Single Letter

HAM/1/7/4/4

Letter from John Farhill to Mary Hamilton

Diplomatic Text


                                                         10th. May 1781

      It appears to me most clearly
that Miʃs ------ never understood yr
conversation with her in the Light
you wishd her to understand it.
Your delicacy prevented your speaking
plainly to her, and she misinter
preted
your Embarraʃsment. Hence
arose the second Paragraph in her
Letter. She imagines you doubted the
Truth of her Aʃsertions, but her
uneasineʃs now is leʃsened by her
having a Letter from her Mr
------
“which certifies, tho indirectly
“his situation & speaks for the”



“Truth of what she then advanced”.
Her reason therefore for wishing a
second Interview is merely to shew
you that she was fully authorizd
in the first instance. She certainly
does not think yr objection is to
the Suit, but to the manner of
offering it: & therefore in the
latter pt of her Letter she says,
if this method of application, viz,
thro her, has met with your
disapprobation, Mr - will be induced
to take some other which may
be more succeʃsful.
      You may say perha[ps] that
I am a Commentator where no



Comment is neceʃsary: if we think
alike my vanity will be flatterd
if differently I know I run no Risque
in venturing an Opinion to you.
I find myself totally unable to do
as much with respect to your
future Conduct; nor is it at all
[nec]eʃsary: In cases of delicacy, a
[de]licate mind will never act impr[o]
perly
. Permit me however to say
that I can see no impropriety
in your answering the enclosed,
indeed I think common politeneʃs
requires it, the contents must be
such as your own good Sense
& better Heart shall dictate.



                             Miʃs Hamilton
                                St James's

(hover over blue text or annotations for clarification;
red text is normalised and/or unformatted in other panel)

Normalised Text


                                                         10th. May 1781

      It appears to me most clearly
that Miss never understood your
conversation with her in the Light
you wished her to understand it.
Your delicacy prevented your speaking
plainly to her, and she misinterpreted
your Embarrassment. Hence
arose the second Paragraph in her
Letter. She imagines you doubted the
Truth of her Assertions, but her
uneasiness now is lessened by her
having a Letter from Mr
“which certifies, though indirectly
“his situation & speaks for the”



“Truth of what she then advanced”.
Her reason therefore for wishing a
second Interview is merely to show
you that she was fully authorized
in the first instance. She certainly
does not think your objection is to
the Suit, but to the manner of
offering it: & therefore in the
latter part of her Letter she says,
if this method of application, viz,
through her, has met with your
disapprobation, Mr will be induced
to take some other which may
be more successful.
      You may say perhaps that
I am a Commentator where no



Comment is necessary: if we think
alike my vanity will be flattered
if differently I know I run no Risk
in venturing an Opinion to you.
I find myself totally unable to do
as much with respect to your
future Conduct; nor is it at all
necessary: In cases of delicacy, a
delicate mind will never act improperly
. Permit me however to say
that I can see no impropriety
in your answering the enclosed,
indeed I think common politeness
requires it, the contents must be
such as your own good Sense
& better Heart shall dictate.



                             Miss Hamilton
                                St James's

(consult diplomatic text or XML for annotations, deletions, clarifications, persons,
quotations,
spellings, uncorrected forms, split words, abbreviations, formatting)

Metadata

Library References

Repository: John Rylands Research Institute and Library, University of Manchester

Archive: Mary Hamilton Papers

Item title: Letter from John Farhill to Mary Hamilton

Shelfmark: HAM/1/7/4/4

Correspondence Details

Sender: John Farhill

Place sent: unknown

Addressee: Mary Hamilton

Place received: London

Date sent: 10 May 1781

Letter Description

Summary: Letter from John Farhill to Mary Hamilton. The letter relates to a misunderstanding with a woman that Hamilton had conversed with [the woman's name has been removed from the sheet], and who now wishes a second interview with her.
   

Length: 1 sheet, 273 words

Transliteration Information

Editorial declaration: First edited in the project 'Unlocking the Mary Hamilton Papers' (Hannah Barker, Sophie Coulombeau, David Denison, Tino Oudesluijs, Cassandra Ulph, Christine Wallis & Nuria Yáñez-Bouza, 2019-2023).

All quotation marks are retained in the text and are represented by appropriate Unicode characters. Words split across two lines may have a hyphen on the first, the second or both fragments (reco-|ver, imperfect|-ly, satisfacti-|-on); or a double hyphen (pur=|port, dan|=ger, qua=|=litys); or none (respect|ing). Any point in abbreviations with superscripted letter(s) is placed last, regardless of relative left-right orientation in the original. Thus, Mrs. or Mrs may occur, but M.rs or Mr.s do not.

Acknowledgements: Transcription and XML version created as part of project 'Unlocking the Mary Hamilton Papers', funded by the Arts & Humanities Research Council under grant AH/S007121/1.

Transliterator: Christine Wallis, editorial team (completed 27 October 2020)

Cataloguer: Lisa Crawley, Archivist, The John Rylands Library

Cataloguer: John Hodgson, Head of Special Collections, John Rylands Research Institute and Library

Copyright: Transcriptions, notes and TEI/XML © the editors

Revision date: 2 November 2021

Document Image (pdf)