º”
º

º-i
~|-
fg
L*.
ºf ºz º.º. ººr
2 ."
2&2
'll IT HX
s
>
BEQUEATHED
UNIVERSITY OF VIICHIGAN
HO/V. A LFF/E US FELCH.
14
|
If S$ ) {}.
-| -
:
º-
º
*
º
Leº

DA
56.2.
, H4+
EFIEF EIOGRAPHIES
OF
EUROPEAN PUBLIC MEN.
EDITED BY
THOMAS WENTWORTH HIGGINSON.
TO BE ISSUED SHORTLY :
E FIEF E I O G R A PHIES.
Vol. II—FWGLISH RA DICAL LEAD FRS.
By R. J. HINTON, $1.50.
Vol. III—FR ENOH LEA DERS.
By Edward KING. $1.50.
G. P. PUTNAM’s SONS, º & g NEW YORK,
BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES
***:::…,
6-cºol 2
stºvº-º-º-º-º-......:
ENGLISH STATESMEN
PREPARED BY
THOMAS WENTWORTH HIGGINSON
NEW YORK
G. P. PUT N AM S S O N S
FOURTH Ave. AND 23D St.
1875.

COPYRIGITT.
G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS.
1875.
men, by way of preparation for attending or reading the
Parliamentary debates. It is easy enough to find books
which portray these men, and that with much wit and
vigor ; but they are all written by Englishmen for English-
men : they all include many details to which an American
is indifferent, and they all omit or take for granted a great
deal that an American wishes to know. In this volume the
attempt has been made to condense several of these
books into one, making them supply one another's defi-
ciencies, and filling the gaps, if need be, from other sources
still ; in the hope to produce something which, if no better
than the rest in its ingredients, may at least be more useful
to Americans through its arrangement.


vi PREFACE.
The book is divided, for convenience, into three parts.
The first of these includes sketches of six conspicuous
men, already well-known in this country. The second
includes as many of the minor Conservative leaders,
members of the present Cabinet. The third includes the
Same number of Liberals, all of whom have heretofore
held office. These pages, therefore, do not delineate merely
Mr. Disraeli and Mr. Gladstone, but their associates and
their probable successors. Were this the only volume pro-
posed, it should certainly include Professor Fawcett and
Sir Charles Dilke also, as representative men ; but as the
line must be drawn somewhere, and as they have not yet
held office, it seemed better to leave them to be described
in the companion volume of “English Radical Leaders”
now in preparation by Col. R. J. Hinton. This gentle-
man, being of English birth, and having always kept him-
self informed in regard to popular agitation in England,
is peculiarly well fitted for the work he has undertaken.
A volume of sketches of French statesmen will also follow,
to be prepared by Edward King, Esq., whose admirable
letters from Paris, during the Franco-Prussian War, afforded
a guarantee of his special fitness for any such task. Other
volumes are already planned and will appear as rapidly as
circumstances may permit.
T. W. H.
NEWPORT, R. I. Feb. 26, 1875.
CONTENTS.
• e º e e s a e g º ºs e º e s is s a tº e º ſº e º e s º º e º ºs º ºs º a
a s e º is a e e s m º ºs º a dº is a s e ºs e º 'º º is s = e is a s tº a º ºs º º
e e º e º e º s º as º is a e s is sº e º ºs e s tº e º e º & tº e º e º ºs &
* g º ºs º gº º e º 'º e g is e º 'º º º º ºs e º 'º º e º ſº tº dº & & &
tº º e e º ſº gº & e e g g g g º O & © tº tº dº e º 'º º tº # *
PART II.
MR. DISRAELI’s MINISTRY.
VII.-LORD CAIRNs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
VIII.--THE DUKE OF RICHMOND
IX. —THE EARL OF DERBY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
X.—THE MARQUIS OF SALISBURY. . . . . . . ... . . .... . . . . . . ..
XI.-SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE
XII.—MR. GATHORNE HARDy
tº ti º e º º ſº tº º is ſº $ tº a tº £ tº ſº tº º ſº e º e º º
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
• * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * g tº ſº tº e º e is e
PART III.
CANDIDATES FOR THE LIBERAL I.F.ADERSHIP.
XIII.—THE MARQUIs of HARTINGTON
XIV.-MR. FORSTER
XV.-MR. LOWE
• * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
e tº º e º e º tº gº º ºs º ºs º º e º e º & tº gº tº e º we s tº e º ºs e e º e
* * * e º ºs e e º sº e º e s ∈ e º sº tº a tº sº e s is us tº e º ºs e s m e º e &
• * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * > e º e º e º 'º e º 4° e º a $ 4 & a tº s tº e º sº º ſº tº dº sº º
*** * * * * * * * * g e tº dº tº * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
brilliant article by Macaulay, based upon a book
£ºil called “The State in its Relations with the Church.”
“The writer of this volume,” said the critic, “is a young man
of unblemished character and of distinguished parliamentary
talents; the rising hope of those stern and unbending Tories
who follow, reluctantly and cautiously, a leader whose ex-
perience and eloquence are indispensable to them, but
whose cautious temper and moderate opinions they abhor.
It would not be at all strange,” he adds, “if Mr. Glad-
stone were one of the most unpopular men in England.”
Nearly thirty-six years have passed, since this passage was
written. The hope of the stern and unbending Tories has
for years been the unquestioned leader of English Liberals,
and though he may have been, at times, as unpopular as
Macaulay could have predicted, the hostility has come
mainly from the ranks of those who were thus early named
as his friends. But whatever may have been Mr. Glad-
stone's opinions or affiliations, whoever may have been his
º º g-
tº sº : * * * *




2 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
friends or foes, the credit of surpassing ability has always
been his. Even in 1839, the Chevalier. Bunsen wrote of
him, “ Gladstone is the first man in England as to intel-
lectual power.”
MR. GLADSTONE'S PERSONAL APPEARANCE.
When an American, on visiting the House of Commons
for the first time, studies with eagerness the face of the
great Liberal statesman, his first impression must be, I
should think, not so much ‘‘how fine ! how intellectual ’’
as “how un-English how American l’ Mr. Disraeli him-
self, though far remoter from the prevailing English type,
is hardly more distinctly separated from it than is Mr.
Gladstone. The more highly charged nervous organiza-
tion, the greater sensitiveness, the mobility, the subtlety of
mind that we habitually attribute, with or without reason,
to the American type, these all are visible, at the very
first glance, in him. For myself, on the only occasion
when I had the honor of meeting Mr. Gladstone in his
own house, I was haunted throughout the interview with
an increasing resemblance to another face and voice, till
at last it almost seemed that it was Ralph Waldo Emerson
with whom I was talking.
“When Mr. Gladstone first entered the House of Com-
mons, in the heyday of his youth,” says an English writer,
“his looks earned for him the sobriquet, which he pre-
served in effect for some years afterwards, of ‘Handsome
Gladstone.’ The handsome looks are gone, but it is a
noble face, for all that, a far nobler countenance than it
was then in its early bloom and freshness. Lined with
MR. GLADSTONE. 3
thought ; paled by years of toil ; the dark hair thinned ;
the dark eyes Caverned under brows habitually contracted
—it is essentially the face of a Senator, one of the ‘Patres
Conscripti.’ And there are subtle traits of character, readily
enough discernible at a glance, by those who care to look for
them, subtle though they are, in those nervous lineaments.
A blending of generosity and scorn in the play of the nos-
trils, an alternating severity and sweetness in the mobile
mouth. It is a face betraying every emotion, concealing
nothing—incapable of concealment. We speak of this, as
of something not by any means to a debater's, and still less
to a party leader's, advantage. It is a very considerable and
perpetual disadvantage to Mr. Gladstone. He ‘wears his
heart upon his sleeve, for daws to peck at.” He will visibly
writhe under an ungenerous taunt, while it is being uttered.
His visage darkens with indignation, while his adversary is
yet speaking.” +
“Mr. Gladstone's face,” says another acute observer,
“differs strangely from that of his great rival. It is the
most mobile and expressive countenance in the House of
Commons; it can no more conceal the thoughts flitting
through the brain behind it than the mirror can refuse to
reflect the figure placed before it ; it is incapable of reserve
or of mystery ; hope, fear, anxiety, exultation, anger, pleas-
ure, each of these in turn is ‘writ large’ upon it, so that
the spectator watching it closely can read in it, as in a book,
the varying thoughts and feelings of him to whom it be-
longs. And the face is in the highest degree characteristic
of the man. There never was a statesman more impulsive
* “The Gladstone Government, by a Templar,” pp. 123, 124.
4. BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
than the present Prime Minister ; never one who took less
pains to hide the workings of his mind from those around
him, or who was more determined to wear his heart upon
his sleeve. His openness in this respect is at once his fault
and his virtue. It is an error in any man to whom are
committed great destinies, and the policy of a mighty na-
tion, and we cannot wonder that his critics should often
have complained of it. But it has at the same time re-
deemed not a few of the mistakes and inconsistencies of his
career, and has given the world evidence of the fact that,
however impulsive and at times imprudent he may be, he
is at least thoroughly sincere, even in his most impulsive
actions.” +
MR. GLADSTONE'S ORIGIN AND PUBLIC CAREER.
William Ewart Gladstone was born in Liverpool, Eng-
land, Dec. 29, 1809 : the son of John Gladstone, Esq.,
and of Anne, daughter of Andrew Robertson, Provost of
Dingwall, Ross, in Scotland. The father was mentioned
with respect in the House of Commons by Sir Robert Peel,
in 1819, as “Mr. Gladstones, the great Liverpool mer-
chant.” He was legally authorized, in 1835, to drop the
final letter of his name ; and was raised to a baronetcy in
1846, being succeeded in that title, five years after, by his
eldest son, the present Sir Thomas Gladstone, the states-
man's half brother.
Mr. W. E. Gladstone was educated at Eton and at Ox-
ford, where he acquired an early eminence which had no
* “Cabinet Portraits, by T. Wemyss Reid,” pp. 17, 18.
MR. GLADSTONE. 5
little influence on his future career. He entered Christ
Church College in 1829, and took the degree of Bachelor
of Arts in 1831, with the rare honors of a “double-first-
class man”—first-class both in classics and in mathematics.
He then became a Fellow of All Souls’ College. In the
year following, he entered Parliament for the first time, as
member for Newark, being then under twenty-three. Two
years later (1834), he took office for the first time, under
Sir Robert Peel, as a Junior Lord of the Treasury. In
1835, he became Under Secretary for the colonies, holding
office, however, for but two months. In 1841, he was
made Vice-president of the Board of Trade, and in 1843,
its President, having also a place in the Cabinet. In 1845,
he became Secretary for colonial affairs. -
Up to this time he had been a moderate conservative,
and was regarded by many as an ‘‘Oxford bigot.” So
faithful was his allegiance to his first chief that the Whig
Examiner called him the “Pony Peel.” His father owned
slave plantations in Demerara, and Mr. Gladstone's first
speech was delivered in reply to Lord Howick, on the
question of Negro Emancipation, and urged the right of
the planters to be compensated. He opposed the reform of
the Irish church, the reduction of the number of Irish
bishops, the Dissenters' Chapel Bill, the Endowment of
Maynooth, and the Emancipation of the Jews. But when
Sir Robert Peel announced his Free Trade policy in
I846, Mr. Gladstone was his firmest supporter ; and from
the time of his return to Parliament, in behalf of Oxford
University, in 1847, he has heartily supported Liberal
measures. In 1852, he became Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer, and while holding this office made, in introduc-
6 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
ing his annual “budget,” a series of speeches which were
pronounced by Lord John Russell (now Earl Russell),
“to contain the ablest expositions of the true principles of
finance ever delivered by a British statesman.” After the
death of Lord Palmerston in 1865, Mr. Gladstone became
the leader of the Liberal party in the House of Commons,
and in December, 1868, he became Premier of England.
At the session of 1873, Mr. Gladstone introduced an
elaborate bill for the reform of university education in
Ireland, the main object of which was the establishment
of a system which should be acceptable to both Protestants
and Catholics. The bill satisfied neither class, and was
defeated ; upon which the ministry resigned. Mr. Disraeli
was called upon to form a new ministry, but declined, and
Mr. Gladstone and his colleagues returned to their posts.
The ministry was, however, again and again defeated, and
On January 24, 1874, Mr. Gladstone unexpectedly issued
an address announcing the dissolution of Parliament.
The elections for a new Parliament gave a strong conserv-
ative majority. On Feb. 17 Mr. Gladstone resigned,
and on the next day Mr. Disraeli assumed the premiership,
which he still holds.
MR. GLADSTONE AS AN ORATOR.
“The first place among living competitors for the Ora-
torical crown,” says Mr. A. Hayward, in an admirable article
in the Quarterly Review, “will be conceded without a dis-
senting voice to Mr. Gladstone. An excellent judge, a
frequent opponent of his policy, whom we consulted, de-
clared that it was Eclipse first and all the rest nowhere.
MR. GLADSTONE. 7
He may lack Mr. Bright's impressive diction, impressive
by its simplicity, or Mr. Disraeli's humor and Sarcasm ;
but he has made ten eminently successful speeches to Mr.
Bright's or Mr. Disraeli's one. His foot is ever in the
stirrup; his lance is ever in the rest. He throws down
the gauntlet to all comers. Right or wrong, he is always
real, natural, earnest, unaffected, and unforced. He is a
great debater, a great parliamentary speaker; with a shade
more imagination, he would be a great orator.””
“In his pronunciation there is, ineradicably noticeable,
the provincial twang of Lancashire. As for his voice, it is
like a silver clarion. And the charm of that harmonious
voice is this—that, after the delivery of a speech four or
five hours in its duration, and (ſesſe Hansard 1) there have
been such speeches, the closing words of the peroration
will ring as clear as a bell upon the ear, without the ſaintest
perceptible indication, to the last, of anything like physical
exhaustion.” +
“Mr. Gladstone's oratorical manner,” says a writer in
the Gentleman's Magazine, “is much more strongly marked
by action than is Mr. Bright's. He emphasizes by smiting
his right hand in the open palm of his left ; by pointing
his finger straight out at his adversary, real or representa-
tive ; and, in his hottest moments, by beating the table
with his clenched hand. Sometimes in answer to cheers
he turns right round to his immediate supporters on the
benches behind him, and speaks directly to them ; where-
2
* “The British Parliament; its History and Eloquence.” Lon-
don Quarterly Review, April, 1872.
+ “The Gladstone Government,” p. 125,
8 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
upon the Conservatives, who hugely enjoy a baiting of the
emotionable ex-Premier, call out ‘Order order l’ This
Call seldom fails in the desired effect of exciting the right
hon. gentleman's irascibility, and when he loses his temper
his opponents may well be glad. Mr. Bright always writes
out the peroration of his speeches, and at one time was
accustomed to send the slip of paper to the reporters. Mr.
Disraeli sometimes writes out the whole of his speeches.
The one he delivered to the Glasgow students in Novem-
ber, I873, was in type in the office of a London newspaper
at the moment the right hon. gentleman was speaking at
the University. Mr. Gladstone never writes a line of his
speeches, and some of his most successful ones have been
made in the heat of debate, and necessarily without prep-
aration. His speech in winding up the debate on the
Irish University Bill has rarely been excelled for close rea-
soning, brilliant illustration, and powerful eloquence; yet
if it be referred to it will be seen that it is for the greater
and best part a reply to the speech of Mr. Disraeli, who
had just sat down, yielding the floor to his rival half an
hour after midnight.
“Evidence of the same swift reviewing of a position, and
of the existence of the same power of instantly marshaling
arguments and illustrations, and sending them forth clad
in a panoply of eloquence, is apparent in Mr. Gladstone's
speech when commenting on Mr. Disraeli's announcement
of the withdrawal of the main portion of the Endowed
Schools Act Amendment Bill. The announcement, and
especially the manner in which it was made, was a surprise
that almost stunned and momentarily bewildered the House
of Commons. Mr. Gladstone was bound to speak, and
MR. GLADSTONE. 9
to speak the moment Mr. Disraeli resumed his seat. He
had no opportunity to take Counsel, and no time to make
preparations for his speech ; but the result of his masterly
oration at this crisis was that the unpopularity and dissatis-
faction created by the course he had taken in the matter
of the Regulation of Public Worship Bill melted like snow
in the firelight, and the conviction was borne in upon his
discontented followers that as long as Mr. Gladstone lived
and chose to hold the office, there was no other leader
possible for the Liberal party.”
“As a debater,” says Wemyss Reid, “he stands without
a rival in the House of Commons. Mr. Disraeli possesses
a brilliant wit, and powers of sarcasm to which he can lay
no claim ; but no one who has seen Mr. Gladstone take
his part in a great party battle will question his superiority
as a debater to any of his rivals or colleagues. He is never
seen to so much advantage as when, at the close of a long
discussion, he rises in the midst of a crowded House im-
patient for the division, to reply to Mr. Disraeli or Mr.
Hardy. The readiness with which he replies to a speech
just delivered is amazing ; he will take up, one after an-
Other, the arguments of his opponent, and examine them
and debate them with as much precision and fluency as
though he had spent weeks in the preparation of his
answer. Then, too, at such moments time is precious,
and he is compelled to repress that tendency to prolixity,
which is one of his greatest faults as an orator. His sen-
* “Men and Manner in Parliament, by the Member for the Chil-
tern Hundreds. Reprinted, with additions, from the Gentleman's
Magazine.” London, I874, pp. 65–69. -
I O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
tences, instead of wandering on interminably, are short
and clear, and from beginning to end of the speech there
is hardly a word which seems unnecessary. *
“The excitement, too, which prevails around him, al-
ways infects him strongly ; his pale face twitches, his mag-
nificent voice quivers, his body sways from side to side as
he pours forth argument, pleading, and invective, strange-
ly intermingled. The storm of cheers and counter-cheers
rages around him, as it can rage nowhere except in the
House of Commons on such an occasion, but high and
clear above the tumult rings out his voice, like the trumpet
sounding through the din of the battle-field. As he draws
to a close something like a calm comes over the scene, and
upon both sides men listen eagerly to his words, anxious
to catch each sentence of his peroration, always delivered
with an artistic care which only one other member of Par-
liament can equal, and seldom failing to impress the
House with its beauty. Then it is that his great powers
are seen to the fullest advantage—voice, and accent, and
gesture, all giving force and life to the words which he
utterS.
“And having upon such an occasion seen him in the
most favorable light, let the reader go into the House of
Commons during the “question hour,’ set apart for the
torture of ministers, if he wishes to see how very different
an appearance he can make under other circumstances.
The art of answering questions is by no means to be de-
spised by a Cabinet Minister; but of all the great minis-
ters we have had in recent times, Mr. Gladstone has the
least knowledge of that art. His great fault is that he does
not know when to stop. Having, in reply to Some troub-
MR. GLADSTONE. I I
lesome questioner, made what seems to be an explicit
declaration of his intentions, instead of sitting down as Mr.
Disraeli would do under similar circumstances, he pro-
ceeds forthwith to explain, at interminable length, the
alternative courses open to him, the reasons why none of
those courses was suitable, and the arguments in favor of
that which he has decided to adopt. On and still on he
goes, with an unbroken fluency, and with a command of
language which is marvelous, until a shade of weariness
steals over the faces of his colleagues on the Treasury
Bench, and honorable gentlemen opposite unceremoniously
show that they have heard enough by entering into a brisk
conversation with each other. Some one, however, is
watching him, and presently, as he glibly makes a state-
ment upon a matter of fact, that some one, whoever he
may be, gives him a direct contradiction. An angry frown
instantly mantles upon the brows of the Premier; he hesi-
tates, pauses, whispers a word to one of his trusty lieu-
tenants at his side, and then possibly is compelled to make
a material modification in his original statement. These
inaccuracies of his in matters of detail are of too frequent
occurrence, and are so notorious, that one or two men
have openly declared him to be ‘constitutionally incapa-
ble of speaking the truth.’ This, of course, is a charge
which no sensible person would for a moment believe in.
Mr. Gladstone has, we are convinced, a most profound
and genuine reverence for the truth as the truth ; never-
theless, it cannot be denied that from carelessness, or some
other cause, he is occasionally led into serious mis-state-
ments, even of the simplest facts.
“And this failing is the less excusable inasmuch as there
{2 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
is no one in the whole kingdom who, as a public speaker,
has a command Over facts, figures, or small matters of
detail at all to be compared to his. The budget speeches
which, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, he has from time
to time delivered, are so famous that we need merely refer
to them. No one who heard any of those speeches, will
forget the Chancellor's marvelous command over the regi-
ments of figures he had to lay before the House; his
knowledge of the Smallest details of his financial scheme;
and the wonderful art and skill which laid down the whole
plan in its proper proportions, giving no undue promi-
nence to one part, and showing no unmerited neglect
towards another. Mr. Gladstone walks amongst figures
like a king amongst his subjects; he plays with them like
a juggler with his balls. Something of his capacity in this
respect he showed in the great speech in which he intro-
duced the Irish Church Bill to the House of Commons.
For three hours did that speech flow on without interrup-
tion ; it was long enough to have filled a goodly-sized
volume, and yet from first to last the Premier had each
one of his countless figures and facts in its proper place ;
and never halted or stumbled for a moment whilst per-
forming his tremendous task.” +
“The most memorable passage of arms between Mr.
Gladstone and Mr. Disraeli caume off in the debate on the
budget (Nov., 1853), when the Derby government was
defeated by a majority of nineteen. It had lasted four
nights, Mr. Gladstone had not spoken. Sir James Gra-
ham and Mr. Sidney Herbert were anxious that he should
* “Cabinet Portraits,” pp. 23–26.
MR. GLADSTONE. I 3
not speak after Mr. Disraeli, who rose at a late hour. In-
deed, it was understood that Mr. Disraeli was to close the
debate. He fought his losing cause with spirit and dex-
terity, till (an unusual thing with him) he lost his temper
and broke through all bounds of conventional decorum.
Strong language may have been justified by the provocation,
but he went too far when he told Sir Charles Wood (Lord
Halifax) that petulance was not sarcasm, nor insolence
invective; and said he viewed Sir James Graham with re-
gard, but not with respect.
“The moment he ceased, before he had well time to re-
sume his seat amidst the loud acclamations of his party,
Mr. Gladstone bounded to the floor. He was encountered
by menacing and derisive cheers; he was twice interrupted,
by an Irish member making unseemly noises in the gal-
lery. But he was irrepressible : he stood firm as Guizot
under his famous ‘Oui, j'ai été à Gand.’ ‘This speech,'
he repeated, ‘is one which must be answered, and
answered at the moment. The character of England, in-
volved in that of her public men, the character of England
is at stake.” After indignantly repelling Mr. Disraeli's
charges and invectives, he ended a masterly analysis of the
budget by describing it as based on principles against
which all true Conservatives stood pledged.
“Mr. Gladstone's speeches (like Fox's or the late Lord
Derby’s) are not so well adapted for quotation as those of
many inferior performers ; because they are essentially
working speeches. But, as an average specimen, we take
the peroration of that on Parliamentary Reform (April 27,
1866, Lord Grosvenor's motion):
“‘This Bill is in a state of crisis and of peril, and the Government
I4. BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
along with it. We stand or fall with it, as has been declared by my
noble friend Lord Russell. We stand with it now ; we may fall
with it a short time hence. If we do so fall, we, or others in our
places, shall rise with it hereaſter. I shall not attempt to measure
with precision the forces that are to be arrayed against us in the
coming issue. Perhaps the great division of to-night is not to be the
last, but only the first of a series of divisions. At some point of the
contest you may possibly succeed. You may drive us from our seats.
You may slay, you may bury the measure that we have introduced.
But we will write upon its gravestone for an epitaph this line, with
certain confidence in its fulfillment :
“Exoriare aliquis nostris ex ossibus ultor.”
You cannot fight against the future. Time is on our side. The
great social forces which move onwards in their might and majesty,
and which the tumult of these debates does not for a moment im-
pede or disturb, those great social forces are against you; they work
with us; they are marshaled in our support. And the banner which
we now carry in the fight, though, perhaps, at some moment of
the struggle, it may droop over our sinking heads, yet will float
again in the eye of heaven, and will be borne by the firm hands of
the united people of the three kingdoms, perhaps not to an easy,
but to a certain and to a not distant victory.’
“It was in this speech that after replying to Mr. Lowe,
who had twitted him with cpposing the Reform Bill in the
Oxford Union Debating Club, when an undergraduate, in
1831, he turned to the Liberal party and said : -
\ ‘I came amongst you an outcast from those with whom I asso-
ciated, driven from their ranks, I admit, by no arbitrary act, but by
the slow and resistless forces of conviction. I came among you, to
make use of the legal phraseology, in forma pauperis. I had moth-
ing to offer you but faithful and honorable service : you received me
as Dido received the shipwrecked AEneas:
“Excepi ejectum littore, egentem.”
MR. GLADSTONE. . I 5
And I only trust you may not hereafter, at any time, have to com-
plete the sentence in regard to me:
“Et regni, demens ! in parte locavi.”
You received me with kindness, indulgence, generosity, and I may
even say with some measure of your confidence. And the relation
between us has assumed such a form that you can never be my
debtors, but that I must be forever in your debt.”
“An old and highly esteemed member of the Liberal
party (Mr. Philips, Member for Bury) said that the deliv-
ery of this passage brought tears into his eyes; and he
added : ‘I was not ashamed to own it, when I observed
that several friends near me were similarly moved.’
“Mr. Gladstone is more Ciceronian than Demosthenic.
Amplification, not condensation, is his forte ; but he can
be fanciful or pithy on occasions; as when in a budget
speech he compared his arrival at the part in which the
remissions of taxation were to be announced, to the descent
into the smiling valleys of Italy after a toilful ascent of the
Alps; or when he said that it was the duty of the Minister
to stand ‘like a wall of adamant,’ between the people and
the Crown. His graceful reply to Mr. Chaplin will com-
pensate for many a hasty reproof administered to assailants
whom he had better have left unnoticed :
“‘The hon. member who has just sat down has admonished us,
and myself in particular, that the sense of justice is apt to grow
dull under the influence of a long parliamentary experience. But
there is one sentiment which I can assure him does not grow dull
under the influence of a long parliamentary experience, and that is
the sense of pleasure when I hear—whether upon these benches or
upon those opposite to me—an able, and at the same time frank,
ingenuous, and manly statement of opinion, and one of such a char.
acter as to show me that the man who makes it is a real addition to
16 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
the intellectual and moral worth and strength of Parliament. Hav-
ing said this, I express my thanks to the hon. member for having
sharply challenged us. It is right that we should be so challenged,
and we do not shrink from it.'” +
The Severest test by which an orator can be tried is com-
monly held to be that of immediate success—the actual
changing of votes by eloquence, and the turning of defeat
into victory. Tried by this standard, also, Mr. Gladstone
is strong ; and there are repeated instances on record
where his personal power alone reversed the expected ſate
of some important measure. For instance, when, as Chan-
Cellor of the Exchequer, he brought in his budget, or
financial estimate, in 1853, it was known that the most
influential portion of the press, headed by the Times, had
bent all its strength, for months, to compel a modification
of the Income Tax, with a view to lighten the burden
thrown on trades and professions by Schedule D.
“A strong pressure was put upon Mr. Gladstone, then
Chancellor of the Exchequer, to fall in with the current of
opinion, which was deemed irresistible. The day before
the financial statement, there was a large dinner company
(ministerialists) assembled at Sir William Molesworth's,
when a member of the Government came in with a face of
dismay to announce that Gladstone was obstinate, and that
they should be all out within the week. Such was the
general expectation. Within twenty-four hours after the
delivery of his speech (April 18), every rational person
was obliged to confess that the proposed modification was
impracticable; and from that hour to this it has never been
* London Quarterly, April, 1872.
MR. GLADSTONE. 17
seriously entertained or formally proposed again. Another
striking instance of the same kind is the revolution he ef-
fected in public and parliamentary opinion (May 4, 1863)
by his speech against the exemption of charities from the
Income Tax.” +
And it is still more remarkable that this sensitive and
finely organized man can produce this effect of conviction,
not merely among his equals in Parliament, but before a
hostile out-door audience.
“See him in the cold gray mist of that October after-
noon advance to the front of the platform at Blackheath,
bareheaded, pale, resolute. -
‘Now one glance round, now upwards turns his brow,
Hushed every breath : he rises—mark him now.’
“ Unluckily, every breath was not hushed. From that
surging sea of heads and faces arose an angry murmur that
presaged a storm. The audience was the reverse of favor-
able : the reserved seats had been invaded by the populace,
including many of the discharged dock-yard laborers ; and
political emissaries were busy among the crowd. But a
love of fair play, stimulated by curiosity, procured him
his opportunity ; he began : his distinct articulation and
finely-toned voice, ‘loud as a trumpet with a silver sound,’
commanded a wide circle, which widened as he went on ;
an English audience is more easily won by firmness than
by flattery; and such was the influence of his manly self-
assertion, combined with a judicious choice of topics, that
the heath far and near resounded with plaudits, when he
wound up by devoting himself, ‘according to the measure
* London Quarterly, April, 1872.
I8 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
of his gifts,” to the service of the country and the Queen.
In little more than an hour he had recovered his waning
popularity and set up his government.” -
“The extreme subtlety of his mind,” says the same
Critic, “while supplying him with an inexhaustible store of
replies and rejoinders, caused him to rely too much on
Over-refined distinctions, and on casuistical modes of rea-
soning. During Garibaldi's visit to London, it was sug-
gested that a noble and richly jointured widow, who was
much about with him, should marry him. To the ob-
... jection that he had a wife living, the ready answer was,
‘Oh, he must get Gladstone to explain her away.” He
has also Burke's habit of attaching undue importance to
Secondary topics. But the same liability to exaggeration
which occasionally impairs the effect of a great speech, not
unfrequently elevates an ordinary one, and enables him to
Compel attention to what may really be an important mat-
ter, although an impatient or fastidious House may deem
it Small.” +
The undue copiousness of Mr. Gladstone's eloquence
was pointed out, twenty years ago, by Mr. Shirley Brooks,
in an admirable sketch of the House of Commons, in the
Quartery Review. Mr. Brooks thinks that this statesman
“would be a more popular orator if he would be less
explicit ; but while he exhausts the subject, he sometimes
exhausts the listener.” The critic then contrasts Mr.
Gladstone's mode of answering questions with that of the
other ministers then in office. He ‘‘points his finger, as
one who is not going to let you off until you quite under-
* London Quarterly, April, 1872. + July, 1854.
MR. GLADSTONE. I9
*
stand the subject, and then he explains it to you at such
length, and with such a copia verborum, that you feel quite
ashamed of the unreasonable trouble you have given to a
man who has so much else to attend to. * * * His an-
swers contrast a good deal with those of Lord Palmerston.
Supposing each statesman to be asked what day the Ses-
sion would be over, the Viscount would reply that it was
the intention of her Majesty to close the session on the
18th of August.
“Mr. Gladstone would possibly premise that, inasmuch
as it was for her Majesty to decide upon the day which
would be acceptable to herself, it was scarcely compatible
with Parliamentary etiquette to ask the Minister to antici-
pate such decision ; but, presuming that he quite under-
stood the purport of the right hon. gentleman's question,
of which he was not entirely assured, the completion of
the duties of the House of Commons, and the formal
termination of the sittings of the Legislature, Were two
distinct things. He would say that her Majesty's Minister
had represented to the Queen that the former would proba-
bly be accomplished about the 18th of August, and that
such day would not be unfavorable for the latter, and
therefore, if the Sovereign should be pleased to ratify that
view of the case, the day he had named would be probably
that inquired after by the right honorable gentleman.”
MR. GLADSTONE AS A PARTY LEADER.
“We have said,” writes Mr. Wemyss Reid, “that Mr.
Disraeli was a great party leader. To party leadership, in
the ordinary acceptation of the term, Mr. Gladstone can
2O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
lay no claim. Mr. Gladstone has many of the best quali-
ties of a great leader. Like Mr. Disraeli, he can inspire
on the part of his followers a high degree of personal
enthusiasm. Out of doors he has a still greater com-
mand over the popular feeling than Mr. Disraeli ; nor is
that ſact to be accounted for by any question of politics.
For whilst Mr. Disraeli's qualities, however much they
may be admired by cultivated men of all political opinions,
are ‘caviare to the general,” Mr. Gladstone's are essentially
popular. He has the passion, the enthusiasm, the fluency
of speech, the apparent simplicity of action which are so
dearly loved by the multitude. His name can be made a
tower of strength for his party; it might be adopted as the
watchword or the rallying cry of a nation.
‘‘But in the House of Commons he finds the task of
leading a majority one which is almost beyond his grasp,
and in which he is only saved from the most serious blun-
ders by the watchfulness of friends and colleagues. Partly,
this is unquestionably due to the fact that he is incapable
of making any allowances for the weaknesses of his fellow-
creatures. He has great strength of his own ; his soul,
when he is engaged on any question of importance, is
filled with an earnestness which is almost heroic, and he
sees only one road to the end at which he aims—the short-
est. Under these circumstances he is incapable of under-
standing how any of his followers, who share his creed,
and profess to be anxious to reach the same goal as him-
self, can demur to the path which he is taking. For their
individual crotchets he makes no allowances, and he is
especially regardless of the unwillingness of the English
gentleman to be driven in any particular direction.
MR. GLADSTONE. 2 I
“It is curious to see as the result of this how much
needless irritation he succeeds at times in Causing amongst
his followers. Over and over again the Liberal clubs have
rung with complaints of his Overbearing manner, of his
“temper’—it ought, rather, to be “temperament’—of his
want of consideration for the ideas, the foibles, the preju-
dices of the rank and file of his party. The general
result is, that he makes a bad leader. Indeed, it would
be safer to say, that he does not lead at all, in the common
sense of the word ; others lead for him. He has another
weakness, which is strangely irritating, not perhaps to the
majority, but at any rate to a very considerable minority of
his followers ; we mean his abhorrence of such a thing as
humor. He makes jests, himself, at times, and occasional-
ly they are good ones; but they are grim and ponderous
jokes, such as one might expect to circle round the board
of a funeral feast rather than in any livelier assemblage,
and the fierceness of manner with which they are delivered,
and the supernatural Solemnity of his countenance, as he
makes them, render it necessary that the man who ventures
to laugh at them should have a bold heart. As to such a
thing as humor in others he cannot see it. More than
once, when the House has been convulsed with laughter,
at some exquisite bit of ‘chaff —to use a slang phrase—on
the part of Mr. Disraeli, he has risen, and in the most
grave and emphatic manner, replied seriously to the lively
sarcasm of his foe. #
“Then there is his “temper.' We hear a great deal—
as it seems to us a great deal more than we ought to hear
—about ‘Gladstone's temper.” . Even Liberal journals and
Liberal members are fond of dwelling upon his hasty tem-
22 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
per, and it seems to be taken for granted that the Prime
Minister is one of those peevish and passionate men who
make life a misery to those around them. The clubs
dwell with much emphasis upon his arrogance and his
domineering disposition ; and every little outburst of
strong feeling which he displays is spoken of as though it
were nothing more than that very contemptible thing—a fit
of anger. As we have already said, it ought, it appears to
us, to be Mr. Gladstone's temperament rather than his tem-
per that should be held accountable for these occasional
outbursts of which so much is made by those around him.
That he is one of those finely-strung men of very tender
susceptibilities, to whom the prick of a pin is more torture
than the heaviest of downright blows, is certain. Equally
Certain is it that he has a will of enormous strength—Lord
Salisbury has spoken of it in Parliament as an “arrogant
will,’ and it is undoubtedly in the Cabinet a dominant
will—that he holds, in a very considerable degree, the
doctrine that the end justifies the means, and that he is in
the heat of debate the victim of an impetuosity which
sometimes hurries him into false positions, from which he
is generally too proud to retreat afterwards.
“But against these serious failings of temperament must
be set the enthusiasm which is also a part of his nature,
and which, when he has really worked himself up to
boiling-point on a great question, he can always Communi-
cate to his followers ; and the resolution which enables
him to persevere with any work he has undertaken, in
the face of difficulties which would overwhelm most men.
As a minister in charge of a great measure, one to which
he has devoted the whole strength of his wonderful mind,
MR. GLADSTONE. 23
he has not an equal. When Mr. Gladstone gives himself
with all his earnestness—and he is the most earnest man
now living in England—to a great public question, he
shows a knowledge, an ability, a power in handling it,
a grasp at once of the greatest principles and of the small-
est details, a readiness to comprehend the objections raised
to particular provisions of the bill, a fertility of resources
in providing remedies for those objections, which no other
English statesman can pretend to possess.”
MR. GLADSTONE AS A STATESMAN.
It is certainly a striking fact that the statesman first
heralded by Macaulay as the rising hope of stern and un-
bending Tories, should live to be seriously regarded by his
opponents as “a mixture of Cromwell and Gambetta ; ”
and to be charged with aiming at Dictatorship. “He
seizes, it is seriously said, the prerogative of the Crown, in
order to coerce the independence of the House of Lords;
he uses his majority in the House of Commons to overbear
the Sovereign ; and he dragoons the House of Commons
by appeals to a public opinion and a national will, inde-
pendent of and superior to it, of which he affects to be the
priest and interpreter.” Even his warm admirers point out
the existence in him of a democratic vein that seems to
belong rather on the American side of the Atlantic. “In-
stead of governing the country through the House of Com-
mons, he occasionally seems disposed to govern the House
of Commons through the country. He sometimes speaks
* “Cabinet Portraits,” pp. 19–23.
24. * BRIEF BIOGRAPHIIES.
as if he had an independent mandate from the nation to
which its Parliamentary representatives were bound to sub-
mit. No one can say that this doctrine has ever been dis-
tinctly expressed or is consciously entertained by the Prime
Minister; but phrases have been occasionally used, and a
course of action has now and then been adopted, which
point to the existence of some such feeling.” +
It will seem, to most Americans, that this criticism is a
compliment, and that Mr. Gladstone simply accepts the
inevitable tendency which is, even in England, substitut-
ing a self-governing nation for a nation to be governed.
The changes to which he yields are as inevitable as the
change which, in America, has long since abolished the
Original functions of an Electoral College, and is soon to
abolish that institution itself. Mr. Gladstone sees that an
English minister must, after all, take his policy from the
people, and show his genius by the skill with which he
embodies this public demand. That Mr. Gladstone is
thus skillful, all admit. The author of “Political Por-
traits” well Says: -
“In the power of giving legislative form to the policy
on which the nation has determined, of organizing Com-
plex and difficult details into a complete and orderly
scheme, and of recommending it by inexhaustible resources
of exposition and illustration to Parliament, Mr. Glad-
stone never had a superior, or, we may venture to say, an
equal. As each reform has become what, in the slang of
the House of Commons, is called a practical question, Mr.
Gladstone has been ready to execute the mandate of the
* “Political Portraits,” from the Zondon Paily Mews, p. I7.
MR. GLADSTONE. 25
constituencies. If he had been in advance of public opin-
ion, like Mr. Bright, or lagged behind it, like Lord Salis-
bury, he could not have discharged this essential work ;
and his best genius and truest strength would have lacked
their opportunity. To this peculiarity of character and
circumstance the fact is owing that in Mr. Gladstone's
career, more than in that of any other man who has lived
through the same period, the history of England during
the past forty years is reflected. If he had been from the
first, or early in his career, a better theoretic politician, he
might have been a less useful practical statesman.”
“The fact is,” says the critic of the Daily News, “that
the early impression of Mr. Gladstone as a stern and un-
bending Tory, and the later censure of him as a Capricious
and erratic revolutionist, are equally without foundation.
True, he has traversed nearly the whole space which sep-
arates the opinions of Lord Eldon from the opinions of Mr.
Bright. The distance is great ; but the time taken to ac-
complish it has been long. Mr. Gladstone has been forty
years about it, and the journey is perhaps not yet com-
pleted.”
And if we are to test Mr. Gladstone's practical states-
manship, like his oratory, by its visible results, it is easy
to point to such lasting monuments as the daring fiscal
measures of Sir Robert Peel's administration, largely
planned and conducted by Mr. Gladstone; the great ex-
tension of suffrage, proposed in his Reform Bill of 1866,
and afterwards carried through, almost of necessity, by his
opponents; the abolition of purchase in the army; the
disendowment and disestablishment of the Irish church ;
and the Treaty of Washington.
26 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
In Mr. Gladstone's record as a statesman, the point
which will, to most Americans, seem peculiarly open to
Criticism, is his attitude in regard to our own civil war.
Yet so far as criticism can be disarmed by frank apology
and retraction, it was surely done by him. For M. Glad-
stone wrote, in August, 1867, a letter to Mr. C. Edwards
Lester, a letter first published in the Wew York Times,
eighteen months later, in which he fully recognizes his
mistake. “He says "~to adopt the able summary con-
tained in the Zondon Spectator of Jan. 16, 1869–“ that at
that time he had not only miscalculated the relative strength
of the two combatants, but misunderstood the true issue
for which they were fighting. The North had not yet
identified itself with the cause of abolition ; and he mis-
takenly believed the cause of the Union to be almost neces-
sarily the cause also of slavery, because he supposed that
the whole power of the Union was mortgaged to sustaining
slavery in the South : while he held that as soon as the
Union should be fairly divided, the slaves would prove
themselves too strong for the whites taken alone, since the
latter would have been no longer backed by an executive
of the United States bound to execute a fugitive slave law.”
Those who remember how much there was in the pub-
lished speeches of both Abolitionists and Anti-Abolitionists
to justify this point of view ; how constantly it had been
urged by Messrs. Garrison and Phillips, that Disunion
would be a benefit to the slaves, and how promptly Messrs.
Seward and Adams had assured the English people that the
war would not affect slavery ; can have some charity for Mr.
Gladstone's difficulties. The Specialor, however, sees in
these the proof of “a very strong previous prepossession
MR. GLADSTONE. 27
3.
for the peculiar institution of the South ; ” and Justin
McCarthy declares this to have been a common solution
of Mr. Gladstone's attitude. “The Gladstones had and
have large West India property; and when England eman-
cipated her slaves by paying off the planters, the Gladstones
Came in for no small share of the national purchase-money.
When the great Liberal orator came out so impetuously
and unluckily with his celebrated panegyric on Jefferson
Davis, a few years ago, Some people shook their head, and
remarked that the old planter spirit does not quite die out
in the course of one generation.” Be this as it may, it is
certain that through all the long subsequent discussion of
the Alabama claims, Mr. Gladstone was uniformly just and
even friendly to the United States, and this in the face of
the bitterest opposition from the other party. His error
was the error of educated England in general ; but from
the moment when it was retracted, America had in the Eng-
lish government no manlier friend.
MIR. GLADSTONE AS AN AUTHOR.
Mr. Gladstone first came before the public as an author
at the age of 28, in a book published by him at Amiens in
1838, while traveling on the Continent for relief from a
disease of the eyes. The title of this work was “The State
in its Relations with the Church.” It expressed very High-
Church opinions, in accordance with the phase of thought
then prevailing at Oxford ; it passed rapidly through three
* “The Liberal Triumvirate of England,” in “Modern Leaders,”
by Justin McCarthy. New York, 1872.
28 - BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
editions, and had the honor, as has been already said, of
an elaborate review by Macaulay, who bestowed the highest
praise upon the spirit and ability of the author, while con-
troverting his opinions. This was followed, in 1840, by a
work of somewhat similar tone, entitled “Church Princi-
ples considered in their Results.” In 1845, he published
a ‘‘Manual of Family Prayers from the Liturgy,” and a
pamphlet on the commercial policy of Sir Robert Peel. He
wrote, in 1851, a pamphlet under the title of “Letters to
the Earl of Aberdeen,” in which he asked the interference
of the British Government in behalf of thirty thousand
political prisoners kept in confinement by the Neapolitan
Bourbons. This pamphlet passed through eleven editions
in a single year, was forwarded by Lord Palmerston to all
the British ministers on the continent of Europe, and was
translated into the principal European languages.
Mr. Gladstone’s “Studies on Homer and the Homeric
Age” (3 vols. 8vo) were published in 1858. Ten years
later, in 1868, he published “Essays on Ecce Homo,”
and a pamphlet on the Irish Church question, entitled
“A Chapter of Autobiography.” Early in 1869 appeared
“Juventus Mundi; the Gods and Men of the Heroic Age.”
This was to some extent a condensation of his earlier work
on Homer, and was even more highly creditable to the
thought and scholarship of the Premier. No modern
writer, perhaps, has brought out so strongly the essential
refinement and dignity of tone pervading the great Greek
poets; and the high position conceded to woman in the
heroic age of Greece. The “Juventus Mundi’’ was re-
printed in Boston in 1869, but I was surprised to find Mr.
Gladstone, three years after, still ignorant of the fact. He
MR. GLADSTONE. 29
seemed much pleased to hear that he had thus a body of
readers in America also. I suppose that an author's joys
and solicitudes are much the same, to whatever heights of
political preferment he may reach.
Indeed, it has been given to Mr. Gladstone to prove, dur-
ing the last few months, that it is now the author, not the
statesman, who rules the world; and he may have taken
some secret pleasure in proving that he could, when out of
office, move England more by his pen than his successful
rival could influence it from his place in Parliament. The
astonishing impression made by his recent pamphlet is
well known. The work itself was an amplification of a
text from an article of his own, in the Com/emporary Review
(Oct., 1874), and bore the title “The Vatican Decrees in
their bearing on Civil Allegiance; a Political Expos-
tulation.” The vigor of the style, the learning exhibited,
and the source whence it came, all contributed to give it an
extraordinary influence. Edition after edition was called for,
and tens of thousands of copies were sold. It was boldly
proclaimed in this pamphlet that, since 1870, “Rome has
substituted for the proud boast of semper eadem, a policy of
violence and change in faith ; ” “that she has equally re-
pudiated modern thought and ancient history ; ” “that she
has refurbished and paraded anew every rusty tool she was
thought to have disused : " and “that Rome requires a
Convert who now joins her, to forfeit his moral and mental
freedom, and to place his loyalty and civil duty at the
mercy of another.”
Mr. Gladstone avoided committing himself as to the
policy which might be necessary for England, in view of
these facts, but his statement of the facts themselves proved
3O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
enough to rouse controversy to the utmost. What was
most important, this discussion elicited from some of the
leading representatives of the old Roman Catholic families
in England the most positive disclaimers of divided alle-
giance ; while Rev. Dr. J. H. Newman—whom Mr. Glad-
stone himself describes as “the first living theologian now
within the Roman Catholic Communion”—has by no
means proved himself so loyal to the Pope's temporal
Supremacy as might have been expected.
CONCLUSION.
The excitement produced by the pamphlet had by no
means died away, when Mr. Gladstone again attracted all
eyes to himself by writing to Earl Granville his formal res-
ignation of the leadership of the Liberal party. The
announcement was made, Jan. 16, 1875, in the following
term S :
“I see no public advantage in my continuing to act as
leader of the Liberal party. After forty-two years of labo-
rious public life, I think myself entitled to retire with the
present opportunity. This retirement is dictated by per-
sonal views regarding the method of spending the closing
years of my life. My conduct in Parliament will continue
to be governed on the same principles as hitherto, and ar-
rangements for the treatment of general business and to
advance the convenience of the Liberal party will have my
cordial support.”
Earl Granville replied : “I have communicated in detail
the reasons, for which I profoundly regret, and deprecate
your decision. My late colleagues fully agree in this
MR. GLADSTONE. 3 I
regret at the failure of the endeavors to dissuade you from
your purpose, and doubtless the Liberal party also concur
with us in the observations we addressed you, prompted by
considerations of public advantages and not merely by a
sense of your service and our admiration and attachment.”
Among the various comments on this unexpected event,
it is probable that none better speaks the average feeling
of the Liberal party than the following from the Spectator :
“Every man, however necessary to his fellow-men, must
be the ultimate judge of his own conduct, but Mr. Glad-
stone's letter of resignation is nothing less than a Calamity.
His decision has been made final just at the moment when
the party, and to a large extent the Country, had made up
its mind to renew cordially and thoroughly its old allegi-
ance, and to follow him as Englishmen follow a leader
who is fighting up the hill in the face of overpowering foes.
The appreciation of Mr. Gladstone is probably stronger
with his party now than it has ever been. Time has shown
those who honestly dissented from him, such as the non-
conformists, that they have nothing to expect either from
the policy, or the Squeezeableness, or the good-nature of
his adversaries, and they were openly rearranging them-
selves to fight under his banner. Time has also worn away
the bitterness of those who were discontented with him on
personal grounds, many of whom failed to obtain seats in
the new Parliament, and time has riveted the faith of the
old Whigs in the wisdom of their originally unwilling
choice. Above all, time has shown the Liberals through-
out the country that for Mr. Gladstone no equal substitute
is obtainable. The party has many able leaders, but some
objection of some sort can be raised to each ; and there is
32 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIIES.
this objection to them all, that no one of them is or could
be an effective leader in the presence of the disapproving
member for Greenwich. That part which Sir Robert Peel
played successfully for some years is not open to Mr. Glad-
St0rme.
“There is not a competent follower behind him who
does not know that he must either lead, or travel abroad,
or, by occasional interventions, dwarf any other leader into
powerlessness, and who was not therefore ready to accept
him, if not with his whole heart—and that is the case with
nine out of ten—at least with his whole brain. If Mr.
Gladstone had only said that he would lead, there would
have been one mighty cheer, and a party as thoroughly
disciplined as Liberals can ever hope to be. It would have
taken but one session of real hardship, of daily watchful-
ness and contest and intellectual victory, to make the party
again strong, and give them that distant sight of power
which impels political leaders to their highest projects and
most strenuous efforts to achieve them. And now the pros-
pect is overcast, the party thrown into anarchy, -for, after
all, its chiefs were Mr. Gladstone's ministers, and after his
resignation cease to form an organism, -and the rulers of
the future are left without the guidance of the man on
whose genius they could most confidently rely. Still
young, as years are counted in English politics, in the
fullest vigor of health, with his brain teeming with capaci-
ties, with an army of followers ready at his beck, Mr. Glad-
stone retires from the service of the country which owes to
him more than to any man now living, and at least as
much as to any premier in her constitutional record.
“And painful as it is to say it, there is another word
MR. GLADSTONE. 33
remaining to be said. This last duty done—and we main-
tain that it is a moral duty of the most imperative kind—
Mr. Gladstone must bethink himself whether, until the
new leadership is compacted, he can conscientiously inter-
vene even occasionally in debate. It seems so hard to
write, but the plain truth lies there, that Mr. Gladstone in
the house so dwarfs every other Liberal, the sound of his
voice so terrifies every other orator, the words of his coun-
sel so outweigh the advice of any other Ulysses, that leader-
ship may be an impossibility or a humiliation. There is
not a possible leader who, if he knew that Mr. Gladstone
were coming after him, would not lose half his powers in
the depressing consciousness that he was sure to be out-
shone, that he might possibly be rebuked, and that he
might be criticised into inanition. With Mr. Gladstone
in the house, no ecclesiastical policy is possible to the
front Liberal bench, and no financial policy can be pressed
with a certainty of acceptance. With Napoleon in the
ranks, no marshal can command, and it is from very ad-
miration, from an enthusiasm of belief in his powers, that
we repeat the advice of those who wish him no good, and
pray him, if he will be kingmaker instead of king, not to
let his shadow take all brightness out of the new-made
crown and all authority out of a scarcely welded sceptre.”
This action on Mr. Gladstone's part appears now (Feb-
ruary, 1875) to be final. But who can say ” He is but
sixty-six—“still young, as years are counted in English
politics”—and it is safe to say that his public career is not
ended. It is even possible that his period of greatest influ-
ence may yet lie in the future. But in what direction that
influence may lie, it is impossible to tell. There is a va- .
34. BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
riable and incalculable element in Mr. Gladstone, result-
ing from the very earnestness of his nature and the sensi-
tiveness of his conscience. His very love of justice is liable
at any moment to put him into attitudes which astonish
his own allies, and he was once charged by Mr. Grant
Duff with a habit of “turning round and firing his revolver
in the face of his followers.”
II.
M. R. DISRAEL I.
#ºl HE visitor to the House of Commons, asking to
# have Mr. Disraeli pointed out, is directed to the
ºšl middle of the first Treasury bench, where sits a
man whose aspect, temperament, and career make him
unique among Englishmen. He is of middle height, of
rather slender figure, and of scrupulously neat aspect. He
looks self-absorbed and utterly alone. “Either because
his colleagues do not care to chat with him, or because he
discourages private conversation in the House, Mr. Disraeli
invariably sits apart, in a kind of grim loneliness. Mr.
Gladstone is, except when he sleeps, rarely quiet for a
moment, frequently engaging in conversation with those
near him, often laughing heartily himself, and being the
cause of laughter in his interlocutors. When Mr. Disraeli
enters the House and takes his accustomed seat, he crosses
One leg over the other, folds his arms, hangs down his
head, and so sits for hours at a time in statuesque silence.” +
“Over the high, arched forehead,” says Wemyss Reid,
* “Men and Manner in Parliament,” p. 45.


