and leave the differences henceforward in respectful silence. The recital may still serve to show to sympathetic persons the true lines and enlargements of her genius. It is certain that this incongruity never interrupted for a moment the intercourse, such as it was, that existed between us. I ought to add here, that certain mental changes brought new questions into conversation. In the summer of 1840, she passed into certain religious states, which did not impress me as quite healthy, or likely to be permanent; and I said, ‘I do not understand your tone; it seems exaggerated. You are one who can afford to speak and to hear the truth. Let us hold hard to the commonsense, and let us speak in the positive degree.’ And I find, in later letters from her, sometimes playful, sometimes grave allusions to this explanation.
Is——there? Does water meet water?—no need of wine, sugar, spice, or even a soupcon of lemon to remind of a tropical climate? I fear me not. Yet, dear positives, believe me superlatively yours, Margaret.The following letter seems to refer, under an Eastern guise, and with something of Eastern exaggeration of compliment too, to some such native sterilities in her correspondent:—