Explanatory Notes        Apparatus Notes ()
This text has been superseded by a newly published text
MTPDocEd
To Jervis Langdon
29 December 1868 • Cleveland, Ohio (MS facsimile: Davis, UCCL 00212)
(SUPERSEDED)
Dear Mr. Langdon

I wrote to the Metropolitan Hotel for your letter (of Dec. 8,) & it overtook me two or three days ago at Charlotte, Mich.1explanatory note I will not deny that the first paragraph hurt me a little—hurt me a good deal—for when you speak of what I said of the drawing-room, I see that you mistook the harmless overflow of a happy frame of mind for criminal frivolity. This is a little unjust—for although what I said may have been unbecoming, it surely was no worse. The subject of the drawing-room cannot be more serious to you than it is to me. But I accept the rebuke, freely & without offer of defence, & am as sorry I offended as if I had intended offense.

All the rest of your letter is just as it should be. The language is as plain as ever language was in the world, but I like it all the better for that. I don’t like to mince matters myself or have them minced for me. I think I am safely past that tender age when one cannot take his food save that it be masticated for him beforehand.—& I would much pefer prefer emendation to suffer from the clean incisionemendation of an honest lancet than from a sweetened poison. Therefore it is even as you say: I have too much good sense” to blame you for that part of your the letter. Plain speaking only increases one’s esteem & respect for the speaker. does not hurt one.

I am not hurrying my love—it is my love that is hurrying me—& surely no one is better able to comprehend that than you. I fancy that Mrs. Langdon was the counter part of her daughter at the age of twenty-three—& so I refer you to the past, for explanation & for pardon of my conduct. At your time of life, & being, like you, the object of an assured regard, I shall be able to talk urge moderation upon younger people, & shall do it relentlessly—but now I feel a larger charity for such. Your heart is big enough to feel all the force of that remark.—& so believing, you will not be surprised to find me thus boldly knocking at it. It does not seem to me that I am otherwise than moderate—it cannot seem so from my point of view—& so while I continue as moderate as I am now & have been, I think it is fair to hope that you will not turn away from me your countenance, or deny me your friendly toleration, even though it be under a mild protest.

It is my desire as truly as yours, that sufficient time shall elapse to show you, beyond all possible question, what I have been, what I am, & what I am likely to be. Otherwise you could not be satisfied with me, nor I with myself. I think that much of my conduct on the Pacific Coast was not of a character to recommend me to the respectful regard of a high eastern civilization, but it was not considered blameworthy there, perhaps. We go according to our lights. I was just what Charlie would have been, similarly circumstanced, & deprived of home influences. I think all my references can say I never did anything mean, false or criminal.

They can say that the same doors that were open to me seven years ago are open to me yet; that all the friends I made in seven years, are still my friends; that wherever I have been I can go again—& enter in the light of day & hold my head up; that I never deceived or defrauded anybody, & don’t owe a cent. And they can say that I attended to my business with due diligence, & made my own living, & never asked anybody to help me do it, either. All the rest they can say about me will be bad. I can tell the whole story myself, without mincing it, & will if they refuse.2explanatory note