36 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
“there hangs from the crown of the head a single curl of
dark hair, a curl which you cannot look at without feeling
a touch of pathos in your inmost heart, for it is the only .
thing about the worn and silent man reminding you of the
brilliant youth of ‘Vivian Grey.’ The face below this soli-
tary lock is deeply marked with the furrows left by care's
ploughshare ; the fine dark eyes look downwards, the
mouth is closed with a firmness that says more for this
man's tenacity of will than pages of eulogy would do ; but
what strikes you more than anything else is the utter lack
of expression upon the countenance. No one looking at
the face, though but for a moment, could fall into the
error of supposing that expression and intelligence are not
there ; they are there, but in concealment.
“Much is said of the power possessed by Napoleon the
Third of hiding his thoughts from the keenest scrutiny;
but more than once even his power over his countenance
has been Sorely taxed, and he has been glad of the grateful
shelter of the curling mustache that shades his mouth.
Without any such help, however, Mr. Disraeli has a face
that is simply inscrutable. Again and again have hun-
dreds of keen eyes been turned at critical moments towards
that face, to read, if it might be possible, something of the
thoughts of the man himself; but never once, not even in
the most exciting crisis of personal or political conflict, has
the face unwittingly relaxed, or friend or foe been able to
read aught there. It is the face of a sphinx, inscrutable
and unfathomable ; it is, as men of every party will admit,
the most remarkable face in England.””
* “Cabinet Portraits,” p. 3.
MR. DISRAELI. 37
MR. DISRAELI's ORIGIN AND POLITICAL CAREER.
The brilliant painter of “Political Portraits” in the Daily
News, thinks that none of Mr. Disraeli's early novels dis-
close as much of the man as is given in the brief sketch of
his family history, prefixed, under the form of a memoir
of his father, to the later editions of “Curiosities of Lite-
rature.” “In the short memoir in question, Mr. Disraeli
accounts for himself more satisfactorily than any formal
autobiography could do. For the purpose of understand-
ing him, it is worth all the rest of his works put together.
It shows the medium, as naturalists call it, in which he
was reared, the influences which acted upon his genius
and character, and against which in turn his genius
and character reacted. In relating the history of his
family, Mr. Disraeli supplies us with the key to his politi-
cal life.
“In the fifteenth century Mr. Disraeli's ancestors, under
a name different from that which they subsequently bore,
were settled in Spain, whence, towards the close of that
century, they were driven by the persecutions of the Inqui-
sition to seek a refuge in the territories of the Venetian
Republic. ‘Grateful to the God of Jacob, who had sus-
tained them through unprecedented trials, and guarded
them through unheard-of perils, they assumed the name
of Disraeli—a name never borne before or since by any
other family, in order that their race might be forever rec-
ognized.” In 1745 Mr. Disraeli's grandfather, Benjamin
Disraeli, the younger of two brothers, settled in England.
Mr. Disraeli would seem not only to have received his
grandfather's name, but to have inherited from him some
38 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
of his qualities. He is depicted as “a man of ardent char-
acter, Sanguine, courageous, speculative, and fortunate ;
with a temper which no disappointment could disturb, and
a brain, amid reverses, full of resource.” The immigrant,
as his grandson relates, made his fortune, laid out an Ital-
ian garden at Enfield, played whist with Sir Horace Mann,
‘ate maccaroni which was dressed by the Venetian consul,’
and sang Canzonettas. He had married a daughter of his
own race, who, however, “never pardoned him for his
name,” since it identified her with a people of whom she
was ashamed, and from whom they kept aloof. As often
happens in similar cases, the only son of the enterprising
Jewish merchant was the very opposite of his father, a timid
recluse, living among his books, simple as Goldsmith, and
learned as a grammarian of the Middle Ages. His birth,
as his son has pointed out, left him without relations or
family acquaintance. ‘He not only never entered into
the politics of the day, but he could never understand
them. He never was connected with any particular body
or set of men ; comrades of school or college, or confed-
erates in that public life which, in England, is, perhaps,
the only foundation of real friendship.’
“Benjamin Disraeli, the grandfather, who, but for his
retirement from business before the era of the revolutionary
wars and the great loans, would probably, his descendant
thinks, have become a millionaire, died when the future
Prime Minister of England was a lad of twelve. Reared
in a home of as absolute seclusion from English Society as
if it had been placed in an island of the Mediterranean,
with occasional glimpses, perhaps, at Enfield, of a strange
society, more foreign than English, and more cosmopolitan
MR. DISRAELI. 39
than either, the young Disraeli must early have felt that
strange sense of moral detachment from the nation in which
he has lived, and in which he has attained the highest
place, which is visible in his writings and his career. In
both homes he must soon have learned that his name and
race placed a certain barrier between him and the distinc-
tions to which he aspired. By a somewhat sweeping and
incredible negative, he describes his grandmother as ‘so
mortified by her social position, that she lived until eighty
without indulging a tender expression.” She disliked her
race, and was, as Mr. Disraeli himself bears witness,
ashamed of the name she bore. Mr. Disraeli deserves
only praise for the contrary impulse, which has led him to
assert that name and that race against ignorant and bigoted
contempt. Still they set him apart. He was outside the
English world ; and, in spite of his intimate participation
in English politics, he has been as a foreigner in them.
He has understood them with a sort of external intellect ;
but he has never thoroughly entered into them, and has
cared for them as little on their own account as his father
did. Parties and questions have been with him weapons,
and not causes. He has written a formal ‘Vindication of
the British Constitution,’ and in the “Adventures of Cap-
tain Popanilla’ has composed one of the most caustic
Satires upon it that have ever appeared. He was the cham-
pion of Free Trade in his earlier books, and won party-
leadership as the advocate of Protection. He has laughed
at our aristocracy—in “Lothair’ he laughs at them still—
and has done them homage, denounced them as a Vene-
tian oligarchy, and eulogized them as the dignified pillars
on which order and liberty rest. He has been a Radical,
4O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
a Tory-Radical, and a Tory without the Radical, a Con-
Servative, and a Constitutionalist ; the client of Mr. Hume
and Mr. O'Connell, the colleague of Lord Salisbury, the
Mentor of Lord John Manners, and the chief adviser of
the late Lord Derby.” +
Mr. Disraeli was born in London (at No. 6 Bloomsbury
Square), December 21, 1805, being the eldest son of Isaac
Disraeli. His mother's maiden name was Basevi. He was
taught by private tutors, and was placed, when very young, as
articled clerk with an eminent solicitor, who was an inti-
mate friend of the elder Disraeli, and who, being childless,
wished to transmit his lucrative practice to his friend's son.
The young man remained in this position for some three
years; after which he traveled on the Continent, and, on
returning to England, published, when only twenty, his
novel of “Vivian Grey.” It immediately attracted much
notice, and won for its author many flattering social atten-
tions. Lady Blessington thus described to Willis, a few
years later, the young author's first appearance in her draw-
ing-room : -
“Disraeli, the elder, came here with his son, the other
night. It would have delighted you to see the old man's
pride in him, and the son's respect for his father. Disraeli,
the elder, lives in the country, about twenty miles from
town ; seldom comes up to London, and leads a life of re-
tired leisure, each day hoarding up and dispensing forth treas-
ures of literature. He is courtly, yet urbane, and impresses
one at once with confidence in his goodness. In his man-
ner, Disraeli the younger is quite the character of Vivian
“Political Portraits,” pp. 25–30.
MR. DISRAELI. 4. I
Grey, full of genius and eloquence, with extreme good
nature and perfect frankness of character.””
The young author then traveled in the East, published
more novels, and, in 1832, offered himself as a Candidate
for Parliament, in the borough of High Wycombe, in
Buckinghamshire. He appeared on that occasion as a Radi-
cal, recommended by Mr. Hume and Sir E. L. Bulwer.
It is said that he had applied unsuccessfully to O'Connell
for indorsement. He was defeated again, and yet again,
and on hearing that Earl Grey, whose relative he was
opposing, had asked the question “Who is he ” Disraeli
published a vehement political pamphlet under that title,
and then another pamphlet entitled “The Crisis Exam-
ined.” He again announced himself as a candidate at
Marylebone, and this, too, failing, became a candidate at
Taunton, in 1835, as a Conservative.
On one occasion, during this canvass, he publicly
denounced O'Connell as “a bloody traitor.” To this
O'Connell afterwards replied that, for aught he knew,
Disraeli might be “the true heir-at-law of the impenitent
thief who died on the Cross.” For this Disraeli challenged
Morgan O'Connell, but the challenge was not accepted ;
Disraeli was bound over to keep the peace, and the corre-
spondence was published. One letter to O'Connell closed
with the words : “We shall meet at Philippi, where I will
seize the first opportunity of inflicting castigation for the
insults you have lavished upon me.” Two years later, when
he at length obtained a seat from the borough of Maid-
stone, in the first Parliament of Queen Victoria's reign,
* “Pencilings by the Way.” London, 1835, III. 77.
42 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
his first speech contained a violent denunciation of O'Con-
nell. Unfortunately, this first speech was a failure, through
the exaggeration of his manner of speaking. It was greeted
with the laughter of the House. He closed it, however,
with these words: “I am not surprised at the reception
I have experienced. I have begun several times many
things, and I have often succeeded at last. I shall sit down
now, but the time will come when you will hear me.” Two
years later, in 1839, this prediction began to be fulfilled,
and he made a speech that commanded the respectful atten-
tion of the House. -
In 1839, Mr. Disraeli married the widow of his friend
and colleague in the Maidstone representation, Wyndham
Lewis. This lady's fortune and her personal character had
alike a happy influence on his destinies, and he has dedi-
cated one of his novels to her as to “a perfect wife.” On
his declining a peerage in 1868, she was created Viscount-
ess Beaconsfield.
During the few years after his marriage, he published
another remarkable series of novels, which, like his earliest
fiction, were supposed to portray real characters, and
which sketched the outline of a new party called “Young
England,” based upon a sort of High-Church radicalism.
The semi-political character of these works helped his parlia-
mentary prestige. But the turning-point in his political
career is commonly considered to have been the Occasion
when, in 1844, he separated himself from Sir Robert Peel,
becoming the spokesman of those who adhered to the pol-
icy of Protection. “Hitherto he had been rather endured
than encouraged, the elder folk among the party with which
he had allied himself looking with suspicion upon the
MR. DISRAELI. 43
young man who came down to the House with carefully
prepared epigrams and not too pellucid adumbrations of a
new philosophy, and who was in personal aspect not alto-
gether dissimilar from Maud's brother,
‘That jeweled mass of millinery,
That oiled and curled Assyrian Bull
Smelling of musk and of insolence.”
But there was no one ready and able to say such cruel
things of a great Minister tottering to his fall as he and so
it came to pass that Mr. Disraeli was accepted as the spokes-
man of a party, and having Once gained a responsible and
weighty position in the House of Commons, improved his
opportunities till he reached the highest eminence of Eng-
lish political life.” -
It is said by those who heard these extraordinary attacks
that no printed reports can give any impression of their
venom and their vigor. This may well be, and yet enough
of these qualities remains to astonish the reader. For in-
stance, Mr. Disraeli said of his antagonist that he ‘‘had all
along, for thirty or forty years, traded on the ideas of others;”
that “his life had been one great appropriation clause ; ”
and that “he had ever been the burglar of other men's in-
tellects.” He described Sir Robert Peel's speeches as
“dreary pages of interminable talk ; full of predictions
falsified, pledges broken, calculations that had gone wrong,
and budgets that had blown up. And this not relieved by
a single original thought, a single generous impulse, or a
single happy expression.” The policy of the Premier was
* “Men and Manner in Parliament,” p. 245.
44 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
described as “a system so matter of fact, yet so fallacious ;
taking in everybody, though everybody knew he was
deceived ; a system so mechanical, yet so Machiavellian,
that he could hardly say what it was, except a sort of hum-
drum hocus-pocus, in which the ‘Order of the Day’ was
moved to take in a nation.” And Mr. Disraeli called on
the House of Commons to “dethrone a dynasty of decep-
tion, by putting an end to this intolerable yoke of official
despotism and Parliamentary imposture.”
In 1849 he became the recognized leader of the Con-
servative party in the House of Commons. In 1852 he
became Chancellor of the Exchequer, and a member of the
Privy Council, under Lord Derby. This ministry remained
in office less than a year, but resumed power in February,
1858, and he was reappointed to the same position. In
February, 1859, he brought forward a reform bill, extend-
ing the suffrage very widely, and basing it rather on educa-
tion than on property. It was defeated in the House of
Commons, March 31, 1859, and Parliament was dissolved
in consequence. In July, 1866, Lord Derby again became
Premier, and Mr. Disraeli Chancellor of the Exchequer;
and the new reform bill was soon after passed, giving the
right of suffrage to all householders in a borough, and to
every person in a county who had a freehold of forty shil-
lings. In February, 1868, Lord Derby resigned, and Mr.
Disraeli became Premier, but resigned in December, hav-
ing been defeated on the Irish Church question ; and the
country having meantime pronounced against him, at a
general election, Mr. Gladstone succeeded him, but in turn
resigned in February, 1874, when Mr. Disraeli again be-
came Prime Minister, a position which he still holds.
MR. DISRAELI. 45
MR. DISRAELI AS AN ORATOR.
“When he rises to speak,” says a writer in the Gentleman's
Magazine of Mr. Disraeli, “he generally rests his hand for a
moment upon the table, but it is only for a moment, for he
invariably endeavors to gain the ear of his audience by mak-
ing a point at the outset, and the attitude which he finds most
conducive to the happy delivery of points is to stand balancing
himself upon his feet with his hands in his coat-tail pockets.
In this position, with his head hung down as if he were
mentally debating how best to express a thought that had
just occurred to his mind, Mr. Disraeli slowly utters the
polished and poisoned sentences over which he has spent
laborious hours in the closet.”
‘‘ But the merest tyro in the House knows a moment
beforehand when Mr. Disraeli is approaching what he
regards as a convenient place in his speech for dropping
in the phrase-gem he pretends to have just found in an odd
corner of his mind. They see him leading up to it; they
note the disappearance of the hands in the direction of the
coat-tail pockets, sometimes in search of the pocket-hand-
kerchief, which is brought out and shaken with a light and
careless air, but most often to extend the coat-tails, whilst
with body gently rocked to and fro, and an affected hesi-
tancy of speech, the speaker produces his bon mol. For the
style of repartee in which Mr. Disraeli indulges—which
may be described generally as a sort of solemn chaffing,
varied by strokes of polished sarcasm—this manner is ad-
mirable, in proportion as it has been seldom observed. But
it is monotonous to a degree perhaps exceeded only by that
of Mr. Cardwell, who, during his last speech on the Army
46 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES,
Estimates, was timed with a watch, and found to go through
the following series of oratorical performances with the regu-
larity of a pendulum, preserving throughout an hour the ex-
act time allotted at the outset to each manoeuvre : First, he
advanced to the table and rested upon it, leaning his left
arm upon the edge; Secondly, he stood bolt upright and
retired half a pace from the table, letting his arms hang stiffly
by his side ; thirdly, he put both hands out and arranged
the papers before him ; fourthly, he retired a full pace,
folded his hands behind him under his coat-tails, and again
stood bolt upright, looking like an undertaker who had
called for Orders. This latter was his favorite position, and
he remained in it for the longest period. But when the
time came to forsake it, he advanced, leaned his arm upon
the table, and again went through the full round of grace-
ful action. Mr. Disraeli is not as bad as this ; but his
oratorical movements are formed in the same school, and
are spoiled by the same defects. Not being an orator by
nature, and knowing the necessity of some action while
speaking, he stiffly performs a series of bodily jerks, which
are as much like the easy, natural gestures of the true orator
as is the waddling of a duck across a stubble-field like the
progress of a swan over the bosom of a lake. * * * *
“It seemed a special providence that the rival leaders
of party should be men of such diametrically opposed tem-
perament, and that a feast so spiced with variety should
be provided for the delectation of the connoisseur. An
artificial, highly-polished, keenly-sharpened, epigrammatic,
terse, unemotional style that of Mr. Disraeli; and then
to be followed by Mr. Gladstone, trembling through
every fiber with the quick, hot rush of passion, glowing
MR. DISRAELI. 47
*
and copious in language, luxuriant in fancy, ſervid in
conviction, and often beside himself with righteous
rage.” +
An acute observer, Mr. Shirley Brooks, remarked of Mr.
Disraeli's oratory of twenty years ago, that his premeditated
speeches, no matter how brief the time for preparation,
were far better than his off-hand replies. “Unprepared,
he has a tendency to verbiage, and to a repetition of the
same idea, without a sufficient variety of treatment : pre-
pared, and not a blow misses; not a sarcasm is impeded
by a weakening phrase. The arrow, stripped of all plumage
except that which aids and steadies its flight, strikes within
a hair's breadth of the archer's aim ; whether it finds the
joint of the harness, or shivers on the shield, is occasionally
matter of opinion ; but that it often wounds deeply would
seem to be proved by the exceeding ferocity with which,
out of the House, Mr. Disraeli is assailed. In the House,
it is rare for any one but Mr. Gladstone to meddle with
him.” + - .
Mr. Escott thus describes the demeanor of Mr. Disraeli,
under fire, in the House of Commons. “There, seated
in the middle of the Treasury Bench, is Mr. Disraeli, calm,
impassive, and to all appearance ‘in inward meditation
wrapt,’ and dreamily unconscious of all that is going on
around him. Immediately opposite is Mr. Gladstone
speaking—for we will suppose it to be one of the occasions
on which the leader of the Opposition camp has forsaken his
Cambrian seclusion at the bidding of the Public Worship
* “Men and Manner in Parliament,” pp. 47–49, 280.
+ London Quarterly, July, 1854.
48 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
Bill—in his most effective manner. Occasionally Mr.
Disraeli leans forward to the table, dips a pen in ink, and
notes down a single word on a diminutive piece of paper.
But the motion seems merely mechanical, and the Prime
Minister once more lapses into apparent lethargy. Mr.
Gladstone is now drawing on to his peroration ; and pres-
ently, having brought his final sentence to a close in a tone
full of emphasis and passion, sits down. Not a moment
is lost; the cheers have not died away when Mr. Disraeli
springs from his seat, with all the artificially suppressed
impetuosity which marked his manner twenty years ago.
The management of his voice is much now as it was then.
In gesture Mr. Disraeli never much indulged. He used
indeed, to be very much in the habit of toying, somewhat
affectedly, with a cambric pocket-handkerchief at particu-
lar points of his address. That device he has now dis-
Carded, and a slight inclination of the body is the only
sign which he gives of any access of momentary emotion.
His utterance is clear as of old, and the occasional very
slight hesitation only serves to give emphasis to the phrase
or word which it precedes. It has been said, with truth,
of the Parliamentary manner of Mr. Disraeli, that no orator
ever carried to a higher perfection the art of compelling a
hearer to listen to every word spoken. It is his character-
istic to adopt a tentative manner until he discovers, by the
acclamations with which some cleverly turned phrase is
received, that he has hit the House between wind and
water. Then his voice changes, his attitude becomes
more erect. Confident of the result, he proceeds to en-
force the argument, or to point the moral, first flashed on
the House by a single verbal felicity, with every variety
MR. DISRAELI. 49
of illustration, and with a luxurious abundance of epi-
thets.” +
Mr. Disraeli has also much more of wit and lightness of
manner—that convenient quality which Edmund Quincy
once defined as “specific levity”—than his great rival.
Being or seeming to be far less in earnest than Mr. Glad-
stone, he finds it more easy to joke with his opponents, or
even to flatter them. “ Not merely has he been in a great
degree all things to all men, complimenting now the
Home Rulers on their good taste and moderation, now
some erewhile antagonist on the conscientious energy of
his career, but he has seldom failed, when opportunity
offered, to import an element of jocularity into the senato-
rial routine. One is reminded by the reception given to
Mr. Disraeli, when he rises to answer the most trivial in-
quiry, of the old story of Theodore Hook. If the author
of Sayings and Doings asked for the mustard, the whole
company went into roars of laughter. Mr. Disraeli has
acquired such a reputation for witty antithesis, and odd
combinations of words, that the most commonplace of his
replies is quite enough to elicit an anticipatory titter from
both sides of the House. It can hardly be said that Mr.
Disraeli's colleagues are equally successful in this line of
effort. Mr. Cross frequently essays the humorous rôle,
but his very mild jests fall flat, and not the faintest suspi-
cion of cachinnation is audible. Mr. Disraeli's weapon
can be handled by himself alone.
“Taking a retrospect of all the rhetorical incidents and
episodes in the House of Commons between the months
* T. H. S. Escott, in Fraser's Magazine, Oct., 1874.
4 -
5O BRIEF EIOGRAPHIES.
of March and August, the most assiduous habitué will be
able only to call to mind one genuine joke, and that was
the happy comparison by Mr. Disraeli of Mr. Fawcett's
incessant queries addressed to the Government, in the
course of the debate on the second reading of the Endowed
Schools Amendment Bill, with ‘a practice of which we
have heard a great deal lately—the Catechism after the
Second Lesson.’ But Mr. Disraeli has coined phrases
which have excited momentary merriment, some of which
may win a permanent place in the répertoire of Parliament-
ary good things.” +
One of the latest observers of Parliamentary traits, in the
Gentleman's Magazine, thus states the weak points of Mr.
Disraeli's oratory: “The Prime Minister is a successful
parliamentary speaker, but his oratorical merits do not
range higher. He lacks two qualities without which true
eloquence is impossible—to wit, earnestness and sincere
conviction. It is only on the rarest occasions that Mr.
Disraeli even affects to be righteously roused ; and then
he is rather amusing than otherwise. He has a lively
fancy, and an art, highly and carefully cultivated, of coin-
ing polished phrases, generally personal in their bearing.
When these are flashed forth, he carries the House with
him ; but for the rest he is even dull. Just as the merits
of the pudding at a school dinner are gauged by the fre-
quency of the plums which occur in a slice, so is the suc-
cess of Mr. Disraeli's speeches measured by the number of
sparkling sentences distributed throughout an oration.
The plums are of the best, but the pudding is unques-
* T. H. S. Escott, in Praser's Magazine, Oct., 1874.
MR. DISRAELI. ' 5 I
tionably heavy; and of course the actual quantity of the
latter is immeasurably greater than that of the former.
There are, to tell the truth, few things more dreary in the
experience of a session in the House of Commons than a
long speech from Mr. Disraeli. At short, sharp replies or
interrogations, he is supremely effective ; but when it
comes to a long speech, the lack of stamina manifests itself,
and we have something which, if not occasionally incom-
prehensible, is often involved. To cite an instance which
will be within the personal recollection of readers, –was any
one able to follow Mr. Disraeli through that argument
about indirect and direct taxation, with special reference to
the income tax, with which he, a fortnight before the disso-
lution, bewildered the farmers at Aylesbury, after having
dined with them at their ordinary 2 He himself evidently
staggered under the unwonted weight of the argument,
and finally hustled it off his shoulders, returning with a
sense of relief, in which his audience shared, to a lighter
style.
“No one has more accurately gauged Mr. Disraeli's
especial abilities than has Mr. Disraeli himself, and he is
at his best when, by reason of fortunate circumstances, he
is so powerful that he can act untrammeled by foreign
influence. We see proof of this in the matter of making
long speeches. Whilst he was in opposition, the leader of
a party which never loved him, and to which he is linked
by bonds of sympathy that are on both sides artificial, he
occasionally felt it incumbent upon him to make long
speeches. Mr. Gladstone had filled the House for two
hours or more with a flood of oratory, and it seemed to
some of the more intelligent of Conservatives that ‘the
52 - BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
party’ were not fairly treated, and did not by comparison
shine, if their leader uttered only half as many words and
occupied the attention of the House for but one moiety of
the time engrossed by the other side. Mr. Disraeli, an-
swering gallantly to the impulse of the spur, has, under
these circumstances, spoken for two hours or even more,
with the result of greatly weakening his argument, and
damaging his cause and his reputation. Since his advent
to power at the head of a great majority, he has felt him-
self to be above dictation, and the result has been, that
although the necessity for his making set speeches has in-
creased, he never makes a long one. During the session
of 1874, there were some momentous debates, in which
the Premier interposed to state the views and intentions of
the Government; but on no occasion did he speak at so
much as an hour's length, and the majority of his speeches
did not occupy more than half an hour in the delivery.
What was, take it for all in all, perhaps the cleverest speech
he ever delivered, that in the Home Rule debate, was com-
menced and brought to a conclusion within the space of
three quarters of an hour. The consequence of this free-
dom to follow the bent of his genius is recorded in the
unanimous verdict of the journals sitting in judgment on
the session—that never in his long career did Mr. Disraeli
shine more brilliantly in debate.”*
It is generally admitted that during his present term of
power Mr. Disraeli's oratory, whether it has changed in
quality or not, has been intentionally diminished in quan-
tity. -
>k a Men and Manner in Parliament,” pp. 39–42.
MR. DISRAELI. 53
“In the late Parliament ‘the Talker’ was by far the most
prominent and the most largely represented individual type
in the House of Commons. This was owing in a great meas-
ure, as has been hinted, to the force of the example set by
the Leader. Mr. Gladstone not only talked frequently him-
self, but was the cause of frequent talking in others. Mr.
Disraeli, on the contrary, never speaks when a speech can
be dispensed with, and his personal influence is so para-
mount that whilst some of his official colleagues were
known in the late Parliament as amongst the most weari-
some Talkers in the House, they are now notable for the
brevity with which they make explanations, answer ques-
tions, or urge arguments.”
Another sharp critic testifies yet more emphatically to the
same point : -
“Mr. Disraeli is often bombastic, often enigmatical, but
he is never circumlocutory. * * * If a question is put to
him, he either replies at once affirmatively or negatively, as
the case may be, or lets his questioner understand, in as
few words as possible, that the subject is one on which he
declines to give any information. He is humorous or con-
temptuous ; he administers a snub, or he lanches an epi-
gram ; he is solemn or he is flippant; but he is always
terse and sententious. Silence wherever silence is possible,
and if not silence, a pregnant brevity, is the lesson which
Mr. Disraeli perpetually labors by his own example to in-
culcate upon his followers. He has not been unsuccessful.
If an analysis were made of the time devoted by members
of the House of Commons to debate last session, it would
* “Men and Manner in Parliament,” p. 172.
54 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
be found that Liberal garrulity stood to Conservative chatter
in the ratio of three to one. It would be also found that,
whereas, under the Liberal régime, the political general left
nothing, or scarcely anything, for his lieutenant to discharge,
Mr. Disraeli has religiously avoided opening his lips in the
House of Commons, whenever he could secure the vicari-
ous performance of the task.” +
MR. DISRAELI AS A PARTY LEADER.
It is generally agreed that the House of Commons has
undergone a great transformation under its present leader.
In Mr. Gladstone's time it “breathed an electrical atmos-
phere,” from the intense earnestness of its leader. A writer
in the Gentleman's Magazine has said of the present House
that it is, “except in matters affecting religious belief, a
sober, business-like assembly, that comes down to get a
certain amount of work performed, and is chiefly concerned
to run through it as quickly as possible, and ‘go home to
bed.” For this marked alteration in demeanor the change
in the personnel of the Ministry is undoubtedly principally
accountable. It is impossible to conceive a more complete
contrast than that presented by the principal men in the
late and the present Governments. Mr. Disraeli vice Mr.
Gladstone, Sir Stafford Northcote vice Mr. Lowe, Mr.
Hardy vice Mr. Cardwell, Mr. Ward Hunt vice Mr. Goschen,
Lord George Hamilton vice Mr. Grant Duff, Sir Michael
Hicks-Beach vice the Marquis of Hartington, Mr. Cross vice
Mr. Bruce, Lord Henry Lennox zice Mr. Ayrton | Is not
* “Fraser's Magazine, October,” 1874.
MR. DISRAELI. 55
the marshaling of these names a chapter in itself? Both
the men and the circumstances under which public affairs
are administered are radically the opposites of each other.
All Mr. Gladstone's colleagues were stars, and all his un-
dertakings heroic, Mr. Disraeli appears to have so selected
the bulk of his colleagues that he might paraphrase the
famous boast attributed to Lord Brougham, - “The Whigs
are all ciphers, and I am the only unit in the cabinet that
gives a value to them.’ He has been content to surround
himself with men of whom, as individuals, no great things
are expected, and his policy upon taking Office, a policy
approved by a nation somewhat wearied out by the rack of
expectancy upon which it had been stretched for the pre-
ceding five years, was to do nothing in a manner as harm-
less and as pleasant a manner as possible.
“Let us alone. Time driveth onward fast,
And in a little while our lips are dumb.
Let us alone. What is it that will last?
All things are taken from us—
(including the Irish Church revenues, the right of the Irish
landlord to do what he liked with his own, the privilege of
purchase in the army, the right to know how our depend-
ents vote, and virtually, the control of the education of our
poorer neighbors' children)—
“All things are taken ſrom us and become
Portions and parcels of the dreadful past.
Let us alone. What pleasure can we have
To war with evil? Is there any peace
In ever climbing up the climbing wave?”
56 BRIEF, BIOGRAPHIES.
This slumberous, petulant murmur of the Lotos-eaters ex-
presses fairly enough the spirit of the Ministry when first
seated on the Treasury Bench, and up to within the last six
weeks of the close of the session, it succeeded in pervading
the House of Commons in a manner marvelous to behold.
“For such a policy as is herein indicated Mr. Disraeli is a
Heaven-born leader. He possesses in a remarkable degree
the great gift of silence, which is absolutely requisite in a
Minister leading the House of Commons in epochs like
that which succeeded the vigorous and soaring government
of Mr. Gladstone. It has always been the fatal fault of Mr.
Gladstone, regarded as a Parliamentary leader, that he
could not from time to time sit still and say nothing. Mr.
Disraeli can, and the advantage he has hereby occasionally
gained over his great rival has been enormous. There is a
passage in “Coningsby'—a book which opens more win-
dows looking on the soul of Mr. Disraeli than are to be
found in all his other utterances bound in a volume—
which recurs to the mind in a study of the Premier as a
Parliamentary leader. ‘A leader who can inspire enthu-
siasm,” says the author, ‘he commands the world. Divine
faculty Rare and incomparable privilege A Parliament-
ary leader who posesses it doubles his majority ; and he
who has it not may shroud himself in artificial reserve, but
he will nevertheless be as far from controlling the spirit as
from captivating the hearts of his sullen followers.’ The
preface to the volume in which this passage occurs is dated
exactly thirty years ago. ‘May-day, 1844,” wrote Mr.
Disraeli, little dreaming how a quarter of a century later
this curious fashion of dating epistles should, in the case of
‘Maundy Thursday,” create quite a sensation throughout
MR. DISRAELI. 57
the empire, and lead to the penning of innumerable leading
articles. Mr. Disraeli was at the period a young man, Shin-
ing in Parliament and society, it is true, but with a glitter-
ing, uncertain light that did not inspire in the mind of the
unprejudiced beholder any confidence in its continuance.
Like his own Coningsby, he had a circle of attached friends,
“all men whose position forced them into public life,’
forming ‘a nucleus of honor, faith, and power,’ and lacking
only a leader who would “dare.’ It is conceivable that at this
epoch Mr. Disraeli set out with the hope of “inspiring enthu-
siasm,’ and so “commanding the world.’ The effort, if made,
is one in which he conspicuously failed, and in the picture he
drew thirty years ago of the leader shrouding himself in arti-
ficial reserve, we have a curiously exact portrait of himself,
whilst he sketches Mr. Gladstone in the opposite panel.”
“He is a great party leader. That is beyond dispute.
To him belongs the honor of having, with an exquisite
tact and skill, led the House of Commons, when he had
only a minority of supporters at his back, and of having
led it in such a way that the most watchful of foes were
unable to trip him up, or even to change the secretly-
formed purpose of his mind. Those who saw him first as
Chancellor of the Exchequer, then as Prime Minister dur-
ing the last Conservative Administration, leading his party
and the House of Commons at the same time, witnessed a
spectacle, the like of which has perhaps never been seen
before ; for we have no previous record of such general-
ship as that which Mr. Disraeli then displayed.
* “Men and Manner in Parliament,” from the Gentleman’s Maga-
zine, pp. 74–78.
58 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
“The writer, when watching him during that eventful
period, was curiously enough constantly reminded of a line
in Cowper's well-known hymn, for if ever a man seemed
to “ride upon the storm' of party politics, to be above it,
and superior to its fury, it was Mr. Disraeli. Once and
again there was mutiny in the ranks of his own party : as
a minister he could have cried with the Psalmist against
his own familiar friend in whom he trusted ; opposite to
him was a foe bent upon mischief, superior in numbers,
and led by a man who, with many great and noble quali-
ties of his own, has never once during a long career been
betrayed into the weakness of an act savoring of tenderness
towards his brilliant rival. From this man Mr. Disraeli
had to look for nothing but the most uncompromising and
relentless opposition—and he knew it. He was himself
engaged in a task which, to the most Sanguine of his own
followers, had but a short time before seemed an utterly
hopeless one, and which, to those of them who were unable
to see as far as he did, seemed worse than hopeless—
suicidal.
“But he went on, in spite of difficulties and discourage-
ments which would have broken the spirit and destroyed
the strength of any other party leader of modern times.
And he went on with wonderful success. Past rocks and
shoals, and quicksands, without number, and by a channel
on which it had never before entered, he steered the vessel
of the State; he faced obstacles which seemed insurmount-
able, and which to any other man would have been what
they seemed, and lo! they vanished away under his mar-
velous manipulation ; with a party sorely reduced in
strength, he kept at bay the overwhelming numbers of the
MR. DISRAELI. 59
enemy; nay, he even used them as instruments of his own,
and it was by their aid that he passed the great measure
which will henceforth be associated with his name, and
balked his eager rivals. This is what Mr. Disraeli has
accomplished within the last few years; and no impartial
man will deny that it is one of the greatest political achieve-
ments recorded in the history of Parliament.
“It was during the trying period between 1866–9 that
he developed his ripest powers. Until he became leader
of the House of Commons on the last occasion, he had
never shown his remarkable fitness for such a post. On
previous occasions he had done well ; but then he did his
work superlatively well. It is true that when he had
formerly been leader of the House he had labored under
the disadvantage of having opposed to him the skilled
veteran who was the most popular party man ever seated
within the walls of Parliament. -
“But making allowances for the difference in his posi-
tion which was made by Lord Palmerston's death, we yet
cannot doubt that there was a ripening and maturing of
his powers during the long interval of opposition through
which he passed whilst that nobleman and Lord Russell
were at the helm of the State for the last time, which con-
tributed materially to his success when he himself was
recalled to the leadership. It was not until he was re-
called, that in addition to all his other great qualities, he
displayed that geniality and humor which the House of
Commons is so quick to appreciate in its leader, and the
absence of which in the present Prime Minister it feels so
strongly.
“It is the parrot-cry of those who criticise Mr. Disraeli's
6O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
character, to say that, despite his wonderful genius, he is
incapable of appreciating the peculiarities, the weaknesses
if you will, of the character of the average English gentle-
man. What better answer can there be to this charge, so
constantly brought against him, than to point to the way
in which he has made himself master of the greatest weak-
ness of the House of Commons—its love of a good laugh 2
During his Premiership, despite all that there was to worry
and annoy him, he kept the House of Commons in good
temper by his constant use of an unflagging and unſailing
humor. He put down bores, or he silenced awkward
questions, with one of those happy phrases or pleasant
jests which Lord Palmerston loved so dearly, and which
did so much to smooth the path of that great statesman
whilst he was at the head of affairs. It seems a very small
thing, this ability to cope successfully with the bores of the
House of Commons, but no one who has studied the
science of party government will regard it with contempt.
“Mr. Disraeli is perhaps never so happy as when he is
putting down one of those terrible children of Parliament
who will know everything, and who will ask their ques-
tions, or air their most recently-acquired knowledge at the
most inappropriate moment. “Who, for instance, has for-
gotten the way in which he met Mr. Darby Griffith, when
that hon. gentleman had put a question which looked like
“a poser P’ Amongst the bores Mr. Griffith is, or rather
was, facile princeps ; and at times, by the very perseverance
of his boring, he has wormed some secrets out of unwilling
Governments. But when Mr. Disraeli, instead of giving
him the information for which he asked, got up, and in
that airy, off-hand manner that sits so well upon him, con-
MR. DISRAELI. ' 61
gratulated the member for Devizes upon the possession of
a “luminous intellect,” the House was so delighted with
the saying that it gave the Minister full liberty to sit down,
and leave Mr. Griffith to digest the unexpected compli-
ment—if he could.
“And somewhat akin to this humor is that higher power
of sarcasm for which Mr. Disraeli has been famous through-
out his whole public life. He is not, in one sense of the
word, a good debater. It cannot be denied that at times
he contrasts unfavorably with Mr. Gladstone. But upon
some subjects he makes speeches which are far above the
level reached by any other man in the House of Commons.
No one has the power of investing a great political event
with more of the interest attaching to domestic affairs than
he has. Over and over again he has brought down inci-
dents, which were so far above the ordinary level of the
House of Commons as to be beyond the reach of its sym-
pathy, to the region of every-day life; as, for instance, in
the case of Mr. Lincoln's assassination, when he made the
speech of all the speeches made the world over upon that
most terrible and most touching of tragedies, and brought
tears into the eyes of men to whom before that moment
the President of the United States had been a mere ab-
straction.” + -
The speech in question—delivered May 1, 1865, in
seconding the motion of Lord George Grey for an address
to the Queen, expressing the sorrow and indignation of the
House of Commons on the assassination of Mr. Lincoln–
is here given in full. If it does not quite justify the un-
* “Cabinet Portraits,” p. 5.
62 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
bounded enthusiasm of the author just quoted, it certainly
should give to Americans a permanent feeling of kindliness
toward the statesman who made it :
“Mr. Disraeli : Sir, there are rare instances when the sympathy
of a nation approaches those tenderer feelings that, generally speak-
ing, are supposed to be peculiar to the individual, and to form the
happy privilege of private life; and this is one.
“Under all circumstances we should have bewailed the catastro-
phe at Washington ; under all circumstances we should have shud-
dered at the means by which it was accomplished. But in the
character of the victim, and even in the accessories of his last mo-
ments, there is something so homely and so innocent that it takes,
as it were, the subject out of all the pomp of history and the cere-
monial of diplomacy; it touches the heart of nations, and appeals to
the domestic sentiment of mankind.
“Sir, whatever the various and varying opinions in this House
and the country generally on the policy of the late President of the
United States, on this, I think, all must agree, that in one of the
severest trials which ever tested the moral qualities of man, he ſul-
filled his duty with simplicity and strength. Nor is it possible for
the people of England, at such a moment, to forget that he
sprang from the same fatherland and spoke the same mother-
tongue.
“When such crimes are perpetrated the public mind is apt to fall
into gloom and perplexity; for it is ignorant alike of the causes and
the consequences of such deeds. But it is one of our duties to reas-
sure the country under unreasoning panic or despondency. Assas-
sination has never changed the history of the world. I will not refer
to the remote past, although an accident has made the most memora-
ble example of antiquity at this moment fresh in the mind and mem-
ory of all present. But even the costly sacrifice of a Caesar did not
propitiate the inexorable destiny of his country. If we look to
modern times, to times at least with the feelings of which we are
familiar, and the people of which were animated and influenced by
the same interests as ourselves, the violent deaths of two heroic men,
MR. DISRAELI. - 63
Henry IV., of France, and the Prince of Orange, are conspicuous
illustrations of this truth. -
“In expressing our unaffected and profound sympathy with the
citizens of the United States at the untimely end of their elected
Chief, let us not, therefore, sanction any feeling of depression, but
rather let us express a fervent hope, that from out the awful trials
of the last four years, of which not the least is this violent demise,
the various populations of North America may issue elevated and
chastened ; rich in that accumulated wisdom, and strong in that dis-
ciplined energy which a young nation can only acquire in a pro-
tracted and perilous struggle. Then they will be enabled not merely
to renew their career of power and prosperity, but they will renew
it to contribute to the general happiness of mankind. It is with
these feelings, Sir, that I now second the Address to the Crown.”*
MR. DISRAELI AS A STATESMAN.
As the late leader of the Liberal party of England began
with being the hope of “the stern and unbending Tories,” so
the present Conservative Premier was at first denounced as
a Radical. He was described, thirty years ago, as “Mr.
Disraeli, who has now been thirteen years more or less
prominently before the public, either as an ultra-Radical,
seeking to be a joint of O'Connell's tail ; as a Liberal,
seeking to be elected for a Liberal constituency under the
auspices of Sir E. L. Bulwer; or as an ultra-Tory, or Tory-
Radical, actually representing Shrewsbury.”
“Marvelous dexterity in manipulating a question, and
wonderful skill in seizing every advantage offered by the
enemy, though they make a man a great party leader, do
not necessarily make him a great statesman. We believe, as
* Hansard’s “Parliamentary Debates,” 3d ser., Vol. I78, p. 124.
64 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
we have already said, that Mr. Disraeli has the faculty of
statesmanship in a very high degree ; but it is nevertheless
manifest that he has at times shown rather too strong a bias
in favor of expediency, and has sacrificed what his party
believed to be great principles in order to secure for them a
temporary advantage. But it is always open to dispute
whether he was not perfectly justified in taking the course
he followed on such occasions. We have not yet reached
the end of the political history of England, and a good
many very acute Liberals are inclined to the belief that
Mr. Disraeli's Reform Bill, for instance, instead of destroy-
ing the Conservative party, saved it from destruction, and
opened for it a new career. Time only can solve this ques-
tion ; but whilst it remains in doubt it is unfair to regard
it as finally settled against Mr. Disraeli ; and on the ques-
tion of the practical capacity as a party leader which Mr.
Disraeli displayed in this transaction, there cannot be even
the shadow of a doubt.” a'
“There is but one instance which need be quoted to
show that he does possess, in a very high degree, the foresight
and the accuracy of judgment which are necessary to make
a man a really great statesman. Need we say that we allude
to the question of the American war. Upon that topic we
were nearly all in the wrong—all but Mr. Disraeli. Lord
Palmerston—clever, experienced, worldly-wise old man as
he was—would have gone in unhesitatingly for a recognition
of the Southern States. Earl Russell declared that we saw
in the new world that which we had so often seen in the
old—a war on the one side for empire, and on the other side
* “Cabinet Portraits,” p. 15.
MR. DISRAELI. 65
for independence. Mr. Gladstone was bursting with zeal—
even when official restraints ought to have tied his tongue—
on behalf of Mr. Davis, and ‘the nation he had made.
“Mr. Disraeli was in opposition, and therefore at liberty
to act entirely in accordance with his own sympathies; his
party were almost to a man the enthusiastic adherents of
the South. It would have seemed, to an ordinarily acute
person, that the safest and most profitable game he could
possibly have played would have been that of the Confed-
eracy. But Mr. Disraeli himself knew better. A cool
judgment and a clear foresight had led him to see the
inevitable end. He was beyond his own party, beyond
his colleagues, beyond his rivals, in the prescience which
enabled him to see what the results of the American war
would be ; and whilst we believe that this statesmanlike
sagacity did much to save England at the time from im-
measurable evils, we cannot but deplore the fact that those
who are put forward as his Superiors in statesmanship did not
in this instance show that they possessed it in something
like the same degree. Had they done so, we should not
now have had an ‘American difficulty to contend with.’”*
MR. DISRAELI AS AN AUTHOR.
It is rarely that an author “wakes up and finds himself
famous” through a single book. In the extraordinary
career of Mr. Disraeli, he has thrice had this experience;
first with “Vivian Grey,” in 1826; then with “Coningsby,”
in 1844; then with “Lothair,” in 1870.
* “Cabinet Portraits, p. 12.
66 IBRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
Those who read in their college-days the first of these
remarkable novels—even many years after its publication—
can vividly recall its peculiar fascination. It offered a pic-
ture of all that is most exciting to youth—love, romance,
ambition, power—achieved by personal wit and daring
alone. Those who read it were almost prepared, like
Poe's hero in his delirium, to find “beauties in Vivian
Grey—more than beauties in Vivian Grey—profundity in
Vivian Grey—everything in Vivian Grey.”
Then came Coningsby. In 1844, as Wemyss Reid justly
says, “everybody read “Coningsby,’ and everybody talked
about it. A few praised, and many abused the work. The
critics lashed the author with more than their accustomed
vigor, and the pamphlets and ‘advertisements’ published
against both author and book helped to keep up the ex-
citement. Nay, to such an extent did it go, that some
gentleman—apparently an ambitious journalist—followed
up the original work by a caricature, which, under the
title of ‘Anti-Coningsby,' met with a very moderate
success.
“How was it that this story of a young man's experi-
ence in the great world of fashion and politics produced so
deep and wide-spread a sensation ? The explanation is a
simple one. It was not the plot, or the style, or the wit,
or the polished sarcasm of the volume, which drew all
readers to it. It was the fact that those who opened its
pages believed that they found in them, drawn by a mas-
ter's hand, sketches—caricatures if you like, photographs
if you will—of the leading statesmen of the day. At first
each reader exercised his own ingenuity, and his personal
knowledge of the political world, in order to discover for
MR. DISRAELI. ' 67
himself the identity of the various characters portrayed in
the fiction.
“It was a pleasant and exciting task to discover the real
name of the Marquis of Monmouth, of Mr. Jawster Sharp,
or Mr. Rigby. The man who had hit upon the identity
of any of these personages rushed off to his club with the
Conviction that he was a benefactor to his race, and has-
tened to pour his secret into the ears of his companions of
the morning, or the smoking-room. Ere long, however,
this process of individual exertion in the great task ap-
peared to have unsatisfactory results, and then there ap-
peared—what do our readers think?—a ‘Key to Conings-
by,' by which the dullest member of the world of fashion
was enabled to see at a glance who was who in the fasci-
nating and daring romance.
“Very curious is it to glance nowadays over one of
these ‘Keys' (for more than one appeared) to the political
novel which ‘B. Disraeli, Esq., M.P.” had given to the
world. If they satisfy the reader of nothing else, they must
at least convince him of the wonderful ingenuity of their
authors. Everybody in “Coningsby,’ down even to “Boots’
at Eton, was shown to be somebody else. Sidonia, the
wonderful Hebrew, who had ‘mastered all arts, all lan-
guages, all Sciences,’ who had been everywhere and seen
everything, and penetrated the hearts of everybody, was
shown to the world as ‘Baron Alfred de Rothschild of
Naples;’ Mr. Jawster Sharp was ‘John Bright, Esq.,
M. P. ; the Marquis of Monmouth was a nobleman whom
Thackeray subsequently presented to the world under the
title of Lord Steyne—the Marquis of Hertford; Coningsby
himself was the amiable peer who is now known as Lord
68 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
Lyttelton ; Oswald Milbank, the twin hero of the story,
was ‘W. E. Gladstone, Esq., M.P.” (!); Vere was Lord
Edward Howard ; and the infamous Rigby was – ;
well, at this point the ‘Keys’ left a discreet blank, which
the world immediately filled up with the name of Mr. J.
Wilson Croker, for some time Secretary to the Admiralty.
There was, of course, not a little reason to doubt the accu-
racy of these different keys.” -
Unluckily, as Mr. Disraeli had followed up “Vivian
Grey” by “Contarini Fleming,” so he followed up “Con-
ingsby'' by “Sibyl" and “Tancred,” which were only
dilutions of their original. Lowell, writing in those days
his very first article—if I mistake not—for the review which
he has since edited, denounced it in a strain more lively
than was then familiar to the readers of the Worth Ameri-
can Review, “For our own part,” he said, “we cannot
see any use that is to be answered by such books as Tan-
cred. It is as dumb as the poor choked hunchback in the
Arabian Nights, when we ask what its business is. There
are no characters in it. There is no dramatic interest,
none of plot or incident. * * * Moralists tell us that
every man is bound to sustain his share in the weight of
the world's sorrows and trials, and we honestly feel as if
we had done our part in reading ‘Tancred.’”
Other works of imagination by Mr. Disraeli were “The
Voyage of Captain Popanilla” (1828), “The Young Duke"
(1831), “Alroy, the Wondrous Tale” (1833), “The
Revolutionary Epick " (1834), “Henrietta Temple *
(1836), and “Venetia” (1837). He wrote also “Lord
* M. A. Review, lxv. 223.
MR. DISRAELI. ' 69.
George Bentinck, a Political Biography,” which appeared
in 1852. But his audacious pen had been for many
years silent when “Lothair” appeared, in 1870. Its suc-
cess in respect to circulation was enormous, but opinions
are still divided as to whether its assumed deference for
rank and station is to be regarded as genuine or as a satire.
It is certain, that Bret Harte's amusing burlesque entitled
“Lothaw’’ seems in these respects hardly an exaggeration
of the original. - -
The author of “Political Portraits” sums up the career
of Mr. Disraeli by declaring that he will be remembered
when many wiser and greater men are forgotten. “To
meet him in the long roll of English Prime Ministers is a
perpetual surprise, something like that of encountering
Saul among the prophets. * * * It will be one of the stand-
ing jokes of history, as amusing to future students of the
Victorian era as to us who have had the happiness to enjoy
it at first hand. It supplies the vein of comedy which runs
through a momentous epoch, as the frolics of Falstaff and
Prince Henry lighten the intrigues and wars of Shake-
speare's chronicle plays. It is not likely to be forgotten,
since what is great often attracts attention less than what is
Curious. A paradox, however trivial, an unsettled point,
however trumpery—the sex of the Chevalier d'Eon, or the
authorship of the Letters of Junius—engage men more
than an important but unperplexing truth. Mr. Disraeli
is a curious puzzle. Nobody ever mentions his name
without a smile ; nobody hears it without a corresponding
Smile. It awakens that sense of incongruity in the percep-
tion of which we are told that humor consists. Among
the staid respectabilities of English politics, Mr. Disraeli is
7o BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
as Fifine at Court or turned duenna. In one sense this is
to Mr. Disraeli's credit. It shows that he has had the
courage to be himself, and has not shaped his nature upon
any conventional model. He has spoken and acted ac-
Cording to his disposition, and brought forth works and
deeds after his kind. He has not suppressed or pared
away his individuality into commonplace.”
“* * * * Mr. Disraeli's Premiership is remarka-
ble chiefly for the fact that he was Prime Minister. His
career yields the moral of the Industrious Apprentice and
of books on self-help, showing that by resolution and
capacity a man may become not only a Lord Mayor, a
Lord Chancellor, or an Archbishop of Canterbury, but
even a Prime Minister, in spite of obstacles seemingly in-
superable.” + -
* “Political Portraits," pp. 23, 38.
III.
M. R. BRIGHT.
MR. BRIGHT's PERSONAL APPEARANCE.
§ ENUINE SAXON, by the soul of Hengist l’
3 was the exulting shout of Cedric [in Ivanhoe]
==<ll on hearing the name of a Saxon knight who
had been victor in the lists. ‘Genuine Saxon’ will be the
exclamation of every critical listener to Mr. Bright. His
look, his tone, his choice of word and illustrations, his
stubborn independence, his boldness, his pugnacity, are all
redolent of race.” +
“Within the last few years the art of photography has
made Mr. Bright's features so well known to his fellow-
Countrymen, that it is no exaggeration to say that he can
go nowhere within the limits of the United Kingdom
without being recognized. It has been the lot of the
writer to see the member for Birmingham stared after by
every third man he passed in Regent Street on a summer
afternoon ; surrounded by an admiring but respectful
* A. Hayward, in London Quarterly, April, 1872.


