Edinburgh
25th Jan. 1868
My Dear Father,
I hope you were not alarmed at getting no letter at the proper time.[2] The fact is that the fearful storm of wind and rain that raged yesterday effectually prevented us from sending off a letter.[3] When Ellen started for her classes yesterday, she had not finished her letter. She went first to Mr Brakenridge[4] and by the time she got there the wind [was] so high and the streets so dangerous that Mrs B. very kindly refused to let her away till the storm subsided. In the meantime everything was quiet enough in the sheltered quadrangle of the New College[5] and I had no idea that any storm was raging till at one o’clock I started for the Philosophical.[6]
I had to go first to Williams & Norgate[7] on Fred[erick] Street, and as soon as I had got out of the shelter of the large buildings on the Mound, I issued quite suddenly into a scene of the most frightful confusion.
The pavement of Princes Street was thickly strew with chimney cans and stones, most of the shops had put up their shutters but left their doors open to harbour crowds of people who were afraid to remain longer in the streets, those who still tried to move on were being blown in every direction except that in which their hats went, cabs were being quite blown over on their sides. I struggled along to Frederick Street with some difficulty and pushed on as far as George Street. Here matters were even worse, the weaker passengers lost all control over their movements, and quite a crowd was glad to gain a little shelter by huddling behind Pitt’s Statue.[8] Here I gave up and got back to the College and remained there till after the Prayer Meeting when I got home pretty well. The wind was as yet rather less furious in the Old Town than in the New tho’ of course I had to keep to the middle of the Street.
When I got home Ellen had not turned up, but I thought she might have wasted some time in School and I had some hopes that the wind was falling. So I sat still till 4 by which time I was too alarmed to wait longer, especially as the wind was rising and now accompanied by blinding showers of sleet.
So I sallied forth and reached Mr Oliphant’s tolerable wet but safely.[9] Princes Street was almost deserted by this time and quite covered with wreck. At one corner a baker’s hurlie[10] had been overturned and deserted and so forth.
I was quite alarmed to hear no news of Ellen at Mr Oliphant’s and rushed down to the Brakenridges where I was very thankful indeed to find her safe and sound, and enjoying her dinner. In fact I had the worst of it myself as I was well drenched. We remained in India St. till the wind fell and I having got myself made somewhat more comfortable we went home about 7 o’clock by which time the evening was quite fine.
At 8 I had to be at the College to read my essay[11] to a very small audience. Many were kept away by the weather and by a party at Rainy’s.
My essay was very favourably received tho’ I think that no one except Lindsay fully understood it. Lindsay gave a very favourable criticism, declaring that the psychological part was perfect so far as our psychology went, but doubting whether psychology was far enough developed to base a theory on.
Black[12] the regular critic praised me highly but quite missed some important points and did not profess fully to understand me. Kippen[13] said he thought it was the best essay he had ever heard and began to pitch into its main points as contrary to the doctrine of predestination — by a complete miscomprehension of a term I had used. Bell[14] gave a very kind laudatory criticism praising the conscientiousness with which the thoughts were worked out, and also praising the style as being genuinely effective without any straining at effect or a single word put in with that aim.
The general agreement was that the essay was somewhat German and obscure, that the obscurity however was due to the subject rather than to the treatment which was clear as far as possible in so abstract a subject, that there was no padding in it, that it was very ingenious, that the thoughts were beautiful and all wrong. I have given a full report to satisfy your mind and will send the essay in process of time. In the meantime it goes back to Davidson who had not yet read it. I had to go and ask him to let me have it for some days.
I think I may say on the whole that my essay could not have been received with more respect. No one ventured to attack it strongly because no one quite followed the course of thought. The only exception was Lindsay whose criticism was very appreciative and who tho’ evidently much inclined towards my views in some points was sceptical as to the feasibility of any theory so comprehensive.
You will be glad to hear that after all these experiences of yesterday we are quite well today.
My essay stood first on Buchanan’s[15] list on Thursday in a curious way.[16] His lectures on the Creation were very ridiculous in their treatment of the various philosophical theories on the question, especially as to Spinoza whom he quite caricatured.
As an experiment, as the last paper was almost wholly on this subject, I put in some Berkleyanism, a correct account of Spinoza with a Latin quotation that I happened to remember out of the “Ethica”, and as he had jumbled up Plato and the Manicheans put down some very common-place observations about [matter, creation etc.][17] to show that Plato was not quite a dualist. To my surprise Buchanan, quite unconscious that I was contradicting what he said, was highly satisfied!
The damage done yesterday was very great. There was a fatal accident in Duke Street — 4 lives lost by the fall of a chimney.[18] Several other severe accidents occurred tho’ none fatal. In a walk with Lindsay this forenoon, I saw a great deal of damage that had been done to property, among other things the ends of two houses, and of a U.P. church[19] in Morningside, quite blown down.