I wish to add to the references I gave Mrs. Langdon, the following: Hon. J. Neely Johnson, Carson City, Nevada. He was one Governor of California some ten years ago, & is now Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Nevada, if my memory serves me. He has known me about seven years—he & his wife—we were next door neighbors—& his househ emendation is always my home, now-a-daysemendation when I am in Carson, & has been for a year or two past.3explanatory note Then there is the present Governor of Nevada, H. G. Blaisdel—he has known me four or five years—don’t know whether he has known any good of me or not. He is a thoroughly pure & upright man, & a most excellent.4explanatory note And I give you, also, Joseph T. Goodman (reared in Elmira, I believe,) proprietor & chief editor of the “Daily Enterprise,” Virginia City, Nevada & C. A. V. Putnam, his N newseditor—the first of whom has known me six years (I was his c City editor 3 years without losing a day,) & the latter five years, & neither of whom would say a damaging word against me for love or money or hesitate to throttle anybody else who ventured to do it—& so you will perceive at once that they are not the best people most promising sources to refer you to for information. Those f two fellows are just the salt of the earth, in my estimation.5explanatory note Now, however, being appealed to seriously, in so grave a matter as this, it is very possible—even likely—that they would override their ancient friendship for me, & speak the whole truth. I shall not write to them—or to any of these references, of course—& so their testimony will be unbiased. Then there is A. J. Marsh, who is a Phonographic Reporter, in San Francisco, my close friend for five or six years,—he & his wife & family are utterly without reproach, & would be in any community.6explanatory note And Frank Gross & wife (of the San Francisco “Bulletin”)—& Sam Williams & Rev. Mr. Bartlett of the same editorial staff. emendation —the two latter don’t know me so intimately as the other. 7explanatory note There is Lewis Leland.8explanatory note (I think he is proprietor of the Metropolitan Hotel in New York—& if he is not now he soon is to be, if I understand the matter rightly.) He has known me intimately for 3 or 4 years—I boarded at his Occidental Hotel 2 or 3 years—& he will surely know my general character & standing in San Francisco. Andemendation R. B. Swain & family, San Francisco. Mr. Swain is Superintendent of the U.S. Mint, & is also one of the “merchant princes there. He is a man the Schuyler Colfax of the Pacific Coast—being regarded by high & low, rich & poor, Tom, Dick & Harry, as a man against whose pure na reputation nothing can be said. He don’t know much about me, himself maybe, though I we were pretty intimate latterly, but he ought to know a good deal through his Secretary Frank B. Harte, (editor of the Overland Monthly & one of the finest writers out there) for we have been very intimate for several years. This morning I received from Mr. Swain a letter which has been following me some time. I think a great deal of him, else I wouldn’t write to him. You have no antipathy to thoroughly good men, & so I beg that you will give his picture a place on the mantelpieceemendation.9explanatory note

As to what I am going to be, henceforth, it is a thing which must be proven & established. I am upon the right path—I shall succeed, I hope. Men as lost as I, have found a Savior, & why not I? I have hope—an earnest hope—a long-lived hope.

I wrote you & Mrs. Langdon a letter from Lansing, which will offend again, I fear—& yet no harm was meant, no undue levity, no disrespect, no lack of reverence. The intent was blameless—& it is the intent, & not the act that should be judged, after all. Even men who take life are judged by this rule only.

They say the desire is so general, here, to have this public distressed again by a repetition of my lecture, that Mr. Fairbanks offers me $150 to repeat it in the third week in January, & Mrs. Fairbanks offers to let me repeat it for the benefit of the Orphan’s Home at (of which at a dollar a head & pay me nothing for it. I have accepted the latter proposition.10explanatory note I have received a second invitation from the Association I lectured for in Pittsburgh to come there & talk again. They have gotten up some little feeling there because of an unjust & angry criticism upon the lecture which (it appeared in the “Dispatch,”) & I think maybe that is the cause of these calls. I shall try to go, though really I am not disposed to quarrel with the Dispatch’s opinion or make myself sorrowful ful sad about it, either. I always liked to express my opinions rather freely in print, & I suppose the Dispatch people have a taste that runs in a similar direction.11explanatory note

The folks here are all well, & we are having a very pleasant time of it. I shall lecture in Akron to-morrowemendation night, & then return here & spend New Year’s.

I like the Herald better bet as an anchorage for me, better than any paper in the Union—its location, politics, present business & prospects, all are suitable. Fairbanks says the concern (with its lot & building,) inventories $212,000emendation; its earnings were $22,000 $42,000 emendation for the past year, which is a good percentageemendation for such safe & lasting property as a newspaper. He owns half & the Benedicts the other half. He wants me in very much—wants me to buy an eighth from the Benedicts, so that the control would rests with him when I gave my vote so—& said price about $25,000. He says if I can get it he will be my security until I can pay it all by the labor of my tongue & hands, & that I shall not be hurried. That suits me, just exactly. It couldn’t be better. I don’t like He says the salaries of himself & the elder Benedict are $3,000—& mine would be $3,000. Yet he would hire me & pay me more. I don’t understand these thingsemendation. It is a slim salary—& so I should have to make the paper make money, to save myself. However, I shall see Mr. Benedict & try to make the arrangement.12explanatory note

