that I want – but Peace and peace of mind and freedom.3
Sincerely yours
T. S. Eliot
I think Wednesday is my best night this week – could you dine here with me?
1–Hugh Walpole (1884–1941), novelist and man of letters.
2–Walpole’s novel The Dark Forest (1916) drew on his wartime experiences with the Red Cross.
3–The following day was Armistice Day.
TO St John Hutchinson
MS Texas
10 November 1918
18 Crawford Mansions
Dear Hutchinson,
I rang up your office last week, but you were out, so you ought to have no comment to make on my absences (which were alleged by the telephone operator – I never go out to tea).
I am at work again having given u
p the Navy as a bad job – this ends my patriotic endeavours.
I disinterred Mary’s letter at the Bank – it had been kept there with others instead of being forwarded, as they expected me in. I am sorry about that and have written to apologise.
What is the chance of seeing you now?
Yrs
T. S. Eliot
TO Virginia Woolf1
MS Berg
12 November 1918
18 Crawford Mansions
Dear Mrs Woolf
Please pardon me for not having responded to your note immediately – on Mondays I never have a moment up till late at night. And I was not furthermore quite sure of being able to come, as I thought that my wife might be arranging to return on Friday evening, but I now hear that she is coming tomorrow.
I shall look forward to Friday with great pleasure.2
Sincerely yours
T. S. Eliot
1–Virginia Woolf, novelist and critic: see Glossary of Names.
2–In her diary for 15 Nov., VW recorded of this first meeting with TSE: ‘Mr Eliot is well expressed by his name – a polished, cultivated, elaborate young American, talking so slow, that each word seems to have special finish allotted it. But beneath the surface, it is fairly evident that he is very intellectual, intolerant, with strong views of his own,&a poetic creed. I am sorry to say that this sets up Ezra Pound & Wyndham Lewis as great poets, or in the current phrase “very interesting” writers. He admires Mr Joyce immensely. He produced 3 or 4 poems for us to look at – the fruit of two years, since he works all day in a Bank, & in his reasonable way thinks regular work good for people of nervous constitutions. I became more or less conscious of a very intricate & highly organised framework of poetic belief; owing to his caution, & his excessive care in the use of language we did not discover much about it. I think he believes in “living phrases” & their difference from dead ones; in writing with extreme care, in observing all syntax & grammar; & so making this new poetry flower in the stem of the oldest’ (Diary of Virginia Woolf, I: 1915–1919, ed. Anne Olivier Bell [1977], 218–19). See also VW’s letter to Roger Fry (Letters, II, 295–6)
TO John Quinn
TS NYPL (MS)
13 November 1918
18 Crawford Mansions
Dear Mr Quinn,
I have received your letter of September 27th.1 I must say that your kindness to me, who am personally unknown to you, has been quite extraordinary, and such as I am not likely to forget. I realise also that you are a very busy man, and that you are not yet recovered from a very severe illness.
My vicissitudes in connection with the Army and Navy have been surprising. Everything turned to red tape in my hands. Of course I am glad now, as the war is ended, that I did not get in, but I was very much annoyed at the time. I was, as you know, collecting testimonials with a view to a commission in the Army Intelligence, through Major Turner. Just as I had secured testimonials which should have satisfied anybody, I was sent for by the Navy Intelligence, who said that I had been mentioned to them as the most suitable man available for certain work of theirs, and said that if I could join them as soon as possible they would make me a Chief Yeoman and raise me to a commission in a few months. I accordingly abandoned the Army, arranged to leave the bank, and told the Navy that I would come to enrol in two weeks. When I did so they were not ready – they had cabled to Washington, as they said they had to do in any case, as a matter of routine, (though they had not mentioned this fact in the first place) and not received an answer. So I waited about a week, having left the bank. Then they sent word to me that the permission was received, so I went to enrol, and had commenced this ceremony before they discovered that as I had already registered for Military Service (as all citizens are supposed to) they did not have sufficient authority. I pointed out that all citizens of military age were registered, or if not that they lost their American rights and were automatically absentees from the British Army, but it was no use, they cabled again. After I had hung about in this way for two weeks, out of a job, I decided that I could not stand the financial loss, especially as I was assured that it would be impossible to get any money out of the Government to cover me for this period, after having given up my work at the bank at the Navy’s request. So I returned to the bank, having wasted a month of time and been out of work for two weeks. Then the armistice came, and I was very glad – anyway, it was not my fault that I had not been able to make myself useful to the country.
