THE LIBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 LOS ANGELES
 
 ^ 'Vj\ *j i- -'4 .;• '^ *'-^e^i
 
 MALCOLM MACCOLL
 
 -J',,- ,9ti^v-!t i^t M-J^.-m^-.-'- 
 
 iK^^i^M^ l^xMl
 
 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 MEMOIRS AND CORRESPONDENCE 
 
 EDITED BY 
 THE RIGHT HON. 
 
 GEORGE W. E. RUSSELL 
 
 The greatest trust between man and man is the trust of 
 giving counsel. — Bacon. 
 
 WITH A PORTRAIT 
 
 NEW YORK 
 E. P. BUTTON AND COMPANY 
 
 681 FIFTH AVENUE 
 I914
 
 6R 
 
 NOTE 
 
 The task of writing this book was undertaken at Mrs. 
 MacColl's request ; and it has been a pleasure to me thus 
 to place on record the character and work of an old and 
 valued friend. For the last thirty years of his life Canon 
 MacCoU honoured me with a share of his regard, and in 
 all the principal controversies of that eventful time he 
 and I found ourselves on the same side. 
 
 My cordial thanks are due to all those who have been 
 kind enough to supply me with material, and more especially 
 to Lord Sahsbury, Lord Bath, Mr. Gladstone's Trustees, 
 and the Literary Executors of Cardinal Newman and 
 Mr. R. H. Hutton. 
 
 G. W. E. R. 
 
 March 14, 1914.
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 
 Note .... 
 
 
 
 V 
 
 I. 
 
 Beginnings 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 II. 
 
 Transition 
 
 
 
 17 
 
 III. 
 
 Gladstonianism 
 
 
 
 22 
 
 IV. 
 
 Ecclesiastica . 
 
 
 
 35 
 
 V. 
 
 The Eastern Question . 
 
 
 
 45 .— - 
 
 VI. 
 
 Some Fruits of Victory 
 
 
 
 71 
 
 VII. 
 
 The Irish Question 
 
 , 
 
 
 113 
 
 VIII. 
 
 Armenia 
 
 
 
 139 1^ 
 215 '^ 
 
 IX. 
 
 The End of Controversy 
 
 
 
 X. 
 
 Friendship and Home . 
 
 
 
 233 
 
 XI. 
 
 Correspondence 
 
 
 
 244 
 
 XII. 
 
 L'Envoi 
 
 Index .... 
 
 
 
 390 
 . 399
 
 \l: / K' >, " 
 
 * 7 A,*A 
 
 
 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 BEGINNINGS 
 
 I am a member of the suffering and Ejiiscopal Church of Scotland — the 
 shadow of a shade now, and f ortmiately so — but I love to pray where my fathers 
 prayed before me. — Sm Walter Scott. 
 
 Malcolm MacColl was born at Glenfinnan, in the county 
 of Inverness, on March 27, 1831. His father was John 
 MacColl, and, according to a tradition preserved in the 
 family, he was descended from a Jacobite who lost his life 
 and his property for his loyalty to the young Pretender. 
 John MacColl married Martha, daughter of Malcolm Macrae, 
 of Letterfearn in Kintail, a lineal descendant of Malcolm 
 Macrae, who was Constable of Ellandona Castle about the 
 beginning of the sixteenth century. ' The Macraes, who 
 were retainers of the Earl of Seaforth, were a small but war- 
 Uke clan, who added to their fighting qualities a capacity for 
 learning which greatly increased their importance in the civil 
 and ecclesiastical history of their native county of Ross.' 
 
 John and Martha MacColl had, besides two daughters, 
 four sons, of whom Malcolm, or ' Callum,' as he was called in 
 the family, was the third. All were able men, and, in spite of 
 disadvantageous beginnings, attained to creditable positions 
 at home or in the colonies ; but it is only with Malcolm 
 that we are here concerned. John MacColl was a tenant- 
 farmer, but sufficiently well educated to teach his four 
 boys elementary I^atin, Greek, and mathematics. He died
 
 2 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 when the eldest was only fourteen, and the care of the 
 family devolved on the mother, a stern, brave, and reUgious 
 woman, who spoke only Gaelic. John MacColl, like his 
 fathers before him, belonged to the Episcopal Church, in 
 which his children were baptized and educated ; but 
 Mrs. MacColl had been brought up a Presbyterian, 
 and, though she joined the Episcopal Church on her 
 marriage, she ' retained to the end her belief in the 
 Calvinists' doctrine of Predestination, and held rather 
 extreme Presbyterian views about the observance of the 
 Sabbath.' From Glenfinnan Mrs. MacColl moved with 
 her children to the little fishing-port of Kintail, where the 
 children learned to speak English, and from Kintail to 
 Ballachulish. There Malcolm MacColl acquitted himself 
 so well at school that he attracted the favourable regard of 
 a wealthy lady, who sent him to a seminary at Dalkeith 
 where schoolmasters were trained. Having qualified at 
 Dalkeith, he taught successively at Callander, Stonehaven, 
 and Perth. At Callander he was permitted by the Bishop 
 to act as lay-reader at a mission-chapel ; and at Perth the 
 Provost of the Cathedral, E. B. K. Fortescue, recognizing 
 his abilities and vocation, encouraged him to enter Trinity 
 College, Glenalmond, as a student in the Divinity Depart- 
 ment.^ ' He walked from Perth to Glenalmond, conning his 
 Greek Testament as he rested on the milestones by the 
 way.' After a preliminary examination, and a further 
 period of study at home, he was admitted to ' the Senior 
 Department ' on September 14, 1854, and obtained the 
 assistance of a ' Houblon Exhibition,' given for knowledge 
 of Gaelic. The first Warden of Glenalmond was Charles 
 Wordsworth, who became Bishop of St. Andrews in 
 1852. He was succeeded in 1854 by John Hannah, after- 
 wards Vicar of Brighton and Archdeacon of Chichester. 
 Among the tutors were George Forrest Browne, afterwards 
 Bishop of Bristol ; William Bright, afterwards Regius 
 Professor of Ecclesiastical History at Oxford ; and Alfred 
 
 ' Trinity College, Glenalmond, was designed to serve both as a Public 
 School and as a Theological Seminary. Mr. Gladstone and his friend 
 J. R. Hope-Scott were its principal founders. It was opened in September 1847.
 
 BEGINNINGS 3 
 
 Barry, afterwards Bishop of Sydney. To these distin- 
 guished men and their colleagues MacColl always expressed 
 lifelong obligation. A note in the College Register illustrates 
 his line of study, by enumerating the following books : 
 the Greek Testament, with Burton's notes ; Mant's ' Com- 
 mentary on the Bible ' ; Eusebius ; Hooker ; Pearson on 
 the Creed ; Wheatly on the Common Prayer ; the Thirty- 
 nine Articles, in Latin and English, with Welchman's notes ; 
 Wordsworth's ' Theophilus Anglicanus ' ; Bates's Lectures 
 on Church History ; Russell's ' History of the Church of 
 Scotland ' ; Whewell's ' Moral Philosophy ' ; and Trench's 
 ' Synonyms of the New Testament.' 
 
 MacColl's personal characteristics seem to have made a 
 vivid impression upon his contemporaries, from whose recol- 
 lections it is quite easy to construct his portrait. Physically, 
 he was much below the middle size, but Avell formed, with a 
 massive head and an intellectual brow. He was extremely 
 active and vigorous, a strong swimmer, a keen fisherman, 
 a daring waterman,^ and a strenuous wrestler. In a friendly 
 encounter with some fellow-students, he ' threw three like 
 ninepins,' but by craft rather than force. ' Being of short 
 stature, he clasped his antagonist low down, hoisted him oft 
 his feet so that he had no yoint d'appui beneath him, and 
 then dropped him flat, sideways.' The love of combat, 
 whether physical or mental, was a part of his nature. Argu- 
 ment, or ' controversee ' as he pronounced it, for he had not 
 lost his Gaelic accent, was his chief delight. He founded 
 a Debating Society, and there enjoyed himself to the top of 
 his bent, ' quickly getting most of his opponents into tight 
 corners.' Wearying of this experience, the other members 
 of the society passed a resolution that the debate should be 
 conducted in Latin, in which tongue they believed MacColl 
 to be only moderately proficient. But this device ' gave them 
 relief only for a time, because he soon quahfied himself to 
 argue in a kind of Latin, probably nearly as good as they 
 could speak themselves.' Even the authorities of the 
 College were not secure from MacColl's argumentative 
 
 1 ' He steered erratically and wildly, so as to make rowing dangerous 
 and landing impossible.' 
 
 B 2
 
 4 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 assaults. He used to interrupt the lectures of Hannah and 
 Bright with puzzling, though not irrelevant, questions, and 
 never was content with an answer which did not satisfy 
 the logical necessities of the case. We are told that his 
 teachers, even when most tenacious of their own opinions, 
 ' recognized his versatility and readiness in eluding a trap 
 or recovering from a slip.' An even more daring venture of 
 controversy is recorded by a contemporary : 
 
 'In Perth in 1853 there was a spitfire priest of the 
 Papal persuasion. He gave the clergy of St. Ninian's 
 Cathedral no end of annoyance by provocative pamphlets 
 and spouting. MacCoU wrote a reply, characteristic of 
 course ; arranged with Masters for its publication, and 
 advertised the fact in the Guardian. 
 
 ' " Who is the Malcolm MacCoU that advertises a reply in 
 this week's Guardian ? " said Professor Bright one day at 
 luncheon in the Glenalmond Dining-Hall. 
 
 ' " He is at the table," said the student at Bright's right 
 hand. Bright's face assumed a stony stare. An ominous 
 silence followed, and shortly afterwards MacCoU was called 
 before the Warden, who pointed out to him the impropriety 
 of one in his position championing the learned staff of the 
 Cathedral, and the audacity of entering the lists in his 
 half-fledged state against an experienced, unscrupulous, and 
 coarse controversialist, and advised him not to proceed 
 with the publication. MacColl mentioned the financial 
 difficulty he would be in with the publisher. The Warden 
 said he would settle that liability, and so MacColl's reply 
 to the spitfire was still-born. But the Warden, who had 
 read the proofs, said that it was very clever.' 
 
 One of MacColl's fellow-students at Glenalmond supplies 
 this interesting comment on the Scottish, as opposed to 
 the English, system of instruction : 
 
 ' In England the budding mind is so cabined, cribbed, 
 confined, that it buds rarely and shoots sparsely. No 
 expression of independent thinking is allowed. In examina- 
 tions, the contents of lectures must not be devia,ted, {xotok^
 
 BEGINNINGS 5 
 
 nor questioned, however open to attack. To be in statu 
 pupillari is to be in a cage, acting the part of parrot. The 
 result is a plentiful crop of minds without imagination, 
 initiation, or go, holding opinions minus premisses — tame 
 minds, that cumber the ground. MacColl went through the 
 two years' course untouched by such taming, and it is 
 doubtful if he, a thoroughbred Kelt, could ever have been 
 tamed into insignificance like a plastic Saxon. The status 
 pwpillaris may not be thus misused now. I speak of it only 
 as I saw it in my early days under some Double Firsts, 
 who often, as the Irrepressibles grew in intellectual stature, 
 had to sing smaller.' 
 
 This early encouragement to the free use of the inde- 
 pendent intellect may have accounted for much in the 
 character and career of Malcolm MacColl. 
 
 With his fellow-students, as in earlier days with his 
 schoolfellows, MacColl seems to have been generally popular, 
 in spite of some resemblance to Diotrephes in the matter 
 of pre-eminence. They admired his pluck and energy ; 
 his conversational gifts, especially in the art of telling 
 ghost-stories ; his ' enthusiasm over fine passages ' which 
 he encountered in his reading ; his manly virtue and earnest 
 piety. One who made a walking-tour with him, and shared 
 his bedroom, said in after years that he ' remembered being 
 impressed by the length of time he took to say his prayers.' 
 Another wrote : ' In all, and througli all, his life was white.' 
 
 During this period of preparation MacColl had eked out 
 his narrow means by taking private tutorships, but his 
 heart had always been set on Holy Orders, and now the time 
 drew near for his ordination. It had been expected at Glen- 
 almond that he would seek a post where he could minister 
 to Gaelic-speaking Highlanders ; but he decided otherwise. 
 
 The Bishop of Glasgow and Galloway, from 1848 to 1859, 
 was Walter John Trower, and the following notes are 
 extracted from his Episcopal Journal : 
 
 'August 17, 1855. — After much correspondence with 
 members of the Church at Castle Douglas in Galloway, it was 
 about this time resolved to set on foot a Mission at this place.'
 
 6 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ''October 7, 1855. — Preached at Castle Douglas. First 
 Church in Galloway.' 
 
 ' April 28, 1856. — Ordained. . . . Deacons : . . . Mal- 
 colm MacColl, Castle Douglas. . . . ' 
 
 On this the present Bishop of Glasgow remarks : 
 
 ' Curiously enough there is no mention of MacCoU having 
 been licensed to Castle Douglas. It was, however, not 
 altogether without precedent in former days, when we 
 were short of clergy, to give a Deacon charge of an infant 
 Mission, though afterwards it was forbidden.' 
 
 Bishop Trower's Journal continues : 
 
 ' September 10, 1856. — Laid the foundation-stone of 
 the new church (St. Ninian's) at Castle Douglas. The 
 services attended by Provost and Council ; and a large 
 number of Presbyterians as well as Church-people. They 
 seemed to be interested and impressed.' 
 
 'August 25, 1857. — Ordained in St. Mary's, Glasgow: 
 Priests . . . Rev. M. MacCoU of Castle Douglas.' 
 
 The history of MacCoU's early days at Castle Douglas 
 may best be given in his own words written in 1858 : 
 
 ' I found a congregation composed of some eight or 
 nine county families, who had just then commenced building 
 a church, which promises to be very handsome. There 
 were no poor at all in the congregation ; but I am happy 
 to say that the half are now composed of the poor. For 
 a clergyman who should wish to live at ease and enjoy 
 himself I know no place preferable to Castle Douglas. The 
 country is beautiful, and a kinder and more hospitable 
 people than the gentry all round I never met. But to a 
 young clergyman, just commencing his clerical life. Castle 
 Douglas has its dangers. The lightness of his parochial 
 duties, and the pleasant society all round him, have a 
 tendency to make a young man too secular and fond of 
 pleasure. At all events, I felt reluctant to expose myself 
 too much to the temptation ; and besides, I was anxious.
 
 BEGINNINGS 7 
 
 if possible, to serve a year or two as curate under an older 
 and more experienced clergyman. Actuated by these 
 considerations, I wrote to the Bishop three months after 
 I had been there, resigning my charge in Castle Douglas, 
 and recommending him to send an older man to succeed 
 me. He replied, in a very kind letter, that he would consult 
 the members of my congregation, and let me know the 
 result ; but that, if I should leave Castle Douglas, he hoped 
 I would not leave his diocese, as he could give me another 
 charge. The congregation begged me to stay, and, the 
 Bishop uniting his solicitation with theirs, I consented. 
 However, I still retained my own opinion that an older 
 man would do better for Castle Douglas, and that a charge 
 where I might have more work and less pleasure, would be 
 better for me. So strongly was I impressed with this, 
 that I resigned a second time ; but my congregation again 
 persuaded me to withdraw my resignation. 
 
 'Things remained in this state till September 1857, 
 when the Bishop was there. The subject was then revived 
 between us ; and we parted with the understanding that 
 if the Bishop should hear of a man likely to suit Castle 
 Douglas and of a charge likely to suit me, he would let me 
 know. He volunteered a pledge that my leaving Castle 
 Douglas should be optional Avith myself, and that he would 
 propose no change till he had a charge to offer me equivalent 
 in value to Castle Douglas. The next time I heard from 
 him was in the middle of March 1858, when I had a short 
 note from him, saying that recent circumstances had 
 induced him to think that I had better seek another charge, 
 and that therefore I must consider my licence withdrawn 
 at the end of three months.' 
 
 MacColl had been unfortunate in the time and place 
 of his ordination. In 1857 and 1858 the Episcopal Church 
 of Scotland was agitated by a furious controversy, and it 
 was difficult for a young and ardent ecclesiastic to keep 
 quite clear of the theological storm. 
 
 In August 1857 the Bishop of Brechin, Alexander 
 Penrose Forbes, delivered to his Diocesan Synod n
 
 8 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 long and learned Charge on the doctrine of the Holy 
 Eucharist. In this Charge he affirmed the Real Objective 
 Presence and the Eucharistic Sacrifice ; he justified 
 Eucharistic Adoration ; and he vindicated the Scottish 
 Communion Office, which at that time had in many 
 places been ousted by the English Office. This out- 
 spoken utterance alarmed not only the Puritan element 
 in the Church, but also that moderate Anglicanism which 
 had all along been out of sympathy with the higher 
 tradition of Scottish Episcopacy. At the close of 1857 a 
 Declaration (which had been rejected by the College of 
 Bishops) was issued on their own authority by the Bishops 
 of Edinburgh, Argyll, and Glasgow, who strongly contro- 
 verted the theological position of the Bishop of Brechin. 
 With the later stages of the controversy and the vindication 
 of Eucharistic doctrine in which it issued, we are not here 
 concerned. What concerns us is its bearing on MacCoU's 
 position and prospects. The admirers of the three pro- 
 testing Bishops started Addresses of Thanks to them, and 
 these addresses were circulated for signature alike among 
 clergy and laity. MacColl refused to sign the address, and 
 had the courage to sign a Remonstrance against the three 
 Bishops' declaration. As a result he found himself under 
 his diocesan's displeasure. The Bishop dismissed him from 
 his charge at Castle Douglas, and he felt himself, in his 
 own phrase, ' snuffed out.' At this juncture, Avith his 
 means of subsistence summarily cut off, and a younger 
 brother dependent on him, he bethought himself of a course 
 which, however little he may have foreseen it at the moment, 
 changed his whole subsequent life. Mr. Gladstone, then 
 M.P. for the University of Oxford, and recently Chancellor 
 of the Exchequer in Lord Aberdeen's Administration, was 
 known to all men as a zealous and munificent supporter 
 of the Episcopal Church in Scotland. He had been one 
 of the founders of the College of Glenalmond, was a 
 member of its Council, and had maintained a constant 
 interest in its fortunes. To him, by a happy inspiration, 
 MacColl turned in his perplexity, and \^Tote the following 
 letter :
 
 BEGINNINGS 9 
 
 Castle Douglas, March 26, 1858. 
 
 ' Sir, — I will state as briefly as I can the reasons which 
 induce me to obtrude myself on the notice of an eminent 
 statesman, whose time must be much occupied, but whose 
 well-known benevolence encourages me to hope that he 
 will pardon the liberty I take with him. 
 
 ' I am a young clergyman in the diocese of Glasgow, 
 and an alumnus of Trinity College, Glenalmond. I have 
 disapproved all along of the agitation against the Bishop 
 of Brechin. I have thought, and still think, that the 
 condemnation, in a published declaration, by the Bishops 
 of Edinburgh, Argyll, and Glasgow, of a case which is to 
 come before them in their judicial capacity, is a violation 
 of every principle of justice and fair play. I have, there- 
 fore, in common with fifteen of my brethren, declined to 
 give my signature to an Address of Thanks to the Bishop 
 for his declaration. For doing this the Bishop lias availed 
 himself of my not being instituted to the charge of Castle 
 Douglas, and has dismissed me from his diocese. All the 
 members of my congregation, except one lady and one 
 gentleman, have approved of my conduct ; and I am sure 
 they would make a demonstration in my favour, if I told 
 them of the Bishop's summary dismissal of me. But 
 that would not be advisable ; and I -wish to leave in 
 peace. 
 
 ' The effect of the Bishop's dismissal of me is, in fact, to 
 deprive me of my daily bread ; for I am on the unpopular 
 side, and there is no likelihood of my getting a situation in 
 the Scottish Church ; while my Scotch Orders shut me out 
 from England.^ What makes it all the more distressing 
 to me is that I have a young brother who is very talented, 
 and whom I meant to have assisted to an Oxford education. 
 We were both left orphans in early youth, with very little 
 to depend upon. 
 
 ' It has just crossed my mind that you might, perhaps, 
 without trouble or inconvenience to yourself, put me in 
 the way of getting a Naval Chaplaincy, or a Tutorship or 
 
 * By tlie then existing law a clergyman in Scotch Orders was not eligible 
 for preferment in the Church of England (see p. 20).
 
 10 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Chaplaincy in a family. I have been Private Tutor in the 
 families of Mr. Grant of Kilgraston, Lord Charles Kerr, 
 Sir John Richardson of Pitfour, and Mr. Graham of Gart- 
 more, from all of whom, as well as from my congregation, 
 I can produce the highest testimonials. If you could 
 favour me in this respect, I can only say that my gratitude 
 would be deeper than words can express. 
 
 ' As your time has of late been so much occupied by 
 literary pursuits, as well as parliamentary duties, you have 
 probably not had time to read the Bishop of Brechin's 
 Charge, which was published last June, and of which the 
 laity knew nothing till the unfortunate Declaration of the 
 three Bishops in December appealing to the private judg- 
 ment of the laity on one of the most mysterious points 
 of our religion. The Bishop's Charge is a short exposition 
 of what is so ably and devotionally treated in Keble's 
 beautiful treatise on Eucharistical Adoration. The Bishop 
 had been accused of teaching Transubstantiation, and the 
 Romish worship of the Host ; but those who so accuse 
 him cannot have read his Charge, or I don't very much 
 admire their honesty ; for he distinctly protests against 
 those tenets, and even expresses his disapproval of the 
 custom of carrying about the Host in processions. He takes 
 his stand upon the Church of England doctrine, and that 
 of the primitive Church, that Christ is present in the 
 Eucharist really and objectively, though not materially or 
 carnally ; and that to Christ so present — not to the elements 
 of bread and wine — adoration [Xarpela) is due. Now, 
 if it be allowed that Christ is present in the Eucharist 
 really and Personally, though mysteriously and trans- 
 cendentally, surely no mortal man has a right to say that 
 He is not to be adored. It seems to me that we cannot 
 deny Eucharistical adoration without denying the Objective 
 Presence in the Eucharist, and falling back on the mere 
 subjective theory, or on that of the old Scotch Non-jurors, 
 that Christ is present only by virtue and efficacy. Dean 
 Ramsay's theor}'', published lately in a sermon, seems a 
 sort of conglomeration of these two. But, when we speak 
 of Christ's Real Presence in the Eucharist, surely we mean
 
 BEGINNINGS 11 
 
 something different from a mere affluence ; surely the 
 expression itself proves that the Presence of Christ in the 
 Eucharist is different from the grace of Baptism not only 
 in degree, but in kind. But we never speak of the Real 
 Presence of Christ in Baptism. 
 
 ' Again, the Bishop says that the Eucharistic Sacrifice 
 is " substantially the same " with the Sacrifice on the Cross. 
 The expression is an unfortunate one ; for it is liable to 
 misconception, and has been misconceived, though the 
 Bishop uses it in a sense which, I am sure, must appear 
 orthodox to any sound Churchman, What the Bishop 
 means is simply this : that in the Eucharistic Sacrifice the 
 benefits purchased once for all on the Cross are applied and 
 extended to Christians. The Sacrifice of Christ on the Cross 
 was " a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and 
 satisfaction for the sins of the whole world " considered in 
 the abstract. But men are not only one by their unity of 
 nature : they are also individuals by the gift of personalit}^ 
 and free will. The Incarnation and Death of Christ elevated 
 and reconstructed humanity, but they did not affect the 
 individuals of that race, except in so far as they affected 
 the nature common to all. It seemed good to God, how- 
 ever, to appoint a sacramental organization for conveying 
 to individual members of mankind the benefits purchased 
 for the whole race on Calvary. Those benefits are peculiarly 
 bestowed on the Eucharist, through which flows mystically 
 " for the heahng of the nations " the Precious Blood shed 
 once for all in agony on Calvary. Christ is perpetually 
 offering himself, as " a Lamb as it had been slain," in the 
 inner shrine above ; and, by His own appointment. His 
 priests on earth are offering the " image," as Keble expresses 
 it, of what He is offering above in the actual verity of His 
 manhood. This, and nothing else, is what the Bishop of 
 Brechin means by saying that the Sacrifice of the Eucharist 
 is " substantially the same " with the Sacrifice on the Cross. 
 And yet he has been stigmatized as a " Jesuit in disguise," 
 and a " traitor within the camp " ; and three of his own 
 brethren— who are hereafter to sit in judgment upon him — 
 have heralded the cry ! I know from the Bishop himself
 
 12 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 that the explanation M^hich I have given of his Charge is the 
 correct one. 
 
 ' Of course I would not have presumed to give this 
 explanation of the Bishop of Brechin's Charge to one who 
 has added a deep knowledge of theology to his other accom- 
 plishments, if I had thought that you had read the Charge. 
 There are few books from which I have derived more 
 instruction than from your treatise on "Church Principles 
 considered in their Results." 
 
 ' I have written very frankly, and I fear too boldly, to 
 one so immeasurably my superior in every way ; but I 
 think you will not take it amiss. I use no words of adula- 
 tion when I say that I should look upon it as a very great 
 calamity if I were inadvertently to offend a man whom I 
 admire so much. . . . 
 
 ' Malcolm MacColl.' 
 
 To this letter Gladstone sent a remarkably kind reply, 
 sympathizing with MacCoU's difficulties and offering to 
 help him in the matter of his younger brother's education.^ 
 MacColl conveyed his thanks in the following words ; 
 
 ' I cannot sufficiently express in words the debt of grati- 
 tude I owe you for what you kindly say with respect to my 
 brother's education. It is my privilege to have some 
 friends among several good families in Scotland ; but I am 
 afraid I should make but a sorry mendicant. I don't 
 think I should ever sum up courage to ask any of my friends 
 for pecuniary assistance towards my brother's education. 
 It was my intention to try and save out of my own income a 
 sum sufficient to keep my brother at Oxford ; and if God 
 should give me a situation, perhaps I may be able to do so 
 still. At any rate, I shall always remember with gratitude 
 your kind offer to interest yourself in the matter.' 
 
 On May 30, 1858, he wrote as follows : 
 
 ' I find that I am tabooed by the Bishops for signing 
 the clerical remonstrance to them, and I am sorry to say 
 
 ^ Hugh MacColl, afterwards Master at the College Communal, Boulogne- 
 sur-Mer, author of Algebraical Exercises and Problems, &c.
 
 BEGINNINGS 13 
 
 the door of the Scottish Episcopal Church is closed against 
 me. It is very hard to be thus excluded from a Church 
 which I love, and to which I am convinced I am as loyal, 
 in my own humble sphere, as any of the Bishops in their 
 exalted stations. But we have all our crosses, and I must 
 not repine. I hardly know what to do.' 
 
 On leaving Castle Douglas, MacColl spent some time with 
 his friends, the Grants of Kilgraston ; and then, seeing no 
 prospect of clerical employment in Scotland, he betook 
 himself to London. On November 4, 1858, he wrote to 
 Gladstone : ' I cannot help feeling melancholy, and some- 
 what wretched, at being, as I am, forcibly expatriated from 
 my native country.' But, though expatriated, he was not 
 friendless. The Rev. John Charles Chambers (1817-1874) 
 had been head of the seminary where MacColl was trained 
 for a schoolmaster, and was now Incumbent of St. Mary-the- 
 Virgin, Soho. He welcomed his former pupil with open 
 arms, and assigned to him a work which MacColl thus 
 described : 
 
 ' I accepted, without salary, the Principalship of an 
 establishment in Carlisle Street, Soho. I believe that a 
 large majority of the young men who go astray in London 
 do so, not from any love of sin for its own sake, but from the 
 dreariness of a solitary lodging. They go forth to seek in 
 forbidden haunts the counterfeits of those innocent recrea- 
 tions and that cheerful society which they left behind them 
 at home. It is very sad to see a young man who possesses, 
 it may be, the elements of real greatness of mind, morally, 
 if not temporally, ruined for lack of the external x^PVy^^ 
 which might have kept him on the true road to happiness. 
 Carlisle House is intended to supply this want. ... It 
 offers, as far as may be, a substitute for home.' 
 
 But, although this work was both interesting and 
 congenial, it was impossible for MacColl to continue long 
 in an unpaid office. At this moment his difficulties were 
 great and pressing. On March 5, 1859, he wrote to Gladstone 
 that he was convinced that the Scottish Bishops WQxild
 
 14 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 refuse to employ a man who rejected the Protestant doctrine 
 of the Eucharist, and said that he ' would rather break 
 stones on the road all his life ' than accept their ruling 
 on the point : 
 
 ' I only hope the unwise conduct of the Bishops will 
 not have the effect of driving any of our communion to 
 Rome. When one is told that the doctrine which he holds 
 cannot be held without treason, except in the Church of 
 Rome, and that if he is consistent he will join that Church, 
 there is a strong temptation to put one's fingers in one's 
 ears, and shut one's eyes, and make a blind leap across to 
 Rome, with a sort of confused hope that it may be better, 
 and cannot be worse, than the communion one is leaving. 
 I have felt that temptation ; but I pray God I may not, 
 in a fit of impatient vexation, do that which I should 
 probably repent of all my life afterwards. 
 
 ' And now, dear Mr. Gladstone, good-bye, and believe 
 that, wherever Providence may cast my future lot, I shall 
 never forget your kindness.' 
 
 He applied unsuccessfully for various tutorships, for a 
 naval chaplaincy, an army chaplaincy, and an Indian chap- 
 laincy. He offered himself for the Mission-field. He secured 
 an appointment under the Bishop of Nelson, which failed 
 him when he made all his arrangements for starting. At 
 every turn he found himself, on account of his part in the 
 Scottish controversy, a marked man. All the doors of 
 ecclesiastical employment seemed closed to him ; and, in 
 his despair, he thought of undertaking some secular employ- 
 ment. On July 18, 1859, he wrote : 
 
 ' All I want is to gain an honest livelihood, and I am 
 not too proud to accept any respectable situation. Under 
 the circumstances, I do not think there would be anything 
 wrong in my employing myself in a secular capacit3\ Bishop 
 Wordsworth distinctly told me, at our interview, that I 
 had only two courses before me — "either to accept the 
 decision of the Bishops, or to retire into lay communion." 
 I have twice been promised an Indian Chaplaincy, and been
 
 BEGINNINGS 15 
 
 twice disappointed ; and now I see nothing for it, but to 
 embrace Bishop Wordsworth's second alternative. I cer- 
 tainly will not acquiesce in the Bishops' decision, come 
 what will. . , , 
 
 ' Well, it cannot be helped. I would do all over again 
 what I have already done. I have obeyed my conscience, 
 and, I hope, it shall never be said of me that I deserted a 
 party with whom I sympathized, because they were un- 
 popular and persecuted. If God sees it good for me to suffer 
 distress and loss of friends, I must try not to repine.' 
 
 During the autumn of 1859 he spent some weeks at 
 the college founded by Mr. G. F. Boyle (afterwards T.ord 
 Glasgow), in the Isle of Cumbrae. In the winter of that 
 year he visited Italy, and studied for a while at the Univer- 
 sity of Naples. In 1860 he estabhshed himself in Aberdeen, 
 officiating, under the Bishop's licence, at St. John's Church ; 
 but his active participation in the Eucharistic controversy, 
 which was still raging, made it likely that he would soon 
 be deprived of even that modest office. The Incumbent of 
 St. John's, Aberdeen, was the Rev. Patrick Cheyne, who 
 was suspended by the Bishop from his sacerdotal functions 
 for teaching a doctrine of the Eucharist similar to that 
 taught by Bishop Forbes. MacColl boldly flung himself 
 into the fighting line. In 1860 he preached, and published, 
 an Eucharistic sermon called ' Christ's Presence no Blessing 
 to the Unworthy ' ; and in the same year addressed an 
 open letter to Mr. Gladstone, called ' Mr. Cheyne and the 
 Bishop of Brechin.' In a private letter dated March 14, 
 1860, he expressed a conviction that he would soon be 
 put out of his 'Stewardship,' adding these characteristic 
 words : 
 
 ' I am not in quite so bad a case as the Unjust Steward. 
 God has given me youth and health ; and if matters come 
 to the worst, I can "dig." After all, £100 a year— the 
 maximum income of most of our clergy — is not so great 
 an inducement that one should play the coward, and sacri- 
 fice his self-respect for the sake of it. I do not wish, how- 
 ever, to judge others harshly, Jf Ihad a wife and children
 
 16 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 — as, unfortunately, most of our poor clergy have — I 
 should probably be as cautious and timid as any of them. 
 A better feeling than remorse or self-interest often " makes 
 cowards of us all.'' I know that many have shrunk back 
 in this controversy, who are much better Christians than 
 I ; and therefore it would be very wrong of me to find 
 fault with them.'
 
 CHAPTER II 
 
 TRANSITION 
 
 The more I look into the Church of England, the more do I recognize the 
 marks of a true Apostolical Church. — Edward Irving. 
 
 The moment had now arrived for MacCoU's transition from 
 the service of the Scottish Episcopal Church to that of 
 the Church of England. His engagement at Aberdeen had 
 come to an end, and, despairing of fair play north of the 
 Tweed, he determined to seek clerical employment in Eng- 
 land. The Church of St. Barnabas, Pimlico, then under 
 the incumbency of the Rev. George Cosby White,i was one 
 of the strongholds of Cathohcism in London, and thither 
 MacCoU turned his steps. Mr. White thus records the 
 incident : ' Mr. Humble, who was at that time on the staff 
 of St. Ninian's, Perth, sent Mr. MacColl to call upon me, 
 with a request that I would do what I could to find work 
 for him in London. He expressed a wish to be connected 
 with St. Barnabas. At that time clergy who had received 
 Scottish Orders were under a disability, and not allowed to 
 minister in England beyond a fixed period. (I think not 
 more than a fortnight.) I was in want of help at the time, 
 and advised MacColl to see Bishop Tait and find whether 
 he was disposed to grant him a temporary licence. The 
 two Scotsmen arranged a concordat, and MacColl joined the 
 staff at St. Barnabas pro tem.^ ^ 
 
 ^ Still (1914) spared to the Church which he has so long served. 
 
 " It may interest some readers of this book to know that one of the 
 most diligent workers in MacCoU's ' district ' Mas a young bride, Mrs. Pascoe 
 Glyn. 
 
 17 c
 
 18 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 On Easter Tuesday, April 2, 1861, MacCoU wrote to 
 Mr. Gladstone : 
 
 ' I have been officiating as one of the curates of 
 St. Barnabas for the last six weeks with the Bishop of 
 London's Licence. I became acquainted with him through 
 the Grants of Kilgraston. My Licence has to be renewed 
 every fortnight ; and the Bishop has kindly offered to 
 renew it as often as 1 wish. He told me that a Bill would 
 soon be introduced into Parliament for the repeal of the 
 Disabilities.' 
 
 Then, turning from his OAvn affairs, MacColl referred to 
 current reports that Gladstone intended to retire from the 
 representation of the University of Oxford, and expressed 
 an earnest hope that they were unfounded. 
 
 ' For my own part, if you will pardon me for saying so, 
 I believe it would be a great calamity for the cause of 
 Religion in England if you were at this time to resign your 
 seat. As regards personal influence, I believe that Mr. 
 Jowett occupies, to a certain extent, the place which New- 
 man left vacant. A distinguished man at Oxford told me 
 that " the young intellect of Oxford was at Jowett's feet." 
 Surely, then, it is very important that Oxford should be 
 represented by a man in whom the most varied learning and 
 the highest gifts of intellect are united with the fullest belief 
 in the truths which the " Essays and Reviews " impugn, ^ 
 Young men are, on the whole, rather feeling, than reasoning, 
 animals. One example will do more to convince them than 
 a thousand arguments. 
 
 ' Did the Essayists really see the abyss to which their 
 speculations tend, surely they would feel that, before 
 attempting to sift facts, they ought to make sure that they 
 have a firm hold of true and eternal principles. To un- 
 settle the minds of a generation, when you giv^e them 
 no land-marks and no causeway across the morass, is to 
 undertake a great responsibility ; and this the Essayists 
 have done.* 
 
 1 Essays and Reviews was published in February 1860.
 
 TRANSITION 10 
 
 On August 28 he wrote to Mr. Gladstone : 
 
 ' 1 am still at St. Barnabas by the kind permission of 
 the Bishop of London. If the Disabilities are removed, I 
 should like no better situation ; but, as it is, I am allowed 
 no salary. However, I think I can manage to hang on till 
 next Session, when I hope something will be done to remove 
 the Disabilities.' 
 
 St. Barnabas was a daughter-church of St. Paul's, 
 Knightsbridge, and MacColl was now transferred to 
 St. Paul's. On June 23, 1862, he wrote to Mr. Gladstone : 
 
 ' Many thanks for your kind note about the Disabilities. 
 The Bishop still consents to my officiating at St. Paul's ; 
 but of course I am at the mercy of Mr. Westerton.' ^ 
 
 Early in the following year, MacColl, who was always 
 desirous to see the world, accepted an engagement as 
 Domestic Chaplain to the British Ambassador at St. Peters- 
 burg,2 and tutor to his sons. His impressions of religion in 
 Russia are given in a letter of April 5, 1863 : 
 
 ' I am very much disappointed in the Russian Church. 
 The Parish Priests, or White Clergy, as they are called, are 
 ignorant and indolent. They never visit the poor, and they 
 are despised by the upper classes. How, indeed, can it be 
 otherwise, so long as the priesthood is a degraded caste ? 
 As a rule, a Russian priest must bring up his sons as priests ; 
 and, if a nobleman enters the ranks of the White Clergy, 
 he forfeits his nobility and all his privileges for himself 
 and his family for ever. You never meet a priest in the 
 upper grades of society. Yet outwardly the Russians 
 pay the most obsequious respect to their priests. If, on 
 some formal occasion, a priest should find his way into the 
 house of a nobleman, the lady of the house kisses his hand 
 with every demonstration of respect, and he leads the way 
 into the dining-room. But this theoretical reverence is 
 coupled with practical contempt. Whatever religion there 
 
 1 The Protestant churchwarden of St. Paul's, Knightsbridge. 
 * Lord Napier and Ettrick.
 
 20 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 is, is confined to the lower classes. They are certainly very 
 religious ; but they are very ignorant. The monks are 
 called Black Clergy ; but it is a case where black is white. 
 They are far superior to the secular Clergy. Their ranks are 
 occasionally recruited from the upper classes ; because, as 
 they are under a vow of celibacy, it does not matter to a 
 nobleman whether he loses his nobility or not, by becoming 
 a monk. The Bishops are chosen from the Black Clergy. 
 A number of Russians communicate in the English Church 
 here at Easter. Every Russian who holds a public appoint- 
 ment, in the army or elsewhere, must, at every Easter, 
 produce a certificate of having communicated somewhere. 
 So many of them — to avoid Confession in their own Church, 
 I fear — communicate in the English Church. The late 
 Count Nesselrode went to Church one day, and only one 
 day, in the year ; and that was to receive the Holy 
 Communion in the English Church at Easter.' 
 
 While acting as cliaplain to Lord Napier, MacColl was 
 offered the incumbency of the English Congregation at 
 St. Petersburg ; but this he declined, and by February 
 1864 was back in England, and again officiating at 
 St. Barnabas, Pimlico ; whence, on July 12, he wrote as 
 follows to Mr. George Moffatt, M.P. for Honiton : 
 
 ' May I remind you, as you kindly asked me, that the 
 Bill for the removal of the Disabilities^ of the Scottish 
 Episcopal Clergy comes on for the Second Reading to- 
 morrow ? I hear that those two arch-bigots, Mr. Arthur 
 Kinnaird and Mr. Newdegate, intend to oppose it, and 
 I hope you will do your best to defeat their attempt. ■ Is it 
 not absurd, and " a disgrace to the Statute-Book," as Sir 
 G. C. Lewis once said in the House of Commons, that I 
 should still be punished because my ancestors a century 
 or more ago were Jacobites, and would not pray tor the 
 Hanoverian Dynasty ? For that is literally the ground 
 upon which the DisabiUties were imposed.' 
 
 ^ These disabilities were removed by Act of Parliament at the end of the 
 Session of 18(34. 
 
 i
 
 TRANSITION 21 
 
 From St. Barnabas MacColl again transferred himself to 
 St. Paul's, Knightsbridge, receiving the Lambeth Degree of 
 M.A. from Archbishop Longley in October 1864. One of 
 his clerical colleagues writes : 
 
 ' We were for three years together curates of St. Paul's, 
 and, as we lived next door to one another in Lyall Place, we 
 had breakfast at each other's lodgings alternately. He was 
 a hot-blooded Highlander, with a bull-dog tenacity ; very 
 loyal and affectionate to friends, but a merciless opponent.' 
 
 The mercilessness here attributed to MacColl pertained 
 exclusively to his character as a public controversialist. In 
 private life he was the most peaceable and placable of men. 
 But when he took his pen in hand to defend some cause 
 in which he believed, or to attack wrong-doing, or even to 
 expose what he esteemed fallacious reasoning, he smote and 
 spared not. We have already seen that, even in his student- 
 days, he essayed a theological controversy with an unscrupu- 
 lous foe ; and, when he had reached the maturity of his 
 powers, Gladstone pronounced him the best pamphleteer 
 in England. The Catalogue of the British Museum reveals 
 him as the author of twenty-three books and tracts, besides 
 prefaces, introductions, and the like ; and of these at least 
 seventeen are clearly controversial. Over and above the 
 works avowed with his name, he wrote a great deal under the 
 signature of ' Scrutator,' while his anonymous contributions 
 to the daily, Aveekly, monthly, and quarterly Press were 
 incessant and innumerable. He was leader-writer, reviewer, 
 special commissioner, and purveyor of exclusive information. 
 His correspondence proves him to have been on confidential 
 terms with the Editors of the Times, the Daily Neivs, 
 the Daily Telegraph, the Daily Chronicle, the Guardian, 
 the Spectator, and the Saturday Review ; and he seems to 
 have never been so happy as when he was working these 
 various oracles in the interests of the men and the causes 
 that he held dear.
 
 CHAPTER III 
 
 GLADSTONIANISM 
 
 What is Romance ? The world well lost for an idea — is not that the essence 
 of it ? — Chakles Bigg. 
 
 By this time MacColl had become a devoted follower of 
 Mr. Gladstone ; alike in politics, in theology, and in the 
 mixed sphere where religion and citizenship meet.^ The 
 General Election of 1865 was at hand, and everyone knew 
 that Gladstone's seat at Oxford was seriously imperilled 
 by the strenuous attack of Gathorne Hardy, afterwards 
 Lord Cranbrook. MacColl, having no connexion with 
 Oxford, could only have an indirect influence on the 
 affairs of the University ; but what influence he had he 
 used with unsparing diligence. The following letter to 
 Gladstone is an amusing illustration of his methods : 
 
 ' May 6, 1865. — A Political Biography of you by a 
 Mr. Masheder,- a Cambridge man, and one of the prin- 
 cipal writers on the staff of the Standard ncAvspaper, has 
 been sent to me for review. It is, of course, written 
 with the view of damaging your prospects at the next 
 Oxford Election ; but it will certainly have the very 
 opposite effect ; for Mr. Masheder's object is to prove — 
 and I think he does it very successfully — that you 
 have been a consistent High Churchman all your life, 
 and a consistent Liberal since 1842-3, when you found 
 
 ' In later years he sometimes used the signature of ' Ex-Tory.' 
 3 The Eight Honourable William Eicart Gladstone, M.P. etc. : A political 
 revi&iv. By R. Masheder. 
 
 22
 
 GLADSTONIANISM 23 
 
 that the idea of the Church developed in your book on 
 Church and State was utterly repudiated by the Tories. 
 He admits, on behalf of the Tories, that they know nothing 
 of the Church of England, except as a " Protestant Estab- 
 lishment " ; and he rejects with scorn the notion of the 
 Church having any existence or reality apart from the 
 State. He scolds the University of Oxford, in no measured 
 terms, for having repeatedly elected so consistent a Liberal 
 and so " Tractarian " a Churchman as yourself. At the 
 same time, Mr. Masheder is not a Low Churchman. He 
 abuses, with impartial vituperation, the Tractarians, Evan- 
 gelicals, and Broad Church School — every school, in fact, 
 which would stir up, independently of political considera- 
 tions, the spiritual energies of the Church, His idea 
 evidently is, that the Church of England is a political 
 institution ordained by Providence to help the Tories 
 against the Whigs. It must have been in a fit of judicial 
 insanity that the Tories were induced to put forward such 
 a champion at this moment to fight their battle at Oxford. 
 The book has fallen like a shell among your High Church 
 opponents. It has only been out a few days, and it has 
 already to my knoAvledge, converted several of your 
 opponents. 
 
 ' My object, however, in writing this note, is to obtain 
 information on the two following points : 
 
 ' Were you not rejected by the Borough of Newark in 
 1845, because you were too Liberal ? And did not the 
 Tories oppose your election for Oxford in 1847 on the same 
 ground ? I cannot obtain any certain information on the 
 subject, though I have asked several persons. Will you, 
 therefore, kindly pardon me for applying to yourself 
 directly ? 
 
 ' You will be amused to hear that Mr. Masheder solemnly 
 decides that you have no claim whatever to the title of an 
 orator ; and just as little to that of a financier. He thinks 
 that, if the Tories had been in power for the last six years, 
 the finances of the nation would now be in a very different 
 condition ; and I am inclined to agree with him. His 
 book, however, is valuable in one respect : he has proved
 
 24 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 to demonstration, from Hansard, that every argument 
 which is urged against your election in 1865 was equallj'' 
 valid at every previous election.' 
 
 In reply, Gladstone gave the required information, 
 which MacColl promptly embodied in a vigorous pamphlet 
 called ' Mr. Gladstone and Oxford,' by ' Scrutator.' It 
 appears from this pamphlet that there were six grounds on 
 which Gladstone's opponents had attacked him with special 
 vigour. First, that he had maintained the ' natural rights 
 of man ' as the basis of the Franchise ; that he had voted 
 for a Dissenters' Burial Bill ; that he favoured the Abolition 
 of Tests ; that he had threatened the Irish Church ; that 
 he supported the ' Conscience Clause ' in schools ; and that 
 Professor Jowett was on his committee. MacColl took 
 these charges point by point, denying some, extenuating 
 others, justifying Gladstone's conduct in all ; and urging 
 the supremacy of his claims as a representative of church- 
 manship and learning. The pamphlet is cogently argued, 
 vigorously worded, and full of those recriminating allusions 
 which politicians love. It was certainly a very remarkable 
 production for a London curate, educated in Scotland, and 
 hitherto unversed in political warfare. 
 
 On July 8, 1865, the Rev. J. G. Cazenove wrote from the 
 College at Cumbrae (of which he was Canon, and after- 
 wards Provost) : 
 
 ' I am very much obliged to you for the copy of your 
 pamphlet, which seems to me very cogent and masterly. . . . 
 
 ' Mr. Gladstone's second son ^ is reading with me here, 
 and a very nice, modest, unassuming person he seems 
 to be.' 
 
 However, Mr. Masheder and his friends carried the day. 
 Gladstone lost the seat, but was returned ' unmuzzled,' 
 as he said, for South Lancashire. On Lord Palmerston's 
 death in the following October, Lord Russell became Prime 
 Minister, with Gladstone as Leader of the House of Commons. 
 
 1 Stephen Edward Gladstone, afterMaids Rector of Hawarden,
 
 GLADSTONIANLSM 25 
 
 In February 1866 the Government introduced a very 
 moderate Reform Bill, which was defeated in the House 
 of Commons by the discontented Liberals whom Bright 
 likened to the dwellers in the Cave of Adullam. Gladstone, 
 set free from office, spent the autumn and winter of 
 1866 in Italy, and on the eve of his departure received 
 the following letter from MacColl, who was staying in 
 Ireland with Colonel Greville-Nugent, afterwards Lord 
 Greville : 
 
 ' Clonyn Castle, Delvin, September 19, 1866. — I am 
 very glad to heab that your speeches are in the press, 
 and so is Colonel Greville-Nugent. I suppose we shall 
 see them advertised soon, and then I shall be able to 
 get a copy ; for I do not know at present the name of 
 your publisher. Colonel Nugent sends his best regards, 
 and trusts that you will, while abroad, lay in a store of good 
 health for the conduct of the next Liberal Campaign, which, 
 he feels sure, will lead to victory. He is very anxious to 
 see a cordial union and co-operation between the English 
 and Irish Liberals ; but he is somewhat doubtful whether 
 the Dubhn banquet to Mr. Bright will contribute to that 
 desirable result. A great deal will depend on the character 
 of Mr. Bright's speech. 
 
 ' I went to the Parish Church here last Sunday, and a 
 more melancholy sight I never beheld. The congregation 
 consisted of five county families, who spend the season in 
 London ; so that the congregation must consist in the 
 summer of the Incumbent's family. There were no poor, 
 and I never saw so undevotional a congregation. During 
 the prayers no one knelt. Some stood, with their backs 
 to the altar and the officiating clergyman, and one knee 
 resting on the seat ; some sat ; and others rechned in the 
 half empty pews, nursing one leg stretched at full length 
 on the cushioned seat. During the singing not more than 
 half the congregation stood up, and the same during the 
 reading of the Gospel. The more I see of the Irish Church, 
 the more I feel that there is no life in it, and that it is simply 
 cumbering the ground.
 
 26 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' What a pity that a race so gifted and so genial as the 
 Irish cannot be conciHated and turned into friends ! The 
 racy sprightliness of the peasantry is charming. It is 
 impossible to converse with an Irish peasant for half an 
 hoar without hearing some sparkling wit. He plays even 
 with his own sorrows, and gilds them over with his rich 
 imagination. I had an instance of this the other day. 
 A poor Irishman was complaining, with a rueful countenance, 
 that he w^as very hungry, and he summed up by declaring 
 that he was " as empty as a lantern, wid the divil a bit of 
 anything inside of him but the light of his own conscience," 
 Certainly the most poetical description of an empty stomach 
 I ever saw or heard of.' 
 
 The chief event of 1867 was the Tory Reform Bill, 
 by which Lord Derby and Disraeli, having in the previous 
 summer defeated the much more modest proposals of the 
 Liberal Government, created Household Suffrage in the 
 towns. MacColl was duly indignant at this remarkable 
 tergiversation, and felt certain that many of the Scottish 
 Tories, who gave Disraeli a triumphal banquet in Edinburgh 
 on October 29, in their hearts disliked this ' glorification of 
 successful treachery and unparalleled hypocrisy.' How- 
 ever, he could bear no active part in the controversies of 
 the autumn and winter, for, having failed in his application 
 for an Inspectorship of Schools, he had been selected to travel 
 for a year with a son of Mr. J. G. Hubbard, afterwards Lord 
 Addington, whose wife was a sister of Lord Napier and 
 Ettrick. He spent the winter in Italy, and, when he re- 
 turned to England, he found the country in great excitement 
 over the prospects of the Estabhshed Church in Ireland. 
 Gladstone had succeeded Lord Russell as Leader of the 
 Liberal party at Christmas 1867, and on March 16, 1868, 
 he announced his determination — for his speech amounted 
 to this — to disestablish the Irish Church. He had fore- 
 shadowed something of the kind in a speech in Parlia- 
 ment in 1865 and in a letter to Dr. Hannah; but he 
 was then hampered by official responsibilities, and by
 
 GLADSTONIANISM 27 
 
 membership of a Cabinet in which he was not paramount. 
 Now he was his own master, and he soon made his 
 intentions clear. Here was an opportunity after MacCoU's 
 own heart, and he jumped at it. On May 30, 1868, he 
 wrote to Gladstone in the following words : 
 
 ' I am anxious to write something on the present 
 state of affairs, and especially with the view of showing 
 how thoroughly consistent your present conduct is with 
 your previous utterances on Ecclesiastical questions. I 
 also wish to show, from my recent experience in Italy, 
 that the policy of our Bishops with respect to the 
 Irish Church is the counterpart of the policy of the 
 Court of Rome in Italy — a policy which is driving the 
 whole Italian nation into infidelity. And above all, I 
 wish to do my best to pay Disraeli out for his ridiculous, 
 but really wicked, cry of a conspiracy between Ritualists 
 and Irish Romanists. The plain truth is, as I know well, 
 that all the hot-headed fools among the Ritualists, the 
 men who have done all the mischief, have been all along, 
 and are now, ardent supporters of Mr. Disraeli. Their 
 organs, the Church Times, and the Church Ne^vs, and the 
 extinct Union newspaper, are ever crying him up and 
 running you down. The Church Times and Church Neu's 
 are still fighting his battle, and the Editor of the latter, the 
 Rev. F. G. Lee, is an intimate friend of Mr. Disraeli, and his 
 confidential adviser on Church matters. I shall take care 
 to let the public know this in time for the General Election. 
 
 ' I paid a visit last week to my friend Mr. Bright ^ at 
 Oxford, and to my great joy found him and several other 
 leading men who were on Mr. G. Hardy's Committee at 
 the Oxford Election in 1865, now enthusiastic in your 
 favour generally, as aacII as on the Irish Church. In fact, 
 Mr. Disraeli has made Liberals of them ; they are so 
 utterly disgusted with himself and his wretched govern- 
 ment, and have lost all confidence in Mr. Hardy and his 
 " great swelling words." ' 
 
 ^ Afterwards Regius Professor of Ecclesiastical History.
 
 28 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Parliament was dissolved in November 1868. The 
 result of the General Election was a majority of 100 pledged 
 to Irish Disestablishment, and Gladstone became for the 
 first time Prime Minister. On March 1 he introduced his 
 Irish Church Bill, of which the cardinal principles were 
 that the Irish Church should cease to be established ; that 
 its property, subject to certain just reservations, should be 
 applied to purposes of secular beneficence ; and that there 
 should be no ' Concurrent Endowment ' of competing sects, 
 although in some important quarters this device was 
 highly favoured. MacCoU immediately came forward with 
 a strong plea for the Bill, under the title ' Is there not 
 a Cause ? ' 
 
 The Irish Church Bill, substantially unaltered, received 
 the Royal Assent on July 26, 1869 ; and, only three 
 months later, Gladstone created what Bishop Wilberforce 
 called ' a very unwholesome and threatening excitement ' 
 by nominating Dr. Temple, Head Master of Rugby (and 
 afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury), for the See of Exeter. 
 People who remembered and resented Temple's connexion 
 with ' Essays and Reviews,' flooded the papers with protests ; 
 and none protested so vehemently as Dr. Pusey. MacCoU 
 flew to the support of his leader. 
 
 'October 16, 1869. — Mr. Cazenove^ knows Dr. Temple 
 well ; and, being himself a very able man, as well as a 
 thorough Churchman, I think his opinion is important. 
 I have quoted it in a letter to next week's Guardian, but 
 without mentioning his name. I hope to induce him to 
 write to the Guardian himself. 
 
 ' I am simply shocked by Dr. Pusey's letter. It is so 
 un-Christian and so unreasoning, as well as inaccurate in one 
 or two facts. I thought he was capable of taking a more 
 enlarged view of such a question. He will not carry the 
 High Church party with him. The Church Times of yester- 
 day goes clean against him, and the Church Revieio supports 
 him but lamely ; and I hope to make its support still lamer 
 next week. 
 
 1 See p. 24.
 
 GLADSTONIANISM 29 
 
 ' I do not know whether you would like the Guardian 
 to say anything in particular next week. If so, there will 
 be time, if you will kindly write by return of post.' 
 
 The principal business of the Session of 1870 was 
 Gladstone's Irish Land Bill, and MacCoU was soon at work 
 in the Press, but found himself not seldom hampered by 
 editorial interference. On March 3 he wrote to Gladstone : 
 
 ' On reflection, I feel pretty certain that it must have 
 been Delane ^ himself who polished up my article. After 
 seeing Mr, Glyn ^ and talking with him on the subject, I 
 came home and jotted down the heads of the sort of article 
 I thought would answer. I then called on the Editor in 
 the afternoon, after 3, and talked the matter over with him. 
 He said it was a matter that required consideration, but 
 that if I would write such an article as I thought would do, 
 he would think about it. I came home, after calling on 
 the Editor of the Guardian in my way, and could not have 
 reached here before 5. I then sat down and wrote the 
 article very hurriedly ; and, having another article on 
 hand that evening, I sent off the former without looking 
 it over, and with a note, saying that if the Editor thought 
 it would do, and would send it me back, I would polish it 
 up for publication. He made up his mind, however, to 
 publish it the following day ; and therefore he could not 
 have had time to send it to anybody else, as he had not 
 time to send it to myself. He must therefore have done 
 it himself,' 
 
 A great event of this year was the decennial performance 
 of the Passion Play at Ober-Ammergau. That solemnity 
 was then little known to English people, and MacColl, 
 who had been struck by an account of it in the Baroness 
 Tautphoeus's novel, ' Quits,' thought that it would furnish 
 good material for some papers in the Times. In reply 
 to his suggestion, Delane wrote : 
 
 ' I don't think we can offer you a mission to report the 
 Passion Play, but if you are going to make a holiday trip 
 
 \ J, T. Delane, Editor of the Times from 1841 to 1877. 
 
 - George Glyn, the Liberal Whip, afterwards Lord VVoIverton,
 
 30 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 and will send a few letters to the value of, say, £20, we should 
 be very glad to have them.' 
 
 MacCoU thus describes the journey : 
 
 ' I started with a friend, taking picturesque Nuremberg 
 by the way. The first day of the Passion Play that year 
 was Whit-Sunday, and we arrived at Ober-Ammergau early 
 the previous Saturday. The village contained no hotel 
 or inn or restaurant of any sort. The visitors were dis- 
 tributed among the inhabitants, or encamped in the fields. 
 Before leaving England we had bespoken lodgings at the 
 house of the schoolmaster, who was the conductor of the 
 Passion Play that year. 
 