I believe I have nothing further to say, except to ask pardon for past offenses against yourself, they being having been heedless, & not deliberate; & that you will

{Mrs. Fairbanks has just come in & she says: “For shame! cut that letter short—do you want to wear out what endurance the poor man has left after his siege of illness?” This is a woman, Sir, whose commands are not to be trifled with.—& so I desist.}

With reverent love & respect
                                       I am
                                         Sincerely
Sam. L. Clemens

on back of letter as folded: J. Langdon Esq | Present.

Textual Commentary
29 December 1868 • To Jervis LangdonCleveland, OhioUCCL 00212
Source text(s):

MS facsimile. The editors have not seen the MS, but in 1982 a photocopy was provided to the Mark Twain Papers by the owner of the MS, Chester L. Davis (1903–87), then executive secretary of the Mark Twain Research Foundation (now Chester L. Davis, Jr.), in Perry, Mo.

Previous Publication:

L2 , 356–363; Wecter, 35–37, with omissions; MTMF , 62, excerpt; LLMT , 36–40.

Provenance:

This letter survived in the Samossoud Collection until at least 1947: sometime between then and 1949 Dixon Wecter saw the MS there and made a typescript of it. Davis evidently acquired the MS, by gift or purchase, directly from Clara Clemens Samossoud sometime after 1947 (see Samossoud Collection, pp. 515–16).

Explanatory Notes
1 Clemens arrived and lectured in Charlotte on Christmas, leaving for Tecumseh, Michigan, the next day. Langdon’s 8 December letter, which evidently replied to his of 2 December, has not been found.
2 In 1906 Clemens recalled a “private talk” with Langdon, which must have occurred during his Elmira visit ending on 27 November:

Mr. Langdon called my attention to something I had already noticed—which was that I was an almost entirely unknown person; that no one around about knew me except Charley, and he was too young to be a reliable judge of men; that I was from the other side of the continent, and that only those people out there would be able to furnish me a character, in case I had one—so he asked me for references. I furnished them, and he said we would now suspend our industries and I could go away and wait until he could write to those people and get answers. (AD, 14 Feb 1906, CU-MARK, in MTA, 2:109–10)