72 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
group on the deck of one of the Holyhead and Kingstown
steamboats ; greeted with enthusiastic cheers when acci-
dently detected on the platform of a Scotch wayside station ;
and followed with glances of affectionate pride as he stur-
dily strode through the crowded Market Street of Man-
chester, ‘the city of his love.' * * * *
“A great many men have been, from time to time, pointed
out as the handsomest members of the House of Commons.
There is, no doubt, very great difference of taste in deciding
what men are personally handsome and what men are not ;
and some of those who have enjoyed for a twelvemonth the
palm of beauty in our great representative assembly have,
in our eyes at least, had no claim whatever to that distinc-
tion. It is a pure matter of taste ; and we may be alto-
gether in the wrong, yet it seems to us that John
Bright is the handsomest man in Parliament. His
figure, it is true, is heavy and unwieldy; he barely
reaches middle height, and of late years he has become
very stout; but his broad, yet lofty forehead, firm, clean-
cut mouth, and, above all, the wonderfully fine eyes
which can flash fire or shed tears at will, seem to us to
make up a countenance possessing the highest kind of
manly beauty. - -
“Within the last few years a transformation, too, has
taken place in his appearance, which has been in one sense
a great improvement. Within that period his hair has
turned from an iron-gray to a pure white, so that now there
is something venerable about his outward aspect, leonine
though it is, withal.” +
* “Cabinet Portraits,” pp. 59, 60.
MR. BRIGHT. 73
MR. BRIGHT's or IGIN AND PUBLIC CAREER.
John Bright was born November 16, 1811, at Green-
bank, Rochdale, England, the residence of his father,
Jacob Bright, a cotton spinner and manufacturer. After
an ordinary school training, he was placed at fifteen in his
father's counting-house. Except during a visit to the Con-
tinent in 1835, his life for twelve years was one of entire
devotion to his business. -
“He has himself told the world how, when he was stay-
ing at Cheltenham, as a young man, stricken down by the
sorest blow which fate can inflict, with none living of his
household save a motherless child, Richard Cobden came
to him and urged him to join in the struggle for Free
Trade. The man whose whole life had been darkened
shook his head sadly, and would have turned from the
prospect which his friend held out to him. Then Cobden
besought him, not for his own sake, but for the sake of
the English poor, to ‘come with him,” and win cheap
bread for the people; and at this Bright yielded, and they
went out upon that wonderful campaign in which many
faults were, no doubt, committed upon both sides ; but in
which, as time has shown, a splendid victory was won for
the people of this realm.” -
It was during this corn-law campaign that his remarka-
ble powers of argument and persuasion first became mani-
fest. In the words of a contemporary writer: “While Mr.
Cobden lent his calm and unanswerable logic to the cause,
Mr. Bright gave it the impetus of zeal and passion. The
one sapped the foundations of economic error, the other
battered at its walls. The one convinced his opponents,
4.
74 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
the other carried them away captive; and both rendered
such efficient service as to make it difficult to say which
was the most useful or the most powerful. Public meet-
ings were held in every part of the British kingdom ; news-
papers were established in the interest of the agitation;
wherever there was a possibility of success, the country was
deluged with pamphlets; eminent men entered the ranks,
but towering high above them all were the names of Cob-
den and Bright. The speeches of the latter were of the
most effective description, and thoroughly English in man-
ner as well as in phraseology. Powerful and impassioned,
he so won his auditors that even those who opposed his
theories were compelled to admire his genius.”
He was nominated to Parliament for Durham, under
the auspices of the Anti-corn Law League, in the year 1843,
but failed. His successful opponent was unseated for brib-
ery, and on a second trial, the same year, Mr. Bright was
returned a member. He at once became the ally of Mr.
Cobden, who had entered Parliament two years earlier.
Their main object was the repeal of the Corn Laws; and
they afterward co-operated in other reforms. In 1847
Mr. Bright became a member for Manchester, and was re-
elected in 1852, but lost his seat in 1857, in consequence
of his opposition to the war policy of the Government. He
was, however, returned from Birmingham during the same
year, and has remained in Parliament ever since. He
took office for the first and only time during Mr. Glad-
stone's last administration, becoming in December, 1868,
President of the Board of Trade, and being the first Quaker
who ever held a Cabinet office in England. He resigned
in 1870, however, his health failing ; and during the
. . M.R. BRIGHT. 75
last few years he has been rarely seen in his seat in Parlia-
In ent.
Mr. Bright has been twice married ; first in 1839, to
Elizabeth, eldest daughter of Jonathan Priestman, Esq.,
of Benwell House, Newcastle-on-Tyne. She died in 1841,
and he was a second time married, in 1847, to Margaret
Elizabeth, eldest daughter of William Leatham, Esq., of
Heath, near Wakefield, in Yorkshire. He is the father of
several children by the last marriage. “When I get home
from this House,” he said, in 1863, in Parliament, ‘‘I find
half a dozen children playing upon my hearth.”
MR. BRIGHT AS AN ORATOR.
A writer in the Edinburgh Review, speaking of Mr.
Bright's published speeches, goes so far as to say, “We
doubt if our language possesses a record of any speeches,
really spoken, which are superior to them.” -
“During three years,” writes the critic of the Daily News,
“Mr. Bright has been an involuntary absentee from Par-
liamentary life. “I shall not know the House of Com-
mons without Sir Robert Peel,” said Macaulay, when his
re-election for Edinburgh restored him to his old place
there. The Reformed House of Commons has scarcely
been itself without Mr. Bright. His accustomed seat be-
low the gangway has lacked him, and his absence was even
less conspicuous when his place was empty than when it
was filled by some veteran Leaguer, or some perfervid
Home Ruler from the upper benches. The portly figure
and the lion-like head caught the glance of all strangers;
and ‘Bright’ was pointed out with pride by the habitués
76 - BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
or the attendants of the place. The time is probably ap-
proaching when he will be seen there again ; when visitors
will comment on the sharp, decisive gestures with which
the member for Birmingham accompanied his talk to his
neighbor; and watch for the quick, nervous glance toward
the Chair, and the slight movement which seldom failed to
catch at once the eye of the Speaker, and to arrest the
attention of the House, as he rose to take part in the de-
bate. Whatever differences of opinion might exist in the
House of Commons with respect to Mr. Bright as a poli-
tician, there never was any question as to his consummate
ability as an orator. The emptiest House—if perchance
he rose in an empty House, which he was seldom prone
to do—speedily filled when he was known to be on his
legs. Beginning in low and measured tones, with a sort
of conversational hesitation in the opening sentences, he
speedily rose to animation. The first condition of his
success was this—that business was the backbone of his
speeches. They were always animated by a purpose which
was clear to himself, and which he never failed to make
clear to his hearers. No one could fail to know what he
was driving at. - \
“Though essentially a plain speaker, both in the literary
and in the moral meaning of the phrase, there can be no
greater mistake than to suppose that he is (if one may still
speak in the present tense) a rude or unpolished one. In one
sense, he is the most cultivated speaker in the House of
Commons, inasmuch as he has most elaborately and success-
fully trained his natural gifts of eloquence. A presence
which fills the eye, a voice which at once takes the ear, and
a slow and deliberate utterance which seems to choose the
MR. BRIGHT. 77
best word, and to watch its effect in order that he may so
choose and place the next as to heighten, or, if need be,
to soften and qualify the impression of the first, compel
attention and interest. Mr. Bright's power of convincing
does not lie so much in strict logic—he does not often
affect the forms of logic, though his speeches never want
the substance of it—as in the submission of the essential
elements of a question to Sagacious common sense and
right feeling. Nothing can be better fitted than his words
to his thought. The best answer to the imputation that
he is un-English in character might, perhaps, be found in
his language, which is more thoroughly and racily English
than that of any speaker in either House. It combines, in
happy blending, alike the simple and the dignified elements
of our tongue. Mr. Bright, if he has not as much wit as
Mr. Disraeli, has a great deal more humor; he has as
much earnestness as Mr. Gladstone, with more self-posses-
Sion ; and he has a simplicity of pathos, and an occasional
grandeur, Scorn, and indignation, which belong to neither.
No Orator has contributed to the public stock more images
and phrases that will live than Mr. Bright. Mr. Disraeli
as the mountebank, with a pill for the earthquake, and Mr.
Lowe and Mr. Horsman as the Scotch terrier party of which
no one could tell the head from the tail, belong now to
history as completely as the Adullamites and the fancy
franchises to our political vocabulary. Few things finer
have ever been uttered by any orator than Mr. Bright's
appeal to the rival leaders to lay aside their animosities in
order to seek a remedy for the wrongs of Ireland, than the
passage in which he described the angel of death visiting
the homes to be desolated by the Crimean war, or than the
78 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
moral dignity of the sentences in which he vindicated his
own career at Birmingham.” +
“‘The greatest orator of his time’ is the verdict which
posterity will unhesitatingly pronounce upon John Bright.
Whatever his rank may be as a statesman—and upon that
point opinions differ widely—there can be, and there will
be no doubt as to his claim to the foremost place amongst
those who have given the English House of Commons a
reputation for eloquence possessed by no other modern
legislative assembly. -
“Those who have heard him most frequently, and those
who are the best able to criticise his oratory, have formed
the highest opinion of it. It is something which no words
Can adequately describe ; something which must be felt to
be appreciated ; but yet something which men of all par-
ties, and of all shades of opinion, regard with an admira-
tion which almost approaches to veneration.
“One of the keenest and most skillful Parliamentary
Critics of the day, a man who constantly opposes Mr.
Bright's views on public policy, and almost scoffs at the
idea that he should claim to be a statesman, has likened
him, as an orator, to a Hebrew poet or leader—to a Moses,
a David, or an Isaiah—simply because he looks upon him
as being all but inspired, when he is giving utterance to
one of those magnificent orations which we believe are
destined to form part of the deathless literature of our
country.” f
“His manner, when speaking, is quiet and subdued, but
it is the apparent subjugation which a bar of iron under-
* “Political Portraits,” pp. 59–62. # “ Cabinet Portraits,” p. 58.
MR. BRIGHT. 79
goes when it passes from the red-hot stage to the condition
of white-heat. The red-hot bar splutters and sends forth
sparks, and is, on the whole, the more imposing to the
passing glance. But there are more heat and power in the
quiet-looking bar that steadfastly burns, content, without
calling attention to the process, by occasionally spluttering
forth an ineffectual shower of sparks. In the course of a
speech Mr. Bright generally manages to say some things
damaging to his opponents and helpful to the cause he
advocates. But when he sits down, there is invariably a
feeling amongst his audience that he has by no means
exhausted himself, but could, if he pleased, have said a
great deal more that would have been equally effectual.
To this end his quiet, self-possessed manner greatly tends.
He has himself well in hand throughout his orations, and
therefore maintains his hold upon his audience. His
gestures are of the fewest; but, unlike Mr. Disraeli's, they
always seem appropriate and natural. A simple wave of
the right hand, and the sentence is emphasized. Nature
has gifted him with a fine presence and a voice the like of
which has but rarely rung through the raſters of St. Ste-
phen's. “Like a bell’ is the illustration usually employed
in the endeavor to convey by words an impression of its
music. But I think it were better to say ‘like a peal of
bells,’ for a single one could not produce the varied tones
in which Mr. Bright suits his expressions to his theme.
On the whole, the dominant note is one of pathos. Pos-
sibly because nearly all Mr. Bright's great speeches have
been made when he has been pleading the cause of the
oppressed or denouncing a threatened wrong, a tone of
melancholy can be heard running through all. And for
8O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
the expression of pathos, there are marvelously touching
tones in his voice, tones which carry right to the listener's
heart the tender thoughts that come glowing from the
speaker's and are clad in simple words as they pass his
tongue.” +
“When a French statesman, conversing with Pitt, ex-
pressed his astonishment at the influence of Fox upon the
House of Commons, the great Commoner replied, “Ah,
you have not been under the wand of the magician.’ And
it is only those who have been ‘under the wand of the
magician who can fully appreciate and understand the
marvelous personal power of the man who was for many
years regarded by one-half of his fellow-countrymen as a
mere demagogue, removed but a single degree from the
condition of a social outlaw. .
‘‘We have seen him thrill to tears, or rouse to shouts of
applause the like of which we never heard before, a rough
Lancashire audience of eight or nine thousand persons,
packed within one of the great mills at Rochdale ; and in
the House of Commons we have heard him speak for an
hour at a stretch, whilst every man in the building listened
with breathless attention, and the cheers that broke out at
the end of every sentence came almost as much from the
one side of the House as from the other. Nay, we have
watched the faces of the men to whom is committed the
government of the British Empire, and of the ‘strangers’
permitted to join with them, strangers including Princes
of the Blood, peers of long descent, the ministers of for-
eign countries, and the leaders of the Church ; we have
* “Men and Manner in Parliament,” pp. 52, 53.
MR. BRIGHT. 8 I
watched them, as slowly, word by word, he was rolling
forth the magnificent peroration of one of his great speeches,
and we have seen upon their countenances such a rapt,
and almost awe-stricken expression, as-to return to the
simile we mentioned at the beginning of this sketch—one
might have expected to see on the faces of a Hebrew con-
gregation before whom an Isaiah was delivering himself of
his heaven-born visions.
“We cannot resist the temptation of transcribing this
one ‘vision' of the Member for Birmingham, whieh formed
the peroration of a speech delivered at Birmingham, in
1862, on the subject of the American War, and the deliv-
ery of which will ever dwell, in the memories of those who
heard it uttered, as one of the most wonderful incidents in
their lives. ‘The leaders of this revolt,” said he, after
speaking for nearly two hours with regard to the war,
‘propose this monstrous thing—that over a territory forty
times as large as England the blight and curse of slavery
shall be forever perpetuated. I cannot believe, for my
part, that such a ſate will befall that fair land, stricken
though it now is with the ravages of war. I cannot believe
that civilization, in its journey with the sun, will sink into
endless night, in order to gratify the ambition of the leaders
of this revolt, who seek to
“Wade through slaughter to a throne,
And shut the gates of mercy on mankind.”
I have another and a far brighter vision before my gaze.
It may be but a vision, but I will cherish it. I see one
vast Confederation, stretching from the frozen North in
unbroken line to the glowing South, and from the wild
6 4% - -
82 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
billows of the Atlantic westward to the calmer waters of the
Pacific main—and I see one people, and one language,
and one law, and one faith, and over all that wide conti-
nent the home of freedom, and a refuge for the oppressed
of every race and of every clime.”
“And yet, whilst the effect produced by Mr. Bright
upon those who listen to him is wonderful, the first im-
pression of those who hear him for the first time is one of
disappointment. When he begins to speak to any audi-
ence, he generally opens his address in a low tone, pauses
occasionally, as though to find a suitable word, and seems
to have no idea whatever of rousing the enthusiasm of those
who listen to him. Those who have taken with them pre-
conceived notions of Mr. Bright, presenting him to their
imaginations as a reckless demagogue, full of sound and
ſury, will hardly be able to recognize the great orator in
the quiet and unimpassioned speaker who stands motion-
less before them, pouring forth a stream of noble Saxon
words, the very simplicity and appropriateness of which
rob the orator of a portion of the credit which is due to him.
“But presently, while the stranger is wondering at the
infatuation of those who have placed upon the brows of
this man the crown of eloquence, he is himself drawn
within the circle of his influence, and, forgetting his pre-
conceived notions, his subsequent disappointment and his
whole theory of the art of oratory, he listens enchanted to
the man who can put the most difficult questions so plainly
before his audience, and in whose hands the dryest subject
becomes so interesting.
“Then, when the speaker has drawn the whole of his
hearers into sympathy with him, he begins to work on their
MR. BRIGHT. 83
emotions like a skillful player on the harp. And first he
rouses the scorn of scorn in their hearts by a few simple
words, which, when we read them in the morning, appear
altogether innocent, but which, as he utters them, scathe
the object of his wrath more terribly than the bitterest or
most violent invective. Perhaps in nothing has Mr. Bright
so much power as in his use of sarcasm. The manner in
which, by a mere inflection of his voice, he can express
the intensest scorn, and so express it as to make his feel-
ings more completely known to his audience than if he
spent an hour in trying to explain them, is simply marvel-
ous. We remember one or two instances in which the
mere tone of his voice has conveyed an impression of his
boundless contempt for his adversaries which no language
could have expressed half so well.
“But almost directly after the audience has been stirred
by the orator's sarcasm, he begins in the calmest and most
deliberate manner to tell some story. Mr. Bright is a
wonderful story-teller, and some of the best anecdotes and
illustrations that have been given to us in modern times
have come from him. The story of the old gentleman,
for instance, who used to say that “a hole wore longer than
a patch,' is worthy of being placed beside the history of
Dame Partington ; and the old lady who “felt very badly
in her inside,’ and the Syrian monk, to whom ‘tears were
as natural as perspiration,’ are good examples of the ready
wit with which he supplies every argument he employs with
an appropriate illustration.
“More notable examples of the same quality are to be
found in that speech in which he christened the Adullam-
ites, and added a new phrase—‘the Cave'—to the vocab-
84 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
ulary of party politics. The speech itself was a triumph
of humor, nothing in it being more grotesquely irresistible
than that never-to-be forgotten description of the ‘party of
two,” which bore so striking a resemblance to the young
lady's terrier, ‘which was so covered with hair that you could
not tell which was the head and which was the tail of it.’
‘‘Perhaps none of Mr. Bright's qualities does so much
to render him popular, as a speaker, both in the House of
Commons and in the provinces, as his humor. And one
peculiarity of his humor is, that it always appears to be
unconscious. When he is telling one of his best stories,
or uttering one of his best sayings, he hardly moves a mus-
cle of his face, and seemingly takes no share in the merri-
ment of his audience.
“It is almost unfortunate that he draws so many of his
illustrations from a book which, in certain circles, is now-
adays going somewhat out of fashion. There are, how-
ever, good reasons why Mr. Bright should indulge as spar-
ingly as possible in classical quotations, which, as they
reflect discredit upon no one, need not be concealed here.
In the course of instruction at the Quaker schools and
colleges where he received the whole of his education, no
place is found for the classics. The study of the dead lan-
guages is deemed a mere weakness and vanity by the sect
of which he is a member, and so it happens that the great
English orator has never enjoyed the advantages of reading,
in the original tongue, the masterpieces of his rivals of
Greece and Rome. That he has studied them as far as he
could possibly do so by the help of translations is evident,
and, indeed, he has himself more than once admitted the
value of a classic model.
MR. BRIGHT. 85
“If the rich stores of classical learning are, however,
almost closed to him, he has made excellent use of those
other fountains of knowledge which are open to his study.
No other public man has such a command of all that is
strong, and pure, and noble in the Saxon tongue, whilst
few show a greater familiarity with our English classics—
with the works of the poets and dramatists of the Eliza-
bethan age, and their successors. All his greater speeches
are illustrated by wonderfully apt and appropriate quota-
tions, some from the Scriptures, and some from the stand-
ard authors of our country. No one who hears these
quotations employed can imagine for a moment that they
are the result of a resort to any “Dictionary of Elegant
Extracts,” or other work of the same kind. They show
the orator's thorough familiarity with those authors who
have done most for English literature. It is said, indeed,
that Mr. Bright makes a habit of committing to memory
the works of some one of our chief poets every year.”*
“Mr. Bright's humor,” says another critic, “is not sar-
donic like Mr. Disraeli's, but it resembles it inasmuch as
its manifestations have chiefly been in the direction of
hitting off some person or party by a single phrase, in Mr.
Bright's case containing a parallel or a comparison drawn
from a source familiar to the least educated mind. Two
at least of his happiest strokes of this sort have their in-
spiration from the Bible. Had Mr. Lowe wanted to say
something damaging about Mr. Bright, he would, in all
probability, have looked through his Homer or his Horace
for an illustration. When Mr. Bright desired, during the
* “Cabinet Portraits,” pp. 61–66.
86 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
debate on the Reform Bill, to cover with ridicule the clique
of which Mr. Lowe was the head, he bethought him of
David's escape from Achish, King of Gath, and the char-
acter of the people who subsequently foregathered with him
in the Cave of Adullam, and a new name was added to the
political vocabulary. When, pending the General Elec-
tion, he had occasion to complain of the determined dis-
Satisfaction of the Conservatives, he again turned to the
classical book of the people, and on the morrow all Eng-
land was laughing at the party who, “if they had been in
the wilderness, would have complained of the Ten Com-
mandments as a harassing piece of legislation.” Mr. Bright's
illustrations, when drawn from other sources, are equally
homely, and, therefore, effective. Thus, when he dubbed
Mr. Disraeli ‘the mystery man of the Ministry,’ and when
he likened Mr. Lowe and Mr. Horsman to a Scotch ter-
rier, ‘of which no one could with certainty say which was
the head and which the tail,” everybody could comprehend
and enjoy the reference. The fearful sting contained in
his casual remark about Sir Charles Adderly, in a letter to
a correspondent who had brought under his notice a mis-
representation of fact which Sir Charles had permitted
himself to indulge in—“I hope he thought he was speak-
ing the truth, but he is rather a dull man, and is liable to
make blunders’—will be best appreciated by those who
know the right honorable baronet. But the volume of
sarcasm hidden in the parenthetical remark about the gen-
tleman's ancestors who came over with the Conqueror—“I
never heard that they did anything else’—is plain reading
for all. So is the well-merited retort upon a noble lord
who, during a time when Mr. Bright was temporarily laid
MR. BRIG IIT. 87
aside by illness, took the opportunity of publicly declaring
that, by way of punishment for the uses he had made of
his talents, Providence had inflicted upon Mr. Bright a
disease of the brain. “It may be so,” said Mr. Bright to
the House of Commons when he came back; ‘but in any
case, it will be some consolation to the friends and family
of the noble lord to know that the disease is one which
even Providence could not inflict upon him.’” +
“The chief defect of Mr. Bright's oratory is a certain
failure in variety both of thought and of manner. He
lacks the sparkling fancy and vivacity of Sheridan and Can-
ning. Those metaphors, blending poetry and philosophy
with oratory, in which Burke's speeches abound, and which
reveal depths of meaning and a delicacy of discrimination
beyond the range of the proposition they enforce, have no
counterpart in Mr. Bright's eloquence, which is often
sombre, and, apart from the animation given to it by tone
and gesture, slightly monotonous. The bitter and vehe-
ment things which Mr. Bright has sometimes said savor of
the Puritanic temper, which is prone to confound error
with willful wrong-doing, and to Smite it as with the Sword
of the Lord and of Gideon. There has been some contro-
versy—a one-sided controversy of course—of a modern
with an ancient author, on the nice question whether rhet-
oric may be better likened to the closed fist and logic to
the open hand, or whether the illustration should be re-
versed ? Mr. Bright's rhetoric, at least, has certainly a
great deal of the clenched fist in it ; and when it exhibits
the open hand, it is usually to administer a slap in the face.
* “Men and Manner in Parliament,” pp. 56–58.
88 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
He appears, occasionally, to have taken as much pains to
conceal real moderation under a form of violence as other
men have done to hide their violence under a mask of
moderation. There has, however, been much exaggera-
tion in the imputations made against him on this head.
The extremest things which he has said may be paralleled in
the language of his predecessors. In the days of the strug-
gle of the first Reform Bill, Lord John Russell and Sir
John Hobhouse used words as threatening as any employed
by Mr. Bright ; and the same might be said of Fox and
Grey before them, to say nothing of the virulent abuse from
Tory squires of which Mr. Bright himself has been the
object. But the fact is, that Mr. Bright's antagonists have
often read their own heated passions into his speeches; and
some of them have had the candor to acknowledge that
language which, in the newspaper reports and in the sharp-
ness of conflict, appeared to be unjustifiably vehement,
loses that character in the printed volume and in Calm
historic retrospect.” +
One of the passages oftenest quoted in illustration of the
simple and commanding eloquence of Mr. Bright is the
close of one of his speeches on the condition of Ireland.
It ends as follows:
“The noble Lord (Palmerston), toward the conclusion of his
speech, spoke of the cloud which rests at present over Ireland. It
is a dark and heavy cloud, and its darkness extends over the feelings
of men in all parts of the British Empire. But there is a consola-
tion which we may all take to ourselves. An inspired king, and
bard, and prophet, has left us words which are not only the expres-
* “Political Portraits,” pp. 64–66.
MR. BRIGHT. 89
sion of a fact, but which we may take as the utterance of a prophecy.
He says, “To the upright their ariseth light in the darkness.’ Let
us try in this matter to be upright. Let us try to be just. That
cloud will be dispelled. The dangers which surround us will van-
ish, and we may yet have the happiness of leaving to our children
the heritage of an honorable citizenship in a united and prosperous
empire.”
But the most memorable of all Mr. Bright's speeches—
that which produced the deepest impression on his hearers,
and that which he is said to remember with the greatest
personal pleasure—was his speech against the further pros-
ecution of the Crimean war. Its most impressive passage,
it is said, was this :
“I do not suppose that your troops are to be beaten in actual con-
flict with the foe, or that they will be driven into the sea; but I am
certain that many homes in England in which there now exists a
fond hope that the distant one may return—many such homes may
be rendered desolate when the next mail shall arrive. The angel of
death has been abroad throughout the land ; you may almost hear
the beating of his wings. There is no one, as when the first-born was
slain of old, to sprinkle with blood the lintel and the two side-posts
of our doors, that he may spare and pass on ; he takes his victims
from the castle of the noble, the mansion of the wealthy, and the
cottage of the poor and lowly, and it is in behalf of all these classes
that I make this solemn appeal.”
The parliamentary critic of the Gentleman's Magazine
says that no one who heard can forget those solemn sen-
tences. It was “a bold oratorical flight to take in the
House of Commons; which is, above all things, practical,
and kills by good hearty laughter any approach to mere.
sentimentality. * * * “If you had said the flapping
of its wings,’ said Mr. Cobden to Mr. Bright, as they
90 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIIES.
walked home together after the speech, “we should have
gone into a fit of laughter.' But Mr. Bright had selected
the right word, had fitted it in the right place, and the true
pathos of the tones in which the sentence was slowly
spoken carried it far above the level of laughter.” + -
But I confess that no extended piece of eloquence that
ever came from Mr. Bright's lips is to me so impressive, at
least in the reading, as those four sentences in which he
bore witness to the House of the personal nobleness of
Mr. Cobden. It was on April 3, 1865. Lord Palmer-
ston had announced to the House the death of that emi-
ment man, and had very warmly eulogized him ; Mr. Disraeli
had followed, speaking in language as strong. Mr. Bright
was the only other speaker, and he spoke only these words :
“MR. BRIGHT:—Sir ... I feel that I cannot address the House on
this occasion ; but every expression of sympathy which I have heard
has been most grateful to my heart. But the time which has elapsed
since, in my presence, the manliest and gentlest spirit that ever
quitted or tenanted a human form took its flight is so short, that I dare
not even attempt to give utterance to the feelings by which I am
oppressed. I shall leave to some calmer moment, when I may have
the opportunity of speaking before some portion of my countrymen,
the lesson which I think may be learned from the life and character
of my friend. I have only to say that, after twenty years of most
intimate and almost brotherly friendship with him, I little knew
how much I loved him until I found that I had lost him.” +
* - \
It seems to me that Ben Jonson's famous
“Wouldst thou hear what man can say
In a little 2 Reader, stay !”
* Men and Manner in Parliament,” p. 54.
+ Hansard, 3d ser, vol. 178, p. 677.
MR. BRIGHT. 9I.
might fitly be prefaced to this brief passage ; and that it
must rank with -
“Sidney's sister, Pembroke's mother,”
among the masterpieces of the English tongue.
MR. BRIGHT AS A STATESMAN.
In a speech by Mr. Bright on the Russian War, he dis-
avowed, once for all, the claim of statesmanship. He then
said:
“I am not, nor did I ever pretend to be, a statesman ; and that
character is so tainted and so equivocal in our day, that I am not
sure that a pure and honorable ambition would aspire to it. I have
not enjoyed for thirty years, like these noble lords, the honors and
emoluments of office. I have not set my sails to every passing
breeze. I am a plain and simple citizen, sent here by one of the
foremost constituencies of the empire; representing—feebly, per-
haps, but honestly, I dare aver—the opinions of very many, and the
true interests of all those who have sent me here.” -
Nevertheless, in spite of this disclaimer, the laurels of .
statesmanship are surely his. A keen critic thus responds :
“Mr. Bright has said, in more than one of his speeches,
that the title of statesman has been so much abused that
he has never very eagerly coveted it. Yet in a certain
real, though limited sense, Mr. Bright is a statesman. He
is the statesman of a class struggling toward direct par-
ticipation in affairs, and of a policy, militant through the
greater part of his career, but toward its close, and mainly
through and by that career, substantially triumphant. In
the intellectual and moral qualities of political foresight
92 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
and fertile resource which the word statesman expresses, it
belongs to him, perhaps, more accurately than to most of
his contemporaries. Of course, if statesmanship means
or requires the tenure of office; if a statesman is essentially
a man whose name is on the back of bills destined to be-
come law ; if the word applies only to the skillful executive
instrument of legislation ; in other words, if a Parliament-
ary adapter is a statesman, Mr. Bright has slender title to
the name. He held office but for a few months, just long
enough to crown by his presence in the Cabinet some of
his own most important works, and to symbolize the na-
tional recognition of the real character of his labors. In
this fact lies the justification of the claim made in his be-
half to the title of statesman. The statesman is a mid-
term, so to speak, between the speculative thinker in poli-
tics and the mere executive or legislative instrument, the
accident of a party or a Ministry, of a combination or an
intrigue, who simply registers and effects the decision of
the nation. The speculative thinker, looking far backward
into causes and far forward into effects, is usually lost to
his contemporaries in the past which he explores or in the
future which he foreshadows. The Minister of the day, or
at least of our day, deals only with the exigencies and pos-
sibilities of the moment. The statesman takes into his
view the problems of the generation in which he lives, the
actual conditions of society and the reforms which are
most urgent, the questions which are unsettled and the
methods and details of settlement. If the word statesman
is to mean anything else and anything more than office-
holder and Parliamentary middle-man, it must mean as
much as this ; and in this sense the title belongs to Mr.
MR. BRIGHT. 93
Bright quite as much as to some people who seem disposed
to monopolize it.””
“But, taking Mr. Bright as he is, it is indisputable that
he has discerned with keenness the questions of the time,
and not simply discerned the questions, but prompted the
answers. Not only in the Corn Laws, and in the restriction
of the suffrage, and the coercion or corruption of the voter,
but also in the condition of Ireland and in that of India,
and in much of our inherited system of foreign and Colo-
nial policy—the policy of interference and of guarantees—
he has placed his hands upon the wounds of the Empire,
and suggested the curative treatment. His therapeutics
have been as sound as his diagnosis. The Irish measures
of the present Government were, in some of their main
provisions, sketched out and recommended by Mr. Bright,
when to hint at such projects was to challenge vituperation
as an incendiary, a despoiler, and a communist. The
Church-rate question was adjusted on the basis of a com-
promise suggested by him. His speeches on India con-
tain the outlines of a scheme for reconstructing the Gov-
ernment of that great dependency. The late Treaty of
Commerce with France is said to have its origin in a sug-
gestion of his, More than half-a-dozen years ago he pro-
posed arbitration on the Alabama differences, when no
Minister would listen to the project. It needs not be said
how complete the confirmation of his judgment has been
on the issue of the Southern Rebellion, on which so many
official persons went wildly wrong. The impolicy of the
Russian War, denunciation of which cost him his seat,
* “Political Portraits,” pp. 67–69.
94. BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
has been practically acknowledged by a Government
Some of whose members were parties to the conflict. On
domestic questions, instead of mere abstract principles
equally applicable to all times, or equally inapplicable to
any, Mr. Bright has always pointed to definite action,
called for by the actual conditions of affairs, and to be
reached by specific and assigned means. In the Reform
agitation, he sketched out a plan for the redistribution of
seats, which, if we may judge from some indications, has
a good chance of being accepted as a safe middle-path be-
tween the present arrangement and the sweeping and sys-
tematic change insisted on by some younger Reformers.
He labored for the extension of the franchise less as an
end itself than as an instrument of the other reſorms which
have followed or promise to follow it. If he had contend-
ed for it as a ‘right of man' he would not have limited
his demand to household suffrage, nor qualified that by
Safeguards against the residuum. -
“If this estimate of Mr. Bright as a politician be cor-
rect, it is difficult to say which of two opposite views is the
more absurd—that which represents him as a common-
place Radical of the Joseph Hume type, with an extraor-
dinary gift of eloquence, or that which dresses him up as
a great revolutionary character, thrown away upon settled
and orderly times. Mr. Bright is essentially a sagacious
English politician, with views larger and wider than those
of hand-to-mouth Ministers, but narrower than those of
speculative thinkers; fertile in resources and expedients,
and not indisposed to compromise in unessential points in
order to secure a freer assent to what is essential. No
Tory, sitting behind Mr. Gathorne Hardy, or side by side
MR. BRIGHT. 95
with Mr. Newdegate, has expressed more unreasonable dis-
trust or alarm than Mr. Bright has shown of the theories
of Mr. Mill and his disciples. No one is less disposed
than he to legislate for the possible requirements of a future
generation. His eye and thought are fixed upon the defi-
, nite wants of the present time, as interpreted truly, but
partially and narrowly, by the views of the Manchester
school. In itself, this limitation implies a defect of intel-
lectual character. Mr. Bright's range of political ideas is
but a small segment of the entire circle of political thought
and action. His indifference to what lies beyond them,
and is necessary to complete them, has often been exhibited
in a manner more exasperating to his friends than to his
enemies. But for the special work which Mr. Bright has
had to do, the loss to him has been gain to the world.
The absurd impression of Mr. Bright as a revolutionist is
due in part to imprudent outbursts of his own, but still
more to imputations unscrupulously cast upon him by the
defenders of particular interests, who wish to associate an-
tagonism to them with antagonism to all social order, and
most of all, perhaps, to the idea that an agitator is neces-
sarily a revolutionary demagogue. If, however, an eminent
writer in the Quarterly Review is right in his doctrine that
Minister and Parliaments, instead of ruling and persuading
the popular power, now simply do its bidding and its work—
if the task of persuasion and ruling is to be done out of
doors, the functions of statesmanship lie there quite as much
as with the obedient instruments in St. Stephen’s.” +
But it will always seem, I should think, to Americans,
* “Political Portraits," p. 70.
96 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
that the most striking evidence of statesmanlike percep-
tion given by Mr. Bright was his comprehension, from the
beginning, of the causes and probable consequences of our
Own Civil War. Other Englishmen were then the friends
of America, but Mr. Bright's speeches were like those of an
American. In reading Mill, for instance, we often come
upon phrases which an American would not have used ;
allusions and assertions which seem to need qualification.
Among all Mr. Bright's speeches we hardly find a single
instance of this ; he knows us as we know ourselves, indeed
better than we knew ourselves. Take, for instance, that
admirable statement of the whole question with which he
opened his address before the Trades Unions of London,
March 26, 1863—the meeting which adopted resolutions
and an address to President Lincoln.
“The subject which we have met to discuss is one of surpassing
interest,--which excites at this moment, and has excited for two
years past, the attention and the astonishment of the civilized world.
We see a country which for many years—during the lifetime of the
oldest amongst us—has been the most peaceful, and prosperous, and
most free, amongst the great nations of the earth—(Hear! Hear!)—
we see it plunged at once into the midst of a sanguinary revolution,
whose proportions are so gigantic as to dwarf all other revolutionary
records and events of which we have any knowledge. But I do not
wonder at this revolution. No man can read the history of the
United States, from the time when they ceased to be dependent
Colonies of England, without discovering that at the birth of that
great Republic there was sown the seed of its dissolution, or at least
of its extreme peril; and the infant giant in its cradle may be said
to have been rocked under the shadow of the cypress, which is the
symbol of mortality and the tomb. (Cheers.)
“Colonial weakness, when face to face with British strength, made
it impossible to put an end to slavery, or to establish a republic free
MR. BRIGHT. 97
from slavery. To meet England, it was necessary to be united, and
to be united it was necessary to tolerate slavery ; and from that hour
to this—at least to a period within the last two or three years—the
love of the Union and the patriotism of the American people have
induced them constantly to make concessions to slavery, because they
knew that when they ceased to made these concessions they ran the
peril of that disruption which has now arrived ; and they dreaded
the destruction of their country even more than they hated the evil
of slavery. (Hear!) But these concessions failed, as I believe con-
cessions to evil always do fail. These concessions failed to secure
safety in that Union. There were principles at war which were
wholly irreconcilable. The South, as you know, for fifty years has
been engaged in building fresh ramparts by which it may defend its
institutions. The North has been growing yearly greater in free-
dom; and though the conflict might be postponed, it was obviously
inevitable. - - *
“In our day, then, that which the statesmen of America had
hoped permanently to postpone has arrived. The great trial is now
going on in the sight of the world, and the verdict upon this great
question must at last be rendered. But how much is at stake?
Some men in this country, some writers, treat it as if, after all, it was
no great matter that had caused this contest in the United States.
I say that a whole continent is at stake. (Cheers.) It is not a ques-
tion of boundary ; it is not a question of tariff; it is not a question
of supremacy of party, or even of the condition of four millions of
negroes. (Cheers.) It is more than that. It is a question of a
whole continent, with its teeming millions, and what shall be their
present and their future fate. (Cheers.) It is for these millions
freedom or slavery, education or ignorance, light or darkness, Chris-
tian morality, ever-widening and all-blessing in its influence, or an
overshadowing and all-blasting guilt. (Cheers.)” +
Again, at a meeting held at the London Tavern, June
16, 1863, to receive Mr. M. D. Conway, Mr. Bright gave
* “Speeches of John Bright on the American Question.” Bos-
ton, 1865, p. 172.
98 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
the following strong statement of the influence exerted on
England by America :
“We all of us know that there has been a great effect produced
in England by the career of the United States. An emigration of
three millions or four millions of persons from the United King-
dom, during the last forty years, has bound us to them by hundreds
and thousands of family ties, (Hear ! Hear!)—and therefore it fol-
lows that whatever there is that is good, and whatever there is that
is free, that we have not, we know something about it, and gradually
may begin to wish for, and some day may insist upon having. (Loud
cheers.) -
“And when I speak of ‘us,' I mean the people of this country.
When I am asserting this fact that the people of England have a
great interest in the well-being of the American Republic, I mean
the people of England. I do not speak of the wearers of crowns or
of coronets in matters of this kind,+(Hear! Hear!)—but of the
twenty millions of seople in this country who live on their labor,
and who, having no votes, are not counted in our political census,
but without whom there could be no British nation at all. (Loud
cheers.) I say that these have an interest, almost as great and direct
as though they were living in Massachusetts or New York, in the
tremendous struggle for freedom which is now shaking the whole .
Northern population. (Cheers.)
“During the last two years there has been much said, and much
written, and some things done in this country, which are calculated
to gain us the hate of both sections of the American Union. I be.
lieve that a course of policy might have been taken by the English
press, and by the English Government, and by what are called the
influential classes in England, that would have bound them to our
hearts and to their hearts. I speak of the twenty millions of the
Free North. I believe we might have been so thoroughly united
with the people, that all remembrance of the war of the Revolution
and of the war of 1812 would have been obliferated, and we should
have been in heart and spirit for all time forth but one nation.
- “I can only hope that, as time passes, and our people become
MR. BRIGHT 99
better informed,—(Hear! Hear!)—they will be more just, and that
ill-feeling of every kind will pass away; that in future all that love
freedom here will hold converse with all that love” freedom there,
and that the two nations, separated as they are by the ocean, come
as they are, notwithstanding, of one stock, may be in future time
united in soul, and may make together every possible effort for the
advancement of the liberties and the happiness of mankind. (Pro-
longed and enthusiastic applause.)” ”
Again, in his great speech on this subject in the House
of Commons (June 30, 1863), how admirably he took up,
point by point, the questions of interest, of honor, of
humanity, even of family ties, which identified, as he
argued, the Union cause with the prosperity of England.
It is thus, for instance, that he appeals to the cotton in-
terest :
“And first, with regard to the supply of cotton, in which the noble
lord, the member for Stamford, takes such a prodigious interest. I
must explain to the noble lord that I know a little about cotton. I
happen to have been engaged in that business—not all my life, for
the noble lord has seen me here ſor twenty years—but my interests
have been in it ; and at this moment the firm of which I am a mem-
ber have no less than six mills, which have been at a stand for nearly
a year, owing to the impossibility of working under the present con-
ditions of the supply of cotton. I live among a people who live by
this trade : and there is no man in England who has a more direct
interest in it than I have. Before the war, the supply of cotton was
little and costly, and every year it was becoming more costly, for the
supply did not keep pace with the demand.
“The point that I am going to argue is this: I believe that the
war that is now raging in America is more likely to abolish slavery
than not, and more likely to abolish it than any other thing that can
be proposed in the world. I regret very much that the pride and
* “Speeches on the American Question,” p. 217.
º º e ** •:
& * e°e © Q º * a
© tº tº t
º tº • © º
* º © & © e tº
& e ap e y , 9
IOO BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
passion of men are such as to justify me in making this statement.
The supply of cotton under slavery must always be insecure. The
House felt so in past years ; for at my recommendation they ap-
pointed a committee, and but for a foolish minister they would have
appointed a special commission to India at my request,-(laughter)
—and I feel the more regret that they did not do so. Is there any
gentleman in this House who will not agree with me in this, that
it would be far better for our great Lancashire industry that our
supply of cottom should be grown by free labor rather than by slave
labor? (Hear!)”*
The conclusion of this speech was as follows:
“I have not said a word with regard to what may happen to Eng-
land if we go into war with the United States. It will be a war on
the ocean. Every ship that belongs to the two nations will, as far as
possible, be swept from the seas; but when the troubles in America
are over—be they ended by restoration of the Union, or by separa-
tion—that great and free people, the most instructed in the world,
—(loud cries of “No l’)—there is not an American to be found in
the New England States who cannot read and write, and there are
not three men in one hundred in the whole Northern States who
cannot read and write, (cheers)—and those who cannot read and
write are those who have recently come from Europe, (laughter)—
I say the most instructed people in, the world, and the most wealthy
—if you take the distribution of wealth annong the whole people—
you will leave in their hearts a wound which probably a century
may not heal, and the posterity of some of those who now hear my
voice may look back with amazement, and I will say with lamenta-
tion, at the course which was taken by the honorable and learned
gentleman, and by such honorable members as may choose to follow
his leading. (No 1 No 1) I suppose the honorable gentlemen who
cry ‘No 1' will admit that we sometimes suffer from some errors of
our ancestors. (Hear! Hear !) There are few persons who will not
admit that, if their fathers had been wiser, their children would have
been happier. (Hear! Hear!)
* “Speeches on the American Question,” pp. 234, 235.
o • * x tº *
© º
a * > * © e tº • *e r e
& Cº. e a º &
& &
º • * o a ... º. e &
e . . . . . * * * & We
MIR. BRIGHT. I O I
“We know the cause of this revolt, its purposes, and its aims.
(Hear!) Those who made it have not left us in darkness respecting
their intentions,—(Hear ! Hear !)—bºt what they are to accomplish
is still hidden from our sight ; and I will abstain now, as I have
always abstained with regard to it, from predicting what is to come.
(Hear! Hear!) I know what I hope for, and what I shall rejoice
in, but I know nothing of future facts that will enable me to ex-
press a confident opinion. (Hear! Hear !) Whether it will give
freedom to the race which white men have trampled in the dust, or
whether the issue will purify a nation steeped in crime in connection
with its conduct to that race, is known only to the Supreme. (Hear!
Hear!) In His hands are alike the breath of man and the life of
states. I am willing to commit to Him the issue of this dreaded
contest; but I implore of Him, and I beseech this House, that my
country may lift nor hand nor voice in aid of the most stupendous
act of guilt that history has recorded in the annals of mankind.
(Loud cheers, amidst which the honorable gentleman resumed his
seat.)” +
In a speech at Rochdale, during the excitement caused
by the Mason and Slidell seizure, he showed this more
than sympathy, this community of spirit with the United
States, in express words. “The crisis to which we have
arrived,” he said, “–I say ‘we,” for after all we are nearly
as much interested as if I was making this speech in the city
of Boston or the city of New York—this crisis, I say,
which has now arrived, was inevitable.” Elsewhere he has
generously said, speaking of America :
“We see there a nation whom I shall call the Transatlantic Eng-
lish nation,-(Hear! Hear!)—the inheritor and partaker of all the
historic glories of this country. We see it torm with intestine broils,
and suffering from calamities from which for more than a century
past—in fact, for more than two centuries past—this country has
* “Speeches on the American Question,” p. 253.
I O2 RRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
been exempt. That struggle is of especial interest to us. We re-
member the description which one of our great poets gives of
Rome— * -
“Lone mother of dead empires.’
But England is the living mother of great nations on the American
and on the Australian continents, which promise to endow the world
with all our knowledge and all our civilization, and even something
more than the freedom she herself enjoys. (Cheers.)” ”
It shows how slowly Mr. Bright's real character made
itself recognized, that he was mentioned by an otherwise just
and dispassionate American observer, long after the begin-
ning of our war, as a mere demagogue. Hon. F. Way-
land, Jr., in an excellent article in the Atlantic Monthly for
December, 1861, thus refers to Mr. Bright: “The un-
wearied exertions of Bright, Roebuck, and other leading
Radicals, could not arouse the people to that state of un-
reasoning excitement in which these demagogues delight.” +
And though Mr. Bright was admitted by this writer to be
‘‘the best declaimer in the House,” it was remarked that
“he labors under the prevalent suspicion of being insincere,
and, beyond a small circle of devoted admirers, has no
influence whatever in Parliament.” Probably the subse-
quent career of this great man has forever removed this
impression.
It has, however, also removed the impression of his ex-
treme radicalism. For instance, he has never yet avowed
himself unequivocally as being in favor of republican insti-
tutions in England ; though no one has ever expressed
* “Speeches on the American Question,” p. II.
+ “Atlantic Monthly, VIII., 669.
MR. BRIGHT. IO3
with more eloquence the principle of self-respect and self-
government, on which republican government rests. Thus
he said at Rochdale (Dec. 4, 1861):
“We know what an election is in the United States for President
of the Republic. There is a most extensive suffrage, and there is
the ballot-box. The members of the House of Representatives are
elected by the same suffrage, and generally they are elected at the
same time. It is thus, therefore, almost inevitable that the House of
Representatives is in accord in public policy with the President for
the time being. Every four years there springs from the vote created
by the whole people a President over that great nation. I think the
world offers no finer spectacle than this ; it offers no higher dignity;
and there is no greater object of ambition on the political stage on
which men are permitted to move. You may point, if you will, to
hereditary rulers, to crowns coming down through successive gener-
ations of the same family, to thrones based on prescription or on
conquest, to scepters wielded over veteran legions and subject
realms—but to my mind there is nothing so worthy of reverence and
obedience, and nothing more sacred, than the authority of the freely
chosen by the majority of a great and free people (applause); and if
there be on earth and among men any right divine to govern, surely
it rests with a ruler so chosen and so approved. (Renewed applause.)”*
It was predicted long since of Mr. Bright, as it is often
foretold of radicals, that actual power would produce con-
servatism. Lord Lytton wrote long since,
“Let Bright responsible for England be,
And straight in Bright a Chatham we shall see.”
And the subject of these lines himself said in 1846, when
defending Sir Robert Peel : “You placed him in office.
When a man is in office, he is not the same man as when
he is in opposition * * * There are such things as the
* “Speeches on the American Question,” pp. 19, 20.
IO4 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
responsibilities of office.” It cannot be said of Mr. Bright
that he has ever recanted a profession or sacrificed a prin-
ciple, but it is undoubtedly true that he has disappointed
those who regarded him as a radical by temperament,
and not merely by conviction. “ The extent of Mr.
Bright's democratic tendencies,” says Mr. Justin McCarthy,
“would probably disappoint some Americans. I may say
now what I should, probably, have been laughed at for
Saying Some years ago, that there is a good deal of the
conservative about John Bright; that he is by nature dis-
posed to shrink from innovation ; and that he is about the
last man in England who would care to make political war
for an idea.” +
Yet, even as these pages go to press, there has come
the report of a speech by Mr. Bright to his constituents,
with an appeal for another daring reform, the disestablish-
ment of the Church of England. But that very able ob-
server, Mr. Smalley, who describes it for the New York
Tribune, is compelled to admit that from ill-health, or from
some other cause, the speaker did not show his usual power.
The letter opens thus:
“LONDON, Jan. 26.-Mr. Bright's speech last night at
Birmingham would be thought a great speech for anybody
but him, or in any circumstances but the present. I can
judge of it only by report, for I could not go down to hear
Mr. Bright, as I had meant to. But it is pretty clear, from
what is said in this morning's papers, that the speech has
disappointed people. The greatest oratorical effort would
not have satisfied expectations. What was wanted from
* “Modern Leaders,” p. III.
MR. BRIGHT. IO5
Mr. Bright was some practical solution of the difficulties
which encompass the Liberal party, some counsel for its
guidance, a new programme, a consoling explanation of
its defeat last February, a remedy for its internal dissen-
sions, and many other things beside. I remember no
period in English politics, since the organization of the
Liberal party, when there was so much discouragement and
such a stress of helplessness. Men don't know what to be
at. They looked to Mr. Bright to tell them, and he has
not told them. Of course there are programmes enough,
in one sense; there are even too many. The trouble is
that there is no one which unites the different sections of
the party. There is more difference between them than
between one of these and the Tory party. They are not
even animated by the hope of regaining office; or perhaps
even by the desire of it. They would not know what to
do with the power if some miracle should restore them to
place. Abandoned by Mr. Gladstone, the more thought-
ful of the advanced Liberals turn naturally to Mr. Bright—
to him who, for a quarter of a century, had supplied the
party with ideas. But Mr. Bright has no distinct plan or
purpose. He has not spoken in public since the general
election, but he refers to it only in an incidental way. He
deplores the retirement of Mr. Gladstone, but has no opin-
ion to offer on the choice of his successor; still less on the
choice of a policy which that successor should follow. His
speech is nearly all devoted to a discussion of ecclesiastical
matters, yet it is very far indeed from being a speech with
which to open a campaign for disestablishment.
“The truth is, I suppose, that Mr. Bright did not feel
equal to the situation. He did not think it was for him
IO6 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
to attempt a task from which Mr. Gladstone had withdrawn
in discouragement. Yet the fifteen thousand people—or
twenty thousand, as others compute—who filled the great
hall in which he spoke must have gone away feeling that
they had listened to a great intellectual effort; to a speech
which, as an effort of pure oratory, was not unworthy of
Mr. Bright's days of unbroken health. In truth, it was an
effort in the most painful sense of the word. Mr. Bright
spoke in circumstances of great physical discomfort. He
has been suffering from nervousness, and from a return of
his old throat troubles. It was doubtful yesterday whether
he could speak at all. His will, and his dislike to send
his constituents away empty, triumphed over his maladies.” +
The following extracts, if they give no just impression
of the speech itself, give us at least the last public words,
up to the present moment, from Mr. Bright:
“Then we are brought face to face with this great fact, which is—
and I wish you to consider this—that the State Church, as we have
it now, is not and cannot be in harmony with the age. (Cheers.)
I should like to ask you what there is that was established in the
reign of Queen Elizabeth that is in harmony with the reign of Queen
Victoria 2 (Applause.). Why, the difference between the two Queens
is enormous, and cannot be exaggerated. The arbitrary doings, the
absolute power, and the insulting assertion of it in the reign of Queen
Elizabeth, cannot be in harmony with the moderation, the justice,
the kindness, and the sympathy which you have in the Queen of our
own day. (Cheers.) -
“I will not complain, though I might complain—and it is a strong
argument in the case—-that wherever you find the Church of England
powerful there you find the opposition to any legislative or adminis-
trative reform most powerful also. (Hear, hear.) We have received
no service from the Church of England as a body. There have been
* New York Zºribune, Feb. II, 1875.
MR. BRIGHT. a Io?
occasional, and remarkable, and admirable exceptions, but as a body
we have received no service on all the great measures of change and
improvement which have so blessed this country during the last half
century. (Hear, hear.) * * * *
“I do not recommend this meeting or any constituency that they
should pledge their candidates to vote for the abolition of the Estab-
lished Church. I do not in the least degree recommend or approve
of any body of men who complain that a party or party leader is
chosen who has not formed the same opinion that I have upon this
question. This is a question which has not come near that point
yet. It is one of the gravest questions which a people has ever had
to consider. It is far more important, and far more difficult than
the question of the extension of the suffrage or of the redistribution
of seats. (Hear, hear.) It is a question that goes down deep into
the hearts of hundreds of thousands of good men and women in this
country, and you cannot by a wrench make a great disturbance of
this kind. What you have to do is to discuss it like intelligent and
Christian men, with fairness to its ministers, with the sole object of
doing what you believe to be good to your country and to the re-
ligion which the country professes. (Applause.) * * * *
“Now, Sir, in conclusion, I say I am not asking you or your con-
stituencies, or any party or section of a party, to plunge into a violent
agitation for the overthrow of the Established Church of England.
I think it would be a great calamity, indeed, that a great change like
that should come of violent hatred and discussion, and that it should
be accomplished in a tempest which is almost like the turmoil of a
great revolution. I ask you only to consider it, and I appeal not
only to you who may be Nonconformists, but I appeal to those who
do care about it, who do care, as they say they do, about Protestant-
ism and religion. It is not for me to join in any crusade against the
Church. I have offered to you to-night my humble contribution to
the discussion of the greatest question of our time. (“Oh l’) If I
am able to form any just judgment.upon it, I should say that will be
a great day for freedom in this country, and for Protestantism and
Christianity, which shall witness the full enfranchisement of the
Church within the realm of England. (Loud cheers.)”
IV.
EARL RUSSEL L.
–C–C–C–,
name of Lord John Russell—is to most Ameri-
kººl cans indelibly associated with the pages of Punch.
For myself, at least, I had always seen him in imagination
as an alert little page in buttons, called before Queen Vic-
toria as a candidate for office, and standing in visible eager-
ness to run, fetch, and carry for his future mistress ; while
she sits and looks doubtfully at him with the anxious re-
mark, “I’m afraid you're not strong enough for the place,
John * With this vivid picture in my mind, it was hard
to substitute for that image the little old man who entered
the House of Lords amid a hush of silence, during the
exciting debate on the Alabama claims, and who was an-
nounced to me in a whisper as Earl Russell.
Next to the pictures in Punch, a single sentence of Syd-
ney Smith's has probably done most to characterize this
statesman for American readers. It occurs in his second
letter addressed to Archdeacon Singleton:


EARL RUSSELL. IO9
“There is not a better man in England than Lord John
Russell ; but his worst failure is, that he is utterly ignorant
of all moral fear; there is nothing he would not undertake.
I believe he would perform the operation for the stone,
build St. Peter's, or assume (with or without ten minutes'
notice) the command of the Channel fleet; and no one
would discover by his manner that the patient had died,
the church tumbled down, and the Channel fleet been
knocked to atoms. I believe his motives are always pure,
and his measures often able ; but they are endless, and
never done with that pedetentous * pace and that pedeten-
tous mind in which it behooves the wise and virtuous im-
prover to walk. He alarms the wise Liberals; and it is
impossible to sleep soundly while he has the command of
the watch.” -
In his late volume of “Recollections and Suggestions,”
Lord Russell takes pains to plead “not guilty” to this
indictment. And as, in general, autobiography is the
most interesting form of biography—and as this book is
far more attractive for its particular passages than as a whole
—I shall extract liberally from its pages, in illustration of
certain special aspects of Earl Russell's career.
EARL RUSSELL AS DESCRIBED BY HIMSELF.
Lord Russell thus describes his early education. He
was born, it must be remembered, August 19, 1792 :
“It may interest some persons to learn what education
I had received before I entered Parliament. That educa-
* This word is adapted by Sydney Smith from Cicero's word
Aedetentime, meaning step-by-step, cautiously or gradually.
I IO BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
tion was in part broken and disturbed. After being at a
private school at Sunbury, I went to Westminster, but was
So ill there that, by the care and affection of my step-
mother, the Duchess of Bedford, my father was persuaded
to remove me, and I was sent with several young men of
riper age to receive private tuition from the Rev. Mr. Smith,
of Woodnesbury, in Kent. There I formed relations of
friendship with the Earl of Clare, the late Duke of Leinster,
his brother, Lord William Fitzgerald, and others. But I
had not remained there long, when Lord and Lady Hol-
land proposed that I should accompany them on a journey
to Spain, in the troubled year 1808. When I returned
from Spain, in 18 IO, I asked my father to allow me to go
to the University of Cambridge. But he told me that, in
his opinion, there was nothing to be learnt at English Uni-
versities, and procured for me admission to the house of
Professor Playfair, at Edinburgh. * .
“There I had my studies directed and my character de-
voloped by one of the best and the noblest, the most up-
right, the most benevolent, and the most liberal of all
philosophers.
“Some years afterwards I traveled again in Spain with
my cousin, the late Earl of Bradford, and Robert Clive,
the son of Lord Powis. In the course of these travels I
became acquainted with the Duke of Wellington, and had
occasion to admire the calmness, the directness, and the
patriotism which distinguished his character. .
“But I need not follow this narrative any further. . I
was about to accompany my companions to Constanti-
nople, and return home by way of Moscow and St. Peters-
burg, when I was informed by a letter from my father
EARL RUSSELL. I ["I
that his old friend, the acute and witty Fitzpatrick, was
dead, and that he intended to propose me as Candidate for
Tavistock. Thus I became a member of Parliament before
I was of age, and from that time my political life begins.”
Of these travels in Spain, and of his early initiation into
the great contests of Europe, he has left this vivid picture :
“In the autumn of 1808, when only sixteen years of
age, I accompanied Lord and Lady Holland to Corunna,
- and afterwards to Lisbon, Seville, and Cadiz, returning by
Lisbon to England in the summer of 1809. They were
eager for the success of the Spanish cause, and I joined to
sympathy for Spain a boyish hatred of Napoleon, who had
treacherously obtained possession of an independent coun-
try by force and fraud—force of immense armies—fraud of
the lowest kind. -
“In 1810, I went on a visit to my brother, Lord Wil-
liam Russell, at the Isla de Leon. He then served on the
staff of Sir Thomas Graham, who was gallantly defending
Cadiz against two French divisions.
“When my visit was over, Colonel James Stanhope,
who likewise was on the staff of Sir Thomas Graham, pro-
posed to me to go with him and Colonel Walpole to the
head-quarters of Lord Wellington, who had just occupied
with his army the lines of Torres Vedras.
“This offer I joyfully accepted, and, after a voyage to
Faro, and a pleasant journey by Almodovar, we arrived at
the quarters of General Hill.
“The next morning we rode with General Hill through
* “Recollections and Suggestions,” 1817–1873, by John Earl Rus-
sell. Boston: Roberts Brothers, 1875. P. 4.
I I 2 BRIEF BI() GRAPHIES.
he small town of Alhandra, beyond which abatſis were
placed to stop the French cavalry, as this was the farthest
English post. Indeed, it had been intended to leave Al-
handra to the French ; and I remember that Lord Grey,
whom I met at dinner at Holland House on my return to
England, was much surprised when I told him that I had
ridden through the place within a fortnight.
“My friends and I proceeded next day to Pero Nero,
where we were most kindly received by Lord Wellington. .
We were furnished with bedsteads though not with beds,
and the next morning before daylight we accompanied our
general to the fort of Sobral.
“Never was I more struck than with the physical, mili-
tary, and political spectacle which lay before me. Stand-
ing on the highest point, and looking around him on every
side, was the English General, his eyes bright and search-
ing as those of an eagle, his countenance full of hope,
beaming with intelligence, as he marked with quick per-
ception every movement of troops and every change of cir-
cumstance within the sweep of the horizon. On each side
of the fort of Sobral rose the intrenchments of the Allies,
bristling with guns and alive with the troops who formed
the garrison of this fortified position. Far off, on the left,
the cliffs rose to a moderate elevation, and the line of
Torres Vedras was prominent in the distance.
“Below us, over a large extent of hill and valley, plain
and eminence, was the position of the French army. The
villages were full of their soldiers ; the white sails of the
Portuguese windmills were actively in motion for the Sup-
ply of flour to the invading army. There stood the ad-
vanced guard of the conquering legions of France : here
EARL RUSSELL. II 3
was the living barrier of England, Spain, and Portugal,
prepared to stay the destructive flood, and to preserve from
the deluge, the liberty and independence of three armed
nations. The sight filled me with admiration, with confi-
dence, and with hope.
“Impressed with these sentiments I returned to Eng-
land. Being some time, in the succeeding autumn, at Lord
Grey's at Howick, I betted a guinea with his brother-in-
law, Lord Ponsonby, that at that time next year Lord Wel-
lington would still hold the lines of Torres Vedras. Lord
Grey thought that I had made a foolish bet, and referred
to the lines of Marshal Villars, called the me plus ultra of
Marlborough, and which Marlborough successfully pene-
trated, as a proof that the lines could not be held. At the
end of a year Lord Ponsonby paid me my bet.
“I remember that in the year 1812, being at dinner at
Lord Wellington's head-quarters, he called to Lord March
(afterward Duke of Richmond), ‘What are you talking of
at that end of the table 2 Lord March : “We are discuss-
ing, sir, the question whether, if we went back to the lines
at Torres Vedas, we should again be able to hold them.’
Lord Wellington said : ‘That may be a political question,
but as a military question, I would go back twenty times
to the lines, and be confident of holding them.’ I saw
Lord Wellington on three other occasions during the Pen-
insular War.
“The second was, when in company with my cousin
George Bridgeman, and my friend Robert Clive, I entered
Spain from Oporto. We joined the army at the time when
Lord Wellington, after the victory of Salamanca and the
capture of Madrid, had failed in his siege of the castle of
I I4. BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
Burgos. I sat next to him at dinner, in the evening, when
he had made up his mind to retire, and to withdraw his
army both from the siege of Burgos and the occupation of
Madrid. I knew nothing of this important and mortifying
decision, nor could anything less prepare me for it than
the Conversation of the great commander. He said he was
Sorry he could not show me the castle; talked of the ad-
vance of the French army, of which I had been a witness,
as a ſorte reconnaissance, and laughed at the luxury of a
Highland soldier, who had piled up a whole tree and set
it in a blaze, in order to make himself a comfortable fire-
side. The rest of his conversation was taken up by comic
descriptions of the defects of his three iron guns—Thunder,
Lightning, and Nelson—of which one had a severe wound
in the mouth, and another had lost its trunnions by the
fire of the enemy. After dinner, my companions and I
were informed by Colonel Ponsonby that a retreat was re-
solved upon for that night, and we were advised to pack
ourselves off as quickly as we could. We lost no time in
following that advice, and, for my part, I found a very
comfortable bed on a heap of chopped straw some leagues
from Burgos. We tried to reach Madrid by San Ilde-
fonso, but were again driven back by the French advance,
and forced to proceed by Salamanca and the Sierra de Gata
to Badajoz, Seville, and Cadiz.””
The condition of England when Lord Russell entered
Parliament, is thus described :
“The foreign policy of our Government was at this time
* “Recollections and Suggestions, 1813–1873, by John Earl Rus-
sell.” Boston : Roberts Brothers, 1875. Page 4
EARL RUSSELL. I [ 5
a timid repudiation of all those doctrines of national liberty
and independence which had been inscribed on our flag at
the end of the war, and which had led Madame de Staël
to declare that the Tories of England were the Whigs of
Europe. *
“Our financial system was based on the necessity of
keeping up a Navy and Army suited to our high position,
and of paying the interest of a debt which, having amounted
to one hundred and thirty millions before the American
War, had risen to eight hundred and thirty-six millions at
the death of George III. In order to defray these ex-
penses, the taxation of the country had penetrated to every
corner and cranny of an Englishman's life, in the manner
described with so much humor, and no less truth, by Syd-
ney Smith.
“With the same object of collecting a large revenue,
and also of promoting native industry, prohibition and
protection pervaded our commercial code. -
“No Roman Catholic could hold high civil office, or be
admitted to a seat in Parliament. No Protestant dissenter
could hold any official position without nominally, at least,
submitting to what, in his eyes, were degradation and pro-
fanation.
“Last of all, our Parliamentary representation was a
mockery and a scandal.” + -
Entering Parliament in 1813, he took part in debates on
various points connected with the social condition of Eng-
land ; and in 1819 he first took a position of leadership,
as an advocate of Parliamentary Reform. This being,
* “Recollections,” etc., p. 14.
I 16 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
probably, the most important course of action undertaken
by any modern English statesman, it will be quite worth
while to give in some detail his narrative of the whole move-
In ent :
“The state of the representation of the people in the
House of Commons, which in 178o had excited so much
popular discontent, had in the course of a long lapse of
time become more and more unsatisfactory. Successive
sovereigns had granted the right, or imposed the burden,
of returning members to Parliament on the corporations,
freeholders, or burgage-tenants of numerous small towns.
Powerful peers and wealthy commoners had bought prop-
erty in these small boroughs with a view to increase their
political influence. One noble lord used to go out hunting
followed by a tail of six or seven members of Parliament of
his own making. Another, being asked who should be
returned for one of his boroughs, named a waiter at White's
Club ; but as he did not know the man's Christian name,
the election was declared void, and a fresh election was
held, when, the name having been ascertained, the waiter
was duly elected. The object of the boroughmongers, as
they were called, was generally to buy up the freeholds or
burgage tenures in a small borough, in order to reduce the
number of electors to a manageable number. If a free-
holder or burgage-tenant refused to sell, it was not a very
uncommon practice to blow up his house with gunpowder,
and thus disfranchise a political opponent.
“In this manner a nmmber of boroughs; Called nomina-
tion boroughs, were created, and became valuable property.
A seat for the whole duration of a Parliament was sold for
365, ooo. But as Parliaments were subject to sudden death,
EARL RUSSELL. I 17
prudent men made a bargain to pay £1, OOO a year so long
as they sat in the House of Commons. Mr. Ricardo, and
many others, were members of the House of Commons in
virtue of such payment. Sir Francis Burdett entered Par-
liament by purchase of a seat from the trustees of the Duke
of Newcastle—a minor. Other proprietors of boroughs
sold their seats to the Treasury for rank, office, or patron-
age. A friend of mine was concerned for a friend of his
in a transaction of this kind. A valuable sinecure was part
of the assets to be allotted to the seller of a portion of the
representation of the people—I think not less than four
seats. The partial remedies applied from time to time by
Parliament did little to cure a wide-spread and notorious
evil.” + e
“On the other hand, while a few men governed the
Government, large commercial and manufacturing cities
had grown up which had no representatives in Parliament.
Mr. Stuart Wortley conducted all the local business of
Yorkshire—of Leeds, Halifax, Bradford, and Sheffield ;
Lord Stanley that of Lancashire—that is, of Manchester,
Oldham, and other populous towns. On public affairs
these great centers of industry, skill, intelligence, and
wealth had no representative voice whatever.
“With a view to work my way to a change, not by
eloquence—for I had none—but by patient toil, and a
plain statement of facts, I brought before the House of
Commons the case of Grampound. I obtained an in-
quiry; and, with the assistance of Mr. Charles Wynn, I
forced the solicitors employed in bribery to reveal the se-
-ºr
* “Recollections,” etc., p. 28.
II 8 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
Crets of their employers: the case was clear; the borough
was convicted.
“At this time Lord Castlereagh, who had always been
personally very kind to me, invited me to speak to him on
one of the benches behind the Treasury Bench. He told
me that the Government would cordially support me, if I
would content myself with extending the right of voting
for Grampound to the neighboring hundreds. I answered
him that I could not agree to that proposal, and that I
must persist in proposing that the franchises of Grampound
should be transferred to the town of Leeds. This was, in
fact, the whole principle at issue between the Government
and the reformers. The hundreds of Cornwall represented
the stationary policy of the Ministry; Leeds, the new pop-
ulation which I sought to admit, and with them, the prin-
ciple of reform. When, twelve years afterward, I proposed
a bill of reform, on behalf of Lord Grey and his col-
leagues, Mr. Alexander Baring said, ‘The plan takes away
representation from the barley-field and gives it to the coal-
field.’ This was the truth in 1819, as in 1832. My pro-
posal took away representation from the dead bones of a
former state of England, and gave it to the living energy
and industry of the England of the nineteenth century,
with its steam-engines and its factories, its cotton and
woolen cloths, its cutlery and its coal-mines, its wealth
and its intelligence. The present vindicated its rights ;
the past lost its privilege.
“But to return.
“After a long conversation, Lord Castlereagh persisted
in his view and I in mine. I carried my bill in the House
of Commons ; but when it went to the House of Lords,
EARL RUSSELL. I IQ
the town of Leeds was expunged, and the two disposable
seats were given to the county of York. Thus the intro-
duction of new representation was avoided. It is singular,
however, that the Government of 1820 should have thought
that by excluding Leeds, Manchester, and Birmingham
from representation, they were consulting the Conservative
interests of the Constitution | Such, however, was the spirit
of the Government of Liverpool and Castlereagh.
“Aſter the disfranchisement of Grampound, I revolved
in my mind a plan for the reform of the whole state of the
representation. sº
“In meditating upon this subject, I had to survey not
only the danger of shaking an edifice which resembled
rather a strong fortress than an ordinary dwelling-house,
but also party objections which would be brought against
me.” + -
In 1822, Lord John Russell, having been expressly urged
to it by Sir James Mackintosh, brought forward a more ex-
tended measure of reform. In a speech of three hours,
he proposed that “one hundred members should be added
to the House of Commons and that they should be chosen
by the larger counties and the great commercial and
manufacturing communities of the kingdom.” This was
strongly opposed by Mr. Canning, in a speech from which
the following is an extract:
“That the noble lord will carry his motion this evening, I have
no fear; but with the talents which he has shown himself to possess,
and with (I sincerely hope) a long and brilliant career of parliamen-
tary distinction before him, he will, no doubt, renew his efforts
* “Recollections,” etc., p. 32.
I2O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
hereafter. Although I presume not to give any weight to observa-
tions or warnings of mine, yet on this, probably the last opportunity
I shall have of raising my voice on the question of Parliamentary
reform, while I conjure the House to pause beſore it consents to
adopt the proposition of the noble lord, I cannot help conjuring the
noble lord himself to pause before he again presses it upon the
country. If, however, he shall persevere—and if his perseverance
shall be successful—and if the result of that success shall be such as
I cannot help apprehending—his be the triumph to have precipi-
tated those results—be mine the consolation that to the utmost,
and the latest of my power, I have opposed them. (Loud cheers.)”
No immediate result followed, Roman Catholic eman-
cipation being then the absorbing question, and being
destined to lead the way to other agitation. This was
foreseen, Lord Russell tells us, by shrewd statesmen :
“One of the shrewdest of the Tory party, who after-
ward held a Cabinet office, is reported to have observed
that he should not have felt so much-objection to Catholic
emancipation had he not felt sure that it would be ſol-
lowed by reform of Parliament. -
“He was not mistaken. The Catholic question having
been moved out of the way, attention was more eagerly
directed to the faults of the existing state of the represen-
tation of the people. ' -
“Standing one day at the bar of the House of Com-
mons, in the year 1830, I showed Mr. Huskisson some
resolutions on parliamentary reform which I intended to
move. Huskisson said : ‘I cannot vote for these reso-
lutions, but something to this effect will be carried before
long.' * * *
* Quoted in “Recollections,” etc. p. 38.
EARL RUSSELL, I2 I
“Few men saw justly and clearly the consequences at
home of the course pursued by the Duke of Wellington
abroad. The Revolution in France, overthrowing Legit-
imacy, and crowning a monarchy founded upon popular
resistance; the excitement of a general election, and the
accession of a new sovereign ; the internal state of the
country, resulting from long mismanagement ; all
contributed to bring about, on the one side a desire
of change, and on the other discouragement and despon-
dency.
“When, therefore, at the meeting of Parliament, Novem-
ber the 3d, the Duke of Wellington declared that the
constitution of the House of Commons was perfect, and
that the wit of man could not a priori have devised any-
thing so good, the general feeling was one of dismay.
The House of Lords, usually so calm, showed signs of
amazement and perturbation. The Duke whispered to one
of his colleagues, ‘What can I have said which seems to
make so great a disturbance P’ ‘You have announced the
fall of your Government, that is all,” replied his more
clear-sighted colleague.
“Accordingly, when Sir Henry Parnell, in the House
of Commons, moved an amendment respecting the ap-
pointment of a Committee on the Civil List, which Mr.
Tierney had frequently brought forward unsuccessfully, it
was carried by a majority of upward of thirty. Although,
in ordinary times, this victory of the Opposition would
have been of little consequence, it was now thought so
serious, that Mr. Peel went at once to the Duke of Wel-
lington, at Apsley House, to declare he could no longer
remain in office ; the following day the whole Ministry re-
I 2.2 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
signed. Lord Grey was sent for by the King, and desired
by his Majesty to form an administration.”
A scheme of reform was then planned by Lord John
Russell and others, and was submitted to Lord Grey. His
cabinet contained but very few members who had sup-
ported proposals for reform of Parliament. The scheme
proposed was, however, adopted in substance as an adminis-
tration measure, though the ballot, which had formed a
part of the concerted plan, but not of Lord John Rus-
sell's plan, was struck out. The measure, it seems, was
brought forward in Parliament without previous notice to
the public. Lord Russell says:
‘‘I was so fully persuaded that the country would re-
spond with enthusiasm and readily assent to a large pro-
posal of reform, that I entreated Lord Grey to impress
upon his colleagues the necessity of secrecy, in order that
the plan might come with all the freshness of novelty
upon the public ear, and deprive our opponents of the
advantage of making adequate preparations to resist the first
assault upon the well-fortified intrenchments of the enemy.
So little were the opposite party prepared for the bill, that
a few days before the first of March, Sir Robert Peel, in a
careful speech, derided what had been done on the subjects
of peace and retrenchment, and predicted that when the
plan of reſorm should be developed, it would occasion dis-
appointment by the meagerness of its proportions, and
the trifling nature of the changes recommended.
“The effect, therefore, of the revelations of the first of
March was astounding. I had purposely omitted, or passed
* “Recollections,” etc., pp. 50, 51.
EARL RUSSELL. I23
**
slightly over, those arguments in favor of reform, which
in 1822 I had developed at length. Sir Robert Peel ob-
served sarcastically that I had said that many ingenious
arguments were urged in favor of the ballot, but that I had
not stated any ingenious arguments in favor of my propo-
sition of that night. This was substantially true. It
Seemed to me that the arguments in favor of reform had
made their impression—a very deep impression—upon the
Country ; but that those arguments had become trite and
familiar, and that the great novelty of my speech must
consist in a clear and intelligible statement of the nature
of the proposition I had to make. The extinction of one
hundred and fifty seats in the House of Commons, all
taken from the class of boroughs which were either depend-
ent or venal, would amount, if carried, to a revolution.
“It was no wonder, therefore, that this proposition,
when placed boldly and baldly before the House of Com-
mons, created feelings of astonishment, mingled with joy
or with Consternation, according to the temper of the
hearers. Mr. John Smith, himself a member for a nom-
ination borough, Said the proposal took away his breath.
Some, perhaps many, thought that the measure was a pre-
lude to civil war, which, in point of fact, it averted. But
incredulity was the prevailing feeling, both among the
moderate Whigs and the great mass of the Tories. Sir
Henry Hardinge told Sir James Graham that he supposed
we should all go out the next morning. Many of the
Whigs thought it impossible the Government could suc-
ceed, either in the existing House of Commons or by an
appeal to the people.
“The Radicals alone were delighted and triumphant,
I 24 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
Joseph Hume, when I met him in the streets a day or two
afterward, assured me of his hearty support of the Govern-
ment. He said (on another subject, in a public speech)
that he was ready to vote black white in order to carry the
measure of reform. Lord Durham, who was sitting under
the gallery on the first of March, told me he was inclined
to doubt the reality of what was passing before his eyes.
A noble lord who sat opposite to me, and who has long
ago Succeeded to a seat in the House of Lords, cheered
me so vociferously that I was myself inclined to doubt his
meaning. I found afterward that his cheers were meant
derisively, to show his thorough conviction of the absurdity
and impracticability of my proposals. *
“For my own part, my impression had always been that
if the Reform Bill of Lord Grey could go down to the
Country, it would receive such an amount of support as
would insure its ultimate, if not its immediate, success. I
was, therefore, much pleased when I found that the leaders
of the Opposition did not intend to dispute the introduc-
tion of the bill, and still more satisfied when, by nine
nights of debate, time was given to the country to hold
public meetings, and to communicate to their members
the popular, and, what turned out to be the almost uni-
versal, opinion in favor of the proposed measure.
“The second reading was fixed for an early day, and
both parties prepared anxiously for the coming conflict.
* Lord Russell's note to this passage is too characteristic to be
omitted : “I had thought it due to the Cabinet to conceal in my
speech the part which I had taken in preparing the measure. In
this concealment I was not justified; I ought to have told the whole
truth.”
EARL RUSSELL, I25
“Before the day arrived, many members who had never
voted for reform on previous occasions, and who were
really hostile to any change in the representation, received
such accounts of the ferment existing in the country, that
they made up their minds to vote in favor of the second
reading. Among these may be reckoned Sir Thomas
Acland and Mr. Wilson Patten, the one member for Dev-
onshire and the other for Lancashire, both excellent coun-
try gentlemen. The second reading was carried, after
a long debate, by a majority of one. I never saw so much
exultation expressed in the House of Commons as upon
that occasion. One member threw his hat up in the
air, and the vociferous cheering was prolonged for some
minutes.
“Yet this majority, trifling as it was, was far from ex-
pressing the intention of those who composed it to give a
cordial and thorough support to the bill in the shape in
which it was introduced. Many amendments, destructive
of its chief provisions, would have been introduced and
carried, had the bill been proceeded with in that House of
Commons.” +
It proved, however, unsafe to attempt to carry the bill
through with a bare majority. “It was manifest that the
existing House of Commons would endeavor to destroy in
detail what they had sanctioned in bulk ; ” and as the re-
formers were sure that they had the country with them,
they resolved to appeal to the people, and induced the King
to dissolve Parliament. Lord Russell continues :
“The King, though averse to the adoption of such a
* “Recollections,” etc., p. 57.
126. BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
proceeding little more than six months after the general
election, was disposed, at this time, to trust implicitly to
Lord Grey, and I am inclined to believe the popular story,
that when it suddenly appeared necessary, in order to pre-
vent remonstrance from the House of Lords, that the King
should appear in person to dissolve Parliament, and some
trifling difficulty of plaiting the horses' manes in time was
interposed as an objection, the King said at once, “Then
I'll go down to Parliament in a hackney-coach.’ Had
such been the spirit of Louis XVI. he might have been the
leader instead of the victim of the French Revolution.
“The scenes which occurred in the two Houses of Par-
liament, so ſar as I was a witness of them, were singular
and unprecedented. Before the King arrived, the House
of Commons was assembled, and Sir Robert Peel and Sir
Francis Burdett rose at the same time to address the House.
Lord Althorp, amid the confusion and clamor of contend-
ing parties, following the precedent of Mr. Fox, moved
that Sir Francis Burdett be now heard. Sir Robert Peel,
on the other hand, imitating a precedent of Lord North,
said: ‘and I rise to speak to that motion.' But instead of
saying a few words, as Lord North had done, to put an end
to all further debate, Sir Robert Peel quite lost his temper,
and in tones of the most violent indignation attacked the
impending dissolution. As he went on, the Tower guns
began to fire, to announce the King's arrival, and as each
discharge was heard, a loud cheer from the Government
side interrupted Sir Robert Peel's declamation. Sir Henry
Hardinge was heard to exclaim, ‘The next time those
. guns are fired they will be shotted l’ Presently we were
all summoned to the House of Lords, where the King's
EARL RUSSELL. 127.
presence had put a stop to a violent and unseemly discus-
sion. The King, in his speech, announced the dissolu-
tion and retired to unrobe. The scene that followed was
one of great excitement and confusion. As I was standing
at the bar, Lord Lyndhurst came up to me and Said,
‘Have you considered the state of Ireland 2 do not you
expect an insurrection ?’ or words to that effect. It so
happened that in going into the House of Commons, I
had met O'Connell in the lobby. I asked him, ‘Will
Ireland be quiet during the general election ?’ and he an-
swered me, ‘Perfectly quiet.” He did not answer for more
than he was able to perform. But of course I said nothing
of this to Lord Lyndhurst, and left him to indulge his
anger and his gloomy foreboding.
“Many good Liberals were in great despondency about
the election, and fancied, as they well might, that an ap-
peal to the condemned boroughs to sanction their own
extinction would meet with a very unfavorable reception,
while, on the other hand, Manchester, Birmingham, Leeds,
and Sheffield, and the principal manufacturing towns of
Lancashire and Yorkshire, would be unable to take part in
the election. -
“But the forty-shilling freeholders, both in those towns
and in the rural counties, made themselves heard in favor
of reform. Middlesex, Yorkshire, Lancashire, Devonshire,
were unanimous in their choice of reform candidates.
“The members for the English counties, with the addi-
tion of two members for Yorkshire in place of Grampound,
were altogether eighty-two ; of these upward of seventy, I
think seventy-six, pledged themselves to support Lord Grey
and the Reform Bill. The proportion of the two parties
I 28 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
.*-*
appeared on the second reading, when there divided in
favor of the bill three hundred and sixty-seven, making,
with nine pairs and two tellers, three hundred and seventy-
eight; against it two hundred and thirty-one, with the same
addition of pairs and tellers, two hundred and forty-two,
giving a majority of one hundred and thirty-six for the
Government and the Reform Bill. This was a majority
which no skillful manoeuvres, nor even the authority of the
time-honored House of Lords, although led by such men
as the Duke of Wellington and Lord Lyndhurst, were likely
to COunteract or Overbear. -
“The Parliament met on June 14, and, after the election
of a Speaker and a debate on the address, the new Reform
Bill was immediately introduced. The second reading, as
I have said, was carried by a large majority, and the oppo-
nents of the bill, no way dismayed, reserved their opposi-
tion for committee. For forty nights the subject was dis-
cussed, in its principles as well as in its details. Sir Robert
Peel, besides objecting to the large amount of disfranchise-
ment and to the ten-pound franchise, took special excep-
tion to the partial disfranchisement in Schedule B, and,
after a very neat and well-arranged speech of Mr. Praed,
Sir Robert argued, with his usual force and ability, that
more room should be left for the entrance into Parliament
of men of retired and studious habits. Subsequent legisla-
tion seems to indicate that, according to public opinion,
too many seats, rather than too few, were left to men of
retired and studious habits. But, besides these fair and
plausible objections to the extent and democratic tendency
of the bill, skillful lawyers like Sir Edward Sugden and Sir
Charles Wetherell tried to unpick it thread by thread,
EARL RUSSELL. I29
leaving no remnant of the original texture. That which
Penelope did to keep off her suitors, they attempted to do
to keep off reform. But, at the end of forty nights, on the
seventh of September, the debate was closed, and after
much labor, and considerable sacrifice of health, I was
able, on that night, to propose, amid much cheering, that
the bill should be reported to the House.
“The bill was then carried to the House of Lords, and
on October 2 the second reading was proposed by Lord
Grey. There never was a debate of greater importance, or
one marked by more ability. Lord Grey's opening speech
recording that, in 1786, he had voted with Mr. Pitt in
favor of reform of Parliament; his clear and able statement
of the reasons which seemed to him to require that the bill
should be adopted by Parliament, and that, in order to be
safe and enduring, it should be large and commensurate
with the evil to be abated, was powerful and convincing.”.”
The bill was rejected in the House of Lords, and was
abandoned; but a new bill was more carefully framed,
thus :
“The number of boroughs to be wholly or partially
disfranchised had been, in my original sketch, arbitrarily
fixed. Lord Durham had suggested that the penalty of
total disfranchisement should be confined to towns, or
rather villages, of less than two thousand inhabitants,
and that none under four thousand should return more
than one member. But the arbitrary line was now again
resorted to ; the number of boroughs to be wholly or
partially disfranchised was copied from the bill rejected by
* “Recollections,” etc., p. 62.
I 3O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
the House of Lords, and the test I have mentioned was
applied to that number, so that fifty-six boroughs, return-
ing one hundred and eleven members, were placed in
Schedule A * for total extinction, and thirty boroughs,
returning sixty members, were condemned to lose half
their representatives. In this manner one hundred and
forty-one seats belonging to boroughs which, since the days
of Charles I., had regularly sent members to Parliament,
were cut off on account of their dependence or their
insignificance. By my original sketch, one hundred and
forty-nine seats would have been disfranchised.
“This was the most popular part of the Reform Bill.
The country argued that from these boroughs, in scarcely
any of which the element of popular representation ex-
isted, had arisen all obstructions to the reforms and re-
trenchments which the people so evidently desired. As
this was the strong and popular position of the Govern-
ment, it would evidently be a great mistake, on the part of
our opponents, to direct their attack against it ; yet, as we
shall presently see, this was the part of our lines singled
out for attack in the House of Lords. -
“The obstruction and delay from which the former bill
had suffered in its passage through the House of Com-
mons were only partially renewed. On March 9 the bill
was in committee for the twenty-first day, and on the next
day, March Io, the report was received. On March 22
* The very name of this once ſamous “Schedule” recalls the wit .
of the “Noctes Ambrosianae: ” f
“Schedule A, Schedule A
Spite of Althorp and Grey,
We shall hear of thee, darling, this many a day !”
EARL RUSSELL. I 3 I
the bill was read a third time, after a division, in which the
ayes were 355, and the noes 239; majority, I 16.
“Throughout the debates which took place upon the
Reform Bill, while Lord Althorp and I had the greater
portion of the labor, and a still larger portion of the
responsibility, the palm of eloquence in debate belonged
undoubtedly to Lord Stanley. Conscious of my own
deficiencies, I had, on the first introduction of the Reform
Bill, stipulated with Lord Althorp that Mr. Grant, and
not I, should undertake the task, the weightiests that
belongs to a leader, of reply at the end of the debate.
But Mr. Grant contented himself with general adherence
to the principles of the bill, while Lord Stanley, by his
animated appeals to the Liberal majority, by his readiness
in answering the sophisms of his opponents, by the pre-
cision and boldness of his language, by his display of all
the great qualities of a Parliamentary orator and an able
statesman, successfully vindicated the authority of the
Government, and satisfied their supporters in the House
of Commons.
“While Sir Robert Peel was the most eminent, both in
weight of argument and in oratorical ability, of the oppo-
nents of the bill, Mr. Croker, by his profusion of words,
by his warmth of declamation, and by his elaborate work-
ing out of details, was perhaps a still more formidable
adversary. He told Lord Althorp, in private, that when
he discovered the error we had made of confounding the
limits of parishes with those of Parliamentary boroughs,
he thought himself sure of defeating the bill. But his own
statements of details were singularly inaccurate ; and even
where the particular point upon which he insisted was not
I 32 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
mistaken, his exaggerations of its importance were repul-
sive to the House of Commons. Above all, the tide of
opinion flowed so rapidly, that all obstacles were swept
away, like Canute's chair, by the advancing waves. Thus
the bill, which had been introduced to the notice of the
House of Commons on March 1, 1831, was finally passed
on March 22, 1832, but little impaired in efficiency. It
overthrew a system which had been left untouched at the
Revolution—a period when the wisest patriots, forced
by necessity to transfer the Crown to a foreign prince, had
been careful rather to maintain the ancient privileges of the
Constitution than to disturb other parts of the existing edi-
fice. The same system had enabled Sir Robert Walpole to
consolidate the throne of the House of Hanover, amidst
internal and external dangers. But the same system
enabled Lord North to maintain his power against the fair
demands and justifiable insurrection of the North American
Colonies, even after the people had become tired of the
contest against our fellow-subjects in America. The same
system enabled Mr. Pitt and his successors to increase the
public debt from about two hundred and thirty millions
to eight hundred millions, and to restrict, by the most
severe laws, the right of public meeting and the liberty of
the press. The fidelity with which the majority of the
House of Commons had supported the French War and
its costly armaments, led Pitt to renounce all his early
theories upon reform, and induced him to rely on the Con-
struction of that House as a firm barrier against demo-
cratic, or, as it was then called, Jacobin revolution. But
the same willingness to sanction expense on the part of
the Government, and to punish excesses on the part of the
EARL RUSSELL. 133
people, which had conciliated the opinion of Pitt, had
estranged the public mind. Government, by nomination-
boroughs, had become odious to the community at large ;
and the House of Commons, which voted by a majority of
more than a hundred its own extinction, did but sanction
the judicial sentence of the country.
“New perils, however, awaited the measure in the House
of Lords. In view of the large majority which had rejected
the bill in October, Lord Grey had thought it right to con-
sider what should be done if the same obstacles should
recur. He and his colleagues could perceive no other
resource than that of advising the King to create a large
number of peers.”
Then followed a memorable conflict in the House of
Lords, ending in the rejection of the Reform Bill, the re-
signation of the Ministry, the refusal of Sir Robert Peel
to form a new Ministry, and the failure of the Duke of
Wellington in the attempt. The result was the reappoint-
ment of Lord Grey's Cabinet, under distinct assurances
from the King that the reform policy should be sustained.
The conclusion is thus told :
“When the Cabinet assembled, very serious discussions
took place. It was unanimously resolved that the bill
must be carried in its integrity, and the question was, how
this object was to be effected. It was understood that Sir
Herbert Taylor, on the part of the King, would use the
royal influence, and that the Duke of Wellington, on his
part, would do all in his power to induce the peers to ab-
stain from further opposition to the bill. Sir Herbert
* “Recollections,” etc., p. 74
134 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES
Taylor was very active, in concert with others, in reconcil-
ing the King to a course which, although it did not
directly overpower the House of Lords by a large creation
of peers, yet, upon this occasion, and on a question of the
gravest importance, absolutely destroyed their privileges as
a House of Parliament, and reduced them to a cipher in
the working of the Constitution. -
“But the Cabinet was not satisfied with the probable
effect of the influences thus brought to bear upon the peers;
they thought it necessary that Lord Grey should be armed
with the power to create peers in a number sufficient to
carry the bill, should any of its essential provisions be in-
terfered with in its further progress through the House of
Lords. It was not until the King had given to Lord Grey
his solemn promise that, if called upon, he would create
peers in a sufficient number for this purpose, that the Min-
isters consented to resume their offices. -
‘‘LOrd Althorp, in announcing the restoration of the
Ministry, said he could not reveal the nature of the securi-
ties for carrying the bill which Lord Grey and his col-
leagues had obtained, but that he trusted the House had
sufficient confidence in him to be satisfied with his assur-
ance that they had that security. -
“After this the bill passed triumphantly through com-
mittee without much debate, and with no important alter-
ation. It was read a third time by a majority of eighty.
The Reform Bill received the royal assent on June 7, 1832.
A Boundary Bill, complicated in its details, was success-
fully carried through both Houses. The Reform Bills for
Scotland and Ireland were likewise carried, and on
August 16 Parliament was prorogued.
EARL RUSSELL. I 35
“A session more successful for the Ministry could not
well have been. The manly and straightforward Conduct
of Lord Grey, and the enthusiastic support he received
from the people, overcame all opposition.
“It may be a question, however, whether the manner
in which the vote of the House of Lords was nullified by
the compulsory absence of a great many of the majority,
was not more perilous for their authority than the creation
of peers which the Cabinet of Lord Grey proposed.” +
Lord Russell’s “Recollections” give much information
as to his course on various important public questions re-
lating to education, religious toleration, and foreign policy.
His general attitude in regard to the Constitution and
present condition of Great Britain is summed up as fol-
lows :
“Among the most interesting speculations upon which
an Englishman can enter, is the question whether the
political Constitution under which we live is likely to en-
dure. Montesquieu said that our Constitution would per-
ish whenever the legislative power should become more
corrupt than the executive. He was thinking, probably,
of the danger arising from bribes in the shape of offices,
or lottery-tickets, or even in the grosser form of money,
given by an incorruptible Minister to a corrupt majority of
the House of Commons. But this kind of corruption had
already diminished in the days of Walpole, had farther
abated in the days of Pitt, and in our time has almost to-
tally disappeared. Public opinion has stamped it out.
“Let us see, then, what are the positive advantages of
* “Recollections,” etc., p. 88.
I 36 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
the British form of government, and what are the apparent
dangers to which it is exposed.
“I. There is complete personal liberty. A man may
think what he pleases, write what he thinks, publish what
he writes. Unless he commits some flagrant offense
against the laws, and be convicted of that offense, he can-
not be punished.
“2. In case of reasonable suspicion of crime; he is en-
titled to have his case examined by a judge of integrity and
learning, whose opinion of his guilt must be confirmed
by a jury taken from among the householders of his
County. *
“3. If a majority of the nation are dissatisfied with the
administration of public affairs, their representatives can
at once obtain a change of men and measures by a simple
declaration of want of confidence.
“This last advantage is one not enjoyed by the United
States of America. When a President has lost the confi-
dence of his countrymen and of Congress, he can only be
removed by an impeachment, for which there may be no
sufficient grounds, or by the expiry of his term of office,
which may be in three months, or may not occur for more
than three years.
“The defects of the English Constitution affect chiefly
the electoral constituents as a body which chooses the
House of Commons, and the Parliament as a body em-
powered to make laws. The electors require to be re-
strained from bribery and excessive expenses, which affect
our reputation and poison representation at its source.
The House of Commons must be compelled by public
opinion to secure purity of election. * * * -
EARL RUSSE LL. I 37
“Some persons have endeavored to bring on at once
such a collision as would either destroy the House of Lords,
or induce the nation to rally round them as an integral
part of the Constitution.
“I beg to submit to such persons the two following re-
marks :- -
“The first is that, if the hereditary privileges of the peers
are overthrown, the hereditary prerogative of the Sovereign
will also be sacrificed. “Do not,’ said an accomplished
Orator in the House of Commons, many years ago, ‘hang
the Crown on the peg of an exception.’ The particular
application was mistaken, but the observation has truth to
recommend it. The Sovereign does not inherit wisdom
any more than the Duke of Norfolk.
“The best Government consists in the union of liberty
and order: we are at present in full possession of liberty,
but order is sometimes in danger. Now, for the purpose
of order, it is material that there should exist in the great
bodies of the State the power which is called authority.
Nothing more excites reverence than ancient prescriptive
privilege; nothing more moves the imagination than an-
cient lineage combined with recent achievement. Thus,
to see in one assembly the descendants of the Talbots who
fought for their country in the fourteenth century, with the
Napier who so lately triumphed in Abyssinia, the heir of
Marlborough, who won the battle of Blenheim, and of
Wellington, the victor at Waterloo, and of Nelson, who
fell at Trafalgar, of Cecil, the wise counsellor of Elizabeth,
and of Grey, the upright Minister of William IV., with the
representatives of Mansfield, and of Camden, of Hardwicke,
and of Somers, gives dignity and weight to the House of
Peers.
I 38 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
“It is true that every editor of a magazine can furnish,
at a few days' notice, a better Senate than the British House
of Lords.
“Happily the people of England give little attention to
those ſanciful schemes. The nobility of England are not,
like the French nobility before the Revolution, slavish
Sycophants of a court. They are known in their country
houses as the free landlords of a free tenantry, promoting
Social good-will by a becoming hospitality. They are
known in Courts of justice as foremen of grand juries and
magistrates at quarter sessions. They share in national
sports, and their wives and daughters visit the widows and
the fatherless in their affliction. -
“Lastly, when a great question arises which requires a
display of more than ordinary knowledge of history, more
accurate learning, more constitutional lore, and more prac-
tical wisdom than is to be found in the usual debates of
Parliament, I know not where
“The general debate,
The popular harangue, the tart reply,
The logic, and the wisdom, and the wit
are to be found in greater perfection than among the pre-
lates on the Episcopal bench, the peers of three centuries
of nobility, and the recent occupants of the Woolsack.
“Let me add what is, perhaps, the most important se-
curity of all—the prospect of any great democratic changes
would shake public credit, and bring the nation to its
senses; so that I cannot say I feel any alarm lest events
should lead to the abolition of the House of Lords, in-
volving, as no doubt it would, the fall of the Monarchy.
\,..
EARL RUSSELL. I 39
“Lastly, to speak of my own work, I can only rejoice
that I have been allowed to have my share in the task
accomplished in the half century which has elapsed from
1819 to 1869. My capacity, I always felt, was very infe-
rior to that of the men who have attained in past times the
foremost place in our Parliament, and in the Councils of
our Sovereign. I have committed many errors, some of
them very gross blunders. But the generous people of
England are always forbearing and forgiving to those states-
men who have the good of their country at heart; like my
betters, I have been misrepresented and slandered by those
who know nothing of me ; but I have been more than
compensated by the confidence and the friendship of the
best men of my own political connection, and by the re-
gard and favorable interpretation of my motives which I
have heard expressed by my generous opponents, from the
days of Lord Castlereagh to these of Mr. Disraeli.”
These are almost the closing words of the personal re-
miniscences published by Lord Russell in 1869, and now
included in his “Recollections and Suggestions.” In
the concluding chapters of this volume there are remarks
which have peculiar interest for Americans.
He says of the policy of the United States in regard to
Canada :
“There occurs from time to time in the press of the
United States an explosion of ambition and envy prompted
by the desire of adding the Dominion of Canada to the
territory of the United States.
“That is, however, far from being a deliberate intention
* “Recollections,” etc., pp. 176, 179.
I4O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
of aggrandizement on the part of the great Western Re-
public.
“Mr. Cobden, who was friendly to our giant son, ex-
pressed his opinion that if the lust of dominion should
ever possess the Government and the people of the United
States, they would look rather to the south than to the
north for the gratification of their ambition. He pointed
out that the territory to the north gave a return to the
efforts of a laborious and frugal workman of only moderate
crops of corn, while the great table-land of Mexico pro-
duced cotton and sugar, and her mines were rich with silver.
He, therefore, reckoned the risk of a war with Great Brit-
ain, which might, as in 1812, prove destructive to the
trade of the United States, while the land of Mexico, di-
vided by civil war, would, as in the days of General Scott,
be easily subdued and as easily held in subjection.
‘‘I know not whether he was acquainted with the say-
ing of a French statesman, engaged in framing the treaty
of Versailles of 1763, that those who were masters of North
America would, in the end, be masters of the South.
“Be this as it may, the honor of the British Crown is
pledged to defend the Queen's dominions in North Ameri-
ca with the utmost forces of the Empire ; and it is very
improbable that, with such a prospect before them, the
President and Secretary of State at Washington will coolly
contemplate a hostile invasion of the Queen's possessions
in Canada.
“It is true that the late Government committed a folly
when they evacuated the new and expensive fortifications
at Quebec, and abandoned the garrison at Halifax. Very,
few years have elapsed since part of the garrison at Halifax
EARL RUSSELL. I4 I
furnished the means of preserving the Island of Jamaica to
the British Crown, and it is not likely that a Canadian gar-
rison would be dispatched to Jamaica with the same readi-
ness, or act with equal efficiency, against a negro insurrec-
tion. -
“But this error can easily be repaired by a Government
which is prepared to defend the Queen's possessions, and
which has a proper sense of the value of British honor. I
should, therefore, pay little regard to the speeches which in
the United States are called ‘Buncome,’ and which are as
void of meaning as they are hollow in sound.” “
In regard to the Treaty of Washington he briefly restates
his well-known opinions :
“I have stated in the House of Lords, that by the
Treaty of Washington the honor of the British nation was
tarnished, her character lowered, and her interests endan-
gered. But as every prominent candidate at the late gen-
eral election had blamed the foreign policy of Mr. Glad-
stone's Cabinet, and as that general election had for its
result a majority of fifty for Mr. Disraeli in the place of a
majority of sixty for Mr. Gladstone, I also stated that in my
opinion the British people, by giving a majority to the
Conservative candidates, had passed a sentence of condem-
nation against the authors of the concession which had
tarnished the honor, lowered the character, endangered the
interests of the British nation. * * *
“For the injuries to property inflicted by the ‘Alabama’
on American merchant vessels an ample compensation,
not to Say an extravagant and inordinate compensation, of
* “Recollections,” etc., p. 362.
I42 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
upward of three millions sterling has been paid, and I
will not say anything further upon this subject.” +
In three different passages of this book, Lord Russell
disarms American criticism by frankly admitting himself to
have been in error as regards the escape of the Alabama.
He first says : - -
“In a single instance, that of the escape of the ‘Ala-
bama,’ we fell into error. I thought it my duty to wait for
the report of the law officers of the crown ; but I ought to
have been satisfied with the opinion of Sir Robert Collier,
and to have given orders to detain the Alabama at Birken-
head.” f -
Again he says:
“Had Lord Granville agreed to see me before he sent
his mission to Washington, I should have pointed out to
him the weak parts of our case ; I should have said, as
Lord Chief Justice Cockburn has since done, that after I
had received the opinion of Sir Robert Collier, there was a
primâ facie case for detaining the ‘Alabama,’ and that I had
failed in not doing so during the interval of four days which
elapsed before I received the legal opinion of the law
officers of the crown. Gen. Washington, in like manner
had, from mistake, allowed British ships to be captured
within the jurisdiction of the United States.” .
And yet again, most emphatically of all :
“I assent entirely to the opinions of the Lord Chief
Justice of England, that the ‘Alabama ought to have been
detained during the four days in which I was waiting for
* “Recollections,” pp. 366–7. + “Recollections,” p. 235.
# “Recollections,” p. 332. *
EARL RUSSELL. I43
the opinion of the law officers. But I think that the fault
was not that of the Commissioners of Customs; it was my
fault, as Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. I should
have been glad to have admitted that fault as plainly and
as explicitly as General Washington admitted his mistake
in 1793.” +
From the conclusion of this book I take these passages,
which are surely most honorable to their author :
“In preparing a conclusion to ‘Recollections and Sug-
gestions,’ which have been the object of memory or medi-
tation for sixty years, it is fit that I should make a general
avowal of the impression I have received with regard to my
own part in public life, and that which others have taken
with whom I have been associated, or to whom I have been
Opposed.
“My persuasion is that I have been received with quite
as much favor as I deserved. I think what I have done
well has been honestly supported ; and that where my
measures have miscarried, the failure has been owing not
to undue animosity or malignant misrepresentation, but to
errors which I have committed from mistaken judgment or
a mistaken appreciation of facts.
“I believe I may say, with many other of the leading
men who, since the Revolution of 1689, have had the di-
rection of public affairs, that my ends have been honest,
and that I have looked to the happiness of my countrymen
as the object to which my efforts ought to be directed.
“Speaking generally, and with some exceptions, I am
willing to give the same testimony to those with whom
* “Recollections,” p. 334.
I44. BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
I have been associated, and to the chief leaders to whom I
have been opposed. * * *
“From 1815 to 1873 there has been a course of gradual
progress toward civil and religious liberty. There is noth-
ing so conservative as Progress. England is in the full en-
joyment of civil and religious freedom. I hope she may
never descend from this height, and that the wish of the
great poet, under whose roof I conclude, may see his vision
fulfilled, and become the creed and the confidence of a bet-
ter and a stronger age of mankind :—
“Of old sat Freedom on the heights,
The thunders breaking at her feet ;
Above her shook the starry lights,
She heard the torrents meet.
‘There in her place she did rejoice,
Self-gather'd in her prophet-mind,
I}ut fragments of her mighty voice
Came rolling on the wind.
‘Then stept she down thro’ town and field,
To mingle with the human race,
And part by part to men revealed
The fullness of her face.'
‘‘ RUSSELL.
“ALDworth, Ocſober 29, 1874.”
EARL RUSSELL AS SEEN BY OTHERS.
Lord Russell was born in London, August 19, 1792,
being the third son of the sixth Duke of Bedford. His
mother was Georgiana Elizabeth, daughter of Viscount
* “Recollections,” etc., pp. 356, 374.
EARL RUSSELE. I45
Torrington. In 1813 he was first chosen to Parliament for
the family borough of Tavistock. In 1830 he was Pay-
master of the Forces, in the Grey ministry; in 1835 he was
Secretary of State for the Home Department under Lord
Melbourne, and afterward Secretary of State for War and
the Colonies. In 1846 he became Prime Minister, and
subsequently held lower offices in the Cabinet, an act for
which he has been criticised. In 1865 he was again Premier,
retiring in 1866. He had sat for forty-seven years in the
House of Commons, when, in July, 1861, he was elevated
to the peerage, with the titles of Earl Russell and Viscount
Amberley. He has been twice married : in 1831, to Ade-
laide, daughter of Thomas Lister, Esq., and widow of
Lord Ribblesdale ; and, in 1841, to Lady Frances Anne
Maria, daughter of the Earl of Minto. He has had children
by both marriages; and his eldest son—by the second
marriage—Lord Amberley, has been Member of Parliament
for Nottingham, and is well known in America.
“Who does not know,” says Wemyss Reid, ‘‘the personal
characteristics of Lord Russell ? Who has not seen the
square and stunted figure, the large head, the big mouth,
the pugnacious nose 2 No one who enters the House of
Lords can mistake his identity. He sits below the gang-
way on the Liberal side of the House, his head and features
almost hidden by a huge broad-brimmed hat. It appears
to be a veritable Cave of Adullam which he has formed for
himself in this part of the House. Here he is joined
at times by Lord Clanricarde, Lord Westbury, or other dis-
contented Liberals, and with them he holds frequent con-
versations in a voice which almost drowns that of the man
who is supposed to have possession of the House for the
7
I46 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
time being. When he rises to speak, he places his hat
upon the seat behind him, clasps his hands behind his
back, turns away from the reporters, and says what he has
to Say in a grumbling monotone.
“His speech has become so indistinct now, that but
little of what he says reaches the peers on the other side of
the House, and men like Lord Grey, who do not care
much for appearances, and who still regard Lord Russell's
utterances as important, will seat themselves close to him
Whilst he is speaking, and, with hand to ear, endeavor
to Catch all that he says. It does not appear, however, that
it is from inability to speak clearly and distinctly that he
makes his speeches in this unsatisfactory manner. It
would rather seem that it is from sheer contempt for the
people he is addressing ; since, when he chooses, he can
Speak out in such a manner as to make himself heard all
Over the House. When he does this, he allows those
present to witness once again the old-fashioned peculiarities
of pronunciation which have always distinguished him.” +
“Lord Russell,” says another writer, “though he has
wanted the physical requisites and the temperament of an
Orator, though he has a dry and hesitating manner, a heavy
but not powerful voice, a drawling tone, and the obsolete
pronunciation of good society in the days of the Regency,
has always been one of the readiest and most efficient
of debaters, possessing that faculty of keen and direct retort
which is like skillful sword-play. He would probably have
been a greater statesman, as he would certainly have been
a greater speaker, if he had possessed a more vigorous Con-
* “Cabinet Portraits,” p. 124.
EARL RUSSELL. I47
stitution, and, what is often a consequence of it, higher
animal spirits. Ordinarily, there is a chilling coldness
or lassitude about him ; and it is only when ‘the steam is
on,” that ‘languid Johnny soars to glorious John,' and
shows himself to be of ‘Tydeus' kind, whose little body
lodged a mighty mind.’ During his younger days, he and
Francis Horner were set down as the two almost hopeless
invalids of the party; and Lord Russell's prospects of dis-
tinction and ultimate leadership were generally dismissed
with the reflection that neither his health nor life could be
counted on. Feeble health has tracked him through the
sixty years of his public career; and its dangers have only
been carefully fought off through a long struggle for exist-
ence. This physical infirmity has, no doubt, had its polit-
ical consequences. Lord Russell's restless activity has been
Somewhat dreary; and there has been, moreover, a lack of
continuity about it. It has been capricious and fitful.
His sudden and unexpected movements, which have often
disconcerted his friends quite as much as his enemies, have
had their origin, possibly, in this want of staying power quite
as much as in any disposition to intrigue.”
“Lord Russell,” says Wemyss Reid, “is hardly a great
man in the highest sense of the word, but in some matters
he holds a higher position than any other of his contempo-
raries. As an authority upon all questions affecting the
Constitution, for instance, he is undoubtedly the highest
we have ; and it is a genuine treat to hear him laying down
the law upon one of these questions. He does so with ju-
dicial clearness, and with more than judicial force. Upon
* “Political Portraits,” p. 134.
I 48 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
many questions of administrative reform, too, the country
is more largely indebted to him than to any other statesman
of modern times. His active brain, his restless industry,
and his constant desire to be doing something which shall
keep him before the eyes of his fellow-countrymen, have led
him again and again to take in hand great works from
which other statesmen had shrunk; whilst his self-confi-
dence and his genuine ability combined, have enabled him
to Conduct many of those works to a successful issue.
“It was an evil day—evil for himself, evil for his
Country, and evil for some foreign powers—in which Lord
Russell became English Foreign Secretary. From first to
last his foreign policy has been an unfortunate one, and it
has also been one which, had England not accepted the
doctrine of non-intervention, would have led us into some
very serious scrapes.
“When he was Home Secretary or Prime Minister we
had him to ourselves, and we understood him. We took
his letters—what a host of them he has given to us !—for
just as much as they were worth, and no more. We made
allowances for his constant love of intermeddling ; and we
could even forgive his chilling personal hauleur. But it
was different when he was representative of England in its
relations with foreign courts. The Poles, the Danes, the
Russians, could hardly be expected to understand the pe-
culiarities of our Foreign Secretary ; and even when his
letters were as innocent as those of Mr. Toots himself,
they believed that all the big words they contained, all the
advice they offered, or rather thrust upon foreign powers,
meant something more than they really did. They had no
conception that, unless he were prepared to support his
EARL RUSSELL. I49
words by deeds, a minister would venture to sit down in
his room in Whitehall, and calmly pen dispatches dictat-
ing, in language which itself was almost Offensive, to Some
of the most powerful States in Europe, and holding out
open encouragement to struggling causes. Thus it hap-
pened that Lord Russell got us into some very humiliating
scrapes during his tenure of the Foreign Office, and did
not a little to efface the impression which his great success
in matters of domestic policy had made on the minds of
his countrymen.” +
It seems to be admitted by all critics, that Lord Russell
takes small pains to soften his own manner or to propiti-
ate friend or foe. “There has always been a sort of inno-
cent nudity about him. He never dresses himself up or
disguises his motives. Whenever he has intrigued—and
nearly every statesman, probably, does intrigue more or
less against his rivals of the opposite party or his own—he
has done so in the most transparent manner. When he
has wanted an office filled by any one else in a Govern-
ment of which he was a member, he has said so and taken
it. * * * He has plotted as openly as the conspira-
tors in Canning's mock-play of Zhe Rovers. If he had
been engaged in the Gunpowder Treason, he would have
walked down to the House of Parliament at midday with
the matches in his hand and the barrel of gunpowder un-
der his arm. When his friends have been in office, and he
has for any reason been out of it, he has spoken his mind
of them as freely, and with as little regard to the policy of
seeming to play the part of a generous patron or an indul-
* “Cabinet Portraits,” p. 121.
I 50 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
gent apologist, as if he and they had sat upon opposite
benches during the whole of their political lives.” +
Much of his personal unpopularity is attributable, no
doubt, to this peculiarity of temperament.
“When we go through the long list of the Earl's public
acts; when we read the speeches which he made fifty years
ago, on behalf of causes dear to the English people, and
when we trace his course through the half century which
has since elapsed, our wonder is that a man who has
undoubtedly done so much, and who has deserved so well
of his countrymen, should have enjoyed so little personal
popularity, and so small an amount of private sympathy
and esteem.
‘‘Take up the political cartoons of the last thirty years,
and you will find no one whom the pictorial satirist has so
frequently sought to make ridiculous as Lord Russell.
Turn over the leaves of a file of the Times, or any other
journal of professedly Liberal opinions, and you will find
no one—not even the most stanch of Tory statesmen—
who is so often rebuked, so often admonished, so often
abused, as the man who, since the days of the Duke of
Wellington's administration, has been one of the most prom-
inent members of the Liberal party. How comes it that
this is the case? How is it that John, Earl Russell, de-
spite his great public services, and despite all that he has
done for the party with which he is identified, and the
abundant success that has attended his political life, is yet
one who can hardly be called a great man in the highest
sense of the term P y
* “Political Portraits,” pp. 126, 127.
EARL RUSSELL. I 5 I
“Partly this is unquestionably to be attributed to the
fact that Lord Russell has throughout his life been a vic-
tim to that cold hauteur which seems to be one of the Sacred
traditions of true Whiggism. This hauteur has nothing in
common with the ordinary and natural pride of aristocratic
birth or high social position. Lord Derby and Lord
Palmerston were both proud men, and against One of
them, at least, it was made a matter of serious accusation
that his demeanor was haughty and ‘aristocratic.' But
there was nothing in either of these men of the offensive
stiffness which has constantly characterized Lord Russell,
and which was so prominent a feature in the characters of
many of the leading Whig statesmen of the past century.
Few could ever become enthusiastic about ‘Lord John,' or
if any one were rash enough to be tempted into momentary
enthusiasm, the ebullition was instantly checked by a chill-
ing word, or look, or letter. -
‘‘We have at this moment before us a vivid recollection
of a characteristic little incident in the Earl's career.
Seven or eight years ago he spent a few weeks in the
autumn in the neighborhood of the Perthshire village of
Blairgowrie, and the sturdy Scotch peasantry, resolving to
do honor to the great Liberal statesman, invited him to a
‘banquet’ at Blairgowrie. The writer happened to be in
the neighborhood at the time, and procuring a ticket for
the banquet—which was about the roughest village feast at
which he was ever present—he went to Blairgowrie to wit-
ness Lord Russell's reception. In due time the famous
Whig minister came. The people were delighted at having
him in their midst, and they cheered him with a lusty vigor
which would have done credit to Yorkshire lungs.
I 52 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
“At the door of the Town Hall, or the Market House,
which was the scene of the banquet, the Earl descended
from his carriage ; he stood a moment in the doorway,
giving some directions to his servants, and the crowd
pressed round him cheering. One respectable-looking man
who was standing very near was particularly enthusiastic.
Upon him the Earl turned with a freezing look and a
haughty gesture. ‘Have the goodness not to make such
a noise, sir!” said he, and the poor Scot shrunk away
utterly abashed, and with doubtless very different feel-
ings with respect to ‘Johnny Russell’ from those which
he had entertained toward him a few minutes previously.
And this was a most characteristic scene. Very vain, and
not at all insensible to the charms of popular applause,
Lord Russell has yet this peculiar coldness and haughti-
ness of manner which chills the enthusiasm of his admirers,
and deprives him of not a little of the popularity which is
undoubtedly his due. * * *
“The Earl seems all his life long to have looked upon
politicians and political parties as worms beneath his feet, or
as a set of chessmen, to be knocked about and shuffled into
a corner with as little ceremony as the player shows in
handling his ivory soldiers. He has acted upon certain
well-defined principles; he has been ‘the consistent friend
of civil and religious liberty’—no one will deny that—but
what have been his feelings toward the people who have
benefited by his exertions In what light does he view the
operatives, the Dissenters, the Roman Catholics, the Jews,
on whose behalf he has interested himself? Can the Grand
Mogul have a more hearty contempt for the meanest of his
subjects than John, Earl Russell, has for the clients whose
EARL RUSSELL. I 53
Cause he has fought for sixty years with such marked. abil-
ity ? We doubt whether he even remembers that they are
vertebrated animals.” +
“At one time, early in his career, Lord Russell appears
to have been half-minded to abandon politics for literature.
The only fruit, however, of this dim intention was the
poetic remonstrance which it called forth from Moore;
and it had probably no deeper root in his character than
the habit of men to idealize the pursuits which they do not
follow, or follow only as a diversion, and to find disappoint-
ment and irritation in those which are the business of their
lives. It is the old story of Horace's first Satire. The
soldier would be a merchant, the farmer would be a law-
yer. Whatever Lord Russell may have proposed, his tute-
lary genius disposed of him more wisely. As a writer, he
might have earned a section in some appendix to Horace
Walpole's ‘Royal and Noble Authors;' but he would have
been simply a dried plant in a horſus siccus, and not a
living growth in a true garden. Lord Russell's taste for
literature has not contributed anything of much value to
it ; but it has enlarged, enriched, and illustrated his states-
manship ; and it has tinctured his oratory. The ablest
and most cultivated, if he be not the wisest, of living
American politicians is in the habit of saying that Lord
Russell's speeches, whatever they may be as they are deliv-
ered, are, as they are printed, the finest specimens of con-
temporary English eloquence. The opinion needs quali-
fication; but it is true that they have a clearness of phrase,
and a sharp precision of thought which are not usual in
* “ Cabinet Portraits,” pp. 116, 120.
7+
I 54. IBRIEF BIOGRAPIIIES.
spoken language; and there is a certain infusion of his-
tory and literature in them which gives them a scholarly
charm. Lord Russell's literary efforts are valuable chiefly
as illustrating his qualities as a statesman. They show that
he has acquired the various knowledge, and has the intel-
lectual tastes and aptitudes, which become his position ;
and they are here and there enriched by sagacious reflec-
tions and happy aphorisms. But it might, perhaps, have
been as well for his reputation if the studies out of which
they have sprung had informed his political career, instead
of entering a separate appearance. Depth of research,
maturity of thought, and continuity of mental effort, are
scarcely to be looked for in works which are mere episodes
and incidents of a busy career. Can any one suppose that
Lord Russell has anything to say which will make his
‘Essays on the Rise and Progress of Christianity in the
West’ of much use to the English reader who possesses
Dean Milman’s ‘History of Latin Christianity ?’ Germs
of thought which in their development might come to
something, first sketches and outlines of ideas which, if
filled up, might be found to have value, are sure to be
scattered in their crude beginning over the promised work.
The subject is one for statesmen to study, but scarcely for
a statesman to write upon, unless he be also a scholar and
a theologian. But Lord Russell's moral fearlessness is well
known ; and it is as conspicuously displayed in undertak-
ing the History of Western Christianity, from the reign of
Tiberius to the Council of Trent, as it would have been if
he had volunteered for the naval and surgical services
which Sydney Smith's joke declared him capable of under-
taking. In his literary efforts, which have been incessant
EARL RUSSELL. I 55
from boyhood to advanced old age, Lord Russell has shown
a taste or an ambition rather than a capacity ; Or, at any
rate, the taste and the ambition have missed the leisure
which could develop them into capacity.””
Lord Russell has been an author, though less conspicu-
ous in that sphere than Mr. Disraeli or Mr. Gladstone.
He wrote, many years since, a novel called “The Nun of
Arrouca,” and a drama called “Don Carlos.” The Wesſ-
minster Review said severely of this last that “there is not
a vestige of poetical feeling, nor a single passage that rises
above commonplace, not a character or creation in the
whole dramafi's personae, they are mere automata ; a more
undignified, pitiful puppet than Philip could not be walked
through five acts of any play; nor a more puling, charac-
terless personage than Don Carlos, whose mawkish senti-
mentality would overpower even a boarding-school miss of
the last generation.”
He wrote also, in early life, a book called “Essays and
Sketches of Life and Character, by a Gentleman who has
left his Lodgings,” the assumed name of the editor being
Joseph Skillet. He also published the “Life of William,
Lord Russell” (1815); “Essay on the History of the Eng-
lish Government and Constitution ” (1821); “History of
the Affairs of Europe since the Peace of Utrecht” (1824);
“The Establishment of the Turks in Europe; an Histori-
cal Essay” (1828); “The Causes of the French Revolu-
tion ” (1832); “Correspondence of John, Fourth Duke of
Bedford ” (1843); “Memoirs, Journals, and Correspond-
ence of Thomas Moore ” (1853–6); and “Memorials
* “Political Portraits,” p. 137.
I 56 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
and Correspondence of Charles James Fox” (1854); sev-
eral Inaugural Addresses; three ‘‘Letters on the State of
Ireland " (1868–9); and two volumes of his own speeches
and dispatches (1870). But though a faithful and labo-
rious editor, he has always been a dull writer, and his fame
will not rest upon this part of his labors. Fortunately, it
has a secure foundation in his actual public service.
“To write the history of his achievements would be to
Write a large portion of the history of the past half century.
No doubt much has been owing to opportunity ; but Lord
Russell did not simply use the opportunities which came to
him, itself not always an easy task; he made them. The
beneficial legislation of the past forty years has sprung from
the Reform Act of 1832 : and to that measure Lord Russell,
in his Own Solitary person, stood related much as Mr. Cob-
den, Mr. Villiers, and Sir Robert Peel were collectively re-
lated to the Repeal of the Corn Laws, or as Mr. Bright,
Mr. Gladstone, and Mr. Disraeli to the Reform Bill of
1867. He was the agitator as well as the legislator; the
pioneer not less than the cultivator. As the present Prime
Minister has said, not less truly than generously, if or-
ders were given for civil as for military services, Lord Rus-
sell's breast would be studded with stars, and crosses, and
ribbons.” +
* “Political Portraits,” p. 139.
V.
EAR L G R A N VILL E.
tº O one can have spent an evening in the House of
§§§ Lords without having his attention attracted by a
º remarkable face, which is at present to be seen on
the ministerial side of the House. It does not look like
an English face. That, at least, will be the visitor's first
impression. It is a French face, rather ; the bland, smil-
ing, but not eminently intellectual countenance of a
French statesman under the House of Orleans. In repose,
though handsome, it has a somewhat sleepy expression-
that does not prepossess the gazer in favor of its owner ;
but when lighted up with a smile, as it is very frequently
lighted up, its expression becomes at once very handsome
and very winning, and no one can watch it long without
feeling that those bland and comely features have in them
an indefinable attractiveness,
“Lord Granville, * * * * as friends and oppo-
nents alike admit, performs the duties of his post as [Lib-
eral] leader of the House of Lords with a tact and discrim-
ination which cannot be too highly commended. The
&


I 53 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
office, which would to most men be a thorny and irksome
task, seems little more to him than a pleasant recreation.
While other men, of greater intellectual power and more
richly endowed with the highest qualities of statesmanship,
would grow prematurely old, and worn, and irritable, under
the difficulties besetting such a post, the Secretary for For-
eign Affairs” looks to-day twenty years younger than his age
as it is recorded in “Debrett,’ and goes through his work
with an ease and grace, and a never-failing flow of good
spirits and even temper, that must make him the object of
every man's envy. -
“He never speaks without that courteous smile, which,
somehow or other, seems to disarm unfriendly criticism ;
he never falls into the traps set by sour or disappointed
members of his own party ; he meets the assaults which
come from the open foe in front, with a confidence which
can only be likened to that of the child too innocent
to have learned that there is such a thing as evil in the world.
“As you sit and watch him going through his nightly
task in the gilded chamber in which the peers deliberate—
standing up boldly to meet the weighty criticisms of a
Cairns, or the fierce onslaught of a Salisbury; soothing
with a tact which is almost feminine the irritable grumblings
of a Clanricarde, or laughing away with charming good
nature the sneers of a Westbury—you are compelled to
wonder whether the grace and graciousness which always
surround him are derived from art or from nature ; whether
he has been from youth upward the suave and fascinating
master of men, or has acquired the manner which is so
-*
* Written in 1872. :
EARL GRAN VILLE. - I 59
attractive and so irresistible by long years of painful
study.” + . . .
“The Right Honorable Granville George Leveson-
Gower, second Earl Granville, was born on the I Ith of
May, 1815—being the eldest son of the first Earl, who was
himself a younger son of the first Marquis of Stafford.”
The first Earl “was, in 1815, when forty-two years of age,
raised to the peerage as Viscount Granville, and in 1833,
when sixty, was created simultaneously Baron Leveson and
Earl Granville. Those three coronets were the rewards of
his good service as British Ambassador at Paris and pre-
viously at St. Petersburg. He had married, before his ad-
vancement to the House of Lords, the daughter of the fifth
Duke of Devonshire—the Lady Henrietta Elizabeth Cav-
endish—from whom was born to him, among other chil-
dren, his son and successor, the present Earl Granville.
“The latter, having been educated first of all at Eton,
and aſterward at Christchurch, Oxford, where he took his
degree in 1834, being enrolled as honorary D. C. L. by his
University nearly thirty years later on, in 1863, was at
twenty years of age, namely, in 1835, appointed attaché at
Paris under his father, then the British Ambassador at the
Court of King Louis Philippe. So that Lord Granville's
knowledge of the diplomatic profession dates back over
considerably more than half his lifetime.
“During nearly ten of the earlier years of his political
career, the now Colonial Secretary, under his then courtesy
title of Lord Leveson, sat in the House of Commons, first
of all from 1837 to 1840, as Member for Morpeth,
* “Cabinet Portraits,” pp. 71–4.
I6O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
and afterward, from 1841 to 1846, as Member for Lichfield.
While yet representing the constituency of Morpeth, he was
named for the first time to office by the then Premier, Vis:
count Melbourne. .
“This occurred in 1840, when the post allotted to him
was, appropriately enough for an ex-attaché, that of Under-
Secretary for Foreign Affairs, the Secretary of State for that
department being at the time no other than Lord Palmer-
ston. At the close of the Melbourne Administration, in
the autumn of the following year, September, 1841, he
passed with the rest of his colleagues into Opposition.” +
On the death of his father, in January, 1846, he
succeeded to the Earldom.
“Although twice married, Lord Granville has no direct
heir to his title—his brother, the Hon. Edward Frederick
Leveson Gower, now M. P. for Bodmin, being his heir-
presumptive. Upon the Earl's first marriage, which took
place in 1840, he espoused the widow of the late Sir Ferdi-
nand Acton, the mother of the present Sir John Acton,
eighth baronet, Marie Louise Pelline, the only child
of Emeric Joseph, the Duc de Dalberg. Left a widower
in 1860, Lord Granville married again in 1865, his second
wife being Castalia Rosalind, the youngest daughter of
Walter Campbell, Esquire, of Islay. Among his titles of
honor it may be mentioned that, besides being a Privy
Councillor, the Earl has been for some years a Knight of
the Garter, that he was long since elected a Fellow of the
Royal Society, that he is Chancellor of the University
of London, and Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports, to which
* “The Gladstone Government,” by a Templar, pp. 229, 230.
EARL GRAN VILLI. I6 I
last-mentioned office he was nominated upon its being va-
cated by the death of Lord Palmerston.” ”
“Of all the members of Mr. Gladstone's Government,”
says the critic of the Daily News, “Lord Granville is prob-
ably the one who, during the past few years, has risen most
rapidly and steadily in public opinion. Not very long ago
it was customary to regard him as a statesman who illus-
trated little more than the charm of good manners in poli-
tics. He was thought to be a Minister of deportment,
whose chief business it was to yield gracefully to irresistible
majorities in the Lords, or to smooth a way for such small
reforms as were offered to that assembly by the semi-Liberal
Administrations which preceded Mr. Gladstone's. He was
spoken of as a courtier politician, a statesman of the salon,
versed at best in the small diplomacy of politics. This
prejudice is of old standing, and was, perhaps, confirmed
by the fact that it was from the Royal Household that Lord
Granville entered upon the career in which he has since
achieved all but the highest place, with probably the suc-
cession to the highest place, in the Liberal party. For the
first two years of Lord John Russell's first Administration
he held the office of Master of the Buckhounds. He had
been Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs for a few months
before the break-up of the Melbourne Government, having
previously served an apprenticeship to diplomacy as attaché
in Paris during his father's embassy there ; and had sat for
ten years in the House of Commons before his succession
to the peerage in 1846. But his political career really be-
gan with his transfer, by Lord John Russell, in 1848, from
* “The Gladstone Government,” p. 236.
I62 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
the charge of her Majesty's Buckhounds to the Vice-Pre-
sidency of the Board of Trade. Great was the clamor
which this appointment raised below the gangway. “Is
thy servant a dog 2 said Manchester, indignant at being
handed over to the Master of the Buckhounds, Mr.
Bright, we believe, made himself the mouthpiece of its
anger in the House of Commons, and spoke his mind
with that frank disregard of persons which has always char-
acterized him. The appointment was denounced as a
piece of nepotism on Lord John Russell’s part. Very
much to his credit, Mr. Bright not long afterward admitted
that Lord Granville's conduct at the Board of Trade had
justified Lord John Russell's selection, and had not justi-
fied his own assault. Lord John Russell, with pardonable
perversity, was more deeply aggrieved by the retractation
than by the original charge. The word nepotism, natur-
ally odious to a Russell, rankled in his mind ; and he
ridiculed the idea that ſamily affection for a descendant of
his grandmother could influence his political appointments.
Lord Russell's grandmother does, indeed, carry the mind
back to a period of history apparently too remote to affect
Ministerial combinations. For a time, however, the un-
filial allusion of her grandson, and his ostentatious indiffer-
ence to her posterity outside the House of Bedford, gave
the old lady an historical resurrection ; and Lord Russell's
grandmother, as the Mother Eve of an entire Whig Cabinet,
became a subject of genealogical interest. It was on this or
on some similar occasion that Mr. Bernal Osborne account-
ed, on physiological principles, for the ricketiness of their
legislative offspring, on the ground that all the members of
the Government were nearly related to each other. * * * *
EARL GRANVILLE. 163
“The claims of elder politicians, and the necessity of
assigning some of the most important offices of State to
members of the House of Commons, had confined Lord
Granville to titular and ornamental posts in the successive
Administrations of Lord Aberdeen, Lord Palmerston, and
Lord Russell. With the exception of the few months,
during which he held the office of Foreign Secretary in the
declining days of Lord John Russell's Government, the
changes of his official career had consisted in his going
from the Presidency of the Council to the Duchy of Lan-
caster, and from the Duchy of Lancaster to the Presidency
of the Council, as Lord John Russell's political exigencies
seemed to require. With a full recollection of the many
high qualities and the great services of that veteran states-
man, one must admit that, out of office, he somewhat
resembles a hermit-crab without a shell, and has seldom
been scrupulous in dispossessing younger colleagues who
have found a retreat that he covets. The manner in which
Lord Granville accommodated himself to the caprices of
his old chief showed not only good nature and self-denial;
but a confidence which, in its readiness to wait, was itself
a sign of power. Once, indeed, greatness seemed likely
to be prematurely thrust upon him. In 1859, Lord Gran-
ville had a narrow escape of himself becoming Premier.
On the retirement of Lord Derby, the Queen had to choose
between Lord Palmerston and Lord John Russell ; and she
seems to have thought that Lord Granville lay between
them. It was supposed that as the Duke of Portland was
the mean between Mr. Fox and Lord North, so the claims
of Lord John Russell and Lord Palmerston might find
their adjustment in Lord Granville. The overture happily
I64 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
failed, through the refusal of Lord John Russell to ac-
quiesce in this arrangement. Lord Granville is to be con-
gratulated on the break-down of the attempted compromise.
To preside over the jealousies and disputes of two rivals,
animated by all the bitterness of an old guard and the
sharper acerbity of a new reconciliation, would not have
been a very comfortable task while it lasted ; and to be a
merely titular Premier, chosen to the first place because he
was then only of the second rank in politics, is not a posi-
tion which any one respecting himself would care to occupy
in administration or in history.” +
The London Times, of June 13, 1859, gave the follow
ing semi-official account of this negotiation : -
“Her Majesty, after listening to all the objections which
Lord Granville had to offer, commanded him to attempt
to form an administration which should at once be strong
in ability and parliamentary influence, and should at the
same time comprehend within itself a full and fair repre-
sentation of all the sections into which the Liberal party has
notoriously been divided. Feeling, probably, that it might
be urged as an objection to this course that Lord Gran-
ville, who has never yet held the office of Prime Minister,
would thus be placed in a position paramount to that occu-
pied by Lord Palmerston and Lord John Russell, each of
whom had served her long and faithfully in many high
offices of state, and had each filled the office of First Min-
ister of the Crown, her Majesty was pleased to observe that
she had in the first instance turned her thoughts towards
Lord Palmerston and Lord John Russell. Her Majesty
* “Political Portraits,” pp. 141, 5.
EARL GRAN VILLE. I65
felt, however, that to make so marked a distinction as is
implied in the choice of one or other of two statesmen so
full of years and honors, and possessing so just a claim
on the consideration of the Queen, would be a very invid-
ious and unwelcome task. Her Majesty also observed
that Lord John Russell and Lord Palmerston appeared to
represent different sections of the Liberal party; Lord
Palmerston the more Conservative, and Lord John Russell
the more popular section. Impressed with these difficulties,
her Majesty cast her eyes on Lord Granville, the acknow-
ledged Leader of the Liberal party in the House of Lords,
in whom both Lord John Russell and Lord Palmerston
had been in the habit of placing confidence, and who
might have greater facilities for uniting the whole Liberal
party under one administration than could be enjoyed by
either of the sectional leaders.”
It seems to be universally admitted that, after Lord
Granville took office under Mr. Gladstone, he showed
higher ability than had before been conceded to him ; and
that in a position of peculiar difficulty, because he repre-
sented in the House of Lords an administration which was
there in the minority.
“The Leadership of the House of Lords, previous to
Mr. Gladstone's Administration, did not really require any
considerable faculty. No measures were sent from the
Lower to the Upper Chamber which seriously exercised the
patience of the Peers. The time was one of truce in do-
mestic politics; Organic changes and great administrative
reforms were not thought of ; and collision, or even
marked difference of opinion between the two Houses,
was of rare occurrence. Since Mr. Gladstone took office,
I66 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
however, all that has been changed.* First as Colonial,
and afterwards as Foreign Secretary, Lord Granville has
had opportunities of displaying that talent for business of
which he gave promise at the Board of Trade, and which
he showed conspicuously as Chairman of the Royal Com-
mission for the Exhibition of 1862. He has the faculty,
which some great statesmen have lacked, of prompt and
decisive action, and of recognising the point at which ſur-
ther inquiry, however speculatively interesting or desirable
for the sake of theoretic completeness, has really no bear-
ing upon practice, except to delay what should be done at
once. The tenure of the two great offices of state which
he has occupied in Mr. Gladstone's Cabinet has marked an
era both in our colonial and in our foreign policy ; and
the importance of his administration may be measured by
the outcry which has been raised against it. The past few
years have been a period of transition. They have brought
with them the delicate and difficult task of committing in
larger and larger proportion to our colonies the essential
work of self-maintenance and self-defence, as the condition
of self-government, without loosening the moral and polit-
ical ties which unite them to the Mother Country in one
common allegiance. So far from Lord Granville having
pursued a policy of separation, he has, on the contrary,
laid the foundations of that readjustment which is the con-
dition of the integrity of the Empire. A bond is not
always the weaker for being loose, and allowing freedom
of motion. When it is tightened, it is the more likely to
strain and snap. With regard to his foreign policy, it
* Written in 1872.
EARL GRAN VILLE. 167
would be strange, if anything could be strange in political
partizanship, to find it attacked by those who were foremost
in denouncing what they used to call the swagger and
braggadocio of Lord Palmerston, and the meddling and
muddling of Lord Russell. Lord Granville unmeddles
and unmuddles. Under him we are no longer startled by
what Mr. Carlyle, describing Lord Palmerston's foreign
policy, Called the sudden appearance of Great Britain in
the character of Hercules-Harlequin, waving her huge
sword of sharpness over field-mice, to see how they will
like it. Lord Granville declines to act the part of ‘Her-
cules-Harlequin, the Attorney Triumphant, the World's
Busybody,’ and we hear outcries about the decline of
British influence and the humiliation of the British name.
The fact is that to conduct a retreat from positions which
ought never to have been taken up is not in itself a very
splendid and imposing business ; but it is a very necessary
one; and, on the whole, it has been well performed. The
Courage to withdraw from a false position must, however,
be proved to be courage by the spirit and firmness with
which, when occasion arises, the interests and honor of
England are vindicated against whatever antagonist, and in
spite of seduction or threat. To Lord Granville it has
fallen to effect the transition from a policy of vicious med-
dling in foreign and colonial affairs to one of judicious ab-
stention, the effect of which, so far from isolating England,
is to leave her ready with undegraded authority, with un-
wasted resources, and with free judgment and conscience,
to interpose with decision, when duty to herself and to the
world may require her to do so. Instead of Snapping and
barking round every European fight, her voice should be
I68 ps: BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
like that of Sir Walter Scott's old hound Maida, of whom
he said, ‘He seldom opens his mouth, but when he does,
he shakes the hills.’” + -
‘‘Lord Granville's success as a Leader of the House of
Lords and as a diplomatist is in great part attributable to
this faculty of patience. A quick-tempered or an angry
negotiator would almost certainly, during the past few
years, have embroiled us with America and Russia, and
probably with France and Germany too. An irritable or
an impulsive leader would soon have the House of Lords
in open revolt. The work of passing great measures of
change through an assembly, a majority of which distrusts
and hates them, and of which the minority that gives them
a sort of support only half likes them, is by no means easy.
A knowledge of men and a tolerance of their prejudices, a
certain art in humoring them, a faculty of coaxing, such
as a kindly physician employs towards a fractious patient—
in other words, “a learned spirit of human dealings,” is
essential in such an assembly. Mere suavity or benignity,
however, would not suffice. There must be firmness be-
neath it, and the power of substituting firmness in manner
for it. In this Lord Granville is by no means deficient.
He is capable of a certain sub-acidity which declares itself
beneath his most honeyed words. His diplomatic corres-
pondence bears witness to his power of saying, on occasion,
sharp and pointed things. He can disarm an Opponent
with an air of winning politeness, and transfix him with an
appearance of almost affectionate solicitude. He can
insinuate a taunt with courteous deference, and suggest to
* “Political Portraits,” p. 148.
EARL GRAN VILLE. I69
an antagonist in terms the most seductive that he is making
a fool of himself. Lord Granville has been described as
distilling a softening and soothing unction over political
affairs; but even such antagonists as Lord Salisbury and
Lord Cairns have sometimes had occasion to say of this
unction, in the language of the Common Prayer version
of the Book of Psalms, ‘Let not his precious balms
break my head.’” +
“Lord Granville's most ardent admirers cannot claim
for him renown as a statesman of the highest type, or a
man of supreme intellectual power. * * * He would be a
bold man who would say that Lord Granville had the Com-
manding personal gifts which compel success in politics.
We suppose we must admit that during his many years of
faithful and honorable service he has done nothing which
can be called great. * * * But it is not to the mere fact
that the bluest of our blue blood runs in his veins that his
universal popularity, and his advancement to the great posi-
tion which he now occupies, are to be attributed. Some-
thing more than family influence, and the ties of kindred,
is needed to explain the fact that men whose public services
are far greater than his, and with whose intellectual endow-
ments he has nothing to compare, are willing to serve
under his leadership ; and that he is able to fill the most
difficult post, perhaps, which can fall to the lot of any
statesman, in a manner which at once satisfies his foes and
delights his friends.
“What, then, is the secret of his success P Few can
doubt that it lies in that wonderful urbanity, that never-
* “Political Portraits,” p. 153.
I 7O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
failing grace and Courteousness of manner, to which allusion
has already been made. Lord Granville is a great noble-
man. He is exalted in rank ; he wields all the power
which large wealth bestows upon its possessors ; he has at
his command ſamily influence, which can best be described
by the one word, irresistible ; he is, in short, a grand seig-
7teur, enjoying all the rights and dignities which appertain
to such a character in a country in which an even exagger-
ated deference is paid to the claims of wealth and rank.
“But most assuredly no nobleman ever more thoroughly
acted up to the maxim noblesse oblige than the Foreign Sec-
retary. No one can watch him long or closely without
seeing that he feels compelled alike by his very rank, and
wealth, and influence, to show the world that these things
are, after all, mere accidents. To use a homely phrase,
Lord Granville, when in the company of his social inferi-
ors, always seems to be apologising for the fact that he is
an earl and a great nobleman. His chief desire seems to
be to put those around him at their ease, and to effect this
object he adopts in his speech and demeanor a courtesy
which is altogether alien to our ‘rough island tongue' and
rough island manners. But there is nothing of Mr.
Heep's 'umbleness in it. Indeed, though one would think
it exaggerated in almost any other man, it seems natural
to Lord Granville—a happy gift, which belongs to him
alone amongst Englishmen.
“What wonder, then, that the Earl is popular with the
people 2 No one can be brought in contact with him with-
out falling a willing and contented victim to the wonderful
glamor which surrounds him. With his equals, of course,
his demeanor is somewhat different. But in his intercourse
EARL GRAN VILLE. - I7 I
with them, also, he gives one the impression of a man bent
upon studying and adapting himself to the wants of others,
rather than upon advancing his own interests. With what
a charming simplicity and gracefulness he yields the palm
to those who have fairly won it from him And how un-
assuming and inoffensive he is in the hour of victory—the
hour which, after all, tests men's qualities more than any
other. Statesmen who are intellectual giants compared to
Lord Granville, think it no shame to be overcome by this
bland and ever-courteous foe; and his rivals in his own
party yield to him a deference such as they would not pay
to the ablest statesman or the haughtiest nobleman in the
House.
“In social life Lord Granville shines as a star of the first
magnitude ; and his happy knack of bringing into the
House of Lords something of the atmosphere of the
drawing-room, aids him not a little in his difficult task.
Who can have passed from the House of Commons—
hot, turbulent, angry—to the House of Lords, without
being struck by the peace and good-breeding which
flourishes under Lord Granville's rule in the latter
place P And wherever he goes the noble Earl is the
same. No man can preside over a social gathering
with greater success ; no man can do more to overcome
the difficulties attending any great public undertaking—
such as the Exhibitions of 1851 and 1862 ; no man
can blend more harmoniously the conflicting elements
of society.
“A hundred anecdotes might be told to illustrate
his irrepressible good-nature, and his absolute freedom from
all pride of birth or place. It seems but yesterday—alas !
172 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
it is ten long years ago"—that the writer saw him on May 1,
1862, broom in hand, sweeping up the scattered refuse
which lay about the dais under the dome of the Exhibition
building, half-an-hour before the time fixed for the opening
Ceremony. He swept then, with a vigor which said as
much for his undiminished physical powers as for his care-
lessness of the restraints of mere etiquette. And one Easter
Monday, two or three years ago, the writer again beheld
him wandering in the crowd gathered upon the slopes of
the Spur Battery at Dover, laden with loaves of bread,
raised pies, and piles of Sandwiches—the remnants of the
luncheon of which his party had just partaken—and
distributing these good things with careful impartiality
amongst the ragged boys and women, of whom too many
were to be seen, attending the Volunteer Review then
being held. * * *
“In the House of Lords, or when he is presiding over
one of the grave, learned societies with which he is
connected, he will lighten the most solemn occasions by
some playful allusion to the notorious peculiarities of some
other public man, or to his own family affairs—as when he
told the members of the University of London, shortly after
his charming wife had presented him with a daughter, that
he now felt a personal interest in the question of education
such as he had never before known. A graceful and pol-
ished speaker in his own tongue, he has a more perfect
command of the French language than any other public
man of our day, and the speeches which he has upon dif-
ferent occasions made in Paris have excited the unbounded
admiration of Our gallant allies.
* Written in 1872.
EARL GRAN VILLE. I73
“Lord Granville's Liberalism is not easily defined. It
is almost as remote from the stiff Whiggism of Lord Rus-
sell as from the ultra-Radicalism of Mr. Fawcett ; and it
never betrays him into the perfervid eccentricities which
sometimes characterize Mr. Gladstone's political career.
Perhaps it may be best described as a social creed. He
is a politician of the salon—a disciple of Lord Palmerston,
who even now copies his great master's example as closely
as the changed times in which he lives will permit him to
do so. He has a chivalrous sympathy with the people, and
he feels that he can best express that sympathy by his ad-
herence to the Liberal party. For a long time men looked
upon his Liberalism with something akin to suspicion ;
and it is only within the last three years that his own party
has accepted him with unreserved confidence and cor-
diality. -
“Certainly Lord Granville has shown a great capacity
for moving with the times. Who would have said, ten
years ago, that Lord Palmerston's favorite peer, the ‘safe”
man, who was then looked upon as the future leader of an
inert Whig party, would, in December, 1868, walk down
the Castle Hill at Windsor arm-in-arm with Mr. John Bright,
just after the latter honorable gentleman had been intro-
duced to the Queen on his appointment as a Cabinet Min-
ister It says much for Lord Granville's ready acquies-
cence in the inevitable, that he should have done such a
thing ; and we may be sure that he did it in the most
graceful and pleasing of manners.””
Whenever the Liberal party returns to power—an event
which cannot, in the nature of things, be postponed many
* “Cabinet Portraits,” pp. 75–80.
I 74 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
years—there is no one so likely to represent it in the
Premiership as Earl Granville. The fact that it was offered
to him in 1859, and that his statesmanlike training is now
much further perfected, would give him an advantage over
every Competitor. Indeed, it is not now apparent who his
competitors would be. “If the necessity of supplying a
Liberal Premier were to arise to-morrow, it would, putting
Mr. Gladstone on one side, be met by a draft on the House
of Lords. Earl Granville is not a robust politician, but
he is, possibly for that reason, an admirable leader of a
party. During a period of great difficulty, and with official
cares of an engrossing character on his hands, Earl Gran-
ville managed so to manipulate affairs in the House of
Lords that only on the rarest occasions was the country
reminded that the Government, of which he was the repre-
sentative, there stood in a hopeless minority. Suave in
manner, firm in purpose, intimate with men and things
at home and abroad, Schooled in diplomacy, practiced in
administration, popular everywhere, an able and ready
speaker, Earl Granville is a man who would unite under
his leadership all save the extremest rank of the Liberal
party. A Ministry formed under his auspices would be
broad-based and strong, for his lordship is a man without
animosities and without adversaries. He could invite
whom he pleased to take office with him, and it is easy to
imagine the acidities of some of his possible colleagues
finding solution in the imperturbable good temper and
tireless geniality of the Premier.””
* “Men and Manner in Parliament,” p. 256.
VI.
THE DUKE OF ARGYLL.
ºHE great Argyll he goes before,” is the line of
§ : Scotch song which comes most vividly into the
Pººl mind of an American when his eye looks eagerly
about the House of Lords for the Duke of Argyll. As the
author of the “Reign of Law " and the father-in-law of a
princess, this nobleman inspires interest, no doubt, but the
charm of the whole is in the associations of Scottish song.
And when he is pointed out, at last, the flavor of national-
ity is unmistakable. “When he strides to the table of
the House of Lords, his shoulders thrown back, his head
erect, his chin in the air, the skirts of his broadcloth coat
one could almost fancy changed into the Campbell tartan.
The bright orange-colored hair feathering up from his fore-
head is as the eagle plume in the highland bonnet. The
free, bold gestures, are as the brandishing of the claymore.
In the very ring of his strident voice there is the clang of
the pibroch. It is McCallum More who is there before