 ' At that time, and probably still, people were known 
 during the period of the Play by their dramatic names. 
 You lodged at the house of Caiaphas or Peter, or Judas, 
 or a Pharisee, as the case might be. The days preceding 
 began with Mass in the parish church. The Play opened 
 at night. There was then no permanent theatre as now. 
 It was a wooden structure open to the sky, except a small 
 part of the stage and of the gallery in the auditorium. In 
 the front row of this covered part was a stately chair 
 intended for the King of Bavaria. But he was not able to 
 be present at a first representation, and the seat of honour 
 was given to me, for it became known that I was to send 
 a report to the Times. The audience consisted of some 
 four thousand people ; all except a very small sprinkling 
 were natives of the hills and valleys of Bavaria, who came 
 to fulfil an ancestral vow, not to witness a spectacle : and 
 they behaved throughout as worshippers, not as spectators. 
 The weather consisted of alternations of sunshine and thunder- 
 storms, but the audience, or rather congregation, sat through 
 it all drenched to the skin. No notes were allowed to be 
 taken visibly. But, favoured by the amplitude of my seat, 
 I was able to write down hurriedly the leading features and 
 incidents of the play. After it was over, I returned to 
 Munich and wrote my report of the whole performance to 
 Delane. . . . The greater part of my report appeared the
 
 GLADSTONIANISM 31 
 
 following day, and filled a whole page of the Times. The 
 remainder, which filled nearly half a page, appeared two days 
 afterwards. It was published as " from an Occasional 
 Correspondent," and I received a cheque for £35 instead of 
 the £20 which Delane had promised me. Very few people 
 in England at that time knew anything about the Ober- 
 Ammergau Play, and my report of it took the public by 
 surprise. Delane forwarded to me many letters which 
 were addressed to him, expressing the hope that my anony- 
 mous report might be published separately ; so I asked 
 Delane's permission to publish it. He consented, and 
 I republished my report accordingly in the form of a small 
 book, with an Introduction on Miracle Plays and Passion 
 Plays, longer than the report itself. The book went 
 rapidly through many editions, and, the Times being read 
 by everybody, crowds immediately started for Ober-Ammer- 
 gau, and other newspapers sent special reporters. I have 
 sometimes regretted since then that I ever published a report 
 of the Play. For, although I am told that the villagers 
 still retain their simple habits and religious character, 
 it is scarcely in human nature not to have some of the 
 fervour taken out of their enthusiasm. But doubtless the 
 interval of ten years helps to prevent the representation 
 being vulgarized or made commonplace : it will ever live 
 in my memory as the most Avonderful combination of 
 reverence and splendid dramatic acting of the most subhme 
 scenes in the history of mankind. It would seem impossible 
 beforehand — it certainly seemed to me — to act the part of 
 the Christus especially, without shocking one's feelings of 
 reverence and religious propriety. But that part was so 
 wonderfully acted as not to grate even upon the most 
 sensitive mind. I suppose the explanation of this is that 
 the dramatis 'personcB acted their various parts with an 
 entire absence of self-consciousness. They were not acting 
 a play but performing a series of acts of devotion. 
 
 ' The Franco-German War broke out two months before 
 the Play was to have been finished, and it had thus to be 
 stopped in the middle, for the men liable for service had
 
 32 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 to join the army ; the Christus, in consideration of the 
 part he played, was sent to attend the wounded in the 
 hospitals. Certain local charities are supported by the 
 profits of the Play, and on this account the performance 
 was allowed to be repeated the following year. I went to 
 see it a second time ; and I may express my feeling of the 
 difference between the two representations by the difference 
 between a worshipping congregation and a well-behaved 
 and decorous audience of spectators. Most of the audience 
 on the second occasion were foreigners from many lands, 
 while on the first occasion they were native to the 
 soil.' 
 
 On July 16, 1870, MacColl wrote thus to Gladstone: 
 
 ' I saw a good deal of Dr. Dolhnger during the four days 
 I spent in Munich on my way to Ober-Ammergau. . . . 
 
 ' Dr. Dollinger wished me to send his kind regards to you, 
 and I rather gathered from what he said that a letter of 
 sympathy from you would be very gratifying to him. He 
 is at present busily engaged on a work on the Papacy. He 
 showed me the plan of the book, and I should think it 
 will make a sensation when it appears. The work is to 
 appear in parts, and in the form of historical letters, so as 
 to enable him to deal with a great variety of subjects while 
 aiming at a certain degree of unity. Dr. Dollinger is 
 confident that liis cause will triumph in the end, though 
 probably long after he has left the scene. 
 
 ' I was much impressed while in Germany with the way 
 in which the people, soldiers and civiHans alike, bear their 
 triumph over France. I saw everywhere a feehng of quiet 
 satisfaction that the unity of Germany was secured. But 
 there was no bravado and no thirst for miHtary glory or 
 foreign aggression. Through the parts of the country 
 which I have traversed the yearning everywhere was for 
 an enduring peace. As far as I could judge, Bismarck is 
 admired, but not loved, and I have heard the old King's 
 pious despatches more than once severely criticized. The 
 praises of the Crown Prince, on the other hand, are in 
 everyone's mouth.'
 
 GLADSTONIANISM 33 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ' September 9, 1871. — The enclosed extract from the Rock 
 may amuse you. I never knew before that I was presented 
 to my present living for having written the famous article 
 in the Edinburgh Review. Indeed, it was new to me that 
 I was even suspected of having written it ; but I am now 
 told that I am generally credited with the authorship ! ' 
 
 This letter requires a word of comment. In April 1871 
 MacColl was presented by Gladstone to the benefice of 
 St. George's, Botolph Lane, in the City of London. The 
 ' famous article ' to which the Rock attributed his prefer- 
 ment was really written by Gladstone. It appeared in 
 October 1870, under the title of ' Germany, France, and 
 England ' ; and Gladstone said subsequently that he had 
 intended it to be really, as well as formally, anonymous. 
 But it was not odd that MacColl should have got the credit 
 of it, for he had published, as ' Scrutator,' a pamphlet 
 on the same subject, called ' Who is Responsible for 
 the War ? ' 
 
 It seems, in the retrospect, that in accepting St. George's, 
 MacColl acted unwisely. He was not well fitted for the 
 position of a parish priest. He was an eloquent and forcible 
 preacher, and, though he always disclaimed the title of 
 ' ritualist,' he had a keen sense for beauty and propriety in 
 the services of the Church. But his disposition was not 
 pastoral. He shrank from that personal dealing with in- 
 dividual souls which is the most vital portion of the pastor's 
 work. His feeling on this point may best be given in his 
 own words : 
 
 ' Perhaps I may, without impertinence, give my own 
 experience. I have never invited anyone to confess to me, 
 except in the ordinary course of reading the Exhortation in 
 the Communion Service, and I have, in the whole course 
 of my ministerial career, received the confessions of just 
 three persons. These I received reluctantly and unavoid- 
 ably. But many persons have asked me to receive their 
 confessions. It is a task from which I have always shrunk.
 
 34 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 and, as nearly the whole of my ministerial life has been spent 
 in London, I have been able to avail myself of the alternative 
 offered in the Prayer Book, by sending those who come to 
 me " to some other discreet and learned minister of God's 
 Word." But, if I had been an incumbent where this 
 alternative was not possible, I should certainly feel bound 
 to hear the confessions of all who came to me, much as 
 I should dislike it.' 
 
 Apart from these considerations, MacColl's incessant 
 absorption in journalism and controversy left him little 
 leisure for clerical work on weekdays, and he was not inclined 
 to reside in the City. His own account of his work at 
 St. George's is dismal enough. On March 1, 1875, he wrote 
 to Gladstone for counsel : 
 
 ' The utter hopelessness of being able to do any good in 
 my parish has been weighing on my mind for some time, 
 and I have been debating with myself whether I ought not 
 to resign my living. I feel, however, that I ought not to 
 take any step of that sort without consulting you, as it is 
 to your kindness that I owe my present position. What 
 do you think ? I have hardly got any resident population, 
 and the few there are, are becoming steadily fewer. The 
 consequence is that I have no parish work at all ; and the 
 position of my little church — in an obscure narrow lane — 
 renders it useless for weekday services. I have tried to 
 turn it to use in a variety of ways, but without success. 
 Is it right for me to draw pay from a parish where I am 
 really doing no work ? In the event of my resigning my 
 living, I have some idea of joining the Central African 
 Mission, as there would seem to be no particular work for 
 me to do at home.' 
 
 But in the following year a new and unlooked-for work 
 presented itself, which must be described in a subsequent 
 chapter.
 
 CHAPTER IV 
 
 ECCLESIASTICA 
 
 Next to a sound rule of faith, there is nothing of so much consequence as 
 a sober standard of feeling in matters of practical religion. — John Keble. 
 
 Between the years 1870 and 1877 a great portion of 
 MacColl's activity was absorbed by ecclesiastical business. 
 In 1871 Archbishop Tait, co-operating with Dean Stanley, 
 began a campaign against the public use of the Athanasian 
 Creed. Pusey and Liddon were the protagonists of those 
 who resisted the Archbishop, and MacCoIl fought strenuously 
 on the same side. In 1872 he published a Letter, addressed 
 to Gladstone, on ' The Damnatory Clauses of the Athanasian 
 Creed Rationally Explained ' ; and at the beginning of 1873 
 he took an active part in organizing a Public Meeting in 
 defence of the Creed. He was justly complimented on the 
 success of an effort Avhich united theologians so diverse 
 as Lord Salisbury and Charles Kingsley, and the protest 
 proved victorious. 
 
 On February 21, 1873, he wrote to Gladstone : 
 
 ' I am astounded at Dean Stanley's speeches on the 
 Athanasian Creed, reported in this week's Guardian. The 
 tone of them is abominable, and it is very difficult to acquit 
 him of deliberate dishonesty. I am very sorry to say this, 
 for I like him personally. But he appears to me to be 
 utterly unscrupulous on this question,' 
 
 But even the excitement of the Athanasian battle 
 did not distract his attention from the fortunes of the 
 
 35 D 2
 
 36 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Church in Oxford. The Regius Professorship of Pastoral 
 Theology became vacant on February 17. Next day 
 MacCoU wrote to Gladstone, enclosing a letter from his 
 former tutor, Dr. Bright, who strongly urged the merits 
 of Edward King, then Principal of Cuddesdon Theological 
 College, and afterwards Bishop of Lincoln : 
 
 ' I feel that I ought to let you read the enclosed letter, 
 though I hardly like to take the liberty of doing so. 
 
 ' I can corroborate all that Dr. Bright says about Canon 
 King. His power over young men is, as Dr. Bright says, 
 really " magnetic." Am I not right in thinking that your 
 son, the Rector of Hawarden, was at Cuddesdon ? If so, 
 I have no doubt that he felt the spell of Canon King's 
 influence. There never was a time, I think, when the 
 power of personal influence was more needed at Oxford 
 than now. But Pusey will soon go, and, anyhow, his 
 work is done. The doctors tell Liddon that Oxford is 
 killing him, and that his stay there is at the risk of his life. 
 When Liddon goes there will be no one left to supply 
 his place in the way of personal influence. King could 
 do so. 
 
 ' I feel that I am taking a great liberty in thus writing 
 to you. But I do feel so keenly the influence for good that 
 a man like Canon King might exercise on the rising genera- 
 tion from the position of an Oxford Professor.' 
 
 ' February 19. — The enclosed was not intended for your 
 eye ; but I hope you will not object to my sending it 
 to you. Dr. Bright's long experience at Oxford, first as a 
 College tutor, and then as a Professor, must have given 
 him a good insight into the needs of the undergraduate 
 mind. His reference to Mr. Plumptre^ is in answer to a 
 letter I wrote to him yesterday, in which I said that I had 
 heard Mr. Plumptre's name mentioned for the Chair of Pas- 
 toral Theology, and that I thought him a most unfit man. 
 The contrast between Mr. Plumptre and Mr. King at the 
 Leeds Congress was most striking. The former set every- 
 body by the ears. The Low Church party fairly hooted him 
 
 ' E. H. Plumptre, afterwards Dean of Wells.
 
 ECCLESIASTICA 37 
 
 down, and refused to hear him out. The latter (Mr. King) 
 had not spoken five minutes when he had the whole audience, 
 of five thousand people, bending under the spell of his moral 
 power like a field of corn before the wind. He seemed 
 to me to realize, if it is not profane to make the comparison, 
 the saying of the Gospel, that " Virtue had gone out of him " 
 to calm the excited passions of the multitude. 
 
 ' Dr. Bright's reference to your Liverpool speech ^ is 
 very genuine. This is the second time he has written to 
 me about it.' 
 
 King was appointed to the vacant chair, and on 
 February 25 MacCoU wrote to the Prime Minister : 
 
 ' I feel that I ought to add my own most sincere thanks 
 to those of Dr. Bright for the invaluable service you have 
 done to the Church of England by the appointment of 
 Mr. King to the Chair of Pastoral Theology.' 
 
 During the winter of 1873-4 MacColl spent some time 
 in Italy, and returned to find Gladstone dislodged from 
 the Premiership by the General Election of February 
 1874. On April 20 Archbishop Tait, acting in conjunc- 
 tion with Archbishop Thomson of York, introduced into 
 the House of Lords his ill-starred ' Pubhc Worship 
 Regulation Bill.' Objectionable in itself, it was rendered 
 much more offensive, during its passage through the 
 House of Lords, by Lord Shaftesbury and Lord Cairns. 
 Disraeli, who was now Prime Minister, welcomed it with 
 effusion, because he thought it popular. ' This,' he said, 
 ' is a Bill to put down Ritualism.' 
 
 On June 1 1 MacColl wrote thus to his leader : 
 
 ' The Dean of York - declares that, if a General Election 
 took place now, not a single Conservative candidate would 
 have the least chance throughout Yorkshire ; so indignant 
 are the clergy at the conduct of the Government in helping 
 forward this Bill of the two Archbishops. 
 
 ' What fools the managers of the Liberal Press are ! 
 
 ^ On Rationalism, delivered at Liverpool College, December 21. 1872. 
 ^ The Hon. Augustus Duncotnbe.
 
 38 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Whenever the clergy threaten a revolt against their tradi- 
 tional party, the Liberal Press whips them back. If, 
 instead of reviling the clergy and abusing Convocation, 
 the Telegraph had at this moment claimed justice for the 
 clergy — such justice as is freely accorded to Dissenting 
 sects and to the Established Kirk in Scotland — the breach 
 between the Tories and a large section of the clergy would 
 become irreparable. But the effect of the articles in the 
 Telegraph is to convince men like Dr. Bright that you are 
 the only Liberal leader who would do them justice. As 
 it is, your leadership of the Liberal party has detached a 
 large portion of the High Church party from the Tories. 
 Many a High Church Clergyman, who never gave a Liberal 
 vote before, voted for the Liberals at the last Election. 
 The Ritualists as a body did so. And if it had not been 
 for the Education League ^ many more High Churchmen 
 would have voted to keep you in office.' 
 
 ' August 4, 1874. — I am surprised that Sir William Har- 
 court's portentous ignorance as to the Canon Law has been 
 allowed to pass unnoticed. W^as there no lawyer in the 
 House of Commons with sufficient respect for his profession 
 to save it from the stigma cast upon it by Sir William 
 Harcourt's speech ? ^ 
 
 ' With regard to the Bill itself, I believe that it has brought 
 the disestablishment of the Church of England to our doors ; 
 unless indeed, like the Ecclesiastical Titles Act, it remains 
 a dead letter. Another result of the Bill will, I believe 
 and trust, be the separation of the great body of the High 
 Church clergy from the Tory party. I believe also that 
 the wisdom of your policy will be recognized by the country 
 when the real bearings of the Bill come to be understood.' 
 
 The Bill became law on August 7, but MacColl carried 
 his ecclesiastical interests with him to Scotland, where he 
 spent his autumn holiday. 
 
 ^ Started in 1871 to promote Secular Education in Elementary Schools. 
 - A speech in support of the P.W.R. Bill and in opposition to Gladstone's 
 amendments.
 
 ECCLESIASTICA 39 
 
 ' Glamis Castle, Forfarshire, September 14. — I think it 
 would be of great importance, in more respects than one, 
 that Dr. Dollinger should come over to England after the 
 Bonn Conference. If he would attend the Brighton Church 
 Congress, so much the better. He half promised me to 
 do so when I saw him in Munich last April. 
 
 ' If you agree with me that some personal intercourse 
 between Dr. Dolhnger and some of our Bishops would be 
 useful to both parties at the present moment, perhaps 
 you would not mind writing to Dr. Dollinger to that 
 effect, A letter from you would have much influence 
 with him. 
 
 ' Have you seen a book called " Supernatural Religion " ? 
 Both its arguments against miracles and against the authen- 
 ticity of the Gospels do not strike me as at all strong. 
 I was surprised to see the Spectator praise it so highly. 
 
 ' Mr. Motley the historian is here just now. He looks 
 very much broken in health. He is forbidden to read 
 anything but light novels, and he is not allowed to write 
 at all, and is somewhat depressed in consequence. But 
 he is most agreeable notwithstanding.' 
 
 By October 1 MacColl was back again in London. 
 
 'November 14, 1874, — They told me at the Vatican that 
 your pamphlet on the Neapolitan prisons had destroyed the 
 Bourbon regime and in fact established Italian unity. I shall 
 not be surprised to learn by and by that your pamphlet on 
 the Vatican Decrees ^ has given the Ultramontane Philoctetes 
 his fatal wound. It has disclosed, and will disclose more 
 and more, the hollo wness of that superficial unity of which 
 Manning boasts. The fact of the Council having been only 
 adjourned leaves a loop-hole for reconsidering the Decrees. 
 Manning has denied the possibility of this, of course. But 
 several Italian ecclesiastics, to say nothing of others, wel- 
 come it as a means of escape after the death of the present 
 Pope. I wrote a very hurried notice of your pamphlet in 
 
 ^ The Vatican Decrees in their bearing on Civil Allegiance : a political 
 expostulation, published November 1874.
 
 40 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 the Guardian, and a few misprints have made it even more 
 crude than when it left my hands. . . . 
 
 ' How amusing the rage of the Pall Mall Gazette is ! 
 But it is very intelligible. The Pall Mall wishes to root up 
 the very foundations of Cliristianity, and the Vatican 
 Decrees are useful auxiliaries to it in that enterprise. 
 
 ''December 17, 1874. — I heard a very bad account of 
 Disraeli's health the other day at Mr. Beresford-Hope's. 
 Those who are obliged to see a good deal of him seem to 
 think that he is breaking up. What a singular career his 
 has been ! I have no wish to say anything uncharitable 
 of him ; but I confess I could not conscientiously help regard- 
 ing his death as the removal of a sinister influence from 
 English politics and from English life. He has done much 
 to debauch the minds of our youth by making mere success, 
 without the least regard to principle, the sole aim of life. 
 I know no figure in English politics who inspires me with 
 more genuine aversion. 
 
 ' I do not believe that this Government is destined to be 
 long-lived. I have always thought that they would not 
 survive their third year of office.' 
 
 ' January 24, 1875. — ^Your resignation of the leadership 
 of the Liberal party ^ was at first a great shock to me ; 
 but now I am glad of it. The Liberals have been very 
 ungrateful for what you have done for them, and now 
 they will find what it is to be without you. I confess 
 that it is with a feeling of malicious pleasure that I 
 observe their dismay. The nation at large, too, will see 
 with clearer vision all that you have done for it, when 
 you stand aside from the heat and dust of party war- 
 fare ; and when a crisis takes place, or any great question 
 requires to be settled, I believe that the country will again 
 call upon you to take the management of affairs, however 
 reluctant you may be to do so. I suppose that Sir Robert 
 Peel, if he had hved, would have been Prime Minister in 
 1852 instead of Lord Aberdeen. 
 
 ' Announced in a letter to Lord Granville on January 13, 1875.
 
 ECCLESIASTICA 41 
 
 ' The Guardiaii contradicted, on what appeared to the 
 Editor internal evidence, an assertion in the Athenceum 
 that you were the author of the article on Bishop Patteson 
 in the Quarterly. The Athenceum, however, repeats its 
 assertion.' i 
 
 ' March 3, 1875. — I have just read the Guardiarv's review 
 of your pamphlet,- and I think it miserable. It does not 
 bring out your points at all. Your argument from the 
 Council of Constance, for example, is to my mind one of 
 the most teUing things I ever read. 
 
 ' I intended to have reviewed the pamphlet myself. 
 But I have to deliver four lectures at St. Paul's Cathedral 
 this week, beginning with to-night, and I did not like to 
 undertake your pamphlet for fear of not doing it justice 
 from want of time. But I think I could have done more 
 justice to it than this meagre review. Liddon is delighted 
 with it, and thinks it will be of immense service in our 
 controversy with Rome.' 
 
 In August 1875 MacColl, accompanying Liddon, attended 
 the second Conference on Reunion at Bonn. He had been 
 prevented by illness from attending the Conference of 1874. 
 
 On the 13th he wrote to Gladstone : 
 
 ' Dr. Dollinger read yesterday, in one of the public 
 sittings of the Conference, a very good letter from the Bishop 
 of Winchester,^ and then he handed me your letter, and 
 asked me to read it, as he said that I could read your hand- 
 writing with greater ease than he could. I had told him, 
 the day before, that though you did not object to the publica- 
 tion of your letter among the transactions of the Conference, 
 you thought it better that it should not be pubhshed just 
 now in the newspapers. Before reading it, therefore, I 
 stated, for the information of the reporters, that it was not 
 to be published. The Times reporter promised me after- 
 wards that he should not report it. But I had no access 
 
 * And it was true. The article appeared in October 1874. 
 - Vaticanism : an answer to replies and reproofs, published February 
 1875. 
 
 ^ E. Harold Browne.
 
 42 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 to any other reporters, and I fear that they may report your 
 letter, and perhaps not accurately. Would it not be better 
 therefore under the circumstances to let your letter appear 
 in the Guardian^ s report of the Conference ? It was listened 
 to with marked attention, and Liddon thinks that it covers 
 the ground so completely that, unless you see some serious 
 objection, it ought to be published at once. If you agree, 
 will you kindly drop me a note addressed to 12 Chester 
 Terrace, S.W. ? I shall be back in town, I hope, next 
 Tuesday. There are twenty Orientals here, including two 
 Bishops ; and some of them are very able and learned. 
 They have been here since Saturday, and have employed 
 the time in diligently discussing the question, partly among 
 themselves, and partly with the Old Catholics. Yesterday 
 morning was the first public Session of the Conference. 
 Dollinger presided, and opened the discussion with a 
 masterly review of the whole question in a speech (entirely 
 ex tempore) occupying an hour and a half. He was followed 
 by Professor Ossinine from St. Petersburg, who expounded 
 the Oriental view in a speech of considerable subtility. 
 In the afternoon the discussion was in English, and we did 
 little more than clear the ground for serious argument. 
 Dollinger has drawn up a most able statement of the Western 
 view in a series of propositions in language extracted from 
 the writing of the principal Greek Fathers. This paper is 
 to form the subject of discussion to-day, and I think it will 
 place the Orientals in a dilemma. The Germans and Enghsh 
 have agreed to accept it, and even to admit one important 
 concession to the Greeks, who, on the other hand, will find it 
 difiicult to reject as heterodox a confession of faith framed 
 in the ipsissima verba of their own Fathers. The Greeks 
 have declared that if we agree on the subject of the Filioque, 
 they see nothing else which need divide us. It is a great 
 gain to have Liddon here. But I wish we had one of the 
 English Bishops for the look of the thing.' 
 
 The Public Worship Regulation Act came into operation 
 on July 1, 1875, and the Puritan party, eagerly avaihng 
 themselves of the new weapon which the Archbishops had
 
 ECCLESIASTICA 43 
 
 placed in their hands, began that scandalous series of 
 religious prosecutions which lasted for the next ten years. 
 The Liberal Press, being partly engineered by Puritans and 
 partly by Agnostics, forsook the faith of religious liberty, 
 and backed the persecuting party. On January 8, 1877, 
 MacColl wrote thus to the editor of the Daily News : 
 
 * I am not a Ritualist myself, and I dislike much of what 
 goes on under the name of Ritualism. But the question in 
 this case is not, to my mind, a question of Ritualism at all, 
 but of equality before the law. What I am looking at now 
 is the political aspect of this question. The Pubhc Worship 
 Regulation Act has detached from the Tory party a larger 
 section of Conservatives, lay and clerical, than probably 
 you are at all aware of. Some of them have become en- 
 thusiastic Disestablishmentarians ; and others would sup- 
 port a Liberal candidate, and let him take his own line as to 
 Disestablishment. Many of them are now being driven back 
 into the ranks of the Conservative party by the conduct of 
 the Liberal Press. Let me give you an example : A peer of 
 old title and large estate told me not long ago that he would 
 not walk across the street to save the Estabhshment at 
 the next Election. Yet he is an hereditary Tory and was 
 made Lord-Lieutenant of his County by Disraeli. He is a 
 moderate High Churchman. Now he tells me that the con- 
 duct of the Liberal Press on the Ritualistic question has 
 convinced him that the evils of State-connexion are less 
 than the tyranny promoted by the Liberal Press. 
 
 ' Surely the line for the Liberal Press to take would be 
 to admit the justice of the Ritualistic case when it is just, 
 and then take any line it pleased. But this determination 
 to single them out as special reprobates among a multitude 
 of greater reprobates (if Lawlessness be the test) is killing 
 their nascent Liberalism, and injuring most seriously the 
 Liberal cause in the next General Election. The Ritualists 
 and their sympathizers are strong enough to turn the 
 scales, as they did the other day at Frome.^ But, if the 
 
 ^ H. B. Samuelson, Liberal, defeated Sir James Fergiisson, Conservative, 
 at a by-election for Frome, November 187G.
 
 44 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Liberal Press will persist in treating them with Turkish 
 justice, they are not unlikely to make peace with the 
 authorities of the Estabhshment by curtaihng their ritual, 
 rather than face the tender mercies of such Liberalism as 
 they are now experiencing. 
 
 ' I regret this sincerely ; for I wish to see the Liberals 
 back in power almost at any cost. I think Dizzy's regime 
 so insufferably demoralizing all round.' 
 
 \
 
 CHAPTER V 
 
 THE EASTERN QUESTION 
 
 Not merely armed men, but young women and girls and babes, counted 
 by hundreds, counted by thousands, subjected to the most refined cruelties, 
 subjected to the last indignities, have been the victims of the Turk. — 
 
 H. P. LiDDON. 
 
 In the autumn of 1875 an insurrection broke out in Bulgaria, 
 and the Turkish Government despatched a large force to 
 suppress it. This was soon done, and the suppression was 
 followed by a hideous orgy of massacre and outrage. In 
 1876 a rumour of these horrors reached England, and public 
 indignation spontaneously awoke, Disraeli (who now became 
 Lord Beaconsfield) sneered at the rumour as ' Coffee-house 
 babble,' and made odious jokes about the Oriental way of 
 executing malefactors. But Christian England was not to 
 be pacified with these Asiatic pleasantries ; and some of 
 those who sympathized most keenly with the persecuted 
 worshippers of Christ in Eastern Europe, determined to 
 test the horrible reports by personal investigation. Among 
 these was Dr. Liddon (who preached at St. Paul's, on 
 August 13, a splendid sermon on our national duty at 
 this crisis), and he chose for his travelling companion 
 Malcolm MacColl. At such a moment MacColl of course 
 communicated with his leader. 
 
 ' Dr. Liddon and myself have some intention of going as 
 near as we can to the seat of war in the East next September, 
 in order to sift for ourselves the stories of Turkish atrocities. 
 I believe that they are substantially accurate, and the 
 shameful efforts of Dizzy and Lord Derby to palliate them 
 are intolerable. Lord Derby's assertion that the British 
 
 45
 
 46 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 fleet was sent to Besika Bay merely to protect British sub- 
 jects and calm the fears of excited Ambassadors, looks to me 
 like a cynical exhibition of scarcely disguised mendacity.' 
 
 * August 21, 1876. — Dr. Liddon and myself intend to 
 start for Servia at the end of the month. . . . We intend 
 to write our experiences to some organs in the London 
 Press. Do you think you could kindly give us any 
 introductions in Vienna or Belgrade ? or to any members 
 of the Austrian or Russian Legation in London ? 
 
 ' Disraeli (I wish he was a prisoner in the hands of the 
 Bashi-Bazouks) seems to me to have played, and to be play- 
 ing still, the game of Russia with extraordinary dexterity. 
 For my own part, I would rather see Russia in possession of 
 Constantinople than the continuance of the status quo in 
 European Turkey. But, putting considerations of humanity 
 out of the question, surely the true English policy would 
 be to encourage the gradual formation of a belt of Christian 
 States between Russia and Constantinople. But that is 
 the policy which Disraeli is doing his very best to render 
 impossible. 
 
 ' How little of an Englishman that clever charlatan is, 
 after all ! I believe that his power was on the wane in any 
 case. But he has thrown away whatever chance he had 
 by becoming Earl of Beaconsfield. I feel indignant that 
 a title which Burke had chosen should be appropriated 
 by such a man as Disraeli ; and I can remember nothing 
 more humiliating than the chorus of adulation with which 
 the Press has greeted his elevation to what I trust will prove 
 his political extinction. I don't believe for a moment that 
 he has any intention of resigning the Premiership. Those 
 who think so misread the character of the man. He wishes 
 to go down to posterity as having led both Houses of 
 Parhament. I doubt whether the peers will appreciate his 
 leadership. For myself, I hope he will not give up the 
 Premiership. If he is Premier at the next General Election, 
 it will be worth a great deal to the Liberal cause. A very 
 large portion of the Clergy and of lay Churchmen (till now 
 Conservatives) have vowed vengeance upon him ; and his 
 pro-Turkish sympathies have alienated a great many more,' 
 
 I
 
 THE EASTERN QUESTION 47 
 
 'September 1, 1876. — Dr. Liddon and I sleep at the 
 Lord Warden Hotel, Dover, on Sunday night, and cross 
 on Monday morning. I suppose a letter would catch me 
 at the Lord Warden Hotel. If not, my next address Avill 
 be the Four Seasons Hotel, Munich. We go by Munich 
 because we are anxious to have a chat with Dollinger. 
 We intend to be in Munich on Wednesday night, and leave 
 for Vienna on Friday. After Vienna our plans are not 
 fixed. We are anxious to go to Belgrade and also to pay 
 a visit to Strossmayer. We shall probably do both if we 
 have time. If we must make a choice between the two, 
 Dean Church thinks that a visit to Strossmayer would pay 
 us better — I mean that we should probably get more 
 information in respect to the Eastern Question. 
 
 ' You have doubtless noticed the short but pregnant 
 letter of Lord Odo Russell to Lord Derby, given on page 6 
 of the "Further Correspondence." Yet, with that letter 
 before him, Dizzy had the audacity to talk of the atrocities 
 as " Coffee-house babble." I would give a great deal for 
 the defeat of his nominee in Bucks. There seems to be 
 good stuff in this Mr. Rupert Carington.i He plants his 
 blows with skill and effect. 
 
 ' I do hope you will make a speech on the Eastern 
 Question. The country is evidently thoroughly roused ; 
 but it wants guidance. Its aspirations are all in the right 
 direction, and all it requires is to have its ideas and wishes 
 put into shape and order. I think immense capital might 
 be made against Dizzy just now, not only on account of 
 the atrocities, but also on account of the extraordinary 
 way in which he has played Russia's game, assuming 
 that she is engaged in a bad game. He has done his 
 best to throw the Christian populations of Turkey into 
 the embraces of Russia, and he has at the same time 
 gone far to educate our own country into the conviction 
 that, if the alternative is forced upon us, it would, on the 
 whole, be better to have Russia rather than the Turk at 
 Constantinople.' 
 
 ^ The Hon. Rupert Carington, Liberal candidate for Bucks at the vacancy 
 created by Disraeli's elevation to the peerage,
 
 48 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 At this point, I turn to MacColl's narrative of the 
 journey : 
 
 ' The Save skirts Bosnia until it reaches Servia. On 
 the left-hand side is Slavonia, which is flat most of the way. 
 On the right is Bosnia, which is generally hilly and pictur- 
 esque. The insurrection in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as 
 the reader will remember, was going on at the time. The 
 river forms the boundary between Austrian territory and 
 Bosnia, which was then under the direct rule of the Sultan. 
 There was thus a constant flow of insurgents passing to 
 and fro across the river. To prevent this, a number of 
 Turkish block-houses were established on the Turkish side 
 of the river ; and to prevent surprise, the wood was cut 
 down within a radius of some two hundred yards of each 
 block-house. In many parts the country was wild, 
 uncultivated and uninliabited. In front of one of those 
 block-houses we passed in sight of an incident which 
 caused a great deal of controversy at the time. This was, 
 a man impaled on a stake .^ We arrived at Semlin, on 
 the Austrian side of the Danube, on the evening of the 
 second day of our voyage. On the opposite side of the 
 river is Belgrade, for which we were bound. It stands 
 high over the river, and the town and country round 
 about is dominated by the fort. We took a boat across 
 the river, and were met on landing by our host, Mr. 
 Cristich, a prominent politician in Belgrade, and after- 
 wards Servian Minister in London. We remained his 
 guests for ten days, and met while there the well-known 
 Dr. Sandwith, of Kars fame, who was ministering, medically 
 and otherwise, to the Servian sick and wounded, on behalf 
 of the Grosvenor House Committee, of which I was Honorary 
 Secretary. Dr. Sandwith took us over the hospital in Bel- 
 grade, where we witnessed the horrible mutilations com- 
 mitted by the Turkish soldiers on the Servian soldiers and 
 innocent persons of both sexes who had fallen into their 
 hands. The day after our arrival, we attended a religious 
 service in the Cathedral of Belgrade, and saw there, among 
 
 » See pp. 339, 366, and 377. 
 
 I
 
 THE EASTERN QUESTION 49 
 
 others, King Milan, who was then only Prince of Servia. 
 His son, who was afterwards assassinated, had been born 
 a week before, and this service was in thanksgiving for his 
 birth. The Prime Minister was Ristitch, with whom we 
 had several interviews. He struck us as a very able and 
 strong man. We made several excursions into the country, 
 and it was our intention to pass on to the Crimea, and return 
 home through Northern Russia. But the war between 
 Turkey and Servia and Montenegro, and the disturbances 
 in Bulgaria, upset our plans. So we determined to return 
 home by the Danube, paying our promised visit to Stross- 
 mayer by the way. 
 
 ' Vukovar is a picturesque little town on the banks 
 of the river, consisting of stragghng houses, with gardens 
 in front of several of them. We arrived at dusk, so 
 could not see much of the town till the following morning. 
 Diakovar, Strossmayer's residence, was eighteen miles 
 distant by carriage. We intended to start for it after 
 breakfast on the morrow, and made inquiries at the hotel 
 as to the possibility of getting a good carriage. During 
 dinner, our waiter told Liddon that the only carriage in 
 Vukovar belonged to his brother ; and as there was naturally 
 a great demand for it, we should engage it at once. It was, 
 he said, a beautiful carriage, with excellent springs — so 
 Liddon engaged it. It was to be at the hotel, or rather, 
 small inn, where we lodged, at ten o'clock the following 
 morning. At the hour appointed, we had our luggage 
 deposited at the door, and we walked in the little square 
 in front of the inn till the carriage arrived. Half an hour 
 passed, yet no sign of the carriage. We waited another 
 half-hour, and began to get rather impatient ; still no sign 
 of our carriage. I suggested jocosely to Liddon that our 
 carriage was standing near the inn, pointing at the same 
 time to a little wooden cart, drawn by a shaggy little pony, 
 with a dirty and mangy-looking lad sitting in front, and 
 a wooden plank, with an iron rail across it for a back, in 
 the middle of the cart. Liddon laughed at the idea ; but 
 after waiting another quarter of an hour, we went up to 
 the inn, and asked about our carriage. The waiter pointed
 
 50 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 to this cart. We asked the boy who he was, and he told 
 us that this was our carriage to Diakovar. We could 
 hardly believe that this was our beautiful carriage, with 
 excellent springs ; but being assured that there was no 
 other vehicle available in Vukovar, we had to make the 
 best of it. So we had our portmanteaus squeezed into the 
 cart, while ourselves took our seats on the wooden plank, 
 without any cushion, behind the driver — with a bar of 
 round iron, about haK an inch in diameter, fitting into the 
 small of our backs. So we started for Diakovar. There 
 had been a good deal of rain before our arrival, and the 
 streets consisted of greasy mud, with ruts varying from 
 six inches to a foot in depth. We jolted along out of the 
 town, passing several good victorias and other carriages ; 
 in fact, Liddon, who seldom suspected evil of his fellow- 
 creatures, had been completely swindled by the waiter. 
 Every jolt of the cart jarred our spines. The wheels were 
 very unsteady, and we had not gone more than two miles 
 when one of them came off. We dismounted, and by dint of 
 pushing the cart while the driver led the pony and pushed 
 the other wheel, we arrived at a smithy a quarter of a 
 mile distant, where we waited till the smith managed to 
 patch and fix the wheel. The driver, after this experience, 
 drove warily and slowly ; and it took us seven hours to 
 cover the eighteen miles. When at last we entered the 
 Bishop's park at Diakovar, and came in sight of the palace, 
 we felt too much ashamed of the appearance of our equipage 
 and driver ; so we ordered him to drive to the back door 
 while we walked to the front door, where we found a tame 
 crane stalking up and down as if acting the part of a sentinel.' 
 
 From the palace, thus painfully reached, MacCoU wrote 
 to Gladstone as follows : 
 
 'September 25, 1876. — I have delayed so long to thank 
 you for the kind gift of your pamphlet ^ that I am now 
 quite ashamed to write to you. I received it at Vienna, 
 and you do not need to be told with what delight I 
 read it. Since then Dr. Liddon and myseK have passed 
 
 ^ Bulgarian Horrors and the Question of the East.
 
 THE EASTERN QUESTION 51 
 
 through Croatia and Slavonia into Servia, and we are 
 now paying a visit of two days to Bishop Strossmayer on 
 our way to England. I have written three letters to the 
 Spectator, and have asked Hutton to send you a copy 
 of the numbers which contain them ; for your time is 
 too precious to be taken up with long letters in manu- 
 script. Otherwise I could give you volumes on all that 
 I have heard and seen since I left England three weeks 
 ago. I have written a short letter to the Times and a 
 longer one to the SjJectator on the Turkish atrocities, and 
 I may possibly write one or two more letters before I reach 
 England. Dr. Liddon gives his impressions to the Guardian. 
 
 ' One cardinal mistake which people at home make is 
 to think that the Bulgarian horrors are rare and isolated 
 outbreaks of Turkish fanaticism. On the contrary, they 
 are only a specimen in tableau of what goes on regularly 
 in the Christian provinces of Turkey. The property, the 
 honour, and the life of every Christian in the Ottoman 
 Empire are daily exposed to the lusts and passions of the 
 Turks. And there is no redress. A husband who remon- 
 strates against the violation of his wife, a brother who 
 complains of the violation of his sister, is exposed to the 
 unbridled will of his Mussulman master ; and it depends 
 on the caprice of his oppressor whether he is killed on the 
 spot or put to a lingering death. He has no help, no one 
 to appeal to but God, no one who will succour him. I 
 shall never forget the melancholy face and sad voice with 
 which a Bosnian peasant, the other day, after a vivid 
 description of the sufferings of his people, added : " And 
 England will not let us be free." 
 
 ' Your pamphlet and speech ^ have done a world of good 
 already. They have been translated into the Servian 
 papers, and I believe that the thanks of the Servian people 
 have reached you ere now. Bishop Strossmayer is also 
 delighted both with your speech and pamphlet, and he 
 has asked Dr. Liddon and me to assure you how much he 
 admires your eloquent championship of humanity, and 
 how grateful he feels for the service you have rendered 
 
 ^ At Blackheath, on the Bulgarian Atrocities. 
 
 E 2
 
 52 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 to "a just and holy cause " (they are his words). He is 
 all on fire in his sympathy for the Christians in Turkey, 
 and has had some thoughts of going to England to do his 
 best to enlighten public opinion there. But he fears that 
 Austria, which at present means Hungary, would come down 
 upon him and put obstacles in the way of whatever good 
 he is now able to do for the Slav populations. I have 
 taken the liberty of saying to him that I would ask you 
 to write to him on the Eastern Question, and he expressed 
 the delight which he would have in corresponding with you. 
 I am sure you would like him, and he would, of course, like 
 you. He is one of the most charming and interesting men 
 I ever met, and I wish you could afford the time to pay him 
 a visit. I suppose there is hardly another man living who 
 has gone more thoroughly than he has done into all the 
 ramifications of the Eastern Question. He is, as you know. 
 Bishop of Sirmium ayid Bosnia. So that his official duties 
 take him often into Bosnia, and he is also intimately 
 acquainted with Servia and Herzegovina. I wish you could 
 hear his torrents of eloquence on the question. Dr. Liddon 
 and I have listened to him with rapt attention for an hour 
 at a time. He agrees entirely with your views on the 
 subject. He says that to hope for any improvement in the 
 Turk is a mischievous delusion, and he dwells emphatically, 
 with a large personal experience to enforce his opinion, 
 on the radical difference between the Turks and other 
 Mohammedans. He says the Bosnian Mussulmans are 
 nothing like so cruel as the Turks, and he thinks that there 
 is good hope of their becoming Christians if they were under 
 a Christian administration. What he himself would prefer 
 is that Bosnia should be given to Servia, and Herzegovina 
 to Montenegro. He has the highest possible opinion of the 
 Servians. He says — and I can confirm it — that they are 
 about the most tolerant people in the world, and are possessed 
 of great political and administrative capacity. Ristitch, the 
 Servian Foreign Minister, he regards as one of the ablest 
 politicians of the day. And certainly that is the impression 
 which Liddon and I carried away from a long conversation 
 with Ristitch. • I am a Catholic," said Strossmayer, " and
 
 THE EASTERN QUESTION 53 
 
 the Servians are Orthodox ; but it is only a difference of 
 unimportant details, and I should be well content to be 
 under the political administration of Servia." Russia, 
 he thinks, would be opposed to the cession of Bosnia to 
 Servia ; for Russia knows that Servia, like Sardinia, might 
 become the nucleus of a great Christian State in the East. 
 England, instead of checkmating Russia, by encouraging the 
 autonomy of the Christian populations of Turkey, has been 
 playing Russia's game. Still it is not too late. England, 
 " the first Christian Power in the world," has the ball at 
 her feet. Let her be prompt to carry out your policy, and 
 she will easily win. Russia will not dare to oppose her ; 
 Italy will act cordially with her ; neither France nor 
 Germany will oppose her ; and Austria, standing alone, 
 would have to give way. 
 
 ' Bishop Strossmayer is building a grand Cathedral 
 close to his palace, chiefly out of his own income. The 
 foundation-stone was laid ten years ago, and he hopes to 
 have it ready for consecration in five years. A pupil of 
 Overbeck's is covering the walls \\ith frescoes, the subjects 
 being all out of the New Testament. It is a most striking 
 and beautiful building, and quite on a par, as to size, with 
 an ordinary English Cathedral. It is roofed, and looks 
 quite finished from the outside, and some progress has been 
 made with the frescoes in the Chancel. When the Cathedral 
 is finished the Bishop intends to build residences for a Dean 
 and Chapter. He has already built a seminary for the 
 training of clergy for Bosnia. In addition to all this his 
 hand is ever open to help any good work in his diocese and 
 beyond it. There was some money required lately for the 
 endowment of the University of Agram. Strossmayer gave 
 £2000, and also contributed largely to the formation of 
 a picture-gallery in Agram. This we were told in Agram 
 by several persons, who added, somewhat bitterly, that 
 the Archbishop of Agram, though his income was £80,000 
 a year, did not give a farthing. Strossmayer keeps open 
 house. Twenty-five guests sat down at his table to dinner 
 yesterday, and forty poor persons — sometimes many more — 
 dine in the servants' hall every day. One curious relic
 
 54 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 of the rule of the Turks in this region still remains in the 
 household of the Bishop. The headman in the servants' 
 hall, a picturesque person, dressed in semi-Oriental fashion, 
 is called Harem-Pasha. Strossmayer gave the Servians 
 £3000 at the beginning of the war. He is a man who 
 overflows with charity, and hopes for the reunion of 
 Christendom in spite of the Vatican Council. He has no 
 scruples about our Orders or Sacraments. If only he were 
 Pope ! He has a weak chest, I am sorry to say, and talks 
 sometimes in the tone of a man who does not expect to live 
 long. The Cathedral, when finished, cannot cost much 
 less than £400,000 ; yet this man is frowned upon at the 
 Vatican, Avhile men like Manning are advanced to the highest 
 dignities. The Vatican does not dare to do more than 
 frown ; for a man who is adored by some six millions of 
 Croats and Slavs cannot safely be treated like Dollinger — 
 for whom, by the way, Strossmayer expresses the highest 
 esteem and regard. 
 
 'Dr. Liddon sends his respects. We start to-day for 
 Vienna by way of Pesth, and I must try to get to London 
 by Monday, as I am down to speak on the Bonn Conference 
 at the Church Congress at Plymouth on October 3. 
 
 ' Bishop Strossmayer says he will write you a short 
 letter. I am so glad, as it will make an opening for a 
 correspondence. He confirms the account of the impalings 
 in Bosnia which I have sent to the Times and Spectator, 
 and adds some horrible details, e.g. that a woman was 
 impaled on the eve of her confinement. These tortures are 
 an amusement to the Turks.' 
 
 On October 9 a meeting to protest against the Bulgarian 
 atrocities was held in St. James's Hall, and MacCoU thus 
 reported it to his chief : 
 
 ' Nothing could have been more enthusiastic. The 
 hearts of the working men are evidently still in the right 
 place, as Dizzy would speedily find out if he were to appeal 
 to them. Delane has come back from Dunrobin Castle with 
 the notion that there is not very much in the agitation,
 
 THE EASTERN QUESTION 55 
 
 after all. He requires to have strong proofs of his error. 
 I hope the meetings will go on, for there is much danger that 
 the Government will betray the country, Forster's rambling 
 and vacillating speech has done much harm. I saw him 
 in Vienna and I travelled part of the way home with him. 
 His view then was that a military occupation of Turkey 
 would be necessary. I think he greatly exaggerates the 
 difficulties. Let the Christians be armed, and the Moham- 
 medans will think twice before they attack them. Stross- 
 mayer has no doubt that the Bosnian Mohammedans, for 
 example, would soon become reconciled to Servian ad- 
 ministration. The threats of a Mussulman rising are all 
 moonshine. The Mohammedans will not rise if they are 
 once given to understand that no European Power will 
 protect them from the consequences of their own misdeeds. 
 At present they rely on England.' 
 
 ' October 13, 1876. — I trust most sincerely that Servia 
 will reject a five months' armistice. The proposal is a 
 clever dodge on the part of Turkey. Six weeks will enable 
 the Powers to settle the affair peacefully or to see that it 
 cannot be peacefully settled. An armistice at all, at this 
 season, is a great boon to Turkey, and a loss to Servia, in a 
 military point of view. 
 
 ' I quite agree with you about Lady 's Fund. She 
 
 is a thorough Turk, and I don't trust her at all. She 
 was staying for two days at the same hotel as Liddon and 
 myself at Vienna. Her sympathy for the Bulgarians is 
 artificial and for a purpose. Her sympathy for the Turks 
 and the Turkish cause is thoroughly genuine. Of course 
 I shall regard what you have said on that point as private. 
 
 ' I am sorry Lord Hartington has not gone into the 
 Christian provinces of Turkey, He will hear nothing at 
 Constantinople, especially in the society in which he appears 
 to be moving, but what is false and bad.' 
 
 All through 1876 and 1877 the great conflict raged, and 
 MacCoU followed it indefatigably through all its phases, 
 which he embodied in a vigorous pamphlet called ' The
 
 56 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Eastern Question : its facts and fallacies.' On December 4, 
 1876, he wrote to Gladstone: 
 
 ' I saw Count Schouvaloff yesterday at Madame Novi- 
 koff's. He agrees with Bismarck that war is inevitable. 
 The Turks, he says, encouraged by Dizzy, will make no 
 concessions of any importance. He thinks that Dizzy 
 will send the fleet up the Dardanelles, which under the 
 circumstances he would regard as an indirect alliance with 
 Turkey. . . . There lies our danger. He may gradually 
 o-et the country into such a fix that we may find our- 
 selves at war with Russia before we know where w^e are. 
 All things are possible with such an unprincipled gambler 
 as he is.' 
 
 On August 8, 1877, MacCoU wrote to Gladstone : 
 
 ' I returned last week from a three weeks' tour in Ireland 
 with Dr. Liddon, and I think you will be pleased to hear that 
 the Irish people, as far as Dr. Liddon and I could learn, are 
 all right on the Eastern Question. We made that a point of 
 inquiry wherever we went and always with the same result. 
 I am convinced that, if the Vatican had not pronounced in 
 favour of the Turks, the Irish would have given as loud a 
 vent to their feelings as the English did. The paper taken 
 in by all the priests is the Freeman's Journal. I read it 
 diligently while I was in Ireland, and I found that its articles 
 on the Eastern Question Mere all on the right side. Even in 
 its occasional articles against Russia there was no violence 
 and there was always a dig at the hated Turk. The country 
 people were enthusiastically against the Turks, and thought 
 they ought to be driven clean out of Europe. 
 
 ' Another thing which pleased, and certainly surprised 
 me, was your popularity with the Irish. They seem to have 
 repented of the folly of 1874, I do not mean that they 
 have given up the craze of Home Rule;^ but they have 
 recovered their faith in you personally. If any chance 
 took you to Ireland now, you would, I am sure, be received 
 with enthusiasm everywhere — at least by the Roman 
 Catholic population. I saw a good deal of a most liberal 
 
 ^ In view of what was to come in 1885, ' the craze of Home Rule ' is 
 a noteworthy expression.
 
 THE EASTERN QUESTION .17 
 
 and charming man, Dr. Moriarty. He told me, among 
 other things, that the Roman CathoHc hierarchy had pretty 
 well come to the conclusion that they had made a great 
 mistake in rejecting your Irish University Bill in 1873.' 
 
 The 'Bulgarian Atrocities' of 1875 bore fruit in 
 the Russo-Turkish War, which, beginning in April 1877, 
 raged with amazing ferocity to March 1878. It seemed 
 morally certain that Lord Beaconsfield wished to intervene 
 on the Turkish side, and Gladstone devoted all his energies 
 to the task of 'counter-working,' as he said, 'the purposes 
 of Lord Beaconsfield.' Day by day we seemed to be drawing 
 nearer the edge of a second and even more criminal Crimea, 
 and our danger became manifest to all men when, on 
 March 28, 1878, Lord Derby i resigned the office of Foreign 
 Secretary because he could not sanction the military prepara- 
 tions which Lord Beaconsfield professed to think necessary 
 in view of the disturbed state of Eastern Europe. On 
 March 30 MacColl wrote privately to the Editor of the 
 Daily News : 
 
 * I have ascertained at the Russian Embassy that it was 
 not the calling out of the Reserves, merely or chiefly, that 
 made Lord Derby resign, but a coup upon which the Govern- 
 ment had determined. They do not know at the Embassy 
 what this coup is — whether the seizure of Gallipoli or 
 Mitylene, or some other strategic point on Turkish territory. 
 They only know — I believe from Lord Derby — that the 
 Government have decided on some action behind the calling 
 out of the Reserves. The danger of course is that, if English 
 troops are sent into the neighbourhood of the Dardanelles, 
 the Russians will, as a matter of precaution, seize Gallipoli. 
 The Russians have made up their minds that it is useless to 
 attempt further negotiations with our Government. They 
 feel certain that Lord Beaconsfield is determined on war, and 
 that he is only prolonging negotiations till he is ready to 
 strike. 
 
 ' The only hope now — and it is a slender one — is in a 
 bold and vital front on the part of the Opposition. 
 
 * Edward Hcnrv. l^th Earl of Derby.
 
 58 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' My little book ^ will be out next week. I wish there 
 were time to make it better. But my facts are so strong 
 that I think I have made out one of the most damning cases 
 ever made out against a Government. 
 
 'Perhaps it will be well to allude to the intended Congress. 
 They tell me at the Russian Embassy that the Government 
 are a little uneasy at the possible effect of Lord Derby's 
 resignation, and that they are vacillating again. Lord 
 Hartington could, by one speech, stop the whole mischief 
 and compel the Government to go into Congress.' 
 
 By an overruling Providence war was averted, and the 
 Government ' went into Congress ' at Berhn in July 1878 — 
 with what results to Christian freedom in the East of Europe 
 we all know. In the following month MacCoU was staying 
 with Lord and Lady Bath at Longleat, and thence he wrote 
 to Gladstone on August 28 : 
 
 ' I send with this a proof -copy of a Report on the Berlin 
 Treaty drawn up by a Sub-Committee of the Eastern Question 
 Association, and which it is intended to issue in a few days. 
 It has been approved by a meeting of the General Committee 
 of the Association : but the vSub-Committee can still make 
 alterations of no great importance, for they have been 
 authorized to do so by the General Committee. I have 
 marked the names of the persons to whom the different 
 parts have been assigned. My main object has been to 
 show what I think is borne out by facts — namely, that 
 Russia, which our Government have claimed to have 
 vanquished, is a very large gainer by the operations of our 
 Plenipotentiaries, and the only gainer. 
 
 ' There are several Tories staying here, and they are 
 anything but jubilant on the state of affairs.' 
 
 From Longleat MacColl went north to stay with Lord 
 and Lady Strathmore at Glamis, whence he wrote on 
 September 28 : 
 
 ' Sir Stafford Northcote has been staying here for some 
 days. Of course I could not expect him to discuss the 
 
 1 Three Years' of the Eastern Qtiestion.
 
 THE EASTERN QUESTION 59 
 
 Eastern Question with me. I found him, however, very 
 friendly. He confessed his uneasiness about Eastern Affairs, 
 though the repulse of our Mission to Cabul was not then 
 known. He also confessed that he had no opinion of Midhat 
 Pasha, whom he described as " a commonplace if not stupid 
 man." This opinion he formed after an interview with the 
 Pasha. 
 
 ' One thing surprised me. Sir Stafford learnt from the 
 papers, while he was here, the elevation of Lord Cairns to 
 an Earldom. He was inclined to doubt it at first, as he 
 could see no reason for it. 
 
 ' I am surprised that the country takes the Afghan 
 imbroglio so quietly. I suppose the public mind has become 
 so used to Dizzy's theatrical surprises that nothing but a 
 disaster will rouse it from its lethargy. I believe, however, 
 that a dissolution would be fatal to the Government. Mr. 
 Baxter (M.P. for Montrose), who dined here the other 
 evening, told me that the Political Committee of the Reform 
 Club are inundated with applications for Liberal candidates 
 — many of the applications coming from places where, six 
 months ago, no Liberal would dream of appearing. 
 
 ' Lord Beaconsfield's Secretary, Mr. Algernon Turnor, is 
 here. He, too, is anything but jubilant. He tells me that 
 France has been very troublesome about Egypt ; insisting 
 not merely on having a Frenchman in the new Government 
 of Nubar Pasha, but on nominating him direct. France, 
 of course, would not hear of an English protectorate in 
 Egypt. 
 
 ' My host, though a Tory, is, and has been all along, 
 against the Government's Eastern policy. So that Sir 
 Stafford Northcote and Mr. Algernon Turnor have not 
 talked as freely as they would have done among 
 sympathizers.' 
 
 'October 12, 1878.— Lord Bath is in town till Monday. 
 I had a long conversation with him yesterday on the 
 present aspect of pohtical affairs. The more I see of him, 
 the abler I think him. I have seldom found his judgment 
 at fault, and therefore I attach much weight to his opinion
 
 60 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 on political questions ; on home questions more especially, 
 for he has been an active party man. He was, as you 
 know, the Tory Whip in the Lords for some time, and he 
 has bestowed much pains on the organization of his party 
 in Somerset and Wiltshire. 
 
 ' At present he is in some perplexity. He has taken no 
 interest in the organization of his party for three years in 
 the two counties I have named, and he says that they are 
 going to pieces. Unless he bestirs himself at once, four seats, 
 he believes, will inevitably be lost to the party. This he 
 would not mind much if it were only for the next Election. 
 But once gone, they may never be recovered. It is therefore 
 a question with him of breaking altogether with his party ; 
 and, with his antecedents, that is a result which he could 
 hardly face without a great wrench. Yet so utterly does 
 he loathe their tactics and policy on the Eastern Question 
 that I almost think it ^nll be a greater wrench to do any- 
 thing to keep them in power. He agrees with you that the 
 reaction against the Government has set in strongly ; and 
 he is very glad that you have not spoken on the Afghan 
 business ; so that the Tories cannot possibly lay any share 
 of their misfortunes on you. He also hopes that when the 
 Liberal leaders do speak, they will confine themselves to 
 destructive criticism, and not give the Government the 
 advantage of having a counter policy to attack. 
 
 ' Now I am going to make what I hope you will not 
 consider an impertinent suggestion, though I feel that it 
 really is impertinent. I see from the papers that the Duke 
 of Argyll is going to pay you a visit. Would it not be 
 worth while to get Lord Bath, in his present frame of mind, 
 to visit you at the same time ? I have no idea whether he 
 has any engagements which would prevent it. But when 
 I was at Longleat some time ago he said, half jocosely but 
 more in earnest, that he wished you would ask Lady Bath 
 and himself to Hawarden.' 
 