Rainy’s pamphlet is out now, but I have not got it read yet.[20] I suppose it has been sent to you.
I have been thinking over your proposed text[21] and like it very much. I wanted to say what struck me as the leading thought but have not room. I may do so on Tuesday. In the meantime I am in some doubt whether the result of the church’s witness in the world as given in v.21 is the conversion of the world (as comparison with v.25 and the fact that Xt. seems throughout to imply that the church will never leave the world might lead one to think) or only a certain intellectual conviction not amounting to the personal knowledge of God and Xt. wh. v.3 calls eternal life.
Your aff. son,
W. R. Smith
[1] CUL ADD 7449 C090 TS
[2] There are frequent allusions in the early letters to parental concern for the health and welfare of their children.
[3] The Friday gale, which caused several fatalities, is fully described in The Scotsman of Saturday, 25th January, 1868: “For fully five hours yesterday there raged over a large part of Scotland and a part of England a hurricane of wind, rain and snow, such as has not been witnessed for many years, and the sad effects are witnessed in grievous loss of life, in many painful accidents, and in no small destruction of property…”.
[4] The Brakenridges lived at 21 India Street and were close friends of the family. Dr David Brakenridge was both physician [MRCPE] and surgeon [LRCSE] hence could be properly addressed as either “Mr” or “Dr”.
[5] New College, then as now, stands at the head of the Mound, looking northward over Princes Street and the New Town. Smith’s journey via Frederick Street to George Street and elsewhere is readily traced. The “large buildings” at the foot of the Mound are the National Gallery and the R.S.A. [Royal Society of Arts].
[6] The Philosophical Institution at 4 Queen Street provided WRS with the convenient use of a sizeable library and newsroom.
[7] Publishers and booksellers.
[8] The bronze statue of William Pitt the younger stands at the intersection of George Street and Frederick Street.
[9] Oliphant, Thomas had been rector of the first “Normal School” in Edinburgh (i.e. training school for teachers) opened by the Church in 1842. At the Disruption he and all his staff “came out” and in 1846 he set up his own private school, the Charlotte Square Institution for Young Ladies, at 33 Charlotte Square. It was this school that Ellen, and later Alice, attended while living in Edinburgh with WRS. In 1848 the Free Church purchased Moray House in the Canongate, which eventually became Edinburgh’s Teacher Training College and is now part of Edinburgh University. As a Free Church elder, Thomas Oliphant attended the General Assembly in 1869 [FCPA, vol. xxvii, 1869].
[10] Handcart (Scot.).
[11] WRS’s essay for Prof. Davidson, referred to in the letter to WPS of 3rd January.
[12] Black, John Sutherland (1846–1923): a year ahead of WRS at New College, Black was to become Smith’s closest friend and ultimately his biographer (with G. W. Chrystal). His father was a “much-respected member” of the Kirkcaldy Free Church Presbytery.
[13] Kippen, James J. G. (b.1846): a student in the same year as WRS, became F.C. minister at Pitcairngreen, near Perth.
[14] Bell, Benjamin (1845-1929): in the same year as WRS at New College, was the son of Dr Benjamin Bell, an eminent Edinburgh surgeon and prominent lay supporter of WRS during his trial. Dr Bell’s eldest son, Dr Joseph Bell, was famous as the Edinburgh medical professor on whom Conan Doyle based the character of Sherlock Holmes.
[15] Buchanan, Dr James (1804–1870): was Professor of Apologetics and Systematic Theology at New College from its establishment until his death.
[16] This was of course a different essay, written for Dr James Buchanan, who rather ineffectually taught Systematic Theology in New College at that time. The chair was given to Prof. James Macgregor in 1868, following Buchanan’s resignation.
[17] The actual Greek terms inserted in the TS at this point are translated here.
[18] As recorded in The Scotsman report: evidently WRS had read the newspaper at the Philosophical Institution that morning.
[19] United Presbyterian: an amalgamation, formed in 1847, of several separate Presbyterian groupings historically opposed to Moderatism, eventually joining with the Free Church in 1900 after protracted negotiations.
[20] The first attempt at union between F.C.and U.P. Churches took place from 1863–1873 but was vigorously opposed within the Free Church by powerful figures such as Dr James Begg and Horatius Bonar. Rainy had written his pamphlet, The Present Position of the Union Question in the Free Church, in response to Bonar’s Statement, Explanatory and Defensive condemning the proposed union (see Carnegie Simpson, 1909, pp. 148–210).
[21] The references are to chapter 17 of John’s Gospel. The actual text of WPS’s printed sermon was John 17: 20–21. Smith’s comments here on this theological crux represent a good example of the “obscurity” complained about by his fellow-students at the Theological Society.