176 BRIEF BIOGRAPIHIES.
us, rather than George Douglas, Duke of Argyll. The
floor of the House is as his native heather, and his name
and his ſame are those of the Highland Chieftain of the
great clan of the Campbells.”
“‘Intensely Scotch,’” remarks another writer, “is
what most men say when they see his Grace the Duke of
Argyll. And it is quite true that his appearance is
intensely Scotch. The chief of the Campbells has the
slight, but erect and firmly-knit figure of a Highlander ;
his head is covered with the yellow hair which has so long
been one of the distinguishing marks of his race, and his
face has that peculiar complexion which is so seldom met
with except in the inhabitants of North Britain.
“Thus in his appearance his nationality is unmistakable,
and no one seeing him can doubt for a moment that he
comes from the lands beyond Solway Frith, To finish
this sketch of his outward man at once, it may be re-
marked that there is something singularly fine in the
Duke's head and face. He has a noble forehead, and the
intellectual evidently predominates over the animal in his
nature—if one may form a judgment upon that important
point from the peculiar molding of his features. And
yet there is nothing about head or face to qualify the ver-
dict which a stranger would pronounce upon him at first
sight—the verdict that he is ‘intensely Scotch.’
“And certainly no one who heard him speak would be
inclined to reverse that verdict. Years of residence in
London, and of constant intercourse with Englishmen,
have failed to rob his tongue of the rough Doric of his
* “The Gladstone Government,” p. 261.
THE DUKE OF ARGYLL. I77
native land. He is a voluble speaker—one of the fastest
in the House of Lords—yet, as you listen to him pouring
out polished but vigorous sentences, you are never permit-
ted to forget that he is a Scotchman. He is a keen poli-
tician, a man of culture, and of statesman-like instinct;
but, more than anything else, he is a Scotchman.” A.
“A certain pugnacity of bearing,” says still another ob-
server, “as of a very game bird, has gained the Duke of
Argyll, as Indian Secretary, the macaronically punning
nickname of Cocculus Indicus, said to have been bestowed
upon him, in a moment of inspiration, by a witty bishop.
There is a dispute on this point, some authorities contend-
ing that the name was given to the Under-Secretary for
India, Mr. Grant Duff, by a well-known member of the
House of Commons. The term suits both the reputed
sponsors and their political god-children so well, that by a
coincident felicity it may very easily have had a double ori-
gin and application. Be this as it may, there is something
decidedly gallinaceous in the Duke's demeanor. There is
an air of the fighting-cock about him. To transfer the
illustration from feathered to featherless bipeds, he bears,
as an orator, a resemblance to a very emphatic and Combat-
ive divine. He is the Boanerges of the House of Lords.
He speaks in a loud and monotonous voice, like a Scotch
preacher addressing a large congregation from a hill-side
in a high and contrary wind. He is an earnest and fluent
speaker, not so much powerful as overpowering, with a
close Scotch logic, a perfervid Scotch temper, and a Scotch
lack of humor. His oratory resembles preaching rather
* “Cabinet Pictures,” p. 168.
178 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
than debating ; and his attacks on the Opposition have had
many a counterpart from Scotch pulpits in polemics against
the Scarlet Lady.” +
‘As some points of resemblance between the American
and the Scotch type have been pointed out by some writers,
it is interesting to notice that a good American observer
was struck, in 1862, with a certain quality of Americanism
in the Duke of Argyll's manner. “In politics, he is a de-
cided and consistent Liberal, and he merits the favorable
consideration of all loyal Americans, from the fact that he
has not failed, on every proper occasion, to advocate our
cause with such arguments as to show clearly that he fully
understands our position, and appreciates the importance
of the principles for which we are contending. It is a
curious coincidence, that his style of address bears a close
resemblance to what may be called the American manner.
Rapid, but distinct in utterance, facile and fluent in
speech, natural and graceful in gesticulation, he might
almost be transplanted to the halls of Congress at Wash-
ington without betraying his foreign birth and education.”?
“The Most Noble and Right Honorable George
Douglas Campbell, eighth Duke of Argyll, * * * *
was born on the 3oth of April, 1823. The father of his
Grace was John Douglas Henry Edward, seventh posses-
sor of the Dukedom since the date of its creation, a hun-
dred and sixty-eight years ago. That seventh Duke of
Argyll, who died on the 26th of April, 1847, * * * *
had in his time been thrice married.
* “Political Portraits,” p. 275.
+ “An American in the House of Lords,” Atlantic Monthly
August, 1863. [By Hon. Francis Wayland.]
THE DUKE OF ARGYLL. - I 79
“Neither by his first nor yet by his third wife did he
have any issue—the mother of the present Duke being the
second wife, Joan, daughter of John Glassel, Esq., of
Long Niddry, in Haddingtonshire.”
The present Duke “was but little more than twenty-
three years of age himself—he had at any rate not yet
reached the twenty-fourth anniversary of his birth—when
he succeeded, on his father's death, to that array of titles
already spoken of as so long and magnificent. They in-
clude among them, in fact, eight titles as Baron, two as
Viscount, three as Earl, two as Marquess, and, the Aaron's
rod of them all, the Dukedom.
“The oldest barony, that of Campbell, dates back to
1445; the oldest earldom, that of Argyll, to 1457—there
is another barony, the barony of Lorne, dating back to
1475—but the most extraordinary creation of them all was
that of 17OI, when the first of the house to wear the coro-
net of strawberry leaves was created, at one and the same
time, Duke of Argyll, Marquess of Lorne and Kintyre, Earl
of Campbell and Cowal, Viscount Lochow and Glenilla,
and Baron Inverary, Mull, Morven, and Tirey—all of the
titles then and previously conferred upon the race being
exclusively, however, in the peerage of Scotland. It was
not until—less than a century since—in 1776, that a Duke
of Argyll was enabled to take his place in the House of
Lords, the Duke of that time being created, in the peerage
of Great Britain, Baron Sundridge and Hamilton. As
Lord Sundridge it is that the Duke of Argyll takes his seat
in the hereditary branch of the Legislature.” +
* “The Gladstone Government,” pp. 256, 257.
I8O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
“While he was yet designated, by courtesy, the Mar-
quess of Lorne, the future Cabinet Minister married, in
1844, the Lady Elizabeth Georgiana Leveson Gower, the
eldest daughter of the second Duke of Sutherland. About
eight years afterward—having, in the interim, not only suc-
ceeded to his hereditary seat in the House of Lords (April
26, 1847), and there made good his claim to be regarded
as a debater of considerable ability—he became, on the
28th of December, 1852, as Lord Privy Seal, a member of
the Coalition Ministry, under Lord Aberdeen's Premier-
ship. As Lord Privy Seal, until the July of 1855, he con-
tinued to sit in the Cabinet, after its reconstruction in the
February of that year by Lord Palmerston as the Head of
the Government. Lord Canning, however, having been
appointed Governor-General of India, his Grace the Duke
of Argyll, toward the close of November, was removed from
the position of Lord Privy Seal to the vacated office of the
Postmaster-General. Upward of two years after that he
was still Postmaster-General, when, in the February of
1858, Ministers having been defeated by a majority of
nineteen on Mr. Milner Gibson's motion, collectively re-
signed.” + From 1859 to 1866, he was again Lord Privy
Seal, and was Secretary of State for India during Mr. Glad-
stone's last administration, 1868–74.
‘‘It has been the great misfortune of the Duke to have
been deprived of the advantages of a University education.
If, like most other young men of his station, he had been
trained at Oxford or Cambridge, he might have lost not a
little of the ruggedness of his character. As it is, he was
* “The-Gladstone Government,” p. 260.
THE DUIKE OF ARGYLL. I 8 I
brought up under private tuition, and he may be said to
have entered upon public life without having been called
upon to measure his strength on equal terms with men
around him.
“It is a terrible misfortune to any man to be born into
the world as the eldest son of a Duke ; to have not the
silver, but the golden spoon constantly in his mouth, and
to be surrounded from his birth by those who are never
permitted for a single hour to forget that “my Lord ' the
Marquis will soon be ‘his Grace' the Duke, chief of a great
family, and owner, it may be, of vast possessions. Some-
thing, however, is done to mitigate this misfortune, when
the youth so placed is sent to a public School—where,
surely, if nowhere else, he may learn that ‘ the rank is but
the guinea stamp —and to college, where, if he like, he
may meet with friends, who, though they may care a good
deal for the man, will not care a straw for the Duke. These
advantages, however, were denied to the Duke of Argyll.
The natural consequence was, that he was trained, not as a
young man, but as a young Marquis. From his earliest
years he had a lively consciousness of his own importance
in the Social scale, and throughout his life he has never
forgotten his great birth and splendid rank. Characteris-
tically enough, when he was still a beardless boy, he in-
dited his ‘Letter to the Peers, by a Peer's Son,” a singularly
vapid and uninteresting performance, bristling in every line
with its writer's intense self-consciousness.
“This pride of birth, moreover, does not stand alone in
the Duke's character. It is accompanied by the yet more
aggressive pride of intellect. The Duke is a very able man.
If he had been but a poor Commoner he would in all prob-
I 82 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
ability have risen to a really important place in political
life. As it is, his wits have never been sharpened by that
wholesome struggle through which all self-made men must
pass. Possibly it is for this very reason that he entertains
So high an opinion of his own ability.
“He has unquestionably a great admiration of genius,
wherever he meets it, and one of the best traits in his per-
sonal character is the manner in which he has befriended
struggling talent. But if he had himself been compelled
to pass through the hard struggle from obscurity to fame,
he would know that, able as he is, he has no personal pre-
tensions to the character of a genius. *
“As it is, his strength has never been really tested, and
he therefore not unnaturally believes it to be somewhat
greater than it is. He has done a good many very clever
things, has hitherto found himself quite equal for the kind
of work which Prime Ministers are in the habit of intrust-
ing to dukes, and has even earned an enviable literary
reputation. Can we, therefore, feel very much surprised
that he should think himself much more clever than he is,
or that he should seek to impress this opinion of his pow-
ers upon the world at large P
“Apart from this pride, however, it would be hard to
say much in depreciation of the Duke of Argyll. We
know that he has been sneered at as ‘a Scotch pedagogue,’
and that men have once and again denounced the pedantry
of his character. But we confess we think such critics
are singularly wide of the mark. That he has a certain
provincialism of feeling, arising from the defects of his early
training, is no doubt true. This provincialism displays
itself in numberless ways, and it is no doubt very irritating
THE DUIKE OF ARGYLL. 183
to people who are not distinguished by it—or by anything
else.
“The Duke's pride would, doubtless, be of a different
character were it not for this provincialism. As it is, it is
not the pride of a Somerset or a Grey ; it is rather the pride
of a Scotch laird, who knows that he is the greatest man in
his own district; or of a Scotch minister, who feels a not
unreasonable respect for his own abilities when he com-
pares them with those of his unlettered flock. It is, in
short, a narrow, even a petty pride; not the noble, though
fatal passion which caused the fall of Lucifer. But this is
his worst defect, and apart from it he has many qualities
which demand our respect and our admiration.
“He has, for instance, shown throughout his life an
unvarying sympathy with his own countrymen. We are
told, on what is, we imagine, good authority, that he is not
popular in Scotland. If this is indeed the case, then we
can only say that his unpopularity is by no means de-
served. Deeply impressed with the traditions of his race,
the Duke remembers how his forefathers were once the repre-
sentatives of their countrymen at the court of their sove-
reign, and how the prayers of the poor North Britons for
mercy or redress were laid at the foot of the throne by the
McCullum Mohr. He is apparently anxious to maintain
those traditions as far as he can do so. Scotland, it is true,
no longer needs a duke as her spokesman ; she has her full
amount of influence in the House of Commons.
“But Scotchmen are still, as of yore, a race anxious to
advance in the world—to rise above their rivals as oil rises
above water. Thus it happens that the poor but ambitious
Scot comes up to London by the hundred every year, bent
I84 IBRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
upon making a name and a fortune for himself. Of course
it would be utterly impossible for any one man to under-
take the charge of this North British contingent, and for
the most part the Scotchman in London is very well able to
help himself without the need of ducal patronage. But
again and again the Duke of Argyll has shown his sym-
pathy with his struggling fellow-countrymen. The Northern
dialect which he himself speaks, the Northern complexion
which is to be seen in his own face, and the Northern char-
acter of which he furnishes a type, are all dearer to him
than anything to be seen in the South.
“One can imagine that he is passionately fond of the
rugged scenery of his native land ; and it is at least beyond
a question that he is passionately fond of the rugged char-
acter of his fellow-countrymen. He shows this affection
for the traits which distinguish Scotchmen in many different
ways. In a recent debate on the Scotch Schools' Bill in
the House of Lords, he spoke with the warmest feeling of
sympathy for that representative man, the ‘dominie' of his
native land. He evidently knew the hard life which too
many schoolmasters had to lead ; and was as deeply im-
pressed with the difficulties and trials which they had to
surmount as though he had been one of their number. It
is too rare a thing to find this close sympathy existing be-
tween the highest rank of the peerage and the lowest rank
of professional life. Who, for instance, would expect
Lord Granville, or the Earl of Derby, to display not only
compassion for the English parish schoolmaster, but a per-
fect knowledge of all his wants, and a deep personal sym-
pathy with him in all his difficulties?
“The Duke is, moreover, distinguished by an un-
THE DUKE OF ARGYLL. 185
swerving consistency in his political creed. He is a Lib-
eral of Liberals; and whilst he has nothing of the dema-
gogue in him, he has not a few of the qualities which fit a
man to be a great public leader. There is that sympathy
with the struggles of the poor of which we have just spoken,
and there is besides that fervid enthusiasm which has
animated so many Scotch patriots. Nobody who has
studied his character can doubt that he has in him the
fiery resolution, and enduring courage, of which martyrs
are made. Were it necessary, the Duke would go to the
scaffold for his opinions as cheerfully as his great ances-
tor; and despite the eager nervous temperament which
distinguishes him, he would, we verily believe, sleep as
cheerfully as that ancestor did upon the eve of his execu-
tion.
“This is high praise, but it is not undeserved. Un-
fortunately, however, it must be materially qualified. Like
his ancestors, the Duke's enthusiasm, though intense, is
narrow. His early training hedged him round with pre-
judices, and though he has all his life long been struggling
to break away from those prejudices, he has not always
succeeded in doing so. He is still intolerant of the opin-
ions of those who differ from him ; still has that hard
pragmatical character which so frequently belongs to the
provincial Scotchman.
“Not even his long political career and his constant
intercourse with the foremost men of his day have robbed
him of this trait. It is occasionally intensely irritating to
hear him dealing with a great question in the House of
Lords, just as it is intensely irritating to be compelled to
listen to some local politician, a great man in his own
I 86 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
vestry, serenely laying down as indisputable his judgment
upon matters which have puzzled the greatest and wisest
of mankind. This it is which accounts for much of the
Duke's unpopularity in political circles. For that he is
unpopular it is impossible to deny. Nor is it surprising
that even a duke should fail to conciliate the world, when
he is not only personally proud and haughty, but when
he shows at times that narrowness of opinion of which we
have spoken.”. .
“In one respect the Duke of Argyll differs honorably
from all but a very small minority of politicians in either
House. He brings to politics a mind variously cultivated
and exercised in different departments of speculation and
research. He has, moreover, a certain distinctness of char-
acter. He is really a personage in public life. Some of
his colleagues and opponents seem little more than masks.
They are officials or ex-officials, and whatever individuality
they once possessed seems to have been absorbed by the
functions they exercise or have exercised. ‘Their nature
is subdued to what they work in, like the dyer's hand,’ and
they scarcely admit of delicate discrimination any more
than so many dyers' hands dipped in the same color would
do. * * * But, politically, the characters of Mr.
Tweedledum and Lord Tweedledee do not allow of, or,
at any rate, would not repay discrimination. They might
shift offices, and even, as Dickens somewhere suggests,
change minds, without anybody finding out the difference.
The Duke of Argyll is far above the material which serves
merely for the padding of a Cabinet. He is a man of
force of character and of mind.”f
* “Cabinet Portraits,” p. 17o. # “Political Portraits,” p. 273.
THE DUKE OF ARGYLL. 187
“If we get in the Duke of Argyll a fair statesman of the
second class—a capable man who can hold his own in a
debate, who can make ministerial statements with clear-
ness and brevity, and who can preside over a department
with something more than ordinary ducal efficiency—we
get a very useful article, and one which is by no means to
be despised. Even in a Cabinet there must be degrees of
ability. Only two or three men in any ministry reach the
first rank in statesmanship, and it is no small honor to any
man to hold a fair place amongst statesmen of the second
rank. -
“That the Duke's place in this class is a fair one cannot
be denied. As a debater, indeed, he rises very near to the
first class. His speeches are almost always powerful, and
they have at the same time a degree of finish which is rare
amongst politicians. On the front bench of his party in
the House of Lords he is, upon the whole, the most effi-
cient debater. He has not, of course, anything of Lord
Granville's wonderful tact; on the contrary, indeed, he
generally succeeds in irritating where he intends to con-
ciliate ; but, intellectually he has more power than the
leader of his party in the Upper House ; and, as he has a
sufficient amount of courage and a ready command of
words, he can hold his own very well against the best
speakers of the opposition.
“He is ambitious, of course; and seems especially to
aspire to fame as an orator—one of the consequences of
which weakness is that he thinks it necessary to inflict upon
the House, at the close of his more important speeches,
perorations carefully modelled upon those of Mr. Bright.
If he could but convince himself that he is not a second
I 88 - BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
Bright, he would do not a little to increase his reputation,
and diminish his unpopularity. As it is, however, it must
be admitted, that, when he has a business statement to
make, he always makes it with clearness and succinctness
—virtues which are, unfortunately, too rare.” +
The Duke of Argyll's career of authorship began at the
early age of nineteen, with the pamphlet already mentioned,
“Letter to the Peers, by a Peer's Son.” This related to
the celebrated Auchterarder case, which led to the disrup-
tion of the Free Church of Scotland ; and the substance of
this and one or two other similar pamphlets was reproduced
in a larger work, published in 1848, and styled “Presby-
tery Examined.” It contained a summary of the eccle-
siastical annals of Scotland since the Reformation. These
works attracted merely local interest, but his later scien-
tific writings, “The Reign of Law” (1866) and “Primae-
val Man” (1869), have been widely circulated and have
passed through many editions.
“The features which have marked the Parliamentary ora-
tions of the Duke of Argyll characterize him in literature.
There, too, he is essentially combative ; and he attacks the
greatest chiefs of research and speculation with the same
eager confidence as that which he displayed in his assaults
upon Lord Derby. He goes squaring round the circle of
the sciences, now aiming a blow at Mr. Darwin, now de-
livering a thrust at Professor Huxley or Professor Tyndall,
now skirmishing with Sir Charles Lyell and Sir John Lub-
bock, and finally launching out against Mr. Mill. The
spectacle is interesting if only as an illustration of courage.
* “Cabinet Portraits,” p. 177.
THE D UKE () F ARGYLL. 189
It is valuable, too, as giving in some degree the measure
of the Duke of Argyll as a writer. He belongs to the tribe
of Answerers. Every great writer has his Answerers, as the
nobler animals have their predaceous parasites. The An-
swerer is under no necessity of framing an original concep-
tion of his subject. He is not called upon to combine the
details of his knowledge into a harmonious and complete
whole. He does not strike out any original track of inves-
tigation. He simply follows the order of ideas of the writer
on whom he fastens, supplying what he thinks to be the
necessary contradictions and correctives. He dogs closely
the footsteps of the explorer, watching for those false steps
which the most successful pioneer cannot avoid, and which
are often the conditions of hitting at last on the true path.
This work, though not of a high order, is by no means
useless. The Answerer may be completely incapable of
evolving a lofty scientific conception, or framing a compre-
hensive theory. Protracted and difficult research may be
beyond him ; but nevertheless he may do a very useful
work in detecting a flaw of logic here, or an error of ob-
servation there ; and in giving clear form to the popular
conceptions, or the prevailing doctrines, with which a new
theory has to contend. This service the Duke of Argyll
has rendered very effectively in his “Reign of Law,’ and
his ‘Primaeval Man.” Both books were essentially the
works of an Answerer. They were parasitical books, so to
speak, deriving their life and support from greater works
of a higher organization ; but they are creditable specimens
of their sort. They belong to the order of speculation fostered
by the Victoria Society, and formerly represented by treatises
on the Harmony of Geology with the Mosaic Narrative.
I90 : BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
“Here we have a feature of the Duke of Argyll's scien-
tific and speculative writing, which somewhat diminishes
its value. It seems always to be animated by an ecclesi-
astical and theological after-thought; and to veil, when it
does not set forth, a religious apology.” +
The Duke of Argyll has a large family of children, the
eldest of whom, the Marquess of Lorne, married (March
21, 1871) the princess Louise, fourth daughter of Queen
Victoria. This is said to be the first instance in English
history of the marriage of a daughter of the reigning sove-
reign to a subject. This fact, with the independence shown
by the Duke in placing one of his sons in a counting-room
in New York and another in an English warehouse, has
attracted unusual attention to his domestic affairs. “The
Duke of Argyll has shown in social matters an inde-
pendence of mind which needs only to be transferred to
politics in order to enable him to do good service. In-
stead of acting in the spirit of Lord John Manners's immor-
tal couplet, which it is not necessary to requote, he has
perceived that if our old nobility is to live, it must not be
ashamed to associate itself with laws and learning, and
must court commerce, and the wealth that comes from
commerce. While through one of his sons he is in alliance
with royalty, through others he is or was connected with
the trade of London, Liverpool, and New York. ‘To my
own proper shame be it spoken,’ says Rob Roy in Scott's
novel, “that has a cousin wi' accounts, and yarn winnles,
and looms, and shuttles, like a mere mechanical person ; '
and the sentiment of Rob Roy would doubtless have been
* “Political Portraits,” p. 276.
THE DUIQE OF ARGYLL. I9 I
echoed by the McCallum More of his day. That the
McCallum More of our own day has overcome it, and has
entered into the views and practice of the Baillie Nicoll
Jarvie, shows a shrewdness of perception and a power of
subduing prejudice to common sense which ought to be
of use in the conduct of public affairs.” +
* “Political Portraits,” p. 283.
P A RT II.
MR. DISRAELI'S MINISTRY.
–0 O-0–
“JoE ATLEE, chatting with Lord Kilgobbin's son Dick about ‘the
mighty intelligences that direct us,” observes, “It is no exaggeration
that I say if you were to be in the Home Office and I at the For-
eign Office without our names being divulged, there is not a man or
woman in England would be the wiser or the worse; though if either
of us were to take charge of the engine on the Holyhead line there
would be a smash or an explosion before we reached Rugby.” Mr.
Lever knew what he was writing about, and that he has not been
led away from the truth by the lure of an epigram will appear if we
reflect for a moment that Mr. Gathorne Hardy has succeeded Mr.
Cardwell at the War Office, Mr. Ward Hunt supersedes Mr. Goschen
at the Admiralty, Lord John Manners occupies Mr. Monsell's desk
at the Post Office, and, as happened after that fearful bout of cursing
on the part of the Cardinal Lord Archbishop of Rheims, nobody
seems one bit the worse—or the better either, for the matter of
that.” &
* “Men and Manner in Parliament,” p. 105.
VII.
LORD CAIRNS.
Fºl HE author of “Political Portraits” has pointed
3 out that the class of lawyer-statesmen is less con-
º spicuous in England than in America. “The condi-
tion under which law and politics are combined in England
commonly sacrifices politics to law, though it ends some-
times in sacrificing law to politics. The House of Com-
mons is generally the shortest road to Westminster Hall.
Rising lawyers enter Parliament as the means of advancing
themselves in their profession, and of course they are not
likely to devote themselves very strenuously or very con-
scientiously, as for its own sake, to that which is with them
but an instrument. To this fact may be attributed the
habitual flexibility of lawyers as politicians, and the slight
impression they usually make on public affairs in England.
In the United States, on the other hand, the bar is usually
the path along which ambition makes its way into the
broader career of Dublic life. The consequence is that


196 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
while the class of great lawyer-statesmen seems to be al-
most extinct here, it has contributed, and still contributes,
the best names to American politics.” +
The most conspicuous remaining example of this class is
to be found in the present Lord High Chancellor of England,
—the late Conservative leader of the House of Lords, “Lord
Cairns,” continues the writer just quoted, “occupies a rather
peculiar position in the House of Lords and in the Conserva-
tive party. He is one of two retired leaders—Lord Malmes-
bury being the other. Both of these gentlemen found their
health unequal to the anxieties of the charge committed to
them ; though there were no public symptoms of wavering
confidence on the part of their followers. They now with
a good grace cede at least a nominal priority to the Duke
of Richmond. A dethroned sovereign is seldom very
heartily a loyal subject. He has usually slumbering pre-
tensions, which may at any moment be revived ; and he
acquiesces rather than obeys.” -
Justin McCarthy, writing in 1870 an essay on “English
Toryism and its Leaders,” pointed out that the Tory party
in England seldom had genuine Tories for leaders. “The
Tories in the House of Commons, the country gentlemen
of England,-the men whose ancestors came over, per-
haps, with the Conqueror, the men who imbibed family
Toryism from the breasts of their mothers, are driven, when
they want a capable leader, to follow a renegade Radical,
the son of a middle-class Jew. In like manner the Tory
Lords, also sadly needing an efficient leader, are compelled
to take up with a lawyer from Belfast, the son of middle-
* “Political Portraits,” p. 165.
LORD CAIRNS. I97
class parents in the North of Ireland, who has fought his
way by sheer talent and energy into the front rank of the
bar, into the front bench of the Parliamentary Opposition,
and at last into a peerage. Lord Cairns is a very capable
man ; his sudden rise into high place and influence proves
the fact of itself, for he was not a young man when he en-
tered Parliament, obscure and unknown, and he is now
only in the prime of life, while he leads the Opposition in
the House of Lords. He is one of the most fluent and
effective debaters in either House; he has great command
of telling argument ; his training at the bar gives him the
faculty of making the very most, and at the shortest notice,
of all the knowledge and all the facts he can bring to bear
on any question. He has shown more than once that he
is capable of pouring forth a powerful, almost, indeed, a
passionate invective. An orator in the highest sense he
certainly is not. No gleam of the poetic softens or bright-
ens his lithe and nervous logic; no deep feeling animates,
inspires, and sanctifies it. He has made no speeches which
anybody hereafter will care to read. He has made, he
will make, no mark upon his age. When he dies, he
wholly dies. But, living, he is a skillful and a capable man
—far better qualified to be a party leader than an Erskine
or a Grattan would be. A North of Ireland Presbyterian,
he has made his way to a peerage, and now to be the leader
of peers, with less of native genius than that which con-
ducted Wolfe Tone, another North of Ireland Presbyterian,
to rebellion and failure and a bloody death. He has,
above all things, skill and discretion ; and he can lead the
Tory party well, so long as no great cause has to be vindi-
cated, no splendid phantom of a principle maintained.
198 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
His name and his antecedents are useful to us now, inas-
much as they serve still farther to illustrate the fact that
Toryism is not led by Tories.” +
Sir Hugh McCalmont Cairns, now Lord Cairns, is the
second son of Wm. Cairns, Esq., of Cultra, County Down,
Ireland. He was born in December, 1819, was educated
at Trinity College, Dublin, and was called to the bar in
1844. In 1852 he was elected to Parliament from Belfast ;
in 1858 was knighted and made Solicitor-General ; in 1866
was made successively Attorney-General and Lord Justice
of Appeal ; and on Feb. 23, 1867, was raised to the peer-
age as Baron Cairns of Garmoyle, County Antrim, Ireland.
In 1868, and again in 1874, he was constituted Lord High
Chancellor of England. He married Mary Harriet, eldest
daughter of John MacNeile, Esq., of Parkmount, County
Antrim, and has six children.
“Lord Cairns,” says the author of “Cabinet Portraits,”
“is allied to none of the noble families on an equality
with whom he has now been placed. The blood of no
great master of men in by-gone ages flows in his veins.
His life has not been passed in the salon of the nobleman,
amidst the refinements and the amenities which surround
the great. He is sprung of the people—the second son of
an Irish gentleman ; his life has been spent in ceaseless
labor—labor of a kind of which the Howards, and the
Gowers, and the Cavendishes can have no knowledge, ex-
cept by repute—labor first for the mere necessaries of life,
then for fame and for power. Not until these things had
been gained—not until, by slow, laborious steps, he had
* “Modern Leaders,” by Justin McCarthy, p. 132.
LORD CAIRNS. I99
raised himself on the most difficult of all ascents, was he
in a position to compete successfully with men like Lord
Granville in that other kind of labor to which the highest
are not strangers—labor on behalf of a party or a principle.
“Looking at the two men as they sit opposite to each
other in the House of Lords this afternoon, one may see
even in their personal appearance some indication of the
diversity of the paths which have brought them at last to
the same level of equality. Lord Granville has been already
sketched in these pages. Lord Cairns, who now sits with
outstretched legs, folded arms, and drooping head, is con-
siderably taller than the leader of the Ministerialists. He
has that wiry, well-knit frame, the possession of which must
help any man so greatly in his struggle with the world ;
but that he has used his strength, spent it freely, if not
prodigally, in the battle through which he has passed, is
proved, if by nothing else, by the pallor of his fine intel-
lectual countenance—a countenance clean-cut like that of
a Greek statue, in repose somewhat severe of aspect, but at
all times stamped with the unmistakable impress of power.
“He looks wonderfully young, this gentleman whose
fortune it has been to lead the most aristocratic party in
the most aristocratic assemblage in the world. Around
him are gathered other peers whose ages are duly recorded
in that most impertinent of books, the “Scarlet-bound
Bible of the British Tuft-hunter.” They are men who were
born to earldoms and dukedoms, and whose lives have
been spent, as it were, under shelter; but Lord Cairns
looks younger than those of them who were born in the
same year as himself; and that he is still in the very prime
of life, and in the fullest possession of physical as well as
2OO BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
mental strength, is evident. And yet how different a career
his has been to that of his compeers
“When the story of his life comes to be written, it will
read more like a romance than a reality; and the young
men of many a future generation might be pointed to him
as the exemplar whom they must copy if they would achieve
success. One can Scarcely believe, looking at the quiet,
reserved, ‘Self-contained', and somewhat frosty man, who
sits to-day on the front Opposition bench of the House of
Peers, that he can really have passed through such a strug-
gle as that which lay between his starting-point in life, and
the eminence at which he has now arrived. -
“He began life at the bar, and so short a time is it since
he received his first brief, that to himself it must seem but
as yesterday that he was a struggling junior looking for-
ward to the day when he should ‘take silk' as one of the
bare possibilities of a remote future. But his great talents
and his unequaled industry helped him in his legal prac-
tice as they helped him in everything else; and by the time
he reached his thirtieth year, he was already well-known in
those wide-spreading circles which have the woolsack as
their center.
“In 1852, when he had entered upon his thirty-third
year, he had gained that great step in the battle of life from
which a man of genius may fight his way to almost any
eminence—a seat in the House of Commons. He was
returned for Belfast, and he soon made his mark in the
House. A staunch Conservative, an enlightened and lib-
eral advocate of the principles of his party, possessed of
remarkable ability as a public speaker, and distinguished
for the clearness and argumentative power with which he
LORD CAIRN.S. 2O I
could lay the facts of a case before an audience, he was
soon marked out for preferment. Lord Derby and Mr.
Disraeli were alike able to appreciate his talents, and the
post of Solicitor-General, with the honor of knighthood,
was speedily conferred upon him.
“Sir Hugh Cairns fulfilled the comparatively humble
duties of ‘Mr. Solicitor’ with admirable tact and power;
he became known in the House of Commons as one of the
most brilliant members of a party which has had many
brilliant adherents, and it was not long before he had
gained such a standing in that most critical of assemblages,
that the news that “Cairns was up sufficed to fill the
benches in the House, and to empty the dining-room and
library. But Sir Hugh had allied himself to a party whose
lot it was to spend many years in the cold shade of
opposition ; and for a long period his professional advance-
ment was, in consequence, at a standstill. He gained
fresh laurels at the bar; he became yet more fully recog-
nized in the House as one of the leaders of the Opposi-
tion ; he labored unweariedly both in his profession and
in Parliament, but he had to see the highest honors which
a ministry could bestow enjoyed by men whose inferiority
to himself they themselves would have been the last to dis-
pute, whilst no reward but the approval of his own con-
Science followed his political exertions.
“The turn of the wheel came at length, however, and
in 1866 Hugh McCalmont Cairns followed his party across
the floor of the House, and became Attorney-General to
. . . the Derby Administration. But this was not the highest
reward which the leader whom he had served so faithfully
had in store for hism. -
2O2 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
“In October of the same year he quitted the House
of Commons, amidst the regrets of men of all parties, and
accepted the easy and dignified post of a Lord Justice of
Appeal. Very soon the Ministry found reason to regret
that his brilliant talents were thus lost to his party, and in
1867, the man who had been a struggling stuff-gownsman
fifteen years before, was raised to the peerage. In the fol-
lowing year, when Mr. Disraeli succeeded Lord Derby in
the Premiership, he did not forget the faithful friend who
had for so many years been his constant ally on the front
Opposition bench of the Lower House. Almost his first
act upon receiving the commands of her Majesty to form
an administration, was to place the Great Seal at the dis-
posal of Lord Cairns, who thus, at the age of forty-nine,
and in spite of the adverse influences surrounding him in
consequence of his political creed, attained the highest
honor of his profession, and inscribed his name in the long
list of those great lawyers who have occupied the wool-
Sack.
“To most men who have fought their way up to this
eminence, the Lord Chancellorship is a point at which
they are content to rest and be thankful. They can go no
further; they have reached the highest stone of the legal
pyramid ; and though some of them may be inclined, like
Alexander, to weep over the fact that there are no fresh
legal worlds to conquer, or may even, like Lord Brougham,
meditate a new career in another country, they are
for the most part satisfied with the result of labors, the
extent of which is known only to themselves, and settle
down quietly to the enjoyment of a peerage and a pension.
But in the case of Lord Cairns his tenure of the woolsack &
LORD CAIRNS. 2O3
would seem only to have been a fresh starting-point in his
Career.
“As Lord Chancellor he not only fulfilled his pro-
fessional duties to the satisfaction of the legal world, but
took an active part in the politics of the day. It was not,
however, until the close of the session of 1868, when,
exhausted with the labors of his double duties as President
of the House of Lords and a Chancery Judge, that Lord
Cairns made the great speech which marked him out for still
higher party preferment than any which he had yet received.
The speech was that upon the Irish Church Suspensory
Bill, which had come up from the lower chamber. Never
will those who witnessed the brilliant scene presented by
the House of Peers on that memorable night forget it. .
Our hereditary legislators had mustered in stronger force
than upon almost any previous occasion within the recol-
lection of living men ; the galleriea were crowded by the
peeresses, dazzling in their beauty and their jewels; the
most notable men in the House of Commons were huddled
together at the bar, or on the steps of the throne; whilst
at the side of the woolsack stood the Lord Chancellor, pale
and emaciated, evidently very ill, but possessed by a spirit
which no physical infirmities could overcome, and pour-
ing forth for hours an unbroken stream of clear and logi-
cal eloquence against the measure before the House.
Every one in the crowded chamber listened spell-bound.
Men who had known Hugh Cairns for a score of years
were lost in admiration at the power which he had now
developed, and which so far surpassed all their previous
experience of him ; cheer upon cheer rolled from the
ministerial benches at the close of each glowing period,
2O4 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
and when the end was reached, and the Lord Chancellor
resumed his seat upon the woolsack, the applause came
from both sides of the House, whilst the very ladies rose
in their enthusiasm and joined in the general approbation
by the waving of fans and handkerchiefs.
“It was a great and almost unexampled success, and its
effect upon the life of Lord Cairns has not yet ceased.
Mr. Disraeli, as all the world knows, left office in the fol-
lowing December, and when Parliament met in February,
1869, it was announced that the leadership of the Con-
servative party in the House of Peers had been assumed by
the ex-Lord Chancellor. No one who is not intimately
acquainted with the inner spirit of English social life can
appreciate the full extent of the honor which was thus
bestowed upon Lord Cairns. For centuries it has been
one of the traditions of our aristocracy that they should be
led in their own chamber only by one of themselves, by a
man whose fathers had for a dozen generations been
amongst our born law-givers, and who was himself allied
to the leading members of both parties in the House.
Lord Cairns, of course, had no pretensions of this kind.
It was but seventeen years since he was elected for Belfast,
and entered the popular chamber as an obscure Commoner.
Only seventeen years And in that time he had passed
through the successive stages of legal honor until he had
reached the highest ; had obtained a coronet, and had the
leadership of his party in the most aristocratic assemblage
In the world bestowed upon him by acclamation | *
Lord Cairns “is a man of keen and sharp intellect, of
* “Cabinet Portraits,” p. 86.
LORD CAIRNS. 205
quick perceptions, and of definite convictions. His lan-
guage is clear and precise, and even grammatical—the last
a peculiarity which distinguishes him from almost all the
Parliamentary orators of his day. But he has one fatal
defect. To use a phrase of the actors, he is without the
sentiment of his part. He does not look the leader of one
of the great aristocratic parties—of the great aristocratic
party—of England ; and he has always apparently been
conscious of this. In the tones of his voice, in manner,
bearing, dress even, Lord Cairns always seems slightly out
of place between Lord Salisbury and the Duke of Rich-
mond. * * *
“Lord Cairns's manner in the House of Lords resembles
that of the trusted professional adviser of a great family at
my lord's breakfast or dinner table, or out shooting with
him in the coverts. There is every disposition to treat him
as of the same set ; he has every disposition to be so
treated. There is no offensive patronage on the one side ;
no unworthy flattery or obsequiousness on the other ; still
there is a consciousness of difference and incompatibility.
A line, merely imaginary, it may be, as devoid of breadth
as the line of mathematics, but as long as their intercourse,
seems to separate the two men as completely as if it were
a gulf. The one cannot step out of the magic circle
which hems him in ; the other cannot step within the cir-
cumference which keeps him out. Mr. Mortimer Gaze-
bee, the family solicitor, may marry Lady Amelia de
Courcy ; but though the streams may flow, like the Rhone
and the Arve, in the same channel, they keep their dis-
tinctness after the junction, and it is long before they really
blend. Politically, Lord Cairns's position has been some-
2O6 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
thing like this. Even when he was nominally leader of
the Conservative party in the House of Lords he always
spoke as if he were rather its professional adviser and
trusted agent than its chief or head. There is no reason
to suppose that his mercantile origin and professional ca-
reer at all interfered with his success as a leader, except as
they affected his own habits of mind, character, and feel-
ing. The Tory peers would no doubt have loyally and
frankly accepted Lord Cairms, if Lord Cairns could have
loyally and frankly accepted himself. They would have
had no misgivings if he had had none. Though a gentle-
man of the middle class to begin with, he is as good a
gentleman by birth, education, and character as any of
them. But the brisk professional manner, the knowing
look, the very attitude and gestures with which he pulls
himself together to make a smart reply, as from a clever
agent to a grumbling tenant or a troublesome mortgagee,
have probably disagreeable associations for the majority of
the peers, in addition to their aesthetic objections on
grounds of taste and style. It is not surprising, therefore,
that so long as Lord Salisbury and Lord Derby stand aloof
from the leadership of the party, the Conservative peers,
in spite of the waste of time involved, should prefer an ar-
rangement which allows the Duke of Richmond to blun-
der out their unaffected sentiments and his, and permits
Lord Cairns later in the evening to explain to his friends,
to his opponents, and to the Duke himself, what the Duke
really means. Their relation to each other resembles that
of the wooden old sergeant and his clearer-minded and
more articulately-speaking wife in one of Dickens' novels.
‘Lord Cairns is correct in his way of giving my opinions.
LORD CAIRNS. 207
—hear me out,’ is the admonition which the Duke of
Richmond seems sometimes to be mentally addressing
to both sides of the House, as he listens, with some curi-
osity but more complacency, to the minute and lengthened
expositions of his noble and learned friend.
“Lord Cairns had attained the first place at the equity
bar, or at least he divided the first place with Lord Sel-
borne, before his elevation to the highest judicial post in
the kingdom. In the Lords, as formerly in the Commons,
he is essential to his party in debate. What he has to say
is enforced by the credit derived from an unblemished per-
sonal character, and by a Parliamentary career as straight-
forward as is compatible with the windings and doublings
of Conservative policy, and as consistent as the political
self-contradictions of his chiefs would allow. Add the
training and habits of an English equity lawyer to the es-
sentially Scotch character of an Irishman of Ulster—for
there is nothing Irish in Lord Cairns except the habit of
Substituting in speech the diphthong of for the vowel i-
and the two main constituents of Lord Cairns's political
composition are brought together. Cold, clear, shrewd,
and disputatious, prone now to reduce great issues to
Small verbal quibbles, and now to see portentous conse-
quences in minute verbal distinctions—a tendency not
without its uses, though as a prevailing habit the mark of
a somewhat petty order of mind—Lord Cairns lacks the
largeness of view and the grasp of principle which are
necessary to transform the political lawyer, or the lawyer-
like politician, into the statesman. His eloquence par-
takes, of course, of the character of his mind. It is fro-
zen oratory. It flows like water from a glacier; or, rather,
2O8 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
it does not flow at all ; for though Lord Cairns never hesi-
tates or recalls a phrase, he can scarcely be called in the
proper sense a fluent speaker. His words rather drop with
monotonous and inexorable precision than run on in a
continuous stream. The several stages of his speech are
like steps cut out in ice, as sharply defined, as smooth and
as cold. Into all the subjects with which he deals he
brings the habits of mind and methods of argument prop-
er to the Chancery barrister.” +
* “Political Portraits,” pp. 175-,80.
VIII.
THE DUKE OF RICHMOND.
º
sº
*-
Richmond to be chosen unanimously as the leader
ºšll of the Conservative party in the House of Lords,
his political biography has yet to be written. The Duke's
personal modesty and the force of circumstances have com->
bined to prevent his taking so active a part in political life
as might otherwise have been the case; and to the outside
world he is comparatively an unknown and untried man.
“Nevertheless, no one who knows much of the inner
life of politics can doubt that the Conservative peers chose
wisely when they called upon the Duke of Richmond, a
few years ago, to take the leadership vacated by Lord
Cairns. It is quite true that the Duke does not possess
and does not pretend to possess those higher qualities of
statesmanship which distinguish Lord Salisbury and Lord
Derby ; and it is equally true that he is not, like Lord
Cairns, blessed with the faculty of thinking upon one's


2 IO BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
legs, which is so great an advantage to a party leader.
Nevertheless, he has many admirable qualities which tend
to fit him for the post which he has now assumed, and,
without venturing upon invidious comparisons with other
distinguished men who sit beside him upon the front Oppo-
sition bench in the House of Lords, we cannot hesitate to
acknowledge that he was the best man available to his party
for the leadership.
“There are many able men seated near him, but upon
the whole there are none—always making the exceptions
we have already named—who have the requisite qualifica-
tions of a leader to so large an extent as the Duke of Rich-
mond. More than once in the course of these papers we
have had to point out what are the qualifications required
in a party leader. Tact and temper are perhaps the most
important. Clearness of statement is another hardly less
so ; facility of speech is equally valuable. But over and
above all these there must be the power of discerning the
weak point in the enemy's harness, and of so directing the
arrows of the Opposition that they may strike between the
joints of the armor. No doubt this last qualification is a
very unamiable one ; but in plain words it means simply
the power to detect the vulnerable points about the foe,
and to strike sharp and strong at those points. Unamiable
as this quality may seem to be, however, it is a very essen-
tial one ; if our party leaders did not possess it they would
soon convert a well-organized army into a rabble, or they
would give to the party which was in the ascendant for the
time a complete immunity from the fear of hostile criticism.
“It is because the Duke of Richmond is well supplied
with these varied qualifications that we venture to antici-
THE DUKE OF RICHMOND. 2 I I
pate for him a successful career as leader of the Conserva-
tive peers. He is not a statesman of the first rank, but he
has that which is next to the highest statesmanship, tact.
He can see which course abounds with shoals and quick-
sands, and which affords room for fair and successful
sailing. It would be flattery to say that he could of his
own wit devise a policy for a great party, but give him a
policy to carry out and he will show a quick appreciation
at once of the strength and the weakness of that policy,
and will bring it to a successful end with greater ease than
some men of deeper thought would display under similar
circumstances.
“He cannot profess to compete with Lord Granville in
the possession of that exquisite urbanity which makes the
Foreign Secretary the ideal representative of “sweetness
and light’ in the Cabinet, but the Duke of Richmond is
nevertheless blessed with an eminently happy temper. He
has not, for instance, the crotchety irritableness of Lord
Russell or the Celtic impetuosity of the Duke of Argyll.
He can present an unruffled front to the enemy even in the
heat of an angry debate, and he can prove at all times
that he is not blind to the excellencies of the party to
which he is opposed.
‘‘It is wonderful to observe how great an influence a
little exhibition of an ability to appreciate the good quali-
ties of opponents has in soothing the asperities of debate.
There are men in the House of Commons at this moment
whose popularity is remarkable, and who enjoy a reputa-
tion for statesmanlike ability which it is certain cannot be
based upon any actual achievements. When the character
of these men is inquired into, the only manner in which it
2 [2 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
is possible to account for the position they occupy is by
ascribing it to their fairness toward those to whom they
are opposed.
“The Duke of Richmond, therefore, having frequently
shown that, even when differing most widely from those
who sit on the opposite side of the House, he can yet rec-
Ognize and appreciate their good qualities, possesses one
of the most valuable of the qualifications which the party
leader ought to have. Clearness of statement again is not
the least important qualification of a party leader, and here
those who have heard the brief and business-like speeches
of the Duke of Richmond cannot question that he pos-
sesses this qualification to a large extent. There have been
cases quite recently of statesmen who, though admirably
adapted in all other respects to lead a party, have never-
theless failed utterly in the attempt to do so, simply because
they had not that command of words which is necessary to
make a statement in such a manner that it may be under-
stood by those to whom it is addressed.” + + 4 +
“Under the Parliamentary system, the tongue is almost
as essential as the brain ; and where complete command
over the former is not possessed, a superabundant Supply
of the latter cannot make up for the deficiency. The
Duke of Richmond, however, is a clear, concise, and
effective speaker. With no pretensions to the reputation
of an orator, he can say what he wants to say in
language which everybody will understand, and he has not
unfrequently made speeches which have been both valuable
in themselves, and powerful influences upon the course
of a great debate. * * * * - ~
“We do not pretend, of course, that the Duke of Rich-
THE DUKE OF RICHMOND. 2 I 3
mond is equal in this respect to either of the leaders
in the House of Commons, but he is nevertheless a ready
speaker—he does not need to prepare his shots with labo-
rious care in his study before he fires them, and that
is, after all, the main thing. All that is wanted of him as
leader is that he should be able not only to express
his thoughts clearly, but to do so without any longer
preparation, any more complete arrangement of his ideas,
than that which he can have in the heat of a debate, or
whilst the opponent to whom he is to reply is yet speaking,
“Of the Duke's politics we need not say much. He is a
most consistent member of the Conservative party; being
perhaps as much a Conservative of the modern School
as any Duke can be expected to be. He would not
be likely to adhere to a form which had no longer
any meaning or vitality ; nor is he one who will advocate
any policy merely because it is the policy of which
a majority of his party approves. Indeed, on this point he
gave clear proof of his independence in 1869, when
he severed for a time his connection with the Conservative
leaders, because he found himself unable to act with them
upon the question of the Irish Church. Independence in
forming opinions, and courage in expressing them, are
not to be denied to the man who could do this under
such circumstances as those which then prevailed.
“The Duke occupied a seat in the House of Commons
for nearly twenty years, thus gaining an admirable political
training ; he has been President of the Poor Law Board
and the Board of Trade, in which capacities he acquitted
himself with marked success.”
* “Cabinet Portraits,” pp. 210, 213, 215.”
2 I 4 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
His Grace, Charles Henry Gordon-Lennox, sixth Duke
of Richmond, is the son of the fifth Duke ; his mother
being Caroline, daughter of the Marquis of Anglesey.
He inherits his ancestral honors, such as they are, from the
first Duke, who was the illegitimate son of Charles II. by
the Duchess of Portsmouth. The present Duke was born
February 27, 1818; was educated at Christ Church,
Oxford; became a captain in the army in 1844, and was
aide-de-Camp successively to the Duke of Wellington, and
to Viscount Hardinge. He was President of the Board
of Trade in 1857–8, and was appointed President of the
Poor Law Board and sworn a Privy Councilor in 1859.
He represented West Sussex in Parliament as a Conserva-
tive from 1841, till October 21, 1860, when he succeeded
to his father's rank and title. Since February 26, 1870, he
has been the recognized leader of the Conservative party in
the House of Lords, and he is now President of the Council.
He married, November 28, 1843, Frances Harriet, daughter
of Algernon Frederick Greville, Esq., and has six children.
“If it were not for the good faith and zeal of his allies,”
says the critic of the Daily Wews, “the Duke of Rich-
mond's leadership would be about as comfortable as
Henry VI.'s Monarchy, disputed by pretenders, and
swayed hither and thither by turbulent barons. Not only
do Lord Cairns and Lord Malmesbury warn him of
the transitoriness of all human greatness, and offer a
service rather of grace than of allegiance ; but Lord
Salisbury and Lord Derby still more vividly remind
him that the etymology dux d non ducendo is as plausible as
that of lucus d mom lucendo. In fact, there are at least five
Richmonds in the field of the House of Lords; and the
THE DUKE OF RICHMOND. 2 I 5
actual Richmond is, with one exception, the least formi-
dable of them all. As a debater, and in force of character
and intellect, he is, perhaps, superior to Lord Malmes-
bury ; and that, whatever it may amount to, is the most
that can be said for him.”
IX.
THE EARL OF DERBY.
Rºll HEN an American takes his first look at the Eng-
§ W; lish House of Lords, he has a vague expectation of
WNS
§ Aft
Aść finding himself in the presence of men of peculiarly
high-bred aspect. I remember an American lady who came
away delightcd because she had seen one such man in the
lobby, but he turned out to be Mr. Russell Sturgis, her
own fellow-countryman. In general, so decisively are such
expectations disappointed that one is apt to go to the
other extreme and to remark, with the author of “Ginx's
Baby”—“Why noble earls should be so ugly, is a prob-
lem in nature.” Yet there is a high-bred style of ugliness,
which would not so surprise us, in Such an assemblage,
as does the essentially bourgeois look that marks some of
the best-known noblemen. The late Lord Althorp is said
to have remarked, in regard to himself, “Nature intended
me for a grazier, but men insist upon making me a states-
73
man.” In his case this was merely an assertion of simple
• se *
º *: §






THE EARL OF IDERBY. 217
and rural tastes; but something of this impression is
really made by the personal appearance of Lord Derby.
To an American, in whose mind this earldom is associated
with the Battle of Bosworth Field, with two centuries of
almost independent sovereignty in the Isle of Man, with
the heroic defense of Latham House, and with Scott's ‘‘Pev-
eril of the Peak,” the impression is a disappointment. If a
man in this generation insists on being Earl of Derby, he
owes it to Republican visitors, at least, that he should wear
a presence worthy of the name. If the imposing spectacle
is to be kept up, let the performer befit the part.
This fact is plainly recognized by the keen critic of the
Daily Wews, who thus contrasts the present Lord Derby
with his brilliant father, whom Bulwer called “the Rupert
of debate : ”
“The late Lord Derby was probably the last specimen
—there has been none certainly since him—of the purely
aristocratic statesman. His temper and prejudices were
no doubt common to him with many of his party; but
only in his case were they associated with the genius and
force of character which made them conspicuous. There
was something knightly in his bearing and tone, which
carried him through transactions other than chivalrous
without forfeiting his title to that favorite epithet. The
present Lord Derby represents the transition of the
English aristocracy into a plutocracy, or rather its merging
into the plutocracy which has grown up around it, and add-
ed immensely to its wealth. The looms of Manchester
and the docks of Liverpool, which have doubled the rent-
roll of Knowsley, seem to have had some moral influence
on its present lord. There is a nameless air of the count-
IO
2 I 8 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
ing-house and of the City about him. It is no doubt these
qualities which have attracted to him the confidence of
such men as Mr. Samuel Laing. His Toryism is bourgeois,
as unlike that of Mr. Disraeli as can possibly be. Indeed,
the friendship of these two eminent men is a singular in-
stance that dissimilar characters are reciprocally more at-
tractive than those which resemble each other. Mr. Dis-
raeli's dedication of the expurgated “Revolutionary Epick”
to Lord Derby is a curious monument of a curious friend-
ship. As cold natures seek the fire, so level and sober
characters seem to find a charm in the escapades and
caprices of more impulsive and whimsical tempers. * * *
“Lord Derby has, in all probability, many years of pub-
lic life before him, which are sure to be respectable and use-
ful; but which do not promise a really great, still less a
brilliant, career. There is the half of a true statesman in
him, but, for lack of the other half, it is likely to be com-
paratively unproductive. A malign fortune has distributed
over two generations and heads of the House of Stanley
the qualities which, if they had been concentrated in one,
would have given, perhaps, its greatest statesman since
Chatham to England. If the present Lord Derby had the
imagination, the impulse, and the eager combative spirit
of his father ; or if the father had had the knowledge, the
candor, and the sober judgment of his son, all rivalry
would have been driven out of the field. As it is, each
has lacked more completely than is usual the Special gifts
of the other, and the physical dissimilarity which was
apparent through the strange family resemblance of voice
and feature illustrated this mental and moral contrast, If
we were to apply the doctrine and language of the older
THE EARL OF DERBY. 2 I 9
psychology, which distinguished three souls in the same
organization—an animal, a rational, and a spiritual soul—
we might say that the present Lord Derby differs from his
predecessor by the lack of the higher or more spiritual
soul. The ethereal fire seems to be withdrawn ; and the
whole nature is heavier with a grosser clay. He is his
father with all the ‘go’ taken out of him, and a good deal
of solid stuff put into him. Instead of the Rupert of de-
bate, whose ringing and flashing words seemed almost to
anticipate his thoughts, so that the orator did not know
what he was going to say until he was ‘going ' to say it no
more and had actually said it, and whose own voice seemed
to convey his meaning to him and to his hearers simulta-
neously, we have a speaker who never trusts himself with-
out paper, who is incapable apparently of uttering half a
dozen continuous sentences unless they are before him in
round text or in clear print, whose Ministerial answers to
questions were always more or less furtively read, and
whose longer speeches are essays as carefully prepared as
if they were intended for the Quarterly Review instead of
for the House of Lords or the platform. The late Lord
Derby plunged into debate, eager to “drink delight of
battle with his Peers,’ careless of the blows he received,
and thinking only of the strokes he gave. The present
Lord Derby is almost a non-combatant even in the very
thick of the fight, in which he makes his appearance like
a herald with a proclamation.”
“The position Lord Derby holds in the State affords an
instance, extremely rare, of an English politician whose
* “Political Portraits,” pp. 96, 99.
22O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
reputation has been made by panegyrics in newspapers and
in the absence of any foundation adequate to the super-
structure. A long time ago, whilst the earl was still Lord
Stanley, he made a speech somewhere which some leading
newspaper eulogized as containing ‘a common-sense view
of the question.' On a subsequent occasion his Lordship
delivered another address on a different subject at a new
place, and three newspapers simultaneously published
leading articles, in which it was remarked that ‘Ilord Stan-
ley shad taken a common-sense view of the question.’
Since that period the ball thus set rolling has gathered im-
petus and bulk, till to-day the morning after the delivery
of any speech by the Earl of Derby is certain to be jour-
malistically marked with a score of white chalks pointing
out that here at last we have ‘the common-sense view of
the question.’ To say that the earth is round when it is
open to a man to allege that it is flat, is obviously to take a
common-sense view of the question. But there is nothing
very new or helpful in the assertion, and much of Lord Der-
by's public utterance is not beyond the charge of being akin
to this sort of ‘common sense.’ It will be remembered what
an ecstasy of delight we were all thrown into only a few
months ago when his Lordship, addressing a Young Men's
Association in Lancashire, told, the enthralled audience to
read good books, to be industrious, to be moral, and to
take care of their health. Here truly was ‘the common-
sense view of the question of life, and though upon
analysis we seem to have heard or read it all before, we are
none the less conscious of the Earl of Derby's claim upon
our admiration, or less profuse in our applause of his
sterling qualities. It may be that Lord Derby is a
TIIE EARL OF DERBY. 22 I
plain sort of man, of phlegmatical temperament, gifted
with a full average measure of intelligence, which he
has cultivated with much industry, and which he ap-
plies to the passing events of the day with fairly successful
issues.”
Edward Henry Smith Stanley, fifteenth Earl of Derby,
is the eldest son of the fourteenth Earl, his mother being
the Honorable Emma Caroline Wilbraham, daughter of
Edward, Lord Skelmersdale. The elder Lord Derby was
well known in America, both as a statesman and as an
author, his translation of Homer having been reprinted
in the United States. The present Earl was born at
Knowsley Park, July 21, 1826; was educated at Trin-
ity College, Cambridge ; failed to be chosen to Parlia-
ment for Lancashire, in March, 1848 ; made a tour
through the United States, Canada, and the West Indies,
and was returned to Parliament for Lyme Rogis during
his absence. He made his first speech in 1850, on
the condition of the sugar colonies. During his absence
in India, in 1852, he was appointed Under-Secretary
for Foreign Affairs, in his father's first administration ;
in 1853, he submitted a plan for the Reform of Indian
Administration, and the essential features of this scheme
were adopted in 1858. In 1855, he declined a position in
the Cabinet under Lord Palmerston ; in 1858, he became
Secretary for the Colonies, in his father's second Cabinet,
and afterwards President of the Board of Control, with the
title of Her Majesty's Commissioner for the affairs of. In-
dia. The transfer of the management of East Indian af-
* “Men and Manner in Parliament,” p. 263.
222 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
fairs from the East India Company to the officers of the
Crown took place under his direction, and he became
first Secretary of State for India. In his father's third
Cabinet, he held the position of Foreign Secretary,
holding that office from 1866 until the accession of
Mr. Gladstone to the Premiership in 1868. In Octo-
ber, 1869, he entered the House of Lords, on the
death of his father ; and in February, 1874, resumed
the Foreign Office under Mr. Disraeli. He was married
in 1870, to the Dowager Marchioness of Salisbury, but has
no children.
“It is no easy task,” says Wemyss Reid, “to decide the
position which Lord Derby holds in the political world.
He is a Conservative, and he has proved his fidelity to his
party at a heavy cost to himself; but he enjoys almost as
much of the respect and esteem of Liberals as of Conser-
vatives, and on three successive occasions he has been
asked to take high office under a Whig Premier. He
stands alone therefore, a party-man and yet not a party-
man. * * * *
“But as Lord Derby—who is, after all, better able to
form an opinion on the point than anybody else—tells us
that he is a Conservative, and as the whole tenor of his
life bears out that assertion, we see no reason for doubting
where to place him. The Liberals have often claimed him
as one of themselves ; but they have yet to make out a
case in support of their claim which will be really conclu-
sive. - . . .
“Whilst, in one respect, however, he is a party man,
there is a sense in which it may be said that:he belongs to
no party. He has never given up to party talents meant
THE EARL OF DERBY. 223
\
for mankind; he has never allowed those party prejudices
and passions, to which almost all men are liable, to blind
his vision or to warp his judgment; he has never, we be-
lieve, made a speech in or out of the House of Commons,
which was only a party speech, and that is more than can
be said of any other living politician.
“Something, no doubt, of his peculiar position in the
political world, is due to his temperament. No one who
has seen Lord Derby, or heard him speak, would be likely
to fall into the error of conceiving that, under any circum-
stances, he could be swayed by violent passions.
“His temperament is phlegmatic to a degree very rare
in England ; in his mode of speech—the slow, deliberate
utterance of carefully-weighed words—he shows that he
possesses above all things the judicial mind ; and in the
passionless but (at the same time) dignified manner which
constantly distinguishes him, he proves that he is above
the reach of the lighter emotions which have so much in-
fluence upon the minds of more ordinary men. It makes
no matter upon what subject he is speaking ; it may be
one of the most abstract description, or it may be a ques-
tion upon which the ſate of a government depends; he
always deals with it in such a manner as to give you the
idea of a judge pronouncing a decision, rather than of a
Cabinet Minister making a speech in Parliament. He
might almost be described as the moderator of that dis-
tinguished assembly. * * *
“It was a happy lot which made him when in office the
recognized head of a department in which above all other
things this passionless, judicial tone of mind is required.
In the ordinary work of politics too much of this element
224 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
is a misfortune. England is ruled by party government,
and were a man to be the representative of the Government
in a department in which strictly party questions were con-
stantly being raised, he would sooner or later inevitably
come to grief if he were to weigh every question judicially,
and to shut out of his view altogether the requirements of
party—which, in this country, are often the requirements
of the nation also.
“But there is one department of the State into which
no such considerations can fairly be said to enter, but in
which, as a rule, the English people trust a minister, not
because he is a Liberal or a Conservative, but because he
is an Englishman. And this is the department which has
been allotted to Lord Derby. How admirably he has con-
ducted the foreign affairs of the country there is no need
for us to tell. By common consent he has been placed
first among the foreign ministers of the day. The absence
alike of passion and of prejudice from the character is just
what is needed by an honorable diplomatist. The man
who has to conduct the dealings of a country with neigh-
boring States, should, above all other things, be able to
comprehend the views taken by those with whom he has to
deal, as well as the views of those for whom he is acting.
He must, especially in the case of an English foreign min-
ister, be able at all times to see his own country, with its
failings and weaknesses, as others see it. We believe there
is no English statesman who can do this so well as Lord
Derby. -
“The day of a blustering foreign policy has gone by.
It died out when Lord Palmerston gave up the scals of the
Foreign Office, and it is never likely to be revived. Still
|
THE EARL OF DERBY. 225
more remote is the day of a Machiavellian foreign policy.
We cannot hope, at any rate for some time to come, to
attain the post-prandial frankness of the diplomacy which
Mr. Reverdy Johnson tried to inaugurate; but we will
never consent to return to the old days of double-dealing,
bribery, and corruption, in which the cleverest knave was
invariably the winner. We have begun to have some dim
preception of the fact that nations must deal together upon
the same principles as individuals, and that in each case
mutual honor, honesty, and courtesy, are the chief requi-
sites. But as yet we are not free from the influence of the
old traditions and the old prejudices, nor have we learnt to
recognize the altered status of England amongst the nations
of the world.
“We need, therefore, a foreign minister, who, in this
respect, is ahead of us, or rather above us; one who can
take a line of action not because it is the line which his
predecessors took before him, or that which is most popu-
lar with the country, but because a careful, and as far as
possible, an impartial consideration of the question, con-
vinces him that this and this only is the right line to take.
Here, then, comes the need for the judicial frame of mind,
and here it is that Lord Derby's qualities are specially val-
uable. * * *
“The calm and dignified demeanor which distinguishes
Lord Derby is an additional qualification on his part for
the Foreign Secretaryship. It is especially the demeanor
which should characterize England so long as she adheres
to the policy of non-intervention ; and the contrast which
it presents to the mischievous fussiness of Lord Russell is
as happy as it is marked. There was, we believe, no Eng-
I Osk
*
226 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
lishman of any party, who did not feel thankful when the
foreign affairs of the country were in the hand of Lord
Stanley, or who did not regret deeply his removal from the
department which he had made specially his own. -
“Lord Granville and he may be said to run together as
the alternate chiefs of the Foreign Office. The former has
more of the suavier in modo, the diplomatic finish and po-
liteness, than the latter; but it is somewhat singular, that
whilst amongst Conservatives no Liberal is more popular
than Lord Granville, amongst Liberals there is no Con-
servative who enjoys their esteem in so high a degree as
Lord Derby. * * *
“Of the many admirable traits of his private character,
of the philanthropy which so constantly distinguishes him
and which has displayed itself in so many ways, of his high
appreciation of modern culture, and his intense respect for
all intellectual pursuits—a respect by no means common
amongst practical politicians—we have left little space in
which to speak. These things, show, however, that his
mind is not absorbed in state-craft, but that he takes a
very lively and a very kindly interest in the smaller affairs
of the world. There is no social movement which has
right and reason on its side, that need look to Lord Derby
for aid in vain.” +
“Probably no one was ever freer from personal or class
prejudices than he. At Cambridge, and afterward in the
House of Commons, Lord Derby sought always the Society
less of the men of his own set than of the men of any set
from whom he could learn something. He was intimate,
* “Cabinet Portraits,” pp. 29–37.
THE EARL OF DERBY. 227
and maintained his intimacy, with the best minds of his
University; and in Parliament nobody of his political rank
talked so freely and indiscriminately with men of every
variety of social and political belonging. This conscien-
tious desire to inform himself on all sides of opinion, and
to look at a question through everybody's eyes in order to
help his own vision, need only a more vivid imagination
and a quicker sympathy, to produce more considerable re-
sults than have followed from it. All that he could assimi-
late he has taken up ; all that he could see he has fairly
allowed to count for what it was worth in the formation of
his opinions. But he seems to lack faculty for the higher
constructive statesmanship. The materials are there, but
there is no master-builder. The altar and sacrifice are
ready, but the flame does not descend. Lord Derby has
little comprehension either of political speculation of the
larger order, or of political feeling of the deeper kind. The
former he regards as visionary notions, the latter as senti-
mental weakness. This constitutes him a ‘safe man in
the eyes of many—that is to say, he is a safe statesman
when no danger threatens. . In times when original con-
ceptions and the power imaginatively to realize and embody
popular feelings are needed, he would be one of the most
dangerous of guides. There is no adviser so perilous as
one who applies ordinary rules to extraordinary occasions,
and this is Lord Derby's habitual attitude in politics.” +
Justin McCarthy admits that there was a time when
he believed that Lord Derby, then Lord Stanley, had
in him the material for a statesman.
* “Political Portraits,” p. IoI.
228 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
“I confess that at one time I looked to him with great
hope, as a man likely to develop into statesmanship of the
highest order, and to announce himself as a votary
of political and intellectual progress. Some years ago I
wrote an article in the Westminster Review, the object
of which was to point to Lord Stanley as the future
Colleague of Gladstone in a great and a really liberal gov-
ernment. I have changed my opinion since. Lord
Stanley wants, not the brains, but the heart for such
a place. He has not the spirit to step out of his hereditary
way. He is one of the sort of men of whom Goethe used
to say, ‘If only they would commit an extravagance even,
I should have some hope for them.’ He seems to care for
little beyond accuracy of judgment and propriety; and I
do not suppose accuracy of judgment and propriety
ever made a great statesman. There is nothing venture-
some about Lord Stanley—therefore there is nothing great.
A man to be great must brave being ridiculous; and I do
not remember that Lord Stanley has ever run the risk of
being ridiculous. * * * *
“In England he has received immense praise for
the part he took in averting a war between France and
Prussia on the Luxembourg question. * * * The
one original thing which Lord Stanley did during the con-
troversy was to write a dispatch to Prussia, recommending
her to come to terms, because of the superior navy
of France and the certainty, in the event of war, that
France would have the best of it at sea. Now, this was a
capital argument to influence a man like Lord Stanley
himself—calm, cold-blooded, utterly rational. But human
ingenuity could hardly have devised an appeal less likely
THE EARL OF DERBY. 229
to influence Prussia in the way of peace. Prussia, flushed
with her splendid victories over Austria, and deeply
offended by the arrogant and dictatorial conduct of
France, was much more likely to be stung by such
an argument, if it affected her at all, into flinging
down the gauntlet at once, and inviting France to come if
she dared. The use of such a mode of persuasion
is, indeed, an adequate illustration of the whole character
of Lord Stanley. Cool, prudent, and rational, he is
capable enough of weighing things fairly when they
are presented to him ; but he can neither create an
opportunity nor run a risk. Therefore, he remains
officially a Tory, mentally a Liberal, politically neither the
one nor the other. His bones are marrowless, his blood
is cold. He can forfeit his own career, and hazard
his reputation for his party; but that is all. He cannot
give his mind to it, and he cannot redeem himself from his
futile bondage to it. He is a respectable speaker, despite
his defective articulation and his lifeless manner; he will
be a respectable politician, despite his want of faith
in or zeal for the cause he tries to follow. That is
his career; that is the doom to which he voluntarily con-
demns himself.” +
“Lord Derby is frequently spoken of as the destined
First Minister of England when the time shall come
for the withdrawal of the present leaders from office
and public life. He would not, however, be the natural
chief of a party of action, because he has no impulses to
push him forward ; nor of a party of reaction, for he has
* “Modern Leaders, by Justin McCarthy,” pp. 133, 134.
23O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
no prejudices to drive him backward. He might with
more propriety be the head of a stationary party in
a period of stagnation. But this Third or Neutral party,
so often invoked, is an impossibility; for it would be
crushed, as between the upper and nether millstones,
by the other two parties. It is not a necessity; for either
of the two parties is ready to supply the void when a
Laodicean policy is wanted. It is curious to observe, and
it would be uncandid to conceal the fact, that, with
the exception of Mr. Cobden and Mr. Bright, the most
ardent Radicals, and the most forward of Advanced
Reformers, had no scruple in serving under the Adminis-
tration, which the Tories assert to have been Conservative
in disguise, of Lord Palmerston. A Third Party is
not necessary, therefore, to a neutral policy of rest and
thankfulness; nor is it necessary to Lord Derby's future
Premiership. His very indifference to party makes him
good-naturedly tolerant of its exigencies, and ready to
adapt himself to them with a facility which has not
improved his reputation. The line which he took in the
Reform Bill intrigues of 1866 and 1867, and on the Irish
Church question in 1868, proves that a man need not
be a strong partisan in order to discharge successfully the
work of factious manoeuvre. It may be questioned, how-
ever, whether Lord Derby has the attractive and command-
ing personal qualities necessary in a Parliamentary leader;
and his conspicuous want of readiness and resource in
debate is almost an insuperable obstacle to his holding
such a position in a nation governed, as Mr. Carlyle says
England is, by talk. He is better fitted to be a perpetual
President of a Social Science Association, or the Chairman
THE EARL OF DERBY. . 23 I
in reserve of any and every Commission of Inquiry which
any Government may choose to appoint. If he had not
been the Earl of Derby, he would have been admirably
placed as the chief permanent official in some of the great
departments of State. He would keep a complicated
mechanism in excellent working trim, would readjust it
when it got slightly out of gear, and would be a check
against the bold innovations of a too eager or impetuous
chief. His administration of the different offices he
has held has been of this orderly, respectable, and un-
exciting character. His foreign policy was sensible and
tame. He tried arbitration with America, but the effort
broke down in the Senate at Washington. He framed
a Luxembourg treaty, which tied only a slip knot. He
is scarcely one of those statesmen of whom it is possible
to expect greater things than he has yet accomplished.
There is no sign of undeveloped qualities in his mind.
At five-and-twenty he was what he is now. A balanced
mind and character in a young man are generally the
signs of narrow limits; for growth is usually successive
in the several parts of mind as of body—first this limb or
faculty, then that—and is marked by disproportion and a
certain ungainliness until the full stature and the final pro-
portion are reached. There is nothing of this sort in Lord
Derby. All was balanced from the first, and there is
no promise of anything very great at the last. He has
ordinary gifts in an extraordinary degree. In a more
complimentary sense than that in which Mr. Disraeli
applies the phrase to a much inferior man, he may
be called the Arch-Mediocrity of English politics.” +
* “Political Portraits,” pp. 103–107.
don Daily News, “who persistently resist change,
and of these Lord Salisbury is in England the
most conspicuous living instance.” The same writer else-
where says that ‘‘Lord Salisbury is one of the most striking,
and, in a certain sense, one of the most pathetic figures in
modern political life. He is a hopeless statesman, or is ani-
mated only by such hope as is too like despair to impose on
prudence the painful necessity of Smothering it. An artist
might take him for a picture of forlorn suspense, or as the
central figure in the representation of a dauntless struggle
against overwhelming odds. There is a certain grimness
of aspect about him, as of the leader of a lost cause re-
solved to fight on, though well assured that nothing but
defeat awaits him. He is a political Prometheus, whose
breast the Radical vulture tears, an Ajax defying the light-