 MacCoU was always in deadly earnest about the con- 
 troversy of the moment, and this earnestness as a rule 
 prevented him from indulging in political pleasantry. But
 
 THE EASTERN QUESTION 61 
 
 for once he was induced to hazard a gibe at Lord Beacons- 
 field's expense, and his prompter was the gravest of all 
 Whig statesmen — the second Lord Northbrook. The 
 Lord Mayor's Banquet was approaching, and the following 
 skit on the Disraeli an manner appeared in the Echo of 
 November 9, 1878 : 
 
 ' To-night's Speech Anticipated 
 
 ' {From our Clairvoyant Correspondent) 
 
 ' A clairvoyant correspondent has sent us the following 
 report of what struck him as the most important part of 
 the Prime Minister's speech this evening at the Lord Mayor's 
 banquet. It will be understood, of course, that we do not 
 make ourselves responsible for the strict accuracy of our 
 correspondent's report. We print it just as we have received 
 it. " After some prehminary skirmishing and intermediate 
 platitudes," writes our correspondent, " the orator, who 
 wore a glittering star upon his breast, launched into what 
 seemed to be the heart of his subject as follows : 
 
 ' " I am told, my Lord Mayor, that trade is bad, and I am 
 not here to rebut that allegation. But to admit that trade 
 is not in a flourishing condition is one thing ; to argue that 
 England is less able than of old to bear the responsibilities 
 and burdens of Empire is quite another. (Cheers.) Look 
 at America ; look at France. When the United States 
 emerged out of that gigantic struggle which threatened 
 to rend them asunder, there were croakers here and 
 elsewhere who prophesied the ruin of that great Republic. 
 Superficial observers and hungry place-hunters — (laughter) 
 — pointed to a stagnant trade, a high taxation, and an 
 exchequer filled with greenbacks, and from those indis- 
 putable facts they drew the false conclusion that the great 
 American Union was on the verge of bankruptcy, and was 
 about to crumble to pieces. But what do we behold ? 
 Why, that the United States — that wondrous polity sprung 
 from the loins of an Imperial race — (tremendous cheering) — 
 is at this moment mightier and wealthier than it v\as before.
 
 62 I^IALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 (Cheers.) And how have the United States achieved that 
 grand result ? By recognizing their destiny, by resolving 
 not to lag behind in the irrepressible struggle for empire. 
 (Cheers.) And I must say that they had one great 
 advantage which I am sometimes tempted to envy them. 
 They had among them no unpatriotic aspirants to office — 
 (cheers) — no pohtician soured by failure and jaundiced by 
 the noxious humours of a distempered ambition — (cheers 
 and laughter) — no craven Cassandra gloating in foreign 
 magazines over the ecHpsed glory and superannuated destiny 
 of his country. (Tremendous cheering.) Thus, unfettered 
 and untrammelled, our American kinsmen confronted 
 their troubles with a hope and courage worthy of the 
 Imperial stock which gave them birth. (Cheers.) And the 
 result is before our eyes in a revived trade, decreased 
 taxation, and a prosperous and contented people. (Cheers.) 
 Nor is the case of France less instructive. Struck down 
 from her pride of place, more through her own intestine 
 divisions than by the sword of a conquering army, she 
 has learnt wisdom in the school of adversity. . . . Let 
 us therefore prove ourselves worthy of our ancestors. 
 (Cheers.) Let us not be weary in well-doing. We have 
 inherited a great and glorious Empire. (Cheers.) Let 
 us guard our heritage — let us bequeath it to our children, 
 not merely undiminished, but widened. (Loud applause.) 
 . . . We enjoy the favour of our Empress-Queen. We 
 have the confidence of a great and understanding people. 
 (Loud cheers.) . . . The occasion is urgent, and Her 
 Majesty's Government feel that they may confidently 
 rely on the wisdom and patriotism of a united nation. 
 (Loud and continued applause.) 
 
 And now the great controversy was drawing towards 
 its close, and MacCoU's spirits were cheered by a strong 
 prescience of approaching victory. On April 16, 1879, he 
 wrote : 
 
 ' Nemesis is at last, I am happy to think, close upon the 
 heels of Dizzy's Government ; and I beheve that when 
 the day of reckoning comes the criminal follies of the last
 
 THE EASTERN QUESTION 63 
 
 three years will be avenged by not merely a defeat, but 
 a disastrous rout, at the polls.' 
 
 'November 5, 1879. — I have a greater horror of Disraeli 
 than you appear to have. I believe him to be utterly and 
 entirely uncontrolled by anything like conscience. Another 
 six years of his rule might push this country on an incline 
 which would soon reduce it to the political level of Spain. 
 But I have no doubt that the next Election wiU give a 
 Liberal victory. What I long to see, however, is not 
 simply a Tory defeat, but a Tory rout. And there is 
 only one thing wanting to secure a victory as complete 
 as that of 1868. That one thing is that the Liberal host 
 should go into battle under the leader who won that 
 victory.' 
 
 Gladstone had abdicated the Liberal leadership in 
 January 1875, and had often used language pointing to 
 retirement from politics. But now he said good-bye to his 
 constituents at Greenwich, and entered upon that famous 
 ' Midlothian Campaign ' which, whether he wished it or 
 not, was destined to replace him in power. This time it 
 was to Mrs. Gladstone that MacColl poured forth his 
 soul : 
 
 ^November 27, 1879. — Mr. Gladstone's tour, or rather 
 royal progress, in the North, has clearly settled the question 
 of leadership for him. Whatever his own private opinion 
 may be, the country will have no refusal. That, as far 
 as I can learn, is the universal opinion in London. The 
 extraordinary spell of his name and eloquence ought not to 
 have surprised people, yet it has come upon London society 
 as a new revelation. He never was more powerful than he 
 is at this moment — perhaps never as powerful. It is the 
 reaction caused by three years of calumny, aided by the 
 conviction that he is the one man who had a policy to 
 propound and the courage to propound it.' 
 
 On March 9, 1880, it was announced that Parliament 
 would immediately be dissolved ; on the 11th Sir Stafford 
 Northcote introduced his Budget ; and the dissolution
 
 64 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 actually took place on the 24tli. On the 11th MacColl 
 wrote thus to Gladstone : 
 
 'The motive of the Government in dissolving after 
 producing their Budget puzzles me a little. I suppose 
 they have been cooking their finance. I see that you are 
 to make a speech in Marylebone to-morrow, I think 
 you ought to look at the first two letters in yesterday's 
 Guardian (Correspondence column) on your last speech. 
 The first letter is by a Tory M.P. ; the second, signed 
 " Ex-Tory," is from me. I enclose also a letter from 
 the same M.P. in last week's Church Times, with the 
 proof of a reply which I have sent, and which will appear 
 to-morrow. You need not return it. I believe a very 
 large section of the High Church party, and most of the 
 RituaUsts, will vote for the Liberals. You have vexed 
 some of them by seeming to say that sympathy with the 
 Eastern Christians has been almost entirely confined to 
 the Nonconformists. I know you have not said so ; but 
 busy men, who have not time to follow the details of a long 
 controversy, are apt to be misled by what you are represented 
 to have said. I think you might to-morrow night say a 
 few words which would gain the Liberal party many votes 
 without ahenating any others. 
 
 ' The RituaHsts can turn the scale in several con- 
 stituencies. They did so in Bristol at the last Election. 
 The Tories are trying desperately to win them.' 
 
 Gladstone was now in the thick of the fight, contesting 
 Midlothian, nominally against Lord Dalkeith, but really 
 against all the Conservative forces of Scotland. At the 
 same time, for security's sake, he was nominated for Leeds, 
 where a Liberal victory was assured ; and his youngest son ^ 
 contested Middlesex. 
 
 MacColl wrote thus to his chief : 
 
 ' This note must take its chance of being opened by you. 
 I write it to tell you that I forward by the same post to you 
 a copy of Lord Bath's book on Bulgaria.- He is first cousin 
 » Afterwards Lord Gladstone. - Observations on Bulgarian Affairs.
 
 THE EASTERN QUESTION 65 
 
 to Lord Dalkeith, and perhaps you might quote what he 
 says on the conduct of our Government towards the end 
 of the volume ; also his exposure of Austria. It might 
 possibly be effective to quote a man of his position and 
 independence as entirely on your side. 
 
 ' You asked me some time ago how Lord Bath was going 
 to act in the General Election. He is very modest, and 
 thinks it would be arrogant for him to write such a letter 
 as Lord Derby's to Lord Sefton.^ At the same time he makes 
 no secret at all of his desire to see the Liberals beat the 
 Government. I know that he has told the Duchess of 
 Buccleuch that he sincerely Avishes you success in Midlothian. 
 He has prevented a contest at Frome. But he says that 
 it will take him about five years to undo his work for the 
 Tories in Wiltshire and Somerset. If you return to power 
 as Premier he will sit behind Lord GranviUe. He has told 
 me so. 
 
 ' I hear golden opinions everywhere of your son's 
 candidature in Middlesex. . , . 
 
 ' I sent you the other day a pamphlet of mine of which 
 I am somewhat ashamed.^ The fact is, I found your son 
 in possession of a Tory political catechism full of lies and 
 sophisms ; and, knowing how busy he was, I sat down last 
 Tuesday evening and jotted dawn some replies to the Tory 
 fallacies. I got interested in my work, and determined 
 to write a pamphlet. I sat down at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, and 
 never left my chair till eleven the following morning, except 
 to put coals on the fire. The pamphlet was in the printer's 
 hands at 11.30 on Wednesday, and was out at 7 p.m. on 
 Thursday. I called myself " Clericus " ; but my pubhsher, 
 who is a sterling Liberal, thought a Rector was a " Dignitary," 
 and so he substituted " A Church Dignitary " for " Clericus," 
 thinking it would draw more attention to the pamphlet. It 
 has done so, I find. For people are wondering " Who the 
 Bishop is." My pamphlet is very roughly executed ; for I 
 sent it to the printer without reading over what I had written.' 
 
 ^ On March 15 Lord Derby announced in a public letter to Lord Sefton 
 his separation from the Conservative party. 
 
 - The Liberal Reason Why, explained in a letter to the Marquess of Harting- 
 ton, M.P., by a Church Dignitary. 
 
 9
 
 66 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' April 3, 1880. — You have, no doubt, heard from others 
 of the wonderful enthusiasm created by your son Herbert 
 wherever he appears. I now wish to tell you, from my 
 own personal observation, that no report that has reached 
 you has at all exaggerated the impression w^hich your son 
 has made and is making. I went to his meeting last night 
 at Hounslow, and heard him speak. It was an admirable 
 speech, admirably dehvered, without a single note or a single 
 hesitation. He spoke for about three-quarters of an hour. 
 There were some Jingoes ; but he subdued them with his good 
 humour, self-possession, mastery of his subject, and great 
 readiness of repartee. As an example of the latter, your son 
 chanced to drop the remark that the Tories had an innings 
 of six years. " And we wiU give them a second innings," 
 shouted a Jingo. " My friend," retorted Herbert, " if you 
 apply the rules of cricket to political hfe, I admit that 
 there is something in your observation ; for such is the 
 egregious mess which the Government have made of their 
 first innings that, by the rules of cricket, they ought to 
 follow on." This sally was received with shouts of laughter, 
 and the obstreperous Jingo was silenced for the rest of the 
 evening. The meeting was a crowded one, and full of 
 enthusiasm. 
 
 'This morning I went with Herbert to a crowded and 
 most enthusiastic meeting in the to^n-hall, Holborn — a 
 large room, quite filled. Your son spoke for an hour 
 splendidly, and did not repeat his speech of last evening. 
 The odds are so fearfully against him, owing to his coming 
 so late into the field, that I am afraid to hope for his success. 
 But such is the effect he has produced that his Committee 
 reaUy think he may come in. If he had only a fortnight 
 more, I would back him against any odds. But, in any 
 case, he has made his career. Whether he sits for Middlesex 
 or not in a few days, it is now the belief of everybody that 
 some place must be found for him in the House of Commons. 
 I intend to go with him to aU his meetings to-morrow. Some 
 of the Committee tell me that my presence as a clergyman 
 of the Established Church is useful. I did think that I might 
 be of some use to your son in supplying him occasionally
 
 THE EASTERN QUESTION 67 
 
 with facts in matters of foreign policy. But I find that he 
 is as well up in that subject as I am, and requires no 
 prompting. 
 
 ' We are in great excitement at this Club ^ over the 
 glorious news of continuous victory. Rounds of cheers 
 were elicited an hour ago by the announcement of your 
 splendid majority at Leeds. I should think, on the spur 
 of the moment, that the numbers you have polled are the 
 largest ever given to a Member of Parliament. A subsequent 
 telegram from Leeds says that they expected to place you 
 at the head of the poll, but not by half the majority actually 
 polled for you. I hope Midlothian will follow the good 
 example. A majority of 100 for you in Midlothian 
 would be considered in London a good majority and a 
 great victory ; for the jubilant confidence expressed by the 
 Tories has made Liberals nervous as to your winning at 
 all. They fear the faggots may overwhelm the genuine 
 voters.' 
 
 Having been returned for Leeds, Gladstone was, on 
 April 5, returned also for Midlothian. He decided to sit 
 for the Scottish constituency which he had won by such 
 superhuman exertions, and his son Herbert, defeated in 
 Middlesex, was popped into the vacant seat at Leeds. 
 
 The result of the General Election was an overwhelming 
 victory for Liberalism, and it became evident that Lord 
 Beaconsfield must resign. But who was to succeed him ? 
 Since Gladstone's abdication in 1875, the Liberal party in 
 the House of Lords had been led by Lord Granville, and in 
 the Commons by Lord Hartington. It seemed therefore 
 that, according to constitutional usage, the Queen must 
 turn to one of these two, as being the titular leader of the 
 victorious party ; but the party wanted Gladstone, and 
 would be satisfied with no one else. This sentiment was 
 shared by all except some half-hearted Whigs, and was thus 
 conveyed by MacColl to Gladstone on April 12 : 
 
 ' I do pray and trust that you will not refuse the Premier- 
 ship — at least for a time. Every post brings me letters full 
 
 ' The Devonshire. 
 
 w 2
 
 68 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 of anxiety on that subject, some of them from persons whose 
 names would never occur to you — strong Tories, whose 
 consciences have been stirred by you against the immoral 
 policy of the Government and who have worked hard on 
 the right side. May I say, without impertinence, that you 
 do not belong altogether to yourself ? 
 
 '1. To be Premier once more in this Parliament of 
 reparation for the wrong and folly of 1874 is necessary to 
 the historical and artistic completeness of your political 
 career. This Parliament is your parliament in a more per- 
 sonal sense even than that of 1868. 
 
 ' 2. Your resumption of the Premiership is necessary to 
 complete the lesson administered by the country, or rather 
 by Providence, to the shallow, pampered society of the 
 Metropolis. Forgive my presumption, but I shall really 
 think that you will be flying against Providence if you do 
 not wield the power which He now offers to you. I am sure 
 that His hand is in all this. This sudden collapse of a policy 
 of iniquitous vainglory looks like a divine judgment hurling 
 the proud from their seats of abused power. 
 
 ' 3. You must initiate the new policy in the East as well 
 as the great questions of home legislation. 
 
 ' I always expected a majority, but not such a majority 
 as this. I calculated on 50 or 60. I knew London did not 
 represent the country. You always said so, and I had many 
 proofs of it. In my capacity of secretary to the Russian 
 Sick and Wounded Fund I was brought in contact with 
 most parts of England and Scotland, and I knew the fierce 
 wrath which was welling up against the Government, and 
 which only wanted an opportunity to exhibit its power and 
 volume. I knew the Liberals would work fanatically against 
 the Government, and I have piles of letters from Tories, 
 lay and clerical, vowing vengeance when the day of reckon- 
 ing came. Many causes have, no doubt, concurred to 
 produce the catastrophe, but the predominant cause is the 
 immorality of the Government's foreign policy. That which 
 the Government thought its strength was in fact its weakness. 
 Never did any set of men live more completely in a fool's 
 paradise. Lord Beaconsfield, I know, told the representa- 
 
 i
 
 THE EASTERN QUESTION 69 
 
 tives of Foreign Powers in London that the country would 
 return him his majority intact, if not increased. 
 
 ' Thank God, his career is closed. The verdict of the 
 country has registered " the catastrophe of a sinister 
 career " — to quote his own phrase in the debate which 
 sealed the fate of Sir Robert Peel's last Administration. 
 I have read everything Lord Beaconsfield ever wrote and 
 every speech he ever delivered, and the impression left 
 upon my mind is one of unmitigated loathing for the man. 
 I do not know in English history any character of such 
 unalloyed selfishness as his. His whole life has been one 
 prolonged lie, and an evil influence has been going out of 
 him which has done much to demoralize Society generally, 
 and the upper strata of it particularly.' 
 
 Lord Beaconsfield resigned on April 18. On the 22nd 
 Lord Hartington had an audience of the Queen at Windsor, 
 and another, at which he was accompanied by Lord Gran- 
 ville, on the following day. On the evening of that day — 
 Friday, April 23, 1880 — Gladstone kissed hands as Prime 
 Minister for the second time, and the ' Eastern Question,' 
 which had stirred such violent passions, some noble and 
 some base, was closed by a rightful triumph. 
 
 The foregoing episode in MacColl's life has been nar- 
 rated at full — some may think disproportionate — length, 
 because it was the most important of all the many contro- 
 versies in which, from first to last, he was engaged. That 
 this was so was his own conviction, and in 1884 he wrote : 
 
 ' I consider my part in the Eastern Question controversy 
 the best work of my life, and I will never do anything 
 which implies that I require any whitewashing for that work. 
 I am proud of it, and would do it all over again if the 
 opportunity recurred.' 
 
 Note to Chapter V 
 
 The story of the years covered by the preceding chapter 
 would be incomplete without some reference to the part
 
 70 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 played by Malcolm MacColl in calling public attention to the 
 iniquities of the Afghan War. For the follo"v^dng estimate 
 of his work in that direction I am indebted to the kindness 
 of Lord Bryce, O.M. : 
 
 ' The Afghan question as it emerged in 1878 was one of 
 those in which MacColl worked hardest and did the most 
 effective service. A Committee was formed under the 
 Presidency of Lord Lawrence, then a very old man, but 
 \vith powers still miimpaired, to point out the evils and 
 dangers of the impending war ; and MacColl got up the 
 facts of the case with amazing diligence and accuracy, 
 ploughing through the numerous Blue Books and extracting 
 from them all that was most significant. The result was a 
 book called " The Causes of the Afghan War," of which he 
 was the chief author, and which was then deemed to be a 
 very effective statement of the case. It was widely cir- 
 culated, and had, I think, a considerable effect on public 
 opinion. In going over the ground with Mm, I was pro- 
 foundly impressed by the thoroughness with which he 
 investigated the whole matter and the skill mth which he 
 handled the facts. He was a splendid worker ; and that 
 it was not anti-Mussulman feehng which moved him (as 
 was alleged against liim and the rest of us who opposed 
 Disraeh's pohcy on the Eastern Question in 1876-78) was 
 proved by the fact that here he was stating the case for a 
 Mussulman ruler who was, as we held, being unfairly treated 
 by the then Government of India, or really perhaps rather by 
 the Beaconsfield Government at home.'
 
 CHAPTER VI 
 
 SOME FRUITS OF VICTORY 
 
 You were always sanguine that the country had ' found out ' Lord Beacon 
 field. But here in London people had not found him out. ... I don't wonder 
 at your remembermg the Song of Miriam. — R. W. Chukch. 
 
 The Liberal victory of Easter 1880 was all that the most 
 ardent partizan could desire ; but its fruits were bitterly 
 disappointing. The return of an avowed atheist for North- 
 ampton created difficulties about the Parliamentary oath. 
 The Tories made the most of those difficulties ; the Speaker 
 and the Government alike were unprepared to deal with 
 them ; and even Liberals forgot religious liberty in their 
 dishke of Bradlaugh. Incapable government in Ireland pro- 
 duced a hideous reign of outrage and murder. Vacillating 
 counsels in Egypt plunged us into a needless and dis- 
 creditable war. Through all these troubles MacColl stuck, 
 with touching loyalty, to his chief, and was indefatigable in 
 negotiating, suggesting, and manipulating the Press. These 
 matters will be narrated in due course, but before we come 
 to them a word must be said about MacColl's personal 
 position. His incumbency was a source of constant dis- 
 tress to him, and on November 9, 1881, he wrote to the 
 Premier's Private Secretary: 
 
 ' Suppose I were to resign my living, do you suppose 
 that Mr. Gladstone would be likely to present Mr. Hutton 
 to it ? Pray do not imagine that I am so very unselfish as 
 to wish to give up my hving merely for the purpose of 
 getting Mr. Hutton (whom I have never seen) to succeed 
 
 71
 
 72 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 me. It is true, indeed, that I think the brother of the 
 Editor of the Spectator, being otherwise eligible, deserves the 
 small recognition of a living of £300 or £400 a year. Mr. 
 Baxter, on my suggestion, applied to IVIr. Bright on behalf 
 of Mr. Hutton ; but Mr. Bright refused to entertain the 
 idea. I do think the Liberal party owe a debt of gratitude 
 to the Spectator which they are slow to acknowledge. When 
 such a fervent Jingo and so thorough-going an admirer of 
 Disraeli as ]\Ir. Rowsell gets a Westminster Canonry, a small 
 living to the brother of Hutton of the Spectator does not 
 appear to me to be an extravagant claim. I at least 
 can never forget the brave service of the Spectator to the 
 cause of justice and freedom during the tyranny of Jingo 
 domination. 
 
 ' Still, I do not propose to resign my living with a view to 
 get Mr. Hutton to succeed me. The fact is, I have thought 
 of resigning my living for some time past. My church is one 
 of those that is scheduled to come down eventually, and 
 this fact has smitten my parish with paralysis. I had 
 intended to utiHze it, out-of-the-way and hidden as it is, 
 for week-day services. But in order to do so I should have 
 to get a surpliced choir ; and thn t is impossible without 
 alterations which require a faculty ; and the Bishop and 
 parishioners oppose the faculty on the plea that it would be 
 useless as the church is doomed. As it is, I get no con- 
 gregation, and my Sunday is a day of unspeakable dreariness 
 to me. I am seriously thinking, therefore, of looking out 
 for an eligible curacy where, I am sure, I should be happier 
 than I am in my present hving.' 
 
 On March 30, 1883, he wrote to Gladstone with refer- 
 ence to a deserving friend whose claims he had pressed : 
 
 ' If it is quite impossible for you to give Mr. G 
 
 the living I mentioned, I should not much mind resigning 
 my living in his favour. I shall resign it by-and-by in any 
 case, for I cannot endure the dreariness of having no con- 
 gregation. Probably ;Mr. G would not mind that as 
 
 much as I do ; for I am fonder of preaching than he is.
 
 SOME FRUITS OF VICTORY 73 
 
 I should not be making a great sacrifice ; for I can make 
 more by my pen than my living is worth ; and I much 
 prefer being a curate to being a rector with no congregation. 
 Moreover, I feel that it is morally bad for me to go on 
 drawing an income for which I am doing nothing.' 
 
 Taking MacColl at his word, Gladstone offered him the 
 choice of two livings in the country. He declined them 
 both, but after the second refusal he wrote as follows to 
 the Private Secretary : 
 
 'April 22, 1883. — After leaving you yesterday afternoon 
 I bethought me that I had possibly done wrong in rejecting 
 Mr. Gladstone's suggestion so hastily. One's own inclina- 
 tion is not always the best monitor in matters of duty. So 
 I went straight to the Dean of St. Paul's (whom I consider 
 a man of singularly sound and clear judgment), and laid 
 the whole case before him, determined, if he thought that 
 I ought to accept, that I would go back to Downing Street 
 and recall all that I had said to you. 
 
 • The Dean, however, thought that the following reasons 
 more than justified me in deciding as I did : 
 
 ' 1. The population is 16,000 and the income £600 ; 
 and the population is a scattered one — not concentrated 
 within narrow geographical limits like a London parish. 
 To work such a parish even decently would require a 
 staff of at least six curates at an aggregate cost of £800 a 
 year — that is, £200 more than the whole value of the living. 
 There would of course be offertories ; but to work the parish 
 properly the whole income would certainly go before the 
 incumbent could pocket a farthing of it. 
 
 ' 2. My parochial experience is confined to towns — I may 
 say to London : the slums of Soho, Pimlico, and St. Paul's, 
 Knightsbridge. I understand how to deal with Londoners ; 
 but I have no experience of the country. 
 
 ' 3. I don't wish to give up theological studies 
 altogether; and it would be necessary to do so in such 
 a huge parish. For as the ordinary expenses of the parish 
 would eat up all the income, I should have to devote what- 
 ever spare time I might have to writing for the Press for an
 
 74 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 income. I would much rather go back to a London curacy 
 again ; and indeed it may possibly come to that. I feel 
 that I have wasted twelve years of my ministerial life in my 
 present parish, and, after one last despairing effort to gather 
 a congregation from outside my parish, I mean to resign my 
 living and take a West End curacy. 
 
 ' But I don't know why I should inflict aU this on you ; 
 for my only object in writing to you is to ask you if you 
 will mind telling Mr. Gladstone that I consulted Dean 
 Church after seeing you yesterday, and that he thought 
 that I had come to a right decision for the reasons which 
 I have stated.' 
 
 In the following summer a Canonry of Worcester fell 
 vacant, and on August 7 MacCoU, having been sounded 
 by Gladstone, wrote as foUows : 
 
 ' The Dean of St. Paul's advises me strongly to accept 
 your kind offer of the Worcester canonry, if you find yourseK 
 able to make the offer formally. The truth is, when I 
 determined to throw myself heart and soul into the Eastern 
 Question controversy I pretty well made up my mind to 
 decline any offer of promotion, should such be made to me, 
 by the Crown : partly to safeguard the purity of my own 
 motives ; and partly to put it out of the power of anybody 
 to say that I was influenced by selfish considerations. And 
 if I only had a congregation in my parish, I should be 
 quite happy as I am, and I should at once decline your 
 most generous kindness \\dthout consulting anyone. But 
 the desolation of my Sundays has become intolerable to me. 
 I A\dll therefore take Dean Church's advice, though leaving 
 London will be to me like tearing up my life by the roots. 
 
 ' Your offer took me so much by surprise to-day that I 
 am afraid I forgot to thank you. If I did, pray put it 
 down to the true cause, and believe that I am really most 
 grateful.' 
 
 It will be observed that this gratitude was felt for a 
 contingent and hypothetical offer. Another was chosen for 
 Worcester, and MacColl was left in the seclusion of Botolph 
 Lane. But not for long. In the following summer, Gladstone
 
 SOME FRUITS OF VICTORY 75 
 
 ofiEered him a Canonry at Ripon ; and on July 2, 1884, he 
 replied as follows : 
 
 ' I am sincerely grateful for your kindness in thinking 
 of me. It ia not the emoluments of the post, but the 
 composition of the Chapter, that makes me hesitate. The 
 Dean is a good man ; but he is a member of the Church 
 Association, and I believe that the rest of the Chapter are 
 of the same way of thinking. Mine is a stupid brain 
 which becomes stagnant when I am unhappy ; and I am 
 afraid I should be unhappy at Ripon. I am not afraid 
 of not being able to get on with the Dean and Chapter, for 
 I can generally get on with most people. What I fear is 
 my not being able to do any good there. The unfruitfulness 
 of my City incumbency so weighs on my conscience that I 
 dread to begin any fresh work at the age of fifty unless I see 
 my way to the prospect of doing some good in it before I die. 
 
 ' There is, however, as much responsibility in the rejection 
 of such an offer as you have kindly made to me, as in its 
 acceptance. Can you give me time to place the matter in 
 the hands of the Dean of St. Paul's, and let him decide 
 for me ? He made me promise, two years ago, not to 
 reject an offer of that kind without previous communication 
 ^v-ith him ; and I have such great confidence in his judgment. 
 The Dean is in Northern Italy, and I suppose it would take 
 four or five days to hear from him. 
 
 ' Meanwhile will you kindly look at the enclosed note ? ^ 
 It is a specimen of several similar letters which I have 
 received since I mentioned your book in the Guardian. 
 I wish you could see your way to a new edition. I would 
 gladly take the labour of seeing it through the press off 
 your hands.' 
 
 ' July 5, 1884. — I have just come from St. Paul's Deanery. 
 The Dean returns for certain on Monday^ but not before. 
 There is thus no object in delaying my decision till 
 to-morrow. I therefore give it to you at once. After the 
 best consideration that I can, unaided, give to all the 
 
 1 The letter was from the Rev. R. R. Whytehead, suggesting that Glad- 
 stone's Church Principles considered in their Eestdta ought to be reprinted.
 
 76 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 circumstances, I have decided to accept. It is quite true 
 that the promise I made to the Dean was Hmited to the 
 question of refusal. I am not afraid of getting on with 
 the Dean and Chapter, for I have never found any difficulty 
 in getting on with anybody, however different from myself 
 in opinions. And I am sure that I shall get on with the 
 Bishop. 
 
 ' I will take and abide by the Dean's advice in regard 
 to my City living. The difficulty about it is the heavy bill 
 for dilapidations for which I am liable. 
 
 ' I will add no more, except to thank you for your very 
 great kindness to me, now as always. I shall strive, with 
 God's help, to prove myself not altogether unworthy of it.' ^ 
 
 The foregoing letter shows that, at this juncture, MacCoU 
 had some thoughts of resigning St. George's. However, 
 other counsels prevailed ; and, instead of resigning, he 
 made the ' one last despairing effort ' which he had 
 foreshadowed, and set himself to the task of renewing 
 and decorating his church. The work was carried out 
 with great success, and he began to see prospects of 
 usefulness even in the City. The church was to be reopened 
 on Thursday, October 30, 1884, and he sought to 
 gather his friends around him. On the 28th he wrote as 
 follows to Gladstone : 
 
 ' I am sorry Lord Bath cannot come to my Parochial 
 Luncheon. Sir Stafford Northcote is coming, and Lord 
 Salisbury and Lord Cranbrook would have come if they 
 had not been summoned on that day to attend meetings 
 of Royal Commissions of which they are members. But 
 they alloAv me, as does also Mr. Goschen, to read the letters of 
 sympathy and good wishes which they have written to me. 
 
 ' I do hope you will be able to come. I think you would 
 be interested. You would find the meeting an excellent 
 illustration of your very wise and useful letter to the Bishop 
 of St. Asaph." The leading Nonconformists in my parish 
 
 * He was installed August IG, 18S4 ; and was chosen to represent the 
 Chapter in the Convocation of York October 1, 1900. 
 
 * On Disestablishment.
 
 SOME FRUITS OF VICTORY 77 
 
 will be present, and one of them will respond to the toast of 
 the Nonconformists, which I intend to propose myself. One 
 of my four churchwardens (who are all elected by the rate- 
 payers) is a Jew. He also is a cordial supporter of the 
 improvements which I have made in the service, and will be 
 present at the Luncheon and speak for himseK. Luncheon 
 is at 1 P.M. in Fishmongers' Hall, preceded by Mattins in 
 my church at 11, with sermon by the Dean of St. Paul's. 
 If you could manage to come in for the sermon (about a 
 quarter before 12) I think I can let you hear fair congrega- 
 tional singing. I have had evening services last evening 
 and to-night, which have been very well attended by 
 City people. I really believe that I can now fill my church 
 to the door every Sunday. If you will kindly come on 
 Thursday, it will make my success absolutely certain, and 
 will, I believe, do good far beyond the limits of my parish. 
 The presence and sympathy of both political parties would, 
 moreover, be of immense service to me in any improvements 
 which I may attempt at Ripon during my term of residence.' 
 
 On November 2, 1884, MacColl's close friend, R. H. 
 Hutton, Editor of the Spectator, who had been present at 
 the reopening, thus described it : 
 
 ' Canon MacColl has achieved a remarkable success in 
 the City by uniting with him the Nonconformists of his 
 parish in an earnest effort to enlarge the usefulness of 
 his church in Botolph Lane. On Thursday the Dean of 
 St. Paul's preached in that church a sermon of rare beauty 
 and power on the constant struggle between the downward 
 and the upward forces at work in our world — the steady 
 decay and the steady renovation. After the service a 
 luncheon was given in Fishmongers' Hall, under the 
 auspices of the Fishmongers themselves, in which the unique 
 feature presented itself that High Churchmen and Dissenters 
 appeared together in hearty co-operation for the spiritual 
 good of the parish whose church had just been restored and 
 beautified. 
 
 ' There were able statesmen present. Lord Napier and 
 Ettrick spoke with an ability which made men wonder
 
 78 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 at his habitual silence in the House of I^ords : but, after 
 all, the feature of the festival was the striking mutual 
 respect and goodwill between Canon MacCoU and his 
 Nonconformist ex-Churchwarden, whose speech on the 
 charity which there ought to be amongst Christians of 
 different Churches struck a far deeper note than is usual 
 on such occasions.' 
 
 On December 9, 1884, MacCoU thus reported progress : 
 
 ' I am glad to say that my experiment in the City is 
 answering admirably. I continue to get fair congregations 
 of City people, chiefly men, both morning and evening. 
 I have no doubt that I shall ere long have my church quite 
 full. It is rather unfortunate that I am obliged to go away 
 three months consecutively just as I am getting things 
 into shape. I hope, however, to get a judicious man and 
 good preacher (two essential conditions) as curate. I have 
 received several offers of co-operation from influential City 
 merchants, some of them strangers to me personally. I am 
 sure there is a great work to be done in the City : and 
 I have come to the conclusion that all the City churches 
 may be filled. I trust that Scott Holland will eventually 
 make St. Paul's his headquarters. He might be a great 
 power among City men. They are eager to learn and very 
 ready to make themselves useful. On the whole, I doubt if 
 the prospects of the Church of England have been so bright 
 at any period since the Reformation as they are now, if she 
 will only recognize " the time of her visitation." ' 
 
 All this was cheerful enough ; but at first MacCoU was 
 not very comfortable at Ripon. Before a year was out, 
 he had placed his resignation in the Bishop's hands.i On 
 July 15, 1885, he wrote thus to Gladstone : 
 
 'I consulted Dean Church and Dr. Liddon before 
 resigning , and they approved . Even apart from the questi on 
 of my successor, I was thoroughly out of my element and 
 
 1 The canonries of Ripon are normally in the gift of the Bishop ; but 
 Bishop Bickersteth died on April 15, 1884, and, vacante sede, the right of 
 appointing to the canonry fell to the Crown. Bishop Carpenter succeeded 
 Bickersteth, and it was therefore to him that MacCoU resigned.
 
 SOME FRUITS OF VICTORY 79 
 
 unhappy at Ripon. I was received with the utmost kindness 
 by everybody, and got on excellently with my colleagues 
 in the Chapter. But the town and Cathedral are dominated 
 by a type of Puritanism of which I have read in books, 
 but which I never came across in real life before. The 
 Deans and Canons are good pious men ; but their idea of 
 the Church and of Divine worship is to me a new religion. 
 Their great dread is that people should think too much 
 of Church ordinances. They think it dangerous to have 
 the Holy Communion celebrated oftener than once on 
 Sunday, and it is never celebrated on any other festival 
 except Christmas — not even on Epiphany or Ascension 
 Day. Of course persons who take this view of the Holy 
 Communion cannot be reverent in administering it, though 
 they do not mean to be irreverent. But the slovenliness 
 and irreverence and coldness of the whole thing always 
 made my Sunday to me a day of misery ; and no schoolboy 
 ever longed for the holidays more than I longed for the 
 termination of my three months' residence. 
 
 ' I could not tell you this while you were in office for 
 fear my motive might be misunderstood ; but I don't 
 mind telling it now.^ 
 
 ' Moreover, the Cathedral is the parish church of Ripon ; 
 and while this fact adds greatly to the difficulty of improv- 
 ing matters in the Cathedral, it imposes so much extra- 
 Cathedral work on the Canon in Residence that he has no 
 time at all for private reading. 
 
 ' So you see I am really making no sacrifice in giving 
 up the Canonry. I should be sorry to obtain any credit 
 which I do not deserve. Nothing could have been pleasanter 
 than my life at Ripon socially. But " man doth not live 
 by bread alone." I was told down there that the state of 
 Church matters in Ripon had much to do with Lord Ripon 
 becoming a Roman Catholic. 
 
 ' Kindly consider all this as private. The Dean and 
 
 Chapter of Ripon are very good and religious men in their 
 
 own way, and have been most kind to me ; and I do not 
 
 wish to say anything at all to their prejudice personally. 
 
 * The Liberal Government had resigned June 24, 1885.
 
 80 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 They act according to their lights, and the system in which 
 they were brought up is responsible.' 
 
 But on July 3 he wrote thus from Munich : 
 
 ' I am perplexed about Ripon. The Bishop declines, in 
 most kind terms, to accept my resignation. But I really 
 wish to leave. The state of things there chills and de- 
 presses me beyond measure ; and, moreover, the fact of the 
 Cathedral being the parish church throws so much parochial 
 work on me that I have no time for private reading. I am 
 not, indeed, obliged to do any work outside the Cathedral. 
 But my only opportunity of doing any good there is outside 
 the Cathedral, and I could not let it slip. During my 
 residence there I started some work in the parish, especially 
 services and addresses to working men on weekdays, which 
 were well attended, not only by working men, but by other 
 classes. One of the reasons which the Bishop gives for 
 refusing to accept my resignation is the good which he is 
 good enough to think my addresses did. The fact is, 
 the people down there are utterly untaught, and they are 
 hungering for knowledge. I could not endure my residence 
 there at all except for my extra-Cathedral work. But the 
 result is that between my work at Ripon and in the City, 
 my time for private study and writing is much abridged. 
 
 ' I am afraid I must leave Munich for London next 
 Thursday. There is to be a Chapter Meeting at Ripon on 
 the 14th, and as my resignation is not yet accepted, I am 
 anxious to attend the meeting. I have been trying to get 
 up a Choir School for the Cathedral, and the matter is now 
 under the Chapter's consideration. I have also been trying 
 to separate the Cathedral from the parish. The connexion 
 does harm to both. But I fear the separation of the 
 Cathedral from the parish is a more difficult matter than 
 the getting up of a Choir School.' 
 
 Eventually all scruples and difficulties were removed, 
 and MacColI retained his stall. One of his colleagues in 
 the Chapter writes as follows : 
 
 ' Great expectations had been aroused locally by the
 
 SOME FRUITS OF VICTORY 81 
 
 introduction of so animated a soul as Canon MacColl into 
 the strictly Evangelical and " quietist " Chapter and pulpit 
 of Ripon Cathedral. It was well known that he had strong 
 political affinities at home and abroad, and also that his 
 views on doctrine and his practice in ritual were of the 
 school designated " High." There seemed to be a prospect 
 of stirring sermons and marked innovations. The former 
 were forthcoming and, with them, large congregations, 
 who, both on Sundays and on special weekday occasions, 
 gathered to hear the new Canon. He was not an orator, 
 like the contemporaneous Bishop, but he had stores of theo- 
 logical and liturgical learning, upon which he drew, notably 
 for a course of lectures on the Nicene Creed, afterwards pub- 
 lished and largely circulated. Of new departures, however, 
 in worship, there were none, while the Chapter remained as 
 constituted on his arrival. Then the early Celebrations were 
 on alternate Sundays, as were those at midday ; and in 
 the summer months the Sunday evening services were sus- 
 pended, though the Cathedral was and is the Parish Church. 
 Time, however, has brought the changes in these respects 
 which Canon MacColl much desired. On the public life of 
 the city, except from the pulpit, he did not much impress 
 himself. During his three months of annual residence, 
 he kept mainly to the Cathedral and to his study. He held 
 that a canonry is not so much for active sei'vice in a locality, 
 as for literary contributions to the Church at large. He 
 gave evidence before the Ritual Commission, and he claimed 
 to have determined a vote in the House of Commons by a 
 book on the subject, written as one of the said contributions, 
 and sent at the opportune moment to every Member. 
 
 * Personally, in social life, he is well remembered as 
 most genial host and most welcome guest. At the Residence 
 were to be met all sorts and conditions of men, from Lord 
 (then Mr. Herbert) Gladstone, the serious politician, to Bret 
 Harte the American humorist. He had many friends and 
 not a single enemy — unless it were the " Unspeakable Turk. " ' 
 
 But it is time to return from MacColl's personal fortunes 
 to his political activities.
 
 82 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 As soon as the Parliament which had been elected at 
 Easter 1880 assembled for its first Session, it became 
 apparent that the Front Opposition Bench, of which 
 the presiding spirit was Sir Stafford Northcote, was 
 remarkably weak, and that the fighting elements were 
 gathered below the gangway. ' The Fourth Party ' became 
 the recognized nickname of a group consisting of Lord 
 Randolph Churchill, Sir Jolm Gorst, Sir Henry Drummond- 
 Wolff, and Mr. Arthur Balfour. The history of this small 
 but most effective party may be read in the ' Life of Lord 
 Randolph Churchill ' and the ^vritings of Mr. Harold Gorst. 
 A well-meant but hastily drawn Bill, to pro\ade compensa- 
 tion to Irish tenants arbitrarily evicted, passed the House 
 of Commons and was wrecked in the Lords. There was 
 an immediate outbreak of agrarian outrage in Ireland, 
 and the Tories began to demand some strong measures of 
 repression. ' The Fourth Party ' was busy, and MacColl 
 heard from his friend Lord Bath of some designs to hold a 
 Public Meeting at which the sentiments of that party should 
 be expressed. Hence the following letters to Gladstone : 
 
 'November 18, 1880. — The designs mentioned by Lord 
 Bath seem to me, I confess, too wild even for the " Fourth 
 Party." But the Tories have done so many wild things 
 of late that almost anything is credible.' 
 
 ' November 19, 1880. — I have just received a note from 
 Lord Bath in which he says that he has ascertained " that 
 whatever the Fourth Party may desire, the bulk of the 
 Conservative party wish for the present to remain quiet." 
 He is therefore anxious that what he told me about a 
 meeting in London shoidd be kept strictly confidential. 
 
 ' If there was any doubt before, surely there can be none 
 now, that the Government could not, if they tried, carry a 
 coercion Bill on this side of Christmas. Lord Randolph 
 Churchill plainly avowed in his speech at Portsmouth 
 yesterday that not only the " Fourth Party," but Sir 
 Stafford Northcote also, would resist any attempt to hmit 
 the arts of Obstruction. 
 
 ' Gavan Duffy reminds us that it took Sir Robert Peel
 
 SOME FRUITS OF VICTORY 83 
 
 three months to carry his Irish Arms Bill in 1843. Yet the 
 art of Obstruction was then in its infancy as compared with 
 its recent development.' 
 
 The contemplated insurrection of the Fourth Party 
 came, for the moment, to naught ; and MacCoU transferred 
 his activities to the ecclesiastical sphere. Arthur Penrhyn 
 Stanley, for eighteen years the much-loved Dean of West- 
 minster, died on July 18, 1881. On August 3 MacColl 
 wrote thus to Gladstone : 
 
 ' How would it do to translate Dean Church from 
 St. Paul's to the Abbey ? Hutton of the Spectator thinks it 
 would be an admirable appointment, and would be generally 
 recognized as such. It would be keeping up the Hterary 
 tradition of the Abbey and putting at its head at the same 
 time a man who, I beheve, has no enemy, and who would 
 make the Abbey as great a power at the West End as 
 St. Paul's is in the East. No man in England is so well 
 fitted for the place as Church ; not even Liddon. 
 
 * Would he accept it ? He is so good a man that I beheve 
 he would do exactly what he thought best for the Church. 
 
 ' I apologize for venturing to make the suggestion. 
 I thought it might be worth while sending it to you as it 
 came from an orthodox Broad Churchman hke Mr. Hutton. 
 I think it probable that he will give expression to it in the 
 Spectator.'' 
 
 The following letter, dated January 16, 1882, has an 
 interest of a different kind : 
 
 ' Three of my guests this evening you know, namely Lord 
 Rosebery, Sir Henry James, and Sir William Harcourt. The 
 rest of my guests are Mr. Johnstone Bevan, an able and 
 learned country squire and High Churchman ; erewhile a 
 strong Tory, but now an ardent Liberal through your 
 exertions on the Eastern Question. Mr. Case, a distin- 
 guished Oxford man, once a curate at All Saints', Margaret 
 Street ; then a 'vert ; studied three years in Rome in the 
 Jesuit College, where he was Passagha's favourite pupil ; 
 took his degree there in high honours, and then attended 
 
 Q 2
 
 84 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Passaglia's lectures for two years more ; then joined the 
 Jesuits, but left them after a year's novitiate, and became 
 "Canon" Case in charge of a Roman Catholic congregation 
 at Gloucester. Vaticanism upset him, and he is now a 
 theist unattached. Mr, Cassels, unknown to the world 
 at large, but a remarkable man. He is the author of 
 " Supernatural Religion." But this is a secret which 
 even his publisher does not know. I discovered it 
 from my intimacy with him and from our having often 
 discussed questions together. He is one of those men 
 whom Calvinism (the religion of their unreflecting years) 
 has driven into infidelity. He is very cultivated and one 
 of the best and most self-sacrificing men I ever knew ; 
 unmarried, wealthy, fond of sport, and an Agnostic ; yet 
 so pure and unselfish. Is not the goodness of such men 
 more noble than that of most Christians ? And must we 
 not believe, in the words of the " Wise Woman "of Tekoah, 
 that in the case of men who, like my friend, do good with- 
 out seeking a reward here or hereafter, God "doth devise 
 means that His banished be not expelled from Him" ? 
 
 ' October 28, 1882. — Did you read the article in the Pall 
 Mall Gazette which I enclose ? ^ I suppose it is Morley's ; and 
 yet I am surprised that he should betray such fear of honest 
 inquiry. But the fact is that some of the most eminent 
 men in the ranks of scepticism are themselves guilty of some 
 of the worst faults which they charge against theologians. 
 Apropos of the Pall Mall article, I have written an article on 
 " Ghost-Stories " in to-day's Spectator, chiefly for the purpose 
 of pubHshing a remarkable dream which was told at Glamis 
 Castle one evening lately, when I was there, by a Major 
 Egerton, whom you may chance to know. He is equerry to 
 the Duke of Connaught, and his wife is lady-in-waiting to the 
 Duchess. The story is as well authenticated as it is curious, 
 and I cannot imagine how Morley would account for it.' 
 
 Parliament had reassembled, after two months' adjourn- 
 ment, on October 24, 1882. The new Rules of Procedure, 
 
 On the Supernatural. ^, 
 
 1
 
 SOME FRUITS OF VICTORY 85 
 
 rendered necessary by obstruction, were under discussion, 
 and on November 2 MacColl wrote to Gladstone : 
 
 ' I really believe that Lord Randolph Churchill is the 
 coming leader of the Tory party. His last night's speech 
 strikes me as far and away ahead of any of his previous 
 efforts.' 
 
 Gladstone was unwell in the Christmas recess of 1882-3, 
 and Avent to Cannes on a visit to Lord Wolverton, formerly 
 Liberal Whip. MacColl was ready with wise counsel. 
 
 February 5, 1883. 
 
 ' Dear Lord Wolverton, — The Daily Neivs of to-day 
 says that it is not yet settled when Mr. Gladstone is to leave 
 Cannes. Could you not manage to keep him, if not till the 
 end of this month, at least for a week after Parliament opens. 
 It would be a blessing if he could be away till after the 
 Bradlaugh row at the opening of Parliament, and also after 
 the (I fear) long debate on the Address. 
 
 'I know that there is a strong feeling in the Liberal 
 party that, for the sake of the party, he should prolong his 
 holiday till Easter ; for it is not expected that any extra- 
 ordinary leadership will be required before then. The truth 
 is, Mr. Gladstone's recent exhaustion has opened people's 
 eyes to the calamity of his possible retirement, and there is a 
 strong feeling that he should husband his strength as much 
 as possible. But if he stayed away even only to the end of 
 February there would be general satisfaction. 
 
 ' Yours sincerely, 
 
 'Malcolm MacColl.' 
 
 Before long, Gladstone was back again in renewed health, 
 and was preparing a Bill to substitute an Affirmation for the 
 Oath required of Members of Parliament. MacColl wrote to 
 him on April 18, 1883 : 
 
 ' The writer of the enclosed letter is Head Master of 
 Woodard's Middle Class Schools, and is in his way a repre- 
 sentative man.^ Is it impossible for the Government to 
 
 1 The Rev. E. G. Lowe.
 
 86 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 restrict the Bill to future elections ? The retrospective 
 character of the Affirmation Bill does not touch the merits 
 of the question, and therefore does not affect my opinion. 
 But it does influence a number of people, and much of the 
 opposition to the Bill would, I am confident, vanish if its 
 retrospective action were struck out. Nor could Mr. Brad- 
 laugh object ; for he has, more than once, offered to resign 
 and stand again, if an Affirmation Bill were passed. 
 
 ' I am sorry and surprised to see names like Mr. Wilkin- 
 son's (the Bishop-elect of Truro), Dr, Hannah, and Dr. 
 Stubbs attached to the petition against the Affirmation Bill. 
 I cannot understand intelligent clergymen taking so suicidal 
 a line. ' ' 
 
 ' I think the enclosed letter will interest you.^ I felt 
 sure that Newman would not take Manning's line on the 
 Parliamentary oath. For no writer has insisted so often 
 and so earnestly as Newman that half-truths, set forth 
 as whole truths, are the most mischievous forms of error. 
 I wrote to him accordingly to ask him whether he did 
 not think that the Parliamentary oath belonged to the 
 mischievous category of half-truths ; and if so, whether 
 he would let me publish his opinion. Assuming that he 
 knew the aim and object of the Affirmation Bill, I merely 
 enclosed a copy of my second letter to the Guardian on the 
 subject. His curious mistake makes his opinion all the more 
 valuable ; for it shows that he thinks the Government 
 would act rightly even if it went so far as to insist on the 
 entire abolition of the oath. 
 
 ' I have written to Cardinal Newman again, and ventured 
 to urge reasons why he ought to allow his opinion to be made 
 public. But in any case, if Manning should carry out his 
 intention of publishing a Protest against the Affirmation 
 Bill, in his own name and in the names of the English Roman 
 Catholic bishops, it will be safe to call emphatic attention 
 to the absence of Newman's name from the Protest. 
 
 ' I have received showers of letters from clergymen all 
 over the country urging me to circulate a petition in the 
 
 1 See'p. 306.
 
 SOME FRUITS OF VICTORY 87 
 
 sense of my letters to the Guardian. But I cannot afford 
 either the time or the money that would be necessary to 
 work such a petition properly ; and, besides, it would now 
 be too late. 
 
 ' If you speak on the Affirmation Bill, may I take the 
 liberty of suggesting that it would be well to lay stress on 
 the present oath being too vague to offer a safeguard for 
 belief even in a personal God, much less in the God of 
 Christianity since the expulsion of the words " on the true 
 faith of a Christian." I know that this aspect of the 
 question tells with many. Some of those who signed the 
 Petition against the Bill have written to tell me that they 
 would not have signed if they had read my letters pre- 
 viously. The clergy are, for the most part, like a flock 
 of sheep, following blindly a few leaders.' 
 
 Gladstone's speech on the Affirmation Bill, delivered 
 on April 26, was, by common consent, one of his finest 
 performances. Some of those who were favourable to 
 the Bill printed this speech, and sent a copy to every 
 beneficed clergyman in England, Scotland, and Ireland. 
 The following acknowledgment was returned by an un- 
 convinced divine : 
 
 ' My Dear Sir, — I have received your recommendation 
 to read carefully the speech of Mr. Gladstone in favour 
 of admitting the infidel Bradlaugh into Parliament. I did 
 so when it was delivered, and I must say that the strength 
 of argument rests with the Opposition. I fully expect in 
 the event of a dissolution the Government will lose between 
 fifty and sixty seats. Any conclusion can be arrived at, 
 according to the premises laid doAvn. Mr. G. avoided the 
 Scriptural lines and followed his own. All parties knew 
 the feeling of the country on the subject, and, notwith- 
 standing the bullying and majority of Gladstone, he was 
 defeated. 
 
 ' Before the Irish Church was robbed, I was nomi- 
 nated to the Deanery of Tuam, but Mr. Disraeli resigning, 
 I was defrauded of my just right by Mr. Gladstone, and 
 my wife, Lady Z, the only surviving child of an Earl,
 
 88 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 was sadly disappointed ; but there is a just Judge above. 
 The letter of nomination is still in my possession. 
 
 * I am, dear sir, 
 
 ' Yours faithfully, 
 
 ' X. Y. Z.' 
 
 It is highly characteristic of Gladstone that, when this 
 letter was shown to him by its recipient as a specimen of 
 epistolary oddity, he read it, not with a smile, but with a 
 portentous frown, and, handing it back, sternly asked, 
 ' What does the fellow mean by quoting an engagement 
 entered into by my predecessor as binding on me ? ' 
 
 On November 5, 1883, MacColl wrote privily from 
 Hawarden to the Editor of the Daily News : ' As far as 
 I can make out, nothing is settled about the Speakership, 
 or any rearrangement of Government offices. ^ If I hear 
 more, I will drop you a line. ... I shall have more 
 opportunity of talking alone with Mr. G. after most of 
 the visitors are gone, and, if I hear any news, I will let you 
 know.' 
 
 By the 23rd he was back in London, and wrote again 
 to the Editor : ' I am writing to you just now to tell you 
 in confidence what may interest you. I was calling at 
 Mr. Gladstone's yesterday evening, just as the Cabinet 
 Council began to meet. Mr. Gladstone came into the 
 drawing-room. Mrs. G. said : " What a dreadful piece of 
 news this is from the Soudan ! " " Yes — for the Eg3rptian 
 Government," said Mr. G. " But," said she, " will 
 it not affect our position ? " " Not in the least," said 
 he. " It is a piece of folly on the part of the Egyptian 
 Government to attempt to exercise dominion in that 
 region." ' i* 'f» 'J 
 
 The chief event of 1884 was the admission of the 
 Agricultural Labourers to the Parliamentary Franchise. 
 Gladstone introduced the Franchise Bill on February 2 ; 
 it passed the House of Commons by large majorities, but 
 when, at the beginning of July, it reached the House of 
 
 ^ In the following February Mr. Speaker Brand was succeeded by 
 Mr. Speaker Peel,
 
 SOME FRUITS OF VICTORY 89 
 
 Lords, the Lords demurred to passing it until they knew 
 the details of the redistribution of seats which must 
 necessarily accompany an extension of the suffrage. 
 
 At this juncture, Mac Coll thought that he might intervene 
 with good effect, and he wrote as follows to the leader of 
 the Conservative party : 
 
 July 7, 1 884. 
 
 ' Dear Lord Salisbury, — I am going to take a very 
 great liberty — a liberty which may justly merit the imputa- 
 tion of presumption and impertinence. I can only throw 
 myself on your kindness for forgiveness, begging you to 
 believe at least in my sincerity and in the goodness of my 
 intentions. 
 
 ' It has for a long time been a dream of mine to see you 
 at the head of a great party (when Mr. Gladstone retired) 
 combining the best elements in Conservatism and Liberalism. 
 The controversy on the Eastern Question was the fu*st check 
 which my hopes received. The bitterness and antipathies 
 caused by that controversy have now, I am glad to think, 
 nearly vanished ; and, if the question of the franchise could 
 be settled without an exciting agitation, I see no reason 
 why my dream should not be fulfilled. May I venture to 
 put down, as briefly as I can, what I think on that subject ? 
 I know how insignificant I am ; but the mouse in the 
 fable was able to nibble away the meshes of the net which 
 had defied the strength of the lion. Men occupying a 
 humble position may sometimes have opportunities of obser- 
 vation which are not equally in the reach of those above 
 them. 
 
 ' I quite understand your Lordship's objection to a 
 Franchise Bill apart from a Redistribution scheme. The 
 question is whether the danger you apprehend is likely 
 to be diminished by the summary rejection of the Bill on 
 the Second Reading. Let us look at the probabilities. 
 
 ' If the Bill is now rejected it will unquestionably be 
 sent again to the Lords ; whether this year or next is, I 
 believe, still a moot question with the Cabinet. Meanwhile 
 there will be a great agitation, marked, I fear, by great
 
 90 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 bitterness against the Lords and the Conservative party 
 generally. 
 
 ' It will be difficult for the Lords to yield without loss 
 of credit if the Bill is sent up to them (as it will be) after a 
 strong agitation. I will therefore assume that they will 
 reject it a second time. That would of course compel a 
 Dissolution on the present Franchise. And then ? I believe 
 the Conservatives would gain considerably in the Counties 
 and lose considerably in the Boroughs. Let us assume that 
 the losses and gains of the two parties would then be pretty 
 evenly balanced. In Ireland the Conservatives would lose 
 much more than the Liberals because they have much more 
 to lose. On the whole I believe that the Conservatives would 
 return from the contest with diminished numbers. So 
 would the Liberals. The great gainer would be Parnell. 
 He would come back with a following large enough to 
 make him master of the situation. How would he use his 
 majority ? Undoubtedly I believe in favour of the Liberals 
 until the question of both Franchise and Redistribution was 
 settled. Then he would probably avail himself of the first 
 opportunity to turn the Government out. A Redistribution 
 Bill proposed under suchcircumstances would be certain 
 to be a great deal more extreme than any likely to be 
 proposed next Session. 
 
 ' The Lords would then be powerless, for the Bill would 
 be the response to the appeal which they had themselves 
 forced. 
 