Clemens further recalled that he had referred Langdon to “six prominent men, among them two clergymen (these were all San Franciscans), and he himself had written to a bank cashier who had in earlier years been a Sunday school superintendent in Elmira and well known to Mr. Langdon” (in MTA , 2:110). Langdon wrote to James S. Hutchinson, then a cashier for the San Francisco banking firm of Sather and Company, who “had formerly been in Langdon’s employ in Elmira,” according to a relative, asking him to interview Clemens’s six references (Hutchinson, 36; Langley 1868, 295, 487). Only two of these references have been identified: the Reverend Horatio Stebbins and the Reverend Charles Wadsworth, with both of whom Clemens felt he was on good terms. Hutchinson did in fact call on Stebbins, and he spoke to one of Wadsworth’s deacons; he may also have tried to contact Wadsworth himself (SLC to Charles Warren Stoddard, 25 Aug 69, Freeman and Co., lot 68).
3 John Neely Johnson (1825–72), originally from Indiana, was admitted to the Iowa bar at the age of twenty-one; he went to California in 1849, where within a year he was elected city attorney of Sacramento. In 1855 he was nominated for governor by the American (Know-Nothing) Party, elected, and served a two-year term (1856–58). In 1860 he moved to Carson City, where he practiced law. There, in 1861, he met Orion and Samuel Clemens, who in late 1862 became his neighbors (and tenants) on Curry Street. In 1851 Johnson married Mary Zabriskie (b. 1833 or 1834), with whom he had a son, William, and then a daughter, now about twelve years old. He served as a delegate from Ormsby County to the 1863 and 1864 Nevada constitutional conventions, and was elected president of the latter. In May 1867 Governor Henry G. Blasdel (see note 4) appointed Johnson to serve as an associate justice of the Nevada Supreme Court, in place of Cornelius M. Brosnan, deceased. On 3 November Johnson was elected for the remaining two years of Brosnan’s original six-year term, during which Brosnan had been scheduled, according to the Nevada State Constitution (article 6, section 3), to serve as chief justice. Johnson may have assumed that he would fill that position as well, but it went instead to former Chief Justice James F. Lewis. Johnson remained on the bench until the end of his term in January 1871, but did not run for re-election and was never chief justice. Like Clemens, he was a Mason. Clemens apparently stayed with the Johnsons while lecturing in Carson City in November 1866 and late April 1868 (SLC to OC, 17 May 62, L1 , 213; OC 1862–63, item 19; Angel, 81, 86, 87n, 90, 336, 679; Melendy and Gilbert, 66–79; Carson City Census, 262; “Utah,” Virginia City Territorial Enterprise, 1 Sept 72, 3; “Obituary,” Salt Lake City Tribune, 2 Sept 72, 1; “Funeral of Governor Johnson,” Salt Lake City Herald, 3 Sept 72, 3; Carson City Appeal: “The Vacancy on the Supreme Bench,” 24 Apr 67, 2; “The Vacant Judgeship Fitly Filled,” 12 May 67, 2; “National Union Republican Nominations,” 17 Sept 68, 2; “Hon. H. O. Beatty” and “Appointed to the Supreme Bench,” 10 Nov 68, 2 and 3).
4 Henry Goode Blasdel (1825–1900), also from Indiana, went to California in 1852 and to Virginia City in 1860, “where he engaged successfully in mining and in the reduction of gold and silver ores, and was the superintendent of the celebrated Potosi, Hale and Norcross mines.” He became the state of Nevada’s first governor in 1864, holding that office through 1870. Blasdel was also a Mason and “a strong advocate of total abstinence” ( NCAB , 2:200; L1 , 317 n. 1). Both Blasdel and Johnson were among the prominent citizens of Carson who invited Clemens to lecture there in 1866, saying in part that the “people of Carson City ... have none other than the most kindly remembrances of you” (SLC to Abraham V. Z. Curry and others, 1 Nov 66, and SLC to Henry G. Blasdel and others, 1 Nov 66, L1 , 363–64).
5 Goodman was born in Masonville, New York, about one hundred miles east of Elmira. Clemens claimed in 1906 that he had not given Goodman’s name until well after Langdon had heard from his other references, reasoning that his old and close friend would not have offered “unprejudiced testimony” (Emrich, 263; AD, 14 Feb 1906, CU-MARK, in MTA , 2:111). This letter shows, however, that even before Langdon could receive replies from the “six prominent men” named in November, Clemens sought to mitigate the result with evidence from ten friendly references. Charles A. V. Putnam (b. 1823 or 1824), a printer originally from Maine, moved to the West in 1852. He had been Joseph Goodman’s “telegraph, paragraph and scissoring editor” on the Virginia City Territorial Enterprise since May 1863. The recent discovery of rich mineral deposits in the White Pine district of Lander County would soon prompt him to leave Virginia City temporarily in order to establish a newspaper in the region (Virginia City Census, 119; Rasmussen, 4:51; Doten, 3:2227–28; ET&S1 , 457; Angel, 330, 649). Clemens’s 1866 characterization of Putnam in “Ministerial Change” was, if anything, even more emphatic about his loyalty to his friends (see SLC 1866).