THE MARQUIS OF SALISBURY. 233
ning, an Ixion on his wheel, anything which symbolizes
defiance, and resistance to a power with which it is vain to
contend ; or he may be compared to Enoch Arden upon
his desert island—“a shipwreck'd sailor waiting for a sail ;
no sail from day to day.” Lord Salisbury is waiting for a
phantom or foundered vessel, the Conservative Reaction,
which does not heave in sight, * to bear him from exile.
‘It cometh not,’ he saith ; “I am aweary, aweary.’ He
is at war with the tendencies of his age. He has set him-
self seriously to do that which the late Lord Derby under-
took as a mere matter of phraseology, and in a lightness
of heart as blithe as M. Emile Ollivier's, and that is to stem
the tide of democracy. This he essays, not with Lord
Derby's reserved intention of going along with the tide if
it should prove the stronger, but with a misgiving that,
after all, he cannot stem it, but that it will sweep him
away. His attitude is that of some heroic watchman upon
a dike in Holland, when the sea threatens to break in ;
and no one but himself will perceive the danger. Lord
Salisbury is animated by false alarms, but they are true to
him ; and while the peril is in his view real and close at
hand, the rescue is distant and problematical. The Con-
servative Reaction may not come at all, or it may come
too late to save anything. It is a fancy with which his
imagination plays : an illusion which does not deceive him,
a day-dream of which he perceives the flimsiness. In the
meantime, his resolute integrity and almost cynical candor
will not allow him to make any compromise with the false
principle which is in the ascendant. He will not burn in-
* [Written in 1873.]
234 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
cense to it, or enter on its service ; but will only and
always resist and expose it.”* - -
Robert Arthur Talbot Gascoigne Cecil, third Marquis
of Salisbury, is the son of the second Marquis; his mother
being the daughter of Bamber Gascoigne, Esq. He was
born at Hatfield, February 13, 1830, and was educated at
Eton and at Christ Church College, Oxford, becoming after-
wards a Fellow of All Souls. He first entered public life
in August, 1853, as Member for Stamford, and remained in
Parliament in that capacity until, April 12th, 1868, he suc-
ceeded to the Marquisate. He was Secretary of State for
India in 1866–7, and was again appointed in 1874. He
married Georgina, daughter of the late Hon. Sir Edward
Hall Alderson, and has had eight children.
A careful Parliamentary observer thus describes the per-
sonal appearance and manner of this nobleman :
“We have said nothing as yet of Lord Salisbury's ap-
pearance, or of his manner of speaking. About both
there is something hardly to be described, but which young
ladies would indicate by the much-abused word ‘interest-
ing,’ and which we may endeavor to convey to our readers
by the word melancholy. It is but seldom that his fine,
powerful face does not wear a certain air of melancholy, and
the tones of his voice are, as a rule, subdued and plaintive.
“He is an effective public speaker—terse, clear, and
vigorous at all times; and though not eloquent, in the or-
dinary acceptation of the word—that is to say, not rhetori-
cal in his speech—he is never feeble, and he frequently
speaks with remarkable power. Now that the acidity of
* “Political Portraits,” p. 76.
THE MARQUIS OF SALISBURY. 235 .
his earlier years is passing away—nothing but a grateful
flavor remaining to remind us of what he once was—no
one can ſail to derive pleasure from listening to him when
he is speaking on any question of importance ; and the
dignity and courtesy which, as a rule, characterize his
manner, well befit the place in which he now Occupies so
distinguished a position.””
Of the “acidity” said by all observers to have marked
the earlier years of Lord Salisbury, Justin McCarthy gives
this graphic delineation : - - -
“One young man of brains there was on the Tory side
of the House of Commons, who did not like Disraeli,
and never professed to like him. This was Lord Robert
Cecil, who subsequently became Viscount Cranborne, and
now sits in the House of Lords as Marquis of Salisbury.
Lord Robert Cecil was by far the ablest scion of noble
Toryism in the House of Commons. Younger than Lord
Stanley, he had not Lord Stanley's solidity and caution, but
he had much more of original ability; he had brilliant
ideas, great readiness in debate, and a perfect genius for
saying bitter things in the bitterest tone. The younger
Son of a wealthy peer, he had, in consequence of a dispute
with his father, manfully accepted honorable poverty, and
was glad, for no short time, to help out his means by the
use of his pen. He wrote in the Quarterly Review, the
time-honored organ of Toryism ; and after a while certain
political articles regularly appearing in that periodical be-
came identified with his name. One great object of these
articles seemed to be to denounce Mr. Disraeli and warn
* “Cabinet Portraits,” p. 207.
236 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
the Tory party against him as a traitor, certain in the end
to sell and surrender their principles. Lord Robert Cecil
was an ultra-Tory—or at least thought himself so—I feel
convinced that his intellect and his experience will set him
free one day. He was a Tory on principle, and would
listen to no compromise. People did not at first see how
much ability there was in him—very few, indeed, saw how
much of genuine manhood and nobleness there was in
him. His tall, bent, awkward figure ; his prematurely bald
crown, his face with an outline and a beard that reminded
one of a Jew peddler from the Minories, his ungainly ges-
tures, his unmelodious voice, and the extraordinary and
wanton bitterness of his tongue, set the ordinary observer
strongly against him. He seemed to delight in being
gratuitously offensive. Let me give one illustration. He
assailed Mr. Gladstone's financial policy one night, and
said it was like the practice of a pettifogging attorney.
This was rather coarse and it was received with loud mur-
murs of disapprobation, but Lord Robert went on un-
heeding. Next night, however, when the debate was
resumed, he rose and said he feared he had used language
the previous evening which was calculated to give offense,
and which he could not justify. There were murmurs of
encouraging applause—nothing delights the House of
Commons like an unsolicited and manly apology. Yes,
he had, on the previous night, in a moment of excitement,
compared the policy of the Chancellor of the Exchequer
to the practice of a pettifogging attorney. That was lan-
guage which on sober consideration he felt he could not
justify and ought not to have used, ‘and therefore,” said
Lord Robert, “I beg leave to offer my sincere apology'—
THE MARQUIS OF SALISBURY. 237
here Mr. Gladstone half rose from his seat, with face of
eager generosity, ready to pardon even before fully asked—
“I beg leave to tender my sincere apology—to the
attorneys 1' Half the House roared with laughter, the
other half with anger—and Gladstone threw himself back
in his seat with an expression of mingled disappointment,
pity and scorn, on his pallid, noble features.
“There was something so wanton, something so nearly
approaching to outrageous buffoonery, in conduct like
this, on the part of Lord Robert Cecil, that it was long be-
fore impartial observers came to recognize the fine intellect
and the manly character that were disguised under such an
unprepossessing exterior. When the Tories came into
power, the great place of Secretary for India was given to
Lord Robert, who had then become Viscount Cranborne,
and the responsibilities of office wrought as complete a
change in him as the wearing of the crown did in Harry
the Fifth. No man ever displayed in so short a time
greater aptitude for the duties of the office he had under-
taken, or a loftier sense of its tremendous moral and polit-
ical responsibility, than did Lord Cranborne during his too
brief tenure of the Indian Secretaryship. The cynic had
become a statesman, the intellectual gladiator an earnest
champion of exalted political principle. The license of
tongue, in which Lord Cranborne had reveled while yet a
free lance, he absolutely renounced when he became a
responsible minister. He extorted the respect and admira-
tion of Gladstone and Bright, and indeed of every one who
took the slightest interest in the condition and the future of
India. The manner of his leaving office became him, too,
almost as much as his occupation of it. He was sincerely
6
238 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
opposed to a sudden lowering of the franchise, and he
insisted that his party ought to think nothing of power
when compared with principle. He found that Disraeli
was determined to surrender anything rather than power,
and he withdrew from the uncongenial companionship.
He resigned office, and dropped into the ranks once more,
never hesitating to express his conviction of the utter insin-
cerity of the Conservative leader. He would have been a
sharp and stinging thorn in Disraeli's side, only that death
intervened and took away, not him, but his father. The
death of his elder brother had made Lord Robert Cecil
Viscount Cranborne ; the death of his father now con-
verted Viscount Cranborne into the Marquis of Salisbury,
and condemned him to the languid, inert, lifeless atmos-
phere of the House of Peers. The sincere pity of all who
admired him followed the brilliant Salisbury in his melan-
choly descent. I should despair of conveying to an
American reader unacquainted with English politics any
adequate idea of the profundity and hopelessness of the fall
which precipitates a young, ardent and gifted politician
from the brilliant battle-ground of the House of Commons
into the lifeless, Lethean pool of the House of Lords.
“Still, the Tory party may be led, as it has been, by a
chief in the House of Lords, although its great and
splendid fights must be fought in the Commons. If then,
in our time, Toryism ever should again become a principle
which a man of genius and high character could fairly fight
for, it has a leader ready to its hand in the Marquis of
Salisbury.”
* “ Modern Leaders,” by Justin McCarthy, p. 131.
THE MARQUIS OF SALISBURY. 239
Of the early literary career of Lord Salisbury, and of the
gradual development of his character, another writer gives
this description :
“The young nobleman had the audacity to seek to win
his spurs in two fields at the same time. As a Member of
the House of Commons, it was of course right and proper
that he should follow the example of the other younger
Sons of great noblemen, and make speeches"in which he
measured himself without the slightest diffidence with the
foremost statesmen and politicians of the day. In the
House of Commons, all, from the Prime Minister down to
the youngest member, are upon a footing of equality; and
it is one of the most delightful privileges which a seat in
that assembly confers, that a man, whatever may be his
own position or want of position, whatever his ability or
lack of ability, may at any time cross swords with the most
distinguished political leaders.
“There was, therefore, nothing remarkable in the fact
that Lord Robert Cecil, though very young, and not yet
thoroughly “formed,” should early distinguish himself by
making speeches, the prevailing characteristics of which
were flippancy and bitterness, and which were mainly
directed against men who were the recognized chiefs of
their parties. .
“But it was altogether a different matter when it began
to be whispered about that the young patrician was en-
deavoring to win for himself a name in another arena, and
that he was already becoming known as one of that band
of brilliant writers which gave to the early career of the
Saturday Review a splendor such as has scarcely been
enjoyed by any other political journal. Then indeed men
24O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
who had the proper contempt entertained by society for the
mean Creatures whose lot it is to guide public opinion by
anonymous pens, shook their heads, and ‘hoped the young
man might not live to regret the step he had taken ; ’
whilst he found—doubtless to his surprise—that even in
the most powerful and distinguished legislative assembly
in the world, a man who is known to be connected with
the press gains for himself additional consideration, even
though it may be a consideration closely allied to fear and
dislike.
“The Marquis of Salisbury is not a man to be flattered,
and we therefore do not hesitate to say that his early career
was one which, though it might be full of promise, was yet
in itself anything but brilliant. It is said that when Lord
Robert began to write for the Saturday Review, his literary
productions were little, if at all, above the level of medi-
ocrity ; but that the late editor of that journal found in
him the most tractable and diligent of pupils, and that
eventually, though by slow and laborious steps, he gained
not merely proficiency but genuine power in the use of his
pen.
“We do not vouch for the truth of this statement,
though it comes to us upon good authority ; but if it be
true it is strikingly characteristic of Lord Salisbury's whole
life. -
“His career has been one of steady progress—the result
of conscientious hard work—and the position which he
now occupies is due far more to his diligence and perseve-
rance than to the accident of his birth. His political life,
it has more than once been said, may be divided into three
stages, distinguished by the three different titles he has
THE MARQUIS OF SALISBURY. 24. I
borne. He began life as Lord Robert Cecil ; he had
gained a great step in advance upon his starting-point
when, through the death of his elder brother, he became
Viscount Cranborne, and as Marquis of Salisbury he has
shown a ripeness and breadth of judgment such as were
hardly to be expected of him in either of the earlier
periods of his life.
“As to the first of these periods it was one in which—
speaking figuratively rather than literally—it may be said
of him that he was ‘very young.' The prevailing impres-
sion produced by his writings during that period is the im-
pression of extreme youth. They are crude, as very
youthful productions generally are ; they are remarkable
too for an acidity which is not altogether unpleasant in a
young man's first essays, but which would be simply intol-
erable if habitually displayed by a man of the world of ma-
ture age and judgment. They are flippant also, and Care-
less. In fact they are boyish ; and, like everything else
boyish, they display that want of finish which, according
to Mr. Disraeli, still distinguishes Lord Salisbury's invec-
tive.
‘‘It was, however, during this period that Lord Robert
won his spurs. He became known as one of the most
dashing skirmishers in the political battlefield. Daring,
even to audacity, he was at all times ready to rush single-
handed into the fight with those who were his superiors in
weight of metal ; and though he received many an over-
throw in these rough tilts, he succeeded in establishing for
himself a reputation which was no doubt intensely gratify-
ing to him as a young man, but which could hardly have
Satisfied his more mature ambition. He became known
I I
242 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
as a cynic who was ready to scoff at everything, as a critic
whose eyes were keen to search out the smallest flaw in the
armor of an Opponent, as the possessor of a bitter tongue
which was able at all times to sting those against whom it
was employed ; as a master of invective, which, even
though it might lack finish, most assuredly did not lack
power. There was, of course, something very juvenile
about this kind of reputation. The danger was that Lord
Robert might have rested satisfied with it. Had he done
so, he would by this time have degenerated into another
John Arthur Roebuck, or a lesser Earl Grey.
“But as years passed on, and the young nobleman, in
whose private life there were not a few circumstances affect-
ing the view he took of society and politics, gained wider
ideas of the world in which he lived, the cynicism, which
was his prevailing characteristic, was softened ; and though
he still showed himself impatient of party discipline, and
unwilling to submit to the restraints which bound his com-
panions and friends ; though there was still, in fact, not a
little of the Bohemian about him, he showed that he was
learning useful lessons, and was gradually finding for him-
self his real path in life. This transition era is that asso-
ciated with the title which he bore for a few years of Lord
Cranborne. .
“It was during this time that he succeeded to high office
under the Crown, and became the ruler, as Indian Secre-
tary, of our splendid Eastern Empire. Here was a work
which might have satisfied the ambition of any man, and
which fully satisfied that of Lord Cranborne. He was able
now to lay aside his reviewing, and those Smart criticisms
on the politics of the day, in which he had spared neither
THE MARQUIS OF SALISBURY. 243
friend nor foe, and one of the effects of which had been to
open an ever-widening breach between himself and the
leader of his party in the House of Commons.
“The great task of governing India, and governing it
well, occupied all his time and attention. He knew lit-
erally nothing of that task when he entered upon it ; but
those who worked under him in the India Office are still
ready to bear testimony to the devotion with which he la-
bored ; to the unremitting anxiety he displayed to make
himself master of the minutest details of the duties imposed
upon him ; to the ceaseless industry with which he worked
by day and night, in order that he might have nothing to
reproach himself with in the performance of his Herculean
task. The result is, that those associated with him in the
Government of India are ready now to bear testimony to
the fact that his tenure of the Secretaryship was in many
respects more successful than that of most of the men
who have been his immediate predecessors and successors.
“It was during his term of office that he succeeded in a
great degree in laying aside the flippant cynicism of his
earlier manner. His official speeches were distinguished
by their clearness and their brevity—in both of which re-
spects they formed a marked and most agreeable contrast
to those of the statesman whom he had succeeded, Lord
Halifax; and, weighed by the responsibilities of great of.
fice, he was not long in learning that the art of governing
the world is not so simple and so easily acquired as in his
more juvenile days he had imagined.” +
“Circumstances which would have made the career of
* “Cabinet Leaders,” p. 199.
244. BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
any other man of at all equal, or even of much inferior
capacity, have been fatal to Lord Salisbury. They have
probably forfeited him his place in history. He will always
be a conspicuous figure in the Parliamentary skirmishes of
his time; but a Member of Parliament is like an actor—
he is forgotten when he is off the stage. Lord Salisbury
was intended to play, for good or for evil, a heroic part ;
and he has been reduced to commonplace. Under a des-
potic government Lord Salisbury might possibly have been
a wise and beneficent ruler. He would even now, it is
most likely, be a first-rate Viceroy of India. In France,
had he been Minister forty-two years ago, he certainly
would have overturned the throne as Polignac did ; but he
would probably have made the very principle of Monarchy
so odious as to have anticipated in July, 1830, the Repub-
lic of February, 1848. In Prussia, a few months ago, as a
Member of the House of Lords, he might have led an
Opposition to Bismarck, which would have made a blank
tablet of existing institutions, and introduced the spectral
figure of the Revolution, which haunts his dreams and his
waking hours too. The inheritance of a great name and a
historic peerage, and of immense wealth and social in-
fluence, has made him simply a Parliamentary gladiator
and critic. He cannot become the administrative or legis-
lative instrument of the convictions of his countrymen, be-
Cause he does not share them, and is too honest to affect
to share them ; he has not even such sympathy with the
ideas of his age and country as would enable him to in-
fluence them. He cannot lead the party of resistance ;
for there is really no party of resistance. There is a Con-
servative majority (so calling itself) in the House of Lords,
THE MARQUIS OF SALISBURY. 245
which applauds his attacks on the Ministry, which is de-
lighted with his often very just and searching criticisms of
their legislative and administrative blunders, and which
assents in the abstract to the maxims of policy he lays
down ; but which for six months of office would do all,
and more than all, it has denounced, and would cap re-
form by revolution.
“Hence Lord Salisbury's tears; and hence the mission
that he has undertaken. He knows that there is no party
of resistance in England ; and he has set himself to create
one. A few years ago he had persuaded himself that it
was all Mr. Disraeli's fault, and that, once rid of him, the
Conservative party would resume its old function in Eng-
lish political life. He has since enlarged his studies of
history, and has discovered that the sinister tactics which
he regarded as the invention of Mr. Disraeli were pursued
before him by the Duke of Wellington, by Sir Robert Peel,
and by the late Lord Derby, if indeed, as a Minister, the
late Lord Derby can be distinguished from Mr. Disraeli.
But the lesson which he might have learned from those
long-delayed researches has apparently not been brought
home to him. When he finds four men so different as the
Duke of Wellington, Sir Robert Peel, Lord Derby, and
Mr. Disraeli pursuing, through nearly half a century, a
similar course on each great public question as it arises ;
when he finds that in office the Conservative party invari-
ably carries out the Liberal policy, and that the question is
simply one of instruments—Wellington or Grey, Peel, or
Russell, Disraeli or Gladstone—the doubt might present
itself to a mind even less acute than his, whether any
elimination of distrusted leaders, or any manipulation of
246 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
parties, can produce a change. The spirit of the time, or
to narrow the phrase to more apprehensible limits, the defi-
nite convictions and the indefinite feelings of all classes of
Englishmen, set in a particular direction—the direction of
what we should call Liberal, and what Lord Salisbury calls
revolutionary ideas. The Conservative party, though the
fact is concealed from them by the inheritance of party
phrases and the impulses of opposition, really share these
ideas ; they make only a mock resistance out of office, or
if the resistance is strenuous, then it is merely to prepare
the way for an absolute capitulation when they are in what
they are pleased to call power, and when responsibility for
the actual administration of affairs strips off their illusions.
If this be not the true account of their conduct, we cannot
suggest any other reconcilable with personal or political
honor. This fact, if it be recognized as one, explains
Lord Salisbury's position. * * *
“The whole social order, in his view, is divided but by
a thin crust from the abyss. The stable and regular rests
upon the tumultuous and chaotic. The certainties are at
the surface, the uncertainties are below. Lord Salisbury
does not believe that the human nature out of which the
present adjustment of affairs has sprung would, in case of
disturbance, secrete institutions and usages as suitable to
it. The England of the present day is the result of a
chapter of accidents ; and he has no confidence that acci-
dent will be as favorable if we trust ourselves to it again.
Defending English institutions, not on the ground that
they are in harmony with reason and justice, but because
they exist, any reform basing itself on reason and justice is
especially distasteful to him, inasmuch as these principles
THE MARQUIS OF SALISBURY. 247
admit of revolutionary applications. The Smallest change
is a denial of the argument of a right to perpetuity from
the fact of existence; and the more insignificant it appears,
the more insidious and dangerous it is. * * *
“The secret of Lord Salisbury's ‘stern and unbending
Toryism —that which differentiates it from the pliant Con-
servatism of his political neighbors—lies in his deep-seated
skepticism as to human nature, and his desponding views
as to the course and tendencies of Society. We have, he
seems to say, an existing social order, perhaps not very
good in itself, certainly not the best conceivable. But it
has this advantage over all possible rivals, that it exists and
they do not. A sort of secondary English nature has
adapted itself to the laws and institutions which we find
among us ; the habits of men recognize these old restraints.
Remove them, and the secondary English nature goes with
them. The state of primitive nature, which in Lord Salis-
bury's theory, as in that of Hobbes, is a state of war, re-
turns, and the aboriginal savage leaps forth. Lord Salis–
bury has apparently been a close student of the first French
Revolution ; and its wild horrors and follies, and the cen-
tury almost of unsettlement which has followed, have had
a sort of terrible fascination for him. But his studies here
also do not begin early enough. He fails to perceive that
it was the blindness of obstinate resistance which brought
about the French Revolution, and that the tactics of timely
concession which have been pursued by Wellington and
Peel, by Derby and Disraeli, and which he laments and
denounces, have preserved England.” + + +
“It is a misfortune that he has never been placed in a
position which would overcome or counteract his native
248 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
difficulty of understanding the majority of his countrymen.
Among the bené mali and bene vestiff, but mediocriter docti,
who form the select society of All Souls, at Oxford ; and
as a representative who never had a constituency, for the
member for Stamford is practically member for ‘Burleigh-
house by Stamford town,’ Lord Salisbury has had little op-
portunity for knowing his fellow-countrymen, or learning
to abate that scorn of them to which his temperament and
his habits as a man of letters incline him. That scorn, it
must be admitted, is impartially distributed over all ranks.
If his distrust seems greatest of the laboring classes, it is
probably because, in his view, they are held to good be-
havior by less powerful artificial restraints, and by a less
developed second nature than the upper and middle
classes. He seems, indeed, to be haunted by the image
of Mr. Odger and Mr. Bradlaugh leading a revolutionary
mob into Hatfield Park, and committing the Elizabethan
mansion again to the flames. Lord Salisbury's unchecked
individuality makes him an interesting subject of political
study, but it almost disqualifies him for modern statesman-
ship. His revolt against Liberal policy and Conservative
tactics is a revolt against the very conditions of Constitu-
tional Government. While he remains what he is, he can
never be the leader of the Conservative party. In con-
ceivable, but almost impossible, circumstances, he might
be the chief of a counter-revolution.””
* “Political Portraits,” pp. 79, 82, 85, 87, 90.
Sºº
§4%tº
sº
XI.
gº T seems to be generally admitted that, in case of
§ 5. the prolonged illness or retirement of Mr. Disraeli,
ºf the claim to the Conservative leadership in the
House of Commons must lie between two members—Sir
Stafford Northcote and Mr. Gathorne Hardy. Justin
McCarthy thus easily disposes of the former of these can-
didates : “Sir Stafford Northcote looks like a Bonn or
Heidelberg professor, and has a fair average intellect, fit for
commonplace finance and elementary politics ; there is not
a ghost of an idea in him.” The London correspondent
of the New York Maſion is a shade less trenchant in his
characterization :-
“The ministerial party + 4 + would be left in the
* “English Toryism and its Leaders,” in “Modern Leaders,” p.
I35.
II +


25O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
house to the guidance of Sir Stafford Northcote. You are
probably nearly as well qualified to take the measure of .
his capacity as we are on this side of the Atlantic. As one
of the Joint High Commission of 1871, he is not unknown
to you. Here he is considered a man of fair capacity and
creditable assiduity. He was trained by Mr. Gladstone,
and has learned from him some rudimentary lessons in
finance. He has the gift of a conciliatory temper, and he
is a tolerable matter-of-fact speaker, with a pleasing if not
a convincing manner, and his opinions are exactly of that
hybrid type between Liberalism and Conservatism which is
now prevalent in England. He could never steer the ship
in troublous times; but in calm weather, with a disciplined
and compact crew, anxious to keep the Tory vessel in, and
an undisciplined and divided Opposition not particularly
anxious to turn it out, he will do the work quite well.
Much would necessarily depend upon the Prime Minister.
If Mr. Disraeli remained in office, and was well enough
to take part in the great debates from time to time with
anything of his old astuteness, Sir Stafford Northcote
might represent him in the daily formal work. But if the
more unfavorable accounts of Mr. Disraeli's health are true,
Sir Stafford Northcote's duties and opportunities for good
and evil would be grave. The future Prime Minister
would be a member of the House of Lords—the Duke of
Richmond in all probability, because rumor (and she is
not always false) has it that Lord Derby will not serve un-
der Lord Salisbury, and Lord Salisbury will not be ruled
by Lord Derby. The leader, therefore, in the Lower
House will hold a most important and most difficult place
in British politics. Will Sir Stafford Northcote prove -
SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE. 25 I
strong enough for the place P That is a question time
alone can solve.” -
The author of “Men and Manner in Parliament” places
him higher still :
“Of all Mr. Disraeli's lieutenants in the House of Com-
mons, Sir Stafford Northcote perhaps stands highest. The
Chancellor of the Exchequer is a Tory of the school of
Sir Robert Peel, of whom he may, by a process analogous
to that by which we reach “the rope’ in the story of The
House that Jack Built, be also considered the pupil. He
was for some years the private secretary of Sir Robert Peel's
great disciple, Mr. Gladstone, and has, as his speeches fre-
quently show, profited by the proximity. In forming his
Ministry Mr. Disraeli seems to have sought for contrasts
to the personnel of the late Government, even to the points
of beard and whisker. On other grounds it is impossible
to conceive a more complete contrast than that presented
by Sir Stafford and his two immediate predecessors in the
office of Chancellor of the Exchequer. Mr. Gladstone
raised the exposition of the Budget to the level of the
highest oratorical displays of the session. In Mr. Lowe's
time the Budget night was an event of importance beyond
the limits of the interest that attached to the disclosure of
the Ministerial financial programme. Sir Stafford North-
cote has brought the Budget speech down to a little more
than a dry business statement inflated rather than adorned
by argument and illustration. Whittier might have been
thinking of him instead of the late Mr. Sumner when he
wrote,
“Nation,” Jan. 28, 1875.
252 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
“No sense of humor dropped its oil
On the hard ways his purpose went;
Small play of fancy lightened toil,
He spake alone the thing he meant.’
“It must be added that the right hon. gentleman, whilst
generally succeeding in making perfectly clear what he
would say, is somewhat prone to be prosy. He ‘hums’
and ‘has,' and harks back to matters he has already dis-
Cussed, makes prolonged diversions into by-paths, and,
putting the fact moderately, is twice as long saying what he
has at heart as is either necessary or, in the interest of his
argument, desirable. In introducing his first Budget he
spoke for two hours and forty minutes, which, it may be
urged, was not an extravagant demand on the attention of
the House, seeing that when Mr. Gladstone, twenty-one
years earlier, brought in his first Budget he spoke for five
hours. But it is well known that, generally for sufficient
reasons, one man may steal a horse whilst it is forbidden
to another to look over the hedge. A harsh dry voice, a
countenance expressionless, perhaps by reason of a supera-
bundance of hair, an unsympathetic manner, and an
almost total absence of the charm of imagination or fancy,
combine to make two hours and a half of Sir Stafford
Northcote worse than twenty-four hours of Mr. Gladstone.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer is, however, a safe busi-
ness man, and in the temper in which Parliament met was
a welcome foil to the brilliancy of his predecessor.””
The same writer elsewhere says: “There is a wonder-
fully wise and statesmanlike air about Sir Stafford North-
-
* “Men and Manner in Parliament,” p. 87
SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE. 253
cote, as he sits, spectacled and bearded, on the Treasury
bench, which of itself would go a long way towards ac-
quiring the confidence and the submission of the House.
But the Right Honorable Baronet is not dependent on his
personal aspect alone for his claim to supremacy. He is
not a good speaker, but he is a ready One, sees a long way
through a question, and can, if need be, cleverly fence with
it. He has a good deal of tact, is fair-minded, honorable,
frank, and at very long intervals displays little flashes of
humorous perception, which are as precious as Solitary
stars twinkling in an apparently hopelessly murky sky. He
is always listened to with that respect the House of Com-
mons intuitively feels and liberally awards to any man who
has succeeded in convincing it that he is an honest and
clear thinker, and thus he personally enjoys the confidence
of both sides of the House.” + -
The Right Honorable Sir Stafford Henry Northcote,
Bart., is the grandson of the previous baronet of that name;
was born in London, Oct. 27, 1818, and was educated at
Balliol College, Oxford, where he graduated first class in
classics, third class in mathematics. In 1843 he married
Cecilia Frances, daughter of Thomas Farrer, Esq., of
Lincoln's Inn. He was called to the bar in 1847 ; entered
Parliament for Dudley, in March, 1855 ; was member for
Stamford from 1858 to 1866, when he was elected to repre-
sent North Devon. He was Private Secretary to Mr. Gladstone
when that gentleman was Secretary to the Board of Trade,
and was Financial Secretary to the Treasury in 1859.
In 1862, he published a book entitled “Twenty Years of
* “Men and Manner in Parliament,” p. 264.
254 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
Commercial Policy.” He became President of the Board
of Trade under Lord Derby, in 1866, and Secretary of
State for India in the following year. In this capacity he
had opportunity to render unusual services, which have
been thus described :
“It was during his term of office that the Abyssinian
Expedition was resolved upon and carried out ; and to
Sir Stafford Northcote, more than to any other man save
Lord Napier, are we indebted for the circumstance that
this noble though costly enterprise, instead of ending in a
repetition of the Crimean muddle, resulted in a brilliant
and almost bloodless victory. * * * *
“As a mere matter of fact, it must be owned that Sir
Stafford Northcote, although he has no pretensions to the
highest class of statesmanship, showed himself upon that
occasion to be an administrator of far more than average
ability. To him ſell one of the largest parts in connection
with the Expedition.
“Whilst it was in preparation, he devoted himself for
several months exclusively to it and to his other official
duties, laboring day and night to perform the Herculean
task imposed upon him. Thanks to his energy and dis-
cretion, Sir Robert Napier found everything at Massowah
which he required, and was enabled to carry his army up
to Magdala almost without the loss of a single life, and to
bring it back again, after the brief struggle with Theodore,
absolutely better in health and general condition than
when it started. It was very easy for gentlemen afterward
to discover that a needless quantity of stores was sent to
Abyssinia, and that money was expended in procuring
from other lands animals or provisions which might have
SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE. 255
been obtained at a much smaller cost in the country itself.
Let it be remembered, when charges of this kind are made
against those who had the conduct of this campaign, that
when it was undertaken our knowledge of Abyssinia itself
was of the slightest possible description ; and that our
ideas with respect to the difficulties and dangers which
awaited our troops were, in consequence, naturally ex-
aggerated.
‘‘Let it also be borne in mind that defeat from any
cause in that mysterious country would have been an
almost irreparable blow to the reputation of England
abroad, that the news of our disasters would not only have
been received with a chuckle of satisfaction in New York,
in Paris, in Berlin, and in St. Petersburg, but that it
would have occasioned secret rejoicings throughout our
Indian Empire. The importance of the matter at issue in
the campaign could not be exaggerated. Happily the
undertaking was a complete, an unexampled success—
thanks, chiefly, if not entirely, to Sir Stafford Northcote
and Lord Napier.
“When we read this chapter in our military history, we
sigh at the remembrance of the days when Red Tape was
the sacred object of official worship, and when our gallant
men in the Crimea were sacrificed to it by thousands. No
minister of state—not even Mr. Lowe himself—could show
a more complete freedom from the trammels of mere rou-
tine than did Sir Stafford Northcote upon this occasion;
and his conduct in the emergency which then arose un-
doubtedly marks him out as an administrator of the highest
ability—one of those men, too rarely to be found, to whom
the country can trust in the midst of a great crisis.
256 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
“It is because this Abyssinian campaign has really
been the greatest achievement of Sir Stafford's political
career that we give it this prominence in our sketch. We
believe that his success on this occasion has been the turn-
ing-point of his life. We do not mean that it has won for
him high honors or great influence, but that it has made
him conscious of his own powers and of the manner in
which those powers can best be used. Before he was
Called upon to take his part in this emergency, he occa-
sionally displayed a timidity in the exercise of his influence
that did not a little to mar his usefulness. Now, however,
he has acquired confidence in himself, and in his ability to
meet any call which may be made upon him, and the
result is that he will in the future take a much more prom-
inent part in public affairs than was previously the case.
“In the first instance, Sir Stafford Northcote won his
spurs in Parliament as an authority upon matters of
finance. Common rumor, for several years, designated him
for the Chancellorship of the Exchequer, whenever Mr.
Disraeli was called upon to assume the Premiership.
When that event did happen, the right hon. baronet was
far too deeply engaged in the conduct of the Abyssinian
War to be able to desert the Indian Office for the Treas-
ury; but there is some reason to think that he will occupy
the post of Finance Minister in the next Conservative Ad-
ministration. *
“He has undoubtedly shown himself an acute and able
critic of the financial policy of the Liberal Government,
and his views upon the question of national finance have
* [Written in 1872.]
SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE. 257
been proved to be both sound and judicious. He can
never hope to attain Mr. Gladstone's wonderful command
of figures, nor could he aspire to Mr. Lowe's adroitness
of manipulation ; but should he ever be called upon to
take charge of the National Exchequer, he may be relied
upon as a safe and able Minister; one who will neither
dazzle the Country by perilous feats of daring, nor bewil-
der it by ingenious changes in the incidence of taxation,
the only merit of which is their ingenuity. On the con-
trary, if Sir Stafford Northcote, rather than Mr. Ward
Hunt, is to be our future Conservative Chancellor of the
Exchequer, we shall expect to have in him a Minister
whose wise measures will not only lighten the burden of
taxation upon the people at large, but will foster and en-
courage the commerce of the country. —So long as he
continues a member of the Conservative party, that party
never need want an efficient and reliable Minister of
Finance.
“But whilst Sir Stafford devoted himself for many years
to the study of financial subjects, and showed great acute-
ness as well as a special knowledge in his mode of dealing
with them, it must not be supposed that he neglected mat-
ters of more general interest. He has taken a considerable
interest in education, and whilst his own views on that sub-
ject are, no doubt, of a somewhat prescribed and narrow
character, he has shown that he can rise above any party
politics, in dealing with a question of national importance.
There are those who say he is not a ‘deep’ man, and it
seems to us that the charge is to a certain extent well foun-
ded ; but if he does not give evidence in his speeches of
any very profound thought, or close and long-continued
258 BRIEF BIOGRAPIIIES.
study, he constantly gives evidence that he is not a mere
politician, but that he is a man of high culture and en-
lightened sympathies.
“Too many of our political leaders seem to be so wrap-
ped up in politics that they have no eyes nor ears for any-
thing else. This cannot be alleged against Sir Stafford
Northcote. Again and again has he shown that his sym-
pathies extend beyond the range of party, and that politics,
though they may occupy the first, do not occupy the only
place in his mind. His efforts in the cause of education
in Devonshire are well known in that county, whilst the
social progress of the people, and of the poor especially,
has always been a matter in which he has shown a deep
interest. In this respect he may indeed be said to occupy
a middle position between the country squire and the
statesman. He possesses that strong sympathy with those
around him, that feeling of personal friendship for the
classes immediately dependent upon him, which dis-
tinguish the English country gentleman; but allied to
these he has the higher instinct and the clearer judgment
of the statesman. Few men are better fitted than he to at-
tract at once the popularity of the masses and the Con-
fidence of the upper classes.
“A striking evidence of his popularity with his oppo-
nents was given last year, when he was chosen by Mr.
Gladstone to accompany Lord de Grey to Washington to
arrange the Alabama Treaty. No choice could have been
received...with greater favor on both sides of the House, and
whilst it did honor to Mr. Gladstone's impartiality and
judgment, it was an unmistakable proof of the esteem
which it is Sir Stafford Northcote's good fortune to enjoy.
SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE. 259
“In the House of Commons, indeed, he enjoys an en-
viable reputation for fairness and moderation. Not many
men have fewer bitter words or merely party speeches to re-
gret than the ex-Indian Secretary. His conciliatory man-
ner towards his opponents, the frankness with which he
admits their virtues, and the leniency with which he judges
their faults, all tend to increase his popularity. He seems
to emulate Lord Derby's studied moderation and impar-
tiality; and however desirable these qualities may be in the
judge, they are not always to be sought for in the active
member of a political party. There is, too, in his speeches
a vast amount of common sense. He may not aspire to
the philosophical views of some members of past and pres-
ent Cabinets; but he is at least entirely free from the sen-
timental and misty ideas which float through the brains of
too many of our politicians. He always knows the point
at which he wishes to arrive ; and he can always describe
his opinions in clear and simple language. -
“To oratorical ability he has no pretensions. His
speeches are, indeed, chiefly remarkable for the rapidity
with which they are delivered ; but they are at least lucid,
and ‘rich in Saving common sense.’ He has been charged,
and not altogether without foundation, with talking plati-
tudes ; but, after all, a man had far better talk platitudes
than talk nonsense, and there are not a few Cabinet Min-
isters who are chargeable with the latter offense. Upon
all matters connected with the Indian Empire he shows an
amount of knowledge which speaks much for his industry;
indeed, it may be said that he is now the spokesman of the
Opposition in the House of Commons upon Indian ques-
tions. His political opinions are staunchly Conservative,
26O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
and throughout the critical period of 1866–8, he was an
earnest and unswerving supporter of Mr. Disraeli, who has
in him one of the most loyal of his colleagues.” +
Sir Stafford Northcote was well known in the United
States, as one of the High Joint Commission for the Ala-
bama Treaty ; and he is now (1875)—even as predicted
by the writer just quoted—Chancellor of the Exchequer
in Mr. Disraeli's Ministry.
* “Cabinet Portraits,” pp. 180, 181.
XII.
MR. GATHORNE HARDY.
ºR. GATHORNE HARDY,” says the keen critic
As of the Daily News, “is habitually received as the
*Mºst sure successor of Mr. Disraeli in the leadership
of the Conservative party in the House of Commons; and
is sometimes hinted at as an actual competitor for the post,
or as even now practically dividing it with his titular chief.
If there be any rivalry between the two statesmen, it is of
a friendly sort. They do not excommunicate each other,
like Pope and Anti-Pope. Their attitude is rather the
brotherly one expressed in the stage direction in the play
of the Aehearsal, ‘Enter the two Kings of Brentford,
hand in hand,’ to which the stage practice used, we be-
lieve, to add, “smelling at one nosegay.' But, in truth,
whatever his hopes for the future, Mr. Gathorne Hardy has
no pretensions to be a second King of Brentford. Mr.
Disraeli keeps the royal nosegay in his own hand, even
though he may allow his destined successor, now and then,
as an act of favor, and as a foretaste of the coming glory,


262 ERIEF BIOGRAPIIIES.
to Smell at it. He may permit Mr. Gathorne Hardy to
exercise, in his absence, viceregal functions. Occasionally,
like an old coachman training a promising novice, he may
give him the reins, and let him take the box seat, while he
himself sits by, to keep a watchful eye on the driving, and
to see that nothing goes wrong. However, all these illus-
trations fail perfectly to express the relations between the
Conservative leader and his first lieutenant in the House
of Commons. Without being really a rival, and depart-
ing from formal subordination, there can be little doubt
that Mr. Hardy does indirectly exercise a certain degree of
authority. He may be compared to a Coadjutor Bishop
appointed to check and overrule, under the guise of as-
sisting, a superior of suspected soundness in the faith.
“There is one immense point in Mr. Gathorne Hardy's
favor, that he has the confidence of the great bulk of the
Conservative party, and that Mr. Disraeli has not. If they
do not positively distrust their brilliant chief, they do not
understand him. He is a potent magician, who has con-
jured with Conservative principles, which are at the same
time “truly Liberal ’ principles, until his bewildered fol-
lowers scarcely know whether Toryism does not include,
implicitly, the Five Points of the Charter. Mr. Disraeli
may practice only white magic, but there is something un-
canny about all conjuring. Now, Mr. Gathorne Hardy
is no conjuror. There is nothing in him beyond the com-
prehension of the most ordinary Tory squire, or the most
vulgar Manchester Reactionist. He does not soar to the
heights nor go down to the depths. He jogs along the
highways, not, even in a political sense, riding across
country. He is a Tory after the Tory party's own heart.
M.R. GATHORNE HARDY. 263
Gazing on itself, like Eve at the fountain, or Narcissus in
the stream, the image which the Tory party sees reflected
back upon it is that of Mr. Gathorne Hardy. When it
puts the proper charm under its pillow, it dreams of him,
as a country girl dreams of her destined husband. The
Conservatism of Mr. Disraeli, of Lord Salisbury, and of
Lord Derby, widely though they differ, is the deliberate
choice of a party connection upon intellectual grounds
higher and wider than those of party, and involving a sur-
vey of the whole field of politics, and an estimate of social
forces and tendencies. Their Conservatism, however sin-
cere and thorough, has its basis in a political rationalism,
as the Catholicism of Father Newman has its roots in a
theological rationalism. There is a philosophy behind it.
Ordinary Toryism distrusts the skeptical premises even
more than it welcomes the Orthodox conclusion. It is not
sure that the conclusion will always follow from the prem-
ises, even in the minds which have for the present drawn
it thence. Mr. Gathorne Hardy is free from all suspicion.
His Toryism is the Toryism of the back benches advanced
to the front bench, and elevated to office. In his speech
at Bradford, in the recess, he expressed an opinion that
the intellectual calibre of the House of Lords was superior
to that of the House of Commons. The intellectual cali-
bre of the Conservatism represented by Lord Salisbury,
Lord Derby, and Lord Cairns, is certainly superior to the
intellectual calibre of the Conservatism represented by Mr.
Gathorne Hardy, Sir John Pakington, and Lord John Man-
ners. Mr. Disraeli redresses the balance, and sways it to
the other side.
“Mr. Gathorne Hardy is a Tory of the old school, with
264 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
a logical apparatus Superadded. His temper, sentiments,
and prejudices are essentially those of the average Conserv-
ative. The ideas, however, which in the case of the latter
are little more than dim and half-formed tendencies to
thought, are with Mr. Hardy precise and clear. In him,
Commonplace Conservatism becomes articulate and self-
conscious ; and this is the source of his recognition as, in
a certain sense, the organ and representative, though not
yet the leader, of his party. He is, perhaps, not sufficiently
in advance of them to be that. This, however, is the
difference between him and them ; that the notions, im-
bedded in the heavy clay of the rural mind, and unable to
extricate themselves thence, have with Mr. Hardy become
explicit, able to move freely among one another, and to
arrange themselves into apprehensible propositions, into
logical syllogisms, and even into a connected chain of
argument, or what seems to be such. Here lies, in great
part, the source of the delight with which the Conservative
party listen to him. When he thinks and reasons in his
speeches, they, listening, have a faint reflected consciousness
of some unwonted mental process which they believe to
be thinking and reasoning. They are sensible of mental
exaltation and exhilaration, and their satisfaction with
him merges into a satisfaction with themselves. In the
quality and number of his ideas, Mr. Hardy does not differ
from the most commonplace Tory in the House of Com-
mons; the only difference is that his ideas are distinct,
and capable of being variously arranged into propositions
and arguments suitable to particular occasions. But the
number of mental combinations and permutations which
can be effected with a rigidly limited supply of thoughts
MR. GATHORNE HARDY. 265
is scanty; hence a certain monotony in Mr. Hardy's elo-
quence, which does not redeem, by any variety of topics,
the low level on which it proceeds.
“Mr. Hardy's speaking is, however, for his audience, or
for that part of it which agrees with him, exceedingly
effective. Its basis and materials are common both to him
and them, and this adds enormously to their appreciation
of the instrumental skill with which he wields forces that
they can turn to no account. He is not devoid of Orator-
ical passion of a certain sort. It is not the passion of the
statesmanship which absorbs a nation into itself, and Speaks
and feels for a whole people; nor that of a prophet-like
warning ; still less, of course, that of revolutionary en-
thusiasm—it is not the passion of Chatham, or of Burke,
or of Vergniaud—but it is more suitable to his topics and to
his hearers. It is the passion of the man in possession who
is afraid of being turned out. It is anger, blended with
virtuous astonishment, and prompted by a scarcely dis-
sembled terror. This seems to be the characteristic feel-
ing of that section of Conservatism which Mr. Hardy repre-
sents, and which sees in projects of reform only vailed
designs of destruction ; the more deadly in effect for being
sometimes specious in appearance. * * *
“This passion of fear gives earnestness to Mr. Hardy's
eloquence, though it does not elevate it. Range of read-
ing, depth of reflection, nobility of sentiment, play of fancy,
are entirely lacking to it. It is made up of fluent, ener-
getic commonplaces, packed into well-poised sentences,
and combined into a duly proportioned structure of
speech. What Mr. Hardy has to say is as well said as
anything so poor could be. He has vigor of arm and
I 2
266 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
precision of alm, but his weapons are blunt. Nevertheless,
he makes a gallant show of fight, and always comes off
from the contest as if victorious. A liquid voice, which is
never strained to harshness, makes his oratory pleasant to
the ear; and his most strenuous invective never passes the
limits of a perfect self-possession.” +
The author of “Men and Manner in Parliament” ex-
presses views somewhat similar :—
“Mr. Gathorne Hardy is, however, the surer of the re-
version of Mr. Disraeli's second office, because he alone
of all the candidates has a following. To the country
gentlemen the Secretary of State for War is, except perhaps
in his views on the Regulation of Public Worship, as
nearly as possible the model of what a Conservative leader
should be. Mr. Disraeli, it is true, somehow or other
pilots them into harbor when the sea is rough, and into
the fair anchorage of power when winds and waves are pro-
pitious. But they cannot understand how he does it, and
are vaguely suspicious that, however it be, it is not likely
to have been accomplished on really sound Conservative
principles. With Mr. Gathorne Hardy the case is differ-
ent. His mind is not so far above the level of that of the
hereditary Conservative that its method of working may
not be grasped by him and its processes of procedure un-
derstood. Mentally he is so far above the rank and file
that the principle of leadership may be introduced, and
yet not so far that the idea of companionship and intelli-
gent mutual assistance is altogether eliminated from the
compact. Mr. Gathorne Hardy would make a most accept-
* “Political Portraits,” pp. 183, 191.
MR. GATHORNE HARDY. 267
able leader to the large majority of Conservative members
of the House of Commons, and, ſaute de mieux, he would
be fairly popular on the other side. But here, as in the
change prognosticated when Mr. Gladstone's final retire-
ment makes room for a successor, the House of Commons
will suffer a grievous loss, genius giving place to clever
mediocrity and facile officialism.” +
Justin McCarthy will only admit of Mr. Hardy that he
“is fluent, as the sand in an hour-glass is fluent, he can
pour out words and serve to mark the passing of time.”f A
writer in Fraser's Magazine concedes to him a very little
In OTC : —
“On the Ministerial bench the second-best speaker is
Mr. Gathorne Hardy, who has always a vigorous flow of
language at his command, and is sometimes, on congenial
occasions, not destitute of pregnant ideas. His speeches
lend that moral support to the cause of Conservative elo-
quence which is lacking in Mr. Disraeli. But the party to
which Mr. Hardy directly appeals is a very limited one.
It is only when he makes himself the champion of a re-
actionary Conservatism that he is sure of an enthusiastic
hearing, and the supporters of reactionary Conservatism are
diminishing daily.” I
“He has a great flow of words,” says another observer,
“and can pour them forth in intelligible sequence
by the hour. But wordiness is not oratory—is even fatal
to oratory—and Mr. Gathorne Hardy is excessively wordy.
5
* “Men and Manner in Parliament,” p. 265.
+ “Modern Political Leaders,” p. 135.
f T. H. S. Escott, in Araser's Magazine, Oct., 1874.
268 IBRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
He has a good voice for a short speech, but in the absence
of modulation it becomes wearisome at the end of the first
half hour. He starts off at a gallop, and never draws rein
till he is about to sit down, which he often does in a husky
and breathless condition. He has some debating power,
and uses it with the trained ability of a barrister. But for
those who are not moved save by some flight of fancy,
Some arrow of wit, some lambent flame of passionate elo-
quence, Mr. Hardy's voice in debate is even as sounding
brass or a tinkling cymbal.” +
The Waſion correspondent will only allow him to be “a
ready, ‘rough-and-tumble ’ sort of orator, with a clear voice
and an aptitude for saying hard, uncomfortable things at
his opponents. Last year, for instance, when some inof-
fensive politician, zealous for his country's good, asked a
harmless question about some regimental band, Mr. Hardy,
being War Minister, recommended him “to blow his own
trumpet, which he was so well qualified to do.' For the
moment it ‘brought the gallery down,” and the inoffen-
sive politician collapsed. But the House of Commons
does not like that sort of thing from a Minister of the
Crown. The pervading atmosphere is superior to it. The
majority of the members are men accustomed to the tone
and spirit of well-bred society, and a coarse snub, such as
this of Mr. Hardy's, administered unnecessarily, the House
resents and remembers. It does not object to see a troub-
lesome man rebuked by a responsible Minister. It rather
enjoys it if well done. But it must be done not coarsely
but with finish—such finish as Mr. Disraeli, for instance,
has always at command. But even if the House could
* “Men and Manner in Parliament,” p. 108.
MR. GATHORNE HARDY. 269
get over Mr. Hardy's want of finish—and the Conserva-
tives would condone a great deal in an emergency—he
would find difficulty in Securing a trusty following, owing
to his ecclesiastical leanings. He alienated the moderate
Protestant party last session by his action on the Public
Worship Regulation Act. He did not disguise his Ritual-
istic proclivities, but on more than one occasion voted with
the professed supporters of the Ritualistic movement
against Mr. Disraeli and other members of the Cabinet.
In the present Puritanic or anti-Romish temper of the
House and of the country, these votes would be almost
sufficient to prevent Mr. Hardy from taking the place of
leader if, owing to Mr. Disraeli's absence, the post should
be unfortunately vacant.” +
The Right Honorable Gathorne Hardy is the son of
John Hardy, Esq., formerly M. P. for Bradford. He was
born at Bradford, Oct. 1, 1814 ; was educated at Shrews-
bury School, and at Oriel College, Oxford ; in 1856, en-
tered Parliament as Member for Leominster, and in 1865,
was elected over Mr. Gladstone, to represent the University
of Oxford. In 1858, he became Under-Secretary for the
Home Department, during Lord Derby's second adminis-
tration, and in 1866, was President of the Poor Law
Board, under Lord Derby's third administration, and in
May, 1867, became Secretary of State for the Home De-
partment, remaining in that position till December, 1868.
He is now (1875) War Secretary under Mr. Disraeli.
“Should Mr. Hardy never again take office—not a
likely supposition”—says Wemyss Reid, writing in 1872,
“he will undoubtedly live in the grateful remembrance of
** * “AWation,” Jan. 28, 1875.
27O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
his countrymen as the best Home Secretary whom this
generation has seen. And to be even a passably good
Home Secretary, not to fail egregiously in that office,
which Mr. Hardy filled with such marked success, is a feat
of no ordinary kind. For the Home Secretary has per-
haps more difficulties to encounter in the performance of
his duties than any other Minister of the Crown. Of the
importance of his post we need say little. He is first of
the five Secretaries of State, taking precedence even of the
statesman to whom are intrusted our relations with foreign
Countries. Virtually he is the ruler of Great Britain ; he
stands as the representative alike of the Crown and of Par-
liament in its dealings with the English people. He holds
in his hands the prerogative of mercy in the case of every
criminal condemned in a court of justice, from the child
sentenced to be birched, to the assassin doomed to lose his
life. He is held responsible by the popular voice for every
one of the failures and indiscretions of every one of the
magistrates and judges of the land. He has to maintain
order throughout the length and breadth of Great Britain ;
to advise when the civil forces shall be supplemented and
assisted by the military; and to be answerable for all that
the troops employed under such circumstances may do.
And in addition to all his other duties, he is made the
chief constable of the capital, and has to be ready in his
place in Parliament to answer the complaints of any quer-
ulous nobody who has found a member willing to lay his
imaginary grievances at the hands of some metropolitan
policeman before that assembly.
“Under any circumstances the accumulation of such
functions and responsibilities upon a single individual
MR. GATHORNE HARDY. 271
must entail a tremendous strain upon the person who is
thus honored ; but how great must that strain be in Eng-
land, where, with unlimited labors, and almost unlimited
responsibility, the power of the Minister is strictly circum-
scribed, and he is often unable to act, not because he does
not know how to act, but because the only way open to
him is a way upon which Our Constitution declares he
shall not enter
“We need not wonder that the Home Secretary is pop-
ularly recognized as the Minister who is always in the
wrong, and that no inconsiderable portion of that terrible.
half-hour in which the Government is submitted to the
‘torture by question' is daily devoted to the popular ex-
position of his countless blunders. For ‘blunders’ he is
always committing in the eyes of somebody, and until falli-
ble man has discovered the art of satisfying everybody, the
Secretary of State for the Home Department will continue
to be what he now is—the best abused man in England.
Every time he remits a sentence of death, the gentlemen
who believe that we are ‘going to the dogs,’ and encour-
aging murder by the tender-hearted manner in which we
administer the laws, will regard him in the light of a per-
sonal enemy, if indeed they do not look upon him as the
actual accomplice of assassins ; and every time he turns a
deaf ear to a petition for mercy, and leaves the law to take
its own course, he is reminded by well-meaning philanthro-
pists of the sanctity of human life, and is even asked by
pertinacious religious journals of the Pecksniffian creed,
how he expects to “answer” for those misdeeds of his,
when he, too, shall have to give an account of the things
done in the body.
272 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
“And what happens in the case of convicted murderers
happens constantly in thousands of less noticeable instances.
Does some eccentric justice of the peace in Glamorganshire
or Cumberland give a decision which is either bad in law,
unnecessarily cruel, or foolishly lenient, the Home Sec-
retary has instantly to choose between the alternative of
upholding the sentence and being abused as the ally and
champion of chartered wrong, and of reversing the de-
cision and being charged with blindness to the difficulties
of those upon whom the administration of the law in re-
mote quarters of the country depends. Truly, though his
post is almost imperial in its importance and responsibility,
it is, so far as personal comfort is concerned, the least
desirable of all the great offices of the state. - - .
“But to Mr. Hardy belongs the credit of having filled
this office in such a manner as almost to stifle complaint,
and that, too, at a most difficult period in our social history.
We do not write as party politicians, and we are not afraid
that we shall be challenged in our assertion that the Home
Government of England was never managed with more
tact, dignity, and discretion than during the time that Mr.
Hardy was at the head of the office in Whitehall.
“Before he assumed the Home Secretaryship he had
shown his abilities as an administrator by the manner in
which he had presided over the Poor Law Board, at a time
when the condition of the poor, and especially of the sick
poor in the metropolis, was attracting unusual attention.
Those who know anything of the work of the Poor Law
Board, now merged in the Local Government Board, know
that the President has a task which is only one degree less
disagreeable than that devolving upon the Home Secretary.
MR. GATHORNE HARDY. 273
“Nothing can well be more difficult than to deal with
the thousands of Unions and Boards of Guardians
throughout the kingdom, in each one of which some dif-
ſerent type of local prejudice is developed. And when, in
addition to these difficulties, there is that of Satisfying a
suddenly aroused public feeling, shocked by revelations
which we would fain believe exaggerated, of the condition
of the poor amongst us, the post of President of the Poor
Law Board becomes an exceptionally difficult One.
“It was at such a crisis as this that Mr. Hardy took
office at the head of the Poor Law Board. He was com-
pelled, at a time in every way unfavorable for such an un-
dertaking, to proceed to prompt measures for the reform
of the many evils of our workhouse hospitals; and he at
once showed how little he had of the official element
which is best described as ‘redtapeism,’ and how fully
alive he was to the necessities of the case, by the manner
in which he proceeded. He swept away with a strong
hand—and despite opposition and abuse, coming as usual
from both sides—many of the worst evils of the existing
system, and laid a broad and sure foundation for a state of
things more creditable to us as a nation. * * *
“It is, however, as a political speaker that he has won
his laurels in the House of Commons. We have given
him full credit for his impartiality when in office, but in the
House of Commons he is the most ardent of partisans. It
was the staunch conservatism of which he is the exponent
—the real “old-fashioned” conservatism, which has only
been modified as far as was necessary to meet the
inevitable changes of the times, and of public feeling—
that gained for Mr. Hardy the great honor of being
I 2* tº gº o ©
274 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
chosen member for the University of Oxford in place o
Mr. Gladstone. w
“Here at least was a man upon whose consistency in
Conservatism full reliance might be placed—a man who
could never be found making terms with Mr. Miall, or in-
dulging in philosophic speculations with respect to the
tenure of land or the rights of property l No hair-
splitting Casuistry, no political or in tellectual restlessness,
need be feared from Mr. Hardy. A man of good common
sense and shrewdness, and with that thorough practical En-
glish nature which has so much to do in securing for its
owner success in life, he was unquestionably admirably
fitted to become the champion and leader of the country
gentleman. His views upon some points may be harsh
and narrow, but they are essentially the views which the
country gentleman holds almost as a part of his religion,
and in his faithful allegiance to Mr. Disraeli Mr. Hardy
expresses the country gentleman's fidelity as well as his
OWI). g -
“By the country gentlemen, indeed, he is regarded with
a confidence which is almost enthusiastic, and more than
once the world has had occasion to note that he has spoken
in the House of Commons almost directly in their name
and as their representative. Few persons can doubt that
he is destined ultimately to succeed the chief whose faith-
ful lieutenant he has so long been, and by whose side he
has labored, since he sat in Parliament, with unbroken
fidelity. .
“As a debater Mr. Hardy holds a high place in the
House. If he does not stand in the first rank of orators,
he is but little beneath it, and he has shown that he is able
&
e - e.
&
:
i
:
©
tº
C & tº
MR. GATHORNE HARDY. 275
to cope successfully even with such consummate masters of
Parliamentary eloquence as Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Bright.
He speaks with a freedom and vigor that gives those who
hear him a strong sense of his powers; he has a full com-
mand of expressive and suitable words; and at times,
when under the influence of strong emotion, he can move
his audience by the utterance of passages of true and lofty
eloquence. But apart from their freshness and their vigor,
one of the great charms of his speeches is their evident
genuineness. That Mr. Hardy always speaks with a sin-
cerity which is not to be called in question, no one who
has heard him can doubt. In his very manner, in the
very tones of his voice—full, free, and unreserved—there
is something that bears witness to his sincerity, and to the
earnestness of his convictions.”
‘Cabinet Portraits,” pp. 49, 54.
P A R T I I I.
CANDIDATES FOR THE LIBERAL LEADERSHIP.
“Never in his l’arliamentary career has either Mr. Disraeli or Mr.
Gladstone exceeded himself in the vigorous ability displayed by each
during the last session ; but, nevertheless, the facts remain that the
one is in his sixty-ninth year, and the other in his sixty-fifth. Few
unaccomplished facts are more certain than that Mr. Disraeli is now
holding his last Premiership, and that with his next lease of power
the final chapter of Mr. Gladstone's life as an English Prime Minister
will be closed. Who is to take up the wand of power when it falls
from the hands of these potent magicians? -
“Looking first in search of answer along the Liberal benches
we see six men whose prominence in debate suggests that amongst
them is to be found the successor to Mr. Gladstone. Their names
are the Marquis of Hartington, Mr. Forster, Mr. Lowe, Mr. Goschen,
Mr. Childers, and last, though, in the opinion of one person, not
least, Sir W. Harcourt. The first five have, with more or less of.
ficiousness—less almost exclusively referring to the Marquis of
Hartington—presented themselves to the House under circumstances
which suggested to Mr. Lowther the happy description of them col-
lectively as ‘the Commissioners for executing the office of Leader
of the Opposition.” It was curious to note early in the Session in
what regular rotation Mr. Lowe, Mr. Forster, Mr. Goschen, and Mr.
Childers assumed the functions of the absent Leader. Sometimes
278 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
the change was effected on alternate nights ; sometimes the Lead-
ership was invested in one man for three successive nights. But the
variation was inevitable, and Mr. Disraeli was doubtless sincere in
his expression of satisfaction during the debate on the Scotch Church
Patronage Bill, when noting Mr. Gladstone's return, and seeing a
prospect of the end of this condition of bewildering uncertainty.
The phenomenon was not, however, without its special value, as af-
fording an opportunity of observing the candidates engaged in a
sort of rehearsal.” ”
* “Men and Manner in Parliament,” p. 233.
XIII.
most forgotten offenses so much greater, had
$22%ill quite forgiven and forgotten the foolish young
English nobleman who displayed his ill-manners by wear-
ing a Confederate flag in his button-hole at a New York
entertainment, during the Civil War. When the news
came that on Mr. Gladstone's retirement, the Parliament-
ary Liberals had selected the Marquis of Hartington as their
leader in the House of Commons, it recalled the forgotten
incident, and became a slight blow at the prestige of Par-
liament in American eyes. “Is this, then,” men said, “a
sample of the wisdom with which the elder branch of the
family is governed We could hardly have done worse at
Washington.” &
The news, however, proved true. “The choice of the
Marquis of Hartington was made in a perfectly democratic