 '.But suppose the Lords were to pass the Franchise 
 Bill this Session ? The Government would of course intro- 
 duce their Redistribution Bill next Session. My own 
 belief is that a Redistribution Bill passed next Session by 
 the present Government would be more moderate than any 
 which the Government can ever propose again, and also 
 more moderate than any which a Conservative Government 
 would be able to pass. The Conservative would have many 
 allies on the Liberal side to make the Bill a moderate one 
 before it reached the Lords ; while the Lords would, in virtue 
 of their forbearance now, have established a right to have 
 a good deal to say on the question of Redistribution,
 
 «OME FRUITS OF VICTORY 91 
 
 I believe, too, that Mr. Gladstone's own views on the ques- 
 tion of Redistribution are moderate. When the secrets of his 
 administration are disclosed, I believe it will be found that 
 his has been the most Conservative influence in his own 
 Cabinet. It was certainly so on the question of the Irish 
 Land Act, He was one of the last men to give way, for 
 example, on the question of the " Three F's." ^ 
 
 ' Then consider this. Mi*. Gladstone is weary of official 
 life and longs to retire. His intention when he took office 
 this time was to retire in two years. That intention was 
 frustrated by the Phoenix Park murders. The troubles 
 in Egypt kept him in office the following year and then 
 (under pressure) he determined to remain till the Franchise 
 Bill was passed. 
 
 ' But, if a Dissolution is forced on that question, Mr. 
 Gladstone will be obliged to lead his party in the General 
 Election. I verily believe that that will mean a gain of at 
 least twenty seats to the Liberals. 
 
 ' Moreover I doubt whether the new voters will be so 
 generally Liberal or Radical as many people imagine, if the 
 Bill is passed now. If it is rejected now, the new voters are 
 certain to revenge themselves on the Conservative party as 
 soon as they get the chance. I spent part of the Whitsun- 
 tide vacation at Hawarden, and in the course of conversa- 
 tion one day with Mr. Gladstone I said, with the view of 
 drawing him out : "I suppose you would be rather glad 
 if the Lords threw out the Franchise Bill." " Glad ! " he 
 said. " Why should I be glad ? " " Because," I answered, 
 " there would probably be such an agitation that you would 
 be able to carry both the Franchise and the Redistribution 
 next Session." " Yes," he said, " but something else 
 might be carried besides. The Dissolution would necessarily 
 turn on the House of Lords, and who can tell where the 
 agitation would end ? Few men relish a revolution at my 
 time of life." 
 
 ' If the Lords reject the Bill and a disaster ensue to the 
 Conservative party, they will all make you their scapegoat, 
 
 ^ ' The Three F'b ' was a short way of expressing Fair Rents, Fixity of 
 Tenure, and Free Sale.
 
 92 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 and my dreams about you will never be realized. You have 
 even now many enemies in your own camp. So had 
 Gladstone for a long time ; but he is now too firmly seated 
 in the saddle to be upset till he chooses to dismount. Your 
 Lordship has had no time or opportunity yet to establish 
 your authority. 
 
 ' I ask pardon for my impertinence, and I beg you to 
 beUeve that I am very grateful for the kindness and forbear- 
 ance which I have received from Lady Salisbury and yourself. 
 I have written this letter Avithout the knowledge of any one, 
 and I hope your Lordship will regard it as confidential. 
 
 ' I remain with much respect, dear Lord Salisbury, 
 ' Yours very gratefully and sincerely, 
 
 'Malcolm MacColl.' 
 
 The amendment, postponing the Franchise Bill till the 
 scheme of Redistribution was known, was carried in the 
 House of Lords on July 8. On the 11th Lord Salisbury 
 wrote as follows : 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — The extreme pressure of corre- 
 spondence during the last few days has compelled me to 
 postpone answering your letter, till the issue to which it 
 referred has been some time decided. 
 
 ' I was not the less obhged to you for the kindness of 
 its tone to me, though, on reflection, I felt obliged to take 
 a different view of my duty from that which you had formed. 
 
 ' On the personal question to which you give a good deal 
 of prominence, I look at the matter from a wholly distinct 
 point of view. The position which you, too indulgently, 
 contemplate for me is one for which I am in no way fit. 
 To be the leader of a large party — still more to be the 
 leader of anything resembHng a coalition — requires in a 
 large measure the gifts of pliancy and optimism ; and I, 
 unfortunately, am very poorly endowed in either respect. 
 
 ' Nor again can I imagine any motive for action in the 
 fear that my party, as you rather prognosticate, wiU throw 
 me over. I do not think such an issue by any means 
 impossible. But the idea is not deterrent : on the contrary, 
 it is a soothing prospect to dwell upon — ^like the mirage
 
 SOME FRUITS OF VICTORY 93 
 
 in the desert. English pohtics keep hold of those who are 
 in them, because the framework of modern life is so tight 
 that men find it hard to change their pursuits. But to 
 those who know EngUsh politics well, they are not attractive 
 — their highest rewards confer no real power. The strongest 
 men — you give me an instance in Mr. Gladstone and the 
 " Three F's " — have to carry out ideas that are not their own. 
 And they fill life up with an incessant labour, which to those 
 who are not blessed with optimism leaves behind it the 
 feeling of an almost unmingled waste of time. As to the 
 more political portion of the question, the case is very 
 simple. I quite recognise the danger of defeat which attends 
 the course we have selected. Various men will variously 
 estimate the extent of that danger ; but its existence no 
 one can doubt. But the alternative which Mr. Gladstone 
 presented to us was the absolute effacement of the Con- 
 servative party. It would not have re-appeared, as a 
 political force, for thirty years. 
 
 ' This conviction, to which, after careful study, I came, 
 greatly simplified for me the computation of risks. An 
 element of popularity, more or less, in our " platform " 
 was wholly immaterial, if the constituencies were to be 
 so arranged, but our platform had not the sUghtest chance 
 of being received. 
 
 ' Believe me, 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 Unsuccessful but undefeated, MacColl returned to the 
 charge : 
 
 ' Dear Lord Salisbury, — I am deeply touched by your 
 letter ; first, by your kindness in writing me at aU, a kindness 
 which I hardly expected, for I felt that my letter to you 
 was presumptuous and impertinent, however little I intended 
 it to be so ; secondly, by your writing to me so frankly and 
 at the same time so fully. I perceive from your letter that 
 I have laid myself open to misconception on one or two points 
 and should like to put myself straight.
 
 94 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' I wrote hurriedly, and I cannot recall distinctly all 
 I said. But I did not mean to say that " your party would 
 throw you over " in any case ; and for the simple reason that 
 I don't think your party can do anything of the kind, except 
 with your own consent. How could they ? They have 
 nobody of your intellectual stature to put in your place. 
 
 ' As I am writing to you confidentially, I may tell you 
 that that is also Mr. Gladstone's opinion. I was with him 
 at Hawarden when Lord Beaconsfield died. Forster spent 
 a day there at the same time, and I remember a conversation 
 between him and Mr. Gladstone on the subject of the 
 Conservative leadership. Forster expressed himself strongly 
 in favour of Sir Stafford Northcote. Mr. Gladstone, who 
 likes Sir Stafford personally, differed from Forster. He 
 said, " The strongest man in the party is Salisbury, and 
 I think a party should always be led by its strongest man. 
 No doubt, it is a great disadvantage to Lord Sahsbury to 
 be in the House of Lords. Still, if he cares for the leadership 
 he must have it ; his party cannot afford to throw him 
 over.'* 
 
 ' May I tell you another anecdote ? In the year 1879 
 (I think) I chanced to dine at IVIr. Gladstone's in Harley 
 Street. It was a mixed party ; there were several Liberals, 
 two Conservatives, our foreign Diplomatist. During dinner 
 poor Hayward (who had a biting tongue) attacked you 
 somewhat bitterly for taking office under Lord Beaconsfield 
 after all you had said against him. Some others joined in 
 the attack. Then Mr. Gladstone broke in and said : "I 
 don't agree with you at all. I think it was Lord SaUsbury's 
 duty to take office under Lord Beaconsfield, and I remember 
 saying as much to Lady Sahsbury at the time. Lord Sahsbury 
 was not likely to become a Liberal ; as an independent 
 member of the House of Lords he would have been powerless ; 
 and the only way in which he would serve his country was 
 by taking office in the only possible Conservative Ministry. 
 Nobody can dishke Lord Sahsbury's present foreign policy 
 more than I do, but I do not despair of him, and I regard 
 his reputation as part of the heritage of England." I do not 
 profess to tell you what he said with verbal accuracy,
 
 SOME FRUITS OF VICTORY 95 
 
 though I am sure I have given it with substantial correctness. 
 But the words which I have itahcized are Mr. Gladstone's 
 actual words. I remember them distinctly, for they made 
 a vivid impression upon me. 
 
 ' It is pleasant to recall these things in the midst of so 
 much controversy. I have often heard Mr. Gladstone speak 
 kindly of you in private, never bitterly. Only two months 
 ago I dined in his company when one of those present tried 
 to get a " rise " out of him in connexion with your name ! He 
 passed over the question lightly, merely saying : " I can't 
 help feeling a sneaking kindness for Lord Salisbury. He 
 has always interested me. He did the very first time 
 I met him long ago, when he was a bright little fellow not 
 yet in his teens." 
 
 ' I hope I am not impertinent in repeating this. But 
 the truth is that yourself and JNIr. Gladstone are the only 
 living statesmen who interest me in any marked degree. I 
 am an impulsive Highlander, given, like the rest of my race, 
 to hero-worship ; and I am disposed to beUeve in men more 
 than in parties. Mr. Gladstone and your Lordship (if I 
 may presume to say so) have more in common in your 
 characters than perhaps either of you imagine ; and one 
 of the gifts which you appear to me to have in common 
 is an extraordinary faculty for giving ludicrously false 
 impressions of yourselves to multitudes of people who do 
 not know you. I suppose it is part of the penalty which 
 genius must pay for its splendid prerogatives. 
 
 ' I don't remember what I said to lead you to suppose 
 that I believed your party "would throw you over." What 
 I meant was that, if any disaster befell the party through 
 the rejection of the Franchise Bill, they would hold your 
 Lordship responsible and yield you a grudging allegiance. 
 I don't think it is within their power to throw you over ; 
 but they might thwart and desert you on occasions, 
 while still professing their general loyalty ; and I doubt 
 whether you would brook that. For my own part, I do 
 not see what a man occupying your position has to gain 
 by leading a poUtical party. I do not refer to your rank 
 and wealth only, but also to those varied intellectual
 
 96 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 resources from which you would probably derive more real 
 pleasure than from the worrying pursuits of political life. 
 
 ' I hope the amendment proposed by Lord Wemyss 
 ofifers a compromise.^ Would there be anything derogatory 
 to the Conservative party in accepting it ? One thing I can 
 tell your Lordship for certain. The Radicals are in a panic 
 lest Mr. Gladstone will accept it ; and the advanced spirits 
 among them are very angry with him for having left the door 
 of compromise still open on Friday night. They believe 
 that they have now the ball at their feet. No doubt you 
 would be attacked by that portion of the Press if you were 
 to make any concession now ; but the bitterness of this 
 attack would be the measure of their disappointment. 
 A leading Radical said to me yesterday, " I hope to God 
 Gladstone is not going to be so foolish as to give the peers 
 another chance, we shall never have so good a cry again." 
 
 ' I have known Mr. Gladstone since I was a boy, and 
 my experience of him is that he is exceedingly accessible 
 on the generous side of his nature. If you were to find some 
 way of passing the Franchise Bill now, and then put Mr. 
 Gladstone on his honour to deal fairly with the question of 
 Redistribution, I believe that he would meet you half way, 
 and would run the risk of seriously offending some of his 
 own party in order to pass a fair Redistribution Bill. I 
 believe that a more moderate Bill may be passed now than 
 can ever be passed again, even by the Conservatives. I am 
 sure that Mr. Gladstone would like to retire into private 
 life with the goodwill of both parties. He is the only Liberal 
 leader who can compel the Radicals to accept a moderate 
 Bill. Lord Hartington would be obliged to be more extreme 
 than Mr. Gladstone. In no other way could he secure the 
 obedience of the Radical wing, and I am not sure that he is 
 himself by any means so Conservative as Mr. Gladstone. 
 What is old, venerable, and picturesque does not appeal 
 to his imagination half so powerfully as it does to Mr. 
 Gladstone's. Moreover, Mr. Gladstone has now no motive 
 
 ^ In favour of passing the Franchise Bill at once, and dealing with 
 Redistribution in the autumn Session;
 
 SOME FRUITS OF VICTORY 97 
 
 to be extreme. His oaniest longing is to be alloAved to 
 retire from public life. Political strife is no longer an 
 exciting pleasure to him ; it is a bore. . . . 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Malcolm MacColl.' 
 
 July 21, 1884. 
 
 ' Dear Lord Salisbury, — Your letter to me the other 
 day was so noble that I felt strongly tempted to show it to 
 Mr. Gladstone. 
 
 ' I felt sure that it would appeal to the best instincts and 
 feelings of his nature, and it always pains me to see you two 
 whom I admire so much opposed to each other. My first 
 impulse was to write to you to ask your permission to 
 let me show your letter to Mr. Gladstone, but on reflection 
 I felt that I would thereby be placing you in a false position. 
 
 'At last, after considering the matter carefully and read- 
 ing your letter over several times to see if it contained 
 anything that you could object to Mr. Gladstone seeing, 
 and arriving at the conclusion that it did not, I made up 
 my mind to show it to him ; so that he might see that you 
 were not influenced by any personal considerations. I put 
 your letter inside an envelope with a note from myself 
 begging him to read it, but to let no eye but his own see it, 
 and to send it back to me direct from himself. I took the 
 letter myself so that it might not pass through the hands 
 of a secretary. Mr. Gladstone took it with him into the 
 country last Saturday week, and returned it to me from 
 the country with a letter which you may like to see, and 
 which I therefore beg to enclose.-^ 
 
 July 13, 1884. 
 
 ^ ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I have read Lord Salisbui^'s letter with a great 
 deal of interest and with considerable sj-mpalh}' on important points. I have 
 always believed, and expressed the belief, that he is not governed by personal 
 ambition : and I agree strongly with him as to the unsatisfying character of 
 political life. There is something to which every heart must answer sympa- 
 thetically in his remarks on his own qualities. 
 
 ' It has repeatedly occurred to my mind of late that his judgment on a Redis- 
 tribution Bill may he (in my view) warped from his using the lights of his 
 personal experience in the House of Commons with the very natural assump- 
 tion that they are a safe guide to the present situation. But the fact is that, 
 since ho carried his brilliant gifts to the House of Peers, a change which may 
 
 a
 
 98 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' I hope you do not think that I have acted dishonourably. 
 It is my earnest wish that Mr. Gladstone and your Lordship 
 should appreciate each other's virtues at the beginning of a 
 controversy into which I fear others will infuse bitterness 
 enough. I know that Mr. Gladstone is very anxious to 
 keep the controversy within moderate limits ; he deprecates 
 attacks on the House of Lords. His letter (which I enclose) 
 gives, I think, a somewhat different complexion to that 
 sentence in his Foreign Office speech,^ on which your Lordship 
 has more than once commented — quite fairly in my opinion. 
 I have more than once heard Mr. Gladstone lament his 
 own defect in not being able always to say precisely what he 
 means ; neither more nor less ; a faculty in which he thinks 
 Lord Palmerston and Mr. Parnell excel more than any 
 public speakers of whom he has any experience. The truth 
 is, Mr. Gladstone takes a desponding view of the future 
 of the House of Commons as a legislative machine, unless 
 some large changes are made in its procedure. He believes 
 that it will be extremely difficult for any Government, 
 whether Liberal or Tory, to pass any Bill giving wide scope 
 for discussion, if it is opposed by a few men on the Opposition 
 side in combination with the Irish. He has often wished 
 you back in the House of Commons, especially since Disraeli 
 left that House. He beheves it would be much easier to 
 conduct pubhc business if you were sitting opposite him. 
 
 ' I apologize most humbly for the great hberty which 
 I have taken, and I hope your Lordship will at least beheve 
 that my intentions have been honourable. I have no selfish 
 feehng in this matter. I am not a strong political partisan. 
 The only political questions in which I have taken an 
 active part have been the Irish Question and the Eastern, 
 
 be called fundamental has come in among us through the growth of business in 
 a measure, but mainly through the arts of obstruction. These arts it is not 
 required for the leaders to practise. The vain and obstreperous, or ambitious 
 men, under a silent permission, and with the fine teaching and intermittent 
 help of the Irish, do it all for them. The consequence of this state of things 
 is that no very wide and complex Bill can now be passed in defiance of the 
 Opposition. Hence flows my doctrine that we have not a chance for a Redis- 
 tribution Bill unless the Opposition has some motive for treating it with mercy. 
 
 ' Yours sincerely, 
 
 • W. E. Gladstone.* 
 1 At a meeting of the Liberal party on May 29.
 
 SOME FRUITS OF VICTORY 1)0 
 
 and both have always seemed to me to have to do with 
 morals and religion as much as with politics. 
 
 ' I remain, dear Lord Salisbury, with many apologies 
 and much respect, 
 
 ' Yours sincerely and faithfully, 
 
 ' Malcolm MacColl.' 
 
 July 24, 1884. 
 
 ' Dear Lord Salisbury, — I was present at the dinner ^ 
 last evening at which Mr. Chamberlain spoke, and I took 
 some pains to learn what the prevailing opinion was about 
 your present political attitude. I was gratified to find that 
 it was one of sincere respect. Two Radical members of 
 the House of Commons told me that they respected you a 
 great deal more than the Conservative M.P.'s in the House 
 of Commons, since you had the courage of your convictions. 
 I know your conduct also contrasted favourably with that 
 of Mr. Disraeli in 1867. Your courage was admired and 
 your conduct was considered thoroughly honourable. 
 
 ' I have often been struck with the rapid recovery of 
 popularity which public men sometimes make in this 
 country, so long as their personal character is respected ; 
 and it would not surprise me to see your Lordship very 
 popular one of these days. Your opposition to the Reform 
 Bill, 1867, extorted the respect of all England, and, when 
 you went to Constantinople, you divided with Mr. Gladstone 
 the confidence of the British public. I have never forgiven 
 Lord Derby and Lord Beaconsfield for having caused, as 
 I believe they did, the failure of your mission. 
 
 ' I breakfasted with Mr. Gladstone this morning and 
 told him what I heard said about you last evening. " It 
 does not surprise me at all," he said, " Lord Salisbury is 
 a man who is capable of making sacrifices for the sake of 
 his convictions, and such a man will always be respected 
 in England." 
 
 'I told him that I had sent his letter to you. "You 
 should have asked my leave first," he said. But I re- 
 minded him that I had sent your Lordship's letters to him 
 
 * .'Kt the Devonshire Club. 
 
 H 2
 
 100 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 without asking your leave, and for the same reason which 
 induced me to send his — namely, that I might not commit 
 your Lordship in any way. With much respect, 
 ' I remain, 
 
 ' Yours very sincerely, 
 
 'Malcolm MacColl.' 
 
 Lord Salisbury replied on July 26 : 
 
 ' Dear Mr, MacColl, — I have been so pressed with 
 correspondence that I have not been able earlier to thank 
 you for your letters. They concern myself too much to 
 admit of any comment on my part other than that some of 
 the observations made are as much on one side of the 
 balance, as I trust the views of me current in the newspapers 
 are upon the other. 
 
 ' I return your enclosure ^ with many thanks. I do not 
 in the least disguise from myself the force of the considera- 
 tions adverted to in the last part of it. The difficulty of 
 legislating in a satisfactory manner is stupendous. I am 
 not of course prepared to admit that the mode in which 
 it was sought to overcome that difficulty was permissible. 
 I am not sanguine that the difficulty — in our present phase 
 of national existence — can be overcome. It is symptomatic 
 of a struggle between the various elements of our society 
 which it will take many decades to fight out : and, till it is 
 fought out, the legislative machine will not work. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 Parliament was prorogued on August 14. The recess 
 was occupied by a vehement debate, on the platform and 
 in the Press, concerning the claim of the Lords to see the 
 details of Restitution before they conceded the Franchise. 
 Throughout the autunm MacColl was exceedingly busy, 
 trying, as ever, to negotiate between the two statesmen 
 in whom alone he believed. On October 5 he wTote to 
 Gladstone from Aboyne Castle : 
 
 1 Gladstone's letter to MacColl on p. 97.
 
 SOME FRUITS OF VICTORY 101 
 
 ' I hope the salmon which I sent to you yesterday 
 morning arrived in good condition. I caught it the previous 
 evening and, like the one which I sent last year, it hooked 
 itself on the outside of the mouth, and consequently gave 
 me two hours' hard work before I landed it, and a mile's 
 walk down the river ; when a fish hooks itself in that way it 
 can keep its mouth shut, so that it is impossible to drown 
 it, and if it is a fresh fish it takes a long time to exhaust it. 
 
 ' I am going to the Seabury Commemoration this week 
 in Aberdeen, 1 and then home, taking Ripon on my way to 
 attend a Chapter Meeting. 
 
 ' I am glad that Lord Strathmore has left so favourable 
 an impression on you. Lady Strathmore also is charming. 
 They were delighted with your visit ; and so were the Hoods. 
 I had several conversations with Lord Hood on the Franchise 
 crisis. He is in favour of the Lords giving way if they can 
 do it with honour. But he said — and Lord Strathmore 
 confirms it — that the Tories in the House of Commons are 
 rather more to blame than the Tory peers. At the Carlton 
 meeting several peers were in favour of giving way, but a 
 number of Tory M.P.'s declared that they would not stand 
 again unless the Lords remained firm. Lord Hood seemed 
 to think that it would be easier for the Lords to give way, 
 if you did not saddle them with the entire responsibility of 
 what they had done. 
 
 ' I have received an interesting letter from Lord Bath 
 on the subject, which I will send you to look at when I have 
 answered it. 
 
 ' How reckless Lord Salisbury becomes whenever he gets 
 on his legs to make a political speech ! I scarcely think 
 that he will advance his cause by his Glasgow speeches. 
 
 ' The Prince of Wales lunched here yesterday, and 
 dropped a few cautious observations which seemed to show 
 that he disapproved of the action of the Lords. He was 
 very gracious to me.' 
 
 The new Session of Parliament was opened on October 23, 
 and on November 6 Gladstone re-introduced the Franchise 
 
 ^ The centenary of tlie consecration of Samuel Seabury to be Bishop of 
 Connecticut.
 
 102 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Bill, which passed the Second Reading by a majority of 140. 
 MacColl now returned to Lord Salisbury, and sought a 
 private interview, of which he made the following record : 
 
 Interview of M. M. with Lord S. 
 
 November 13, 1884. 
 
 ' M. — I think it very kind of you to let me come and speak 
 my mind to you quite frankly. What I have to say may be 
 of no value or importance whatever. Still I think that I may 
 possibly be able to place a few facts before you of which 
 you may not be aware, or direct your attention to some 
 aspects of the controversy which may not have presented 
 themselves to your mind. 
 
 ' ^.— That is very likely. I shall be glad to hear what 
 you have to say. 
 
 ' M. — I know how valuable your time is, and I hope you 
 will stop me when you think that I am saying anything irrele- 
 vant or useless. I have come entirely " on my own hook," 
 without consultation with anybody ; so that you must 
 consider whatever I say strictly on its merits. The first 
 point to which I wish to call your attention is the fact, 
 which not a few Conservatives now admit, that the great 
 Conservative force in the Liberal party at this moment is 
 Mr. Gladstone. He stands between the Peers and the deluge. 
 He told Lord Strathmore at Glamis Castle, with the earnest- 
 ness of sincere conviction, that, if a dissolution were forced on 
 the Franchise Question, the question of the Franchise would 
 pass into the shade and the House of Lords would inevitably 
 come to the front. He is opposed to a dissolution on this 
 question therefore, not because he anticipates defeat, but 
 because he fears a disastrous victory — disastrous to the 
 House of Lords and the Conservative party. You tell me 
 that the effect of the Government's manipulation of the 
 question of Redistribution would be to "efface the Con- 
 servative party for thirty years." That would be a disaster 
 Avhich, I am sure, Mr. Gladstone would deplore as sincerely 
 as yourself ; and it is just because he wishes to avert it 
 that he is so anxious to settle the question while he remains
 
 SOME FRUITS OF VICTORY 103 
 
 at the head of the Liberal party. What possible motive 
 could he have, at his age, in wishing to ruin your party for 
 a generation ? 
 
 ' S. — I have never attributed any evil motive to him. He 
 might not wish to injure us himself. But, powerful as he 
 is, he might be obliged to yield to the exigencies of party 
 considerations. 
 
 ' if. — And do you think that those considerations are 
 likely to be less powerful when the Liberal party is no longer 
 controlled and guided by Mr. Gladstone ? He wishes the 
 question settled now in the interests of true Conservatism. 
 There is a powerful and growing section of Liberals who 
 wish it not to be settled till Mr. Gladstone has passed off 
 the scene. 
 
 '8. — I am quite aware of that. 
 
 ' M. — But are you not playing the game of that party ? 
 Mr. Chamberlain certainly thinks so, for he has said so 
 pubUcly, and not longer ago than in his speech at the 
 laying of the foundation-stone of the National Liberal Club. 
 Mr. John Morley has been equally frank. Besides, if you 
 succeed in forcing a dissolution, the House of Lords will not 
 be the only question for which a drastic solution will be 
 clamorously demanded. You may have a Land question 
 for England and Scotland, more formidable than that of 
 Ireland ; and behind that again the Church Estabhshment. 
 
 ' S. — I am aware of all the risks you point out ; but I 
 am not sure that it would not be better to face them at once 
 instead of postponing them. They are sure to come to the 
 front bye and by. 
 
 ' M. — But are they sure to come in an acute form if 
 we leave them to the natural evolution of events ? For 
 my part, I do not see that Disestablishment need come at 
 all if the Church continue to advance in the next twenty 
 years as she has done during the last twenty. And it is 
 in the spread of Church principles among the masses that 
 I should be disposed to look for Conservative safeguards 
 (I do not mean in any party sense) rather than in any 
 artificial distribution of votes. I do not believe that the 
 democracy of this country, taking it in the mass, is hostile,
 
 104 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 like that of the Continent, either to the Church or to a terri- 
 torial aristocracy. The House of Lords is unpopular as an 
 institution ; but I do not believe that the peerage is at all 
 unpopular apart from its legislative functions. Therefore 
 I do not see why you should be so much afraid of the new 
 voters in whatsoever way they may be distributed. 
 
 ' S. — Perhaps you are right in a general way. But at 
 present there is a large urban population, including a con- 
 siderable number of miners, who are Radical in sentiment 
 and not much under the control of Church principles. If 
 these are thrown into the rural constituencies as at present 
 constituted, the Conservative element would be swamped, 
 and might never be able to recover itself. 
 
 ' 31. — But what will the effect of your throwing out the 
 Franchise Bill a second time have on the rural population ? 
 Is it not likely to make them, too. Radicals ? And will 
 they not take their revenge upon you when they get their 
 votes ? 
 
 ' *S^. — I doubt it. That class of voters don't appear to be 
 much influenced by motives of gratitude or resentment. 
 They did not show much gratitude to INIr. Disraeh in the 
 General Election after he gave them Household Suffrage in 
 the Boroughs. 
 
 ' M. — That was because they knew that the Bill was not 
 Disraeli's at all. And nobody did more to enlighten them 
 on that point than your Lordship. You remember also the 
 late Duke of Buccleuch's laconic summing-up of the matter, 
 just after Mr. Disraeli's Bill became law : that when the 
 Bill received the Royal Assent "nothing remained of its 
 original shape but the first word, ' Whereas.' " 
 
 ' S. — At all events, you must not allow your knowledge 
 of Borough voters to influence you unduly as regards the 
 rural labourers. In general, they are dull, unenlightened, 
 slow to receive new impressions, conservative in the sense 
 of being indisposed to change their traditional habits and 
 customs. After one or two General Elections they may come 
 to take in their newly-acquired power and act accordingly. 
 At present they will, I believe, follow the dominant 
 influence in their neiuhbourhood. I am not much afraid
 
 SOME FRUITS OF VICTORY 1U5 
 
 therefore of the effect of our policy on the Agricultural 
 Labourers. 
 
 ' J/. — I have no experience to entitle me to have an opinion 
 of my own on that subject. But your Lordship's opinion is 
 not shared by all Conservatives. Lord Bath has studied 
 this question carefully, and I know that he, for one, is 
 apprehensive of the effect of a second rejection of the 
 Franchise Bill on the minds of the Agricultural Labourers. 
 However that may be, I understand that you wish to have 
 a dissolution before the question of Redistribution is settled, 
 
 ' S. — I would rather put it this way, that I do not see 
 how we can let the Franchise Bill pass, while our eyes are 
 blindfolded as to Redistribution. 
 
 ' i¥. — But why are you blindfolded ? The Government 
 have offered to show you their scheme, at least in its general 
 principles. 
 
 ' S. — But that is not a sufficient security. I do not see 
 how we can go back from our claim to keep the Franchise 
 Bill under our control till such a Redistribution Bill as we 
 may approve of is secured. 
 
 ' M. — Very well; let us see what the probable result is 
 likely to be of your dealing w ith the Franchise Bill in a way 
 that the Government would regard as equivalent to its rejec- 
 tion. The Government is in possession, and has a variety of 
 courses to choose from. It may create peers — a course which 
 seemed to be indicated by Lord Hartington in his speech 
 in the beginning of October. You remember the passage ? 
 
 ' S. — Oh, yes. It was a mere hrutum fuhnen for the 
 purpose of frightening us. 
 
 ' M. — I doubt whether it is prudent to dismiss it in that 
 way. But let us consider the next alternative — Dissolution. 
 Mr. Gladstone is too much committed against a Dissolution 
 forced by the peers. So we may go to the third alternative 
 — Resignation. But a Minister mIio has the confidence 
 of the House of Commons by an overwhelming majority 
 would be justified in choosing his ow^n time for resigning ; 
 and you could hardly expect Mr. Gladstone to choose the 
 time most convenient to j'ou. 
 
 ' S. — Certainly not.
 
 106 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' M. — Suppose, then, that the Franchise Bill comes 
 to an untimely end in the House of Lords. What is to 
 prevent the Government meeting Parhament next spring 
 with some other Bills, including a County Government Bill 
 which would, let us assume, among other things divide the 
 rates between landlords and tenants. I fancy that such 
 a Bill would be more Hkely to win the farmers than Mr. 
 Chaplin's 5 per cent, duty on corn. Meanwhile an agitation 
 has been already started in favour of a general reduction 
 of rents. That agitation will be worked against Messrs. 
 Chaplin and Co. by several Liberal candidates. I know 
 one County candidate who has got all the particulars of the 
 
 frequent rises in Mr. 's rents, and who will use it with 
 
 great effect. It will not be difficult to persuade the farmers 
 that any profit from a duty on corn will find its way into 
 the landlord's pockets. I doubt whether a resignation even 
 now would be very advantageous to you in the counties, 
 
 ' S, — What do you say to South Warwickshire ? ^ The 
 great victory there has been quite as great a surprise to us 
 as it has been to the Liberals. 
 
 ' M. — From what I can learn I do not gather that South 
 Warwickshire is by any means a typical election. The 
 inference I draw from it is precisely the opposite to that 
 drawn from it by Mr. ChapHn in a speech a day or two ago. 
 South Warwickshire has been the chief theatre of Arch's 
 propaganda ; and the result is that the farmers' fear of, 
 and anger against, the labourers have driven them into the 
 Tory camp. Mr. Chaplin drew the extraordinary inference 
 that the victory proved that the labourers of South Warwick- 
 shire are in sympathy with the action of the House of Lords 
 on the Franchise Question. 
 
 ' ;Sf.— I saw that. He must have been misreported. He 
 could hardly have said anything so foolish. 
 
 « M. — Well, let us suppose a Dissolution next session on 
 the Franchise Question, a County Government BiU, and the 
 House of Lords. I assume that, on Mr. Gladstone's resigna- 
 tion, you would form a Government which would certainly 
 
 1 At a by-election caused by the death of Mr. Gilbert Leigh, a Liberal, 
 the seat was won by Mr. Sampson Lloyd, a Conservative.
 
 SOME FRUITS OF VICTORY 107 
 
 include Lord Randolph Cliurchill and Mr. Chaplin, and 
 perhaps Mr. Lowther. You would either dissolve at once, 
 or would be forced to do so. Instead of the safe field of 
 aggressive criticism, you would find yourself on the defensive 
 all round, and would be confronted by such questions as 
 the following : Would you renew the Coercion Act in 
 Ireland ? If yes, you would have the Irish vote against 
 you, everywhere. If no, you would lose all the moderate 
 Liberals, and probably some Tories. What would you do 
 in Egypt ? Annexation ? Protectorate ? Retention of the 
 Sudan ? Would you put a duty on corn ? If yes, you 
 might win some Counties, but you would lose more Boroughs. 
 If you merely promised an enquiry, the farmers would consider 
 that an evasion, and the public in general would conclude 
 that you were playing with a great question for mere party 
 purposes. You M-ould fall between the two stools of Free 
 Trade and Protection for corn. You can hardly expect that 
 you would get a working majority. Even on the most hope- 
 ful assumption you could only retain power by the support 
 of the Parnellites; and that support would be given on 
 terms which I am sure you would not accept. You would 
 have to give place to a Liberal Government ; and you have 
 meanwhile pledged yourself to abide by the decision of the 
 country after a General Election. You would therefore 
 be bound to pass the Franchise Bill and Redistribution Bill 
 offered you by a resentful party flushed with victory. Can 
 you persuade yourself that you could then get such good 
 terms as you may get now ? 
 
 * S. — I see all the dangers. Still it is a choice of evils, 
 and I do not see how we can pass the Franchise Bill without 
 some security as to Redistribution. 
 
 ' M. — What security do you require ? 
 
 ' S. — It is for the Government to make the next move. 
 
 ' M. — Is that so ? Has not Lord John Manners, with the 
 apparent concurrence of the Opposition, scornfully rejected 
 the offer of the Government to take the leaders of the 
 Opposition into their confidence ? 
 
 ' S. — I do not understand that such an offer was made. 
 
 ' M. — I thouglit it had been. Is it impossible for yourself
 
 108 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 and Mr. Gladstone to come together on this question ? 
 I was in hopes you might have been brought together at 
 Glamis Castle last September. 
 
 ' S. — That, I fear, was impossible. I might have got there 
 incognito ; but not Mr. Gladstone. His face is known at 
 every railway station in the kingdom. And if our meeting 
 had got into the papers it would have done more harm than 
 good. 
 
 ' M. — But why not meet noAv and talk the matter over ? 
 
 'S. — ^It is impossible to meet privately, and to meet 
 publicly would breed suspicions and resentments on both 
 sides. 
 
 ' M. — But can nothing at all be done ? 
 
 ' S. — I am sorry ; but I really do not see how we can 
 give way. 
 
 ' M. — May I tell Mr. Gladstone of our conversation ? 
 
 ' 8. — On no account. You must not even tell him that you 
 have been with me. Not that I should mind his knowing 
 all about it. But if it came out that you had been to see 
 me first, and then ]Mr. Gladstone, it would do mischief. 
 And these things always do come out. In this matter I can 
 keep a secret better than Mr. Gladstone, because I need 
 not tell it to anybody ; but he has his Cabinet to deal 
 with ; and a secret imparted to a dozen or more men is 
 certain to ooze out. 
 
 ' M. — ^If I have an opportunity, may I at least give 
 Mr. Gladstone to understand, without quoting you or saying 
 that I have seen you, that nothing short of your seeing 
 the Government scheme, and satisfying yourself that the 
 Government will deal fairly with your party, will satisfy 
 you ? 
 
 ' S. — Yes. I have no objection to your saying so much 
 as that.-^ 
 
 ' M. — It is very kind of you to listen so patiently to all 
 that I have been saying, I hardly like to trespass any longer 
 on your patience. 
 
 ' S. — Pray go on if you have anything more to say. 
 
 1 I went accordingly that afternoon and told Mr. Gladstone's Secretaiy, 
 E. W. Hamilton, all that I was allowed to say. — M. M.
 
 SOME FRUITS OF VICTORY 100 
 
 ' M. — I am afraid 1 may be taking a liberty. Yet 1 think 
 I ought to tell you that I have very good reason to believe 
 that a number of Conservative peers only want a decent 
 excuse to back out of the opposition to the Franchise Bill, 
 There are others — I could name two friends of your own — 
 whose chivalrous loyalty to you may induce them to follow 
 you if you decide to reject the Franchise Bill a second time, 
 but they will follow you with sore hearts, and with a feeling 
 that you have used them ungenerously. It seems to me 
 that Providence has now given you a great chance to retrieve 
 your political reputation. When you went to Constanti- 
 nople I believe you stood only second to Mr. Gladstone in 
 the confidence of the public. I am not expressing any 
 opinion of my own ; but you must be aware that after your 
 return you were believed by many, not all Liberals, to have 
 sacrificed some of your convictions to political ambition. 
 Mr. Gladstone has declared in public and in private that he 
 does not believe that you are influenced by political ambition. 
 So far, your conduct on the Franchise question has, I believe, 
 done you good. I have heard some Radicals say — I may 
 mention IVIr. H. Fowler and Mr. Caine — that they respected 
 the consistency and honesty of your conduct. You have 
 shown that you are willing to risk your political future, and 
 that of your order, in defence of your convictions. Show 
 in addition that you can rise superior to party and play the 
 part of a statesman, and I believe that you will at once 
 occupy a position in public estimation higher than you have 
 ever done yet. Nothing has more struck me in English 
 political life than the generosity with which the public 
 forget a public man's conscientious errors the moment he 
 has turned over a new leaf. My great desire from the 
 beginning of this controversy has been that Mr. Gladstone 
 and yourself should understand each other. I know that 
 he has lately said some severe things of you. 
 
 ' 8. — Yes, he has. 
 
 ' M. — And you have said severe things of him. Mr. 
 Gladstone has this excuse, that you have crossed him in 
 love. 
 
 ' S. — How ? I don't understand vou.
 
 110 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' M. — I believe that at one time Mr. Gladstone set his 
 heart upon you as the man destined to regenerate the 
 Conservative party from the bastard conservatism invented 
 by Lord Beaconsfield. And you have disappointed him. 
 
 ' S. — I have never thought Mr. Gladstone had any 
 personal feeling against me. I have never doubted his 
 conscientiousness. 
 
 ' M. — I don't mind saying to you that I did not like 
 Mr. Gladstone contrasting your leadership of the Lords 
 unfavourably with Lord Beaconsfield's. I dare, say I am 
 prejudiced ; but I have no opinion of Lord Beaconsfield's 
 sagacity as a leader. You could not, if you tried, act more 
 foolishly than Lord Beaconsfield did when he persuaded the 
 Lords to reject the Compensation for Disturbance Bill. 
 
 ' S. — (Smiling.) That of course is a matter of opinion. 
 
 ' 31. — On the other hand, how could you contrast ]Mr. 
 Gladstone's leadership of the Liberal party unfavourably 
 with Lord Palmerston's ? I regard Lord Palmerston as a 
 political charlatan, in spite of his ability. He was a man of 
 no convictions. It is from men of his type that revolutions 
 generally come. 
 
 ' S. — That sounds a paradox. Lord Palmerston is gene- 
 rally regarded as the type of an astute and moderate leader. 
 
 ' M. — I know he is. But what proof did he ever give 
 of constructive statesmanship ? His moderation consisted 
 in trifling with great questions Avhich he ought to have 
 settled. What could have been more abjectly shallow than 
 his dismissal of the Irish Land question with the flippant 
 epigram that "Tenant Right is Landlord Wrong"? He 
 might have settled the question of Parliamentary Reform 
 and of the Irish land on moderate lines ; and it is because 
 he threw away his opportunities that you have had a 
 revolutionary Land Act for Ireland, and that you are now 
 in the midst of a political crisis on the question of Reform 
 in England. It is in reversing the hand-to-mouth states- 
 manship of Lord Palmerston that IVIr. Gladstone shows 
 how much more moderate and conservative a statesman he 
 is ; I mean in using his authority vnth the nation in setthng 
 questions on conservative lines, which if left unsettled by
 
 SOME FRUITS OF VICTORY 111 
 
 liim, would have to be settled on revolutionary lines by his 
 successors. But I must not waste more of your time. I 
 cannot tell you how grateful I am to you for your kindness 
 in having allowed me to speak to you so frankly and at such 
 length. I do hope that matters may be settled amicably. 
 ' S. — I hope so too. I am very glad to have had this 
 conversation with you, and I shall always be glad to see you 
 or hear from you.' 
 
 On November 17 MacCoU wrote as follows : 
 
 'Dear Lord Salisbury, — I hope that I am not 
 abusing your patience and good nature in venturing to 
 write to you once more. 
 
 ' I have been to Downing Street since I saw you ; but, 
 as I did not feel at liberty to say anything which might 
 possibly imply that I had had any communication with 
 you, I could not say more than that I felt convinced that, 
 if you only got a guarantee against a Dissolution on the 
 new County Franchise before a Redistribution Bill was 
 passed, you would hold out no longer. Have you not got 
 your guarantee now ? I was not in the House of Commons 
 this evening ; but I understand that IVIr. Gladstone de- 
 clared that he would stake the existence of the Government 
 on the Redistribution Bill even after it reached the Lords. 
 The Lords will then have it in their power, if they are so 
 minded, to force a Dissolution on the present Franchise early 
 next year, to say nothing of any chance that may turn up 
 against the Government in the interval in the House of 
 Commons. 
 
 ' I do hope your Lordship will think this a sufficient 
 security. I hope it most of all for the sake of your own 
 future. So far, my belief is that you have done yourself 
 good rather than harm in public estimation. Your oppo- 
 nents respect your conscientiousness. Mr. Henry Fowler, 
 a Radical M.P. and Nonconformist to boot, spoke in that 
 sense to me the other day. You have gained much. 
 
 ' The Government have practically conceded your 
 demand. You can afford to accept the olive branch with 
 dignity, security and grace ; and you wUl behe all the talk
 
 112 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 about your rashness. 1 know that several Conservative peers 
 are only waiting for a decent excuse to go back from their 
 vote of last July ; and, even among those whose chivalrous 
 loyalty to you will forbid them to desert you if you call 
 upon them to follow you in rejecting the Ministerial offer, 
 there will be some — I know two — who will follow you with 
 a sore feeling that they have been ungraciously used. 
 
 ' I am afraid I am impertinent, but I think you will at 
 least kindly appreciate my motives. 
 ' With sincere respect, 
 ' I remain, 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Malcolm MacColl.' 
 
 On the very day on which this letter was written 
 Gladstone suddenly gave way, and announced in the House 
 of Commons that he would be prepared to settle the details 
 of Redistribution in private conference with Lord Salisbury, 
 if the Lords would agree to pass the Franchise Bill before 
 the Session ended. So the Tories gained their point and 
 the Radicals murmured. The Redistribution Bill, arranged 
 in its main principles between the leaders of the two parties, 
 was read a second time in the House of Commons on 
 December 4, and the Franchise Bill received the Royal 
 Assent on the 6th. ^ 
 
 When all was settled, MacColl sent the record of his 
 interview with Lord Salisbury to Gladstone's Private 
 Secretary, who rephed as follows : ' I return you with many 
 thanks this interesting memorandum of your conversation 
 with Lord Salisbury. ... I admire your pluck in tackhng 
 so big a man as Lord S. unquestionably is. Mr. Gladstone 
 found him most pleasant to deal with ; and one of the good 
 results likely to ensue from this historic incident is that 
 it will, I am sure, tend to both great men understanding 
 each other better.' 
 
 ^ Twelve years later, Gladstone described this as ' one of the most important 
 and delicate crises in which I ever was concerned.'
 
 a 
 
 
 CHAPTER VII 
 
 THE IRISH QUESTION 
 
 The moment the very name of Ireland is mentioned, the English seem to 
 bid adieu to common feeling, common prudence, and common sense. 
 
 Sydney Smith. 
 
 At the beginning of 1885 it was apparent to all dispassionate 
 beholders that Gladstone and his Government were declining 
 in popularity. They had alienated the Irish, who now made 
 common cause with the Tories, both in the House and in 
 the constituencies. They had disgusted some of their most 
 zealous supporters by their surrender to the Lords. They 
 had perpetrated a series of blunders in Egypt which rightly 
 incurred constant Votes of Censure in Parliament, and those 
 votes were only defeated by ever-decreasing majorities. 
 The Tory party, ostensibly led by Lord Salisbury and Sir 
 Stafford Northcote, but really animated by Lord Randolph 
 Churchill, was hungering for office. ^ All round there were 
 signs of impending disaster. 
 
 On May 3, 1885, MacColl wrote thus to Lord Salisbury : 
 
 ' If I may take the liberty of saying so, I find evidence 
 circulating from all quarters that your Lordship has vastly 
 strengthened your position throughout the country, as I 
 always believed you would, by your management of the 
 Franchise Question. I wish you were in the House of 
 Commons.' 
 
 ^ ' When Lord Beaconsficld died. Dr. Littledale suggested the following motto 
 (from the opening of Gluck's opera, Orfco) for the Conservative party under the 
 '■dual control" of Lord Salisbuiy and Sir Stafford Northcote: "Dove andro 
 senza il mio Ben ? " — M. M.' 
 
 113 I
 
 114 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 On June 8 Sir Michael Hicks-Beach ^ carried an amend- 
 ment to the Budget, and some complicated negotiations 
 between the leaders on both sides ensued. While these were 
 proceeding, MacColl wTote to Lord Salisbury as follows : 
 
 ' I take the liberty of sending you, quite confidentially, 
 the folloAA ing information : 
 
 ' 1. I believe that in Ministerial circles, and among the 
 Liberals generally, the defeat of the Government is con- 
 sidered the best thing that could happen to the party under 
 the present circumstances, for the following reasons : 
 
 ' (a) The defeat is not understood to mean a revolt of 
 any considerable number of Liberals. There was no urgent 
 whip ; not the five-line whip on large paper that is sent out 
 when there is serious danger ; but an ordinary four-line on 
 ordinary paper. And this was not sent out until Saturday 
 night. So that many members did not have it at aU. (I give 
 you the explanation given to me.) Moreover, members 
 were allowed by the Liberal Whips to absent themselves. 
 Certainly this is true in some cases to my knowledge. 
 Mr. Barran was allowed on Monday forenoon to go to 
 Leeds. A Liberal member told me yesterday that he left 
 the House at 10 p.m. on Monday " because he felt out of 
 sorts," not anticipating any danger. I have heard of 
 several other similar cases. So much is this the case that 
 it is thought in some quarters that the Government, as 
 Mr. John Morley put it to an acquaintance of mine 
 yesterday, " rode for a fall." 
 
 * That is not my own belief. I am sure Mr. Gladstone 
 did not expect danger (though I beUeve he is rather glad 
 at the result). In fact a member of the Government told 
 me as late as Monday afternoon that there was no danger. 
 He said a number of Conservatives would support the 
 Government, and he mentioned Mr. Hubbard as one of the 
 Conservatives who intended to do so. He said Mr. Hubbard 
 told him so. The result is that the Government feel that 
 they can rely on the continued loyalty of their party in 
 any action they may take in opposition ; the bulk of the 
 absentees being eager to recover their character with their 
 
 constituents. 
 
 ' Afterwards Lord St. Aldwjii.
 
 THE IRISH QUESTION 115 
 
 * (6) My own conviction is that, if the Session had died 
 a natural death, I\Ir. Gladstone would have retired. It is 
 believed now that he will not leave the party in the lurch, 
 but will lead in the dissolution, and perhaps for the first 
 session of the new Parliament. 
 
 ' A Liberal told me yesterday that this would make a 
 difference of over a hundred seats to the Liberals. I am 
 not sure that this is an exaggeration. 
 
 ' I was astonished down at Ripon at the failure of even 
 the faU of Khartoum and the death of Gordon to affect 
 Mr. Gladstone's popularity. The fact is, that any mistake 
 of the Government is put down either to bad luck, Tory 
 obstruction, or too much yielding to Tory advice, or to 
 Mr. Gladstone not having his own way in the Cabinet. 
 
 ' He personally is acquitted. I don't remember any- 
 thing like this in English politics. 
 
 ' (c) The news from Ireland has grown bad within the 
 last few days, it is thought in anticipation of the Crimes 
 Act lapsing. (This is authentic. I had it yesterday from 
 Mr. Gladstone's Private Secretary.) 
 
 'The Liberal party is so little committed to the renewal of 
 the Crimes Act that they may take advantage of any mistake 
 a Conservative Government might make on that subject. 
 
 ' The defeat came just in the nick of time for them on 
 that question. 
 
 ' (d) It is generally felt that the Liberals will have a 
 great advantage in being the attacking party in the General 
 Election under Mr. Gladstone's leadership ; whereas fighting 
 on the defensive without Mr. Gladstone might be disastrous 
 to them, largely through internal dissensions. 
 
 ' Please kindly consider all this quite confidential, and 
 burn my letter.' 
 
 Undaunted by these prognostications, Lord Salisbury 
 accepted the Premiership, and the new Government took 
 office on June 24. On July 3 MacCoU wrote to his 
 dethroned chief from Munich : 
 
 ' I have found Dr. Dollinger in wonderfully good health 
 and spirits, and not looking very much older than he 
 did when I last saw him eight years ago. His hair has 
 
 I 2
 
 116 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 grown somewhat more grey ; that is almost the only change 
 I notice. His mind seems as clear as ever. He enjoys 
 excellent sleep, he says, and has an excellent appetite, 
 and has had no occasion to consult a doctor for twenty 
 years. He is greatly interested in the poUtical situation 
 in England, and asked me a crowd of questions with great 
 eagerness. He expressed great satisfaction with your 
 letter,^ admired its " dignity" ; and thought its generosity 
 " worthy of your high position." He is also glad to conclude 
 that you do not contemplate a very early retirement from 
 pohtical life, and sees no reason for it on account of your 
 age, as you are more than ten years his junior. He has 
 passed his seventy-sixth. He assured me that your visit 
 to Denmark - was believed throughout Germany, and en- 
 tirely by Bismarck, to have had a pohtical object, namely 
 an understanding with Russia to the prejudice of Germany. 
 This is very absurd ; but Continental pubHcists and states- 
 men are sometimes capable of the wildest absurdities in 
 respect to Enghsh politics.' 
 
 When the Session of 1885 came to an end, it was gene- 
 rally understood that the General Election would take place 
 in November, the Register having been specially accelerated 
 for that purpose. In September MacCoU was staying wdth 
 Lord Huntly at Aboyne, and on the 16th he wrote thus to 
 the Editor of the Daily News : 
 
 ' You may take the following for gospel : 
 ' The Government has had under consideration for the 
 last week the question of postponing the Dissolution till 
 the New Year. The reason given will be the difficulty 
 of getting the registers ready. The real reason is that the 
 Tories have come to the conclusion that they mil be beaten, 
 and the hungry officials among them insist on two or three 
 months more of the spoils of office. My information is 
 unquestionable ; but it is confidential, and I cannot give 
 my authority. You may use it publicly, however, but of 
 course without the least allusion to your informant.' 
 
 * Addressed to a meeting of the Midlothian Liberal Association, June 30, 1885. 
 - In September 1883.
 
 THE IRISH QUESTION 117 
 
 In what was called the ' Unauthorized Programme ' 
 for the Radical party, Mr. Chamberlain had most inoppor- 
 tunely raised the question of Disestablishment, and the 
 clergy were up in arms. On November 11 MacColl 
 expressed his discontent in a letter to Lord Salisbury : 
 
 ' Perhaps I may take the liberty of sending a few observa- 
 tions to your Lordship next week on some aspects of the 
 political situation. Meanwhile I will only say three things : 
 
 ' 1. Mr. Chamberlain's extraordinary stupidity as a tac- 
 tician has damaged him enormously, even among Radicals. 
 He seems to possess a positive genius for blundering in 
 tactics. A man of ordinary common sense and humour 
 would have seen that the delicious story about his screws 
 which he told at Birmingham last evening, if it makes 
 a good point in favour of Free Trade, shows also that 
 Mr. Chamberlain has more regard for his own interest than 
 for the welfare of the working classes. 
 
 ' 2. I wish the clergy could be stopped from preaching 
 pohtical sermons and denouncing Dissenters as infidels, for 
 I could give your Lordship several instances when such 
 sermons have injured not the Church merely but the 
 Conservative party as well. One of the most surprising 
 things in this controversy to me is the large number of 
 Nonconformists who are opposed to Disestablishment. 
 Indiscriminate attacks on Dissenters therefore are, to take 
 no other ground, extremely bad tactics. 
 
 ' 3. I beg to tender my thanks to your Lordship for what, 
 as far as I can learn from the papers, is your wise policy 
 in regard to the Bulgarian imbroglio. I have never doubted 
 that if you had held the seals of the Foreign Office in 1870-7 
 instead of that owl Lord Derby, that controversy would 
 have had a very different history. 
 
 ' Servia seems to me to be behaving infamously. Her 
 Government offered no opposition to the Treaty of San 
 Stefano in 1878, demanded no compensation. Yet the 
 Treaty of San Stefano, if I remember rightly, made a 
 larger Bulgaria than that against which Servia is now 
 protesting.'
 
 118 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Parliament, in spite of the rumours of Aboyne, was dis- 
 solved on November 18. When the Election closed, the 
 number of Liberals returned was just equal to that of the 
 Tories combined with the Irish. Lord Sahsbury therefore 
 remained in power, but his tenure of office was manifestly 
 insecure. The Irish members could at any moment displace 
 him. On December 9 he was thus addressed by MacCoU : 
 
 ' I wonder if you would mind taking the trouble to run 
 your eye on the enclosed memorandum on the present 
 political situation, before I have the honour of seeing you on 
 Monday. I may possibly have something more to say by 
 that time. 
 
 ' I verily believe that the Irish Question can be settled 
 on some such lines as I venture thus hurriedly and roughly 
 to sketch ; and I do not believe that it can be settled on 
 any other. I am no statesman, however, and my ideas may 
 be as foolish as they are crude. 
 
 ' No scheme of Local Government will satisfy the Irish 
 — I mean County Government. They long to present 
 themselves before the world as a Nation capable of self- 
 government, and nothing that falls short of satisfying 
 that unquenchable craving will appease them.' 
 
 On December 19 the world was astonished by an 
 anonymous paragraph in the Standard to the effect that 
 if Gladstone should regain the Premiership, he would be 
 prepared to ' deal in a Hberal spirit with the demand 
 for Home Rule.' This wholly unexpected announcement 
 created an indescribable confusion, perplexity, and excite- 
 ment, alike in poHtical circles and outside them. Gladstone 
 held his peace, and would neither confirm nor deny the 
 change of front attributed to him. It was exactly 
 the sort of crisis which suited MacColl, and his public- 
 spirited activities may be collected from the following 
 correspondence : 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' December 19, 1885. — I am quite sure that all the versions 
 published to-day in regard to Mr. Gladstone's intentions are
 
 THE IRISH QUESTION 119 
 
 pure speculation. They are probably based on a letter 
 from Mr. Herbert Gladstone to a friend in Leeds in which he 
 throws out suggestions of his own (so I am told) as to the 
 settlement of the Irish Question. It is a great mistake, 
 however, to suppose that Mr. Herbert Gladstone consults 
 his father before he speaks or writes on public questions. 
 My impression is this, that Mr. Gladstone has not as yet 
 formulated any cut-and-dried scheme. His mind, I know, 
 has been engaged on the subject at intervals from the year 
 1871 ; and with closer and more detailed attention during 
 the last few years. He has lately been working out and 
 testing every scheme within the limits which I told your 
 Lordship on Monday ; ^ but I doubt whether he has yet 
 finally made up his mind as to the details of any scheme 
 in particular. When I was there last week he was deep in 
 Burke, a writer whom he venerates as a great master of 
 political wisdom on all constitutional subjects. I regret 
 the tone of the Standard article on the subject. I am quite 
 sure that Mr. Gladstone has no wish to obtain a party triumph 
 on your Lordship on this subject. I am convinced that 
 what he wishes above all things just now is cordial relations 
 between yourself and him on this subject. I have not the 
 smallest doubt of his sincerity when he assured me that a 
 scheme of Home Rule proposed by you on the lines which 
 he indicated " should have his hearty support " ; and that 
 he believed that a Tory Government had advantages for 
 that purpose which a Liberal Government would not enjoy. 
 He feels strongly and solemnly that the Irish Question has 
 arrived at a crisis, and that the safest plan is to put aside 
 mere tinkering and temporary experiments and to face the 
 question boldly and generously. Another thing which I am 
 profoundly convinced is that the last thing he wishes is 
 to lessen your political influence or injure your political 
 future. He is very much afraid of Lord Randolph Churchill 
 and the Tory democrats, and he has never abandoned the 
 hope of a restoration of the Tory party, under your guidance, 
 to the general principles of policy which guided it under Sir 
 Robert Peel. My belief is that as Mr. Gladstone approaches 
 
 * At a private interview.
 
 120 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 the close of his career his mind goes back to his old Con- 
 servative position with considerable longing. I Avas struck 
 with a speech of his some years ago, when he was riding on 
 the crest of a wave of Liberal triumph. The predominant 
 feeling of his mind, he said, was a feeling of distress and 
 solitariness when he looked back and saw " the long proces- 
 sion of the figures of the dead," such as Sidney Herbert, Lord 
 Cardwell, the Duke of Newcastle, and others. He spoke of 
 you to me the other day in terms of great cordiality ; praised 
 very highly your great quickness, grasp and fairness in your 
 conferences with him on the Redistribution Bill ; and 
 declared that he had never had a pleasanter man to work 
 with. My honest beUef is that you and he have at bottom 
 more in common than either of you have with any other 
 public men ; and it is one of the most unfortunate events of 
 our time that you should be in opposition to each other 
 instead of in the same Cabinet. Your Lordship may have 
 remarked how 'Mr. Gladstone went a little out of his way 
 in Midlothian to single you out from the rest of your party 
 for special praise, first, on the Bulgarian Question ; secondly, 
 for your implied rebuke of the speeches of Lord Randolph 
 Churchill and Sir M. Hicks-Beach on the Irish Question. 
 
