[Grace Toll Hall, Scripps College, Claremont]
Your letter of the 4th November was awaiting me on my return from Paris. I had hoped that I might find one. I will postpone the diary of my travels for another letter; it is too trivial to be included in this. IHale, Emilybirthdays, presents and love-tokens;w2TSE 'cables' EH roses;a9 amflowers and floraroses;c7sent to EH on birthday;a2 glad the roses arrived in time: roses were, as you may have guessed, only my second choice, and I am a little disappointed.
I am very grateful to you for your letter. For a long time now, ever since January, my mind has been tormented by certain doubts and worries. Your letter does not exactly relieve them, but it releases them; it seems to me that the time has come to say something of them.
You may have some clue from a doubt which I expressed or rather hinted at in a recent letter. I feel still more strongly now, that I must have cut a pretty poor figure in your eyes all this time – at best, a timid and irresolute person. IHale, Emilyrelationship with TSE;w9TSE's reasons against marrying;c5 should like you to know, once and for all, that there is nothing in this world that I would not give up without hesitation if I had even the slightest hope that you would accept me as your husband. It gives me a very odd feeling to write that word. IHale, EmilyTSE's love for;x2and the torment of resignation;b6 am thankful that it is only in occasional flashes that I have the slightest real perception of what that state would be like; for the most part, with work and distraction, never having known happiness I can get on pretty well without it. The notion of my needing any urging, to take any step which might possibly lead to that end, seems to me so grotesque that (I say again) I wonder what manner of man I must have seemed to you to be. Words can only serve up to a point, but indeed I have preferred – though I may have let myself go a very little now and then – not to try to make you realise my full feelings – I should not go on living if I realised them continuously myself.
Heretravels, trips and plansTSE's 1933 westward tour to Scripps;a8and a conversation about divorce;b5 is what I tried to say on New Year’s Eve – thoughEliot, Vivien (TSE's first wife, née Haigh-Wood)the possibility of divorcing;f2in common and canon law;a5 even up to then I swear I took for granted that you knew it already. TheChristianitydivorce;b5in church law;a3 position of the Church is completely uncompromising about the indissolubility of marriage. FranklyEliot, Vivien (TSE's first wife, née Haigh-Wood)the possibility of divorcing;f2against what TSE symbolises;a2, I doubt whether the future of my own single soul would be enough to weigh with me, though theoretically it ought to. IChristianityChristendom;b2TSE on his prominence within;a2 think that my responsibility to society counts more with me. I am – I can say it without the slightest vanity – the most conspicuous layman in the Church to-day, and my defection would be all the more significant because I was not born into it. I should of course be excommunicate, I should no longer take any part in Church affairs, and if I ever raised my voice to speak for the Faith or to attack paganism I should meet only with ridicule and contempt. I should not mind that, I believe, I am used to being attacked or misrepresented; but I could not bear the thought of others being weakened by my example, or of the triumph of the enemies of Christianity; the thought that I not only could do no further good, but that I had perhaps done irreparable harm. IEliot, Vivien (TSE's first wife, née Haigh-Wood)marriage to;e6TSE on entering into;a1 admit that my case is a little different from most; and at the time of my ‘marriage’ I was not a Christian and was married in a Registry Office. But such exceptions are not made, and cannot be made.
This is the greatest renunciation to make, that I could make. Neither power, nor fame, nor money not public opinion seems to me of any value.
To be quite frank in my confessions, I must not try to dramatise myself or set up as a hero! How can I be quite sure that even these motives would be strong enough to maintain my purpose, if I did not know that divorce was legally impossible? To put it quite briefly, I have no grounds for divorce; and to be divorced I should have to provide grounds – the only grounds in this country is adultery. Many men provide these either by living openly with the person they are going to marry after the divorce is granted, or by hiring a woman to simulate adultery by spending the night in a hotel. But for them there must be something that I should not have: the consent of the wife to bring a divorce suit. That I should never get. The consent has to be assured, and yet it cannot be legally given; for if it can be shown – and it is the business of the King’s Proctor to show it – that there is an understanding between husband and wife for her to divorce him, before any offence is actually committed, then that is ‘collusion’ and the divorce is not granted.
All these things I thought I made clear to you: but I did not, evidently. And up to this year I assumed – quite unjustifiably – that you knew them already. And this leads me to my second trouble, which is not relieved.
ItHale, Emilyrelationship with TSE;w9TSE fears having misled over;c6 has struck me that it may seem to you that all this time I have been deceiving you, and establishing a relation of ‘friendship’ under false pretences. It has struck me that if you had known what you know now you would have hesitated to correspond with me, or to allow me to come to see you in California. IfHale, EmilyTSE's love for;x2TSE doubts decision to declare;c2 there was such a misunderstanding between us, I would to God that I had never revealed my feelings to you as I did three years ago; if there was such a misunderstanding, it will torment me to my death. At least I can hope to convince you that I would never have done such a thing deliberately: even though that be little help. When I first wrote to you, it was an overwhelming impulse which perhaps I ought to have suppressed. But I had no intention of altering your feelings towards me; I meant only to leave it at that; I hoped, certainly that the tribute of seventeen years anguish and regret might give you some little, merited and legitimate pleasure, even if you were completely indifferent about me. And the whole time – even in delirium of excitement and newness, I thought that I was merely dealing with a fait accompli, (whatever the fait was) – that whether you married someone else or not, my letters would not have made the difference.
So you see I have been very unhappy and uneasy. I should like you to write in reply as frankly as you can: I mean to say to what extent you have condemned me and do condemn me. I am very very grateful to you, Emily dear, for all that you have given me in your letters. No woman in the world could have given me anything comparable; you have never disappointed my conception of you, and I am happy in the knowledge that my conception of you is not an ‘idealisation’. ThereHale, Emilyrelationship with TSE;w9EH again offered manumission from;c7 never has been, and never will be, anyone else. If you judge me unfavourably, I shall be sure that you are right. But in that case, for God’s sake let me disappear from your life. MyHale, Emilycorrespondence with TSE;w3TSE offers to cease;e8 correspondence with you is the last and only thing that I have, to give up: that is for you to say.
IHale, Emilyrelationship with TSE;w9EH writes to Ada concerning;c8 am glad that you wrote to Ada.1
My ink has run out, and I have no more. If anything is still puzzling or obscure, please tell me.
1.EH’s letter to Ada Sheffield has not been traced. Ada wrote to EH on 22 Oct. 1933, see above.