that george borrow should have become an agent for the bible society, then in the third decade of its flourishing career, has naturally excited doubts as to his moral honesty. the position was truly a contrast to an earlier ideal contained in the letter to his norwich friend, roger kerrison, that we have already given, in which, with all the zest of a shelley, he declares that he intends to live in london, “write plays, poetry, etc., abuse religion, and get myself prosecuted.” but that was in 1824, and borrow had suffered great tribulation in the intervening eight years. he had acquired many languages, wandered far and written much, all too little of which had found a publisher. there was plenty of time for his religious outlook to have changed in the interval, and in any case borrow was no theologian. the negative outlook of “godless billy taylor,” and the positive outlook of certain evangelical friends with whom he was now on visiting terms, were of small account compared with the imperative need of making a living—and then there was the passionate longing of his nature for a wider sphere—for travelling activity which should not be dependent alone upon the vagabond’s crust. what matter if, as harriet martineau—most generous and also most malicious of women, with much kinship with borrow in temperament—said, that his appearance before the public as a devout agent of the bible society excited a “burst of laughter from all who remembered the old norwich days”; what matter if another “scribbling woman,” as carlyle called such strident female writers as were in vogue in mid-victorian days—frances power cobbe—thought him “insincere”; these were unable to comprehend the abnormal heart of borrow, so entirely at one with goethe in wilhelm meister’s wanderjahre:

p. 91bleibe nicht am boden heften,

frisch gewagt und frisch hinaus!

kopf und arm, mit heitern kräften,

ueberall sind sie zu haus;

wo wir uns der sonne freuen,

sind wir jede sorge los;

dass wir uns in ihr zerstreuen,

darum ist die welt so gross. [91a]

here was borrow’s opportunity indeed. verily i believe that it would have been the same had it been a society for the propagation of the writings of defoe among the persians. with what zest would borrow have undertaken to translate moll flanders and captain singleton into the languages of hafiz and omar! but the bible society was ready to his hand, and borrow did nothing by halves. a good hater and a staunch friend, he was loyal to the bible society in no half-hearted way, and not the most pronounced quarrel with forces obviously quite out of tune with his nature led to any real slackening of that loyalty. in the end a portion of his property went to swell the bible society’s funds. [91b]

when borrow became one of its servants, the bible society was only in its third decade. it was founded in the year 1804, and had the names of william wilberforce, granville sharp, and zachary macaulay on its first committee. to circulate the authorised version of the bible without note or comment was the first ideal that these worthy men set before them; never to the entire satisfaction of the great printing organisations, which already had a considerable financial interest in such a circulation. for long years the words “sold under cost price” upon the bibles of the society excited mingled feelings among those interested in the book trade. the society’s first idea was limited to bibles in the english tongue. this was speedily modified. p. 92a bible society was set up in nuremberg to which money was granted by the parent organisation. a bible in the welsh language was circulated broadcast through the principality, and so the movement grew. from the first it had one of its principal centres in norwich, where joseph john gurney’s house was open to its committee, and at its annual gatherings at earlham his sister elizabeth fry took a leading part, while wilberforce, charles simeon, the famous preacher, and legh richmond, whose dairyman’s daughter borrow failed to appreciate, were of the company. “uncles buxton and cunningham are here,” we find one of joseph john gurney’s daughters writing in describing a bible society gathering. this was john cunningham, rector of harrow, and it was his brother who helped borrow to his position in connection with the society, as we shall see. at the moment of these early meetings borrow is but a boy, meeting joseph gurney on the banks of the river near earlham, and listening to his discourse upon angling. the work of the bible society in russia may be said to have commenced when one john paterson of glasgow, who had been a missionary of the congregational body, went to st. petersburg during those critical months of 1812 that napoleon was marching into russia. paterson indeed, william canton tells us, was “one of the last to behold the old tartar wall and high brick towers” and other splendours of the moscow which in a month or two were to be consumed by the flames. paterson was back again in st. petersburg before the french were at the gates of moscow, and it is noteworthy that while moscow was burning, and the czar was on his way to join his army, this remarkable scot was submitting to prince galitzin a plan for a bible society in st. petersburg, and a memorial to the czar thereon:

the plan and memorial were examined by the czar on the 18th (of december); with a stroke of his pen he gave his sanction—“so be it, alexander”; and as he wrote, the last tattered remnants of the grand army struggled across the ice of the niemen. [92]

the society was formed in january 1813, and when the czar returned to st. petersburg in 1815, after the shattering of napoleon’s power, he authorised a new translation of the p. 93bible into modern russian. from russia it was not a far cry, where the spirit of evangelisation held sway, to manchuria and to china. to these remote lands the bible society desired to send its literature. in 1822 the gospel of st. matthew was printed in st. petersburg in manchu. ten years later the type of the whole new testament in that language was lying in the russian capital. “all that was required was a manchu scholar to see the work through the press.” here came the chance for borrow. at this period there resided at oulton hall, suffolk, but a few miles from norwich, a family of the name of skepper, edmund and anne his wife, with their two children, breame and mary. mary married in 1817 one henry clarke, a lieutenant in the royal navy. he died afterwards of consumption. a posthumous child of the marriage, henrietta mary, was born two months after her father died. mary clarke, as she now was, threw herself with zest into all the religious enthusiasms of the locality, and the rev. francis cunningham, vicar of st. margaret’s, lowestoft, was one of her friends. borrow had met mary clarke on one of her visits to lowestoft, and she had doubtless been impressed with his fine presence, to say nothing of the intelligence and varied learning of the young man. the following note, the first communication i can find from borrow to his future wife, indicates how matters stood at the time:

to mrs. clarke

st. giles, norwich, 22 october, 1832.