 ' Mr. Gladstone and yourself stand out, head and shoulders, 
 above the rest of your parties respectively, and can afford 
 to take your own lines, with the certainty that the party 
 in each case 7nust follow. You may depend upon it that, 
 whatever line IVIr. Gladstone adopts on the Irish Question, 
 he will carry his whole party with him. He will certainly 
 secure Lord Spencer, Lord Hartington, and Goschen ; and 
 the extreme wing will not dare to revolt even if they were 
 incHned. Is it impossible for your Lordship and Mr. Glad- 
 stone to come to some understanding on this question ? 
 You are a necessity to your party. Your position is now 
 so well established that there can be no move against you. 
 There is nobody among them who can approach you even 
 as a respectable leader, and you have gained immensely 
 in the country. You have a great future before you, but 
 much will depend on your attitude just now on the Irish 
 Question. If you will only trust to your own inspirations
 
 THE IRISH QUESTION 121 
 
 all will be well. You knoAv hoM- much I longed to bring 
 yourself and Mr. Gladstone together on the Franchise 
 Question ; and I think I contributed a little toAvards that 
 happy result. Believe me, what Mr. Gladstone most desires 
 just now is to leave moderate men behind him to lead the 
 democracy. May I come to see your Lordship some day 
 next week, after Monday, if you should chance to be in 
 town ? ' 
 
 Salisbury to MacColl 
 
 'December 19, 1885. — I am very much obliged to you 
 for your letter which I have read with very great interest. 
 
 ' I am not in a position to discuss the momentous subjects 
 with which it deals, because I am not free to express my 
 own individual opinions alone. I must only express such 
 of them as can be properly put forward as the opinions 
 of the Cabinet at large, and even to that extent I have no 
 knowledge that the Cabinet would desire me to do so. 
 I will therefore content myself with acknowledging your 
 kind letter.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' December 21, 1885. — Thank you for your very courteous 
 and kind letter. I quite understand your position. 
 
 ' Do you see any objection to my addressing you publicly 
 on the subject of Ireland, in the form of a short pamphlet ? 
 I should write to you personally as First Minister of the 
 Crown, and should embody substantially the views which 
 I have always taken the liberty of laying before you ; but 
 of course without the slightest instruction that I have had 
 any communication upon the subject with you.' 
 
 Salisbury to MacColl 
 
 'December 22, 1885. — I am very much obliged to you 
 for the flattering proposal that your forthcoming pamphlet 
 on the subject of Ireland should take the form of a letter 
 to me ; but on the whole I think it better, in order to avoid 
 possible misconstruction, that it should take some other
 
 122 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 form. Of course I do not know what in detail your opinions 
 might be, and I might find it difficult to persuade some of 
 my friends that the fact of your addressing them to me in 
 that form did not indicate a certain concurrence on my part.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ''December 22, 1885. — I have been intending to write to 
 you every day since my return from Hawarden ; but I really 
 have found no time. . . . What I wish to tell you is my 
 impression as to Lord SaUsbury's mind on the question of 
 Ireland. I saw him by appointment on the evening of the 
 day on which I returned from Hawarden. Assuming your 
 assent, I told him what you said to me on Monday morning : 
 namely, that you believed the Irish Question to be urgent, 
 and must be dealt with without delay (to which he assented) ; 
 that you were in favour of dealing with it subject to the 
 conditions of : 
 
 ' 1 . Impunity for the integrity and interests of the Empire. 
 
 ' 2. Ireland to bear her fair share of taxation. 
 
 ' 3. Adequate security for the minority ; that if he saw 
 his way of proposing legislation on those lines he should 
 have your hearty support ; otherwise that you would con- 
 sider your hands free. He listened most attentively, and 
 then said : "I consider your scheme the most logical 
 and complete of any that I have seen." He meant a 
 Memorandum which I took the liberty of sending to him on 
 the Irish Question before I went to Hawarden. I am not 
 going to trouble you with a detailed account of that 
 Memorandum further than to say that it embraced a Parlia- 
 ment in Dubhn as part of a scheme of General Federation, 
 beginning with Ireland and gradually extending to the 
 rest of the Empire. It also embraced a radical reform of 
 the House of Lords. I feel strongly that most of the 
 objections to a large scheme of Home Rule for Ireland would 
 vanish if it formed part of a wider scheme to follow. 
 
 ' I found Lord Sahsbury, as I gathered, prepared to go 
 as far probably as yourself on the question of Home Rule ; 
 but he seemed hopeless as to the prospect of carrying his
 
 THE IRISH QUESTION 123 
 
 party with him. In the course of our conversation I said 
 to him : "If you propose a large scheme of Home Rule, 
 I am sure that Mr. Gladstone will help you to carry it, 
 provided of course that it is up to and within the limits 
 which he thinks necessary and safe. At the same time your 
 party would be in this dilemma. They would feel that no 
 scheme short of yours could ever again be proposed ; and 
 they would say to themselves : ' After all, is it not better, 
 since we can never now expect a smaller scheme, to help 
 our own party to pass it ? ' Would not your followers and 
 colleagues be likely to reason in that manner ? " I asked. 
 " Perhaps they would," he replied, " but they would 
 devour me." He spoke in the most friendly way about 
 you, and I left him with the impression that he quite realized 
 the gravity of the Irish Question ; that personally he would 
 not shrink from grapphng with it in a bold and hberal spirit ; 
 but that he despaired of carrying his party with him. 
 
 ' After the publication of the scheme of Home Rule 
 attributed to you, I wrote to Lord Salisbury to express 
 my belief that you had not as yet formulated any detailed 
 scheme, still less authorized the publication of any scheme 
 as yours, however clear you might be in your own mind as 
 to the general lines on which any scheme that promised 
 success should go. I also expressed the strongest con- 
 viction that it was of capital importance in this crisis that 
 you and he should act cordially together with a single eye 
 to interests of the Empire. I also took the liberty of 
 expressing a very strong opinion that it would be far better 
 to offer the Irish nothing at all than anything short of 
 a Parliament in Dublin ; and stated reasons (with which 
 I will not trouble you) to show that the safest concession 
 would be a Parliament in Dublin ; any smaller concession 
 like County Boards or Provincial Councils being certain to 
 prove facile tools in Parnell's hands, while a Parliament in 
 Dublin would speedily develop an Opposition party and 
 compel Parnell to become leader of a party of law and order. 
 
 ' I enclose Lord Salisbury's reply, not because it contains 
 any information, but because it shows a friendly disposition 
 towards a liberal discussion of the question of Home Rule,
 
 124 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 and also because it shows, as I think, that he is himself in 
 advance of his Cabinet. 
 
 ' Kindly consider all this confidential. What an inert 
 mass of transmitted prejudices on this question lies like an 
 incubus on the minds of most educated people in England ! 
 Even my good friends at the Spectator office are impervious 
 to reasoning. But I don't despair. The constituencies are 
 less prejudiced and more open to the reception of light.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ^December 24, 1885. — To prevent mistake or mischief in 
 the present state of influenced feeling I thought it right to 
 let Mr. Gladstone know, two days ago, that I had put your 
 Lordship in possession of his views on the Irish Question as 
 far as I knew them. I have heard from him to-day. ... In 
 his letter he says : "I am only anxious it should be clearly 
 understood that, while you stated to him " (i.e. to your 
 Lordship) " what you conceived to be the manifest purport 
 of my conversation w^ith you, you had no authority, and con- 
 veyed no message from me. Unless you are quite sure that 
 Lord S. clearly understands this, I beg you to convey 
 it to him. I say nothing adverse to the accuracy of your 
 account. It was an account given on your responsibility of 
 what you conceived to be my present view." He goes on to 
 add that he " has given no human being " any authority 
 to put forth any intentions of his on the Irish Question. 
 
 ' I suppose that ]\ir. Gladstone is sensitive about his 
 being supposed to move in this matter without consultation 
 with his colleagues. I never believed that he had anything 
 to do with the schemes published as his. I did not intend 
 to convey any message from him to your Lordship, and 
 I hope I did not give you the impression that I did. I am 
 sorry to trouble you, but I am nervously anxious not to 
 do mischief at this grave crisis.' 
 
 Salisbury to MacColl 
 
 ' December 25, 1885. — I quite agree with you that it is 
 very difficult to say anything at this juncture without risk
 
 THE IRISH QUESTION 125 
 
 of being misunderstood. But I did not in the least mis- 
 understand the purport of your observations on Monday. 
 
 ' You told me more than once that you were speaking 
 entirely on your own authority.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ^December 28, 1885. — I received the enclosed letter 
 from Lord Salisbury this morning. I was very careful 
 not to commit you to anything ; all I told Lord Salis- 
 bury — indeed all I knew — hardly went beyond your 
 public utterances on the subject of Ireland. The impression 
 you left on my mind was that you were not in favour of 
 a Parliament in Dublin ; but you said nothing to justify 
 me in drawing any positive conclusion either way. On the 
 other hand, I have an impression that Lord Salisbury 
 would not absolutely refuse to consider the question of a 
 Parliament in Dublin on certain conditions ; but my im- 
 pression may be wrong, and I have no right to commit him 
 either way. 
 
 ' How slow the English mind, especially in educated 
 society, is to turn itself to a fresh point of view on political 
 questions ! Yet it sometimes undergoes a rapid conversion, 
 and I should not wonder if it did on this question of Home 
 Rule. The mass of people are very ignorant of Irish matters. 
 
 ' I wish you, with all my heart, many happy returns of 
 your birthday, and I still live in hope that you will crown 
 your great political career by settling the Irish Question on 
 a durable and happy basis.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 'December 28, 1885. — I am very much obliged to you 
 for your kindness in taking the trouble to write to me ; 
 and I am very glad to find that I have done no mischief. 
 
 ' There is a sentence in Mr. Gladstone's letter to me, 
 from which I made a quotation in my last letter to your 
 Lordship, which I think I ought to send you. After saying 
 that he had authorized nobody to put forth any views of 
 his on the Irish Question, he adds that he has never given
 
 126 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 even any " indication " of views or intentions that could 
 commit him to anything beyond this : "If the Government 
 take up the question, my desire is to give them the best aid 
 that with reasonable freedom of judgment I may." 
 
 ' My own fear, I confess, is, and has always been, that 
 Mr. Gladstone will not go far enough in the direction of 
 Home Rule. Certainly the impression which I brought away 
 with me from Hawarden was that Mr. Gladstone was not in 
 favour of a Parliament in Dublin. I inferred this from his 
 rejecting the Canadian scheme ; from his objection (as I 
 understood him) to any form of Grattan's Parliament ; and 
 above all, from the anecdote he told me of Sir Robert Peel 
 bidding him to " put away " his grand schemes of financial 
 reconstruction, and " work on the materials at hand." The 
 two points on which he seemed to feel most strongly were 
 that an honest attempt to settle the question in this Parlia- 
 ment — or rather to deal with it in this Parliament — could 
 not be avoided without danger : and the most hopeful way 
 of dealing with it would be that your Government should 
 take it up on lines which he could support as Leader of the 
 Opposition. This would enable you to deal with it more 
 independently than if you were obliged to rely on the Irish 
 vote.' 
 
 The new Parliament assembled on January 21, 1886, in 
 an atmosphere electrical with excitement and conjecture. 
 On the 24th MacCoU wrote from Rip on to his chief : 
 
 ' I asked my publisher to send you a pamphlet which 
 I have written on the Irish Question. ^ It is very crude ; 
 for, among other reasons, it was published in a desperate 
 hurry in the course of a week, and while I was busy making 
 preparations for coming down here. 
 
 ' If I may say so, I thought your speech on the Address 
 perfect. I wish I had known the Government were going 
 to make the Queen speak that nonsense about the " funda- 
 mental law " of the Act of Union, and I would have quoted 
 Lord Salisbury's own demolition of that absurd idea when 
 the late Lord Derby propounded it on the Second Reading 
 
 ^ Arguments for and against Home Rule.
 
 THE IRISH QUESTION 127 
 
 of your Irish Church Disestablishment Bill. The speech is 
 worth looking at. 
 
 ' I am much pleased with the tone of the Irish members. 
 It is hopeful. If they continue like that they will immensely 
 facilitate the settlement of the Irish Question. 
 
 ' I am so sorry the Spectator has gone so completely 
 wrong in this matter. Hutton has got a twist on the question. 
 He has some Irish blood in him, and there seems to be some 
 malign influence in Irish Protestantism which blinds the eyes 
 even of good men on Irish questions. There is a hateful 
 caste-feeling, like that of the Moslem towards the Rayah. 
 
 ' I hope Lord Hartington is all right. If he is, your 
 task will be easy, in spite of the insolent bluster of the 
 Times and the grotesque impertinences of Albert Grey 
 and Arthur ElHot. Why should not the American State 
 Legislatures answer in Ireland ? ' 
 
 After the General Election of 1880 the great Lord 
 Shaftesbury wrote in his diary : ' When Gladstone runs 
 down a steep place, his huge majority, like the pigs in 
 Scripture, but hoping for a better issue, will go with him, 
 roaring in grunts of exultation.' This prophecy took for 
 granted the unalterable docility of the Liberal party ; but 
 that docility, sorely tried by the events of the last five 
 years, had now reached its limit. On February 1, 188C, 
 Gladstone, having displaced Lord Sahsbury's Government 
 on an amendment to the Address, kissed hands as Prime 
 Minister, at the head of an administration pledged to Home 
 Rule. Some of his former colleagues had refused to 
 join his Government ; others subsequently retired from it. 
 The Liberals who objected to Home Rule formed them- 
 selves into a compact and vigorous party, under the 
 leadership of Lord Hartington and Mr. Chamberlain. On 
 February 4 MacColl wrote thus to Gladstone : 
 
 ' I am so glad that Lord Rosebery is to be at the Foreign 
 Office, and hardly less glad that the Government is free 
 from the incubus of Lord Derby's paralysing presence. 
 
 ' I received this morning a long and most kind letter 
 from Lord Hartington about my pamphlet, in which I have
 
 128 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 taken the liberty of making some criticism on himself 
 in connexion with Ireland. He says that he " sincerely 
 trusts that you may succeed " in settling the Irish Question, 
 " though he has felt that he is too deeply committed to 
 co-operate with you." 
 
 ' What a fine noble fellow he is ; so true, and leal, and 
 self-forgetting ! 
 
 ' Wishing you God speed in your great task, and 
 anticipating the complete success of your pohcy.' 
 
 This bright anticipation was not fulfilled. The Home 
 Rule Bill was defeated on the Second Reading on June 8. 
 Gladstone appealed to the country, and the country rejected 
 Home Rule. The liberal Government retired from office 
 without waiting to meet the new Parhament. A resigning 
 Premier usually scatters honours as he goes, and MacColl 
 was anxious that deserving Gladstonians should not be 
 ignored. On July 15 he wrote to Gladstone's Private 
 Secretary : 
 
 ' July 15, 1886. — May I venture to put the following 
 facts before you in case you think it well to speak to 
 Mr. Gladstone on the subject ? 
 
 ' It has come to my knowledge that Mr. Gladstone is 
 likely to be asked to confer a baronetcy on Mr. Pulley, late 
 M.P. for Hereford. I have known Mr. Pulley since he has 
 been in Parliament. Mr. Gladstone has had no more 
 devoted follower. He was offered a walk-over for Hereford 
 this time if he went against Mr. Gladstone's pohcy and 
 proclaimed himself a "Unionist." He replied that he would 
 rather be beaten as a follower of Mr. Gladstone than win any 
 number of victories as his opponent. I went to speak for 
 him, and found him very popular. But the combination 
 was too strong for him. 
 
 ' Mr. Pulley is very well off and has a pretty property 
 near Hereford. He is a great cattle-breeder and is most 
 popular among the farmers. I am rather sorry he did not 
 stand for one of the Divisions of the County. He is also a 
 man of tastes and accomphshments. He and Lord Chester- 
 field are almost the only representatives of Liberalism
 
 THE IRISH QUESTION 129 
 
 among the gentry in that part of Hereford, and all Liberals 
 thereabouts would be gratified by any honour bestowed 
 on Mr. Pulley. The Chesterfield family are all fond of 
 him, and would, I am sure, speak as highly of him as I do. 
 Mr. Pulley is going to look carefully after the registration 
 of Herefordshire in order to win back the county, and a 
 baronetcy would be useful to the cause. But it is Pulley's 
 great loyalty to Mr. Gladstone that I chiefly value.' 
 
 On August 6, 1886, he wrote to Gladstone : 
 
 * Of course you have read all about the magnificent 
 demonstration in Dublin.^ Lord and Lady Aberdeen have 
 shown how easily the Irish can be governed and how loyal 
 they can be made if approached in the right way. The 
 demonstration was doubtless meant in large part for you ; 
 but it would not have been so successful but for the wonder- 
 ful hold the Aberdeens got of the Irish people of all classes, 
 creeds, and parties. I could tell you some interesting in- 
 cidents but I must not trouble you. I may write on it in 
 the Pall Mall. Hutton would only let me write a para- 
 graph in "Current Events ' and even that in leading-strings." 
 
 On August 19, 1886, the new Parliament assembled for 
 the transaction of business, with Lord Salisbury comfort- 
 ably installed in office, at the head of a party composed 
 of Tories and Liberal Unionists. During the next five 
 years, MacCoU attended Gladstone's varying fortunes with 
 touching fidelity. The letters of this period may be left 
 to tell their own tale. Except where otherwise indicated, 
 they are addressed by MacColl to Gladstone. 
 
 ''December 7, 1886. — I have just been reading the 
 speeches at the Liberal Unionist meeting this afternoon. 
 My impression is that they will help the cause of Home 
 Rule. These men have no policy except Coercion. They 
 have gone back from their former professions at the last 
 two General Elections. Their only policy is to say ditto, 
 ditto, to a Tory Government, provided that Government 
 will act a little more despotically. No power of sophistry 
 
 ^ At the departure of the Viceroy and Lady Aberdeen.
 
 130 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 will make their position defensible, or even intelligible, at 
 the next dissolution. Those who may think it desirable 
 to keep a Tory Government in office will vote for a Tory. 
 Those who think it desirable to have a Liberal Government 
 in office will vote for a Gladstonian Liberal. 
 
 ' I think Lord Hartington's reproach against you for 
 your silence on the " Plan of Campaign " is cool, and Bright's 
 language is impudent. Where was he when you were 
 supporting in September a policy which would have made 
 the " Plan of Campaign " impossible ? He had no advice 
 to give then. He did not take the trouble even to hear 
 the pleading of the Irish representatives, in most moderate 
 language, to the British Parliament in favour of a legal 
 tribunal to try the complaints of Irish tenants. 
 
 ' I hope you will not for the present be induced to break 
 your silence. The " Liberal Unionists " are content, so 
 far as the complaints of the Irish people are concerned, to 
 wait the pleasure of the Government ; and they deny you 
 the right to wait for the production of the Government's 
 policy. I hope you will disappoint them. 
 
 ' But I wish you could find means of warning the Irish 
 against the most imprudent language attributed to Dillon 
 as to " a policy of revenge." Is it not the fact that there is 
 nothing in the British Constitution to prevent the Crown 
 from ceding by treaty the whole of Ireland to a foreign 
 Power ? And is not this a legitimate reductio ad absurdum 
 of Dicey's chief argument against your Bill ? * 
 
 * January 6, 1887. — I met at dinner this evening Colonel 
 Hozier, Secretary of the " Liberal Unionists." We had a 
 long talk on the Irish Question. He told me that Lord 
 Hartington really longed for the reunion of the Liberal 
 party, and was still most loyal to you. And Colonel 
 Hozier suggested that I should go and have a talk on the 
 Irish Question with Lord Hartington. I objected that I had 
 nothing particular to say. But he seemed to think that 
 if I expressed a wish to see Lord Hartington, and said that 
 I had seen you and that you were disposed to discuss the 
 Irish Question in a friendly way, some good might come of it.
 
 THE IRISH QUESTION 131 
 
 ' Do you advise me to ask to see Lord Hartington, of 
 course without committing you ? I told Colonel Hozier 
 that a Statutory Parliament in Dublin, under whatever 
 limitations, must be the starting-point of any discussion.' 
 
 ' February 11, 1887. — I met Chamberlain at dinner a few 
 days ago. He is evidently anxious to rejoin the party, 
 without appearing to surrender. But he is furious at 
 Labouchere's attacks, and indignant that the rank and file 
 of the party, and some of the leaders, do not separate them- 
 selves from those attacks. He said that of course he did 
 not expect you to do it, but that some of the minor leaders 
 might have done it. 
 
 ' I have asked him to dine with me, and I said that I 
 would ask you, and Lord Spencer, and Trevelyan and John 
 Morley. He said he should be delighted, and has given me 
 my choice of February 21 and 22, and March 4. I have an 
 engagement for February 22. I hope you are able and will 
 not mind coming on either of the other days. If you could 
 give me my choice of the two days, it would give a better 
 chance of securing the other gentlemen whom I have named.' 
 
 'February 15, 1887.— I have seen Sir George Trevelyan 
 several times lately, and I believe that he is in a very 
 hopeful mood. He is most friendly in his attitude towards 
 Home Rule Liberals, and towards you personally. My 
 belief is that he is sincerely anxious for the reunion of 
 the party as soon as possible ; and that believing Home 
 Rule to be inevitable, he wishes to remain out of Parhament 
 till it is settled, and for that reason, among others, wishes 
 it to be settled soon. That, at all events, is the impression 
 which he has given me. 
 
 ' On Chamberlain's suggestion the House-dinners of this 
 Club, which have been suspended since the split in the 
 party, are to be resumed, not on a sectional basis, but on 
 the basis of a party seeking to heal differences. Trevelyan 
 is to preside at the first, and Campbell-Bannerman at the 
 second. I know that it is Trevelyan's intention to preside 
 in an attitude of peace-maker, and if he should meet you 
 beforehand his purpose will be strengthened.' 
 
 K 2
 
 132 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' March 17, 1887.— The Liberal Unionist " Knights of 
 the Round Table " ^ appear to have coolly come to the con- 
 clusion that it is your business to cast aside your own Bills 
 in toto and set to work on drafting their ideas into a Bill. 
 They have both declared that they do not abate a jot 
 of their ideas. The concession is to be all on your side. 
 And what do they mean by accepting your " principle " ? 
 Courtney last night repudiated aU idea of anything like 
 an Irish Parliament and Executive, and he claimed, as 
 on his side, not only Lord Hartington and Sir Henry 
 James, but also Chamberlain and Sir George Trevelyan, who 
 was present, and tacitly accepted the position assigned to 
 him by Courtney. 
 
 ' I hope there will be no more Round Table Conferences. 
 The only result will be to confuse the people. Any idea that 
 you are going back from the main principles of your Bill 
 will take the heart out of the Liberal party. Of course 
 you are doing nothing of the kind. But I can see already 
 that some very good Liberals are getting bewildered.' 
 
 'May 11, 1887. — I have just been having an interest- 
 ing conversation with Sir George Trevelyan. He has just 
 returned from the country where he has been feeling the 
 pulse of people about the Coercion Bill. The only point on 
 which he feels at all uneasy is the danger of giving a plausible 
 excuse for a charge of obstruction against the Liberal party. 
 Except on that point he thinks the Liberals are making no 
 mistake. He is anxious that you should have a consultation 
 with some of the leaders — e.g. Lord Herschell, Harcourt, and 
 Morley and Spencer — and decide what amendments are 
 really important ; make a good, but not prolonged, fight on 
 those ; and then let the Government pass their odious Bill 
 after a final protest from you. He thinks this would damage 
 the Government much more than prolonged debates which 
 may give a handle to the Tories and Dissentient Liberals. 
 And if the Irish would fall in with this policy, Trevelyan 
 
 ^ Early in 1887 Sir William Harcourt, Mr. Chamberlain, Lord Herschell, Sir 
 George Trevelyan, and Mr. John Morley met ' round a table ' at Sir WiUiam 
 Harcourt' 8 house to consider the Irish Question. After prolonged discussion, 
 they separated without arriving at an agreement.
 
 THE IRISH QUESTION 133 
 
 thinks that it would help the cause immensely. He does 
 not think that the leaders and the majority of the Dissentients 
 will ever come back to the party, and is of opinion that the 
 party had better act on that assumption. 
 
 ' I told Trevelyan that I would communicate to you 
 what he said.' 
 
 ' July 4, 1887. — I am delighted that you have at last taken 
 off the gloves and hit out at Lord Hartington and the "Liberal 
 Unionists " so-called.^ You have been too gentle with them 
 hitherto, and they have mistaken your gentleness for con- 
 scious appreciation of the waning popularity of yourself and 
 your cause. The country, too, was getting a Uttle bewildered. 
 It did not Imow how far your concessions were to go. I 
 think you have gone to the utmost limit of conciliation and 
 concession. It is now for the other side to produce their 
 plan. They are in office and in power, and it is nothing 
 less than impudent to call upon you, as leader of the Opposi- 
 tion, to produce in opposition another Home Rule Bill. 
 That would be very convenient for them ; for they know 
 that they will all go to pieces the moment they begin 
 their constructive policy. I am deeply disappointed in 
 Lord Hartington. I still believe in his honesty and personal 
 unselfishness ; but he has ceased to be a Liberal. I have 
 never known a case where " evil communications " have 
 more rapidly corrupted good principles. 
 
 ' The Dissentient Liberals are playing the life of this 
 Parliament against your leadership. They intend to support 
 this Government in anytlmig to keep you out of office. 
 It is better therefore to recognize facts and treat the 
 Dissentient Liberals as deserters to the enemy's camp. 
 I am sure that policy is the best in point of tactics for the 
 constituencies. 
 
 ' Hutton breakfasted with me here on Saturday. I am 
 very sorry for him. It is real agony to him to be writing 
 against you, and he is now especially distressed because a 
 letter you wrote to him correcting a misreport of a speech 
 of yours lay for six weeks in this Club without being 
 
 ^ lu a speech to the Liberal M.P.'s for Durham.
 
 134 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 forwarded to him, and he was thus prevented from making 
 the correction. He has made it, however, in an article in 
 last Saturday's Spectator. He thinks, somewhat amusingly, 
 that the Club-porter, a vehement Home Ruler, kept back 
 your letter on purpose in order to spite him ; and your not 
 having acknowledged his letter of explanation makes him 
 half believe that you don't believe him.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 'April 6, 1889. — You have always been so kind and 
 indulgent to me that I am going to take the liberty of 
 writing a few words to you on the political situation. 
 I have never been much of a party man ; and since your 
 Lordship has taken the lead of the Conservative party I have 
 kept aloof from politics except one or two articles on 
 Home Rule. I venture to enclose a copy of my last inter- 
 position in politics — an article in the Review of last July. 
 
 ' I have returned from three months' residence at Ripon, 
 and after careful inquiry my conviction is that there are 
 no Liberal Unionists now in that Parliamentary Division of 
 Yorkshire. In 1886 the Liberal member became a Liberal 
 Unionist and retired in favour of Mr. Wharton. Last 
 January he was at his own request re-elected a member of 
 the Liberal Association. I believe that what has taken 
 place at Ripon has been taking place all over the country. 
 The Liberal Unionists have practically ceased to exist as a 
 political force outside the House of Commons. Therefore 
 when the Dissolution comes the fight will be between the 
 Conservative party and the Home Rulers ; and my behef 
 is that the Home Rulers will have a considerable and probably 
 a large majority. That is not a prospect which I regard, 
 Home Ruler as I am, with unmixed satisfaction. It was my 
 hope that on the retirement of Mr. Gladstone your Lordship 
 might be able to lead a moderate party, avoiding all extremes. 
 
 ' I do not think that even now my dream is an 
 impossibility, provided only the Tory party saw its way to 
 go in for Home Rule on a large scale, embracing the whole 
 Empire. My reasons for that view are given in the article 
 of which I enclose a copy. I have talked the matter over
 
 THE IRISH QUESTION 135 
 
 with many Conservatives all over the country, and I have 
 not met one Conservative who did not say that he would 
 rejoice in such a scheme. My belief is that it would be the 
 most conservative policy that can be imagined. Extreme 
 measures in Church and State have their fulcrum and lever- 
 power in Scotland, Wales, and Ireland. Let these be allowed 
 to manage their own affairs and leave England to manage hers. 
 
 ' I want Home Rule for England, which has been for 
 a long time governed by votes which are not English. The 
 Liberals are not yet prepared for such a measure of Home 
 Rule as I want. 
 
 ' Many of them, especially among the Radical party, 
 would oppose it just because of its conservative tendency. 
 I believe that the country would greatly, even enthusi- 
 astically, accept such a scheme. What is the alternative ? 
 A Land Purchase scheme, to be followed by a Local Govern- 
 ment scheme ? A Land Purchase scheme must rest on 
 Imperial guarantee, or on Chamberlain's system of local 
 banks. I believe that no Government can carry the former. 
 The Tories and Liberal Unionists at the last Election de- 
 nounced the idea of any Imperial guarantee so vigorously 
 that they could not now propose it ; and Chamberlain 
 is too deeply pledged against it to retreat. Besides, 
 Chamberlain's great ambition is to settle the Irish Question 
 on his own lines. He still hopes to lead the Liberal party, 
 and he thinks that his best chance of doing so will be to 
 gain the credit of having settled the Irish Question. Depend 
 upon it, he will support no proposal which will exclude his 
 own pet schemes of Land Purchase and Local Government. 
 How would his schemes act ? Let us suppose a Land 
 Purchase Bill passed of which local banks would furnish 
 the guarantee. How would Irish landlords regard such 
 a guarantee ? It would be perfectly safe, says Mr. 
 Chamberlain, because the Land Bill will be followed by a 
 Local Government Bill, the financial operations of which 
 would collapse in the event of failure as to the Land Bill 
 guarantee. But what would the Nationalists care about 
 that ? Such a failure is precisely what they would most 
 desire. The credit of the Government and of the Conservative
 
 136 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 party would be involved in the crash, and the Home Rulers 
 would be triumphant along the whole line. The more the 
 question is looked at, the more inevitable seems to me 
 the conclusion that there are only two alternatives ; the 
 indefinite countenance of things as they are, which is 
 impossible, or Home Rule in the sense of a subordinate 
 Parliament including an Executive, to be followed by the 
 establishment of similar bodies in Scotland, Wales, and 
 England, all under the control of a great paramount Imperial 
 Parliament. Under such a scheme the Irish would submit 
 to checks and safeguards which were imposed on the other 
 Nationalists and not on them alone. And surely it is not 
 beyond the resources of British statesmanship to give the 
 Colonies some voice under such a scheme as I have ventured 
 to suggest.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 'April 11, 1889.— I feel that I did not sufficiently 
 apologize for the liberty I took the other day in writing 
 to you, so I venture to send one word of explanation. 
 
 ' The plain truth is that I have never been much of a 
 political partisan. My natural tendency — due, I presume, 
 to my Celtic nature — is to regard persons more than parties. 
 In my early boyhood, I made Mr. Gladstone a hero, and 
 I hate to see my idols broken. So that I have sometimes de- 
 fended him even when I did not altogether like some things 
 he had said. I still believe in his Churchmanship ; and as 
 to Home Rule, I was a Home Ruler before Mr. Gladstone, 
 and the man Avho had the most to do with my conversion 
 to that policy, as well as to the disestablishment of the Irish 
 Church, was the late Lord Greville, whom I used to visit in 
 Ireland. My hope has always been that, when Mr. Glad- 
 stone passed away, your Lordship would lead a moderate 
 party which might command the confidence of Churchmen 
 generally, and I have not quite resigned that hope now. 
 But I feel that it all depends on the policy with which your 
 Lordship will go to the country at the next Dissolution. 
 
 ' I may be quite wrong ; but I feel nearly certain that 
 Home Rule will carry the day Avhether Mr. Gladstone be
 
 THE IRISH QUESTION 137 
 
 still leader of the Opposition or not. On the other hand, the 
 Liberals are not agreed upon the large Home Rule poHcy 
 which I advocate, and the Conservatives are not, as far as 
 I know, committed against it. Home Rule for Ireland 
 alone is a very different thing from the pohcy which I desire, 
 and would be so regarded by the country. Is this poHcy 
 impossible for the Conservative party ? I do not see why 
 it should be.' 
 
 Salisbury to MacColl 
 
 'April 12, 1889. — I am much obhged to you for your 
 letters, and the two printed papers. 
 
 ' As to Home Rule in your sense — which is Federation — 
 I do not see in it any elements of practicability. Nations 
 do not change their political nature like that, except through 
 blood. It would require a subordination of all ordinary 
 motives, a renunciation of traditions and prepossessions, 
 a far-reaching and disciplined resolve, which is never en- 
 gendered by mere persuasion, and only comes after conflict 
 and under the pressure of military force. To ask the British 
 nation in its present moral and political condition to execute 
 such a transformation would be like asking the Rector's 
 cob to win the Derby. The forces are not there. I express 
 no opinion as to the advantage of the change — if it were 
 possible.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ' August 15, 1891. — Politics are going beautifully. I pre- 
 dict a Liberal majority next year of 60 for a minimum ; 
 but I expect at least 100.' 
 
 ' November 29, 1891. — I hope you will deal trenchantly 
 with the revolutionary doctrine propounded by Lord 
 Hartington in his speech in Manchester this autumn,^ 
 namely that the Opposition would first obstruct your Home 
 Rule Bill in the Commons, no matter what majority you 
 got, and then throw it out in the House of Lords. This 
 seems to me more revolutionary than Lord Salisbury's 
 
 ' November 10, 1891.
 
 138 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 declaration i the other day, that, if you passed your 
 Bill, the Opposition, without giving it a fair trial, 
 would immediately start an agitation for its repeal. 
 But Lord Salisbury has estopped himself from acting on 
 Lord Hartington's revolutionary advice, as you will see 
 from the enclosed extract which I have made from his 
 speech in favour of your Irish Disestablishment Bill. That 
 Bill had never been before the country except in Parlia- 
 ment ; and the whole question had only been before the 
 country about a year. The Home Rule Question, on the 
 other hand, was debated through most of a Session in the 
 House of Commons ; there was a dissolution upon it ; it 
 is the one parliamentary subject before the nation since the 
 beginning of 1886, and the next dissolution will take place 
 upon it. For the Lords to throw it out in the face of a 
 majority in the Commons — a good majority at all events — 
 is surely a most revolutionary doctrine. Moreover, the 
 Home Rule Bill is a far smaller invasion of the Act of Union 
 than the Irish Church Bill. Leave the Irish members at 
 Westminster, and your 1886 Bill is not in conflict with a 
 single clause of the Act of Union. I have compared them. 
 I think Lord Salisbury's most statesmanlike doctrine in 
 1869 ought to be quoted.' 
 
 MacColl was always the most sanguine of Gladstonians. 
 His constant and confident anticipations of the overthrow 
 of the Unionist Government betray his incurable hopeful- 
 ness. As the General Election drew near, he shared 
 Gladstone's belief that the majority for Home Rule could 
 not be less than a hundred. Parliament was dissolved 
 on June 28, 1892, and, when the Election was over, the 
 majority was only forty, all told. Gladstone became 
 Prime Minister for the fourth time, and in 1893 brought 
 in his second Home Rule Bill, which scrambled through 
 the House of Commons but was defeated in the Lords by 
 419 to 41. Thus ignominously collapsed the movement 
 which had started in December 1885, and for twenty 
 years the Irish Question slumbered. 
 
 ^ At Birmingham, November 24, 1891.
 
 CHAPTER VIII 
 
 ARMENIA 
 
 The Armenian Massacres, judiciously interspersed with intervals of breath- 
 ing-time, have surpassed in their scale, and in the intensity and diversity of 
 their wickedness, all modem, if not all historical, experience. 
 
 W. E. Gladstone. 
 
 It was a marked characteristic of MacColl's nature that, 
 when once he had convinced himself that a cause was 
 righteous, he followed it through evil report and good 
 report, in season and out of season. This was pre-eminently- 
 true with regard to the cause of the Christian populations 
 in Eastern Europe, and their resistance to the age-long 
 persecution which they have endured at the hands of their 
 Turkish oppressors. In a former chapter we have seen 
 MacCoU's untired activity in the Eastern Question of 
 1876-9, and at the point which we have now reached he 
 found himself imperatively recalled to his earHer battle-field. 
 Gladstone resigned the Premiership in March 1894, 
 being succeeded by Lord Rosebery, and ceased to be a 
 Member of Parliament at the dissolution of 1895. Mean- 
 while, distressing reports had reached England of atrocities 
 committed by the Turks on the Christians of Armenia, and 
 MacColl's chivalrous spirit was stirred within him. In this, 
 as in other controversies, he was in the closest sympathy 
 with Gladstone, to whom he wrote on November 22, 1894 : 
 
 ' You have probably seen in the Times and Daily Netvs 
 the accounts of the massacres in Armenia. They are on 
 much the same scale and of the same character as the 
 Bulgarian atrocities. The real truth is that they were, 
 
 139
 
 140 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 like the Bulgarian atrocities, organized in Constantinople 
 to terrorize and " diminish " the population. The Porte 
 has appointed a Commission, as it did in Bulgaria, and the 
 report of that Commission will doubtless follow the Bulgarian 
 precedent. What is needed is an independent enquiry, 
 to be followed by such action as the circumstances may 
 require. It must be remembered that England is under 
 a double obligation in this matter : first, by the 61st Clause 
 of the Treaty of Berlin ; secondly, by the Anglo-Turkish Con- 
 vention, which engages England to resist Russian aggression 
 in Armenia by force of arms. 
 
 ' A word from you at this moment would have a mighty 
 effect. If the Government follow the example of Lord 
 Beaconsfield's Government, the General Election will as 
 surely prove their ruin as that of 1880 proved the ruin of 
 Lord Beaconsfield's administration. Already I am receiving 
 communications from Liberals in various places to organize 
 an agitation. 
 
 ' I am writing in haste to catch this morning's post. 
 Of course I don't mean my letter for publication ; but I 
 hope you will write me a line or two in reply m hich I may 
 publish. The thing to be insisted on just now — is it not ? 
 — is first, that a Turkish Commission of enquiry is a farce ; 
 secondly, that the Government ought to order an independent 
 enquiry. Even Lord Beaconsfield's Government did that 
 in Bulgaria.' 
 
 When MacCoU's spirit was roused, his pen was never 
 idle. On May 9, 1895, he wrote to Gladstone : 
 
 ' By the God Wlio made me, and in Whose strength I 
 stand, I mean to do my level best to set the heather on fire 
 on this question, cost me what it may, and cost the Govern- 
 ment what it may.' 
 
 On May 20 he wrote thus to Lord Salisbury : 
 
 ' I am taking the liberty of sending you a pamphlet 
 which I hope you will find time to read.^ My belief is that 
 
 ^ England's Responsibility towards Armenia.
 
 ARMENIA 141 
 
 both political parties are failing to recognize the significance 
 and importance of this Armenian Question, as they did that 
 of the Bulgarian business in its early stages. The country 
 is getting roused on the question, unknown to the wire- 
 pullers or political managers. There is always in the 
 country a large section of those who take but a languid 
 interest in ordinary Party politics, but who are roused 
 to fever heat by a question like this, which appeals to 
 their emotions, their humanity, their Christianity, and 
 their passion for justice. I was in touch with these in 
 1877-80, through committees which I had formed all over 
 the country, quite apart from political organizations. So 
 that when Adam, the Liberal Whip, asked me, on the eve 
 of the Election of 1880, what I thought of the probabihties, 
 I said I gave the Liberals a majority of 60 for a minimum 
 and anything over 100 for a maximum. He thought I was 
 mad, his calculation being that on the most sanguine 
 view the utmost the Liberals could do would be to reduce 
 the Tory majority to about 20. Gladstone, who is always 
 in magnetic touch with the country on a question of this 
 sort, agreed with me, as he does now. I have renewed 
 my organization and am again in touch with that ordinarily 
 inert mass, which can be roused to enthusiasm by a question 
 of this sort. The first edition of my pamphlet (1000 copies) 
 was sold out in five days, almost all being orders from the 
 country ; and within the last fortnight I have received 
 1000 letters from different parts of the country, all on fire 
 on this question. But of that state of feeling political 
 wire-pullers know nothing. Yet it is this margin of votes 
 which will decide the next Election. Will you kindly read 
 my pamphlet, and then let me have a talk with you ? 
 The Government have made a mess of the business and 
 are past praying for.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ' May 24, 1895. — I am very glad you are in town. You 
 may be able, I trust, to save the Government and the Liberal 
 party from a most serious disaster on the Armenian Question.
 
 142 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Their scheme of reforms will be their ruin unless the Sultan 
 is such an ass as to reject it. I will give you my reasons 
 for that opinion, and I think you wiU consider them good 
 reasons. I will call with this ; but probably you will not be 
 able to see me to-day. 
 
 ' I enclose a copy of the second edition of my pamphlet. 
 The first edition (1000 copies) was sold out in five days, and 
 the pamphlet was out of print for five days because the 
 publishers were not prepared for so rapid a sale.' It has been 
 very well reviewed, and the sale has been almost entirely 
 in the country. 
 
 ' I enclose also a copy of some criticisms of mine on 
 the scheme of reforms for Armenia, part of which the 
 Times quoted to-day. I wrote it hurriedly, partly for the 
 Grosvenor House Committee, of which I am Honorary 
 Secretary, and partly as a cue to the provincial Press, from 
 the editors of which I have received shoals of letters asking 
 my opinion.' 
 
 On June 21 the Government was beaten in a snap- 
 division on the Army Estimates ; and Lord Rosebery, 
 instead of challenging the judgment of the country by dis- 
 solution, meekly toddled out of office. Lord Salisbury 
 became Prime Minister, and dissolved Parliament on July 8. 
 The General Election gave him a majority which lasted 
 unbroken till 1906. 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' July 18, 1895. — I have shed no tears on the Liberal 
 collapse. I expected it whenever Mr. Gladstone retired, 
 though his retirement is not the only cause of disaster. 
 I gave them up a year ago and have done my best to 
 damage them throughout the country for their feeble 
 diplomacy on the Armenian Question. I managed to turn 
 a number of Liberal papers against them on that ques- 
 tion, and got " cut " for my pains by a leading member 
 of the Cabinet. I hope your Lordship wdll be able to 
 secure European control, as in the Lebanon, for Armenia. 
 That is much more important than any scheme of 
 paper reforms. My belief is that, if the late Government
 
 ARMENIA 143 
 
 had given Sir Philip Currie a free hand, he would have 
 secured European control for Armenia.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ' July 22, 1895. — Information has reached me to the 
 effect that, if nothing is done for the Armenians within 
 a reasonable time, they will turn on their oppressors, pre- 
 ferring death at once by a general massacre to the slow 
 torture which they are made to endure. 
 
 ' I have just seen the Duke of Westminster, who is very 
 earnest in the matter. But he thinks that a meeting in 
 Chester would do no good unless you could be persuaded to 
 speak. He wiU write to you to that effect, and he would 
 himself preside at the meeting. Do you not think that you 
 could speak under such circumstances ? There could be 
 no Party character suspected in a meeting called by and 
 presided over by the Duke of Westminster. Moreover, I 
 wrote my Quarterly article with a view of committing 
 the Tory party to a policy of coercion in Armenia. The 
 Quarterly will be out next Wednesday with my article in 
 it, and a speech from you would therefore be only backing 
 up the recommendation of the leading Tory organ. I don't 
 want my name to get known as the writer of the article. 
 I believe the Conservatives, as a party, would welcome a 
 speech from you just now on the Eastern Question. Several 
 Tories have said as much to me. You can save the 
 Armenians from extinction.' 
 
 The Same to the Same 
 ' July 30, 1895. — A thousand thanks. A speech from 
 you just now is just what is needed. It will rouse the 
 country as nothing else can. I think Lord Salisbury is 
 well inclined ; but he is timid. If he feels that he has the 
 nation at his back, I think he may be induced to take a 
 strong line both in Armenia and Macedonia. Russia also 
 will suspect nothing sinister from you. What she fears is 
 the creation of an Armenian Principality on her frontiers. 
 Reassured on that point, I think she would support the 
 appointment of a European Commission, or Governor under
 
 144 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 the control of the Powers. Without such security reforms 
 are of no use, as you have often said. Pressed into a 
 corner, the Sultan will promise anything.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' July 31, 1895. — I hope the Pall Mall Gazette and 
 St. James's Gazette of to-day will not mislead you as to 
 Mr. Gladstone's intention in consenting to address a public 
 meeting at Chester on the Armenian Question. The facts 
 are in brief as follows : About a fortnight ago a Chester 
 clergyman wrote to me to say that he had read my 
 pamphlet with horror, and that he was so roused that 
 he had consulted a number of Churchmen in Chester, and 
 they all agreed to get up a pubhc meeting if I would 
 go and deliver an address. I went to consult the Duke 
 of Westminster and he agreed to take the Chair, but 
 suggested that it would be well to get Mr. Gladstone 
 to speak if possible. I said that I did not think there was 
 any chance, as Mr. Gladstone had repeatedly declined to 
 write or speak on the subject of Armenia for fear of giving 
 some people an opportunity of turning his action to Party 
 purposes. However, the Duke said he would write to 
 Mi. Gladstone and offer to preside at the meeting, and he 
 advised me to write too. I did, and IVIr. Gladstone was 
 very reluctant to agree. He told me that he had been 
 urged by many persons, including supporters of your Lord- 
 ship's Government, to speak, but had declined for fear of 
 doing harm rather than good ; but he would consult friends. 
 He has at last consented to speak, but with the intention 
 of supporting your Lordship's diplomacy by shoAving the 
 Sultan and the Great Powers that you have all England 
 at your back. Between ourselves, he was, to put it 
 mildly, puzzled by the diplomacy of the late Govern- 
 ment on this question. He has always believed in your 
 Lordship's sympathy for the rayahs of Turkey as well as 
 your thorough comprehension of the whole question ; and the 
 Qvurterly Review article on Islam convinced him that he 
 would be helping the Government by speaking just now.
 
 ARMENIA 145 
 
 That is the whole truth. If there is any point which your 
 Lordship would vnsh Mr. Gladstone to make or to avoid 
 and win tell me confidentially, either by letter or by letting 
 me come to see you, I will take care that Mr. Gladstone 
 shall attend to it without letting him know that I have had 
 communication with your Lordship. From information — 
 trustworthy, I believe — which has reached me, I am afraid 
 the Sultan means to settle the Armenian Question by the 
 extermination of the Armenians. I should be troubling at 
 too great length if I were to give my reasons. I have 
 summarized them in the preface of a cheap edition of my 
 pamphlet which will be out to-morrow and of which I will 
 take the hberty to send a copy to your Lordship. I have 
 great confidence in your Lordship's management of this 
 question, which is more than I had in the late Government. 
 They had not got a back-bone among them.' 
 
 Salisbury to MacColl 
 
 'August 1, 1895. — I am much obliged to you for your 
 letter of July 3L 
 
 ' I am so Httle disposed to look upon Mr. Gladstone's 
 proposed action as being in any way hkely to be an impedi- 
 ment, that I have already telegraphed the news of it to Sir 
 Philip Currie, in case he should not hear of it from other 
 quarters, and in case the mention of it may be useful for the 
 purposes he has in hand. 
 
 ' The peculiarity of my predecessors' policy, which of 
 course I am bound to carry out, is that they have acted 
 in strict harmony with the Governments of France and 
 Russia ; and that co-operation, while it gives solemnity 
 and force to our intervention, carries with it necessarily 
 many Hmiting conditions, which will make our conjoint 
 action different in some respects, which may be important, 
 from the action which this country would probably have 
 pursued alone. This all-important character in the present 
 intervention must be remembered both in attempting to 
 forecast what the action taken will be, and in judging of it 
 when it has been taken.'
 
 14G MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ' August 2, 1895. — When it was announced that 
 you were to speak at Chester the Pall Mall Gazette, 
 St. James's Gazette, and Glohe attacked you, and the 
 Pall Mall attacked me as well. They said that you 
 were going to embarrass the Government. Therefore I 
 wrote to Lord Salisbury and explained how the Chester 
 meeting came about, and your reluctance to do any- 
 thing that might even seem to embarrass his diplomacy. 
 To-day I have received a reply which is marked 
 " private," but of which I venture to send you a copy 
 in confidence, for I venture to think it important. I 
 think you will help him and encourage him to act more 
 energetically if you admit in your speech that his hands 
 are somewhat tied by the action of his predecessors. I 
 think the late Government threw away a great oppor- 
 tunity by their feeble and dilatory action on the Armenian 
 Question.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 'August 28, 1895. — I apologize for trespassing so 
 much on your time and patience. But I am anxious 
 to do nothing and to advise nothing which might tend 
 in any way to embarrass your Lordship in your eflPorts 
 on behalf of the Armenians. I have a bundle of un- 
 answered letters received during my illness, from persons 
 all over the kingdom, on the subject of public meetings 
 in connexion with Armenia. I advised my correspondents 
 to rest satisfied with the Chester meeting, ^ adding that 
 I knew that your Lordship was doing all you could, but 
 a number of letters suggest public meetings in aid of the 
 Relief Fund on behalf of the Armenians. I enclose a 
 specimen. The writer is a strong Conservative, and there- 
 fore most friendly to the Government. The question is 
 whether it will be wise to have such meetings ; for, although 
 the advertised purpose will be to express sympathy with the 
 Armenians and to collect money for them, it will, I beheve, 
 
 1 Gladatoue addressed a iniblic meeting at Chester on August 6, 1895.
 
 ARMENIA 147 
 
 be difficult to prevent such meetings from having the 
 character of Indignation Meetings ; not of course against 
 the Government but against the Porte. And I have a 
 strong feeling that supplementary meetings would be likely 
 to weaken the moral effect of the Chester meeting. That 
 meeting must have shown the Sultan that your Lordship 
 has the whole nation at your back. The calm which has 
 succeeded must have impressed him, I should think, more 
 than any number of noisy meetings would have done.' 
 
 Salisbury to MacColl 
 
 ' August 29, 1895. — I think on the whole that it would 
 not be desirable that I should offer you any advice as 
 to the question whether you should hold meetings upon 
 the Armenian matter or not. 
 
 ' I have already been accused, most unjustly, of having 
 got up the Demonstration at which you spoke.' i 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ^November 2, 1895. — I have ordered a copy of the 
 current number of the Contemporary Review to be sent 
 to your Lordship. In an article on the Armenian Question 
 I have, while condemning the settlement, laid the entire 
 responsibiUty of it on the late Government. The moment 
 a summary of the scheme was published last May, I read 
 a paper on it at a meeting of the Grosvenor House 
 Committee, of which the Duke of Westminster is Presi- 
 dent, and the Duke of Portland, Lord Bute, and Lord 
 Strathmore are members. I criticized it in detail, and 
 showed as I think the utter futility and even mischief of it 
 without European control. The Duke of Westminster, by 
 the wish of the Committee, sent my criticisms to the 
 papers, much to the disgust of Lord Rosebery and his 
 Government who have never forgiven me ; for I raised the 
 Liberal Press against them. The Liberal papers are now 
 disposed to forget this and to throw the whole blame of the 
 failure on your Lordship. I have no doubt that I shall be 
 
 ^ At St. James's Hall, on May 7, 1895. 
 
 L 2
 
 148 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 anathematized in Liberal circles for my article, but I can't 
 help that. I regard their diplomacy on this question as 
 fatuous in the extreme. If the Liberal Government had, 
 last May, presented the Sultan \%dth a workable scheme, 
 with an alternative menace of the fleet going to Smyrna, 
 I have no doubt they would have won. Russia and 
 France had not then made up their minds, and would 
 have been obliged to co-operate, but Lord Rosebery threw 
 away his opportunity. I believe he was anxious to help 
 the Armenians, but he was not master of the question ; 
 Lord Kimberley was weak and timid, and Sir W. Harcourt 
 bullied both, thinking only of what could win the Election, 
 as he thought — his pet Veto Bill.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ^November 5, 1895. — I am in private correspondence 
 with Lord Salisbury on the Eastern Question, and find 
 him most friendly. I suspect that he is not well backed 
 up in the Cabinet. I am afraid Chamberlain is too much 
 bent on making a name for himself in the Colonial 
 Department to care a button for the Armenians ; and of 
 course the Duke of Devonshire will put on his caution- 
 drag.' 
 
 All through the spring and summer of 1896 things 
 went from bad to worse in Armenia. MacColl incessantly 
 plied his vigorous pen, and used whatever influence he could 
 bring to bear on his friends, and more particularly on 
 Lord Sahsbury and Mr. Gladstone — the only statesmen in 
 whom he had confidence. When reviewing a book by the 
 Duke of Argyll on ' Our Responsibihties for Turkey,' he 
 wrote : ' I am glad of any opportunity to have a fling at 
 the Unspeakable One.' His personal relations with Lord 
 Rosebery were friendly enough, but he despised the pusillani- 
 mous policy of inaction which Lord Rosebery's Cabinet had 
 maintained ; and, as the summer declined into the autumn, 
 he encouraged Gladstone to come forward yet once again 
 on behaK of the persecuted Christians. From this point 
 his correspondence may be left to tell its own tale.
 
 ARMENIA 149 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 'September 9, 1896. — I have been for some days 
 the recipient of letters from all parts of the United 
 Kingdom, urging the duty of holding public meetings 
 in London and elsewhere. Since the meeting at Chester 
 at which Mr. Gladstone spoke, soon after your Lordship's 
 accession to office, I have used whatever influence 
 I possess against the policy of agitation, and I have 
 taken every opportunity of declaring publicly that 
 your Lordship has been handicapped by the imbecile 
 diplomacy of your predecessors. I knoAv for a fact that on 
 the collapse of China the Russian Government invoked a 
 friendly understanding mth Lord Rosebery's Government 
 both in the far East and near. Lord Rosebery dechned, 
 and British policy has been thwarted ever since. Lord 
 Rosebery's Government mismanaged the Armenian Question 
 from the beginning. I can never forgive them for the 
 appointment of the Turkish Commission on the Armenian 
 massacres, which was appointed by their advice, for no 
 other reason that I can think of but that of hoodwinking 
 pubHc opinion in England. And as they began, so they 
 proceeded, from one feeble proposal to another. The truth, 
 I believe, is, that Lord Rosebery's Government was para- 
 lysed by internal discords. I think Lord Rosebery's own 
 feelings were in favour of a more vigorous policy and an 
 understanding with Russia. Sir W. Harcourt, on the other 
 hand — besides delighting in thwarting Lord Rosebery — 
 thought that he would win the election by his Budget and 
 his Veto Bill and thus return to power with a personal 
 prestige which would force his supersession of Lord 
 Rosebery. That is only my private opinion. What I dc 
 know is that Harcourt opposed the line in foreign policy 
 that Lord Rosebery was at one time disposed to adopt. 
 I don't know how many of the Cabinet supported him ; 
 but I believe that Mr. John Morley certainly did. Lord 
 Kimberley, on the other hand, was too lethargic to take 
 a strong line. 
 
 ' I have troubled your Lordship with these remarks
 
 150 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 in order to show that I, for one, should be very sorry to 
 see our Foreign policy again entrusted to the custody of the 
 late ministry, and that I am therefore very unlikely to do 
 anything which might have a tendency to embarrass your 
 Lordship. But public feeling is getting so hot and wild 
 on the question, that I am disposed to think that public 
 meetings will be held with or without the co-operation of 
 the Grosvenor House Committee. In the former case the 
 Committee would be able to exercise some control. I should 
 probably (as Honorary Secretary) have a voice in the 
 drafting of Resolutions, the choice of speakers, and the line 
 of poHcy to be adopted. There are as many Conservatives 
 as Liberals on the Grosvenor House Committee, including 
 a member of your Lordship's Government, the Duke of 
 Portland ; and I should of course do nothing without con- 
 sultation with the Committee. 
 
 ' I should be greatly obliged if your Lordship would tell 
 me quite privately which you think more advisable : that 
 the Grosvenor House Committee — if we find that public 
 meetings are inevitable — should do our best to guide and 
 control them ; or simply let them take their course. I am 
 glad to see the Daily Chronicle, which is prone to take an 
 independent hne, while urging further meetings, gives your 
 Lordship credit (in its yesterday's leader) for doing your 
 best, but throws over Lord Rosebery and the Liberal 
 leaders as hopelessly indifferent to the moral obUgations 
 of the situation. My opinion, if I may venture to say so, 
 is that it would be wiser to guide the indignation of the 
 public than to leave it to run riot.' 
 
 Salisbury to MacColl 
 
 'September 9, 1896.— Of Armenia I have little to say, 
 for you know almost as much as I do about it. My last 
 news is not good. I have heard from more than one 
 good authority that, at the recent interview in Vienna, 
 Lobanoff and Goluchowski agreed that it was perfectly 
 possible to put off the dissolution of the Turkish Empire 
 for a great number of years ; and mutually pledged each
 
 ARMENIA 151 
 
 other to work together for that purpose to the best of their 
 power. Of course, Austria carries Germany and Russia 
 carries France. Yet there are things which the most 
 powerful combinations cannot do.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' [Hawarden], September 12, 1896. — Instead of going 
 straight to London from Curraghmore, without seeing 
 Mr. Gladstone, as I had intended, I have just arrived 
 here, for two reasons : first, because I found that it was no 
 longer a question of meetings or no meetings, but only of 
 guiding the meetings. Three weeks ago I thought the 
 nation had settled down into a state of apathy as regards 
 the horrors in Turkey. Now I find that the indignation 
 of the people must have a vent ; and I am glad of it, 
 for I beUeve it can be kept within reasonable bounds. 
 My second reason for coming here is that I learnt that 
 Mr. Gladstone has been and is being strongly urged to speak 
 at a meeting to be held at Chester, and he is considering 
 the matter. I know that his disposition js to help your 
 Lordship in any action which you may think it wise to 
 take ; and I believe there is no action, however drastic, in 
 which the nation would not joyfully support you. I came 
 to talk the matter over with Mr. Gladstone. But I have 
 not yet seen him, for I have only just arrived from 
 Ireland ; and I am going to take the liberty of putting 
 my own views before your Lordship as to the policy to 
 be advocated at public meetings as the most feasible and 
 least violent : 
 
 ' (1) The deposition of the Sultan by the united action 
 of the Great Powers, or by one or more of them with the 
 acquiescence of the rest. 
 