6 Andrew Jackson Marsh (1826–83) was born in Binghamton, New York. He served in the Mexican War and worked for the New York Herald before moving to California in 1860. In 1861–62 he wrote correspondence from Carson City for the Sacramento Union (see Marsh 1972). Marsh and Clemens had been acquainted since at least 1862, and had collaborated in reporting the 1863 Nevada Constitutional Convention. Marsh was now the shorthand reporter for the Fifteenth District Court in San Francisco; nothing is known about his family (Marsh, Clemens, and Bowman, 462 n. 2 and passim; SLC to OC, 23 July 62, L1, 229; Langley 1868, 365, 735).
7 Frank Wells Gross (1839–86) was born in Illinois and reared in Massachusetts, moving to San Francisco with his father in 1856. He joined the staff of the San Francisco Evening Bulletin in 1860, eventually serving as its local editor; he had recently left that position and was now a reporter for the Morning Call. Gross and his wife (who is not further identified) had one daughter. Like Johnson and Blasdel, he was a Mason (“Death of Frank W. Gross,” San Francisco Morning Call, 6 Dec 86, 3; “Biographies of Some of the Candidates,” San Francisco Alta California, 20 June 79, 1; San Francisco City and County 1867, s.v. “Gross, Frank Wells”; Langley 1868, 251). Samuel Williams, the Bulletin’s drama and music critic, has been previously identified (14 Apr 68 to Williams, n. 1click to open letter). William Chauncey Bartlett (1818–1907) was born in Connecticut but as a young man went to Ohio, where in the early 1850s he practiced law. In 1860 he moved to California and entered the ministry, serving as pastor of the First Congregational Church in Santa Cruz in 1860–64. He became a correspondent for the Bulletin in about 1867 and soon thereafter accepted an editorial position; like Williams, he was also a contributor to Harte’s Overland Monthly (“Veteran Journalist Answers Final Call,” San Francisco Call, 9 Dec 1907, 4; “Dr. William C. Bartlett, Famous Pioneer, Expires,” Oakland Tribune, 9 Dec 1907, 3; Langley 1868, 83; Robinson et al., 44–45).
8 Leland is identified in 19 and 20 Dec 68 to OLL, n. 7.
9 Robert Bunker Swain (1822–72) was born in Massachusetts and went to California in 1855. From 1863 to 1869 he was superintendent of the United States branch mint in San Francisco, as well as head of R. B. Swain and Company, commission merchants and insurance agents. He and his wife, the former Clara Ann Fillmore, had one son. Swain had named Bret Harte his secretary, a sinecure that by 1868 paid $270 per month. Their offices were in the Call building on Commercial Street. Clemens had known and worked with Harte on the Californian long before he became editor of the Overland Monthly. His opinion of Harte’s literary talents was much the same in 1866: see SLC to JLC and PAM, 20 Jan 66, L1 , 328 (Langley 1868, 531; CofC , 12, 227–28; O’Connor, 68–69, 90; Bartlett 1898, 41; Brooks 1898, 99).
10 Clemens’s lecture at Case Hall in Cleveland on 22 January 1869 netted $564 for the Cleveland Orphan Asylum (“Cleveland Orphan Asylum,” Cleveland Herald, 17 Feb 69, 3).
12 The Cleveland Herald, a small Republican daily housed in a four-story building on Bank Street, was run by Fairbanks, Benedict, and Company. Abel Fairbanks had, since 1850, owned the paper jointly with various partners, currently father and son George A. and George S. Benedict (1812–76, 1841–71). In 1868 the Herald claimed a daily circulation of 7,500 (Rowell, 86; Rose, 231–32, 242; “George H. Benedict,” New York Times, 15 May 76, 5; “A Railway Horror,” New York Tribune, 8 Feb 71, 1; “The Railroad Horror,” Buffalo Express, 10 Feb 71, 2).
Emendations and Textual Notes
  pefer prefer  •  pefer | | fer prefer
  incision •  incis incision corrected miswriting
  househ  •  h partly formed
  now-a-days •  now- | a-days
  staff.  •  deletion implied
  Francisco. And •  Francisco.— | And
  mantelpiece •  mantel- | piece
  to-morrow •  to- | morrow
  $212,000 •  possibly ‘$22 12,000’; ‘2 partly formed
  $22,000 $42,000  •  $2 42,- | 000
  percentage •  per- | centage
  things. It •  things.— | It