feel as though I had been guilty of every crime,
and I have passed many sleepless nights after receiving letters from you.
I shall not sleep to-night in consequence of passages in your letters
just received."

Here he quotes from his mother's letter and answers:

"Now as to the young man's living for six hundred dollars, I know who it
is of whom you speak. It is Dr. Parkman, who made it his boast that he
would live for that sum, but you did not enquire _how_ he lived. I can
tell you. He never refused an invitation to dine, breakfast, or tea,
which he used to obtain often by pushing himself into everybody's
company. When he did not succeed in getting invitations, he invited
himself to breakfast, dine, or sup with some of his friends. He has often
walked up to breakfast with us, a distance of three or four miles. If he
failed in getting a dinner or meal at any of these places, he either used
to go without, or a bit of bread answered the purpose till next meal. In
his dress he was so shabby and uncouth that any decent person would be
ashamed to walk with him in the street. Above all, his notorious meanness
in his money matters, his stickling with his poor washerwoman for a
halfpenny and with others for a farthing, and his uniform stinginess on
all occasions rendered him notoriously disgusting to all his
acquaintances, and affords, I should imagine, but a poor example for
imitation....

"The fact is I could live for _fifty_ pounds a year if my only object was
to live cheap, and, on the other hand, if I was allowed one thousand
pounds a year, I could spend it all without the least extravagance in
obtaining greater advantages in my art. But as your goodness has allowed
me but two hundred pounds (and I wish you again to receive my sincere
thanks for this allowance), should not my sole endeavor be to spend all
this to the utmost advantage; to keep as closely within the bounds of
that allowance as possible, and would not _economy_ in this instance
consist in rigidly keeping up to this rule? If this is a true statement
of the case, then have I been perfectly economical, for I have not yet
overrun my allowance, and I think I shall be able to return home without
having exceeded it a single shilling. If I have done this, and still
continue to do it, why, in every letter I receive from home, is the
injunction repeated of _being economical?_ It makes me exceedingly
unhappy, especially when I am conscious of having used my utmost
e