 ' (2) If a majority of the Powers oppose this solution, 
 that your Lordship should lay your policy before the 
 Powers, namely that, in consequence of their refusal to act, 
 you should break off diplomatic relations with the Sultan, 
 recalling the British Ambassador at Constantinople and 
 giving the Turkish Ambassador his passport.
 
 152 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' I have not a doubt that the mere threat of your Lord- 
 ship's determination to take this course would force the 
 Powers to accept the alternative of the Sultan's deposition, 
 or to propose some efficacious alternative of their own. 
 See how your refusal to agree to their cruel policy in regard 
 to Crete compelled them to follow your lead. Their nervous 
 dread of a general war is the very lever to work upon. To 
 disarm any suspicion of your intention or desire to gain 
 any special advantage for England, would it not be possible 
 to propose a self-denying ordinance by which the Powers 
 would bind themselves to respect the territorial status quo 
 in Turkey ? This would show the world that, if there is 
 any Power which is cloaking selfish designs under a mask 
 of zeal for the prosecuted Christians, it is not England. 
 The very fear of opening out the whole Eastern Question 
 will make the other Powers go with your Lordship instead 
 of thwarting you, once they see that you are determined 
 to get the Sultan deposed, or throw upon them, before the 
 civilized world and their own Christian subjects, the respon- 
 sibility of leaving this criminal lunatic to go on playing his 
 mad pranks. 
 
 ' I believe that just now the Power which plays the 
 boldest game will win, and win peacefully. Your Lordship 
 has proved this in the case of Crete ! I am certain that you 
 have now an opportunity, such as does not often fall to the 
 lot of a statesman, of forcing the Great Powers to follow you 
 in pacifying Turkey and thereby establishing a great name 
 in history and earning the gratitude of your country and 
 the benediction of Christendom. 
 
 ' And there is another reason why I wish your T^ordship 
 to achieve a great success in this matter. Now that Mr. 
 Gladstone has retired, your Lordship, as far as I can see, is 
 the only statesman among us who is capable of infusing moral 
 force into pohtics, whenever you give yourself fair play. 
 And moral force is sadly needed in pohtics just now. For 
 the Governments of Europe seem to me to be falling under 
 the dominion of the Stock Exchange and financial gamblers. 
 God is being dethroned in favour of Mammon. Your Lord- 
 ship can now strike a note that will touch the best and
 
 ARMENIA 153 
 
 noblest elements in the British character, and you will find 
 the whole nation at your back. I am not going to degrade 
 so sacred a subject by suggesting that you would do your 
 party as well as your Government a great service by taking 
 a bold lead on this question. And it would be no new 
 departure on your part, as I am prepared to prove, and shall 
 prove, from your speech in the House of Commons in 1858 
 down to the present time. Lord Carnarvon told me in 
 1878 that it was due to your influence in Lord Beacons- 
 field's Government that this country was saved from the 
 great crime and blunder of going to war on behalf of Turkey. 
 I am sure that in this crisis your own wishes have been 
 thwarted by obstacles and influences not known in their 
 entirety to me, although I know some of those and guess 
 more. One thing I can certainly prevent, and will — namely, 
 any attempt of the Liberal leaders to make any Party 
 capital out of the situation. I apologize for the untidiness 
 of this letter as well as for its audacity. I have written it 
 currente calamo to catch the post before seeing Mr. Gladstone. 
 I will write and tell you his view privately.' 
 
 Salisbury to MacColl 
 
 September 12, 1896. 
 
 ' Dear Canon MacColl, — I do not think I ought to 
 offer any advice with respect to the agitation of which you 
 speak. 
 
 ' But there is one circumstance which has I think 
 been overlooked and to which I ought to draw your 
 attention. 
 
 ' Mr. Gladstone and others speak as if the present 
 situation was similar, or at least analogous, to the situation 
 of 1876. This seems to me a serious mistake. In 1876 
 Mr. Gladstone supported one policy — to co-operate with 
 Russia against Turkey ; Lord Beaconsfield supported the 
 opposite poHcy — to maintain Turkey against Russia. Mr. 
 Gladstone was unable to persuade the Parliament of that 
 day to accept his poUcy. But, whether wise or not, it was 
 a perfectly practicable policy. If he had succeeded, he
 
 154 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 could have taken office, and carried out his policy at once. 
 He would have had Russia on his side ; and no other 
 State, except Turkey, would have gone against him. 
 
 ' But the policy which is now advocated — the policy 
 of taking the rule over Armenia, and the rest of Asiatic 
 Turkey, away from the Sultan — is in a very different 
 position. 
 
 ' Since the recent massacres, Austria, Russia and 
 Germany have agreed to do their utmost to maintain the 
 status quo as long as they can. As far as I know France has 
 not spoken ; but she would undoubtedly have taken the 
 same side. The policy, therefore, which the Armenian 
 sympathizers would advocate is not possible : and therein 
 differs vitally from Mr. Gladstone's policy of 1876. You 
 might turn this Government out, and ten other Govern- 
 ments after it, but you would not be able to accomplish a 
 result which Austria, Russia, Germany, France and Turkey 
 are determined to prevent. 
 
 ' Under these circumstances, I doubt whether any 
 practicable result can come from any loud outcry here. 
 
 ' Ever yours truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' [Hawarden'], September 13, 1896. — Your most kind 
 letter has just reached me here. I must apologize for 
 the very hurriedly written and unconscionably long letter 
 which I wrote your Lordship on my arrival here yesterday. 
 I had not time to read it over, and I am afraid that 
 I may have failed to convey my meaning clearly. I 
 have not said a word to Mr. Gladstone about it, nor 
 shall I till I hear again from your Lordship. I will tell 
 him to-day, without hinting at my authority, that I have 
 good reason to believe in the existence of such a compact 
 between Russia and Austria as your Lordship mentions. 
 How dramatic — I beheve providential — that the leading 
 partner in that iniquitous compact should have been sum- 
 moned to his account immediatelv afterwards ! I think
 
 ARMENIA 155 
 
 the probability now is that IVIr. Gladstone will speak at 
 Chester ; but I know that his strong desire is to enlist 
 popular sympathy in support of any action which your 
 Lordship may find it possible to take. Between ourselves, 
 I believe that he has very little faith in the Liberal leaders, 
 though he does not say much. When told yesterday that 
 Asquith had published a strongly-worded letter in the 
 Daily Chronicle, he said at once " I hope he has not attacked 
 the Government." I asked his opinion about some such 
 policy as I took the great liberty of suggesting in my letter 
 to your Lordship yesterday. He answered, " I dare say 
 you are right. If nothing else can be done, probably the 
 recall of our Ambassador and the dismissal of the Sultan 
 would be the best alternative. But I would not urge that 
 on Lord Salisbury publicly ; it would have the appearance 
 of dictating a policy, and would make it difficult for him 
 to adopt it, even if he were inclined beforehand to do so. 
 Stick to Coercion, leaving him the choice of the means ; 
 or insist on the futility of mere discussion and ' Representa- 
 tions.' That can't hamper him, for it is only what he has 
 said himself more than once." I assume that this indicates 
 the line which he will himself take at Chester. But I have 
 had no opportunity of any private talk vnih him yet. I 
 mean to put the following case before him : " Suppose Lord 
 Salisbury has information that there is a combination of 
 Powers — Austria, Germany, Russia, and France — to oppose 
 any action on the part of England which might, in their 
 opinion, endanger the stability of the Turkish Empire, how 
 could Coercion be applied to the Sultan ? In such a con- 
 tingency, could England do anything more than protest 
 and throw the responsibility of the consequences on the 
 Powers ? " I will tell your Lordship what his answer is. 
 But I shall probably have no opportunity of any private 
 talk with Mr. Gladstone till after the Sunday post is gone. 
 So I send this letter beforehand. I shall go to London 
 to-morrow to arrange a meeting of the Grosvenor House 
 Committee. We can certainly, I think, keep pubhc feeling in 
 London under control, and to some extent in the provinces. 
 It would be a great help to me if I could know privately
 
 156 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 your Lordship's mind as to the poHcy of pubhc meetings. 
 The Standard, I see, calls for public meetings of a non-party 
 character to strengthen your Lordship's hands. I do not 
 think that public meetings can be prevented now ; but 
 they may be controlled ; and I think I could certainly, as 
 Honorary Secretary of the Grosvenor House Committee, 
 postpone any large public meetings in London if your 
 Lordship thinks this advisable. 
 
 ' The most telling thing of course would be to call public 
 meetings in support of any action which you might find it 
 possible to take. I cannot help thinking that, in the event 
 of your Lordship being thwarted by the combination which 
 you mention, a review of the situation, with the literary 
 skill which you have so readily at your command, coupled 
 with warning as to the consequences of letting things slide, 
 and the withdrawal of the British Ambassador at Constanti- 
 nople, would have an electrical effect all over the world and 
 would cow the pro-Turkish coalition. Even in despotic 
 countries Governments cannot afford to defy public opinion. 
 There are indeed occasions in which autocrats are more 
 amenable to the pressure of public opinion than constitu- 
 tional sovereigns ; for under a despotism there is no barrier 
 between the monarch and the multitude. I believe it was 
 the pressure of public opinion in Russia that compelled the 
 Government of the Czar to declare war against Turkey in 
 1877. A lucid review of the situation by your Lordship, 
 leading up to a warning as to the consequences of inaction 
 and the cowp of withdrawing the Ambassador, could, I 
 believe, make it impossible for the Powers to hold back ; 
 especially if your Lordship Avere to prove the unselfishness 
 of England by proposing a self-denying ordinance by which 
 all the Powers pledged themselves to respect the territorial 
 integrity of the Turkish Empire on terms compatible with 
 civihzed existence for the Christian subjects of the Sultan. 
 Even such negative action on the part of your Lordship as 
 I humbly venture to suggest would terrify the Powers in 
 their present state of nervous anxiety. The withdrawal of 
 England from the European Concert might encourage a rising 
 in Macedonia, possibly in Arabia, which is always in veiled
 
 ARMENIA 157 
 
 rebellion, I believe the Powers would shirk the responsi- 
 bility of facing such risks after your Lordship had clearly 
 saddled them with the responsibility. And you would have 
 all England at your back. As it is, the Daily Chronicle has 
 been for some time appealing to your Lordship to champion 
 the national honour and conscience, w^hich it has been 
 accusing the Liberal leaders of having betrayed. I have 
 no doubt that they will now try to ride into popular favour 
 on the crest of the rising tide. But they will try in vain. 
 The most powerful organ of the Liberal party now is the 
 Daily Chronicle. I know the editor, a strong Radical, but 
 a thoroughly honest, manly fellow who takes his own line 
 and has but a small opinion of the leaders of his party. I 
 shall see him to-morrow, and I think I can keep him straight 
 without committing any indiscretion. I should like to 
 secure some good Conservative speakers if we have a large 
 meeting in London ; and it has occurred to me that your 
 Lordship's son, Lord Hugh, would be a good man to have if 
 he would agree. His speech on the Education Bill in the 
 House of Commons made a great impression even on those 
 who differed from him. Mr. Mundella characterized it as 
 far and away the best maiden speech he had ever heard ; 
 and a shrewd Radical M.P., a Scotchman, told me that the 
 speech " fairly carried him off his legs." I owe many 
 apologies for troubling your Lordship. My excuse is that 
 this question haunts and oppresses me day and night, and 
 that I believe your Lordship has now an opportunity of 
 checkmating the cynical selfishness of the Powers and of 
 establishing yourself firmly and permanently in the admira- 
 tion and confidence of the nation.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' September 14, 1896. — I have just returned from 
 Hawarden and have read your most kind and interesting 
 letter. I quite see the distinction your Lordship draws 
 between the cases of Bulgaria and Armenia, and I am 
 sure you will need no assurance from me that, so far 
 from desiring to damage the Government, I am most
 
 158 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 anxious to do what little I can to support it. I did 
 what I could against Lord Rosebery's Government in the 
 last General Election, and I do all in my power to prevent 
 its return to office. I think its mismanagement of the 
 Armenian Question has been the fons et origo malorum. 
 I Avill also add in strict confidence, that Mr. Gladstone has 
 no wish to help the late Government back to power. I dis- 
 cussed the whole question with him this morning. On 
 Saturday he was all in favour of Coercion, and thought that 
 England's treaty-rights gave her a locus standi for inter- 
 fering alone in case the other Powers held back. Finding 
 him this morning incredulous as to my suggestion of a 
 combination of the four Great Powers to support the 
 Sultan against isolated action on the part of England, I read 
 him in confidence that part of your Lordship's letter which 
 was returned to me from Curraghmore. He promised to 
 regard it as most entirely confidential. He was greatly 
 impressed, and saw your Lordship's difficulty. I think he 
 now realizes the impossibility of your attempting any policy 
 of Coercion in the strict sense of the word, and falls back on 
 my suggestion of withdrawing the British Ambassador from 
 Constantinople in order to separate England from com- 
 plicity with the criminal inaction of the other Powers. He 
 thought the Sultan's last insolent rebuff might offer your 
 Lordship a good opportunit}'' for declining all further 
 diplomatic intercourse with the Sultan until he gave 
 satisfaction ; and he cited Crete as a proof of the success of 
 your separate action, and an augury of the success of similar 
 action in Armenia. He did not like Lord Rosebery's letter. 
 He is flooded with appeals to speak from different places ; 
 and I think he will decide to speak either in Chester or 
 Liverpool. But his earnest desire is to avoid doing or 
 saying anything which might tend to embarrass you. He 
 has asked me to send him some extracts from your Lord- 
 ship's speeches on this question which would enable him 
 to take the line of supporting you. I have seen also this 
 evening the editor of the Daily Chronicle. I wrote to him 
 from Hawarden on Saturday evening to suggest that he 
 should trounce Lord Rosebery, and he has done it, as
 
 ARMENIA 159 
 
 you will see in his first leader to-day, which I enclose. 
 At present I think I can keep the Daily Chronicle and 
 the Observer and the Sunday Times and the Guardian and 
 Spectator straight. But the tide of indignation is rising 
 fast, and I don't think it will be possible to stem it, though 
 it may be guided along moderate and safe channels. It 
 will be hard, yet I think I can prevent any public meetings 
 of any importance in London before the middle of October. 
 But if the Grosvenor House Committee do nothing at all 
 the agitation will fall into the hands of Dr. Guinness Rogers 
 and the Nonconformists in the interest of Lord Rosebery. 
 At present the Grosvenor House Committee is a power in 
 the country, and we can help the Government up to a certain 
 point. Beyond a certain point we cannot go without losing 
 all our influence. May I run down to see your Lordship 
 for an hour, to lay all the facts, as I know them, before 
 you, and especially Mr. Gladstone's views ? I am afraid 
 of troubling you with too long a letter ; but will write 
 again if your Lordship cannot see me. Nobody knows me 
 thereabouts, and I could say all I have to say, and have 
 your Lordship's views in reply in half an hour, and nobody 
 would be the wiser. I will hold myself in readiness to come 
 at a moment's notice. Mr. Gladstone told me to-day that 
 he believed your heart was much more in the matter than 
 Lord Rosebery's, and his earnest wish is to support you. 
 But he seems to have quite made up his mind that further 
 diplomatic representations to the Sultan are positively 
 mischievous.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' September 15, 1896. — You must hate the look of 
 my handwriting, overwhelmed as you are with corres- 
 pondence. But I was anxious not to let a post go 
 without writing to say that a very short summary of 
 a sermon of mine at Hawarden last Sunday, which has 
 appeared in to-day's paper, is inaccurate. The Standard 
 account is most accurate. I have sent a correction to 
 the papers. I refused to preach in the morning or to 
 take any part in the service, hoping to escape notice.
 
 160 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 as I was told that a reporter always carae in from 
 Chester for the morning service, but not for the evening 
 service. I have just been to the Spectator office. Hutton 
 is away for his holiday, and his colleague Townsend is in 
 charge. Townsend's pohcy is to invite the Czar to take 
 Constantinople, if he wants it, and come to terms with 
 England as to the best means for settling the Eastern 
 Question. He is bent on that policy and will have an 
 article in that sense in this week's Spectator. I prefer the 
 poUcy of deposing the Sultan, coupled with a self-denying 
 ordinance on the part of the Great Powers ; and in case of 
 failure, cessation of diplomatic intercourse with the Sultan. 
 I believe it to be quite impossible to stop the agitation, but 
 that it may be guided on lines of prudence. I should like 
 to give your Lordship my reasons for this opinion if you 
 could spare me half-an-hour's conversation. It is so easy, 
 when one is imperfectly informed, to make a mistake mth- 
 out intending it. . . . I enclose the Daily Chronicle's articles 
 to-day. The first was partly suggested by me — I mean in 
 so far as it recognizes in a general way your Lordship's 
 difficulties, and gives you credit for the Cretan settlement.' 
 
 Salisbury to MacColl 
 
 September 15, 1896. 
 
 ' Dear Canon MacColl, — I am much obhged to you 
 for your interesting letters and also for your very kind 
 offer to come down here ^ to confer with me. 
 
 ' But I am afraid that I cannot encourage you to carry 
 out your considerate design. You carry a flag — and your 
 coming would give an occasion to many unfounded in- 
 ferences. Though I fully appreciate the kind spirit in 
 which you are deahng with this agitation, I, of course, am 
 far from urging or backing it, and must avoid where I can 
 the appearance of doing so. I see the foreign newspapers, 
 in their queer view of things Enghsh, are already suggesting 
 that the agitation is got up by the Government. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 1 Walmer Castle.
 
 ARMENIA 161 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 'September 16, 1896. — I quite see the difficulty. I 
 thought I might run down to see you without anyone 
 knowing it, just as I thought I would preach in the 
 evening at Hawarden Church without anyone knowing it. 
 I was obliged to touch on Armenia, for I wanted money 
 for our ReHef Fund. The agitation cannot be stopped, 
 but may be guided, I think. I beheve I can keep London 
 quiet for the present by a little Fabian policy, letting 
 off steam in harmless meetings on the subject, but pre- 
 venting any large demonstration. Your Lordship may 
 have seen something about the " Byron Society." It is, 
 in fact, the Grosvenor House Committee under an alias. 
 We manage it, and between the two we occupy the field, 
 and it is impossible, for the present, to get up any demon- 
 stration outside of us. But the heather is on fire all over 
 the country. I have got a letter from the Bishop of Ripon 
 saying that there is to be a great meeting in Bradford next 
 Monday at which he is to speak. He asks me what line 
 he should take. The Times is foolish in trying to stop the 
 agitation, instead of giving it a lead and a policy. I 
 hope to have time to-day to write a signed article for 
 to-morrow's Daily Chronicle to scotch the furtive attempts 
 of the Daily News and National Liberal Federation to reap 
 any Party advantage from the agitation. If the Con- 
 servatives are only prudent and don't oppose the agitation, 
 it may turn to the great advantage of the Government.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' September 19, 1896. — The enclosed letter from Mr. 
 Gladstone ^ missed me owing to my temporary absence in the 
 country. It is in reply to a letter from me urging the reasons 
 which your Lordship gave me for the difference between the 
 circumstances of 1876 and 1896. I think you ought to see 
 
 * In the enclosed letter Gladstone described the apprehension of war with 
 the Northern Powers as ' speculative ' (see p. 261). 
 
 M
 
 162 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 the letter at once without my waiting to ask Mr. Gladstone's 
 permission. But the original is not very legible, and, as 
 your Lordship's time is very precious, I am having a clear 
 literal copy made. As I am writing this, I will try to tell 
 you Mr. Gladstone's mind exactly as he told it to me. His 
 earnest desire is to support your Lordship, and his difficulty 
 hitherto in yielding to entreaties that he would speak 
 has been the fear of embarrassing you. Now that some 
 organs of the foreign Press are accusing your Government 
 of fomenting agitation, he thinks that an expression of his 
 opinion in favour of strong action would help you abroad. 
 He beheves that some such proposal as he suggests would 
 avoid all danger of war. It would commit the Govern- 
 ment to nothing. He does not beUeve that the Northern 
 Powers would threaten to resist ; on the contrary it would 
 bring the Powers to their senses and make them act with you ; 
 if not in the way he proposes, then in some other way that 
 would be effective ; and that, if they really threatened to 
 oppose, it would throw on them the whole responsibiHty 
 and make England's position in the eyes of the world a 
 grand one. He will support you through thick and thin 
 in any action to separate England from any further com- 
 pUcity in the guilt by a continuance of the method of 
 " representations to the Sultan." My o\\ti position is an 
 extremely difficult one. I have hardly stopped for some 
 days answering the piles of letters which reached me daily. 
 The country is in a highly inflammable condition. For 
 instance, I have received a letter from an indignant Con- 
 servative gentleman (a wealthy merchant) suggesting that, 
 if the Government cannot move, private persons should 
 follow the example of English sympathizers with Itahan and 
 Spanish freedom, and help the victims of Turkey in Europe 
 and Asia with arms, and in other ways. He suggests the 
 chartering of a ship to land arms, and he says that he will 
 gladly contribute £5000. 
 
 ' My advice in regard to public meetings is to give the 
 Government a free hand, and resolve to support it in any 
 effective action for relieving the national conscience from
 
 ARMENIA 163 
 
 any further complicity with the policy of mere argument and 
 persuasion addressed to the Sultan. Hot remonstrances 
 are addressed to me for not getting the Grosvenor House 
 Committee to call a meeting in London, and I am writing 
 some signed articles in the Daily Chronicle, partly to gain 
 time by thrashing the subject out and partly to test the 
 trend of public opinion ; partly also to vindicate your Lord- 
 ship's whole position so far on the Eastern Question. I 
 shall deal with that subject on Monday. I hope your Lord- 
 ship may be able to influence the Czar to join himself with 
 your policy now that Prince Lobanoff is gone ; but you 
 are regarded in Russia as a poUtical enemy ; and I think 
 I can show that Russia has good reason to be grateful to 
 you ; and the Christians of Turkey also. I shall found my 
 argument on official evidence. 
 
 ' Lord Rosebery and the Daily News put out feelers to 
 see how far they could go in making this a Party question. 
 I think I have quashed that attempt in the Daily Chronicle. 
 Harcourt is lying low to see how the cat is going to jump. 
 I have a rod in pickle for him also if he tries to do mischief, 
 and I shall not hesitate to use it if necessary. He was 
 largely instrumental in preventing Lord Rosebery's Govern- 
 ment from doing anything for the Armenians. I don't 
 think we can avoid having a meeting in St. James's Hall 
 soon, else a meeting will be held without us. My plan is to 
 get a Bishop or an Archbishop to preside, so as to make the 
 meeting more Christian than pohtical. Some members of 
 Lord Rosebery's Government wish to speak ; but we shall 
 not allow them ; first, because they could hardly avoid giving 
 the meeting a Party character ; secondly, because they made 
 such a mess of the Armenian Question when they might 
 easily have settled it. May I presume to give an opinion of 
 my own on the question ? I am sure from all correspondence 
 that reaches me that the wish of the whole country is to 
 back you up in anything that separates England from 
 acquiescence in a policy of inaction. Make a distinct 
 proposal to the Powers, and, if they reject it, throw the 
 risk of all that may follow on them, and withdraw our 
 
 M 2
 
 164 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Ambassador. I am sure the Powers would not dare to take 
 the responsibiUty, and you would spring at a bound into the 
 position of the first statesman in Europe. In any case the 
 country would be satisfied with your having done your best. 
 It would be a fatal mistake for Conservatives to abstain 
 from attending public meetings. The more of them take 
 the chair, the better. It is also, I think, a mistake to say 
 we cannot fight. It is to invite insolence. We need not 
 fight, but we ought not to say that we cannot. I venture 
 to send in a separate envelope some articles from the 
 Daily Chronicle. I am doing my best for the Government 
 as well as for the Armenians ; but if your Lordship thinks 
 that I am doing mischief, I will retire. 
 
 ' I can only help to quench the agitation by swimming 
 some way with the stream. The Daily Chronicle is a great 
 power, and I want to lend to its support of your Lordship 
 as much help as I can.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ''September 19, 1896. — As your letter was not marked 
 " private " it occurred to me that you might think your 
 opinion might help Lord Salisbury by showing the Northern 
 Powers that you were ready to back him up even if he acted 
 alone. But of course I should not publish it without your 
 permission, or without Lord SaHsbury's. In my article 
 in to-day's Chronicle I have committed you to nothing 
 beyond what you have already pubUshed. It was just 
 because you had made your view so plain that I think it 
 so disloyal or stupid on Lord Rosebery's part to put a spoke 
 in the wheel of your pohcy. How is it that he never speaks 
 on a critical occasion without some damaging indiscretion ? 
 His nonsense about " the Predominant Partner " gave 
 a fatal stab to Home Rule for the time being. And how 
 can a leader expect to carry his pohcy when he says, as Lord 
 Rosebery has said more than once, " I am not an enthusiastic 
 Home Ruler ; I don't expect much from it " ; or " I am not 
 enthusiastic for Disestabhshment," and then goes on to 
 express a preference for Erastianism ? I expected so much
 
 ARMENIA 165 
 
 from him, and am dreadfully disappointed. He has now 
 done the same kind of mischief that Forster did on his return 
 from Turkey in 1876. The Morning Post, Daily Telegraph, 
 Globe, St. James's Gazette, Pall Mall Gazette, etc., are all 
 patting him on the back to-day.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ' September 19, 1896. — I have not received your letter 
 back from Lord Salisbury, probably owing to his being 
 from home. . . . Ought it not to be published ? And 
 shall I publish it ? It puts the case so very clearly and 
 forcibly. I wonder what Lord Salisbury will say to it. 
 He is sure to tell me. When I have your answer I will 
 see the editors of the Times, Standard, and Daily Telegraph 
 privately, to get them, if possible, to take the right line, 
 and to impress upon them the danger to the Government 
 of its organs going against you. 
 
 ' Lord Salisbury, I understand, has difficulties in his 
 Cabinet : Duke of Devonshire, Hicks-Beach, Cross, Lans- 
 downe, Goschen, being opposed to action, and now Lord 
 Rosebery comes out with a manifesto in favour of inaction 
 and a continuance of the tomfoolery of the Concert of the 
 Powers. ... Of course the papers which counsel inaction 
 are jubilant over Rosebery 's letter. I suppose he will advise 
 the Prince of Wales to use his influence with the Czar in 
 that sense. I hope you have written to the Prince to 
 impress him with your point of view. Lord Rosebery is 
 hopeless as a leader, I fear. . . . He could have settled the 
 Armenian Question with the greatest ease after the Massacre 
 of Sassun. But he refused to publish the reports from 
 his own Consuls, and then, when the truth came out in 
 spite of him, he tried to hoodwink the public by urging 
 the Sultan — the author of the massacres — to appoint a 
 purely Turkish Commission of Enquiry ! And noAv he 
 tries to put a spoke in your wheel. 
 
 ' I have been writing signed articles in the Chronicle 
 in favour of your policy. 
 
 ' If you let me publish your letter, may I say in a note
 
 166 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 accompanying it, that your earnest desire is to support 
 any measure by means of which Lord Salisbury may be 
 enabled to sever England from all comphcity in the con- 
 tinued impunity which the other Powers grant the Sultan 
 in his work of massacre and extermination ? 
 
 ' God bless you for all that you are doing in this matter. 
 I will tell you what Lord Salisbury says.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ^September 20, 1896. — The Italian Green Book is most 
 damning to Lord Rosebery's Government as far as Armenia 
 is concerned. They are exhibited as a pack of idiots who 
 had no policy at all, and whose diplomacy was singularly 
 well calculated to encourage the Sultan. My own impression 
 is that Harcourt thought he Avas going to win the elections 
 by his Budget and Local Veto Bill, and did not want the 
 Armenian Question to divert public attention from his great 
 achievements, and Rosebery was too weak to take a line of 
 his own ; while Lord Kimberley was too phlegmatic to in- 
 terest himseK in the Armenians. Only four months ago he 
 calmly told me that he believed the stories of massacres and 
 outrages to be greatly exaggerated. It hardly lies in Lord 
 Rosebery's mouth now to accuse Lord Salisbury's policy of 
 being " neither spirited nor skilful." Anything more imbecile 
 than his policy cannot well be imagined. And now he has 
 gone dead against your policy and encourages yesterday's 
 Scotsman (at least by his letter) to make a violent attack 
 on the agitation. " Lord Rosebery," says the article, " is a 
 much safer guide for the Liberal party than Mr. Gladstone." 
 God save us from such guides ! I have much more con- 
 fidence in Lord Salisbury. He told me a year ago that he 
 found his hands tied by the policy and diplomacy of his 
 predecessors. Your letter suggesting the method of a 
 material guarantee has much impressed him. He has 
 written in a very friendly way about it, and I think he is 
 considering it together with other plans. The thing now 
 is to encourage him, and give him a free hand. I doubt 
 whether he has not at this moment a majority of the Cabinet
 
 ARMENIA 167 
 
 against such a strong measure as you suggest ; and I wish 
 I felt sure that the Queen was with him. He was a httle 
 hurt by your accusing him of being " a dupe or a victim." 
 Perhaps you could say something at Liverpool in another 
 sense.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ' September 20, 1896. — I am very sorry I forgot to send 
 you the extracts from Lord Salisbury's speeches on which 
 you might found your speech : the speech in which he 
 said that mere " representations " to the Sultan were 
 futile ; and the speech (quite lately) in which he called 
 the Turkish Empire " a gangrene " which might necessitate 
 drastic treatment. They shall be sent to-morrow. 
 
 ' Lord Rosebery's letter in yesterday's papers is doing 
 a world of mischief, and will strengthen the party in the 
 Government which is opposed to action. I am writing a 
 series of signed articles on the subject in the Daily Chronicle, 
 and I have taken upon me to say — as there was no time to 
 lose — that Lord Rosebery's policy is not your policy, and 
 that if Lord Salisbury will take " separate action," as you did 
 in 1880, you will back him up.^ I have also given a dig to 
 Sir Charles Dilke, whose lead Lord Rosebery has followed. 
 Dilke was continually doing mischief in 1876-7, throwing 
 cold water, as much as he dared, on your policy. 
 
 ' I will send you to-morrow morning an article of mine 
 in which you will find Austria's policy exposed out of the 
 Blue Books. It is worse than Russia's, and Goluchowski 
 is a greater sinner than LobanofiF. I know nothing more 
 cynically brutal than Goluchowski's policy, as expounded 
 by himself in the passages which I have quoted. It is a 
 calm confession that the extermination of the Armenians, 
 *' appalling " as he confesses it to be, must be permitted 
 rather than incur any risk to Austrian interests. That is 
 what it comes to. I hope you will pillory it at Liverpool. 
 
 1 Letters from Lord Rosebery, respecting the Armenian agitation, were 
 published on September 19, 24, and 26, 1896. MaeColl's strictures appeared 
 in the Daily Chronicle on the 17th, 18th, 19th, 21st, 23rd, 25th, 2Cth, 28th, and 
 29th of the same month.
 
 168 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 But may I venture to express humbly my opinion that it 
 would be prudent to say nothing about Lobanoff till it is 
 certain that the Tsar is hopeless ? I am inclined to hope 
 much from the Tsar's and Tsarina's visit to this country. 
 ' Does history record a single act of generosity on the 
 part of Austria, or any blow ever struck by her in the cause 
 of any freedom but her own ? ' 
 
 Salisbury to MacColl 
 
 September 21, 1896. 
 
 ' Dear Canon MacColl, — I am much obUged to you 
 for your letter and its enclosure. I understand from Lady 
 Salisbury that you are expecting a comment on the latter 
 from me. I do not think it would be right for me to enter 
 upon any matter of controversy, for I could hardly make 
 myself fully understood. The letter is exceedingly interest- 
 ing, and raises several points on which a long discussion 
 might be taken. What in certain contingencies would the 
 Porte do ? — what in certain contingencies would the three 
 Emperors do ? These are questions of great moment, to 
 which it is true that only a "speculative " answer can be 
 given. Unfortunately that is the case with most endeavours 
 to form a forecast in things political. In such matters men 
 may well differ in the opinions which they may form as to 
 the probable result of certain lines of conduct. My only 
 plea for leaning to the cautious side is that any unnecessary 
 hazard might lead to such appalling consequences. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 'September 26, 1896. — How very good of you to write 
 to me when you have so much to do, and so soon 
 after your great speech at Liverpool.^ I wanted to 
 have gone to Liverpool, to hear you, but could not 
 get away. I think your speech quite splendid, so compre- 
 hensive and luminous and judicious, as well as eloquent. 
 It is sure to have a great effect. It has raised the 
 
 ^ Delivered in Hengler's Circus, September 24, 189G.
 
 ARMENIA 169 
 
 whole question to a higher level, and will compel all 
 Europe to think. Yes, the Clubs are detestable, and the 
 Times and Telegraph imbecile ; the Standard is much 
 better. All the papers treat you with great admiration 
 and respect. I believe they received a hint beforehand that 
 Lord Salisbury regarded your intervention from a friendly 
 point of view. 
 
 ' I have just written a hurried article for to-morrow's 
 Observer in reply to the Times and other critics of your 
 speech. I have tried to put the true points of your speech 
 succinctly as regards Coercion, and I have corrected a 
 gross misrepresentation by the Times of the agreement 
 between Lobanoff and Goluchowski. The Times doubt- 
 less got the information about the agreement which Lord 
 Salisbury told me, and has perverted it. 
 
 ' In sending your letter about material guarantees to 
 Lord Salisbury, I asked him if he objected to its publication 
 if you did not. His letter in reply is very friendly, though 
 he does not commit himself ; and he makes no objection to 
 the publication of your letter. So I have felt free to write 
 more plainly in to-morrow's Observer in explaining your 
 speech, though I have hardly gone beyond the speech itself. 
 ' Rosebery's letter is deplorable, and he has the Scotsman 
 backing him up enthusiastically. That will hardly help him 
 to keep his hold on his party. But " he that will to Cooper 
 maun to Cooper.^^ ^ The Scotsman has honoured me with 
 two leading articles, attacking me. 
 
 ' The agitation is going on apace. I get heaps of appli- 
 cations every day to speak at public meetings. Mr. E. 
 Lyttelton ^ has made me promise to speak at Hertford 
 next Friday. You have now given the meetings a policy, 
 which is a great matter. Lord Hugh Cecil is going to 
 speak at a meeting at Greenwich, his mother tells me. 
 Yes, Rosebery is lagging behind Lord Salisbury. Thus 
 far Bury is decidedly better than Bery. 
 
 ' I hope you have not suffered from your grand effort. 
 God bless you for it.' 
 
 ^ The editor of the Scotsman was C. A. Cooper. 
 - Head Master of Haileyburj'.
 
 170 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 'September 28, 1896. — I could not get a copy of the 
 Observer yesterday. I now enclose my article on your 
 speech. It is badly written, for I had to write it in a 
 desperate hurry. I hope I have not transgressed the legiti- 
 mate Hmits of " economical " language (in the theological 
 sense) in saying that the information was from Vienna. It 
 is strictly true, for Lord SaKsbury told me that he had his 
 information from Vienna. 
 
 ' You see your speech has had a great effect on European 
 opinion. The German Press, and Bismarck's organ in 
 particular, are cursing and swearing at you — the highest 
 comphment which they could pay you. In case you may 
 not have seen them elsewhere, I enclose some extracts 
 from the Russian papers which used to be most hostile to 
 England. It is a significant change, and I have no doubt 
 that your speech has been the principal factor in their 
 conversion. My revelations in the Chronicle have, I 
 beUeve, helped. My last two articles were telegraphed to 
 St. Petersburg. There can be no permanent combination 
 between Russia on the one hand, and Germany and 
 Austria on the other. 
 
 ' What a fool Greenwood is, with all his cleverness ! 
 He has given me just the opportunity which I wanted for 
 separating Lord Salisbury's poHcy from Lord Beacons- 
 field's. I could not very weU have done it till he gave me 
 an opening. 
 
 ' I cannot understand Lord Rosebery. He has appar- 
 ently lost his temper, and seems to be resolved to show 
 that he can hold his own against you. . . . But he has 
 done mischief in Scotland, and the Daily Telegraph to-day 
 has a leader praising his wise statesmanship. I wonder if 
 you could drop a note to the Speaker (privately) to warn 
 Rosebery of the damage he is doing to his leadership. The 
 Editor ^ is a great friend of his.' 
 
 ^ Sir Wemyss Reid.
 
 ARMENIA 171 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ' September 29, 1896. — It never occurred to me to quote 
 or in any way make use of anything in any of your letters 
 to me. In my hurriedly written article in last Sunday's 
 Observer I founded myself entirely on your speech, and I 
 hope I said nothing indiscreet. 
 
 ' The Philistines are upon me now. In a leading article 
 last Friday the Daily Telegraph called me " an amateur 
 pohtician," and accused me of preaching " a crusade against 
 the Crescent." I wrote a letter, which they put in a promi- 
 nent place, indignantly denying the accusation. Then they 
 fell back, in another leader, on " the trend of my innumerable 
 essays for twenty years." I wrote them another letter 
 yesterday challenging them to prove their assertion out of 
 any essay of mine, and stating the distinction which I have 
 always made between Islam as a religious creed and Islam 
 as a political system. That letter they have also put in 
 large type on the front page, and Lawson has privately 
 written me a handsome letter of apology. An amusing 
 letter from an Indian Mussulman from Lincoln's Inn appears 
 in the same paper undertaking to prove the " D.T's " 
 original charge by a quotation from my speech at St. James's 
 Hall last year. The fool has fathered on me a passage from the 
 speech of Dr. Story, then Moderator of the General Assembly ! 
 
 ' To-day that bumptious charlatan, , has written 
 
 an attack on me in the Tiines for my criticism of Rosebery's 
 letters, and the Times back him up in a leader in which it 
 praises Lord R;Osebery to the skies, and calls me " a reverend 
 amateur in statecraft." I have defended myself in a letter 
 which they are bound to put in. I have also written another 
 signed article for the Daily Chronicle of to-morrow ; and 
 if you find time to run your eye through it I should be much 
 obliged if you could let me know in a line whether you 
 think I have overstated my case. Rosebery has done 
 immense mischief. . . . 
 
 ' Your speech has roused Europe ; and, if the idiotic 
 Times had backed you up, the Sultan would have caved in, 
 I believe.'
 
 172 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' October 4, 1896. — After the Bishop of Rochester ^ 
 undertook to preside at the London Meeting on the 19th, 
 I left the choice of speakers to him, and I am sorry that 
 he appears to have asked Lord Rosebery, who has fortu- 
 nately refused. I don't know the Bishop of Rochester's 
 address, but I have written to beg Mr. Gladstone to teU 
 the Bishop that no member of our late Government must 
 be asked to speak unless some member of the present 
 Government speaks. 
 
 ' Lord Rosebery's letters clearly show that he is afraid 
 of your achieving a personal triumph in the matter. He is 
 Hke the fox that lost its tail. His own management of the 
 question was such a deplorable fiasco that he is jealous of 
 your Lordship taking any initiative which might lead to the 
 settlement of the question, and thereby expose his failure 
 more conspicuously by the contrast. Now I want not only 
 to see the question settled, but to see it settled by you ; and 
 that not only for the sake of the Armenians, but for the 
 sake of England also. I look upon our future with some 
 apprehension. Everything depends upon our Church retain- 
 ing and extending her hold on the nation ; and that again 
 depends on the fair settlement of the Education Question. 
 Now if your Lordship were by your initiative to carry the 
 Powers or some of them with you, or failing to do so were 
 to decline to act with them as in Crete, you would at a bound 
 obtain a moral and parliamentary authority in this country 
 which would enable you to carry almost any measures you 
 pleased in Parliament. At present you occupy a unique 
 position such as no Minister has occupied during this 
 century. There is no Opposition. I beheve the agitation, 
 if properly managed, would strengthen the hands of 
 the Government immensely, especially on the Continent. 
 Foreign Governments and the Sultan now see that the agita- 
 tion is spontaneous and disinterested, and that the country 
 is ready to back you up in any measure you may think 
 
 1 E. S. Talbot.
 
 ARMENIA 173 
 
 necessary. I know the feeling of the country, I believe, 
 as well as most persons, and I am convinced that the country 
 would back you up enthusiastically even if you were to 
 declare your intention to force the Dardanelles. That is a 
 very different thing from urging or recommending you to do 
 it, but surely it will strengthen your diplomacy if foreign 
 Governments see that the country gives you carte blanche, 
 without any kind of restriction, for action, separate or 
 in concert with the other Powers. My own hope is that 
 you may be able to come to an understanding with Russia 
 and France, which would probably carry Italy also. But 
 of all things I feel morally certain that, in the present state 
 of Austrian nervousness, fighting against England is the 
 very last thing she dreams of. 
 
 ' The Power that shows the boldest front and the strongest 
 determination will carry the day. Your Lordship need 
 have no apprehension as to any attack from the Liberal 
 side. I am a person of small consequence ; but on this 
 question I believe I have a good deal of influence. I have 
 let it be known at Liberal headquarters that, if any attempt 
 were made to embarrass you or make Party capital out 
 of the Armenian Question, I could and would make a 
 terrible exposure of the late Government out of the 
 Blue Books and other sources. I was also able to say 
 that Mr. Gladstone would oppose any attack on the 
 Government. 
 
 ' The fact is that he has been so very busy with Butler ^ 
 and other non-political questions, that he had not followed 
 the diplomatic history of the Armenian Question. I gave 
 him a summary of it out of the Blue Books when I was at 
 Hawarden. So that he saw that the Rosebery Government 
 was to blame. Your Lordship may have noticed that he 
 drew a sharp line in his Liverpool speech between Rosebery's 
 Government and yours. He expressed his hope and 
 expectation that, when the facts became known, it 
 would be found that ... the Government had done 
 nothing to be complained of either by omission or 
 
 1 Gladstone brought out an edition of the works of Bishop Butler in 
 1896.
 
 174 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 commission ; and since then he has been saying that he 
 has more confidence in you than in Rosebery. He said so 
 last week to Lady Grosvenor who is his guest now. And, 
 in a letter to me the day of the Liverpool meeting, he says 
 " As far as I can see, Salisbury has been much better than 
 Rosebery ; so that I ought to prefer Bury to Bery in this 
 great matter." Would your Lordship object to a member 
 of the Government — say Mr. Ritchie — speaking at the 
 London meeting on the 19th ? I should Uke to know before 
 asking him. And if Lord Hugh is not, as I hear, to speak 
 at Greenwich, would there be any objection to his speaking 
 at the London meeting ? ' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ' October 4, 1896. — Thank you so much for your most 
 kind letter. The Mayor of Harrogate came to London 
 to press me to address a pubUc meeting at Harrogate, 
 which he said would be a crowded one. I agreed because 
 Harrogate is rather a Tory place. I have promised 
 to address some other meetings in the North, and also 
 a meeting at Warminster on the 14th, when young 
 Lord Bath, following the traditions of his father, will 
 preside. 
 
 ' I have been inundated, and so has the editor of the 
 Chronicle, with letters suggesting that my articles should 
 be published in booklet form, and I am going to repubUsh 
 them. It has been suggested to me from various quarters 
 that I should ask you if you would mind kindly writing a 
 Preface for the republished articles. I hardly like doing 
 it ; but, if you saw your way to write a Preface, of course 
 it would ensure a large circulation and immediate atten- 
 tion. Of course I need not say that I would make altera- 
 tions of any kind which you might suggest on reading the 
 proof. Two more articles are to come : one on the tradi- 
 tional pohcy of Russia, and the last on Islam as a pohtical 
 system, with a view of showing that there can be no reform 
 in Turkey, and never has been (except on paper) without 
 coercion.
 
 ARMENIA 175 
 
 * Wemyss Reid is doing his best (which is very lame) to 
 bolster up Rosebery in the Speaker. His account of the 
 events of 1877-80 is a travesty of the facts, and I mean to 
 write a letter for next week's Speaker to point that out. 
 I don't suppose he will refuse to publish it. John Morley 
 told Massingham (of the Daily Chronicle) a few days ago 
 that he meant to support you against Rosebery. Harcourt 
 will probably do the same. . . . 
 
 ' My last article but one (on Russia's traditional poHcy) 
 was sent to the Chronicle on Friday, and will, I hope, 
 appear to-morrow. I shall write the last article of the series 
 to-morrow. 
 
 ' I am sorry that the Bishop of Rochester asked (as I gather 
 from the papers) Lord Rosebery to speak at the meeting 
 at which he is to preside. It was a great mistake after 
 Rosebery's pronouncements on this question. Moreover, 
 I have promised Lord Salisbury privately that no member 
 of the late Government shall speak at the meeting unless 
 a member of the present Government speaks ; and that 
 Rosebery shall not speak on any condition. Can you 
 kindly let the Bishop of Rochester know this ? I should 
 like the Bishop to consult with me before he fixes on any 
 speakers. A mistake in that matter might be ruinous. 
 
 ' A thousand thanks for your noble service, which is 
 already bearing victorious fruit.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ''October 11, 1896. — Rosebery has passed all bounds.^ 
 I am going to speak at Harrogate to-morrow, and I 
 intend to " deal faithfully " with Rosebery, as they say 
 in Scotland. I can make out such a damning case against 
 him out of the Blue Books, which he left Lord Salisbury 
 to publish, that I can afford, and mean, to be very mild 
 in my language. The facts will speak for themselves. 
 
 ' On my return to London I am going to write a Preface 
 to my republished articles, in which I undertake to make 
 
 * Lord Rosebery resigned the Liberal leadership in a letter published on 
 October 8, and on the following day he made a speech at Edinburgh, proclaiming 
 his dissent from Gladstone's policy.
 
 176 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 mincemeat of Rosebery's speech, while very civil to himself. 
 I will send you the proof ; and if you think 3'^ou can write 
 anything that I may publish I should be so grateful. I 
 want the reply to Rosebery to be as widely circulated as 
 possible. I have spared him hitherto, and I mean to be 
 very polite to him now. But the facts are terrible ; I shall 
 give chapter and verse. 
 
 ' I do hope you will not give another article 
 
 on the Armenian Question. He is really a skunk, going 
 about London running you down and exalting Rosebery. 
 The Fortnightly and Contemporary Bevieivs are friendly and 
 sympathetic. 
 
 ' I have asked Lord Salisbury if he objects to a member 
 of the Government speaking at the St. James's Hall meeting. 
 He does not object, though he thinks it will be a difhcult 
 speech to make, as Europe will really be the audience.^ 
 I have asked Ritchie. Salisbury is worth a score of 
 Roseberys. 
 
 ' I return to London on Tuesday, and speak at War- 
 minster on Thursday, Lord Bath in the chair.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' October 17, 1896. — Lord Rosebery's attack on Mr. 
 Gladstone, followed by Sir JVIichael Hicks-Beach's un- 
 friendly criticism and Mr. George Curzon's sneering refer- 
 ence to Mr. Gladstone, has roused an intense feehng of 
 indignation and resentment which may end in an ex- 
 plosion unless some means are taken to soothe it. I am 
 a little anxious about the meeting to-morrow evening. 
 Hitherto I have been enabled to keep the whole Liberal 
 party behind the Government, in spite of one or two 
 
 October 7, 1896. 
 ^ ' Deab Canon MacColl, — It would not be for me to object to any 
 member of the Government speaking on this question : but as a matter of 
 fact it does not seem to me objectionable in itself. But it would be a very 
 difficult speech to make, because the most important portion of the audience 
 mil be the governments of other countries. 
 
 ' Believe me, 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.'
 
 ARMENIA 177 
 
 attempts on the part of the Daily News and a few other 
 papers to make Party capital out of the agitation. But 
 the attacks that have now begun to be made on the agita- 
 tion, and on Mr. Gladstone, from the ]\Iinisterial side 
 will provoke the other side to retaliate. The questions 
 will then become a Party one, as in 1876-7, and the 
 Liberals will be glad to unite on a policy of opposi- 
 tion to the Government. To prevent this I have written 
 the enclosed letter. If your Lordship thinks that I have 
 taken a judicious line, perhaps you would not mind 
 sending me a reply which might be read at to-morrow's 
 meeting, together with my letter. It would have a 
 calming effect.^ 
 
 ' The publication of my letter, moreover, would show 
 foreign nations that there is no sort of attempt or wish to 
 force your Lordship's hands or press any particular policy 
 upon you. Pace Mr. George Curzon, I think the agitation 
 is calculated to strengthen your hands, not by any influence 
 of yourself, but by showing the nations of the Continent 
 that you have a free hand and a united nation behind 
 you. . . . 
 
 * I am dead tired, and have scarcely had any sleep for a 
 fortnight.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' October 19, 1896.— I am afraid you will hate the 
 sight of my handwriting, but I should like to tell you that 
 the meeting to-night was, I hope, all that your Lordship 
 could desire. It gave the Government its entire con- 
 fidence. Your name was constantly cheered. Even Dr. 
 Chfford became enthusiastic about you. The only 
 jarring note was a little gibe by Sir Walter Phillimore, 
 of all men. against the Treaty of Berlin and Anglo- 
 Turkish Convention. But it fell flat. The meeting 
 was the most enthusiastic I ever attended and the most 
 representative. There was a warlike note in it, to this 
 extent that, if the Government should think even war 
 
 This request was refused as ' eutircly at variance with usage. 
 
 N
 
 178 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 necessary, the country would back it. That will not 
 injure the Government in the Concert of Europe, but rather 
 the reverse, I think, as showing that you have a perfectly 
 free hand and a united nation behind you. The fact 
 is that Lord Rosebery's speech has deeply wounded the 
 self-respect and manly courage of the nation. People 
 feel humiliated by his gratuitous proclamation of our im- 
 potence, and the British Lion wants to show that he is not 
 afraid. Lord Rosebery's name was received with hisses. 
 I have never known so striking a difference between 
 the feeling of official and unofficial Liberalism as that 
 between the official and semi-official organ of the Oppo- 
 sition and the feeling of the general body of Liberalism. 
 My feeling is that if the Liberals were to go to the 
 country now on the policy of Lord Rosebery's speech, 
 scarcely a hundred of them would return. It is so 
 kind of you to be so patient with me. Of course I see 
 that you could not write me a letter to be read at 
 the meeting, but would it be possible for you to write 
 me something that I might publish to express your 
 Lordship's satisfaction with my explanation of the origin 
 and aims of the agitation ? I mean, of course, if you 
 really are satisfied. It would show to foreign Govern- 
 ments : 
 
 ' (1) That this Government had nothing to do with the 
 agitation. 
 
 ' (2) That its aims are not so wild as they have been 
 represented.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ' October 19, 1896. — The enclosed newspaper cuttings 
 may possibly interest you as indicating the reaction 
 against the Rosebery speech. One is an article which I 
 wrote in yesterday's Observer. It was written in desperate 
 hurry, and I had not time to see a proof. The other 
 cutting is a summarized report of a speech of mine at 
 Harrogate on Monday evening last week. Ten days ago 
 the Mayor of Harrogate came to London to ask me if I
 
 ARMENIA 179 
 
 would speak on the Armenian Question at a great meeting 
 which they proposed to have. If I did, he said, I could 
 have all the speaking to myself. He was deputed to 
 tell me so. I agreed. I received the report of Rosebery's 
 speech on Saturday evening in Derbyshire, and I deter- 
 mined to reply to it on Monday at Harrogate. The meeting 
 was a representative one. The Mayor, a Radical, was in 
 the chair, and he was supported by leading Conservatives. 
 The town hall, which holds 1800, was crowded, and numbers 
 had to go back for want of room. The majority of the 
 audience were Liberals, the Mayor told me. I spoke for an 
 hour and a half. The first part of my speech I devoted 
 to the Armenian Question, till I fairly got hold of the 
 audience. Then I began to dissect Lord Rosebery's speech, 
 and every point I made against him was received with 
 cheers. Only one man in the meeting, a paid Liberal 
 agent, tried to interrupt me ; and the audience suppressed 
 him summarily. The Mr. Williams on the platform, who 
 tried in vain to get the chairman to rule me out of order, is 
 the editor of the Leeds Mercury. The audience was very 
 impatient with him, and, when he got up again to support 
 the resolution which I had moved, the meeting would not 
 hear him till I begged them to do so. He quite changed his 
 tone ; and the meeting passed a unanimous vote of thanks 
 to me. I think the meeting has had a sobering effect on 
 the Leeds Mercury. It begins to see that the Rosebery 
 ticket will not do. But a still more instructive experience 
 was a meeting last Thursday at Warminster. I agreed to 
 address the meeting if Lord Bath Avould preside, which he 
 did very gladly, and made an excellent speech in the right 
 key. It was a crowded meeting, and I again criticized 
 Rosebery's speech and received the hearty cheers of the 
 audience. But the most remarkable fact was that I was 
 followed by the Congregational minister of Warminster, 
 who has a large congregation, I was told. He not only 
 backed up my criticism of Rosebery's speech ; he went far 
 beyond me. He denounced the speech as a manifesto of 
 gross political immorality, disqualifying Lord Rosebery for 
 ever again occupying the leadership of the Liberal party, 
 
 N 2
 
 180 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 He was cheered all through. Not a solitary voice was raised 
 for Rosebery, while your name, as at Harrogate, evoked 
 loud cheers.' 
 
 Salisbury to MacColl 
 
 ' October 20, 1896. — I think it would be imprudent to 
 write publicly any letter with respect to the agitation, 
 because our only chance of exerting any influence over 
 the Powers is by persuading that agitation is not our 
 doing. It is almost impossible to persuade people either 
 at Vienna or Berlin that the whole movement is not a 
 got-up thing designed to serve some wily purpose. They 
 think this, because they know that in their own countries 
 no such movement could possibly be raised except by 
 Government machinery.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 'November 7, 1896. — The enclosed circular^ is from 
 a member of the late Government. I shall go to the 
 meeting for the purpose of opposing the proposal, and 
 I think I shall succeed. But some members of your 
 Government have made my task more difficult than it 
 need have been by their most ungenerous and ungrateful 
 attacks on Mr. Gladstone and their laudation of Lord 
 Rosebery at Mr. Gladstone's expense. As soon as I had 
 put Mr. Gladstone in possession of the facts, showing the 
 mismanagement of the question by the late Government, 
 he cheerfully acted on my suggestion to rally the Liberal 
 party behind your Lordship ; and with his aid I have 
 hitherto been able to prevent any Party action against the 
 Government. My own belief is that Lord Rosebery's 
 resignation was mainly due to Mr. Gladstone's rally of the 
 Liberal party in support of the Government, and it is rather 
 trying to find member after member of the Government 
 attacking Mr. Gladstone and praising Lord Rosebery. 
 I venture to think that it is a short-sighted policy, too. 
 I have spoken at several meetings in different parts of the 
 
 ' Inciting Liberals to attack the Tory Government for its inaction about 
 Armenia.
 
 ARMENIA 181 
 
 country, and Lord Rosebery's name cannot be mentioned 
 without hisses. I never knew a case where the London 
 Press and pohtical wire-pullers were so completely out of 
 touch with the feeling of the country. I addressed a 
 crowded meeting at Eastbourne a while ago at the request 
 of the Mayor (a strong Conservative) who was in the chair. 
 The member, Admiral Field, also addressed the meeting. 
 He praised Lord Rosebery's speech and condemned Mi*. 
 Gladstone's, and the agitation. He could hardly get a hear- 
 ing ; and my host, a Conservative and a leading doctor in the 
 place, told me afterwards that the speech would probably 
 cost the Admiral his seat. 
 
 'Your Lordship can help me if you can manage on 
 Monday ^ to say something kind about Mr. Gladstone and 
 sympathetic about the agitation without at all committing 
 the Government. 'Any more attacks on Mr. Gladstone and 
 the agitation will paralyse my efforts to prevent efficient 
 Liberalism from making this a Party question.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 'November 17, 1896.— I observe that Sir H. Campbell- 
 Bannerman, in a speech delivered yesterday, says that 
 he " has always been opposed to isolated action." 
 Lord Rosebery has succeeded in propagating an entirely 
 false impression of your speech, and the other Liberal 
 leaders go about like parrots, saying ditto, ditto to him. 
 I have done my best to undo the mischief ; but my 
 influence is so small. A Preface by you to my book, 
 succinctly restating your position, would be read by every- 
 body, and would bring back the question to its true 
 position. I have reason to believe that Lord Salisbury 
 proposed to the Powers some weeks ago some action on the 
 lines of your pohcy . . . just about the time that Rosebery 
 made his most mischievous speech. That speech, backed 
 up by all Lord Rosebery's late colleagues who have spoken 
 on the subject, and by the Daily iV^eiys and Westminster 
 Gazette, together with powerful opponents in his own Cabinet, 
 
 ^ At the Lord Mayor's Banquet.
 
 182 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 has discouraged Lord Salisbury. But he reserved the 
 possible use of " isolated action " in his Guildhall speech ; 
 and I believe that some pronouncement from you now in the 
 sense of the Liverpool speech would be of immense service 
 to the cause. The country is entirely with you, and vehe- 
 mently against Rosebery, Of this I have had abundant 
 proof at large public meetings at which I have spoken. The 
 great thing is to keep public feeling alive on the subject, 
 and something from your pen would do it, as nothing else 
 can, and would at the same time give you an opportunity 
 indirectly of undoing the mischief which Rosebery has done. 
 