dear madam,—according to promise i transmit you a piece of oriental writing, namely the tale of blue beard, translated into turkish by myself. i wish it were in my power to send you something more worthy of your acceptance, but i hope you will not disdain the gift, insignificant though it be. desiring to be kindly remembered to mr. and mrs. skepper and the remainder of the family,—i remain, dear madam, your most obedient humble servant,

george borrow.

that borrow owed his introduction to mr. cunningham to mrs. clarke is clear, although cunningham, in his letter to the bible society urging the claims of borrow, refers to the fact that a “young farmer” in the neighbourhood had introduced him. this was probably her brother, breame p. 94skepper. dr. knapp was of the opinion that joseph john gurney obtained borrow his appointment, but the recently published correspondence of borrow with the bible society makes it clear that cunningham wrote—on 27th december, 1832—recommending borrow to the secretary, the rev. andrew brandram. how little he knew of borrow is indicated by the fact that he referred to him as “independent in circumstances.” brandram told caroline fox many years afterwards that gurney had effected the introduction, but this was merely a lapse of memory. in fact we find borrow asking to be allowed to meet gurney before his departure. in any case he has himself told us, in one of the brief biographies of himself that he wrote, that he promptly walked to london, covering the whole distance of 112 miles in twenty-seven hours, and that his expenses amounted to 5½d. laid out in a pint of ale, a half-pint of milk, a roll of bread and two apples. he reached london in the early morning, called at the offices of the bible society in earl street, and was kindly received by andrew brandram and joseph jowett, the two secretaries. he was asked if he would care to learn manchu, and go to st. petersburg. he was given six months for the task, and doubtless also some money on account. he returned to norwich more luxuriously—by mail coach. in june, 1833, we find a letter from borrow to jowett, dated from willow lane, norwich, and commencing, “i have mastered manchu, and i should feel obliged by your informing the committee of the fact, and also my excellent friend, mr. brandram.” a long reply to this by jowett is among my borrow papers, but the bible society clearly kept copies of its letters, and a portion of this one has been printed. it shows that borrow went through much heart-burning before his destiny was finally settled. at last he was again invited to london, and found himself as one of two candidates for the privilege of going to russia. the examination consisted of a manchu hymn, of which borrow’s version seems to have proved the more acceptable, and he afterwards printed it in his targum. finally, on the 5th of july, 1833, borrow received a letter from jowett offering him the appointment with a salary of £200 a year and expenses. the letter contained his first lesson in the then unaccustomed discipline of the evangelical vocabulary. he was not at first at home in the precise measure p. 95of unction required by his new friends. borrow had spoken of the prospect of becoming “useful to the deity, to man, and to himself.” “doubtless you meant,” commented jowett, “the prospect of glorifying god,” and jowett frankly tells him that his tone of confidence in speaking of himself “had alarmed some of the excellent members of our committee.” borrow adapted himself at once, and is congratulated by jowett in a later communication upon the “truly christian” spirit of his next letter.

by an interesting coincidence there was living in norwich at the moment when borrow was about to leave it, a man who had long identified himself with good causes in russia, and had lived in that country for a considerable period of his life. john venning was born in totnes in 1776, and he is buried—in the rosary cemetery—at norwich, where he died in 1858, after twenty-eight years’ residence in that city. he started for st. petersburg four years after john howard had died, ostensibly on behalf of the commercial house with which he was associated, but with the intention of carrying on the work of that great man in prison reform. alexander i. was on the throne, and he made venning his friend, frequently conversing with him upon religious subjects. he became the treasurer of a society for the humanising of russian prisons; but when nicholas became czar in 1825 venning’s work became more difficult, though the emperor was sympathetic. venning returned to england in 1830, and thus opportunely, in 1833, was able to give his fellow-townsman letters of introduction to prince galitzin and other russian notables, so that borrow was able to set forth under the happiest auspices—with an entire change of conditions from those eight years of semi-starvation that he was now to leave behind him for ever. borrow left london for st. petersburg on 31st july, 1833, not forgetting to pay his mother before he left the £17 he had had to borrow during his time of stress. always devoted to his mother, borrow sent her sums of money at intervals from the moment the power of earning came to him. we shall never know, we can only surmise, something of the self-sacrificing devotion of that mother during the years in which borrow had failed to find remunerative work. wherever he wandered there had always been a home in the willow lane cottage. it is probable that much the greater p. 96part of the period of his eight years of penury was spent under her roof. yet we may be sure that the good mother never once reproached her son. she had just that touch of idealism in her character that made for faith and hope. in any case never more was borrow to suffer penury, or to be a burden on his mother. henceforth, to her dying day, she was to be his devoted care.