28O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
manner, by a regular caucus of Liberal Members of Parlia-
ment, with John Bright for chairman. It was just like a
Democratic or Republican caucus in Washington, and the
best man for the place was selected, without any regard
being had to his rank or family connections. But it has
been said that the new parliamentary leader is a man of
the first rank but of second-class ability, which only proves
that his party has no man of first-class ability to act in the
emergency. It is a very remarkable circumstance, how-
ever, and which shows how little change has been effected
in the ruling classes of Great Britain during the past three
hundred years, that the Marquis of Hartington, the leader
of the Liberals in the House of Commons, and Earl Gran-
ville, the Liberal leader in the House of Peers, are near
relatives, and descendants from that Liberal ancestor, Wil-
liam Cavendish, who was appointed by Henry the Eighth
to take the surrenders of religious establishments when he
despoiled the Church, and founded the great families by the
bestowal of the confiscated property, whose descendants
have been the virtual rulers of England up to the present
time. The ancestor of the Marquis of Hartington knew
how to take good care of himself; and the Duke of Dev-
onshire, his descendant, besides being the wealthiest of
Bnglish nobles, is also the patron of forty-five church liv-
ings.” +
“I doubt,” says Justin McCarthy, “whether an Ameri-
can reader can have any accurate idea, unless he has spe-
cially studied the matter, and watched its practical opera-
tion in England, of the manner in which the influence of
* AVezy Wozł Independent
| THE MARQUIS OF HARTINGTON. 28 I
the Peers makes itself felt through the political life of
Great Britain. Americans often have some kind of notion
that the aristocracy govern the country directly and des–
potically, with the high hand of imperious feudalism.
There is nothing of the kind in reality. The House of
Lords is, as a piece of political machinery, almost inopera-
tive—as nearly as possible harmless. No English Peer,
Lord Derby alone excepted, has anything like the political
authority and direct influence of Mr. Gladstone, Mr. Dis-
raeli, or Mr. Bright. There are very few Peers, indeed,
about whose political utterances anybody in the country
cares three straws. But, on the other hand, the traditional
prestige of the Peers, the tacit, time-honored, generally-
conceded doctrine that a Peer has first right to everything
—the mediaeval superstition tolerated largely in our own
time, which allows a sort of divinity to hedge a Peer—all
this has an indirect, immense, pervading, almost universal
infiuence in the practical working of English politics.
The Peers have, in fact, a political droit du seigneur in Eng-
land. They have first taste of every privilege, first choice
of every appointment. Political office is their pasture,
where they are privileged to feed at will. There does not
now exist a man in England likely to receive high office,
who would be bold enough to suggest the forming of a
Cabinet without Peers in it, even though there were no
Peers to be had who possessed the slightest qualification
for any ministerial position. The Peers must have a cer-
tain number of places, because they are Peers. The House
of Commons swarms with the sons and nephews of Peers.
The household appointments, the ministerial offices, the
good places in the army and the church are theirs when
282 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
they choose—and they generally do choose—to have them.
The son of a Peer, if in the House of Commons, may be
raised at One step from his place in the back benches to a
seat in the Cabinet, simply because of his rank. When
Earl Russell, two or three years ago, raised Mr. Goschen,
One of the representatives of the city of London, and a
partner in a great London banking-house, to a place in the
Cabinet, the whole country wondered: a very few, who were
not frightened out of their propriety, admired; some
thought the world must be coming to an end. But when
the Marquis of Hartington was suddenly picked out of
West End dissipation and made War Secretary, nobody ex-
pressed the least wonder, for he was the heir of the House
of Devonshire. Indeed, it was perfectly notorious that the
young Marquis was presented to office, in the first instance,
because it was hoped by his friends that official duties
might wean him from the follies and frivolities of a more
than ordinarily heedless youth.”
The Right Honorable Spencer Compton Cavendish,
Marquis of Hartington, is the eldest son of the seventh
Duke of Devonshire, his mother being Lady Blanche
Georgiana, daughter of the Earl of Carlisle. The title of
Marquis is only a courtesy title, borne by him as heir of a
Duke. He was born July 23, 1833; was educated at
Trinity College, Cambridge, where he took the degree of
B.A. in 1852, and that of M.A. in 1854. He was first
chosen to Parliament for North Lancashire in 1857; and
was afterward defeated by that constituency and returned
for the Radnor borough, the previously returned member
retiring to make room for him. In 1863 he was for a
*. “Modern Leaders,” by Justin McCarthy, p. 13.
THE MARQUIS OF HARTINGTON. 283
month a Lord of the Admiralty, and then for three years
Under Secretary of State for War. In 1866 he became
Secretary of State for War, and also Privy Councilor; in
1868 Post-Master General (under Mr. Gladstone), and
in 1870, Secretary of State for Ireland. He retired from
office with Mr. Gladstone in 1874. He is unmarried.
The Parliamentary critic of the Gentleman's Magazine, speak-
ing of the earlier ministerial career of this gentleman, says:
“The Marquis of Hartington had none of the super-
cilious manner of Mr. Ayrton, but, equally with a col-
league in whose companionship he must have joyed, his
lordship possessed the art of making his audience thor-
oughly understand that, what with their questions, their
objections, and their suggestions, they were decidedly ob-
noxious and altogether unnecessary people, and that if
they would just leave the affairs of the department in the
hands of him who, however unwillingly, addressed them,
it would be a great deal better for the country. For the
heir to a dukedom and revenues untold, the Marquis of
Hartington was a most exemplary Member of Parliament,
being constantly in his place in the House, and invariably
at hand when the division bell rang, just as if he were a
Taper or a Tadpole, or even a Right Hon. Nicholas Rigby.
But he never spoke unless he were absolutely obliged, and
then said as little as possible. There was a surliness about
his manner that did not make him an attractive speaker ;
but then, as I have said, he is the eldest son of a duke, and
on the whole was acceptable to the House of Commons,
and even partially awed the Irish members.” +
“Throughout his career he has never said a striking thing
* “Men and Manner in Parliament,” p. 97.
284 r BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
and never done a bold one, following steadily the beaten
path of official life, doing thoroughly, intelligently, and
well the thing that lay to his hand. As a speaker he barely
succeeded in commanding the attention of the House when
his official position made his words momentous, and out
of Office he has, perforce, grown accustomed to speak be-
fore a beggarly array of empty benches. He invariably
takes a common sense view of the question under discussion,
but he never succeeds in making common sense attractive.
He is one of those men with respect to whom it is, in the
interest of a large number of our fellow-creatures, a mat-
ter of regret that he should have chanced to arrogate the
rare position in life of a Duke's heir, for he was sure to
have earned a comfortable living had he been born in cir-
cumstances that would have thrown him entirely on his
own resources. In brief, the Marquis of Hartington is a
hard-working, conscientious, stolid man, wearing all the
polish he is capable of receiving from high education and
social intercourse, but withal somewhat surly in manner,
greatly impressed with the vast gulf that is fixed between a
Marquis and a man to the despite of the latter, innocent
of the slightest spark of humor, guiltless of gracefulness
of diction, and free from the foibles of fanciful thought.” "
Mr. Wemyss Reid thus describes the personal appear-
ance of the new Liberal leader :
“What does the spectator who looks at the Treasury
Bench, whilst the House is sitting, see when his eye rests
upon the Marquis of Hartington He sees a rather good-
looking man, of tall stature. He is quite young yet—far
* “Men and Manner in Parliament,” p. 252.
THE MARQUIS OF HARTINGTON. 285
younger than any of his colleagues. But the handsome
face has a worn, listless look that adds ten years to his ap-
parent age. The eyes are downcast, the mustache droops
heavily over the full and loosely-molded lips; the man
himself has the air of one who is hopelessly bored with the
business of the State which is going on around him, and
in which it is his lot to be so prominent an actor. And
when my Lord Hartington rises to speak, the impression
which he produces upon his hearers is hardly more favor-
able than that produced by his personal appearance. The
tall young gentleman, to whom some awkward question has
been put by a pertinacious Irish Member like the redoubt-
able Mr. Maguire, languidly gathers himself together when
his tormentor has ceased, languidly rises from his seat, and
languidly adjusts himself in a lounging attitude against the
table of the House. -
“It is apparently more than this young nobleman of
six-and-thirty years can do to support himself for half-a-
dozen minutes without the aid of some substantial piece of
furniture. When he has satisfactorily posed himself in
this manner, the long white hand is seen to play for a
moment listlessly with the thick brown beard, as though
my Lord Marquis kept his ideas hidden somewhere in that
appendage to his handsome face, and then a thick, guttural
stream of words begins to pour forth from the lips, which
are hardly opened in order to emit the sound. Listening
attentively to the lazy drawl which seems to trickle down
the speaker's beard, you get some faint idea that an answer
is being given to the question that has just been put ; but
you must be particularly quick of hearing in order to
understand that answer. Possibly it is not during the
286 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
question-hour at all that the Marquis has risen. He may
have been called upon for an exposition of some great
State question, at a time when that question is attracting
the earnest attention of Parliament. But there is no dif-
ference in the speaker's manner. There is the same in-
dolent grace in the slouching attitude he adopts ; the same
imperturbable self-possession in the manner in which he
strokes and pats the thick brown beard ; the same cool
indifference to everybody and everything in the tone in
which he drawls out his slip-shod sentences.
“The nervous man trembles as he listens to the Marquis
of Hartington whilst he is speaking. At every moment it
seems that the stuttering, stammering, halting flow of
words will come to a final stop ; and that the grievously
over-taxed physical powers of the speaker will collapse al-
together. But let no unaccustomed listener labor under
any such apprehension. It is true that it is but ‘a lum-
bering wain’ of speech which Lord Hartington drives, but
it is at any rate a sure one. The Marquis has far too keen
a sense of the ridiculous to do anything so absurd as break
down. He has, moreover, far too haughty a contempt for
his audience to care to conceal from them his inability to
construct smooth and flowing sentences to express his
ideas. He can think on his legs; and though his
thoughts may not be very brilliant, such as they are
he feels no hesitation about presenting them, in all their
baldness and incoherency, to the first political assem-
blage in the world. But then, has he not taken the
measure of that assemblage, as of everything else under
the sun ? Has he not discovered that here, as well as
elsewhere, nineteen-twentieths of the people are very ordi-
THE MARQUIS OF HARTINGTON. 287
nary persons, who have a profound respect for a duke's
son, and who are by no means quick to discern or resent
his defects 2
“The cynicism which is one of his characteristics is by
no means assumed ; it is but the natural expression of the
feelings of one who has tasted most pleasures, and made
acquaintance with most men under the sun, and who finds
pleasure and work, and fame and power, alike a weariness
to the flesh and a “vain vanity’ to the spirit. Why should
he then trouble himself to show the people who have not
tasted of the fruit of the tree of knowledge. that he pos-
sesses any of the qualities which they are accustomed to
esteem He need not display those qualities, he need not
have them, in order to gain everything that it is possible
for the most gifted of men to gain. Without showing
- either remarkable ability or remarkable industry, he finds
himself not only a Member of Parliament, but a Cabinet
Minister and the head of a great State department. *
“Of so much importance do some men consider his
presence in the House of Commons, that when he is
defeated in fair fight in North Lancashire, one Mr. Green
Price, member for the Radnor burghs, straightway com-
mits political suicide in order to make way for him, and
performs this tremendous act of self sacrifice without hope
of reward, and without, as he takes care to declare, havin
any personal knowledge of the Marquis. # =
“All other honors, moreover, which are the highest and
exceptional rewards of great genius and great services, are
his by right of birth. He has but to stretch out his hands
Or
tº
* [Written in 1870.]
288 - BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
in order to grasp them. Nay, at this very moment, many
a shrewd political prophet would be ready to back the Mar-
quis of Hartington for the premiership itself. Much more
unlikely things have come to pass than that this languid
young man should be called to the helm of affairs, the vir-
tual rulership of the British Empire.
“Can we wonder, when we remember all these things,
that the Marquis of Hartington, though he has been
a Cabinet Minister in two administrations, should never
have shown the capacity which might reasonably be looked
for even in a subordinate member of a government? Let
us not be too hard upon the Marquis. Few men would
be able to resist the temptations of such a position as that
which he occupies, and it is something to see the heir of
the Duke of Devonshire submitting to the drudgery
of late sittings in the House of Commons, to the annoy-
ance of having to answer the absurd and impertinent ques-
tions of ‘cads,’ and to the wearing routine of office work.
It would be too much—would it not?—to expect such
a man, in addition to making these sacrifices for the sake
of the public service, to condescend to increase the debt
of gratitude owed to him by his country, by giving proof
that he was not altogether destitute of the ability without
which a man of the middle-class could never have climbed
beyond an Under-Secretaryship or a Junior Lordship of
the Treasury.
“We are not without a faint idea that this ability is not
wanting in the heir of the great house of Cavendish. It
certainly ought to be there if genius be hereditary, for
Lord Hartington is the son of one of the ablest men and
most accomplished scholars of his day; and he had the
THE MARQUIS OF HARTINGTON. 289
great advantage, during the years of his nonage at Holkar
Hall, of being under the direct tuition of his father. But
if he does possess great ability, the young nobleman has
achieved a remarkable success in his endeavors to hide it
from the vulgar gaze.
“Flatterers will, of course, be ready to assure the pub-
lic that the Marquis of Hartington is an administrator of
tried skill, and that he possesses that statesmanlike
Capacity, that breadth of view, that soundness of judg-
ment, without which no one can hope to succeed in
the battle of life. And we must not accuse these men of
deliberate lying. There is a form of that peculiar disease
called color-blindness, which renders many persons, acute
enough in every other respect, quite unable to see the
blemishes and imperfections in the character of any one so
lofty in station as the heir to a dukedom. The glamour of
great rank surrounds the Marquis of Hartington, and
nothing is more astonishing than the influence which that
glamour has upon the world at large.
“To this nobleman have been intrusted in succession
the duties involved in the charge of the War Office,
of the Post Office, and of Irish Affairs. His present
position * appears to us to be that for which he is best
fitted. He has some knowledge of Ireland, acquired by the
actual possession of property in the island ; he has the
courage and self-control which are absolutely needed by
any man who is brought much in contact with Irish poli-
ticians ; and his personal independence makes him very
careless about the assaults to which an Irish Secretary is
* [Written in 1870.
I ey
J
29O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
Constantly exposed. As Postmaster-General he was, of
course, little more than a cipher ; and as Secretary for
War he might not be worse, but he was certainly not bet-
ter than his predecessors.
“And yet it is impossible to deny that Lord Hartington
has at least one great merit. He does not blunder. He
may never do anything brilliantly ; may never display
a spark of Original genius of any kind ; but he is at least
free alike from the awkwardness which generally dis-
tinguishes plebeian mediocrity, and from the rash impetu-
Osity which is frequently allied to more brilliant talents.” +
It was noted as a promising circumstance that the first
speech made in the House of Commons by the new
leader was to deprecate the recognition of the new
King of Spain. The Marquis of Hartington “expressed
the hope that Her Majesty would not recognize any gov-
ernment which did not meet the approbation of the
Spanish people, which was a most liberal recognition
of popular sovereignty for the heir of a dukedom to make.”
A good political observer furthermore declares that popular
opinion in England points to something like a revival of
the old Whig party policy, under Lord Granville in
the House of Lords and Lord Hartington in the House
of Commons. “The political history of the last forty
years, if it is to repeat itself, points at something of
the kind. After the old Reform Act a strong Radi-
cal government, which did great things, was followed
in 1841 by a strong Tory government like the present.
That was followed by a political lull under the man-
* “Cabinet Portraits,” p. 93.
THE MARQUIS OF HARTINGTON. 29I
agement of the Whigs. Then came the new Reform Act,
the late Radical government which did great things, and a
strong Tory government which is now in power and likely
to remain. If in the ordinary cycle of events we are
to have a political lull under Whig management or
its modern equivalent, we cannot have better managers
than Lord Granville and Lord Hartington.” ”
* Mew York Mation, Feb. II, 1875 (London correspondence).
XIV.
1872, ‘‘the position of no man in the House of
2 ºr Commons was more enviable than that of Mr.
Forster, Vice-President of the Council, and at that time
still shut out of the sacred pale of the Cabinet. Writing
of him at that date it fell to our lot to say that, ‘There is
no one amongst the junior members of the present Admin-
istration whose future is likely to surpass that which appears
to lie before him. He has made for himself a most envia-
ble position in Parliament, where he has succeeded in gain-
ing not only the confidence of the leaders of his own party,
but the esteem and respect of all his opponents.
‘‘‘A staunch Liberal, a member of one of the most
advanced, if not of the most advanced section of the Radi-
cal party, and a man whose unflinching devotion to his
own principles does not require to be tested, he is never-
theless singularly popular amongst the Conservatives gen-
erally, and there is unquestionably no man now sitting on


MR. FORSTER, 293
w
the Treasury Bench who can command so favorable a hear-
ing for any measure he has to propose from both sides of
the House, as the right honorable gentleman whose Rabe-
laisian face forms one of the features of that post of honor.
“‘We may go further than this, and say that at the
present moment, after Mr. Gladstone, Mr. Bright, and
Mr. Lowe, there does not seem to be any one on the Lib-
eral side of the House who would be likely a few years
hence to compete with Mr. Forster for the possession of
the highest post in the Administration. It is no exagger-
ation—it is rather the carefully-formed opinion of the ablest
critics—that the Member for Bradford is more likely than
any other of those who are his compeers in parliamentary
standing to attain the crowning honor of the Premiership.
In short, Mr. Forster may be described as the most rising
man in his party,’” +
“Whether he will ever now be the Liberal leader is pos-
sibly open to doubt. To us it seems, however, that no
other member of his party can hope to compete with him
successfully. Compared with most of the men who might
compete with him, he has on his side the crowning advan-
tages of comparative youth and of popularity. He is still
in the very prime of life, and he has succeeded in winning
for himself a foremost place in the esteem and confidence
of nearly all parties in the House of Commons. Under
these circumstances we are inclined to think that men are
not rash who express their belief that, if he is spared, the
right hon. gentleman who now represents Bradford in the
House of Commons will become Prime Minister of Eng-
* “Cabinet Portraits,” p. 232.
294 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
land. There is most assuredly no one in his own rank in
Parliament whose chances of obtaining that distinction
would be preferred to his. Much, of course, depends upon
himself; but, judging by the past, we see no reason why
in that future day, when those who are now at the head of
affairs have departed, Mr. Forster should not appear as the
leader of the new generation, and enter upon a far higher
career of statesmanship than any which he has yet at-
tempted.” +
Mr. Forster has a claim on American regard in view of
his parentage, as well as for himself. He is the son of that
William Forster of whom Whittier wrote:—
“The years are many since his hand
Was laid upon my head,
Too weak and young to understand
The serious words he said.
“Yet often now the good man's look
Before me seems to swim,
As if some inward feeling took
The outward guise of him.”
In a note to this poem, the author thus sums up the
brief history of this good man :-
“William Forster of Norwich, England, died in East
Tennessee, in January, 1854, while engaged in presenting
to the Governors of the States of this Union the address of
his religious society on the evils of slavery. He was the
relative and coadjutor of the Buxtons, Gurneys, and Frys,
and his whole life, extending almost to threescore and ten
years, was a pure and beautiful example of Christian benev-
* “Cabinet Portraits,” p. 242.
MR FORSTER. 295
olence. He had traveled over Europe, and visited most
of its sovereigns to plead against the slave-trade and slav-
ery; and had twice before made visits to this country under
impressions of religious duty.” -
The Right Honorable William Edward Forster was born at
Bradpole, in Dorsetshire, July 11, 1818. His mother was
the sister of Sir Thomas Fowell Buxton, Bart. He was educa-
ted at the Friends' School at Tottenham ; became a manu-
facturer in Bradford ; and married, in 1850, a daughter of
the celebrated Dr. Arnold of Rugby. In 1861, he entered
Parliament as Member for Bradford ; was Under-Secretary
for the colonies from November 1865, to July, 1866; in
December, 1868, was made one of the Charity Commis-
sioners, and Vice-President of the Committee of the Coun-
cil on Education, and also Privy Councilor. In 1870, he
was the chief supporter of the new Education Bill, to
which he ultimately gave such a form as to dissatisfy most
of the dissenters. In 1871, he had similar charge of
the Ballot Law. I remember well his appearance dur-
ing a long and teasing series of debates upon amend-
ments, in which he was constantly called upon to explain
and deſend the details of an elaborate bill, which was op-
posed and criticised from a dozen different points of view.
It seemed to me an ordeal such as no American public
man can possibly be called upon to undergo, so long as
our Cabinet Ministers have no seats in Congress. Mr.
Forster sat on the front Ministerial bench, his elbows on his
knees, his head between his hands, as if he needed to
grasp that organ firmly to keep the brain from utter bewil-
derment. Occasionally touched beyond endurance by some
criticism from Sir William (then Vernon) Harcourt, he
296 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
would lift his head, spring to his feet, and state with great
clearness, and apparent frankness, the precise reason why
the bill had been put in that form ; then sliding suddenly
into his seat he would cover head and eyes with his hands
Once more, and apparently resign himself to an utter
ignoring of the whole wrangle, or, perhaps, to an ecstasy
of resolute self-martyrdom.
“How has it come to pass,” asks Wemyss Reid, “that
Mr. Forster holds such a position in Parliament, in spite
of the violent abuse showered on him out of doors 2 Not
assuredly because he is connected with any of our great
governing families, or because he has been through a long
course of public life the faithful friend and ally of some
Whig statesman. There is hardly any one in the House
of Commons who could lay less claim to these advantages
—if they are advantages—than Mr. Forster. He is the
son of a Minister of the Society of Friends, a gentleman
who was distinguished during a long life by his works of
practical benevolence, and who died whilst traveling on
an Anti-Slavery mission in the United States. He is, it is
true, the son-in-law of Dr. Arnold ; but Dr. Arnold's in-
fluence, vast though it has been, has not, we need scarcely
say, been in the direction of the Senate. Furthermore,
Mr. Forster is, or until a very recent period was, a York-
shire millowner and manufacturer. His residence is in
that lovely valley of the Wharf, the beauties of which Turner
was so fond of studying and reproducing, and his place of
business is in the crowded streets of Bradford, a town with
the staple industry of which the Vice-President of the
Council is intimately acquainted. It can hardly be said,
therefore, that it is to any accident of birth or social influ-
MR. FORSTER. 297
ence that Mr. Forster owes the position he has gained in
the political world. He is a Yorkshire mill-owner, and
professes to be little more.
“Nor can it be said that it is to any remarkable gift of
eloquence that he is indebted for the high rank he has al-
ready taken. Mr. Forster can hardly be said to be an elo-
quent man. His speeches, though they are usually clear
and powerful, are not adorned by any rhetorical graces,
nor are they lightened by any play of imagination. They
are the plain unvarnished statement of honest opinions,
arrived at after a due weighing of all sides of the question
upon which those opinions have had to be formed. They
have nothing of the literary beauty attaching to Mr.
Bright's orations, nor have they the elasticity, the grace,
and the eloquence for which Mr. Gladstone's speeches are
remarkable.
“Mr. Forster was, moreover, a notable man in Parlia-
ment before he gained the opportunity of making a repu-
tation as a statesman. Long ere he was allowed to intro-
duce measures of his own, or to sit in the Cabinet, he had
gained a place in the esteem of his fellow-members that
was in every way enviable. It seems to us that it was to his
general character and reputation, and to the marked ability
he had shown in his criticisms on some public affairs, that
he was indebted for this place.
“Before he had sat many years in the House of Com-
mons, he had succeeded in establishing for himself not
Only a reputation for ability but for fairness. It was this
eminent fairness and impartiality which did so much to
gain for him that popularity which he now enjoys. His
fairness was, however, something very different from the
13*.
298 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
cold-blooded judicial attitude assumed by Lord Derby, or
the veneering of suavity worn by Lord Granville. It was
rather the generous fairness of an outspoken English gen-
tleman, who feels the utmost confidence in the perſect
righteousness of his own views upon any and every subject,
and who is prepared to maintain those views at all costs
against all comers, but who has at the same time a gentle-
manly respect and even liking for honest opponents, and
who is quite ready to admit that, though his own views are
the best, there may be something in the views of other
people which deserves consideration.
“There is, in fact, a bluff and frank good-nature in the
manner in which Mr. Forster deals with his opponents,
which does more to conquer them than torrents of decla-
mation or the most ingeniously designed strategy. The
House of Commons, as a whole, rejoices as much in meet-
ing a fair and generous opponent as any individual mem-
ber would do, and accordingly Mr. Forster, who deals out
to both sides of the House a courtesy, somewhat rough of
speech, it is true, but always ſairly divided between both
parties, finds himself one of those enviable men who are
popular with everybody. -
“Before he had established a position for himself at St.
Stephen's, however, Mr. Forster held no mean place at
Bradford, of which town he was one of the parliamentary
representatives. The right honorable gentleman always
speaks with something akin to enthusiasm when he men-
tions Bradford in the House of Commons, and Bradford
returns the compliment by greeting him with overflowing
enthusiasm whenever he appears in its midst for the pur-
pose of addressing his constituents.
MR. FORSTER. 299
“It seems to us that the Yorkshire borough could
hardly have a more suitable representative than Mr. For-
ster. The strong, sturdy common sense of the people of
that district, their inherent love of fair play, their ambition,
and their energy, are all fitly represented in Mr. Forster.
It is a sight worth seeing when the right honorable gentle-
man addresses a meeting of his fellow-townsmen in St.
George's Hall, and it vividly recalls to mind the triumphs
enjoyed by Mr. Bright whenever he makes his appearance
in the Free Trade Hall at Manchester, or the Town Hall
at Birmingham. It is apparent the moment Mr. Forster
appears upon the platform that the most perfect confidence
and mutual good-will exists between member and constit-
uents. The latter cheer him with a heartiness which
speaks volumes on behalf of the soundness of their Lib-
eralism and their lungs, and the former responds to the
greeting he thus receives by making a speech in which he
disburdens himself to his friends with a freedom and a
frankness which must cause him to be the envy of more
Cautious statesmen. .
‘‘Let it not be supposed, however, that in the frankness
which leads Mr. Forster to tell his constituents exactly
what he thinks about the prospects of any particular policy
in which his party is engaged, without regard to the consid-
eration whether his opinions are likely to encourage his
friends or the reverse, he ever falls into the mistake of saying
too much. On the contrary, his very openness and frankness
save him from the traps into which more cautious men are
apt to fall. Thus Mr. Forster has never been known to
reveal a ministerial secret prematurely. Indeed, when he
became a member of the Government he told his constit-
3OO BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
uents, with the utmost straightforwardness, that they must
not expect him to tell them everything; that he would tell
them all that he could in fairness, but that there were cer-
tain topics upon which his tongue must henceforth be
tied, and that much as he would like to speak upon these
topics, he could not do so.
“His constituents, being sensible Yorkshiremen, ac-
cepted this frank apology as a compliment rather than
otherwise, and thus it is that Mr. Forster, though a mem-
ber of the present Administration, and holding an impor-
tant position in it, enjoys the delightful privilege of talk-
ing as freely as any independent member to his constituents
upon most topics, and is allowed by them to say just as
much or as little as he likes upon the other topics with
which he is immediately concerned in his official capacity.
His mode of securing this privilege by a frank confession
of the disabilities under which a member of any Govern-
ment necessarily labors, was a happy instance of the tact
which has ever distinguished him throughout his public
life.” ‘k
The critic of the Daily News, however, pronounces Mr.
Forster to be, in the highest sense of the word—the sense
of Lord Halifax-a political Trimmer. He says that “Mr.
Forster's Ministerial career has exhibited, the more threat-
eningly because the germs of dangerous qualities are blend-
ed in him with great capacities and honorable aims, at
least the first stage of this political decline. He is the
chief Trimmer of modern politics. That is indeed the
claim which in other terms is put forward on his behalf
* “Cabinet Portraits,” p. 234
MR. FORSTER. 3OI
to public confidence. We are told that it is his effort to
produce measures which shall please both sides of the
House. In other words, Mr. Forster has made the ex-
periment of trying to serve two masters; and the result is
what has been predicted of all such efforts. Mr. Facing-
Both-Ways is not the model for an English statesman.
The English Elementary Education Act was a triumph of
political trimming. The measure was framed to pass the
two Houses of Parliament, and as a Liberal majority was
secured by the quarter from whence it came, by the undue
confidence placed in the Minister who had charge of it,
and by the indisposition to embarrass the Government,
Mr. Forster spent all his energies in conciliating the Con-
servative opposition. He was bent on making the measure
acceptable to them, and to the majority in the House of
Lords. He trimmed the boat to the Tory side. The nav-
igation through Parliament was dexterously performed ;
but the vessel constructed for that purpose has scarcely
proved seaworthy. Already it has had to put in port for re-
pairs, and, if we may judge from the suggestions which
have been made, nothing more is contemplated than a lit-
tle more trimming. The same qualities were displayed,
though not so conspicuously, in Mr. Forster's conduct of
the Ballot Bill.
“It is Mr. Forster's fault as a statesman not to look be-
yond the House of Commons, or, at most, to enlarge his
view only to the House of Lords; to think too much of
the passing of a measure, and too little of what it will
prove to be when passed. Like some barbarous tribes,
who sacrifice to the evil spirit because they feel that the
benevolence of the good spirit is theirs already, Mr. For-
3O2 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
ster has neglected his Liberal friends for his Conservative
adversaries. The administration of the Endowed Schools
Act bears traces of this design to curry favor with the Op-
position. The result is that, though Mr. Forster took
office as one of the representatives of the Radical section
of the Liberal party, he is now reckoned as the link between
the Government and the Conservatives. It is said that if
he is again returned for Bradford, it will be by Tory
votes. Members who owe their seats to Tory votes cannot
avoid paying the debt by a more or less Tory policy. They
take their political complexion from their constituents, as
Some animals are said to change their color with that of
the food they eat. Mr. Forster has, we hope, force of char-
acter and strength of conviction to avoid this catastrophe;
but he is running great risk of it. In the meantime he
has done not a little to disintegrate his party, and to sub-
stitute in Parliamentary contests the skirmishing of fortui-
tous bands, gathered from this side and from that, for the
regular and organized warfare of rival parties, that is to
say, of opposing convictions and principles. The resent-
ment which these tactics have created is confined to a sec-
tion of the Liberal party. The distrust which they have
inspired is far more widely spread ; and, unless it be dis-
pelled by a different line of conduct, must affect for the
worse Mr. Forster's political prospects and career.
“Sydney Smith long ago pointed out that it was Lord
Russell's misfortune, with a simple and ingenuous char-
acter, to believe that he was endowed with a genius for
intrigue. Many of the most serious errors of that eminent
statesman's career are due to his own innocent conviction
of his skill in finesse. Mr. Forster is in a similar danger
MR, FORSTER. 3O3
of sacrificing the better elements of his character to a cer-
tain, almost sinister, faculty of Parliamentary manage-
ment.” +
“His speech in introducing the Education measure de-
serves to be noted as a masterpiece of clear and persuasive
exposition. It followed but a few days after that wonder-
ful address in which Mr. Gladstone made the intricacies of
the Irish Land Bill as simple and intelligible as the multi-
plication table. Most men would have shrunk nervously
from the comparison which could not fail to be suggested
under the circumstances between the two speeches. Mr.
Forster was not free from the nervousness ; but he, never-
theless, gave no chance to the most invidious critics to draw
odious comparisons between himself and Mr. Gladstone.
Without making the slightest attempt to secure oratorical
effect, he quietly and deliberately stated to the House the
provisions of his bill, in language which nobody could
misunderstand. When he sat down it seemed for the mo-
ment that he had achieved one of the greatest parliament-
ary triumphs of modern times. Everybody was captivated
by his exposition of the measure, and on the one side of
the House leading members of the Conservative party, and
on the other influential Radicals, joined in congratulating
Mr. Forster upon the masterly manner in which he had
solved the great problem of the day.
‘‘We know that since then some of his own friends have
seen fit to alter their opinions, and that the views taken by
a section of the Liberals with regard to Mr. Forster's bill
have been considerably modified under pressure from with-
* “Political Portraits,” p. 205.
3O4. BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
out. Still this does not alter the fact that in the first
instance his proposals were hailed as the most successful
attempt to settle the educational difficulty which had ever
been made, and that the speech in which those proposals
were stated was of itself a model of lucid and simple ex-
position. He conducted the subsequent parliamentary
skirmishes on the question with tact, temper, and discre-
tion. As for Mr. Forster's future, it seems to us that the
more his present position is studied the more brilliant will
that future seem.” -
Mr. Forster visited America last year, and made an ex-
tended tour through the United States. In the latter part
of his visit, he had a reception from the Union League
Club of New York, on the evening of December 15, 1874.
The address of the presiding officer, Joseph H. Choate,
Esq, contained an excellent resumé of Mr. Forster's ser-
vices to this country during the Civil War. Some extracts
from this speech follow :
“You are all too familiar with the events of those days to have
forgotten the part which our distinguished guest then took in Parlia-
ment as the Member for Bradford. It is no flattery to say that he
acted always as the steadfast friend of his own country and of ours,
and demonstrated that the two characters were not incompatible. I
may not, in his presence, detail all that he said and did in the line
of this policy. Let two or three instances suffice. In the early part
of 1862, when a violent pressure was brought to bear upon his Gov-
ernment to attempt a breach of the blockade by which our navy had
already successfully invested the Southern ports, he disputed in the
House of Commons the alleged inefficiency of the blockade, and
demonstrated by the very facts and arguments which were brought
* “Cabinet Portraits,” p. 240.
MR. FORSTER. 3O5
to bear against it that it had been wonderfully effective from the be-
ginning. He argued that the strict observance of a genuine neu-
trality was all that could save England from a more deplorable war
than any other in which she could engage ; a war in which, to use
his own words, “she would have to fight for slavery and against her
own kinsmen.' This view happily prevailed. The Government de-
clared against the proposition, and so England was saved from a
gross injustice and America from a disaster which would have been
irreparable. . A little later in the same year, when defeat and disas-
ter covered our arms, when Washington was in greater danger than
Richmond, and the commercial prosperity of England was checked,
and her great cotton mills stopped by the progress of the war, a
bold attempt was made in Parliament to induce the British Govern-
ment to offer mediation. He then insisted that such an offer would
he unjustifiable in the position as it then stood, and would justly be
regarded as an affront by our Government ; that England's true in-
terest was that the war should end as speedily as possible, and that
such a step on her part would only imbitter and prolong it. He
contended that slavery was the true cause of the war, and expressed
his conviction that the war would end in its extermination, although
he could not see exactly how that desired end would be brought
about. It is not a little remarkable that when this prophetic hope
was asserted on the other side of the Atlantic our own Government,
though near in time, was not yet quite so near in purpose to its re-
alization. On almost the very day on which it was uttered, Presi-
dent Lincoln sent a Message to Congress with the draft of a bill,
the plan of which was to compensate any State which might abolish
slavery within its limits, by issuing to it United States six per cent.
bonds at so many dollars a head for all the slaves so freed. And it
was not till six months afterward that the hope of history was real-
ized by the actual publication, on the 1st of January, 1863, of the
proclamation that declared all slaves to be freemen thenceforth and
forever. From the very outbreak of our troubles our friend de-
manded of the Government a strict enforcement of its Foreign En-
listment act, to prevent rebel cruisers from being built and equipped
in England, and sent forth for the destruction of our commerce ;
306 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
and if he and those who stood with him could have had their way,
no Confederate flag would have ſound its way out upon the ocean,
The Alabama, the Florida, and the Shenandoa/, would have been
tied fast until the end of the war to the British docks, where they
were built or equipped, and the war itself would have been thereby
shortened by many months or years. In March, 1863, when exhort-
ing the Government to increased vigilance in preventing the escape
of new cruisers which were already projected, he used the argument
so characteristic of a Christian statesman, that England should do
as she would be done by, and, he added, as America had always
done by her, and in that connection he cited two instances of the
fidelity of our Government in that regard—the case of the Aussian
Admiral and the Maury—and it may not be uninteresting to him to
know that the great American shipbuilder and the eminent Ameri-
can merchant to whom he referred in that debate, as illustrating the
fact that American subjects would not break their own neutrality
laws, are present with us this evening to do him honor. We have to be
thankful that he was by no means alone in these efforts. John
Bright was always with him, shoulder to shoulder. The aggregate
of these friendly influences was sufficient to restrain the Government
from any overt acts against its declared neutrality, and there is good
reason to believe that we had more friends than we knew, not only
in Parliament, but in the Government, and that that gracious lady,
the Queen herself, was wholly averse to anything which tended to a
breach of friendship with America. * * * *
“But I should be false to this occasion, gentlemen, if I did not, in
conclusion, call your attention to another totally different subject, in
regard to which our eminent friend is entitled to grateful recog-
nition wherever the English language is spoken. I mean for his
whole-souled devotion to the great cause of education. Since, in this
country, education has been the one great interest underlying and
overshadowing all the rest from the day when the Pilgrims landed
at Plymouth until this hour; since its success is the measure and the
standard of our national strength and prosperity; since the different
regions and sections of this great Republic take rank exactly like
children in the schools according to the fidelity with which they
MR. FORSTER. 3O7
have cherished it, we cannot, as Americans, afford to leave it out of
the estimate of that tribute which we are paying to-night. Our
guest was the father and the champion of that great measure, so vital
to the welfare of England—the Elementary Education bill—which
was introduced and carried through in the Session of 1870, having
for its object—as its name implies—to secure elementary education
to all the children of England. No man who pretends to be edu-
cated ought to be unfamiliar with that long series of speeches in the
House of Commons, by which Mr. Forster, as the member of Parlia-
ment having that bill in charge, advocated and carried it through,
How he demonstrated that upon its speedy passage depended the
industrial prosperity, the constitutional system, and the national
safety of England. How, in an almost unparalleled debate of twen-
ty-one days, he contended for its passage—answering all questions,
settling all doubts, silencing all opposition; so that, when at last it
had received the royal assent, every child in England could ſairly
thank him for having secured to it at least the sure foundation of an
education.”
Mr. Forster's speech was so interesting and important—
as being the first elaborate statement ever made, on Ameri-
can soil, by a leading English statesman, of the political
relations between the two countries—that it will be given
in full :—
“MR. PRESIDENT AND GENTLEMEN : I have often had occasion to
lament that want of power of expression which has accompanied me
through life, and I have often wondered why it is I ventured to take
part in public affairs, but I never regretted it so much as I do this
evening. I know of no time in the history of my life, in which there
was such an occasion for me to be eloquent, and yet, alas ! eloquent
I cannot be. I can only say that I never was so embarrassed, I may
say overpowered, with kindness as by the kindness of your reception
this evening. I try to imagine that it is not to myself personally,
and yet the eloquent and kind remarks of the President almost make
me think that it, to some extent, is a personal welcome that you are
308 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
giving me. (Applause) And I will say that when this invitation
was first extended to me I thought that really I should not accept,
that it would hardly be fitting so to honor me, but I supposed that
I should not readily decline any meeting in which the good feeling
of Americans to Englishmen, even though to one of her least con-
spicuous statesmen, would be thus evinced. I must not merely
thank you for your great kindness, but as I am about leaving your
shores in two days, I am glad to be able, in this meeting, to say one
word of the great kindness with which I have been received through-
out your great country. It was not merely courtesy to myself; that
I should have expected, for the character the Americans have for
courtesy would have secured that I should be thus treated where I
was known. But there are mischief-makers who, sometimes from
recklessness and sometimes from malice, try, on both sides of the
Atlantic, to represent that there is some ill-feeling between the two
countries and between the two peoples, and, therefore, I am glad to
take this opportunity of saying that, from Boston to the Rocky Moun-
tains, and from Niagara to New Orleans, I never heard one mention
of my country that an Englishman would not like to hear. (Ap-
plause.) Well, sir, you have alluded to the facts connected with your
great struggle, with your great rebellion. I will myself hardly allude
to them. You have stated with great generosity your opinion that,
as time goes on, history will prove both to Americans and to Eng-
glishmen, that you had in that great crisis more friends in our coun-
try than perhaps at the time you supposed. I think you will find, as
you get to know more of the actual facts, I think you will find what
was really the case, that both the people and the Government of
England were your steadfast sympathizers and friends. (Applause.)
You stated, sir, and stated with great truth, that there were men in
our country who could not help being your friends in that great
struggle; that the Abolitionists, the old anti-slavery men, well knew
what that struggle meant, and indeed I may say that I, as an enemy,
of slavery from the time that I could first read a book or listen to
words spoken on the subject—that I should have been utterly without
excuse if I had not the knowledge to see what was the real meaning
of the terrible contest in which you were engaged. (Applause.) I
MR. FORSTER. 309
had the knowledge that there was never any struggle out of my
country, I don't know that there was ever any struggle anywhere, in
which I felt so intensely interested as in your great Civil War.
“There never was a war upon which depended a greater stake, in
which the issue was more important. History, I believe, will declare
it was the war of this century, of this age. What were the great re-
sults? What were the great stakes at issue? There was the preserva-
tion of your great Union; there was the abolition of this terrible evil
of slavery. What would have happened if you had not succeeded ?
Why, your Union would have been broken up. You would have
had in America, as we have in Europe, countries with large standing
armies, combinations, complications, and difficulties, frontiers con-
stantly, jealously, watching each other, constantly trying—and that
is what I always endeavor to remind men in England—constantly
trying to drag the nations of Europe into some difficulties on one
side or the other. And as regards slavery, slave power would have
been dominant over a large portion of your fair country, and in fact
we would have been put back in the progress of civilization for many,
many years. (Applause.) What would have been the results? There
never was a war waged for a greater stake: there never was a war
with greater results. These results may be summed up almost in
two words—slavery abolished in the United States, and by that
abolition doomed to destruction elsewhere—and your nation saved
not only from that assault, but saved, as I fully believe, forever.
(Applause.) -
“No one who traveled over your country—no one can read her
history—no one can see how you are united together by every tie of
liberty, of interest, and of blood, without saying that nothing but
the destruction, the influences of such a tremendous evil as slavery
would promote disseveration. These were facts which I knew before
I came to America. I knew what an important war it had been,
and how great the stake, and how great the results; but I confess
that traveling in your country has made me realize more even than
I did when I was reading the daily accounts that reached me during
the struggle—has made me realize more completely what a terrible
war it was. I doubt whether there ever was a civil war, or any war,
3 I O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
which was waged with greater destruction of life on each side, with
greater suffering, and I may say with greater courage, greater hero-
ism, greater endurance. And when I say that I don't say on one
side only, for your fellow-countrymen of the South showed that they
were Americans, showed, I might say, that they were of English de-
scent. (Applause.) We know the courage with which they ſought
was wasted on a wrong side ; it was expended in what was indeed a
bad cause, but they did not think so. They were in rebellion because
of the circumstances that surrounded them. There was such a fate
and destiny hanging over them, and these men who were fighting
against the Union, and fighting for slavery, thought, as they told me
in the South, that they were fighting for their firesides. But not
only was the war waged one of the greatest wars in the world for
the valor and heroism with which it was waged, but there is another
fact that is brought home to me by the short visit I have paid you,
and that is there never was a civil war which, I fully believe, has
leſt less hatred and less rancor behind it (applause); less hatred be-
tween the victor and the vanquished, less hatred between the freed-
men and their masters. I don't say that there is absolutely no ill-
feeling or ill-will left on the part of any of the men in the South, or
that what happened to the men in the North has been entirely
wiped out of their memories; but I do say this to the credit of our
common race, there was never a contest that we can find anywhere
but in itselſ—no civil war for any length of time prosecuted, that has
left so little of a feeling of hatred on the part of the combatants,
and has made it so easy for them now to unite together, and to be,
as the President said, one country, hardly remembering their difficul-
ties. (Applause.) I was introduced last week by a Federal General
to a Confederate General, on the floor of the House. I heard, as I
went through the country, men who had been fighting in different
camps talking over the battles in which they had been opposed to
each other, and in fact I was always told that if there was any diffi-
culty or disagreement left it was not between those who fought, but
rather between those who had not fought. (A laugh.)
“Well, Sir, then as regards the master and the slave, I do not deny
that you have a terrible problem—a most difficult problem—before
MR. FORSTER. 3 II
you ; the problem of dealing with the freedman and considering
what the antecedents of slavery are, what slavery made him--aye,
what slavery made his master. The problem of having to deal
with these men in their new condition is one that may well call for
all the forbearance and all the wisdom of the Government, and
politicians, and people. And even then, although I do not mean to
say that you have not difficulties in the present ; that you have not
difficulties, perhaps, in the immediate future; yet, even then,
you ought to be full of hope, for great is the progress of the past.
I am not here to tell you what you yourselves know so much better
than I do. It would be presumptuous on my part to put before
you the little experience I have learned in this short and hasty tour
I have made through your country, but I must say that going down
to the South with the most intense interest in the fate and
the condition of the freedmen, I have come from it with a great
feeling of hopefulness, in spite of every difficulty there may
be at the present, and in spite of every disturbance we sometimes
hear of and lament over, that you will be really able to solve that
problem.
“One or two little things which I noticed in the South impressed
me very favorably; and though they may not be new to you, they
were details which very deeply impressed me. I went to a sugar
plantation near New Orleans, and there I found only two changes.
One change was—the slaves were free. But there I saw two women
and a man working, and a white man walking down the canes. He
was their foreman now ; he had been their overseer. He said that
the freedmen and the freed women, whom he had in the times of
slavery to drive to work with the lash, cheerfully earned their
$30 a month, with rations, for the men, and 75 cents a day for the
women, with rations. That is a fact you may set up against
all you hear from Vicksburg—and the Returning Board of New
Orleans. (Laughter.) Then again there was another little fact.
I only mention it among thousands of such facts. In a place
in which, a few years ago, it would have been a crime to teach any
colored person to read, we went to an excellent colored school, and
the parents came with the children, and we asked how many
3 I2 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
of these had been slaves, and we ascertained that almost every one
of them had been. And again, we asked how many had little bits
of land, and a large proportion of them, we found, had little bits of
land. There again is progress in the past that shows how really
you are working out the problem, and I believe, if I may be
allowed to say it, that all that is wanting now is to leave matters
very much to themselves, and you will find the whites and blacks,
the masters and their slaves, will accustom themselves to the new
state of society, to the new position of the laborer. There remains
this most important fact—a fact which is of importance to us
as well as to you. Contrary to the experience of the West Indies,
the actual amount of produce raised in the South, the actual crops
that have been taken from the soil, including cotton, rice, and
tobacco, is as great as it was before the abolition of slavery. Well,
I must not detain you with any extended remarks. (Cries of “Go
on, go on.”) I will only mention one other fact that came before
me when I was there. Whenever I could, I heard your oratory—
never missed a speech, if I could possibly help it, and I heard one
eloquent gentleman responding to a welcome which was conveyed,
not as conveyed to me to-night, but in the form of a serenade. I
cannot repeat his speech ; but there was one sentence in it which
struck me very much. He was returned, I believe, by the Demo-
cratic Party; at any rate, he was a favorite of the Democratic
Party, and so he spoke from their point of view, I suppose. But,
describing what he hoped would be their future policy, he described
what I believe is the policy of every patriot, be he Democrat
or Republican or of any other party throughout this great country.
He said that policy was ‘peace between the sections ; peace
between the races.” (Applause.) Well, may I add one other word
to that—peace between you and us—(applause)—and not peace
merely, but friendship and fraternity among all English-speaking
communities.
“Now, I took an intense interest in your war. I earnestly desired
that the rebellion should be put down, not merely because I be-
lieved that it was for the good of your people, but also because it
was for the good of civilization, for the good of England, and for the
MR. FORSTER. 3 I 3
", -
good of all countries that the Union should be preserved—not
merely because I hated slavery and longed to see it abolished, but
because I had no other aspiration so deep-seated as the desire for an
Anglo-American alliance, and while slavery existed that alliance was
almost impossible. How could any such alliance exist when there
was this disagreement between the two Governments, and between
these two countries. Let me say a word or two upon this alliance,
because I believe a great many of you desire it as much as I do, and
I think it is of the utmost importance that we should thoroughly ex-
press what we mean by it. It is not from a feeling of self-interest,
or ſrom a feeling of fear of your power, however great it may be ; it
is not from fear of war between us and you, if by that is meant the
fear of your defeating us, that has caused me to have a feeling so
strong in favor of this alliance. In one respect I have a fear of war
between you and us, and you also have that fear with us. I say it is
not from fear of your power, for who is bold enough to say that if
these two countries, inheriting one prowess and one ancestry, and
inheriting the endurance and determination not to allow themselves
to be defeated, with all their resources and all their courage, should
go to war, which of them at the end of that fierce struggle would
come out the conqueror. But I fear war, as you fear it, because it
would be a civil war, and you know what civil war means. War
between us and you would really mean civil war. It is not merely
that we are kinsmen by our common ancestry, but that kinsmanship
is being constantly renewed. There are thousands upon thousands
of men in almost every one of your cities that have their relations in
our country, and there is scarcely any one of our towns that has not
got a kinsman here. I can well recollect when I was addressing my
constituents at the time of your civil war, saying that we owed justice
to a foreign country, and then catching myself up and saying, ‘this
is not a foreign country, for I should like to know how many of you
there are present that have got relations in America,’ and there was
almost half of the audience jumped up in response. I may say this,
because when I said it was not fear of war that made me desire an
Anglo-American alliance, I stated that we do not fear a civil war be-
tween us. But it is no calculation of self-interest, nor any mere fear
314 BRIEF BIOGRAPEIIES.
of war that has induced that strong desire for this alliance in the
minds of many of us—I may say in my own mind certainly, and I
believe there are many who have the same feeling. But it is the
belief that you and we together, that your Government and our
Government, that your commonwealth and our commonwealth
might together influence the world, might together lead Christian
nations in the path of progress, and might together try to teach and
civilize the weaker nations to tread that path. (Applause.) I am
told that this is a wild sentiment of ours, that these are unmeaning
phrases, or a threat to other nations. I claim to be a practical poli-
tician. If I have had any success whatever in political life, it has
been because I tried to hold fast to all practical matters. It is just
because I am a practical politician that I have earnestly desired that
you and we together may help one another in so putting into prac-
tice the same principles of freedom and of order, that by the power
of our success we may induce other nations to follow out example
and so pervade other people that they may persuade, may force, their
Governments to follow that example, and to disband those vast
standing armies which keep back civilization and threaten the peace .
and prosperity of the world. #
“Now take, for instance, that arbitration matter at Geneva. I do
not know that that is a popular thing to talk about here. (Laugh-
ter.) I believe you think you did not get half enough money, and I
know it is not very popular either in our country. You know when
a man pays out money he thinks he pays too much, while the man
who receives the money generally thinks he ought to get more. But,
bowever that may be, be it popular or not at present, I may say here
what I never shrunk from saying in England, either in Parliament
or out of it, that I struggled hard for that arbitration, that I earnestly
desired that that matter should be sent to arbitration, and when
there was some possibility that it might fall off on account of some
things that were said here which I will not allude to to-night, I
clung to it, determined that if possible it should go on. And I tell you
simply the reason why I did so. I won't go into that question of the
claim, or how far you were right and how far you were mistaken in
thinking we were so wrong as you supposed. Undoubtedly it was
I 4
MR. ForSTER. 3I 5
a case in which lawyers could on each side debate indefinitely. But
the one reason I allude to to-night is that I was very much struck by
a description of it I saw in one of your principal papers a few days
ago—a description which seemed to be rather approved of by your
paper—and that was a description by that eminent European states-
man, Senor Castelar, who described it as a ‘sublime humiliation.’
I am proud of that sublime humiliation. (Applause.) But I do not
know that I should be proud of it if I thought it was a humiliation
at all. I have no fear whatever that history will quickly pass the
same verdict, and that in both our countries it will very speedily be
popular, although it may not be at this moment. A lawsuit is not
liked, but a lawsuit is better than fisticuffs on any occasion. But
the ground upon which I struggled for it was this, that, having, with
all its difficulties, got that dispute between us to arbitration, having,
with all its difficulties—and they were not few—kept that arbitration
going till we came to the decision, it will be uncommonly difficult
for anybody, any Government on either side, however much it may
wish it, or any mischief-makers on either side, however powerful
they may be—I say it will be very difficult for them in future to
bring up a war between our two countries without an arbitration
being first tried. And then again, I do rejoice that the first suc-
cessful trial, upon a great and important occasion, which I believe
this to have been, of arbitration as a settlement of a dispute between
two great countries, should have been by England and America, and
that we should have set the example to the rest of the world. Well,
I dare say I shall be told, what is the use of your talking so much
about this alliance between the two countries, because when Ameri-
cans get to live some time in America they become very different
from Englishmen, and Englishmen are very likely changed from
what they were when Americans left England, and this itself will be
sufficient to keep up disagreement. I believe, if any one holds that
opinion, it is a very great mistake. There are differences, but it
appears to me they are differences in appearance rather than in
reality.
“Let me just give you my experience in coming to you. I honestly
conſess that on the first day or two I was struck with the differ-
316 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES. º
ence between your country and ours. But after that day or two
it seemed altogether to disappear. And I have not been able to
fancy that I have not been in my own country. Then you may talk
of the differences in the Governments. Well, there is a difference
in the form of the Government, but it is curious how we get at the
same end, and how we have the same object, and how there are the
same principles in our two Governments. I have been spending a
week in Washington, and I have been most kindly allowed to see as
much as it was possible to see of the machinery of your parliament-
ary government, and I must confess that at first sight there seemed
to me there was a very great difference. I was aware of one very
remarkable difference which I should find out. That which with us
is a ministry, ceases to be a ministry as soon as the majority of the
country have declared against the party to which it belonged, but
with you it lasts as long as the President chooses to keep it in
power. (Laughter.) I was aware of that difference, and I am also
aware that with your institutions, which I need-not go into now,
especially as you know them so much better than myself, that it
would be difficult—scarcely possible—to make a change in that re-
spect. But I was not prepared to find out this fact, that your mem-
bers of your House of Commons, if I may be allowed to call your
House of Representatives your House of Commons, remain in power
and remain members long after they have been turned out. I have
great pleasure in witnessing the deputies in your House assembled
and transacting the public affairs, but I found out that two-thirds of
the gentlemen I had the pleasure of seeing had second selves wait-
ing for their seats, who were ready to take their places, and who,
like the Peri in the poem, were looking in at the Elysium within,
but still kept out. Upon going home, if I come across my old col-
leagues, I can explain to them how very different would have been
their position here, and how premature, from an American point of
view, our hasty and precipitate action last year would have been. I
believe you have a very good reason for this difference, for it seems
to me it is your way of bringing in the Conservative element in
affairs, which I suppose would be necessary in any popular Govern-
ment. The principle of both countries is that the will of the people
sº - M.R. FORSTER. . 317
should be obeyed. That is a principle upon which your Govern-
ment is formed and your Parliament is constituted, and upon which
our Government and your Government and our Parliament and your
Parliament are constituted. But, also, we both of us think that we
should be perfectly sure that we know what that willis. You take time
to find it out. We have our House of Lords, and it appears to me this
checks and delays, and I am not sure that your plan is not the more
conservative of the two. I only give that instance as an illustration
of the similarity there is between us and you, in principle and in
reality, though there may be a difference in appearance and in form.
“Well, we talk about the difference in the form of Government.
You have a republic, the central Government over your federation of
States, and we have our islands with their Parliament and the
colonies growing up to be our equals, but yet our fellow-subjects, re-
joicing in the common allegiance to our ancient and constitutional
monarchy. Because the fact is that we have not been altogether
stupid—that is to say, the lesson you taught us about colonies a hun-
dred years ago we have to some extent learned, and we have
learned it to such an extent that we have made it very hard for our
colonies to leave us. Whether under President or Sovereign,
whether choosing, as you do, your first Magistrate from term to
term, or proud, as we are, of our loyalty to our beloved Queen,
(Applause,) yet you and we together, whether American citizens or
British subjects, are citizens of a commonwealth whose principle of
government is that it is a Government of the people, by the people,
and for the people. And who are the English-speaking communi-
ties through the world 2 Well, it is hard to make the answer to
that question without appearing invidious. We can fancy it would
appear like boasting to describe the vast extent of the temperate
regions that English-speaking peoples possess, and we hope that
added numbers of our race will fill them before long, while the old
islands, not yet exhausted, still send forth their emigrants to conquer
nature. These English-speaking communities that possess such a
large portion of land have, as I say, governments based upon the
same principles; they have the same faculties; they have also the
same temptations. The dangers which beset you in America are
3 18 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
very much the same dangers that beset us in England. And, what-
ever they may be, I have hoped for your future as I have hoped for
our future. There is this great similarity between you and us, that
if an Englishman comes to the States, and if an American goes to
England, if he was to believe half that is said, he would not be very
hopeful for the future. But I disbelieve almost everything I have
heard. I am inclined to say to those who are despondent, it lies
with yourselves to neutralize your own predictions. The only thing
you want, if I may be excused for telling you, is that your men of
station and culture should not be satisfied with criticising, but they
should take part in the government of their country.
“I see as I go through your States—and I have been doing so at
an interesting time, as you have just been having your elections—I
See places where men of position and influence are coming forward
who have not done so up to this time, and who feel that patriotism
calls on them to take their part in the Civil Government of their
country, just as in the war they so nobly responded to the call of
duty. Well, if we have the like facilities and the like temptations,
we have also the like aspirations and the like objects. Aims which
we do in a measure fulfill, and aspirations which we in a measure
attain to. We and you revere the law, and are determined to pre-
serve order. We and you are determined to protect the rights of
property, and are striving to secure the fulfillment by property of
its duties. We and you are determined that no priest or potentate
shall stand between our Creator and ourselves. We are both of us
anxious to replace war by arbitrations, and defense, not defiance, is
our motto. Would that I could add that we are determined to have
free trade and untrammeled commercial intercourse. (Applause.)
But that will come. (A laugh.) I was very glad to hear that Mr.
Hewitt said he looked forward to the time when he would be a free-
trader, but that the difficulty of having free trade was that labor was
cheaper with us, and that as soon as labor would be as dear in
England as it is here it would come. We have made the laboring
man far better off than he was, and we intend to make him still
better off than now. But the way to make the laborer better off is
to have the most perfect freedom of commercial intercourse.
“There is one other point in which we may lead one another, and
MR. FORSTER, 3 IQ
that is justice to the weaker races, we in India and Africa, you to your
negroes and Indians, and both of us in China and Japan, and in the
islands of the Pacific. This as an illustration of how much easier it
is for us now to work together two Governments than it was. There.
is hardly any duty more incumbent upon us than that we should set
our faces against the terrible trade of coolies in China, and to de-
stroy the attempt to revive the slave trade in the Islands of the
Pacific. A few years ago we could hardly have counted upon you
for assistance, but now we are counting upon you for the fullest as-
sistance, and we know both Governments will spur each other to do
their duty in this matter. I have already detained you longer than
I expected by these desultory remarks. I must now conclude. I
must beg you, however, to let me wish, through you, prosperity to
your great country, peace between your States, and wisdom and
virtue to your statesmen, so that they may, by a just and equal rule
over all classes and colors, make contentment general throughout
your wide borders, North and South and West, and make it so sure
that your Government shall wield its mighty power to do good to
the world. And I can hardly sit down without giving especial
thanks to the club, Sir, for their kindness, overpowering as it has
been to me, in giving me the opportunity not only to meet its mem-
bers but so many of its distinguished citizens. And in doing so,
perhaps, I may take the name of your club as an omen for the future.
This Union League Club, I am told, was formed in dark hours of
danger, to bind together loyal Americans in support of your glorious
Union against the assaults of the slave power. May it be the type
and forerunner of another Union League, of a close alliance between
the United States and England, and all English-speaking commu-
nities, of a friendship between our Governments, and that you and
we together may influence the world by proving, how great are the
blessings of popular government, when individual self-control pre-
vails among the people ; and depend upon it, neither you nor we will
be able to promote liberties abroad, to protect the liberties of others,
or even to preserve our own liberties if either of us should allow this
individual self-control to fade from among us. (Applause.)” ”
<! . -
* AVczy York Times, Dec. 15, 1874.
* * * * * * * * * * “No one who has ever spent an afternoon in
the lobby, or an evening in the House of Commons, can
be unacquainted with his physical characteristics. His
big, burly figure, precisely the figure one associates with
Farmer Brown and the ownership of fields of growing
wheat ; his purplish-pink face, redeemed from the charge
of a common place vulgarity by a forehead which has a
massive grandeur of the rarest kind ; his silvery white hair,
that has been white from his birth ; his weak eyes perpet-
ually blinking and hiding themselves from the light of the
sun ; the short, quick step with which he walks ; the un-
easy roll of his great head upon his shoulders, calling to
mind a similar performance to be seen any day at the bear-
pit of the Zoological Gardens; the harsh but not unpleas-
ant voice, which it seems impossible to raise above the