 ' I believe that Russia, too, is now in a sympathetic mood 
 — ^largely due to your Liverpool speech — and some friendly 
 words from you would go a long way towards enhsting the 
 sympathy of Russia on the right side. 
 
 ' I think George Russell's move unwise, especially after 
 the exhibition of Lord Rosebery and his colleagues.^ I will 
 be no party to attacking Lord Salisbury, and glorifying 
 Rosebery and Co.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 'November 30, 1896. — Am I not right in saying that 
 no expedition could have saved Gordon under the circum- 
 stances ? I am sick of the Gordon culte, and if my time 
 were not so much occupied I should like to give the public 
 the other side of Gordon's character. His character was a 
 strange mixture : disinterested as regards money ; but self- 
 willed, arrogant, impulsive, bad-tempered, full of spiritual 
 pride, and willing to sacrifice everything to what he called 
 his "honour," which he identified with the honour of his 
 country. I don't think it exaggerated or unjust to apply 
 to him Tennyson's — " His honour rooted in dishonour 
 stood," etc. 
 
 ' I think you will receive from Longmans on Wednesday 
 a copy of my book on " The Sultan and the Powers." The 
 first twelve chapters are a reprint, revised and enlarged, of 
 
 1 This ' move ' was an attempt to impress the gravity of the Armenian 
 Question on the conscience of the Liberal Party.
 
 ARMENIA 183 
 
 my articles in the Daily Chronicle. I left the references 
 to the agitation as a record of the aim and purpose of 
 those who encouraged and took part in it. I wonder what 
 you think of what I said about the origin of the Crimean 
 War. I am afraid you will not like what I have said about 
 Egypt. But I really cannot see any alternative to the 
 British occupation, except making Egypt autonomous under 
 a non-Mussulman ruler. Under Mussulman rule everything 
 would relapse to the old corruption and cruelty. All the 
 same, I should like to see us out of Egypt, for I believe that 
 our presence there is a danger to the Empire. At the same 
 time the French seem to me to have behaved very badly. 
 Our promises to leave Egypt are not nearly as explicit 
 as the French promises to leave Tunis and not to fortify 
 Biserta ; yet they have practically annexed Tunis and 
 fortified Biserta. 
 
 ' I thought Herbert's speech at Leeds last week quite 
 admirable both from an oratorical and political point of 
 view : quite worthy of his father's son.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' November 30, 1896. — I am taking the liberty of sending 
 you a book on the Eastern Question ; very imperfect and 
 crude I am well aware, for I wrote it in a hurry. The first 
 twelve chapters are a reprint, revised and enlarged, of 
 signed articles which appeared in the Daily Chronicle. I left 
 all references to the agitation just as they appeared in the 
 Chronicle, as a record of the aim and intention of those who 
 had most to do with the agitation. Two of the articles were 
 telegraphed to St. Petersburg when they appeared — those in 
 which I have described two great services, as I think, which 
 your Lordship has rendered to Russia. My object in writing 
 them was to help to do away with the strong prejudice 
 which has existed against you in Russia since 1877, and 
 thus perhaps make it easier for you to bring about an 
 understanding with the Russian Government. 
 
 ' I think I have made it quite impossible for the Liberal 
 party to make an attack on your Lordship with regard to
 
 184 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Armenia. But the attempt is to be made. And the attack 
 is to be opened by Mr. P. W. Clayden, one of the George 
 Russell Committee, who is also political leader-writer and 
 assistant editor of the Daily News. He is in the press 
 with a book attacking your Lordship's whole policy on the 
 Eastern Question since 1877. I think my exposure of the 
 miserable mess which the late Government made of the 
 Armenian Question will neutralize Mr. Clayden's attack. 
 I hear also that there is to be a meeting in London on 
 December 9 to protest against the inaction of the Govern- 
 ment in regard to Armenia. The policy of the Liberal 
 leaders apparently is to lie low till they see the effect of 
 George Russell's movement, and act accordingly. It is too 
 bad of the Times to insinuate, and of other papers to assert, 
 that George Russell has been inspired by Mr. Gladstone 
 during a recent visit to Hawarden. Mr. Gladstone has had 
 nothing to do with the matter, and George Russell has 
 not been to Hawarden for months. I wonder who invents 
 these lies. 
 
 ' The country, I believe, is getting restive at the con- 
 tinued inaction of the Powers. Lord Rosebery's Edin- 
 burgh and Colchester speeches have been deeply resented 
 in the country. His sudden panic has wounded people's 
 pride, and his glorification of the gospel of " British 
 interests " versus moral obligations has revolted their 
 consciences, as it did when Lord Beaconsfield made the 
 same appeal in a less offensive form than Lord Rosebery. 
 The Chronicle still supports your Lordship, as against 
 the Liberals, on the Armenian Question. But it too is 
 getting impatient. I wonder if your Lordship could tell 
 me privately anything of an encouraging nature of which 
 I might make judicious use.' 
 
 Salisbury to MacColl 
 
 December 4, 1896. 
 
 ' Dear Canon MacColl, — I am much obhged to you 
 for the book you have sent me and which I hope to have 
 an early opportunity of reading.
 
 ARMENIA 185 
 
 ' I do not think people will impute the inaction to her 
 Majesty's Government when they see the papers. But by 
 the force of circumstances the deciding voice Ues with 
 Russia. The fact that she is the only Power that can march 
 into Turkey without crossing the sea is conclusive of itself. 
 Of her I can only say that her tone is much more satisfactory 
 than it was ; but I will make no attempt at prophecy. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ' December 4, 1896. — I am horrified at having wasted 
 an hour of your time reading my letter. I will try to be 
 brief now. 
 
 ' I want us to leave Egypt for the reasons which you give. 
 I think that a Mohammedan Government may govern 
 Mohammedans with a rough kind of justice ; though even 
 so the tendency is always towards misrule, corruption, and 
 cruelty. But a Mohammedan Government cannot govern 
 Christian subjects justly, for the Christian lies under irre- 
 pealable disabilities which make him really an outlaw. He 
 can never become a citizen. Is there a single exception in 
 the history of Mohammedanism ? I don't know one. Our 
 reforms in Egypt are, in many particulars, opposed to the 
 immutable theocratic law of Islam, and would certainly 
 not survive the British occupation for a year. There are, 
 I believe, some 700,000 native Christians in Egypt, whose 
 only protection is foreign occupation. But let Egypt be 
 severed from Turkey and be made into an independent 
 Principality under a Christian, and then we may leave it. 
 Everything depends on the ruler not being a Mohammedan. 
 A Mohammedan ruler must enforce the Sacred Law which 
 governs the status of the non-Mussulman subject.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' December 6, 1896. — I am exceedingly obliged by your 
 kind letter, which at least gives some little hope of a 
 change for the better on the part of Russia. But what
 
 186 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 pleases me best is your Lordship's assurance as to the 
 efforts of her Majesty's Government. 
 
 ' One of my main reasons for writing my book was to 
 make it easier for your Lordship, if I could, to come to a 
 friendly understanding with Russia, by proving that you were 
 by no means unfriendly to her. F. Greenwood's indiscreet 
 revelations ^ enabled me to do this on one particular point 
 without compromising your Lordship. Next, I have been 
 for a long time anxious to tell the true story of your failure 
 at Constantinople. As you were away, you can have no 
 idea of the campaign of calumny which the jingo Press 
 in London kept up against you. The Pall Mall Gazette, 
 then under Greenwood, was the worst. Even Lady Salisbury 
 was not spared. It was plain that Greenwood was regularly 
 in receipt of Cabinet secrets, and now he has avowed it in 
 his Cornhill article. I could never bring myself to trust 
 Lord Beaconsfield ; but I did not believe him capable of 
 such treachery as that. 
 
 ' I enclose a pamphlet issued by the George Russell Com- 
 mittee, The writer is assistant-editor of the Daily News, 
 and one of its principal political leader-writers. The 
 pamphlet probably indicates the line of attack when Parlia- 
 ment meets. I think I have by anticipation destroyed 
 that line of attack in my book. 
 
 ' I don't understand Lord Rosebery. His Edinburgh 
 speech was a flat contradiction of his previous attitude. 
 And now he seems to have turned his back on his Edinburgh 
 speech, for he told a gentleman of my acquaintance last 
 week in Edinburgh that " he was afraid that the Liberal 
 party would not go sufficiently strongly against Lord 
 Salisbury." That goes to confirm my suspicion that his 
 real quarrel with Mr. Gladstone was caused by G.'s expres- 
 sion of confidence in the Government, Certainly, until the 
 Edinburgh speech. Lord Rosebery complained bitterly to 
 his friends that Harcourt's opposition prevented him from 
 taking, while in office, a stronger line on the Armenian 
 Question. I have ventured to make one or two mild 
 
 1 ' Characteristics of Lord Beaconsfield,' in the Cornhill Magazine for 
 November 1896. 
 
 i
 
 ARMENIA 187 
 
 criticisms on your Lordship in my book, partly in order to 
 enhance the effect of my defence of you. Indiscriminating 
 praise is bad advocacy. I wonder if I could send through 
 the Foreign Office a copy of my book to a rich Russian 
 Armenian whom I know in St. Petersburg. I want to get 
 a few hundred pounds out of him for the Armenian Relief 
 Fund. The censorship is so stupid and capricious that my 
 book might not reach its destination if sent by post. I 
 once sent a book to St. Petersburg by post. It was an 
 innocent book on astronomy, entitled " The Revolution 
 of the Heavens." The word "Revolution" caught the 
 censor's eye and he read no more but confiscated the book.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' December 27, 1896. — When I took the Hberty of sending 
 your Lordship a copy of my last book, I had never read it 
 right through. I wrote it in a great hurry, in the midst of 
 other work, and sent it to the printers day by day as I was 
 writing it. Having read it as a whole I am sorry I sent your 
 Lordship a copy. It is crude in parts, and badly arranged, 
 and in some places violent in language. I should not, how- 
 ever, think of troubling your Lordship with this superfluous 
 information. I write for another reason. I had a long con- 
 versation last week with M. de Staal on the Eastern Question 
 generally, which led to his talking about my book, which he 
 has read. He spoke favourably of it, and thought that a 
 translation of it into Russian would do good. He did not 
 know, he said, that the traditional attitude of Russia and Eng- 
 land towards each other had been so friendly as I had shown 
 it to be in my two chapters on that subject, and he was sure 
 that it was not generally known in Russia. He said also that, 
 although he never thought himseK that you had any hostile 
 feeling towards Russia, he did not know that you had been 
 so well disposed towards his country as appeared from my 
 book ; and he believed that this fact also was not known in 
 Russia. The book is therefore to be translated into Russian ; 
 and is in course of translation into French. But I intend 
 to cut out a great deal in both translations, and to make
 
 188 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 alterations in what remains, leaving out everything 
 calculated to give offence. 
 
 ' My object in writing to your Lordship is to ask if I have 
 unintentionally misrepresented you in any way, so that I 
 may correct it, if I have. I have ventured to criticize you 
 mildly in one or two places, partly because I believed what I 
 said, but chiefly because I wished to prevent foreign critics 
 thinking I was writing as a partizan of the Government, and 
 perhaps inspired by it.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ' December 29, 1896.i — I did not forget the day, but I 
 have waited till the crowd of telegrams and letters were 
 out of the way before writing to tell you how heartily I wish 
 you every good thing for the coming year. I am so glad to 
 learn from the papers that yourself and Mrs. Gladstone are 
 in the enjoyment of good health. God grant that that may 
 continue to the end, and that the end may be distant. 
 
 ' I met Lord Rosebery twice last week, and he was very 
 cordial in spite of my attack on his speech. 
 
 ' The Russian Ambassador has expressed strong ap- 
 proval of my book, and a copy has been sent to Russia for 
 translation into Russian. He said he believed that Lobanoff 
 would have changed his policy if he had lived a little 
 longer ; and he agreed with me that Austria (with Germany 
 behind her) was now the chief obstacle. But he was 
 hopeful.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' January 2, 1897. — I am much obliged by your Lord- 
 ship's kind letter. It is a relief to me, for I found that in the 
 great hurry of writing the book, I might have committed 
 some indiscretions. I am toning down the book generally 
 for the foreign translations, and cutting out excrescences. 
 I am glad to infer from the newspapers that matters are in 
 a more hopeful state at Constantinople, and I trust that the 
 issue will silence those who insist that your Lordship's record 
 
 1 Gladstone was born December 29, 1809.
 
 ARMENIA 189 
 
 on the Eastern Question unfits you to conduct negotiations 
 on behalf of England. Part of my object in writing on this 
 subject was (1) to show that your record, on the contrary, 
 quahfied you in a special degree to deal with the question ; 
 (2) that the responsibility of your failure at Constantinople 
 in 1877 rests entirely on others. In that respect my book, 
 hurriedly put together as it is, has been a revelation to 
 people in this country and abroad. , In addition to what 
 M. de Staal told me, I have had letters from Russia in this 
 sense, and also from people of some influence in France, 
 among others from the Due de Broglie. M. de Staal said 
 to me that if Prince Lobanoff was now aUve, he believed 
 that he would support your Lordship's policy, or words 
 to that effect. The letter from the Dean of Durham i in 
 the enclosed envelope is a sample of several letters of the 
 same kind which I have received from Liberals of some 
 position in England, and also some Conservative Church- 
 men. A diplomatic success on the Eastern Question would 
 strengthen your Lordship's hands enormously on domestic 
 questions, and help you to command a large following 
 among Liberals, to whom Christianity and morality are 
 of more consequence than party manoeuvres. I think my 
 dream of long ago may be realized yet— the dream of 
 seeing you lead what is best in both the Liberal and 
 Conservative parties.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ' January 25, 1897.— You are probably too busy to have 
 read the last batch of Parliamentary Papers. Those that 
 relate to the Sultan and his doings are horrible enough. 
 But I think Lord Sahsbury deserves all the confidence which 
 you and I placed in him ; and I think it is a little un- 
 generous of the Daily News, Westminster Gazette, and Speaker 
 to taunt him with his "recantation" and "repentance," 
 seeing that he has done so much better than his predecessor. 
 It is silly, too, to say that Lord SaHsbury's success proves 
 the wisdom of Lord Rosebery's speech. It is your poHcy, 
 
 1 G. W. Kitchin.
 
 190 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 not Lord Rosebery's, that Lord Salisbury has adopted. He 
 has declined, in effect, to act any longer with the Concert 
 of the Powers unless they adopt a policy of coercion. 
 Thinking the taunts of the Liberal papers (except the 
 Chronicle) unfair to Lord SaUsbury, I wrote an article in 
 yesterday's Observer, which I enclose. . . . 
 
 ' The Emperor of Russia has accepted a copy of my 
 book, and has sent me his thanks in very kind terms through 
 the Russian Ambassador. The book is being translated 
 into Russian.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ' January 27, 1897.— Thank you for so fully explaining 
 your view. I do not disagree at all ; but I overlooked your 
 points, except the first — sole action ; which I rather think 
 is implied in Lord SaHsbury's despatches, at least so far as 
 this, that he will not act with the Concert except on the 
 principle of coercion. In his last Mansion House speech, he 
 said that, while he thought separate action would then be 
 unwise, " he did not debar separate action : he would be a 
 very imprudent man who did so." And I cannot help 
 thinking that the extraordinary volte face of Austria was due 
 to some hint from Lord Salisbury as to separate action. He 
 has a craze that an army is necessary, and he has been 
 trying to get Russia to cross the frontier.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 * January 28, 1897. — I received yourletter as I was leaving 
 London. So I wrote very hurriedly. Before the receipt of 
 your letter I had wTitten to the Daily Chronicle, and my letter 
 has appeared to-day. I think it is more in accord with your 
 view than the article which I sent you on Sunday. I have 
 on purpose put as much meaning into Lord Salisbury's 
 despatches as they can possibly bear. I have tried to 
 show that he is on your side, not on Lord Rosebery's. And 
 I think he is. Certainly he has not committed himself, 
 as Lord Rosebery has done, against solitary action. He 
 reserved it expHcitly in his Mansion House speech, though
 
 ARMENIA 191 
 
 it does not show in his despatches. If he stands firm on 
 his despatches, I believe that he will win. I believe that 
 France is now the obstacle. It is a question of finance 
 with her. She has a hundred millions sterling in Turkish 
 speculations, and she will agree to nothing which will not 
 secure her against loss. She has told Russia that there 
 might be a financial crisis in Paris which might imperil 
 the Dual Alliance.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' March 11, 1897. — I would not trespass on your Lord- 
 ship's valuable time did not I believe that the communication 
 which I am about to make is of some importance. I have 
 known the King of Greece for more than twenty years, and 
 have occasionally corresponded \vith him during this crisis. 
 Last night I received a letter from him in reply to one from 
 me counselling prudence. His letter is marked Confidential 
 and is evidently intended for my eyes alone. For that reason 
 he probably shows his mind more fully than he would be 
 likely to do in any official communication, or in any letter 
 likely to be read by anybody but myself. He does not 
 know that I have any acquaintance with your Lordship or 
 with any members of the Government. 
 
 ' I do not feel at liberty to show your Lordship his 
 Majesty's letter, or reveal its contents, but I think I may 
 tell you in confidence two or three points which evidently 
 weigh very heavily on the King's mind. 
 
 ' (1) He feels certain that the withdrawal of the Greek 
 troops would lead to anarchy and carnage in the interior 
 of Crete , . . and would induce the Mussulman natives 
 and Bashi-Bazouks to provoke the insurgents into con- 
 fiict which would make the ultimate settlement of the 
 island under an autonomous Government most difficult, and 
 which would meanwhile require a foreign army of occupa- 
 tion to restore order. Moreover, it is evidently the King's 
 conviction that the Greek troops in Crete would refuse 
 to leave, though their officers might obey the King's 
 summons.
 
 192 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' (2) I ventured to suggest in my last letter that a pU- 
 hiscite now would be far from decision in favour of Greece — 
 I mean of annexation to Greece. The King assures me that 
 I am in error. He says that the Mussulmans of Crete would 
 much prefer annexation to Greece to autonomy, if that 
 alternative is offered them. In Crete they are in a minority, 
 and have the same objection to autonomy that the Protes- 
 tants of Ulster have to Home Rule — fear of oppression by 
 the majority, now in a state of exasperation against the 
 Mussulmans. They beheve, on the other hand, that Greece 
 would see justice done to them. And they are encouraged 
 in this belief by messages from the Mussulmans in Thessaly 
 strongly advising annexation to Greece as the true policy 
 for the Cretan Mussulman. Probably the Mussulmans of 
 Thessaly would like a considerable increase in the Mussulman 
 element in the kingdom, as adding to their own importance. 
 
 ' My belief is that the King would use all his influence in 
 favour of a pacific compromise. Suppose the Powers were 
 to take over the Greek troops, place them under the supreme 
 command of an officer from one of the Powers, and use them 
 for police purposes during the period of transition. This 
 would give confidence to Christians and Mussulmans alike : 
 to the Christians because they would see that they were 
 not to be delivered over to the Turks ; to the Mussulmans 
 because the Greeks would be under the control and order of 
 the Powers and co-operating with the foreign troops. The 
 first consideration surely is to restore confidence on both 
 sides. If to this were added either an offer to Prince George, 
 or one of the Danube Princes, of the Governorship of 
 the island during the autonomous regime ; or permission 
 to the Cretans to elect their own Prince, as in Bulgaria ; 
 I beheve the whole question would be settled peacefully. 
 I doubt whether anything short of that will settle it. Beyond 
 a certain point the King is not his own master. There will 
 be a revolution in Greece if the Powers insist on their pound 
 of flesh, and the Balkans will be in a blaze. 
 
 ' As to public feeling at home, my own strong conviction 
 is that it contains the elements of an agitation fiercer and 
 more widespread than the Bulgarian agitation. A manifesto
 
 ARMENIA 193 
 
 or a speech from ]\Ir. Gladstone against the coercion of 
 Greece would set the heather on fire ; and I am not sure 
 that he will not do something of the kind if extreme measures 
 are taken against Greece. For he feels acutely on the 
 subject. And believe me, if the Opposition leaders see their 
 chance of damaging the Government, they will not hesitate. 
 Their present moderation will then serve them in good 
 stead. Personally I have used whatever influence I may 
 possess in favour of moderation. I have refused all invita- 
 tions to public meetings and kept the Grosvenor Committee 
 so far out of the agitation. But I know from the communica- 
 tions which reach me from all parts of the country that the 
 popular mind is deeply stirred and will explode if coercive 
 action is taken against Greece after the inaction of the 
 Powers in presence of the Sultan's massacres. I know, 
 of course, that your Lordship is working hard in the 
 interests of both Crete and Greece ; but the multitude 
 are slow to make nice distinctions, and ^\'hat they will 
 see is the practically free hand given to the Sultan in 
 all his massacres, as contrasted with the coercion and ruin 
 of Greece for going to the help of the Christians of Crete, 
 when threatened with similar massacres. No amount of 
 explanations will expel from the minds of the masses the 
 conviction that the British Government has once more taken 
 the part of the Turks against the Christians. In this matter 
 it is of the last importance that the Government should not 
 only be right, but should appear right. When the public 
 mind is profoundly moved on a question that appeals to its 
 moral sense and chivalry, parliamentary majorities are 
 generally a false index. In 1876-80 the normal majority 
 of the Government was about 60. Its majorities on the 
 Bulgarian Question ranged from 90 to 134. Yet the country 
 was all the while with IVIr. Gladstone. London Society is 
 always wrong on such a question as this. I apologize for 
 troubling your Lordship when your time is so precious. My 
 excuse is that I am doing it with the sincere desire to serve 
 the Government generally and your Lordship in particular. 
 I have always regarded you as the statesman whom I should 
 like to follow when Mr. Gladstone was out of the arena.
 
 194 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 I believe that you have now an opportunity which seldom 
 falls to the lot of statesmen ; an opportunity of preserving 
 peace and at the same time pacifying Greece and Crete, and 
 also of establishing a great name in history, although the 
 last consideration is probably one which does not influence 
 you at all, I have done my very best to serve you — poor 
 as that best may have been — and alienated friends in doing 
 it. May I venture without presumption to say that your 
 Lordship seems to me to underrate your own influence in 
 the Concert ? You are the dominant influence. The 
 Pow'ers, like the Sultan, have accepted your proposal 
 of an autonomy only in principle, and it surely would 
 be consistent with your conditions that coercion should 
 not be applied to Greece till, at least, the outline of 
 the scheme has been agreed upon. If, in the meanwhile, 
 an arrangement can be made to utilize the Greek troops 
 as forces employed by the Powers to help to keep order 
 during the period of interregnum, the crisis will, I believe, 
 be at an end. If this cannot be done, I fear greatly that 
 the too probable alternative will be war. And if war broke 
 out while our forces are engaged, in alliance with the three 
 Powers, against Greece, will it not be very difficult to avoid 
 being drawn into it ? 
 
 ' God forbid that w^e should have a repetition of the 
 experience of the Crimean War — drifting into the vortex 
 through the very means adopted to avoid it. The 
 Greek King is very despondent and evidently fears the 
 worst. . . . 
 
 ' I shall not write to the King till to-morrow evening. 
 If your Lordship would like to make any communication 
 to him privately, I am of course at your service.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ' March 18, 1897. — Mr. Murray has kindly sent me an 
 early copy of your rousing letter to the Duke of Westminster, 
 which I have just read with the greatest interest and 
 admiration.^ God grant it may arrest the dow^nward 
 
 * The Eastern Crisis ; A I^ttter to the. Duke of Westminster, K.O.
 
 ARMENIA 195 
 
 course of the Government. Salisbury has tried (1) to get 
 the Powers to agree to the annexation of Crete to Greece ; 
 
 (2) to utilize the Greek troops under foreign command ; 
 
 (3) to expel Turkish troops from Crete if the Greeks are to 
 be expelled. My belief is that he would have forced the 
 Powers to adopt his pohcy if he had stood firm. But, angry 
 as I am with him, I hold that the man who has done the 
 mischief is Rosebery. Your Liverpool speech united Liberals 
 and Tories in favour of your policy. Then came the Edin- 
 burgh speech to smash that union and divide the Liberal 
 party. Ever since then the Daily Neivs, Westminster 
 Gazette, and Speaker have preached the duty of acting with 
 the Concert with all the zeal of renegades. They are now 
 preaching the coercion of Greece. Lord Salisbury is a timid 
 man and has shrunk from enforcing a pohcy against the 
 majority of his Cabinet and the inertia of his party, when he 
 receives no assurance of support from the Liberal party, 
 while their reputed organs in the Press are hounding him 
 on to act with the Concert at any cost. Doubtless Rose- 
 bery inspires those papers. His amour propre is engaged 
 in proving the soundness of his oAvn policy, namely, that 
 nothing can be done apart from the Concert, and that a great 
 war would ensue if England left it. I am afraid that he 
 would rather that Crete should remain enslaved than prove 
 himself a false prophet. 
 
 ' I have been writing in my humble way on the subject, 
 and am glad to find myself in agreement Avith your line 
 of argument. I enclose an article which I wrote for last 
 Sunday's Observer, which is a useful paper, because people 
 read it on Sunday without the distraction of other papers. 
 I have also written an article for the next Fortnightly 
 Bevieiv. I have said a good word for Salisbury in the 
 Observer article, because I knew that he was then pressing 
 the Powers to employ the Greek troops to restore order in 
 the interior of Crete.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 ' [Athens], April 6, 1897.— I have seen the King several 
 times since I have been here, and have had long conversations 
 
 o 2
 
 196 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 •with him. He has l^egged me to send his warmest thanks for 
 your great service to Greece and Crete by your splendid 
 letter to the Duke of Westminster. The Powers have so 
 mismanaged matters that they have now forced the King to 
 the alternative of war or revolution. He cannot draw back 
 now, he says, except on one of two conditions : (1) Crete 
 must be united with Greece; or (2) he must administer it after 
 the manner of Austria in Bosnia. If the Powers were really 
 anxious to settle matters honourably all round, they could 
 save their own amour p-opre by encouraging direct negotia- 
 tions between the Porte and Greece. The Sultan made 
 overtures to that effect some three weeks ago, and Greece 
 responded in a friendly way. But Russia stopped the 
 negotiations. The King says that experience has proved 
 absolutely that it is impossible to govern Greece without 
 Crete. He is indignant at the accusation that he has been 
 getting up an agitation in Crete for the sake of having a 
 plausible excuse for intervening, the fact being that he has 
 been for a year urging the Powers to force the Sultan to 
 fulfil his promises towards the Cretans. The agitation was 
 caused by the crowds of Cretan refugees whom the Powers 
 landed or caused to be landed in Greece. Some of these had 
 been mutilated by the Turks. Among other horrors the King 
 told me that he had seen some young children whose parents 
 had been murdered before their eyes. The Turks seized 
 the parents, laid them on a table and cut their heads off, 
 the blood spurting on the clothes of the children. The King 
 saw the stains, and had the story from the poor children 
 themselves. There was a group of children whose parents 
 were murdered like that — some half-dozen couples of 
 parents. Some of these atrocities were perpetrated on the 
 King's subjects, of whom there are thirty thousand in 
 Crete. 
 
 ' The King believes that the Cretans would not have 
 accepted autonomy in any case ; but, even if there had been 
 any chance of their doing so, the Powers have destroyed 
 that chance by their cruel treatment of the insurgents and 
 their open and even ostentatious alliance with the Turks. 
 The Admirals exercise a strict censorship, and I am afraid 
 
 4
 
 ARMENIA 197 
 
 the British pubhc does not know a tithe of the brutahties 
 that are being perpetrated on the Cretans. Some of the 
 non-combatants in the interior, the King told me, have been 
 reduced to the necessity of feeding on roots and grasses. 
 Boats are seized, and in some cases smashed, for trying to 
 carry provisions from one part of the island to the other. 
 And some peasants' boats have been destroyed to prevent 
 their fishing. I enclose a cutting from last Sunday's Astij, 
 of Athens, which will show you the kind of devilry that is 
 being done under the British flag. The British ships are 
 distinguishing themselves beyond others in this work. 
 If you should see your way to do anything in the matter, 
 please don't mention my name, as my conversations with the 
 King have been private. He does not object to the facts 
 themselves being known. . . . 
 
 ' The Powers appear to be hesitating to blockade Greece. 
 And they may indeed Avell hesitate. For the King assured 
 me that within an hour of hearing of the blockade of Greece, 
 he would order his army to cross the frontier. And then ? 
 My own belief is that there will in that case be a general rising 
 of the Greek race, of whom there arc more than six millions 
 in the Turkish Empire. Greek volunteers are every day 
 streaming into Athens from all parts of the Turkish Empire. 
 Last Wednesday 700 arrived from different Greek islands ; 
 on Thursday 500 from the Caucasus ; on Friday 300 from 
 Rumelia ; on Saturday a contingent from Macedonia ; 
 on Sunday 100, and yesterday 200, from Cyprus. And they 
 all come at their oAvn cost. The enthusiasm is extraordinary. 
 The Assassin has denuded the rest of his Empire of troops 
 in order to meet Greece and watch the Balkan States. A 
 rising in the Greek islands, aided by the Greek fleet, Avould 
 probably succeed, and even Smyrna might be wrested from 
 the Sultan. If Greece could only open the campaign with a 
 success, the whole Turkish Empire might collapse ; for there 
 would probably be insurrections not only in the Greek 
 islands, but in Macedonia, Arabia, and Syria. And for all 
 that the Powers will be responsible. I believe that Chamber- 
 lain is largely responsible for Lord Salisbury's policy in 
 Crete. He is evidently preparing for a casus belli in the
 
 198 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Transvaal, and is probably urging Salisbury to keep in 
 with the Concert, and especially with Germany, in view of 
 a war with the Transvaal.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' May 12, 1897. — There are two or three facts which your 
 Lordship may not know, but which I think you ought to know 
 before the conditions of peace between Greece and Turkey 
 are settled. During my visit to Greece I received information 
 which I consider of great importance, and which I intend to 
 use as far as I am permitted to do so, without indicating the 
 sources of my information, in an article in the forthcoming 
 Fortnightly Review. I had a long conversation with the King 
 and Crown Princess, and Mr. Dimitroff, the Bulgarian Agent 
 in Athens, whom your Lordship knows is a very able man, 
 and singularly well-informed on the Eastern Question. 
 But my information is not derived from the above. The 
 Armenian Minister in Athens gave me a good deal of informa- 
 tion on condition that I would not mention his name. The 
 fact of his being an Armenian, and therefore not mixed up 
 in the Eastern Question, opened sources of information to 
 him which are generally closed to European diplomatists. 
 I need not add that I had conversations with Greeks of all 
 sorts, official and non-official ; and I got also some valuable 
 information from the late Turkish Minister in Athens, a 
 man of moderate views and far from unfriendly to Greece. 
 I believe your Lordship may rely on the accuracy of the 
 following. Dimitroff was sent to Athens to bring about 
 an understanding between Greece and Bulgaria, in which it 
 was hoped that Servia would eventually be included. The 
 proposal made by the Bulgarian Government to the Greek 
 was that they should combine to draw up a scheme of 
 reforms for Macedonia and other parts of European Turkey, 
 chiefly inhabited by Christians ; that they should then 
 endeavour to get the sanction of the Great Powers for this 
 scheme, and afterwards present it to the Sultan. Greece 
 declined on the ground that it would be useless. Probably 
 the Powers ^^'ould not accept it ; and whether they did or
 
 ARMENIA 199 
 
 not, the Sultan would reject it. It would therefore be 
 useless. Bulgaria answered : " We quite agree that it would 
 be useless for the ostensible purpose. But the real purpose 
 of Bulgaria is to come to an understanding with Greece, 
 to work together for the liberation of the Christians of 
 European Turkey, postponing for the present our rival 
 claims ; but appearing before the world as the two Powers 
 most interested in the question, and thus gradually shutting 
 out the intervention of Russia and Austria, whose aims are 
 fatal alike to the development of Greece and of Bulgaria. 
 Servia would gradually see that it was her interest to join us. 
 She has nothing to gain, and much to fear, Hke the rest of us, 
 from Austria and Russia." But Greece would not agree to 
 the proposal ; very unwisely as I think. Had she agreed, 
 Bulgaria could and would have managed to prevent the 
 Sultan from declaring war on Greece. She could, on short 
 notice, have put 120,000 excellent troops thoroughly equipped 
 in the field, with a strong hne of reserves behind them. 
 Without giving legitimate ground of complaint, Bulgaria 
 could thus have made such a demonstration on the frontier of 
 Macedonia as would have prevented the Sultan from massing 
 an army on the frontier of Thessaly ; the more so, as the 
 Sultan was anxious to find a plausible excuse for not going 
 to war. From the moment it was announced that Crete 
 was to have an autonomy that would abolish his authority, 
 he was anxious to come to terms with Greece, and made 
 overtures on the subject, which Greece received amicably. 
 But Russia stopped the negotiations. I believe the Sultan 
 would have come to terms with Greece on one of two 
 conditions : (1) The sale of the island outright, a number of 
 wealthy Greeks abroad being willing to find the money ; or 
 (2) allowing King George to administer the island under his 
 sovereignty and on payment of a tribute. Greece would 
 have agreed to either condition if the negotiations had been 
 allowed to proceed. Your Lordship may depend upon it that, 
 if it really comes to an effective autonomy for Crete, both 
 the Sultan and the Cretan Mussulmans will much prefer 
 annexation to Greece in either of the ways which I have 
 named, for it will be much better for both of them. Russia
 
 200 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 sounded King George, before the Greek troops went to Crete, 
 as to whether he would agree to let Russia have Suda Bay in 
 return for being allowed to annex Crete to Greece. The King 
 refused. . . . My belief is that the promised autonomy will be 
 a stepping-stone to the annexation of the island by one of the 
 Great Powers other than England. A pretext will be found 
 in the need of foreign occupation when the Turkish troops 
 are withdrawn ; but the occupation will be as permanent as 
 that of Austria in Bosnia. If Russia be allowed to occupy 
 it, it will be on the understanding that the other Powers 
 shall have compensation elsewhere ; France, in combined 
 action against us by Russia and Germany and possibly 
 Austria, in Egypt ; Germany, in obtaining a combined veto 
 on British aggression in the Transvaal ; Austria, in getting 
 a free hand to Salonica. But however the parts may be 
 distributed, I have good reason for believing that such 
 a scheme has been broached. As a member of the Concert, 
 England labours under this serious disadvantage, that she 
 has no separate agreement with any of her colleagues, 
 while they have all separate agreements among themselves. 
 Your Lordship is thus working with a band of conspirators, 
 and will, I fear, share the same fate which an honest 
 man meets in such company. It is, I hope, not too late 
 to defeat this conspiracy. It may be too late very soon. 
 Bulgaria is most anxious that England should help 
 Greece and Bulgaria to a mutual friendly understanding. 
 Bulgaria is willing to recede, in the interest of Greece, 
 from the frontier of the San Stefano Treaty ; and she is 
 willing to make concessions to Servia. She would gladly 
 see Greece in possession of Crete at once, and also of the 
 frontier promised to Greece by the Berlin Congress. And 
 eventually she would willingly see Greece in possession of 
 Salonica and of a fair share of Macedonia. But Bulgaria 
 will insist — very justly I think — on an outlet to the .^gean. 
 That is the point of difference at present. Greece claims 
 an unbroken littoral in that direction. If Greece will agree 
 to the terms of Bulgaria, then Bulgaria will be only too 
 glad to make an alliance Avith Greece, which would be greatly 
 to their mutual advantage commercially and otherwise.
 
 ARMENIA 201 
 
 Such an agreement, too, would open out most valuable 
 markets for British trade. On the other hand, Germany and 
 Austria are determined to monopohze the trade of Bulgaria, 
 Servia, and Roumania, Russia being taken into partner- 
 ship ; an arrangement fatal to British trade in the Levant. 
 Germany and Russia will now, I suppose, hypocritically play 
 the part of false friends to Greece. When I was in Athens 
 they were representing England as the real enemy of Greece, 
 and aiming at the annexation of Crete. The King asked 
 me if I thought there was any truth in it. It would not 
 surprise me to find a crowd of German officers presently 
 arriving at Athens to reorganize the Greek Army, which 
 supplies the raw material of a splendid force. If the Balkan 
 States and Greece once make up their minds that England 
 has thrown them over, they will be forced to come to terms 
 with the Northern Powers, whose aim is to foster their 
 mutual jealousies to prevent their combining, and thus 
 make them severely dependent on their big neighbours. 
 Stambouloff formed the audacious project of a union with 
 Roumania, and sent a secret agent to King Charles with that 
 offer. The two States Avere to come to a secret understanding, 
 unite themselves when their plans were complete, under the 
 Roumanian Crown, thus forming a powerful Kingdom, which 
 could put 500,000 fine troops into the field ; then on the first 
 favourable opportunity they were to seize Constantinople 
 and make it the capital of the New Kingdom. King 
 Charles jumped at the idea, and eagerly accepted the offer, 
 but said that he must consult Russia. He did, and 
 Russia put her veto on the scheme. The great desire 
 of the three autocrats now is to sow distrust among the 
 various nationalities and prevent their combination. Is 
 it not the interest of England to defeat tlie policy of the 
 Emperors and make friends of the Balkan States and 
 Greece ? If they are enclosed within the circle of hostile 
 treaties by which the Northern Powers intend to exclude 
 our trade, as they have already excluded it largely, the loss 
 will damage us more seriously than anything that may 
 happen in the Transvaal. In settling the terms of peace 
 between Turkey and Greece your Lordship will have an
 
 202 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 opportunity of showing Greece and the Balkan States that 
 England is, after all, their best friend, and, by means of 
 private diplomacy, Greece and Bulgaria, and afterwards 
 Servia, may be brought together to their great benefit and 
 ours as well. But if this opportunity is let slip, it A^ill 
 probably be our last chance. All the Great Powers, except 
 Italy, would be delighted to see us damaged, and our 
 commercial and naval supremacy destroyed ; and Italy 
 is bound by the Triple Alliance. I ask your Lordship's 
 pardon for troubling you with this long letter.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ' May 22, 1897. — I asked Herbert to forward to you in 
 confidence a proof of an article by me on Greece in the next 
 Fortnightly Review. I told j\Ii\ J. Morley the substance of it 
 privately, for I have not put my name to it. My argument 
 is based on authentic facts which I obtained from unques- 
 tionable sources, not all Greek, w hile I was in Athens. I will 
 tell you them in strictest confidence. They are the King of 
 Greece, the Crown Princess (sister to the German Emperor), 
 and the Bulgarian Agent at Athens, a singularly able man, 
 and very much behind the scenes. There was another, an 
 important diplomatist, whose name I will give you when 
 I see you. 
 
 ' I observe that the Constantinople correspondent of 
 yesterday's Speaker — Dr. Washburn, the head of Roberts 
 College, who has private sources of information through 
 former pupils now^ in official life — has also an inkling of the 
 Imperial plot to crush Greece. And our Government, and 
 France and Italy, have lent themselves to it ! 
 
 ' I now enclose a copy of an article by me in to-day's 
 London Observer. What are the Liberal leaders about, 
 remaining dumb till the mischief has been done by the 
 imposition of conditions of peace on Greece which will 
 destroy her independence ? Better a hundred times the 
 cession of Thessaly to Turkey for the present than a war 
 indemnity which would place Greece as completely under
 
 ARMP:N1A 203 
 
 the control of one of the Great Powers as Egypt is under 
 ours. But there is no case for a war indemnity. 
 
 ' Rosebery's fanatical glorification, in his Edinburgh 
 speech, of the Concert, and his denunciation of your policy, 
 have much to answer for. He is even now backing up Lord 
 Salisbury's policy, both privately and through the Daily 
 News, Westminster Gazette, and Speaker. 
 
 ' The people are dumb because there is no one to 
 enlighten them or give voice to their indignation.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ' May 26, 1897. — Thank you for your postcard. For at 
 least the last six years there has been a staff of German 
 officers at Constantinople engaged in organizing the Turkish 
 army. Their chief. General Goltz, is one of the ablest 
 generals in the German army. When war broke out he went 
 with his staff to join the Turkish headquarters, and he and 
 a Turkish general Avere the first officers of the Sultan's army 
 to enter Larissa. So far, what I have stated is a matter of 
 notoriety. 
 
 ' 1. It is undisputed that German officers have been 
 organizing the Turkish army for years ; and all the 
 newspaper correspondents have stated that Goltz and his 
 German officers have been at the Turkish headquarters 
 all through the fighting. 
 
 ' 2. A German officer at the Turkish headquarters 
 published a letter in a German paper, in A\hich he said 
 that Edhem Pasha's staff was so thoroughly German that 
 German was the language spoken at headquarters, and that 
 the Germans managed everything. That letter was quoted 
 by the Daily News and Daily Chronicle. 
 
 '3. Hanotaux, the French Foreign Minister, declared 
 last Saturday "Turkey had soldiers of tried valour, but no 
 officers and no cohesion. These Germany has given her, 
 and among the officers Edliem Pasha " {Times, May 24). 
 (See letter from Paris Correspondent giving a report of 
 Hanotaux's speech).
 
 204 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' 4. The King of Greece told me that some of the German 
 officers were seen by his son's staff commanding Turkish 
 batteries and wearing the German military cap instead of the 
 Turkish fez ; so little pains did they take to conceal their 
 presence. 
 
 ' 5. The Duchess of Sparta, the German Emperor's 
 sister, told me that the strategy of the Turkish army was 
 conducted by German officers, who reported to the Emperor, 
 inter alia, the great superiority of the Greek artillery over 
 the Turkish. 
 
 ' Ought not this gross violation of neutrality to be taken 
 into consideration in settling the terms of peace ? What 
 are the Liberal leaders about ? ' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' May 26, 1897.— You have always been very forbearing 
 to me when I have taken liberties with you in presuming 
 to express my opinion on subjects which He outside my own 
 sphere of duty. I am going to take one more liberty. I feel 
 oppressed with a presentiment of coming calamity which 
 cannot I shake off. But I will trouble your Lordship with 
 only two facts. The Constantinople correspondent of the 
 Speaker is Dr. Washburn, the head of Roberts College. As 
 an American he does not trouble himself about our Party 
 politics ; but he takes keen interest in the Eastern Question, 
 and is wonderfully well informed on it from his confidential 
 correspondence with men in official positions in Bulgaria, 
 Greece, Roumania, and Turkey, including even the Yildiz 
 Kiosk, who have passed through his hands. In his last 
 letter he says that there has been a conspiracy among the 
 Emperors to crush Greece. That is also the impression 
 which I gathered in Greece, and I wrote an article, partly 
 dealing with that aspect of the question, for the next 
 Fortnightly Review. At the last moment I have been 
 asked to withdraw it in favour of an article " from an 
 authority behind the scenes," who backs up Dr. Washburn's 
 view, taking my points and " adding to them from authentic 
 sources." . . .
 
 ARMENIA 205 
 
 ' The editor has asked leave to incorporate one or tA\ o 
 of my statements in this article. I have agreed on condition 
 that he is careful to do justice to your Lordship, which he 
 has readily agreed to do. I think there must be truth 
 in what comes so confidently from several independent 
 sources. I know, for I have seen the evidence in black and 
 white, that at least one Great Power would have helped 
 Greece to the possession of Crete in return for Suda 
 Bay. My hope now is that the robbers will cjuarrel among 
 themselves. The honest men may perhaps come by their 
 o^vn. But that the Tsar and Kaiser will now join in avenging 
 the Sultan is surely unlikely ; and without coercion there will 
 be nothing to show for the diplomacy of the Concert. My 
 dream was to see your Lordship at the head of a great Party 
 for the rest of your life. The Concert has shattered my 
 dream ; for it has ruined your Lordship's diplomacy. I am 
 more sorry than I can tell. The author of the Armenian 
 massacres and of the troubles in Crete will be victorious 
 along the whole line if he is allowed to get an indemnity 
 . . . from Greece.' 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 ' June 12, 1897. — I enclose a copy of an article of mine 
 in this month's Fortnightly Review and also two cuttings 
 from yesterday's Times, w^hich seem to bear out my view 
 of the situation, especially in regard to Germany. My 
 conclusions are based a good deal on information which 
 I cannot make public. 
 
 ' I have let down Lord Salisbury more easily than 
 my feelings would prompt, because I w^as anxious not 
 to exasperate his party, some of whom in their hearts do 
 not approve of his faint-heart edness. But I must add 
 that I have just as little confidence in the Liberal leaders. 
 What have they done to educate the country ? Nothing. 
 Tliey have given the Government the approval of their 
 silence. Nor can I forget that Rosebery's fanatical eulogy 
 on the Concert and his fierce denunciation of your Liverpool 
 speech have been at the bottom of all the mischief. And
 
 206 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 it is his feeble [)olicy in Armenia that Lord Sahsbary has 
 followed. I am afraid we shall yet have to pay dearly 
 for our base pusillanimity during the last three years. If 
 you had imitated the taciturn poHcy of the Liberal leaders 
 in 1876-1880 you would not have won the country. But 
 for you, Hartington and the rest would have done nothing. 
 I am utterly disgusted. The authorship of my article is 
 a secret.' i 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' July 23, 1897. — I have been away from home and did 
 not see the Parliamentary Papers on Turkey till to-day. May 
 I venture to express my sincere admiration and pleasure at 
 your Lordship's masterly diplomacy which has achieved such 
 a splendid success ? I have felt all along that, when you put 
 forth your great powers and your complete mastery of the 
 subject, you would bend the statesmen and Sovereigns of the 
 Great Powers to your will, and would be seen leading, not 
 following, the Concert of Europe ; and I have expressed that 
 feeling more than once in pubhc. You have taken " separate 
 action " in the sense in which I have always beUeved that 
 it would succeed, namely, by declining to act with the 
 Concert any longer in a policy of paper-reforms and futile 
 remonstrances ; and by proposing a policy of your own which 
 will ensure success so far as success is possible imder such 
 a rotten system as the Turkish Government. M. Hano- 
 taux's complaint of the " moderation " of your Guildhall 
 
 1 In this article, which was called ' A Plot against British Interests in the 
 Levant,' and was signed ' Vindex,' MacColl said : 
 
 ' As for the Concert itself, I have never expected any good from it, and 
 I have always thought it a great mistake on the part of the late Government to 
 revive it on the Armenian Question. It is an admirable instrument when 
 its members aim at the same thing. When, as now, the majority of them 
 are using it in pursuit of ends injurious alike to the interests of Great Britain 
 and to those of the emancipated, as well as the still enslaved, populations 
 of Turkey, the sooner we leave it the better. Honesty is always at a 
 serious disadvantage in partnership with dishonesty, and experience, so 
 far, seems to show that our presence in this Concert serves only to further 
 ends which are not ours, and which may prove disastrous to our credit and 
 interests.'
 
 ARMENIA 207 
 
 speech is funny, when one remembers that his own speech 
 in the French Chamber gave great satisfaction — as in my 
 humble opinion it was calculated to do — to the Sultan, The 
 papers do not seem to me to have grasped the full significance 
 of your Lordship's diplomatic success. I have therefore 
 scribbled an article for to-morrow's Observer in the hope of 
 dotting the i's more plainly.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' August 27, 1897. — I trust that I am not taking an undue 
 liberty in writing to express my thankfulness at the report 
 of your Lordship having proposed the raising of a fund for the 
 Greek Indemnity on the guarantee of England, France, and 
 Russia, and the consequent control of as much Greek revenue 
 as would cover the Indemnity. That would keep Germany 
 out of it. Germany, I am sure, has all along aimed at getting 
 control of Greece, and general European control would mean 
 German control, as Germany holds more Greek bonds than 
 all the other Powers put together. Financial control of 
 Greece by Germany would mean the practical reduc- 
 tion of Greece to the conditions of a German province. 
 Once let Germany have a footing in Greece, and 
 she will remain there as we remain in Egypt, I would 
 rather leave the Turks in Thessaly — hateful as that 
 would be — than give Germany financial control of Greece. 
 That would be better for Greece in the end, and certainly 
 better for the political and commercial interests of Great 
 Britain. I believe the German Emperor wished to 
 drive the present dynasty out of Greece, and I have the 
 authority of a near relation of his own for that opinion. 
 The destruction of the monarchy, followed by revolution, 
 and the establishment of German control over Greece, 
 would give Germany an excuse for establishing herself in 
 Greece as we are established in Egypt. Russia and France 
 can hardly wish that, though Austria might not mind. Of 
 course she goes with her partners in the Triple Alliance. , . . 
 It would be a great gain to the world — and to England not
 
 208 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 least — it" England could come to a friendly understanding 
 with Russia and France.' 
 
 MacColl to George Armitstead 
 
 'September 3, 1897. — The Concert of Europe has been 
 the parent of all the mischief both in Greece and in Armenia. 
 How different would the case be now if the Government 
 had followed the policy, sketched out in his great Liverpool 
 speech, of Mr. Gladstone, instead of that of Lord Rosebery's 
 Edinburgh speech ! I say this with much regret, for I 
 like Lord Rosebery. He has been very kind to me, 
 and I rejoiced when he succeeded Mr. Gladstone in the 
 Premiership. I expected great things from his ability, his 
 knowledge, his tact, and his genuine Liberalism ; and I 
 made great allowances for his difficulties at the head of a 
 Cabinet where the ablest of his colleagues was at once 
 disloyal to him and at the same time Leader of the 
 House of Commons. And in the mismanagement, as I 
 think it, of the Armenian Question in its earlier stages, 
 I laid the blame on Sir W. Harcourt, who did not want 
 the Government to score a great success in a department 
 with which he had no special connexion. . . . 
 
 ' If Lord Rosebery had but asserted himself more and 
 kept Harcourt in his place, things would have turned out 
 differently. The way to unite the Liberals and win the 
 masses is to appeal to their moral sense and sympathies 
 on some great question that transcends all sectional in- 
 terests. If Lord Rosebery, instead of suppressing the Con- 
 sular reports from Armenia, had pubhshed them and gone 
 to the country on that question, he would have carried it 
 as jVIr. Gladstone did on the Bulgarian question, and would, 
 moreover, have scored a great diplomatic victory. There 
 was then no combination of Powers on the other side, and 
 England might have carried Russia and France with her. 
 Italy was ahready eager to follow England in a policy of 
 Coercion, and Russia would have come to terms with us 
 as to Armenia if we had not unwisely, as I think, refused her 
 request that we should act A\dth her on the China- Japanese
 
 ARMENIA 209 
 
 question. Lord Rosebery had the ball at his feet then, 
 and he threw away his chance. But Harcourt has since 
 then thrown away his chance, and has made a mess of the 
 Greek and South African questions. This may give Lord 
 Rosebery another chance. Who knows ? ' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' September Q, 1897. — You may have come across Dr. Dick- 
 son, the writer of the enclosed, at Constantinople, and are 
 better able to say what weight attaches to his name than I 
 am. I have no personal acquaintance with him, but heard 
 him well spoken of when I was at Constantinople five years 
 ago, and asked him if I might publish his letter with or 
 without his name. I have just got his answer, in which he 
 says that I may in any case publish his letter with his 
 initials only, but with his full name if the Foreign Office 
 do not object. If your Lordship sees no objection, I 
 thought of publishing Dr. Dickson's letter with some com- 
 ments of my own, contrasting your Lordship's method with 
 your predecessor's, which you inherited. I have always 
 thought and said that the late Government is largely 
 responsible for the massacres in Armenia in not having 
 settled a plan of Coercion before it drew upon and tried to 
 force on the Sultan a scheme of reforms which violated some 
 fundamental limits of the Mohammedan creed, and accept- 
 ance of which, without Coercion, would have made the Sultan 
 an apostate in his own opinion, and in that of all his Moham- 
 medan subjects. The Sacred Law commands him to yield 
 to force majeure, but forbids him to yield to anything else. 
 Your Lordship's circular despatch of last October recognizes 
 the fact, which is the key of the whole question, and quite 
 a new departure in the diplomatic history of the Eastern 
 Question. The point is one which it is very hard to drive 
 into the mind of the British public, and I think the pubhca- 
 tion of Dr. Dickson's letter would enable me to reach some 
 minds which are otherwise inaccessible to me. Of course 
 I would make no allusion at all to your Lordship's answer 
 either way. If your Lordship should consider it advisable
 
 210 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 to guarantee singly the loan for payment of the Greek 
 Indemnity, I am sure the country would approve. Since my 
 return I have been making enquiry in Liberal quarters, 
 and I am sure there would be no opposition there, but, on 
 the contrary, hearty support. The whole country would be 
 delighted to see Germany checkmated. I have no doubt 
 that the success of the Sultan in diplomacy and in Thessalj^ 
 has had a good deal to do with the rising of the Indian tribes, 
 stimulated as they have been by his paid emissaries. Those 
 tribes are very ignorant, and it is probable that in their 
 minds Greece looms as the country which hurled back the 
 armies to Persia and sent Alexander the Great to conquer 
 India. So that the defeat of Greece by the Sultan means 
 to them, in a vague way, the defeat of Europe in general, and 
 England in particular. I have sometimes been struck with 
 the almost incredible ignorance even of educated Turks. 
 When I was in Constantinople five years ago a Greek gentle- 
 man was imprisoned for refusing to reveal the hiding-place 
 of the chief of a dangerous conspiracy. The accusation was 
 based on the fact that a copy of the rules of a perfectly inno- 
 cent Friendly Society were found on him, marked with 
 a verse from St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians as follows : 
 " Do good unto all men, but especially unto them who are 
 of the household of faith. — Paulus Galat. vi. 10." The 
 police thought that the chief of the conspiracy was 
 "Paulus," and when my friend, who told me the story, 
 explained to the Pasha that " Paulus " was a Christian 
 Apostle dead more than eighteen centuries ago, the Pasha 
 triumphantl}'^ replied : " See how clever those Greeks are, 
 that is what they told you; but don't you see that this 
 ' Paulus ' lives at Galata ? But the rascals have given a 
 false address. There is no such number as vi. 10 in Galata." 
 My friend had actually to produce two witnesses known to 
 the Prefect of Police with an affidavit that Paulus lived 
 eighteen centuries ago before the poor Greek gentleman 
 could be got out of prison. 
 
 ' Let the Turks be driven out of Thessaly by the action of 
 England, and I have no doubt that the fact will have a con- 
 siderable influence on the ignorant Mohammedans of India.'
 
 ARMENIA 211 
 
 MacColl to Gladstone 
 
 'September 9, 1897. — Thank you very much for your 
 kind and interesting letter. How Avell and clearly you 
 write ! Your sight seems to have come quite back. 
 
 ' Salisbury's weakness is deplorable. My belief is that 
 there is a plot on the part of Germany to keep the Turks 
 in Thessaly and destroy the Greek Kingdom, and that 
 Austria and Russia are privy to it : probably France also. 
 That wretched Levantine Hanotaux is as bad as any of them. 
 
 ' But what are the Liberal leaders about ? They are 
 just as bad as the Government. They have done absolutely 
 nothing to enlighten the country. It shows how the Bul- 
 garian business would have ended if you had not taken it up. 
 I wish you would persuade Herbert to take up the Greek and 
 Armenian questions. He has the knowledge, the oratorical 
 ability, and the enthusiasm, if he would only bestir himself. 
 He has a great opportunity and might make a name for 
 himself. The name he bears, too, would help him much.' 
 
 The foregoing letter may be regarded as closing Mac- 
 Coil's active service in the Eastern Question. Gladstone's 
 mortal illness had now begun, though its true character had 
 not yet been recognized. In November 1897 he left England 
 for Cannes, ' sanguine,' as he said, ' of benefit from the 
 southern sun ' ; but the pain and weakness increased week 
 by week, and in February 1898 he came home to die. In 
 March MacColl visited him at Bournemouth, and reported 
 what he had seen in the following letters : 
 
 March 21, 1898. 
 
 ' Dear Lord Salisbury, — I have just returned from 
 Bournemouth. I found Mr. Gladstone greatly changed, 
 suffering, and dreadfully depressed. He sent to ask me 
 to dine with him. When I arrived he said " I wanted you 
 to dine with me, hoping to have some talk with you. 
 But you must excuse me. I am very hard hit. I cannot 
 talk."
 
 212 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' His mind is all there, as his occasional remarks show. 
 He expressed himself much concerned at your Lordship's 
 illness, and made some acute observations on politics. 
 
 ' Then he laid his elbows on the table and buried his 
 face in his hands, and this he did at intervals during dinner. 
 After dinner he lay on the sofa, while his sons played the 
 piano by turns. Music is the only thing that soothes pain. 
 At ten he went to bed. After saying good-night to me, 
 he said " I don't know if I shall ever see you again " ; then 
 he put his arm round my neck, said many kind things, and 
 patting me on the back, blessed me and retired. 
 
 ' More than his ordinary depression came upon him 
 last week. He has not been able to read or write for a long 
 time on account of the neuralgic pain Avhich affects the 
 eyes when he tries to use them ; and he does not care to be 
 read to. 
 
 ' Your Lordship will understand how trying this is to a 
 man of liis busy brain. His spirits are utterly broken. All 
 the organs of his body are sound ; but the danger is that the 
 continued depression will so diminish his vitality as seriously 
 to affect the heart, and the lamp of hfe may go out suddenly. 
 
 ' I think your Lordship will like to know these particu- 
 lars. Not now for the first time have I heard him speak 
 most kindly of you. For me this world will seem different 
 when he is gone. 
 
 ' I hope your Lordship's visit to the South wiU com- 
 pletely restore your health ; and I remain, with much 
 respect, 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 'Malcolm MacColl.' 
 
 March 25, 1898. 
 
