To Thomas Foy

Sir

My engagements here prevent me from devoting the amount of time I could wish to a reply to yours of Sunday.¹ If your feelings were wounded it is a proof that one object aimed at in my letter² has been attained. It was penned with this deliberate intention, though certainly with very little hope of such a result, as I had begun to imagine that you had no feelings to wound.

I don’t think I am made of very combustible material. If you can prove me so constituted you may, if you think fit, set yourself down as the discoverer of the fact. I entirely disclaim all knowledge of that ‘inflammation’ which you fancy your absence on Sunday week created. My opinion of your conduct was formed previous to my going to Southampton and your presence or absence was a matter of exceedingly small moment to me. I wrote to you actuated by no sudden gust of passion, but with the settled conviction that it was my duty to do so, that I was writing to a man whose honourable feeling had vanished, the very broad cloth on whose back was a shining falsehood inasmuch as it deceived the public into the belief that its wearer was a gentleman.

This was the sad and sober feeling which influenced me when I wrote to you. I am indebted to no ‘cowardly rascal’ for the materials of my opinion. Years ago I heard how you could amuse yourself after my departure from Manchester³ and yet could not afford to pay me. You were employed at Swansea, this I learned from Hubert Couran⁴ and I wrote to you there. You may deny having received my letter but what guarantee have I for the truth of this denial. Some months afterwards you met Tidmarsh in London and asked him for my address but you never wrote to me. I asked him how you looked and his reply was – without knowing anything of the transaction between us – that you were ‘splendidly dressed’. You have mentioned the name of Mr McLachlan, I believe him to be an honest man and that if you imagine the contrary you do him wrong. This is my opinion of him and this being the case I would accept him with brotherly affection if he had not 6d in his pocket sooner than such a character as I deemed yours to be, however elaborate might be the manmillinery⁵ of its exterior.

One sentence in your letter amuses me; you seem to have woven the principle therein contained into your actions and referred to it as their justification ‘I may with you or anyone else be affected by circumstances’ a convenient creed no doubt for those who wish to make use of it, but a creed to which no man of principle will fly for refuge. Take the advice of one who notwithstanding all his ‘abuse’ and all his ‘revenge’ would still wish to see you rescued from the effeminacy and folly, to gratify which you have unfortunately made shipwreck of whatever nobleness or manhood you ever possessed, put this creed of circumstances under your feet and endeavour to be honest in spite of circumstances.

I have given your integrity a long trial and I would give it another if I could. Had I a wish to gratify my ‘vengeance’ nothing could be easier; but I would like to throw you once more upon your principle; my letters are intended to cut deep. I speak my mind fully without exaggeration or diminution. If what I have said shews you the peril in which you have placed your reputation, and if a regard for its safety prompts you to adopt the only course of action by which that safety can be ensured, I shall be infinitely better pleased than if in reply to my first letter you had at once responded by prompt payment.

Your friend | John Tyndall

RI MS JT/2/13b/375-376

LT Transcript Only