It is perversely encouraging to catch a great writer in a goof, and this goof in particular illustrates what seems to be the most difficult problem in English pronouns.
In defiance of all predictions, “whom” continues to thrive in written English. If anything, its position now is stronger than it was a decade or two ago.
It’s not usually hard to decide when to use “who” or “whom”; the rules are exactly the same as for “he” and “him.”
He gave it to me.
I gave it to him.
Who gave it to you?
You gave it to whom?
“Who” is the subject; “whom” is the object.
But when “who” or “whom” is part of a long clause that is itself an object, it gets tricky, and even Hawthorne stumbles.
The original papers, together with the scarlet letter itself—a most curious relic—are still in my possession, and shall be freely exhibited to whomsoever, induced by the great interest of the narrative, may desire a sight of them. (“The Custom House,” the introduction to The Scarlet Letter.)
It should have been “whosoever,” not “whomsoever.”
At first glance, “to whom” seems obviously correct. But the pronoun isn’t the object of “to”; the object is the whole clause “whomsoever, induced by the great interest of the narrative, may desire a sight of them.” “Whomsoever” is the subject of “may desire,” and therefore should be “whosoever.”
On the other hand, in the stock phrase “to whom it may concern,” “whom” is absolutely correct. Why? Because, in the clause that is the object of “to,” “whom” is the object of “concern.”
It concerns him.
It concerns whom?
So we caught Hawthorne napping, and we demonstrated a valuable grammatical principle. It’s been a good day.
The Editor 