M.R. LOWE. 32 I
level of conversation ; the nervous little laugh which ever
and anon bursts from his throat ; once seen or heard, these
things can never be forgotten.
“And, looking at Mr. Lowe nowadays, it is hard to
conceive how men could ever have failed to read the signs
of an extraordinary and original genius in his personal ap-
pearance, and in the little tricks and weaknesses of man-
ner which we have indicated. For in this strange, un-
Couth man, who, as he walks the streets, is perpetually
singing or talking softly to himself; who always appears
to be living in another world to that in which those around
him move ; and who at times appears to be altogether ob-
livious to the commonplace events passing before his eyes,
nothing is so remarkable as the impression of power which
he produces upon those who study his appearance. He
has the head and frame of a Roman emperor, and the
painter who wanted a model for a portrait of Nero could
hardly do better than copy the likeness of the Member for
the University of London.” + -
“The Right Honorable Robert Lowe was born in 1811
at Bingham, in Nottinghamshire. He is the son of the
late Rev. Robert Lowe, then the Rector of Bingham, by
Ellen, the second daughter of the late Rev. Reginald Pyn-
der, Rector of Madresfield, in Worcestershire. Having
received the rudiments of his education at Winchester, he
was removed thence in due course to the University of Ox-
ford, where he was entered as a student of Magdalen. In
1833 he graduated as B.A. with high honors, being first-
class in classics, and second-class in mathematics. It was
* “Cabinet Portraits,” p. 39.
I4% & *
322 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
in 1836 that he took his degree as M.A., but the year prior
to that he had been elected a Fellow of Magdalen. His
fellowship he held, however, for scarcely one twelvemonth,
in consequence of his marrying, in 1836, Georgina, the
second daughter of George Orred, Esq., of Aigburth
House, near Liverpool.
“Settling in Oxford for some years, he there obtained
considerable eminence as a private tutor, coaching in the
academic curriculum, with the skill of maturity, many
who were as nearly as possible of his own age ; and that
so effectually, that more than one among them has since
attained, thanks in no small degree to the influence of his
instruction, distinction among his own immediate contem-
poraries. Having applied himself by preference, however,
to the study of the law, he threw up his professional en-
gagements in tuition at the University, shortly after the
Hilary Term of 1842, having during that time been called
to the bar at Lincoln's Inn on the 27th of January. His
intention, nevertheless, was not to practice as a barrister
in England ; for in that same year, 1842, he took his de-
parture from this country to the antipodes, settling down,
as it appeared for some time, as a permanent resident in
Australia. There, in fact, he remained for about eight
years altogether. -
“Within a year after his arrival in the colony he ob-
tained a seat in the Council, a seat which he continued to
hold uninterruptedly for seven years, namely, until 1850,
the date of his return homewards. Two years before that
date, however, the Hon. Robert Lowe had, in 1848, been
elected as Member for Sydney to the Colonial Parliament.
“Returning to England, as we-have said, in 1850, two
MR. LOWE. - 323
years after that—it was on the 8th of July, 1852—he was
successful in obtaining an entrance into a far grander arena,
one worthier of his powers as a debater, and, we will now
hope, yet more of his capacities as an administrator—the
ex-Member for Sydney gaining admission then for the first
time to the House of Commons as M.P. for the borough
of Kidderminster. His maiden speech, delivered not very
long after his entrance into the House, we ourselves per-
fectly well remember hearing—remember, as the phrase is,
as though it were but an incident of yesterday. His Aus-
tralian reputation had preceded him : added to which he
had, already, since his return homewards, within that brief
interval, acquired another and a wholly distinct reputation
—the reputation of a journalist, Immediately upon his
rising, amidst eager cries of ‘New Member,’ there en-
sued—what is most unusual when merely a new Member
rises—a really breathless silence, one of those momentary
pauses when, as the absurd expression is, ‘You might have
heard [which you couldn’t possibly] a pin drop.’
‘‘ Directly afterwards—when the Member for Kidder-
minster had begun speaking—there were whispered words
here and there faintly audible about the House, in expla-
nation of this silence, words of tribute less to the man
than to the great organ of which he was regarded as the
representative—“Times / Times /' It was far rather as the
supposed representative of the Times than as simply the
representative ‘soi-disant’ of Kidderminster that Mr. Lowe
was, at that first moment of his appearance before us, an
object of such eager curiosity and expectation. And his
appearance itself had unquestionably something to do with
the peculiar interest which was at once, at the instant of
324. BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
his rising, awakened. Regarded from a distance, he prob-
ably appeared to be a hale old man far advanced in years,
with the silvery hair of an octogenarian. Regarding him
near at hand, one could not but recognize at once in the
whitened head and ruddy countenance peculiarities of con-
stitution, and not the effects of time, the honorable Mem-
ber being then, in point of fact, only just turned forty.
“As a maiden speech, that address of his, when for the
first time speaking before the House of Commons, was in
every way remarkable. It was clear, cogent, full of infor-
mation, sinuous and elastic in the sequentially linked
chain of its argument, audible in every syllable throughout
the whole House, without an effort on the part of the
speaker himself in his delivery, and evidencing from first
to last the most admirable self-possession. It was a suc-
cess. It was more than that, it was a success at once easy
and brilliant. The House took to the new member—ap-
preciated him almost, as it were, by an instinct, for the
subject afforded him but moderate opportunities for the
display of the resources of his oratory—was in harmony at
once with his abilities, not with his opinions, for which it
more or less, even then, as it has mostly ever since, be-
trayed in effect a sort of general antagonism—and, beyond
one moment's question, recognized the fact that the expec-
tations which had been awakened had been to the full jus-
tified, that a new man of mark was now added to those al-
ready in the popular branch of the Legislature.
“Before the year of his first entrance into the House of
Commons had run out, Mr. Lowe had won for himself an
official position. In the December of 1852, he was ap-
pointed one of the joint Secretaries of the Board of Con-
MR. LOWE. 325
trol, on the formation by Lord Aberdeen of the Coalition
Government. That post he occupied until the February
of 1855, when the responsibilities of the Premiership were
transferred, as with a sense of relief to everybody, himself
included, from the hands of the Earl of Aberdeen to those
of Viscount Palmerston,” +
It seems, however, that Mr. Cobden, who had carefully
observed Mr. Lowe's opening career, did not form so high
an opinion of his powers as did others. In 1857, when
some of the electors of Manchester were thinking of ask-
ing Mr. Lowe to be a candidate for that borough, Mr.
Cobden advised them to see and hear that gentleman first.
‘‘I have heard him,” he said, “and I will say this, and in
saying it I shall be borne out by any impartial man in the
House of Commons—that, considering he had some rep-
utation for ability at Oxford, and as a writer in the 77mes,
he is the most conspicious failure in the House of Com-
mons.”
In 1855 Mr. Lowe became Vice-President of the Board
of Trade and Paymaster of the Forces, under Lord Palm-
erston—being at the same time sworn in as a Privy
Councilor. After the retirement of the Palmerston Gov-
ernment, Mr. Lowe had the personal experience of being
mobbed by his own constituency of Kidderminster, after
which he withdrew from that representation and sat in
Parliament nearly ten years for Calne, a nomination borough
since extinguished by the Reform Bill of 1867. From 1859
to 1864 he held office again, under Lord Palmerston, be-
ing President of the Board of Health and Vice-President
* “The Gladstone Government,” p. 180.
326 |BRIEF BIOGRAPHIIES.
of the Education Board of the Privy Council. These offi-
ces he voluntarily resigned. -
“From his first entrance upon office, men found in Mr.
Lowe the most uncompromising and independent of offi-
cials. Not until 1863, however, did the irritation which he
everywhere aroused rise to the dimensions of a storm. At that
time he filled the office of Vice-President of the Council,
and the clamor against him was terrific. For he had shown
himself a man who knew no such thing as expediency ;
who recognized no possibility of anybody being right who
differed from himself; and who displayed a disregard of
the ordinary amenities of political life hardly to be ex-
pected in one who was a Member of Parliament, a Privy
Councilor, and an official of some years' standing.” +
It was not, however, until 1866 that Mr. Lowe became
really distinguished in the House of Commons. “Mr.
Lowe had achieved a certain degree of social reputation
before that time ; but he had not risen to more than a sec-
ondary position in Parliament and in Administration. A
vote of the House of Commons had compelled him to re-
tire from office towards the close of Ilord Palmerston's last
Ministry; and in the reconstruction of the Government by
Lord Russell Mr. Lowe was not included. He was there-
fore free as an independent member to resist to the utter-
most the Reform Bill of 1866, and he did so with an
eagerness, a brilliancy, and an effect which made him the
Parliamentary hero of the day. The success was the suc-
cess of a single session ; nothing in Mr. Lowe's previous
career had given any promise of the faculties which he then
* “Cabinet Portraits,” p. 40.
MR. LOWE. 327
displayed; nothing that he has done since has exhibited
the same powers of debate. “Single-speech Hamilton,’
who was a very able man, and made some ordinarily good
speeches besides the one which has earned him his name,
has a sort of parallel in single-session Lowe. There have
been painters, usually not much above mediocrity, who
seem to have scaled the heights of genius in a single pic-
ture ; poets, ordinarily only second or third rate, whom a
solitary ode or sonnet has lifted to the level of the masters
of song. The year 1866 gives Mr. Lowe a place among
Parliamentary orators. For the first, and for the only time
in his life, he was in sympathy with the majority of his
audience. He spoke from strong feelings to strong feel-
ings. He was carried away by hate, scorn, and terror of
the Reform proposals of 1866, of their authors, and of the
classes whose enfranchisement was promised ; and these
feelings were shared by nearly the whole of the Tory party,
and by large numbers of the nominal supporters of the
Government. He was the orator of a crisis of anger, dis-
trust, and fear. It is curious that an enlargement of the
franchise, far wider than any which he denounced, should
have made him, for the first time, when close upon sixty,
a member of the Cabinet, holding one of the greatest
offices of the State ; and should have relieved him from the
burden of lordly patronage to which he had consented to
owe his seat in the House of Commons. Mr. Lowe ex-
changed a small nomination borough for the University of
London in the interval between his resignation of the Vice-
Presidency of the Committee of Council in Lord Palmer-
ston's Administration and his appointment to the Chancel-
lorship of the Exchequer in Mr. Gladstone's. The
328 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
Reform Bill of 1867 came between ; and household suffrage
effected this deliverance; but, like some slave populations,
he ignorantly resisted his deliverer. Mr. Bright once ex-
pressed his gratitude to Mr. Lowe's patron, that whereas
he might have sent his butler to the House of Commons,
he had been kind enough to depute a great intellectual
gladiator. Perhaps, in Mr. Lowe's rhapsodies over the
glorious struggles of the two great aristocratic parties, of
one of which he was content to be the retainer, and in his
desire to uphold them against the incursions of a leveling
democracy, there was something of the spirit of the ser-
vants’ hall. Did he feel himself bound to represent his
unfortunate rival, the disappointed butler P
“Mr. Lowe has scarcely, perhaps, sustained during the
past half-dozen years the political and Oratorical reputation
which he earned in the memorable year 1866. But he has
maintained himself in a position far higher than that which
had previously been assigned to him. The credit of the
great displays of the Reform controversy remains with him ;
and an indefinite reserve of power is attributed to him,
which increases the attention and respect with which he is
listened to. It has insured him an audience and has given
him confidence.””
“Good or indifferent,” says one critical observer, “Mr.
Lowe's speeches are of the class of oratory which is better
when reported than when listened to * * * Possibly, the
outside public will find a difficulty in believing it, but it
is nevertheless true that Mr. Lowe is a bashful speaker.
When he comes to a point in his speech he seems half
* “Political Portraits,” p. 47.
MR. LOWE. 329
afraid that it will not succeed, and goes some way towards
realizing his fears by hanging down his head and nervously
jerking out the concluding portion of the sentence, wherein
the sting generally lies, in a low, broken tone that fre-
quently fails to reach one-half his hearers. He is, further-
more, afflicted with near-sightedness, and on Budget
nights, when recurrence to documents was of momentary
necessity, the spectacle of the Chancellor of the Exchequer
holding within an inch of his eyebrows a piece of paper—
generally the wrong piece at first—hurriedly glancing over
it, quoting figures, and immediately correcting his quota-
tions, was a spectacle not calculated to engender either
confidence or pleasure. Mr. Lowe's manner of answering
questions was wont much to amuse the House before
repetition palled upon the appetite. If the question might
be answered by the monosyllable ‘yes’ or ‘no,’ ‘yes’ or
‘no’ was the full extent of Mr. Lowe's answer. Essen-
tially a combative man, he threw a challenge into an answer
relating to the tax on agricultural horses, and implied his
scorn of mankind generally in a statement touching the
legacy duty. Like the ‘noble peasant,’ sung by Crabbe,
“Of no man's presence Isaac felt afraid,
At no man’s questions Isaac looked dismayed,’
Unfortunately we cannot continue the quotation, and add
to the description of Mr. Lowe,
‘Yet while the serious thought his soul approved,
Cheerful he seemed and gentleness he loved;
To bliss domestic he his heart resigned,
And with the firmest had the fondest mind.”
33O BRIEF RIOGRAPHIES.
One thing should be added to his credit, that he had a
wholesome contempt for purposeless talk, and once horri-
fied a number of estimable gentlemen who had occupied
a whole night in a discussion on a forthcoming Budget by
Curtly promising to consider their ‘interesting conver-
sation,’ and so resuming his seat. They thought they had
been ‘debating,’ and have probably never forgiven the
scornful Chancellor of the Exchequer for reminding them
that they were only conversing.” +
Another critic has pointed out, in respect to the Parlia-
mentary Oratory of Mr. Lowe, ‘‘that, when least in har-
mony with public opinion, his fame as an orator has been
most conspicuously in the ascendant. The multitude out
of doors, the Members within the walls of Parliament,
have seemed to take a perverse enjoyment in listening to
over-night, or reading next morning, speeches of Mr.
Lowe's, with which not another soul in the three kingdoms
could anywhere be found to agree, but for the mother-wit,
the terse and nervous eloquence, the subtle irony, the in-
genious logic, the elegant Scholarship, the daring para-
doxes, and the rhetorical artifices of every kind woven into
the warp and weft, of which everybody, in any way capable
of appreciating them, had but one feeling, and that—ad-
miration.” +
Earl Russel, describing his difficulties with his Re-
form Bill in 1865–6, thus describes the party of which
Mr. Lowe was then the leader ;
“Our whole course, however, was disturbed by the
* “Men and Manner in Parliament,” p. 90.
+ “The Gladstone Government,” p. 187.
MR. LOWE. 33 I
formation of a party which aimed, not so much at the im-
provement of a Reform Bill, as the defeat of the Ministry.
They owe the name by which they are known to the wit
of Mr. Bright, who likened them to the occupiers of the
Cave of Adullam. The band may be said to have been
divided into three columns or gangs, the first consisting of
the selfish, the second of the timid, and the third of those
who were both selfish and timid. They had a leader who,
like the Achitophel of Dryden, was
‘Sagacious, bold, and turbulent of wit.'
Of him, as of Achitophel—supposing his object was to
destroy the Ministry—it might also be said—
“To further this, Achitophel unites
The malcontents of all the Israelites ;
Whose differing parties he could wisely join,
For several ends to serve the same design.’
There were, no doubt, some honest men in the Cave of Adul-
lam ; but, upon the whole, I have never, in my long political
life, known a party so utterly destitute of consistent prin-
ciple or of patriotic end ; they were indifferent to the state
of the suffrage, or the disfranchisement of boroughs, pro-
vided their own selfish objects were attained.
“When these bandits, uniting themselves to the Tories,
had put the Government in a minority, the Cabinet thought
it right to offer their resignation. It was not that they
could not bear a defeat on a detail of the Reform Bill, but
that it was obvious that the band of Adullam would never
be satisfied till, by wiles and stratagems, they had driven
the Ministry from office.
332 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
“Of the three gangs which issued from the Cave of Adul-
lam, the timid inspire pity, the selfish indignation, the
timid and selfish contempt,” +
On the formation of Mr. Gladstone's Government in
December, 1868, Mr. Lowe became Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer, but was transferred, in 1873, to the position of
Home Secretary, and retired with Mr. Gladstone, in 1874.
He has been less known in the United States, probably,
through his political career than through his attacks on the
English University system. These attacks, coming from
a man trained under that, system, have had rather more
weight than the peculiarities of Mr. Lowe's temperament
quite justified. The critic of the London Daily News thus.
analyzes his position on this point : -
“Mr. Lowe is always bewailing the faultiness of his
education, and the hindrances to which, as a mistaught,
and in essential points an untaught man, he has been ex-
posed in his political career. Instead of being apprenticed
to a respectable trade, or-sent to some school of the applied
arts, as of civil engineering, it was his misfortune to be well
grounded in Latin and Greek, to go to Oxford, to win
prizes and scholarships, to take a first-class degree, and to
become a fellow and tutor of his college. A young man
thus neglected, or suffered to throw himself away upon dead
languages, is, in his view, a melancholy object. Mr. Lowe
is certainly an instance that the ingenuous arts do not
always refine the character, and that humane letters may
leave a man something of a savage. If the fault he finds
with the process is due to imperfect satisfaction in his own
* “Recollections and Suggestions,” by John, Earl Russell, p. 237.
M.R. LOWE. 333
case with the result, there may be some agreement with
him. But the truth is, that Mr. Lowe is an instance not
of the effect of classical training on the mind and charac-
ter, but of the failure of such training to exercise its natural
effect. His scholarship, minute and elegant as it is, is
rather an acquirement held by a certain external tenure, a
something annexed to him from without, an ornament
hung about him, than a germ sown within the mind,
assimilating nutriment there, and growing and bringing
forth fruit. Knowledge has not with him been transformed
into wisdom. His acquaintance with the poets, Orators,
historians, and philosophers of Greece and Rome has Sup-
plied him with illustrations and parallels for the adornment
of his speeches ; but the essential thought thus attired is
usually thin and poor. Mr. Lowe does not seem to be
mentally richer for the rich mines in which he has worked.
The barbarian is adorned with pearls and gold, but he is
still a barbarian. ‘The coltish nature breaks at seasons
through the gilded pale.’ Mr. Lowe's acquirements are
those of an Oxford don, or of a Scotch Dominie of the
narrower order, and might have suited well enough,
though they would not have best suited, the chair at
Glasgow to which he once aspired.
“An American humorist has apologetically remarked
that there is a good deal of human nature in most men.
It is Mr. Lowe's misfortune that there is very little human
nature in him, and that what there is, is not of the best
sort. This fact explains what Mr. Disraeli once described
as his extraordinary faculty of spontaneous aversion. He
starts from and grows enraged at Samples of human na-
ture which are foreign to him, like a dog or a horse which
334. BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
*
barks or shies at some inexplicable portent. He thinks
they mean mischief. They come from some unknown
world, and are much more likely to be ‘goblins damned'
than ‘spirits of health.” Mr. Gladstone's ‘flesh and
blood argument for the suffrage drove him into transports
of passion. Mr. Lowe is an exceedingly acute half of a
man ; but his mental and moral organization is incom-
pletely developed ; and the language which appeals to the
missing half is so much empty rhapsody or meaningless
gibberish. This defect, which has deprived his consum-
mate Scholarship of any humanizing influence, and of the
large and considerate wisdom which are its proper fruits,
and made his attainments but as the ample knowledge of
an elderly schoolboy, has left the varied training of life as
little productive. Mr. Lowe, disappointed of the Glas-
gow chair of Greek, left the cloister for the world ; Ox-
ford for Australia. He was engaged in public and Parlia-
mentary affairs at the Antipodes, before he entered the
English House of Commons, and took a fourth-rate place
in Lord Aberdeen's Government. It is remarkable, and it
is at once the cause and sign of that perpetual immaturity
of mind and character, that eternal hobblehoyhood which
marks him, that Mr. Lowe's experience of the world, like
his acquaintance with books, seems never to have been
assimilated by him. They have never blended with each
other into the Ulysses-like wisdom of a man who has ‘seen
and known cities of men, and manners, climates, coun-
cils, governments,’ and become a part of all that he has
met.” Mr. Lowe has always been, and, at Sixty and over,
he still is the sprightly, traveled, too well informed youth,
with a ready answer, often pert and shallow, for his betters, .
MR. LOW E. 335
and a contempt for everything which in feeling and thought
goes deeper than he does. He is rather a nondescript
personage in the House of Commons. He is a reader of
Plato, and he perhaps recollects in one of the dialogues a
description of an ambiguous class of persons who stand
on the border territory between philosophers and statesmen
without being either one or the other, and who, having a
modicum of philosophy and a modicum of statesmanship,
think themselves better than, both philosophers and states-
men, though they are really inferior to them, fancying
that they hold the first place while occupying only the
third. This class of people, says Plato, are never so hap-
py as when they can hold philosophers up to contempt as
good for nothing. The impertinences with which Mr.
Lowe favored Mr. Mill in the last Parliament, recall some
passages of this description ; and his attitude to Mr. Glad-
stone and Mr. Bright, on the other hand, completes the
likeness. Mr. Lowe may see himself in the sketch.
‘Veluti in speculum.’” +
* “Political Portraits,” p. 41.
XVI.
SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT.
sº IR WILLIAM HARCOURT,” wrote lately the
| London correspondent of an American news-
£ºd paper,” “is at this moment the most unpopu-
lar man in England ; but he will, I dare say, survive his
unpopularity. It is a pity to make so much of him.” Un-
luckily the unpopularity is an old story, as is that anec-
dote growing from it, of the four men who agreed that
each should bring the most disagreeable man of his
acquaintance to dine at a London club.; Sir William Har-
court finally making his appearance as the invited guest of
each. It is not probable, however, that the imputation of
personal unpopularity would disturb the individual in
question, so long as no one impeached his ability, and
this, at least, is not to be doubted.
“It is no exaggeration,” says Fraser's Magazine,+ “to
say that there is only one gentleman who has entered Par-
liament within the last decade who has succeeded in secur-
ing anything like a distinguished position, and whose
* “AWezy York AWation,” Feb. II, 1875. + October, 1874.


SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT. 337
presence would be missed if he were to quit it next Ses-
sion—Sir William Harcourt.”
Sir William George Granville Vernon-Harcourt was born
October 14, 1827. He is the second son of Rev. W. Ver-
non-Harcourt, and grandson of the late Archbishop of
York. He was educated at Trinity College, Cambridge,
where he graduated with high honors in 1851. He was
called to the bar in 1854, and became a Queen's Counsel
in 1866. In 1868 he was returned to Parliament for Ox-
ford, having previously distinguished himself as the author
of a series of articles in the London Złmes signed Historicus
and relating to the American civil war and to international
law. In 1869 he was elected Professor of International
Law at Cambridge University. In 1873 he became Solici-
tor-General and was knighted, being thenceforth known as
Sir William Harcourt instead of Vernon Harcourt as be-
fore. He went out of office with Mr. Gladstone's adminis-
tration in February, 1874.
“Sir William Harcourt has the Parliamentary advan-
tages of a commanding presence, a good voice, and very
little practice at the bar. No one hearing him speak
would guess that he is a lawyer, much less a Queen's
Counsel. His gestures are few, and, though not eloquent,
they are at least unobtrusive. He is a scholarly man and
a wit, and there are cast about in the speeches he has de-
livered in the House as many ‘good things' as will be
found in an equal number of average orations by far more
celebrated speakers. The pity of it is that he has never
succeeded in impressing the House with a belief in his
sincerity. Rightly or wrongly, he has ever been regarded
as a place-hunter, and when, during the Ministerial crisis
I 5
338 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
in the Session of 1873, he had made a damaging speech,
Mr. Disraeli took all the sting out of it by slyly observing
that he ‘did not know whether the House was yet to re-
gard the observations of the hon. member for Oxford as
carrying the weight of a Solicitor-General.’ In the same
way Some of his most epigrammatic sentences miss fire be-
cause, whilst they are put forth as being impromptu, the
House insists upon detecting about them the smell of the
lamp. Another reason why his bon moſs do not have
the success their literary merit demands is that Sir W.
Harcourt is so moved with his own humor that he in-
dulges in an involuntary chuckle by way of preface, and
after he has safely delivered his precious charge gets over
an awkward pause that thereupon occurs by an unmusical
noise like a prolonged A-a-a-a- In a long speech he
is apt to grow heavy—or perhaps only appears so from
the fact that he is expected to be uniformly smart, and
‘brevity is the soul of wit.’ It is in a short, sharp attack, a
lively diversion interposed in the jousts between the thun-
derous encounters of the Achilles and the Hector of debate
that Mr. Vernon Harcourt has shone in times past, and in
becoming ‘Sir William Harcourt’ he adventurously aban-
doned the primitive but proved sling and stone for the
cumbrous armor and the unaccustomed spear. * * * *
“A commanding figure, a good voice, a sarcastic style, a
happy gift of phrase-making, a fund of general reading,
and a lawyer-like faculty of mastering a brief at an hour's
notice combined to make him a Parliamentary speaker
decidedly above the average. Somebody trying to define
pleasure has said it consists chiefly in surprise. Of this
also Mr. Vernon Harcourt had taken count, and till by
SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT. 339
repetition the thing palled upon the accustomed palate,
the House of Commons had the “pleasure of hearing a
professed Liberal, after having paid some compliments to
his chiefs, suddenly turn upon them and in bitter words
denounce their course of procedure. No one knew for cer-
tain when Mr. Vernon Harcourt rose to speak in debate
which side he would espouse, a circumstance that of itself
lent an interest to his interposition, and the excitement was
cleverly kept up by the ostentatiously impartial manner in
which the speaker alternately administered praise and
blame. An able man who professes himself “independ-
ent’ in the House of Commons is like one standing in
the center of a poised plank on either end of which a child
sits. By the slightest motion one way or the other the
Center figure can sway the ends at his pleasure ; and simi-
larly a skillful speaker in an assembly divided by a sharp
party line can move it to applause which shall be continu-
ous and in the aggregate general.” < * * *
‘‘It was Mr. Vernon Harcourt's misfortune, that he was,
with unusual promptitude and unanimity, ‘found out,’ or
at least the House thought it had ‘found him out,’ which
for all practical purposes amounts to the same thing. At
the period indicated, which specially includes the Session
of 1873, it was understood that the object of the hon. and
learned gentleman's ambition was the Solicitor-General-
ship, and it was a matter of common occurrence for refer-
ence to be openly made in debate to the existence and
pressure of this motive. At the close of the Session the
coveted prize was within his grasp, but its possession
proved almost illusory, leaving him only a knight's title to
convince him that it had not been a dream. At the open-
34O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
ing of the Session of 1874 he was Sir William Harcourt,
with a seat on the front Opposition bench, and in contact
with circumstances that suggested the passage of a cycle
since the days when Vernon Harcourt sat below the gang-
way opposite and twitted ‘my right hon, friend at the head
of the Government.’. Here was a collapse of a great
Scheme, and just when the patient private had struggled
out of the ranks, and had his place and his cocked hat to
ride with the staff What was to be done P There were
two courses open to him. He might throw in his lot
with his colleagues, wear their uniform, do sentry work on
the front Opposition bench, go out under fire when or-
dered, vote with the Whip, and in due time, when the tide
turned, cross over to the Treasury bench once more as So-
licitor-General, with the certain prospect of the reversion
of a judgeship as the reward of faithful service. Or he
might fling off his allegiance to his chief, deliberately re-
nounce his chances of promotion when Mr. Gladstone
should come back to office, and, defying his old patron,
play double or quits with Fortune. After some hesitation,
and partly urged on by circumstances, Sir W. Harcourt
has decided upon the latter course.”
“Sir William Harcourt,” says Mr. Escott in Fraser's
Magazine, f “has modeled his declamatory style very closely
after the example of the Tory chief. When the late
Solicitor-General entered Parliament, it was said that his
peculiar mission was to demolish Mr. Disraeli. One Can-
not help being reminded of Androcles and the lion.
When the king of beasts was let loose into the arena, for
* “Men and Manner in Parliament,” pp. 139, 239, 242.
+ October, 1874.
SIR WILLIAM IIARCOURT. 34. I
the purpose of devouring his victim, the spectators were
much disappointed at seeing the grateful animal tranquilly
lick the hands and fawn at the feet of its former liberator.
So it has been with Sir William Harcourt and Mr. Disraeli.
Instead of attacking the then leader of the Opposition,
‘Historicus,” on his entry into the House of Commons,
turned round upon his own party, and in set phrases,
which displayed a very close and careful study of Mr.
Disraeli's most vituperative harangues, imputed all manner
of inaptitudes and offenses to the occupants of the Treasury
Bench. The next thing which the world heard of Sir Wil-
liam Harcourt was, that he was a frequent guest of Mr.
Disraeli at Hughenden ; and in a remarkable speech
which he made at the Oxford dinner on New Year's Day, he
produced a very accurate parody of Mr. Disraeli at his best.”
Accordingly, the Nation correspondent thinks, “The
Tories do not know how to act. They see in Sir W. Har-
court the sort of politician of which their Prime Minister
was the prototype, and many of them think that he is just
the man for them, and that Mr. Disraeli's strength is wan-
ing. But they cannot yet make up their minds to beckon
him over to their side. The outside world look on with
interest and amusement at the divergence, and wonder
how it will end. On the whole, they feel inclined to put
their money on the skillful player—to the extent, at least,
of backing him not to draw a blank.” +
The London Spectator has lately christened Sir William
Harcourt “a Liberal Disraeli,” and has summed up his
career as that of “a man who, in six short years of Parlia-
* New York Mation, Jan. 28, 1875. London correspondence
(Jan. 1).
342 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
mentary life, has not only attained the position of the
Solicitor-General of his party, but who has come to be
vaguely discussed as a possible leader of the Liberals in
Case of Mr. Gladstone's retirement. Indeed, though the
testimonials of fitness for that post which have been given
him have mostly proceeded from high Tories like the
Marquis of Bath, and though he owes to the duly grateful,
and perhaps not quite disinterested, panegyrics of Mr.
Disraeli at least as much as he owes to the success he has
achieved as the spokesman of what he himself, we think,
Once called ‘the Common-sense party’ of Liberals, there
can be no doubt that he has really made a great stride
towards political influence, especially during the last
Session, when he took up the cry that the Act of Uniform-
ity should be strictly enforced on the State Church, and
accompanied this demand with such eloquent denuncia-
tions of the Ritualists as earned for him Sir Wilfrid
Lawson's happy sobriquet of ‘the new Melancthon,’ who
had appeared to support Mr. Disraeli in his difficult imper-
sonation of the character of a new Luther. Probably,
indeed, no Liberal has gained so much in the last Session
as Sir William Harcourt. We ourselves have noted his
career from the first with a considerable, though not always,
perhaps, a favorable interest, and we should say of him
that if ever the Liberal party were to fall into the state of
helpless and headless imbecility in which Mr. Disraeli found
the Conservatives after the split with Sir Robert Peel, Sir
William Harcourt might very well become its leader, and
would bring to the task closely corresponding qualities of
character and brain to those which made Mr. Disraeli great.
Oddly enough, it was commonly reported on his first elec-
SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT. 343
tion for the City of Oxford that he regarded it as his Par-
liamentary mission ‘to put down Disraeli.' If that rumor
had any basis of fact in it, Sir William Harcourt has indeed
acted the part of Balaam towards the foe he was expected
to curse, and has blessed him altogether. And doubtless,
there was a natural sympathy between the men which ren-
dered it hardly possible for Sir William Harcourt not to
admire the great democratic educator of the Tory party.
Indeed, Sir William Harcourt has frequently shown great
qualities of the Disraeli kind. He has real wit and real
audacity. He has a great faculty for ad capſandum cries,
and treats politics, like Mr. Disraeli, rather as a great game
at which bold players may win high stakes, than as a region
in which great Causes are fought out. He is proud of his
complete mastery of the various avenues to the imagination
of English Philistinism, and hardly ever goes wrong in de-
tecting the points at which Liberal principles are positively
disliked by the great majority of Liberal voters. Early in
his career, for instance, he discovered that the proposal for
which Mr. Fawcett has fought so earnestly and so perti-
naciously, to throw the expenses of elections on the constitu-
encies themselves, was not one at all congenial either to
the rate-payer as such, or even to the voter as such, since
English voters very seldom wish to facilitate the election of
men of their own class, much preferring to lay the well-to-do,
who can spend something in the service, under obligations
to them; and no sooner had he detected this than the plan
of throwing election expenses on the rates received his
strenuous opposition.
“Indeed, in this respect—in the diagnosis of electoral
feelings, –we should regard Sir William Harcourt as greatl y
344 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
Mr. Disraeli's superior, and for a very obvious reason, that
he is a genuine Anglo-Saxon himself, while Mr. Disraeli's
insight into the predilections of English constituencies
comes entirely of acute observation of feelings to which he
himself is for the most part a stranger. Sir William Har-
court has in this way even more than Mr. Disraeli's sym-
pathy for the latent Conservatism of ‘the residuum.’
And no one can give that sort of Conservatism happier ex-
pression. When he told the people of Oxford that he loved
the Established Church because “he owed all that was best
and dearest to him in life to a youth spent in an English
country parsonage,’ he put these Conservative feelings in
the very form in which English audiences like best to hear
them put. Again, the Liberal causes to which he most
attaches himself are equally well chosen for the same pur-
pose. Nothing could be better than his protest, on Wed-
nesday night, against a policy of enclosure which might
end in making almost all Englishmen trespassers whenever
they go off the high-roads. His opposition to the Parks
Bill, in which he fought an unequal fight against Mr. Ayr-
ton—unequal only because he was so Careless in getting
up his case against a most able and accurate Opponent—
was conceived in the same spirit. Sir William Harcourt
understands to the bottom the sort of annoyances which
most gall the pride of an average Englishman, and that
disposition to bluster which injuries to such a pride always
produce. Nothing could be more skillful after its kind than
the way in which he, last Session, lectured the clergy on
their wish to be above the law, and laid down magnilo-
quent commonplaces on the sacredness of that law. He
has the key to the heart of the average Englishman's not
SIR WILLIAM HATRCOURT. 345
very earnest, but somewhat bounceable, Liberalism. No
one will ever find him undertaking “heroic' legislation
for Ireland, or pushing on any legislation with Mr. Glad-
stone's painfully conscientious sense of what is due to his
pledges and his own high resolves. If Sir William Har-
court were ever to come to the top, he would be a leader
with qualities about half-way between the less serious as-
pects of Lord Palmerston's character and the most plausi-
ble aspects of Mr. Disraeli's. A far cleverer speaker than
Lord Palmerston ever was, Sir William Harcourt would
yet never throw that great force of personal interest and
volition into politics which Lord Palmerston threw into his
Foreign-Office work. He would be content to amuse us
with such Sphinx-like sayings as those of which Mr. Dis-
raeli has, as it were, the patent, though the pupil has
sometimes been almost equal to the master—as when he
told his constituents that “Patience is the secret of politics,
for time is ſhe artificer of nations.” But of the oratory of
deep conviction, we need never look for much from Sir
William Harcourt. With great knowledge of the world,
great satirical powers, plausibility ad libiţum, and as much
good sense as is produced by a bright intellect without
much accuracy or industry, Sir William Harcourt might
lead with great success a party which happened to dislike
“earnestness,’ and preferred to earn a superficial popu-
larity.
“That we ourselves do not look to the possibility of such
a leadership with any very great satisfaction will be evident
enough. It so happens that, during this century at least,
the Liberal leader has almost always been a man of deeper
and warmer convictions than his opponent, though, to all
346 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
appearance, Lord Melbourne may have been an exception.
Lord Grey, Lord John Russell, even Lord Palmerston, Mr.
Gladstone—these were all men who, whatever their faults,
had in them a kind of grim earnestness of their own.
Lord Palmerston may have lost this to some extent toward
the close of his life ; nay, he always took political life
more easily, appeared to take it less to heart than any of
the others. But even he, when opposed to Mr. Disraeli,
seemed a man pitted against a voice. Sir William Har-
court is unquestionably nearer to the Disraeli type—evinces
less of heartiness in his politics, and a far greater taste for
claptrap and bounce than any leader to whom the English
Liberals have been recently accustomed. If he were ever
to secure for himself the succession to Mr. Gladstone—
which, by his good luck, some years hence might possibly
happen—the event would mark a very serious decadence
in the tone of the Liberal party. * * * A politician so
clever as he may rise to any eminence, if the temporary
mind of the country and of the Parliament happens to be
in sympathy with him. But the transition, if it should
ever occur, from Mr. Gladstone to Sir William Harcourt,
would be a fearfully sudden descent from intensity of pur-
pose to no purpose at all. And yet, perhaps, no one
would ‘educate ’ the Liberal party to submit to the Con-
servative prejudices of a half-educated democracy more
skillfully than Sir W. Harcourt.” -
XVII.
Mr. Goschen and Mr. Childers is not to be seri-
ously discussed at the present juncture. Their
time may come, but it is not yet. Both right honorable
gentlemen have succeeded in establishing a character as
able administrators, and as debaters not to be scorned in a
pitched battle. But neither has shown himself gifted with
the heaven-born genius that made Pitt's accession to the
Premiership in his twenty-fourth year appear a natural
sequence of the occurrence of a vacancy ; and neither is
of sufficiently long standing to claim promotion by right
of seniority or service. During the Session of 1874, Mr.
Goschen startled the House by appearing, for one night
only, in quite a new character. When in office, and in-
deed on ordinary occasions, he addresses the House in a
timid, half apologetical manner, and in language which


348 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
well beseems his mien. On the night when the last stage
of the Licensing Bill was reached, it being apparently his
turn to speak for ‘the party,’ he attacked the Government
in general and the Home Secretary in particular in a lively,
bitter, and sarcastic speech, which was really in very good
style, and would have done credit to Mr. Lowe himself.
It is true that the effect was somewhat marred by the right
honorable gentleman's holding his hat with one hand be-
hind his back as he spoke, Sedulously standing clear of
the table, and presenting on the whole an appearance of
nervous preparation for instant flight that suggested the
cherishing of a design to put on his hat and make a run for
it as soon as he had said all that was on his mind. But
the speech was emphatically a good One, and created in
the minds of hearers not only surprise but expectation.” +
“Mr. Goschen,” says the same critic elsewhere, “is a
speaker of the Cardwell school, though here the mournful
manner is changed for a somewhat timid, anxious, half
apologetical air. He has a curious trick when addressing
the House of holding himself by the lappets of the coat,
as if otherwise he might run away and leave matters to ex-
plain themselves. Sometimes he changes the action and,
apparently having the same object in view, holds himself
firmly down by the hips. When not thus engaged he is nerv-
ously sorting the papers before him, or clawing at the air
with the forefinger of his right hand. He has a peculiar
voice, which does not gain additional charm from the prev-
alence of a tone suggestive of a perpetual cold in the head.
Like [those of] Mr. Cardwell, his speeches read better than
* “Men and Manner in Parliament," p. 249.
M.R. GOSCIIEN. 349
they sound, for he, too, has great business capacity, and
possesses the power of marshaling intricate facts and fig-
ures in a manner that makes dark places clear.””
“Mr. Goschen,” says Fraser's Magazine,f “is rapidly
becoming an acute and formidable critic. His delivery is
faulty—he mouths too much. His action is violent, with-
out being effective ; and he has contracted the same
vicious habit as that which is so signally exemplified in
Mr. Cross, the Home Secretary, of assailing the table
when he is desirous to lend additional emphasis to his
words.” - -
“The Right Honorable George Joachim Goschen was
born on the Ioth of August, 1831. He is the Son of a
London merchant, of German Origin. Mr. GOSchen's
grandfather is understood to have been a publisher of Leip-
sic. His father, the London merchant just referred to,
was the late William Henry Goschen, Esq., of Austin-
friars and Roehampton. As a schoolboy, the President of .
the Poor-Law Board was educated at Rugby, under Dr.
Tait, now the ninety-second Archbishop of Canterbury.
As a stripling, he went to Oriel College, Oxford, where in
1853, as first class in classics, he greatly distinguished him-
self, finding some difficulty in graduating, solely by reason
of certain scruples of conscience in regard to the oath
administered. Married, in 1857, to Lucy, daughter of
John Dalley, Esq., Mr. Goschen—without any thought
of having a political career opened to him within a very
few years afterwards, and certainly never dreaming, at the
time, that before he should be thirty-six he would have
* “Men and Manner in Parliament,” p. 108.
+ October, 1874.
35O BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
taken his seat in the inner circle of the Government as
a Cabinet Minister, and have been sworn in as one of her
Majesty's Privy Councilors—settled down in the city
of London, to all appearance permanently, as a man
of business. He became a member of the firm of
Fruhling and Goschen, in Austinfriars. From that
establishment he eventually retired altogether, at the
beginning of 1866, on his becoming a member of Earl
Russell's last Administration. Statesmanship and Com-
merce were apparently deemed by him to be incompatible.
“Before then, however, he had made his mark in the
mercantile world as a thoroughly representative City-man,
using that phrase with no reference whatever to the fact of
his having been, since the May of 1863, one of the four
members returned by the City of London to the House of
Commons. As a theoretical financier, he was already
noticeable, before his entrance into the House of Com-
mons, in his capacity, namely, as the author of a treatise
entitled the ‘Theory of Foreign Exchange’—a treatise
which has already run through several editions, and which
has long since come to be regarded, upon monetary mat-
ters, as an authority. The ability displayed by Mr.
Goschen, first of all, in his brilliant academic career, and
afterwards as the writer of a work like the one just now
particularized, a work at once abstruse and practical, but
above all, through the clear-headedness revealed by him
within the knowledge of City-men in his character as
a practical man of business, led, at the date last men-
tioned, namely, in the May of 1863, to his name being
put forward, upon a death vacancy in the representation of
the metropolis, as the carefully-selected Liberal candidate.
. M.R. . GOSCHEN. 35 I
“So favorable an impression had he produced, even
then, in his private capacity upon that constituency— a
constituency, moreover, not very readily satisfied in regard
to an entirely new candidate's antecedents—that he was at
once returned. He has been returned as M. P. for the
City of London, ever since, by a series of reëlections—by a
reëlection in 1865, by another in 1866, and by another in
1868, sending him to the top of the poll as the first of the
four representatives. Partly through his personal energy,
partly through his unmistakable intelligence, but partly.
also by reason of his being the representative—as one may
Say, the picked commercial and financial representative—of
a great constituency like that of the metropolis, the atten-
tion of the leaders of party was directed especially to Mr.
Goschen, and that, too, with such happy results for himself
that, when he had been only a year and a half in the
House, he was appointed to an office of no less importance
and prominence than that of Vice-President of the Board of
Trade. In that office he had been barely a couple of
months, however—that is, from the 20th of November,
1865, to the 26th of January, 1866—when, at the latter
date, he was elevated to a seat in the Cabinet as Chancellor
of the Duchy of Lancaster, and sworn in as a member of
the Privy Council. So rapid a rise as this was almost, if it
be not entirely, without precedent. It was regarded by
many in the House as a something quite out of the range
of its collective experience.”* - *
“When Earl Russell,” says Justin McCarthy, in a pas-
sage already quoted, “two or three years ago, raised Mr.
* “The Gladstone Government,” p 323.
352 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
Goschen, one of the representatives of the City of London,
and a partner in the great London counting-house, to a
place in the Cabinet, the whole country wondered ; a very
few, who were not frightened out of their propriety, ad-
mired—some thought the world must be coming to an
end.” + But when Mr. Gladstone, in 1868, made the
same gentleman President of the Poor-Law Board, and
when, in 1871, he was appointed First Lord of the Admi-
alty, no one was surprised, for he had clearly won the pro-
motion. He retired from office in 1874, with Mr. Glad-
stone, but still retains his seat in Parliament.
* “Modern Leaders,” p. 14.
XVIII.
ºHE Right Honorable Hugh Culling Eardley
§ § Childers was born on the 25th of June, 1827,
ººl in London. He is the only son of the late
Reverend Eardley Childers, of Cantley, Yorkshire, by
Maria Charlotte, the eldest daughter of the late Sir Cull-
ing Smith, Bart., of Bedwell Park, Hertfordshire. Having
commenced his education at Cheam School, he com-
pleted it at Trinity College, Cambridge, where he gradu-
ated as B. A. in 1850. Obtaining his degree thus, in
the twenty-third year of his age, -in that same year,
1850, he was married to Emily, the third daughter of
George Walker, Esq., of Norton, Worcestershire. It was
a date marking in every way his entrance upon life, on
leaving the University, for, before the year was out, he
had, with his young wife, taken his departure from Eng-
land for the antipodes, going out in search of an active
º


354 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
Career, which he at once discovered and commenced, in
Australia. Immediately upon his arrival in those ‘fresh
fields and pastures new,’ he became a member of the then
recently established Government of Victoria.
“That independent Government had been called into
existence by an Act passed in the Imperial Parliament
during the session of 1850, the session just concluded when
Mr. Childers set forth on his voyage to Australia. The
enactment referred to, 13 & 14 Vict, cap. 59—For the
Better Government of Her Majesty's Australian Colonies
forming the Colony of Victoria—bestowed upon that por-
tion of our antarctic possessions the priceless boon of a
Representative Constitution. It also fully empowered the
legislative body to levy customs, duties, and taxes of other
descriptions. - -
“In the inauguration of this new Government, Mr.
Childers, young though he was, had a very conspicuous
share, both as an administrator and as a legislator. He
was a member of the very first Cabinet formed in Victoria,
and he was also one of the popular representatives in the
very first Legislative Assembly which was there convened.
His office in the Cabinet was that of Commissioner of
Trade and Customs. His seat in the Victorian Legislature
was as Member for Portland. That constituency he repre-
sented in 1856 and 1857. His Ministerial position he
held, however, not simply during two, but during as many
as six years, alltogether, namely, from 1851, the year of his
arrival in Victoria, to the beginning of 1857, the date of
his departure homewards. So that it has been with him,
as it had previously been with his distinguished colleague,
the present Chancellor of the Exchequer—he had learnt
MR. CHILDERS. 355
statesmanship in Australia before his entrance into the
nobler arena of the Imperial Parliament.
“Mr. Lowe, it will be remembered, had returned to
England in 1850, before Mr. Childers—his junior by six-
teen years—had arrived, in 1851, in Australia. The for-
mer had been Member of Council for seven years, from
1843 to 1850; the latter had been for six years, that is,
from 1851 to 1857, Member, as we have seen, of the first
Cabinet. One had sat for two years (1848-1849) as Mem-
ber for Sydney—one for two years (1856-1857) as Member
for Portland. The Hon. Robert Lowe and the Hon.
Hugh Childers returned homewards, each, in turn, laden
with Australian experiences—the latter to take his seat in
the British Cabinet eventually as First Lord of the Admi-
ralty, the former as Chancellor of the Exchequer. Tutored
in the same school, they have together won their way to
high office for the first time in the same Government.
“It was in the character of Agent-General for the colony
of Victoria that Mr. Childers, in 1857, arrived in England.
Within a couple of years after his return he had obtained a
seat in the House of Commons. He entered the House,
for the first time, in the February of 1860, as the colleague
of Mr. Monckton Milnes, the poet (since created Lord
Houghton), having just then been elected one of the two
representatives of the borough of Pontefract. His acqui-
sition, thus, of a place in the legislature, was not accom-
plished, however, without some difficulty. He had un-
successfully appealed to that same constituency in the
April of 1859, but, having afterwards petitioned against the
return, the sitting member resigned, a new writ was issued,
and the future Cabinet Minister was elected, as we have
356 BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
said, for the first time as M.P. for Pontefract. As mem-
ber for that borough he has held his place in the House
of Commons ever since then uninterruptedly. He was re-
elected in the April of 1864, and again in the July of 1865,
and now, more recently, twice in rapid succession, as we all
know, namely, during the last General Election, and im-
mediately afterwards on the abrupt change of Government.
“Within a year after his first entrance into the
House, Mr. Childers was appointed, in 1861, Chairman
of the Select Committee on Transportation. Two years
afterwards he was gazetted as one of the Royal Commis-
Sioners instructed to inquire into laws relating to Penal
Servitude : and four years later on, in 1867, was gazetted
as a Royal Commissioner to investigate the Constitution
of the Law Courts. It should be mentioned, in regard
to his labors in connection with the earlier of these two
Royal Commissions, that his individual recommenda-
tions, in respect to transportation, were eventually accepted
and acted upon by Her Majesty's Government.
‘‘Nearly five years have now elapsed since Mr. Childers,
after a career of no more than four years in the House of
Commons, was selected as worthy of office by the then
Premier, Viscount Palmerston. He was, thereupon—this
was in the April of 1864—appointed one of the Lords of
the Admiralty—the very department over which he is now
presiding as a Cabinet Minister. Continued in that ap-
pointment until the August of 1865, he was then removed
to the position of Financial Secretary to the Treasury, a
position which he continued to hold in the Government
reconstructed by Earl Russell immediately upon the death
of his predecessor in the Premiership. As Financial Sec-
MR. CHILDERS. 357
retary to the Treasury Mr. Childers fully sustained and, so
to speak, justified, the high reputation for administrative
ability which he had brought back with him from Australia.
“His career, in the interim, outside the House of Com-
mons, had been sufficiently active and energetic. In evi-
dence of which, it may be here stated that, besides being
the author of several vigorous pamphlets on Free Trade,
on Railway Policy, and on National Education, he is the
Chairman of the Great India Peninsular Railway Com-
pany, and a Director of four companies as considerable as
the London and County Bank, the Bank of Australia, the
Royal Mail Steam Packet Company, and the Liverpool,
London, and Globe Insurance. Entered some years since
as a student of Lincoln’s Inn, he has never yet been
Called to the Bar.” +
The author of “Men and Manner in Parliament,”
writing more than a year ago, pointed out the Marquis of
Hartington as the probable successor of Mr. Gladstone, on
the ground that among all the other probable candidates
for the position there existed latent jealousies which could
only be composed by the selection of some ‘‘ broad bosom
of respectable mediocrity upon which a dozen heads,
aching with jealousy and burning with ambition, might
peacefully repose. Mr. Forster would not consent to
serve under Mr. Lowe, and Mr. Lowe would scorn to hold
office under Mr. Forster. Mr. Goschen and Mr. Childers
are as Damon and Pythias in friendly counsel and co-
operation in naval affairs; but if one were called to lead
the House of Commons the other must perforce be passed
* “The Gladstone Government,” p. 270.
358 - BRIEF BIOGRAPHIES.
over, and it would be difficult to convince him that the
selection had been made wholly in accordance with that
principle by the rigid adoption of which the world has,
according to Mr. Darwin, reached its present state of per-
fection. The elevation of Lord Hartington to the titular
Premiership would leave the ambitious youth of Mr. Glad-
stone's Ministry exactly as they now stand, with the excep-
tion of the removal of the figure in whose colossal shadow
they have hitherto walked, like Gulliver's companions in
Lilliput.” +
* “Men and Manner in Parliament,” p. 254.
I N ID E X.
A.
Aberdeen, Lord, 163.
Abyssinian Expedition, 254,
Arbitration, Geneva, 141, 314.
Acland, Sir Thos., 125
Adams, C. F., 26.
Addelly, Sir Chas., 86.
Adullamites, the, 77, 83, 86, 145. 331.
Alabama Claims, 27, 93, 108, 306.
Alabama Treaty, 141, 142, 258, 314.
Alderson, Sir E. H., 234.
Althorp, Lond, 126. 130, 131, 134, 216.
Amberley, Lord, 145.
American Revolution, approved by
Lord Russell, 132.
“Anti-Coningsby,” 66.
ARGYLL, DUKE of, 175. Personal ap-
pearance, 175; American aspect.
178 : birth and career, 178 ; writ-
ings, 181, 188; Scottish feeling,
183; oratory, 187; children, 190.
Arnold, Dr. Thomas, 295, 296.
“Atlantic Monthly,” quoted,
17S.
Australia, 322.
Ayrton, A. S., 54, 344.
B.
Baring, Alex., 118.
Bath, Marquis of, 342.
Beaconsfield, Wiscountess (Mrs. Dis-
raeli), 42.
Bentinck, Lord George, 69.
Bismarck, Prince, 244.
Blessington, Lady, 40.
102,
Bradlaugh, Charles, 248.
BRIGHT. John. His personal appear-
ance, 71; origin and career, 73: as
an orator, 75; as a statesman, 91.
Also, 7, 8, 162, 173. 230, 237, 275,
280, 281, 297, 299, 325, 335.
Brooks, Shirley, quoted, 18, 47.
Brougham, Lord, 202.
Bruce, H. A., 54.
Budget Speeches of Gladstone, 12, 16,
251 ; of Northcote, 251 ; of Lowe,
251, 329 : Bunsen, Chevalier, on
Gladstone, 2.
Burdett, Sir F., 117, 126.
Buxton, Sir T. F., 295.
C.
“ Cabinet Portraits,” see Reid, T. W.
CAIRNs, Lord. A lawyer-states-
man, 195: origin and career, 198;
oratory, 203; manner, 205; limita-
tions, 207. Also, 15S, 169, 214, 263.
Canada, Relation of United States to,
140,
Canning. George, 119.
Cardwell, Edward, 45, 54, 193, 348.
Carlyle Thomas, 167, 230.
Castelar, Señor, 315.
Castlereagh, Lord, 118, 139.
Cecil, Lord Robert, see Salisbury.
CHILDERs, H. C. E., 353. Also, 277,
347.
Choate, J. H., Speech by, 304.
Church of England, 106, 2S0.
Clanricarde, Lord, 145, 158.
360
INDEX.
E.
Edinburgh Review, quoted, 75.
Education Act, English, 295, 301, 306,
Eldon, Lold, 25.
Emancipation, Negro, in West lin,
dies, 5, 27.
Emancipation, Roman Catholic, 120,
Emerson, R. W., 2.
England, Condition of, in 1813, 114.
Escott, T. H. S. (Fraser's Magazine),
quoted, 47, 50, 54, 336, 340, 349.
Exemption of Charities from Taxa-
tion, 17.
F.
Cobden, Richard, 73, 89, 90, 140. 230,
325. Mr. Bright's speech on his
death, 90.
Cockburn, Chief Justice, 142.
Collier, Sir R., 142.
Colonies, British, 140, 166, 317, 354.
* Comingsby,” quoted, 56; criticised,
06; Key to, 67.
Conway, M. D., 97.
Corn-Laws, 73, 93.
Crabbe, George, quoted, 329.
Cranborne, Viscount, see Salisbury.
Crimean War, the, 77, 89, 91, 93, 254,
255.
Croker, J. W., 68, 131.
Cross, 54, 349.
D.
Dalley, John, 349.
Darwin, Charles, 358.
Davis, Jeſferson, 27, 65.
De Grey, Lord. See Ripon.
DLRBY, Lord, 216. Personal appear-
ance, 217 ; character, 217; birth
and career, 221; political opinions,
222. Also, 209, 214, 250, 263, 29S.
As Lord Stanley, 220, 228, 235.
Derby, Lord (the late), 13, 40, 44, 151,
201, 217, 218, 219, 221, 233, 245, 269,
281. As Lord Stanley, 117, 131.
Devonshi, e, Duke of, 280, 282.
Disestablishment, 105.
DISRAELI, BENJ., 35. Personal ap-
pearance, 35 ; origin and political
career, 37; as an orator, 45 ; as a
party leader, 54; speech on Pres.
Lincoln's death, 62 ; as a states-
man, 63; as an author, 65. Also,
6, 7, 8, 12, 20, 77, 139, 141. 202, 218,
235, 238, 215, 250, 251, 256, 260, 261,
262, 267, 269, 274, 277, 281, 338, 340,
341, 342, 343, 345, 346.
Dryden, John, quoted, 331.
Duſſ, Grant, 34, 54, 177.
Dulham, Lord, 124, 129.
Farrer, Thomas, 253.
Fawcett, Henry, 50, 173, 343.
ForsTER, William E., 292. Political
prospects, 292 ; origin and career,
295; personal appearance, 295 ; as
an orator, 297 ; as a statesman,
298; reception in New York, 304;
his speech on that occasion, 307.
Also, 277, 357.
Forster, William, 294, 296.
“Fraser's Magazine.” See Escot T.
Free trade, 318.
G.
Garibaldi, 18.
Garrison, W. L., 26.
Gascoigne, Banber, 234.
Geneva Arbitration, 141, 314
“Gentleman’s Magazine.” See “Men
&nd Martne?".”
Gibson, Milner, 180.
“Gladstone Government,” the, by a
Templar, quoted, 3, etc.
Gladstone, John, 4.
Gladstone, Sir Thomas, 44.
GLADSTONE, W. E., 1 ; Macaulay on,
1 ; personal appearance, 2 ; origin
and public career, 4; CŞ an orator,
6; as a party leader, 19; as a states-
INDEX.
36 I
man, 23; as an author, 27 ; his pres-
ent position, 30; also, 46, 48, 51,
53, 55, 57, 61, 68, 77, 105, 141, 165,
236, 237, 245, 250, 251, 252, 257, 258,
269, 274, 277, 278, 279, 281, 2S3, 297,
303, 332, 334, 335, 340, 346, 355, 358.
Goscii BN, G. J., 347; oratory, 348;
origin and career, 349; also, 54,
193, 277, 2S2, 357.
Goschen, W. H., 349.
Graham, Sir J., 12, 13, 123.
Graham, Sir T., 111.
Grant, Mr., 131.
GRANVILLE, EARL, 157; personal ap-
pearance, 157; birth and career,
159; offered the premiership, 163:
courtesy, 169; popular sympathies,
173 ; also, 30, 142, 199, 226, 290, 208.
Grey, Lord (as Lord Howick), 5.
Grey, Lord (the late), 41, 112, 113, 118,
122, 124, 126, 129, 130, 135, 346.
Grey, Sir George, 61.
Griffith, Darby, 60.
H. º
Halifax, Lord. 13, 243.
Halifax, Lord (the author), 300.
Hamilton, Lord George, 54.
“Hansard’s Debates,” quoted, 63, 90.
HARcourt, SIR WILLIAM, 336; ori-
gin and career, 337 ; oratory, 337 ;
political position, 341 ; character,
343; also, 277, 295, 347.
Hardinge, Sir H., 123, 126.
HARDr, GATB.orNE, 261 ; opinions,
263, 266 , oratory, 264, 267; origin
and career, 269; as Home Secretary,
270 ; also, 54, 94, 193, 249.
Harte, Bret, 69.
HARTINGTON, Lord, 279; appointed
liberal leader, 279 ; birth and ca-
reer, 2S2 ; personal appearance,
284 ; character, 288; also, 54, 277,
357, 358. .
Hayward, A. (London Quarterly),
quoted, 6. 12, 17, 18, 71.
Herbert, Sidney, 12.
Hertford, Marquis of, 67.
Hicks-Beach, Sir M., 54.
Hobhouse, Sir J. C., S8.
Holland, Lord and Lady, 111.
Home Department (English), 270,
Home Rule (Ireland), 52, 75.
Hook, Theodore, 49.
Horner, Francis, 147.
Horseman, Mr., 77, 86.
Houghton, Lord, 355.
Household Suffrage, 94.
Howard, Lord Edward, 68.
Howick, Lord ; see Grey, Lord.
Hume, Joseph, 40, 94, 124.
Hunt, Ward, 54, 193, 257.
Huskisson, Wm., 120.
I.
Indian affairs, 237, 243, 259.
Ireland, condition of 52, 77, 88, 93,
289.
Irish University Act, 8.
J.
Johnson, Reverdy, 225.
L.
Laing, Samuel, 21S.
Lawson, Sir Wilfred, 342,
Lawyer, Statesman, 195.
Lennox, Lord H., 54.
Lester, C. E., 26.
Leveson, Lord. See Granville.
Lewis, Wyndham, 42.
Liberal Leadership, the, 277, 357.
Licensing Bill, the, 348.
Lincoln, President, 62, 96.
Lords, House of, 137, 216, 281.
Lorne, Marquis of, 190.
Louise, Princess (Marchioness of
Lorne), 190.
362
INDEX.
Low E, ROBERT, 320; personal appear-
ance, 320 ; origin and career, 321 ;
oratory, 326; character, 332; also
14, 54, 77, 85, 251, 255, 257, 277, 293,
355, 357.
Lowell, J. R., quoted 68.
Lowther, Mr. , 277.
Lyndhurst, Lord, 128.
Lyttleton, Lord, 68.
Lytton, Lord (Sir E. L. Bulwer), 63.
103, 47.
M.
Macaulay, T. B., on Gladstone, 1, 23;
on Peel, 75.
McCarthy, Justin, quoted, 27, 104, 198,
229, 238, 249, 282, 350.
Mackintosh, Sir James, 119.
Maguire, Mr., 285.
Malmesbury, Lord, 196, 214, 215.
Manners, Lord J., 40, 190, 191, 193, 263.
Mason & Slidell, seizure of, 101.
Melbourne, Lord, 145, 160, 346.
“Men and Manner in Parliament,”
Quoted, 9, etc.
Miall. Edward, 274.
Mill, J. S., 96, 335.
Monsell, Mr., 193.
Molesworth, Sir W., 16.
N.
Napier, Lord, 254, 255.
Napoleon I., 111.
Napoleon III., 36.
“Nation ” (N. Y.), quoted, 249, 268,
200, 336, 341.
Newdegate, Mr., 95.
Newman, Rev. J. H., 30.
“ News,” Daily, London ; see Politi-
cal Portraits.
“ Noctes Ambrosianae,” quoted, 130.
“North American Review,” quoted,
68.
North, Lord, 132.
.*
Northcote, SIR STAFFord, 249; per-
sonal appearance, 249, 252; birth
and career, 253; management of
Abyssinian expedition, 254; politi-
cal opinions, 258; mission to the
United States, 258. Also, 54,
O.
..O'Connell, Daniel, 40, 41, 63, 127.
O'Connell, Maurice, 41.
Odger, Jacob, 248.
Ollivier, Emile, 233.
Orred, George, 322.
Osborne, Bernal, 162.
P.
Pakington, Sir J., 263.
Palmerston, Lord, 6, 19, 59, 64, SS, 151,
163, 164, 167, 173, 180, 221, 224, 325,
326, 327, 345, 356.
Parnell, Sir H., 121.
Patten, Wilson, 125.
Peel, Sir R., 4, 5, 25, 28, 32, 43, 75, 103,
121, 126, 128, 133, 245, 251.
Phillips, Wendell, 26.
Pitt Willian, 132, 135, 347.
Poe, E. A., on “Vivian Grey,” 66.
“Political Portraits,” quoted, 24, etc.
Ponsonby, Col., 114.
Ponsonby, Lord, 113.
Poor Law Board, 272.
Praed, W. M., 12S.
Price, Green, 287.
Public Worship Bill, 9.
‘‘ Punch,” London, quoted, 108.
Pynder, Rev. Reginald, 321.
Q.
Quincy, Edmund, 49.
R.
Reſorm IBill, the (of 1832), 115, 156,
290 (of 1867), 13, 44, 156, 291.
Reid, W. T., “ Cabinet Portraits,”
quoted, 4, etc.
INDEX.
363
Republicanism in England, 24, 102,
138.
Ricardo, David, 117.
RICHMOND, THE DUKE OF. conserv-
ative leader, 209; qualifications,
210; birth and career, 214. Also,
113, 196, 205, 200, 250.
Ripon, Lord (as Lord de Grey), 258.
Roebuck, J. A., 242.
Roman Catholic Church, 29, 269.
It USSELL, LORD, 108 ; personal ap-
pearance, 10S, 145; travels, 110 ;
entering Parliament, 114; efforts
for parliamentary reform, 115; Ala-
bama treaty, 141 ; birth and career,
145; foreign policy, 148; personal
qualities, 150; as a writer, 153. Al-
so, 6, 59, 8S, 161, 162, 167, 173, 245,
2S2, 302, 326, 330, 346, 351, 356.
Russell, Lord William, 111.
S.
$AI,ISBURY, Lord, 233; political atti-
tude, 233; birth and career, 234;
appearance and manner, 234; as
Indian minister, 242. Also, 22, 25,
40, 158, 16), 205, 209, 214, 250, 263.
As Lord Robert Cecil, 235, 238, 241;
as Lord Cranborne, 235, 238, 247.
Salisbury, Marchioness of, 222.
“Saturday Review,” the, 239.
Scotland, 183, 188, 278.
Seward W. H., 26.
Slavery, American, 26, S1, 99, 294, 305.
Smalley, G. W., quoted, 104.
‘Smith, Sir C. E., 353.
Smith, John, 123.
Smith Sydney, quoted, 108, 302.
“Spectator,” the, quoted, 26, 31, 341.
‘Staël, M. de, 115.
Stanley, Lord ; see Derby.
Sturgis, Russell, 216.
Sugden, Sir E., 128.
º
T.
Tait, Dr., 349.
“Tancred ‘’ criticized, 68.
Taylor, Sir Herbert, 133.
Tennyson, Alfred, quoted, 55.
Tiernay, George, 121.
“Times '' (London), 323.
“Times '' (N. Y.), quoted, 319.
Toryism, 1, 218, 236, 247, 262.
Treaty of Washington ; see Alabama,
the. -
“Tribune "" (N. Y.), quoted, 106.
U.
Union League Club (N. Y.), 304,
319. "
United States, Civil War in, as view-
ed by Lord Palmerston, 64; by Dis-
racli, 64; by Lord Russell, 64; by
Gladstone, 26, 64; by Bright, S0, 93,
96 ; by Forster, 304, 308.
United States Constitution, compar-
ed with British, 135, 317.
W.
Victoria, Queen, 108, 164.
Victoria (colony), 354.
“Vivian Grey,” Key to, 67.
W.
Walker George, 353.
Walpole Sir R., 132, 135.
Washington, Gen., 142.
Wayland, Francis, quoted, 102, 178.
Wellington, Lord, 111, 113, 121, 128,
133, 245.
Westbuiry, Lord, 145, 158.
Wetherell, Sir C., 128.
Whittier, J. G., quoted, 251, 294.
Willis, N. P., 40.
Wortley Stuart, 117.
Wynn, Chas., 117.
ſiliili
§§§§§§§ 5% "
|
i
i
?
0 NOT REMOVE
0R
MUTILATE GARD

Ģ
į,
čſ.
§§§
§§
§§§§
|×
· º √
* * * · · *
ºº:: -
№ae，
§§§§§§
ſaeae
; “¿º ºſº
*** ģ-
、。№ 3）& ſae
¿ſº， ¿
∞ √~--~--~--~§§§©® :
™,× × ×
¿ $¢.************
ș,§§§
.*.*.*.*
jº.º.º.
º: …
g
Q ， ！
§
§.
Ķ
ğ ºčºſ！！！
? ！！！
∞ √≠√∞
', ，'']，
∞∞∞
§§
s， šº"，
§§§
ºs x， y） * * * *ſ*.
§§§§§§
！ ！！
§ 9
&#， ， ， ，
！ \， ，
äış º
xº
§§
§*x）'）;
ſae
§§
§§§§
∞ √°.
§.
§
№
§§§§§
*** №w : *
∞
§，
∞ √∞ √°.',
§...','№, s.s.
& º
º
* , º
， ， ， ！
8，5）
§ 2º
}，
ºs ：
§§
:.ſk
, -, ×， 3 * * *
§§¿¿.*..*
！ ！！ %±
≡ （x , ！
ſaeſ.