I am very grateful to you for all the trouble you were at.
I will do as you suggest with regard to Knopf;2 as yet I have had no acknowledgement from him of having received the manuscript, and possibly he will not want to print it.
I wonder why the Little Review does not gain subscriptions in America.
I sometimes think that with us (Americans) the serious has to be the pedantic, and that only the pedantic and the cheap are understood: the Saturday Evening Post, and the Dial or Atlantic Monthly. But of course there are many things about the L. Review which I do not care for, and I dare say you would agree with me. Anyway, its present existence is that of a Coalition Government, satisfying nobody.
With the most cordial wishes for your improvement in health,
Sincerely yours
T. S. Eliot
1–Quinn had written, ‘You would be exempt in this country because of your hernia, and also because of your dependencies.’ On EP’s ‘instructions’, he had sent a letter to Major Turner on TSE’s behalf, a copy of which he enclosed.
2–Quinn had advised TSE to send a statement about himself and ‘what the book stands for’; otherwise, Knopf was ‘likely to make breaks, particularly with reference to essays and poems’, as he had done with EP’s Pavannes and Divisions.
TO His Mother
TS Houghton
13 November 1918
18 Crawford Mansions
My Dearest Mother,
It seems to me months since I have written to you. I never forget to write, but as I explained to father in writing a week ago, the experiences I have been through have been paralysing. It has been just like a Chancery suit – dragging on and on and on, and always apparently about to end so that one could write and say definitely. I have realised how sweet and kind you have been all through, and how cleverly you seemed to divine what was going on and what I was feeling, and you never reproached me for not writing. Also you and father have been splendid in trying to help me. I have got both the Sims and Slocum cables. Of course they are too late for the purpose for which I wanted them, all the same I think I will try to present them merely for the pleasure of a social call, and because it is due to the people who signed them.
When I wrote to father the Navy affair was still dragging on. By Thursday I decided that as no answer had been received I must throw the thing up, as I could not afford the expense. So I secured a letter from the Navy which partially explained and deplored the business, and went to the bank. The Lloyds managers were very sympathetic, and delighted to have me back. So they signed an appeal for my exemption, and I started in to learn some new and more intricate work, and two days later the armistice was signed. So it is really all for the best that I did not get into the Navy. One may be very useful, but it is not the same thing after the fighting has ceased, especially when one is badly needed elsewhere. And the salaries of the whole bank staff are going to be very largely increased all round, and I may get another rise of my own at Christmas, besides.
Anyway, no one can say that I did not try my best to get into Army or Navy.
Now as soon as conditions become normal, it may not be for some months yet, I shall apply for leave of absence (without pay) for an extended time for a visit to America. After that I should hope to come for a visit every summer, but this first time I want plenty of time – of course the sooner the better! – but I doubt if I can be spared before some months – perhaps the summer. Anyway, you may count upon seeing me as soon as it can be arranged – how wonderful that will be.
&
nbsp; I have not time to write more now. I will write and tell you about London on Monday last, I was in the middle of it all, in the City.1
With very much love and gratitude
Your devoted son
Tom
I cabled you Monday.
1–The Daily Mirror reported how on 11 Nov., Armistice Day, ‘Bells burst forth into joyful chimes … bands paraded the streets followed by cheering crowds of soldiers and civilians and London generally gave itself up wholeheartedly to rejoicing.’
TO J. H. Woods
TS Professor David G. Williams
20 November 1918
18 Crawford Mansions
Dear Professor Woods,
I am extremely grateful to you for your kindness, both in writing a testimonial for me, which I shall prize, and for writing to my mother. The whole affair is now, happily let us say, a dead issue. The Armistice was the conclusion of three very trying months for me. I at least did my best to get into some service. I was graded as unfit for active service, and wanted to secure a post in the Intelligence. The Army Intelligence involved making a collection of opinions; I levied eighteen letters of recommendation from English friends, and then had to have a few American ones as well. Just as I received yours I was offered a post in the Navy Intelligence, but after making all my arrangements I found that they did not have the proper authority to enroll me! The affair dragged on for some weeks, and finally I returned to my work at Lloyds Bank, as there seemed to be no prospect of the Navy’s reimbursing me for the time I was losing. The Armistice was signed immediately after.
