After refusing the Ingersoll matter I offered them Saturday, the Record today, when it is stale, prints a paragraph touching the matter.
The Times came out this morning with another of Jim Scovel's interviews with W. W.—which it needed no expert to divine to be utterly and shamelessly false.
WALT WHITMAN DINEDTom Donaldson, interviewed by Press reporter, gave a very significant talk—I liked it better than anything I have seen from Donaldson. Later in day came this telegram from Baker: "Notice gives date thirty-first instead of twenty-first I understand that same mistake occurs in Philada. announcements of course this error must be corrected immedy."
Baker writes me a long letter, giving new details in an interesting way.
No deliberating could have excited the talk the Academy refusal has raised in town—all in our favor. There needs be no stir from our side: the others have done it all for us. Everybody talks the affair. Men meet me on the street—some come to see me—to inquire after particulars. I wrote Morris last night—telling him of the telegram—and to Farson, informing him that we were about ready to sign contract. This afternoon we went to see Farson—talking various matters over, about posters, tickets, etc.—finally making contract in my name, Morris witnessing. Discussed as to how much of hall to reserve, finally deciding—if possible—all floor and part gallery. Examined stage. Got estimate on posters. Wrote Baker of these and many other details on my return home.
7:48 P.M. W. in his room reading. As it had rained pretty much all day, though abated now, W. had not been able to get out. Complains of his hearing still. Told me had been up to Harned's yesterday. "Nobody was there but Mr. Walsh—no strangers." Had not heard of Scovel matter in Times. Laughed heartily when finding Jim had signed that forged letter Matthew Arnold. Would he wish the thing contradicted? "No—not in print: I fully authorize you to tell the truth of things to any who may desire it, but I would not go beyond that. Of course, this is my advice only."
Morris took dinner with Gilchrist last evening—Percy with them. Herbert explained that his brother had no time to go over to see W. and that if he (Herbert) went alone, W. might think it showed disregard on Percy's part—so neither probably would get over. W. thought that "a peculiar explanation," and added, "There are fears of me yet. Every now and then I have reason to remember Mrs. Pine—her impulse—that so astonished Warren (she is a large, good woman, too) to rush out and pitch me, chair and nurse, into the street. And why? Because I had said of women, 'Women? What are women, anyhow? Nothing but a set of old cows!' And how had she known I said such a thing? Oh, she had been told! It is a good specimen brick of the work some people are doing for me, industriously, indefatigably—I suppose to be accounted for by that same magnetism, as they call it, which on the other hand secures me such frank, whole-hearted friendship as Bucke's and Kennedy's." But surely this had no explanation of Percy Gilchrist's absence? "No, I do not intend to say that: I can only say about their coming that if they have no impulse to come they certainly should not come." But he "admitted" there were "things in Herbert's recent course" which "mystified" him.
He thought Tom Donaldson's interview "very good" and "calculated to help the cause."
Took from his pocket a square envelope addressed to "Editor
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 181] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Post Newspaper," Camden—and asked me to mail it on my way up. "It is about the Ingersoll matter," he said. I asked, "Is it signed?" "No. I do not wish to appear, but my friends, who know my ways, will readily see who it is from." And he laughed over the other Post piece (on Ingersoll), the style of which had "strangely defeated Bucke and been penetrated by Ingersoll." We spoke of people to invite over—should one of them be Gilder? "No, not Gilder; it would not do to invite Gilder for Ingersoll." Expressed a gladness that the books had reached Ingersoll. I said at one point, "These Philadelphia business men can be very sympathetic with Siberian exiles—5000 miles away—and with Ben Franklin, 100 years old—but for the laborers whom they crowd down in our struggle for life, and for Ingersoll, who calls at their doors today, they have neither eye nor ear." W. exclaimed, "Oh! how good! And how like O'Connor that sounds!" And he asked, "Did you see the good notes from Harry Bonsall in the Post? They hit home—especially that about Franklin. I think Harry has done us a keen turn."
I told him a story of a Quaker who, hit on his one cheek, turned the other and was hit there also; then ripped off his coat, swore a great oath and said, "Now I have obeyed the scriptural injunction, I'm going to lick you like hell!" W. laughed a long while over this—said it was "as good a story as he had heard in a long while." Then added, "It reminds me of a Quaker story William O'Connor told often—enjoyed telling—of a merchantman boarded by pirates. The captain—foreseeing the scrimmage—armed his men—with guns, pistols, knives. But an old imperturbable Quaker passenger could not be induced to have the most modest weapon; simply looked on as they prepared. But by and by, in the mêlée—the Quaker was seen to pick up an axe that lay near him and as the pirates made shift to board the merchantman, he would swing his axe, chop off the hands as they set on the rail, and cry out, 'Go way from here,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Begin page 182] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
my friend: what right has thee anyhow to board our boat!' O'Connor's way of telling this was irresistible—especially in his delicate emphasis of the courtesy of the Quaker."