 ' Dear Lord Salisbury, — It was most kind of you to 
 answer my letter. I did not expect any answer, and beg 
 that your Lordship will not take the trouble to answer this. 
 I know how precious your time is, and I write merely to tell 
 you two things which perhaps you would like to know. 
 
 ' 1. An expert surgeon (Sir T. Smith) has discovered 
 that Mr. Gladstone's trouble is caused by necrosis of the
 
 ARMENIA 213 
 
 bone on one side of the nose. It is possible that there may 
 be something cancerous, for it was impossible to make a 
 sufficiently minute examination without a surgical opera- 
 tion, which was considered unadvisable at his age. 
 
 ' How long he will last the doctors cannot say, for his 
 physique in all other respects is excellent. It is a dreadful 
 prospect, and he bears it so nobly. At first he prayed for 
 death, but, realizing the agony his death would cause his 
 wife, he prayed for life as long as she was allowed to live. 
 But I am sure she would not survive him. Their lives 
 have become almost organically united. When I was there 
 last week he said " I am hard hit : I have suffered so much 
 during the past six months. And yet I ought not to 
 complain. I have now enjoyed a life of 176 half years 
 almost entirely without pain, and it would be ungrateful 
 to repine if I am now doomed to one half year's pain." Was 
 it not characteristic of him to go into this calculation ? 
 
 ' His freedom from pain hitherto, combined with his 
 highly strung and sensitive organization, makes his pain 
 now all the more trying ; and all that his friends can do for 
 him is to pray that his pain may be assuaged or the ordeal 
 shortened. The pain, being near the eye, prevents any 
 reading or writing, and this enforced intellectual idleness 
 is not the least part of his trial. 
 
 ' 2. The second thing I wish to say is that Mr. Gladstone, 
 even in his pain, not only sympathized with your Lordship, 
 when he heard of your illness, but expressed a hope that 
 you would soon be able to take charge of the helm. He felt 
 uneasy about the outburst of Jingoism, which has lately 
 manifested itself, and compared it to the similar agitation 
 which drove the Aberdeen Ministry into a disastrous war 
 against the better judgment of the Prime Minister. I may 
 add that I have, within the last few weeks, taken some pains 
 to ascertain the state of feeling in the provinces, and my 
 conviction is that the bellicose portion of the London Press, 
 the House of Commons, and the Clubs are entirely out of 
 touch with the country. . . . 
 
 ' I hope your Lordship will not venture to travel in this 
 cruel weather. Influenza is a foe which cannot be trifled
 
 214 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 with. It struck me down suddenly in the end of January, 
 and I have not got quite over it yet. 
 
 ' That your Lordship may be long spared to control the 
 course of public afEairs is, dear Lord Salisbury, with sincere 
 respect, the fervent prayer of 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Malcolm MacColl.' 
 
 Gladstone died on May 19, 1898, and the persecuted 
 Christians of the East will never forget that he bore 
 them on his heart to the very gate of the eternal world. 
 Almost his last intelligible words were : ' Those poor 
 Armenians.'
 
 CHAPTER IX 
 
 THE END OF CONTROVERSY 
 
 Charge once more, then, and be dumb ! 
 Let the victors, when they come. 
 When the forts of folly fall. 
 Find thy body by the wall ! 
 
 Matthew Arnold. 
 
 MacColl always disclaimed the title of Ritualist. In this 
 he Avas quite right ; for he was neither a ritualist in the strict 
 sense of having a technical knowledge of ritual, nor in the 
 popular sense of over- valuing pomp and ceremony in Divine 
 worship. He held, as was natural in a man of Jacobite 
 antecedents, the high Sacramental theology which obtained 
 among the Non-Jurors, and we have seen that, in very 
 early days, he risked all his chances of professional 
 advancement — nay, his very means of subsistence — by 
 vindicating the doctrine of the Holy Eucharist which was 
 taught by Bishop Forbes and John Keble. He was entirely 
 free from Romeward inclinations — was not his first act 
 of controversy a dispute with aggressive Romanism ? His 
 intimacy with Dr. Dollinger, and his friendly relations with 
 the Orthodox Church, reinforced the sturdy Anglicanism in 
 which he lived and died. He found it easy to make common 
 cause with all Christian men, even when he differed from 
 them on secondary points ; and his personal relations with 
 a Broad Church diocesan and a Low Church chapter 
 were entirely cordial. Yet he never shrank from bearing 
 witness to what he believed. ' I cannot be there ' — in the 
 pulpit of Ripon Cathedral — ' and not teach what I believe 
 to be the truth.' 
 
 He held Erastianism and all that savoured of it in just 
 abhorrence, and, when the law of the Church came into 
 
 2 If)
 
 216 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 conflict with the law of the State, he was always forward to 
 defend the Church's right. In 1896 he wrote to Gladstone : 
 
 ' I think it a calamity that the new Primate ^ should 
 have formally told the clergy of his late diocese that it 
 was their duty to lend their churches for the marriage of 
 divorced persons. I remember your telling me twenty-five 
 years ago that it would be my duty to lock the door of my 
 church, put the key into my pocket, and go to prison, 
 rather than lend my church for the marriage of a divorced 
 person. I wish you would say something of the kind. ... ■ 
 
 The sanctity of marriage is bound up with the well-being I 
 
 of society, and it is being undermined in this country, I 
 
 largely by the importation of pernicious doctrines and 
 practices from America and France. A warning from you 
 would have immense weight.' 
 
 Thus in essential matters MacCoU was a thoroughly 
 Catholic-minded Churchman, but in matters of ceremonial 
 he was easily satisfied. He liked, and in his own church prac- 
 tised, the type of worship which prevailed at All Saints', 
 Margaret Street, and St. Paul's, Knightsbridge, in the 
 'sixties and 'seventies. When he championed those who went 
 beyond it, he was actuated, not by love of elaborate rites, but 
 by his passion for justice and his hatred of oppression. 
 
 We have seen in an earher chapter that, when the 
 Public Worship Regulation Act of 1874 was passed, MacCoU 
 strenuously attacked the usurped jurisdiction of the ex- 
 Divorce Judge, whom the Archbishops, in a fit of panic, had 
 made the arbiter of liturgical disputes ; and exposed the 
 popular misconceptions which lie hidden in such words as 
 Lawlessness, SacerdotaHsm, and Rituahsm. He was instant, 
 in season and out of season, for fair play for ill-used priests, 
 and even incurred rebuke (in a quarter where he least 
 expected it) by pleading for the release of Mr. Green.^ In 
 1885 he wrote to Gladstone: 
 
 ' May I venture to enclose a copy of a review which I 
 wrote for the Guardian some weeks ago of a most pretentious 
 
 1 Frederick Temple. 
 
 » The Rev. S, F. Green, Vicar of St. John the Evangelist, Miles Platting.
 
 THE END OF CONTROVERSY 217 
 
 book^ written to rehabilitate the Purchas and Ridsdale 
 Judgments, by a lawyer ? The book is recommended by 
 several bishops, and, I am sorry to hear, by Lord Selborne. 
 I believe that the Church of England stands in more danger 
 from such champions as these than she does from the 
 machinations of the Liberation Society. I wish Lord 
 Selborne could be got to look again at the facts in respect 
 to the Advertisements, What answer can be given to 
 the quotation which I have made from Grindal ? ' 
 
 But by degrees the Public Worship Regulation Act 
 ceased to be operative. Archbishop Tait, on his deathbed, 
 had tried to undo some of the mischief which in his life he 
 had wrought ; other Bishops followed his example ; and, 
 after the ' Lincoln Judgment,' delivered by Archbishop 
 Benson in 1890, prosecutions for Ritual came to an end. 
 The year 1898 dawned on a Church at peace. Nothing 
 seemed less probable than a recrudescence of that ignorant 
 and violent Puritanism which prevailed in the years when 
 the Public Worship Act was in full swing. But early in 
 the year, a Protestant bookseller, who had long been en- 
 deavouring to get himself taken seriously by the public, 
 rented an office in the parish of St. Ethelburga, Bishops- 
 gate, in order that he might be legally qualified to com- 
 municate at the Parish Altar, and to disturb the united 
 congregation which worshipped there. Firm and tactful 
 treatment averted disturbance ; but the bookseller soon 
 made another bid for notoriety by violentl}' interrupting 
 the service of the Veneration of the Cross on Good Friday, 
 at St. Cuthbert's Church, Philbeach Gardens. The outrage 
 at St. Cuthbert's was followed by similar performances — 
 notably at St. Michael's, Shoreditch, and St. Thomas's, 
 Liverpool ; but decent Evangelicals soon became disgusted 
 with their self-chosen champion and his methods. It was 
 found impossible to maintain the reign of terror, and the 
 clamour was dying down, when that stout champion of 
 Erastianism and other lost causes, Sir William Harcourt, 
 rushed into the fray. His last achievement in this field 
 
 * The Reformation Settlement, by J. Lewis, M.A., LL.D.
 
 218 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 had occurred during the debates on the PubHc Worship 
 Regulation Act in 1874, when Gladstone inflicted on him a 
 deserved and memorable castigation. Since that unpleasant 
 but salutary evening, Sir WilUam (who after Gladstone's 
 return to power in 1880 had become an enthusiastic 
 Gladstonian) had kept aloof from rehgious controversy. 
 But now Gladstone was in his grave, and the attack on 
 Rituahsm might be renewed without risk. Accordingly, 
 Sir William broke loose in anti-ritualistic speeches, and 
 enlivened the parliamentary recess with a series of furious 
 letters to the Times. His object, as he said, was to bring the 
 Bishops to a sense of their duty, and one of those Bishops — 
 Mandell Creighton — turned the tables on him with comical 
 completeness.^ 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' JuUj 29, 1898. — I take the hberty of enclosing a copy 
 of an article of mine in the forthcoming Fortnightly 
 Review written with a view to parrying the attempt of Sir 
 William Harcourt to return to power on the " Protes- 
 tantism-in-danger " cry. I think he has made a great 
 tactical blunder. He has completely alienated the High 
 Church party as well as the Ritualists, and not a few of 
 the Broad Church Party ; and this, I believe, without any 
 compensating advantage. He M^ould have been wise, as a 
 Home Ruler, to " let sleeping (Protestant) dogs lie," for 
 they will not be slow to ask him : ' How dare you propose 
 to hand Ireland over to a Church in which all the doctrines 
 and practices which you denounce prevail ? " The more 
 astute of his party see this, and are very much annoyed at 
 his maladroitness. 
 
 ' I don't beheve the present No Popery agitation has much 
 substance in it, or that it will last long. At the same time I 
 believe that there are a number of mischievous fools among 
 the Ritualists who deserve to be summarily suppressed. 
 I draw a hne between them, and those who merely claim the 
 ritual sanctioned by the Ornaments Rubric, and which, 
 
 ^ See Creighton' s Life, vol. ii. p. 449.
 
 THE END OF CONTROVERSY 219 
 
 though I do not care for it myself, I believe to be entirely 
 legal, notwithstanding the Purchas Judgment, which I 
 am convinced is a gross pervasion of the law. The late 
 Mr. Justice Fitzjames Stephen told me that my book on 
 the subject had completely convinced him that the Purchas 
 Judgment was a miscarriage of justice.' 
 
 Lord Salisbury treated the situation with impartial 
 sarcasm. 
 
 'August I, 1898. — Many thanks for the article from 
 your pen which I will read forthwith. 
 
 ' I feel that the Ritualists are a great evil — not on 
 account of the ritual, which I cannot treat as a matter of 
 first-rate importance — but on account of the anarchy they 
 have introduced into the Church. But Harcourt's objection 
 is pure Ultra-Protestantism. 
 
 ' He has held this language for five-and-twenty years. 
 It is too foolish not to be sincere.' 
 
 On February 9, 1899, Lord SaHsbury wrote : ' I agree 
 with you in thinking that this agitation is very superficial. 
 But I wish the Ritualists were not such idiots.' 
 
 Still, there were signs of a Protestant panic, and it 
 made its way into the House of Commons. Puritan 
 agitators began to talk airily of coercive legislation ; of the 
 abolition of the Bishop's Veto on Ecclesiastical prosecutions ; 
 of the substitution of deprivation for imprisonment ; and 
 of other short and easy methods for de-catholicizing the 
 Church of P^ngland. The threats of 1874 were heard again ; 
 and we were told once more that ' the Mass ' and ' the 
 Confessional ' must be put do\\n by law. 
 
 Now, it was eminently true of MacColl that he always 
 
 rose with the emergency of occasion ; and here was an 
 
 occasion which called for the exercise of his peculiar gifts. 
 
 He responded to the call with all his energy. On January 15, 
 
 1 899, he wrote to Lord Sahsbury : 
 
 ' I take the liberty of sending you a signed article of 
 mine in to-day's Observer, wTitten after careful enquiry all
 
 220 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 over the country. My belief is that the controversy which 
 Sir W. Harcourt has raised has scarcely touched the work- 
 ing classes. Indeed I believe that, except perhaps in 
 Lancashire, he will gain nothing. He has quite alienated 
 Liberal Churchmen ; and when the day of reckoning comes 
 he will find himself in a cleft stick with the Evangelical 
 party. He means (so John Morley tells me) to stand to 
 his guns on Home Rule. See what follows. The Protestants, 
 who are now shouting for him, will ask him before the 
 General Election : " Do you mean to hand Ireland over to 
 a Church which teaches and practises all that you have 
 been denouncing ? " 
 
 ' His attempt to distinguish between those doctrines and 
 practices, as held by the Church of England and Church of 
 Rome, is absurd. 
 
 ' He denounces them, not simply because he thinks them 
 illegal, but because he beUeves them to be pernicious and 
 demoralizing. The Roman Catholics see this, and its 
 mischievous influence on their getting a University in 
 Ireland. He will therefore lose the Roman Catholic vote 
 as well as the Church vote. 
 
 ' I began to write, three weeks ago, a book on the whole 
 controversy, which I hope to send to the printers by the 
 end of this month. I have \witten half of it, and I think 
 I have made Harcourt's position utterly irretrievable 
 politically, as well as proved him entirely ignorant of the 
 questions in dispute. 
 
 ' I intend my book to be very moderate, and to explain 
 in a reasonable and loyal sense the doctrines which Harcourt 
 so egregiously misunderstands. 
 
 ' I intend this to show that the Purchas and Ridsdale 
 Judgments are opposed alike to law and history, and to bring 
 out the fact that they are in deadly conflict with, another 
 Judgment of the same Court. And I shall conclude with a 
 chapter on Romanism. The Roman Catholics are crowing 
 over us, and I intend to carry the war into their camp. 
 
 ' In truth the whole trouble comes from a few incom- 
 parable fools among the younger Ritualists, who deserve no 
 mercy.
 
 THE END OP CONTROVERSY 221 
 
 ' The Bishop of London ^ is acting with great tact and 
 discretion. He has wisely abstained from laying down any 
 general rule, but deals with each case on its merits ; and 
 he is not afraid of the newspapers. The consequence is 
 that he is quietly getting the clergy to follow his decisions 
 and at the same time winning the confidence and respect 
 of the Press.' 
 
 The book, wliich appeared in June 1899, was perhaps 
 the most successful of all MacColl's controversial works. It 
 was called ' The Reformation Settlement, Examined in the 
 light of History and Law,' and it was prefaced by an Intro- 
 ductory Letter to Sir William Harcourt. It dealt in turn 
 with the Eucharistic Presence, the Eucharistic Sacrifice, 
 the causes and results of the Reformation, the testimony 
 of Anglican Divines, the Propinquity of the Spiritual 
 World, Sacerdotalism, Confession, the Intermediate State, 
 the Ecclesiastical Courts, the Ornaments Rubric, and the 
 validity of Anglican Orders. 
 
 This book had an instantaneous and a remarkable 
 success. One competent critic declared that ' for dignity, 
 vigour, and incisiveness it was worthy of the author of the 
 " Letters of Junius." ' Another said that the writer had 
 been remarkably successful ' in proving that the principles 
 which High Churchmen have inherited from the Caroline 
 Divines fell in with the modern, and, in the best sense 
 liberal, theology, and with the science of to-day.' But 
 perhaps the tribute paid by the Spectator was the most 
 remarkable, for that exemplary journal still maintained the 
 traditions of R. H. Hutton, who always avowed his want 
 of sympathy with what he oddly called the ' moral logic ' 
 of the Ritualists : 
 
 ' We hasten to add our tribute of cordial respect to the 
 general conception of Canon MacColl's book, and to the 
 courage, vigour, and thoroughness with which he has carried 
 it out. . . . Having demonstrated the historic width and 
 the present-day reasonableness of Anglican liberty in the 
 
 ^ Mandull Creighton.
 
 222 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 realm of Sacramental teaching, Canon MacCoU is not less 
 concerned to exhibit the injustice of the attempt to suppress 
 the ritual by which " High " views are symbolized and set 
 forth. And, in particular, he deals at length, and very 
 effectively indeed, with the Judgments of the Judicial Com- 
 mittee on points connected with the Ornaments Rubric. . . . 
 He places beyond reasonable doubt the fact that the plain 
 meaning of the rubric by which the ornaments of the Church 
 and of its ministers were deliberately regulated at the last 
 revision of the Prayer Book (which, of course, has Parlia- 
 mentary as well as Sjmodical authority), was set aside by the 
 Judicial Committee, and a wholly non-natural meaning read 
 into it and made of penal obligation. . . . Another point 
 of great importance on which, as it seems to us, Canon 
 MacColl achieves special success, is his demonstration of the 
 unhistoric character of the claim, put forward by Sir WilHam 
 Harcourt in his most aggressive manner, that the Crown and 
 Parliament have a right to determine the doctrine, discipline, 
 and ceremonial of the Church of England. . . . We may 
 not agree with all Canon MacCoU's conclusions, but we must 
 congratulate him on having produced a book which is cal- 
 culated to promote sound thinking on the relations between 
 Church and State, and to dissuade the candid reader from 
 participation in efforts towards a reduction of the ancient 
 and clearly established liberties of the Anglican clergy.' 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 'July 17, 1899.— As the so-called "Church Crisis" has 
 been a matter of concern to you, both as a Churchman 
 and Statesman, you may possibly be interested in knowing 
 that, in addition to piles of private letters, mostly from 
 strangers and of all states of Churchmanship, and no 
 Churchmanship, or even disbelief in Christianity, assuring 
 me that my book presented the question in dispute in a 
 light which seemed to my correspondents reasonable, the 
 organs of pubHc opinion have also treated me with great 
 friendliness. I take the liberty of enclosing an abstract
 
 THE END OF CONTROVERSY 223 
 
 of reviews, which my pubHshers tell me is a fair selection. 
 I have always believed in the justice of John Bull when 
 a fair appeal was made to his reason and love of fair 
 play. The recent elections have shown, I think, that the 
 agitation, as I have always maintained, has never touched 
 the masses and that the Church Association and the Pro- 
 testant Laymen's League are a negligible quantity in the 
 electorate. 
 
 ' The Conservative candidates in Edinburgh and Oldham 
 surrendered unconditionally to the Church Association. 
 
 ' The Liberal candidates refused their terms and won 
 by triumphant majorities. In East St. Pancras the Conser- 
 vative candidate spurned the Church Association and won. 
 In Southport my friend Captain C. B. Balfour fell between 
 tAvo stools. He accepted nearly all the terms of the Ultra- 
 Protestants, including the abolition of the Episcopal Veto, 
 but advocated diplomatic relations with the Pope. He 
 thus failed to roconciliate the Protestants, and he alienated 
 many Churchmen.' 
 
 In issuing a cheaper edition, with a fresh preface and some 
 additional matter, MacCoU remarked with great satisfaction : 
 ' The interest taken by the public in the subjects discussed 
 in this volume is proved by the fact that the book ran 
 through seven editions within a year of its publication.' 
 A tenth edition was pubHshed in 1901. 
 
 Whatever may be thought of MacColl's beliefs, or of 
 the arguments by which he upheld them (and the present 
 writer agrees with him both in the former and in the 
 latter), it must be admitted that the facts and documents 
 which he collected and made generally accessible in ' The 
 Reformation Settlement,' are, if not vital, at least pro- 
 foundly relevant to the life, structure, and working of the 
 Enghsh Church. 
 
 The storm was not yet at an end. A ' Church Discipline 
 Bill,' aimed at destroying Ritualism, was introduced in 
 1899, and questions of rituahsm and its suppression played 
 a considerable part in the General Election of 1900.
 
 224 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' October 2, 1900. — I have taken the Hberty of asking 
 my pubHshers to send you a copy of the new edition of 
 my book on "The Reformation Settlement." In a new- 
 preface and two additional chapters I have subjected the 
 Lambeth Decisions to an exhaustive internal examination. 
 Foolish and mischievous as I think the conduct of some of 
 the extreme Ritualists, I consider it less mischievous than 
 the decisions of the Archbishops. 
 
 ' I have given my reasons for that opinion at length in my 
 criticism. Our bishops, with the best intentions, have always 
 displayed a genius for mismanaging every Church movement, 
 whether Low, High, or Broad. I am sometimes tempted to 
 think that the strongest historical argument for the Divine 
 origin of the Church in this land is the fact of its having 
 survived on every critical occasion the blundering tactics of 
 its chief members. People will generally follow leaders who 
 know how to lead. I have always believed and said that 
 there never was any substance in the Kensit agitation. 
 
 ' It never had any popular backing, and it is already 
 practically dead. Even Harcourt, who expected to ride 
 back to office on the crest of a great popular wave of Pro- 
 testantism, has discovered his mistake, and has dropped the 
 subject. . . . 
 
 ' I have received letters of commendation from leading 
 Nonconformists, and Scotch Presbyterians ; and the Divinity 
 Faculty of the University of St. Andrews have invited me 
 to deliver an address to the University this month, and 
 I have agreed to do so with the approval of the Bishop of 
 London and the Bishop of St. Andrews, Dr. Wilkinson, late 
 of Truro. 
 
 ' My new edition also contains a chapter in answer to 
 a courteous attack on me by Professor Maitland of Cam- 
 bridge, who also wrote a book a year ago to prove that the 
 Bishop of Oxford is quite wrong in maintaining that the 
 Roman Canon Law was never formally received in England. 
 Maitland, an able and very learned man, is one of those 
 agnostics who seek to damage the Church of England for
 
 THE END OF CONTROVERSY 225 
 
 the purpose of damaging dogmatic Christianity altogether ; 
 and their method is to argue that the only logical theory 
 of Christianity is the Roman Church in its most aggressively 
 Ultramontane form. 
 
 ' They know that that form of Christianity will not 
 prevail, and hence their anxiety to represent it as the only 
 logical form of Christianity, and that form which prevailed 
 in England before the Reformation. 
 
 ' I must apologize for troubling your Lordship at this 
 busy time, but the insistent Protestants will doubtless press 
 their Bill ^ on the House of Commons ; and, unless my 
 argument can be refuted, I think I have shown that, if the 
 law be impartially enforced, the authors of the Church 
 Discipline Bill are likely to share the fate of the inventor of 
 the guillotine and be first victims of their own instrument.' 
 
 The General Election of 1900 confirmed Lord Salisbury 
 in power, with Mr. Arthur Balfour as Leader of the House 
 of Commons. ' Church Disciphne Bills ' were still in fashion, 
 and succeeded one another in the sessions of 1901, 1902, 
 and 1903. 
 
 MacColl to Salisbury 
 
 ' November 8, 1901. — I never believed that there was any 
 substance in the Kensit outburst of fanatical Protestantism, 
 or any popular support behind it, though Sir William 
 Harcourt thought he was going to ride into office on the 
 crest of a great Protestant Avave. The Brighton Church 
 Congress marked the end of the "Crisis." The extreme 
 men on both sides were cowed and silenced by the practical 
 argument between moderate Evangelicals and High Church- 
 men on fundamental questions. The Bishop of Exeter and 
 I, for instance, were chosen to open the discussion on the 
 Church of England's appeal to antiquity, in the belief, 
 I suppose, that we represented opposite schools ; but our 
 papers, without any previous communication with each 
 other, ran on the same lines and came to the same 
 
 ' A Bill aimed at suppressing Ritualism.
 
 226 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 conclusion ; and the Bishop told me afterwards that he 
 could not detect any material difference between us.' ^ 
 
 We have already seen that MacColl parted company 
 with the Liberal party after Gladstone's retirement from 
 the Premiership. He had no confidence in the politicians who 
 from that time on framed the Liberal pohcy, though he was 
 on friendly terms with them in private life. In short, there 
 was no Liberal leader in whom he could perceive that blend 
 of good citizenship and good churchmanship which had 
 always fascinated him in Salisbury and Gladstone. He 
 specially disHked the line which the Liberal leaders took 
 in the matter of public education. In 1902 he wrote to 
 Lord Salisbury : 
 
 ' I hope I shall not be deemed obtrusive if I venture to 
 congratulate your Lordship on the fine and noble speech 
 which your son Lord Hugh dehvered on the second reading 
 of the Education Bill. 
 
 ' It was very refreshing to hear it in these days of vulgar 
 popularity-hunting and Mammon-worship. I wish I could 
 live to see him leader of the Conservative party and Prime 
 Minister. It is moral earnestness and spiritual elevation 
 of character that tell most with the mass of people in this 
 country, if it be combined with intellectual abiHty. 
 
 ' I beheve that Mr. John Morley, agnostic though he be, 
 has more influence in the country than any Liberal leader, 
 because of his moral earnestness and conscientious fidehty 
 to his convictions regardless of personal consequences. 
 
 ' I hope one result of the Education controversy will be 
 to get rid of that mischievous imposture — "Undenomina- 
 tional religious education." I don't understand the excite- 
 ment of the Nonconformists, It seems to me exceedingly 
 doubtful whether the Bill,^ as it stands, will help Church 
 Schools at all.' 
 
 1 Mr. Balfour, who succeeded Lord Salisbury as Prime Minister in 1902, 
 sought [to allay the anxiety of his followers by a Royal Commission on 
 Ecclesiastical Discipline, which was issued on April 23, 1904, and reported 
 on June 21, 1906. MacColl was examined before the Commission, and gave 
 valuable evidence. 
 
 * The Conservative Education Bill.
 
 THE END OF CONTROVERSY 227 
 
 On June 15, 1902, he wrote to Lord Salisbury : 
 
 ' I believe the great majority of the public are grossly 
 misled as to the present state of the religious question under 
 the Board School System. This impression prompted me 
 to write an article on the subject, of which I take the Uberty 
 of enclosing a copy. My article, together with some letters 
 which I wrote in the Times and Westminster Gazette, has 
 brought in some interesting letters from Nonconformists, 
 saying that my presentment of the case is quite new to them. 
 The Liberal Association of this (Ripon) division of Yorkshire 
 has summoned a meeting on the question on July 11, and they 
 have asked me to speak. I agreed to do so if they allowed 
 me to speak on the lines of the enclosed article, and the}'^ 
 have consented and give me carte blanche. I think the Church 
 party have been acting too much on the defensive, generally 
 a great mistake in controversial tactics. To be constantly 
 defending ourselves gives an impression that we have no 
 case. 
 
 ' If the Nonconformists persist in their violent, and as 
 it seems to me, unreasoning, denunciations, would it not be 
 well to offer to lease (if not buy) the Church School Buildings, 
 leaving each denomination to teach its own rehgion in all 
 schools at stated hours ? We should then have universal 
 Board Schools, and the Church could provide a gradually 
 trained class of catechists who would give Church children 
 in all schools far better religious instruction [than is now 
 given in most of the voluntary schools. The cost of training 
 and maintaining this staff of catechists would be borne bj'^ 
 the State payment for our School Buildings, and would 
 make our School managers able to be independent of local 
 subscriptions, which will, I fear, fall off with the payment 
 of rates.' 
 
 ''November 27, 1902. — I am taking the liberty of sending 
 you a copy of a little book of mine on the Education 
 Question. I lost patience with the Nonconformists and 
 the Liberal party and sat down to write very hurriedly an 
 exposure of their inconsistencies and not too scrupulous 
 conduct. 
 
 Q 2
 
 228 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' They care a great deal more to damage the Church and 
 the Government than to advance the cause of education, 
 I am sure they overrate their strength in the country. 
 I have received a number of letters from Nonconformists 
 begging me to believe that the clamour of the political 
 Nonconformists by no means represents the Nonconformists 
 as a body. 
 
 ' My object has been : 
 
 ' 1. To detach the Secularists, who are logical and 
 honest, from the Liberal and Nonconformist party on this 
 question. 
 
 ' 2. To show the unfair and inconsistent attitude of the 
 Nonconformists and the Opposition. The former, whose 
 raison d'etre is to liberate the Christian religion from State 
 control and endowment, are now agitating for the 
 State endowment and control of a new religion, namely 
 Undenominationalism . 
 
 ' 3. To prove that the Opposition — leaders, rank and file, 
 are in this matter going against Liberal principles in general 
 and Mr. Gladstone's Liberalism in particular. 
 
 ' I trust the House of Lords will abolish, or at least 
 essentially modify, the Kenyon-Slaney amendment.^ It 
 \Adll not gain the Government a single seat : it will lose 
 them many at the next Election. With that amendment 
 the security for the religious education of the Church's 
 children is gone. Even Avithout the Kenyon-Slaney amend- 
 ment, the schools will be in peril. The managers will find 
 it hard to obtain the necessary subscriptions for repairs and 
 structural changes and additions, and it will be moderate 
 rather than extreme incumbents whom the amendment 
 Avill hurt.' 
 
 Salisbury to MacColl 
 
 December 7, 1902. 
 
 ' Dear Canon MacColl, — I am much obhged to you 
 for your letter, and your book on the Education Question. 
 
 1 Colonel Kenyon-Slaney carried an amendment to the Education Bill, 
 providing that religious education in a Voluntary School shall be under the 
 control of the Managers, as distinguished from the Incumbent.
 
 THE END OF CONTROVERSY 229 
 
 ' I have not voted on the Education Bill — as I am not 
 at all satisfied with the probable working of the Kenyon- 
 Slaney Clause.' 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 MacCoIl's unwilHngness to help the Liberal party re- 
 strained him from taking part in the resistance which the 
 Liberals, some strongly and others faintly, offered to the 
 South African war ; but there were some incidents in 
 the campaign which stirred him to private remonstrance. 
 On November 16, 1901, he wrote to Lord Salisbury : 
 
 ' You have always been kind and patient with me, even 
 when I fear I have been very troublesome. But I am 
 writing this note in the interests of the Government. 
 
 ' I have been, as your Lordship knows, for years Honorary 
 Secretary of a powerful nonpoHtical Committee to help 
 the Christians in the Turkish Empire. I had much diffi- 
 culty in managing the Committee and preventing a fierce 
 agitation throughout the country at the time of the Armenian 
 horrors, but I was able to say that it was Lord Rosebery's 
 Cabinet which had left the Armenians to their fate, and 
 left your Lordship such a damnosa hcereditas as practically 
 tied your hands, and I proved my impeachment with 
 abundant evidence in my book, "The Sultan and the 
 Powers." I offended the Liberal leaders to the quick, and 
 increased my offence by publicly advising those who wished 
 to help the Armenians to vote against the Liberals in the 
 Election of 1805. 
 
 ' Since then I have taken no part in politics. 
 
 ' I have kept entirely aloof from the controversy on the 
 South African question, except twice, when I wrote to the 
 papers to defend Lord Kitchener, whom I knoA\- well, against 
 accusations of cruelty and inhumanity both in the Soudan 
 and in South Africa. 
 
 ' That is a long preface to explain the real object of this 
 letter. For some weeks past I have been bombarded with 
 letters reproaching me for not helping to rouse the country
 
 230 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 to what my correspondents call the cruelties that are going 
 on in South Africa. The enclosed cutting is a specimen 
 of what people send me. I confess that letters like this 
 coming from our own soldiers — and I have seen not a few 
 of them — are dreadful reading. Is all this indiscriminate 
 burning and destruction necessary ? My own belief is 
 that it does not fulfil its object in South Africa, while it 
 is certainly damaging the Government here to a degree, 
 I believe, that Party managers are not aware of. I had 
 experience of this in the Bulgarian business. There is a 
 large number of people — large enough to decide an Election 
 — who do not trouble themselves much about Party politics 
 but are roused to zealous energy by an appeal to their 
 emotions and sense of justice. To this class of people Lord 
 Beaconsfield owed his defeat in 1880. His cjniical attitude 
 towards the Bulgarian massacres roused a fierce feehng of 
 vengeance among a mass of people outside the ken of 
 political managers. 
 
 ' I do not say that there is anything Hke that now, but 
 there is a strong feeling, increasing in volume and by no 
 means confined to Liberals, against the policy of wholesale 
 farm-burning and the prevalence of martial law. I feel 
 sad and distressed about the whole business ; but I keep 
 my distress to myself. I beheve, however, that I am doing 
 the Government a service by writing this letter to your 
 Lordship. If any mitigation of the policy of indiscriminate 
 farm-burning can be devised, it would be a rehef to many 
 who are, and wish to remain, friendly with the Government.' 
 
 Salisbury to MacColl 
 
 November 18, 1901. 
 
 ' Dear Canon MacColl, — Any discussions of the measures 
 which repel you must necessarily turn on the question 
 whether we are justified in sanctioning the warlike pohcy 
 which our Generals consider necessary. War is a terrible 
 thing. The Boers should have thought of its horrible 
 significance when they invaded the Queen's dominions 
 without a cause. The detailed measures of the war must
 
 THE END OF CONTROVERSY 231 
 
 be adopted in conformity with the opinions of the Generals 
 to whom we trust our poHcy. The answer to criticisms on 
 farm-burning must continue to be — the Generals thought 
 it necessary, 
 
 ' I agree with you that the horrors of the Concentration 
 Camps followed on this decision — almost of necessity. The 
 huddling together of so many human beings, especially 
 women and children, could not but cause a great mortality ; 
 particularly among a people so dirty as the Boers. 
 
 ' The question whether it will dispose the Election against 
 us in 1905 or 1906 is not a question which can aid us now — 
 though I dare say you are right. 
 
 ' Ever yours truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 But Lord Salisbury's long day of honourable service 
 was drawing to its close. He had lost his gifted wife ; 
 his health was faihng ; and his natural tendency to 
 depression increased month by month. On July 11, 
 1902, he resigned the Premiership, and on July 18 MacCoU 
 addressed him as follows : 
 
 ' Perhaps I may, without presumption, venture to add 
 to the multitude of similar expressions which have reached 
 your Lordship my humble and most sincere regret at your 
 retirement from public life. The two questions that have 
 always interested me in politics are the welfare of the 
 Church, with which I believe the interest of the nation to 
 be so intimately bound ; and the relations of this country 
 with Russia, and the Ottoman Empire and its Christian 
 subjects. There is no one left in either House of Parliament 
 or on either Front Bench who is really master of either 
 of these subjects, or who seriously cares about them. 
 
 ' Your son, Lord Hugh, understands both, and I hope 
 that he has a great future before him. But meanwhile the 
 outlook seems to me far from bright ; and I am not a 
 pessimist by nature. 
 
 The old order changeth, yielding place to new. 
 ' What the new has in store for this country is hidden
 
 2^2 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 from us. I trust it may be more auspicious than I 
 anticipate. 
 
 ' I thank your Lordship for all the kindness and forbear- 
 ance which you have ever shown to me, even when I have 
 been, as I fear, very troublesome. My interest in politics 
 is now dead. You are the last of the statesmen to whom 
 I have been accustomed to look up, and who made politics 
 interesting for me.' 
 
 Here is Lord Salisbury's reply : 
 
 July 19, 1902. 
 
 ' My Dear Canon MacColl, — I thank you heartily for 
 your kind letter. 
 
 ' I agree with you in looking forward with much interest 
 on the future that is coming upon us. It may be better — 
 I do not know — but I think it will be very different from the 
 past we are leaving behind. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.'
 
 CHAPTER X 
 
 FRIENDSHIP AND HOME 
 
 Some persons are pleasant only when they are with one companion ; others 
 only in a large company, where they can shine. Whereas, the really pleasant 
 person is pleasant everywhere, and with everyone. — Sir Arthur Helps. 
 
 We have now reached the close of MacCoU's poUtical activi- 
 ties, and the moment seems suitable for a brief survey of 
 his private and social hfe. In the year 1898 an anonymous 
 writer, after describing certain clergymen who played more 
 or less successfully the part of the French Abbe in English 
 society, continued in the following words : 
 
 ' Canon Malcolm MacColl is an Abbe with a difference. 
 No one eats his dinner more sociably or tells a story more 
 aptly ; no one enjoys good society more keenly or is more 
 appreciated in it ; but he does not make society a pro- 
 fession. He is conscientiously devoted to the duties of his 
 Canonry ; he is an accomplished theologian ; and he is 
 perhaps the most expert and vigorous pamphleteer in 
 England. The Franco-German War, the Athanasian Creed, 
 the Ritualistic prosecutions, the case for Home Rule, and 
 the misdeeds of the Sultan, have in turn produced from his 
 pen pamphlets which have rushed into huge circulations 
 and swollen to the dimensions of solid treatises. Canon 
 MacColl is genuinely and ex animo an ecclesiastic ; but he is 
 a politician as well. His inflexible integrity and fine sense 
 of honour have enabled him to play, with credit to himself 
 and advantage to the public, the rather risky part of the 
 Priest in PoHtics. He has been trusted aUke by Lord 
 
 233
 
 234 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Salisbury and by Mr. Gladstone ; has conducted negotiations 
 of great pith and moment ; and has been behind the scenes 
 of some historic performances. Yet he has never made an 
 enemy, nor betrayed a secret, nor lowered the honour of his 
 sacred calling.' ^ 
 
 ' Genuinely and ex animo an ecclesiastic ' was a phrase 
 fully warranted by the facts, although MacColl's exercise 
 of his ministry was unsystematic and disjointed. Dr. 
 Jackson, who was Bishop of London when he was appointed 
 to St. George's, Botolph Lane, ' regarded such livings in the 
 light of honourable sinecures, giving leisure and a moderate 
 income to clergymen who were able and wiUing to serve 
 the Church with their pens.' ~ So, at first MacCoU did little 
 in his parish, but he was extremely kind in helping over- 
 worked clergymen. He often did duty for his friend and 
 former fellow-curate, the Rev. W. H. Langhorne, Vicar of 
 St. Augustine's, Stepney, and in 1891 he took temporary 
 charge of Holy Trinity, Shoreditch, whence he wrote to 
 Gladstone : 
 
 ' I am here in the charge of Mr. Jay's parish — 8000 
 people in the most abject poverty. He could not take a 
 hoHday, so I offered to take his place for a month. It is 
 rather hard work ; daily services : three on Thursday, with 
 a sermon, and five on Sunday, with three sermons. Mr. Jay 
 is a hero. I admire his work here so much. My own 
 church is now closed, and a commission is sitting to settle 
 the terms of the union of my parish vnth a neighbouring 
 one.' 
 
 ' Three sermons ' were no terror to MacCoU, who was 
 
 ^ Collections and Recollections, series i. 
 
 ^ The following facts concerning St. George's, Botolph Lane, are supplied 
 by th<* kindness of the Registrar of the Diocese . 
 
 ' Canon Malcolm MacColl was instituted to this benefice on April 27, 1871. 
 He ceased to be Rector on November 28, 1901. The church was closed on 
 account of its dangerous condition about the middle of the year 1891. The 
 authority (under the Union of Benefices Act, 1860) for the removal of the 
 church was issued in February 1903, and then St. George's was united to 
 the Parish of St. Mary-at-Hill (Prebendary CarlUe's Parish).'
 
 FRIENDSHIP AND HOME 235 
 
 a vigorous preacher, and loved preaching. In 1894 he 
 wrote to Gladstone : 
 
 'I have received about fifty letters, from all over the 
 country — some of them very touching — from people in sor- 
 row, begging me to collect and pubUsh two series of sermons 
 which I preached at Ripon : one last year on Immortality, 
 and one this year on the Intermediate State. Three or four 
 Yorkshire papers and one London paper report my sermons 
 while I am at Ripon without my consent, and that is why 
 I get letters about them. I have promised at last to bring 
 out a volume of sermons this year ; but that would only 
 mean revising and enlarging the published reports. It is 
 wonderful what hazy views even Churchpeople have about 
 the future Hfe. I have letters from dissenters — one of them 
 a dissenting minister — saying that my sermons were " a 
 new revelation " to him. Yet there is nothing in them that 
 is not commonplace.' 
 
 MacCoU's church had been condemned as a dangerous 
 structure, and was closed in 1891. Thenceforward his only 
 official duties were those attached to his Canonry, and he 
 was free to pursue his journaHstic and literary avocations 
 as his fancy led him. Gladstone had hatched a project for 
 reprinting Sir WiUiam Palmer's 'Treatise on the Church,' ^ 
 and had urged MacCoU to act as general Editor of the reprint, 
 employing experts in the various fields of knowledge which 
 the treatise touched. MacColl spent an infinitude of time 
 and trouble on the endeavour ; but the difficulties, some 
 emanating from Palmer himself, were innumerable, and in 
 the end proved to be insuperable. The correspondence 
 lasted, off and on, from 1881 to 1898, and nothing came of 
 it after all. It was a deplorable waste of energy which, 
 
 1 Tho sermons were published under the title of Life Here and Hereafter ; 
 and. together with his other theological writings, obtained for MacColl on 
 April 14, 1899, the honorary degree of D.D. from the University of Edinburgh. 
 
 - A Treatise on the Church of Christ, designed chiefly for the vm of studevt-^ 
 of theology. By the Rev. William Pabner, M.A., of Worcester College, Oxford. 
 1838.
 
 236 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 more wisely directed, might have connected MacColl's name 
 with a work of permanent value to religion. 
 
 In journalism, where MacColl was unhampered by the 
 frowardness of collaborators, he was eminently successful. 
 His income, from that source alone, was at one time £1000 
 a year. Yet he was wholly indifferent to money. ' Poverty,' 
 he once wrote, ' is not poverty to me ' — and he spent as freely 
 as he earned. He had always lived at what is vaguely 
 called ' The West End ' of London — in lodgings at Lyall 
 Place and at Chester Terrace, in chambers at New Burlington 
 Street, and latterly at a flat in Victoria Street, of which 
 one might say, as Sir George Trevelyan says of Macaulay's 
 apartment in the Albany, that it was ' all library.' He 
 spent a great deal of time at clubs, ' The Devonshire ' being 
 his favourite resort. Here he entertained his friends con- 
 stantly and most hospitably ; and, when the party was to 
 include ladies, he gave it at the Albemarle, where Mr. and 
 Mrs. Gladstone were often among his guests.^ When he 
 wished to join the Athenaeum, he asked Matthew Arnold to 
 second him, and Arnold's reply must be given — ' I know 
 my countrymen, and can assure you that what they like 
 is " a swell " ; Lord Granville or Lord Spencer would be, 
 therefore, much more valuable seconders than I. But 
 if, after this warning, you still prefer to take me as your 
 seconder, I am quite at your service.' 
 
 For his autumn hoHdays, MacColl generally gravitated 
 towards Scotland, where he took delight in salmon-fishing. 
 A good deal of his correspondence is dated from great 
 country houses ; he often went yachting with such close 
 friends as Lord and Lady Waterford and Mrs. Meynell- 
 Ingram ; and he made rapid journeys to the Riviera, Geneva, 
 Italy, Greece, Russia, and Palestine. His circle of acquaint- 
 ances was extremely wide, and included a good many 
 people with whom he had neither ecclesiastical nor poUtical 
 
 ' One occasion his guests were — ilr. Gladstone, Count Herbert Bismarck, 
 Lord Rosebery, Sir William Harcourt. Mr. Casscls, and Mr. Cashel-Hoey ; 
 another, Lord Bath, Mr. Bret Harte, j\Ir. Holmau Hunt, JNIr. Browning, Mr. Felix 
 Moscheles, and the writer of Little Lord Fauntlercy — and so on.
 
 FRIENDSHIP AND HOME 237 
 
 sympathy. He kept masses of letters and notes from all 
 sorts and conditions of men, and they afford amusing 
 glimpses of his social life. Delane complains that people 
 regard him as an ' otiose person ' who can dine out whenever 
 he Ukes ; and, in reply to MacColl's casual observation that 
 September is the ' dull season ' of the Times, says that 
 it seems to him ' much more interesting, amusing, and 
 instructive, than when more than half of it is filled with 
 speeches, most of which may justly be called dull.' Lord 
 Rosebery can imagine nothing more tempting than 
 MacColl's invitation to dinner, but has to obey a Royal 
 command elsewhere. Lord Bath is delighted by a ' most 
 pleasant ' dinner at the Flat, and finds that ' a lift makes a 
 London apartment habitable.' Sir William Harcourt hopes 
 that MacColl will attend Mr. Lewis Harcourt's wedding, in 
 spite of the fact that ' incense will not be used ceremoniall5^' 
 E. A. Freeman is passing through London, and would like 
 to see MacColl, only ' it is hopeless ever to think of finding 
 anybody in the howling wilderness which we call a 
 " Metropolis." ' MacColl's ' picture of the cathedral close ' 
 attracts Mr. John Morley to Ripon. Browning writes 
 enthusiastically of MacColl's ' goodness ' in asking him to 
 dinner : 
 
 ' Nothing can be kinder nor more pleasant than your 
 invitation — which, notwithstanding, T am obliged to give 
 up the hope of accepting. I go at the end of the week to 
 the North of Italy, and am unable to dispose of an hour 
 in the meantime.' 
 
 John Bright is characteristically conscientious : 
 
 ' The Wednesday and Thursday of the days you mention 
 are already engaged, and I am to dine with Mr. Lefevre, 
 and Sir A. Hayter. The other days are days on which 
 the House sits, and I have been forced to make a rule not 
 to make engagements for those days — for I cannot with 
 propriety, or justice to our Chief, absent myself whilst 
 business of importance is going on. I must therefore
 
 238 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ask you to excuse me if I am anable to accept your kind 
 invitation — under other circumstances I should gladly have 
 joined your party at the Devonshire Club.' 
 
 In the midst of a life thus agreeably diversified, MacColl, 
 suddenly, as it would seem, turned his thoughts in a very 
 different direction. On February 6, 1897, he wrote as 
 follows to Gladstone : 
 
 ' You have always been so good and kind to me that I 
 don't like to take any serious step in life without consulting 
 you. What do you say to my joining the Cowley Brother- 
 hood ? I feel sometimes so dreadfully lonely that I find work 
 of any kind a hard pull against the collar ; and I have 
 sometimes thought that I could do more good living in a 
 Brotherhood. Of course there is the risk of my finding 
 it hard to adapt myself, at my time of life, to the mode of 
 living under new conditions. But living part of the year in 
 chambers, and another part of the year managing a house- 
 hold, with a fresh staff of servants each year, is so trying, 
 at least to me.' 
 
 The purport of Gladstone's reply to this surprising 
 suggestion may be inferred from the following letters. On 
 February 18 MacColl returned to the subject : 
 
 ' I wrote to Father X. at the same time that I wrote 
 to you, and I enclose his answer. It is very much on the 
 same line as yours. So I will do nothing for the present. 
 Perhaps I may some day have an opportunity of talking 
 to you about it. 
 
 ' As to marriage, the fact is that I don't think any 
 woman for whom I care would be likely to care for me. 
 I have so little of any kind to offer ; and I should shrink 
 from the presumption of asking any woman to marry me 
 unless I felt quite sure that she was inchned that 
 way. I have no other objection to marrying ; and I 
 dare say I should be more happy that way than in any 
 other.'
 
 FRIENDSHIP AND HOME 239 
 
 Here is Father X.'s answer : 
 
 ' Febritary 9, 1897.— I must begin by apologizing for 
 having left your letter so long unanswered, but I have been 
 away from home, and did not get back until late last 
 night. 
 
 ' It was a great pleasure to receive your letter, and to 
 feel that you were ready, if it seemed to be God's will, to 
 give up your present mode of life, which, I should suppose, 
 has many attractions for you, and to take the humble 
 position of a Postulant here. 
 
 ' I think 'that, at your age, it will need a very clear 
 call from God manifesting unmistakably His wiU that you 
 should come to us, before it would be wise to take such 
 a step. 
 
 ' When one has been in the sacred ministry more than 
 thirty years,^ as, I think, you have, it is not an easy thing 
 to uproot oneself and, so to speak, to begin life over again, 
 and to take upon oneself the yoke of the novitiate in a 
 religious community. 
 
 ' I do not doubt that God might see good reasons why 
 in particular cases a man of your age might need such a 
 transplanting, but I feel sure that He would then make 
 His will perfectly clear, and would call you with a very 
 unmistakable call. 
 
 ' Whether He has done so,|I cannot say. If He has, 
 I feel sure that your way would be made clear for you, 
 and that we should welcome you. 
 
 * In the meanwhile, would it not be possible for you to 
 pay us a visit here ? If you were to spend a week here 
 some time in Lent, you would see something of our ways, 
 and you would have a quiet time to yourself. I should 
 recommend not coming in Holy Week, because so many 
 of the Fathers and senior Novices go away to give courses 
 of sermons in various places during that week, so that you 
 would hardly see anything of us. But, if you were to come 
 any time between Ash Wednesday and Passion Sunday, a 
 cell would be ready for you.' 
 
 ' It was really more than forty.
 
 240 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Happily, the counsels of common-sense prevailed. Mac- 
 Coll had surrendered his will to what he thought might be 
 a Divine call ; but, having satisfied himself that it was 
 nothing more than a feeling of restlessness engendered by 
 loneliness and despondency, he returned to the line of life 
 which naturally fitted him. In the event, his self-surrender 
 was not unrewarded. In 1904 he was married to Consuelo 
 Albinia, youngest daughter of Maj or- General W. H. Cromp- 
 ton-Stansfield, of Esholt Hall, Yorkshire ; and so at length 
 attained to the happiness of a home. Marriage rather 
 extended than contracted the range of his hospitalities, 
 though the scene of them was now transferred from Club- 
 land to the pleasant house in Beaufort Gardens where he 
 and Mrs. MacColl had established themselves. All his old 
 friends delighted in his increased happiness, and some of 
 his brightest hours were passed in visits, with his wife, to 
 the houses where he had so long been an habitual and a 
 welcome guest. 
 
 The only shadow on the scene was cast by failing health. 
 MacColl had been blessed by nature with a constitution of 
 extraordinary vigour, which he had taxed to the uttermost 
 by incessant labour, generally against time, and by a 
 complete self-forgetfulness as to ease and comfort. More 
 than once he had paid the inevitable penalty. His letters 
 mention one definite attack of rheumatic fever, and more 
 than one recurrence of similar trouble. A still graver 
 illness overtook him in the summer of 1892, when travelling 
 in Greece. He thus described it in a letter to Lord 
 Salisbury : 
 
 ' In a long journey from Athens to Olympia to see the 
 discoveries made at Olympia, I had to pass, thinly clad, 
 through a great oak forest and a malarious plain with 
 a range of snow-clad mountains near the railway, and 
 I caught a chill, whic?i rapidly developed into a Avasting 
 dysentery and raging fever. Still I went on ten miles (to 
 Olympia) the following day, and was carried to the museum 
 and propped up in a chair to feast my soul for a quarter 
 of an hour on that wonderful Hermes of Praxiteles. There
 
 FRIENDSHIP AND HOME 241 
 
 I had to make a long journey back to Patras where I was 
 carried aboard Lord Waterford's yacht more dead than 
 ahve. I could get no proper medical aid till I reached 
 Naples five days afterwards, delayed by a gale. I am 
 reduced to a skeleton, but I shall soon recover my strength, 
 please God.' 
 
 He attributed his recovery in great measure to the 
 good offices of Lady Waterford,-*^ concerning whom he wrote 
 to Gladstone : 
 
 ' You know that she stayed at Naples to nurse me — 
 with her husband's glad permission — when the doctors 
 gave me up, although she had then been eight months 
 absent from her children. The sunshine of her presence, 
 the music of her voice, her tender tactful sympathy did 
 more for me than all the doctors. I have never known 
 such unselfishness as hers, not simply in its self-forget- 
 fulness, but, most of all, in its brightness and charm and 
 grace.' 
 
 But the immediately succeeding years were, as we have 
 seen, more than usually full of anxious and exhausting 
 work ; and in 1899 the machine again gave trouble. Writing 
 from Bad Nauheim on July 17, he said : 
 
 ' I have been sent hurriedly to this place by my London 
 doctor who discovered a fortnight ago the development of 
 some heart-complaint. The late Sir Andrew Clark told 
 me ten years ago that I had some functional weakness of 
 the heart, but nothing organically wrong ; and my London 
 doctor examined me eight months ago and said that my 
 heart was quite sound. The specialist now says that I am 
 suffering from heart-dilatation, which may be cured, and 
 also from valvular insufficiency, which cannot be cured, 
 though my life may be prolonged with care. 
 
 ' He attributes it to too much brain-pressure, and, 
 when I told him of the high-pressure speed with which 
 
 ^ Lady Blanche Elizabeth Adelaide Somerset married in 1874 the 
 5th Marquess of Waterford, and died in 1897.
 
 242 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 I wrote my recent book,^ he said that that would account 
 for it. 
 
 ' But if my effort has in any way helped to clear away 
 some ignorance and prejudice, I ought not to regret its 
 consequences to myself.' 
 
 MacCoU returned from Nauheim in greatly improved 
 health, and there were no outward signs of serious mischief. 
 He resumed, though perhaps rather less strenuously, his 
 usual occupations, and did not lay them aside even when 
 marriage brought new interests into his hfe. It was a 
 pleasing incident that in March 1906 the King of the 
 Hellenes, in recognition of MacColl's lifelong devotion to 
 the cause of Greece, conferred on him the Cross of the 
 Order of the Redeemer. 
 
 The General Election of 1906 gave an overwhelming 
 majority to the Liberals, and the first Session of the new 
 Parliament was devoted to a well-meant but ill-drawn 
 Education Bill, which the Lords, without much ceremony, 
 rejected. The Liberals felt the time had come to try 
 conclusions with the House which had so often defeated or 
 deferred reforms ; and some of the more eager spirits 
 called aloud for the aboUtion of the Second Chamber. 
 This view did not commend itself to MacColl, and on 
 the evening of April 4, 1907, he wrote fifteen pages of 
 a memorandum on the disadvantages of government 
 by a single chamber. He took for his text the ques- 
 tion once asked by Mr. John Morley ^ about the House 
 of Lords — ' Shall we mend it, or end it ? ' — and he 
 declared unequivocally for mending. The manuscript lies 
 before me as I write. The handwriting, always clear and 
 graceful though extremely rapid, shows no sign of impair- 
 ment ; and the memorandum, though only a fragment, 
 displays all the habitual vigour of thought and phrase. 
 
 That night MacColl lay down to rest in his usual health, 
 but next morning, while he was dressing, the mischief 
 latent in the heart became acute, and in a few minutes all 
 
 ^ The Reformation Settlement. 
 
 '^ Afterwards Lord Morley of Blackburn,
 
 FRIENDSHIP AND HOME 243 
 
 was over. He was buried at Kirkby Overblow, near Ripon, 
 on April 10, the Bishops of Ripon and Knaresborough, the 
 Dean of Ripon, and the Rev. Stephen Gladstone, officiating ; 
 and a Memorial Service was held at St. Saviour's, Chelsea, 
 on the same day. In the Chapel of St. Wilfrid, in the 
 north choir-aisle of Ripon Cathedral, there stands an altar 
 with the name of Malcolm MacCoU inscribed at the foot— 
 ' the gift, for his sake, of friends who desire to preserve 
 his memory within the walls where his presence was so 
 often seen and where the echoes of his voice have hardly 
 yet passed into silence.' 
 
 Life ! we've been long together, 
 
 Through pleasant and through cloudy weather ; 
 
 'Tis hard to part when friends are dear ; 
 
 Perhaps 't ^\'ill cost a sigh, a tear ; 
 
 Then steal away, give little warning. 
 
 Choose thine o^^■n time ; 
 
 Say not Good night, but in some brighter climo 
 
 Bid me Good morning. 
 
 A. L Barbauld 
 
 &2
 
 CHAPTER XI 
 
 CORRESPONDENCE 
 
 I can imagine no more conclusive proof of excellence in letters than that 
 they disclose the character of the recipient as well as of the author. 
 
 Herbert Paul. 
 
 The letters inserted in the preceding chapters will have 
 given the reader some notion of MacColl's peculiar position 
 as the confidential adviser of statesmen on both sides in 
 politics. They form, however, only a small fraction of 
 this enormous correspondence. He was himself a most 
 indefatigable letter-writer, and many of those with whom 
 he habitually corresponded were equally copious in reply. 
 The exigencies of space forbid more than a selection from 
 the mass of letters entrusted to my care ; but in making that 
 selection I have tried to show the range and variety of 
 MacColl's friendships, and the high regard in which he was 
 held by men of very different types and schools. 
 
 At this point it may be well to record the fact that 
 MacCoU numbered among his correspondents members, and 
 even heads, of more than one of the reigning houses of Europe ; 
 but, for obvious reasons, the letters which he received from 
 these royal personages must be %vithheld from publication. 
 
 The begirming of MacColl's intimacy with Gladstone 
 has been noted in the memoir ; its growth and development 
 are illustrated by the letters here subjoined. 
 
 11 Carlton House Terrace, February 16, 1864. 
 
 ' My Dear Sir, — I return the correspondence between 
 Dr. Newman and Mr. Kingsley, with many thanks. It is 
 
 244
 
 GLADSTONE 245 
 
 abundantly but not pleasantly interesting. It is mis- 
 managed, I venture to think, on the side of Mr. Kingsley : 
 on the side of Mr. Newman it leaves with me a rather painful 
 impression, which^I had not anticipated. 
 
 ' Nothing can be more unfortunate than his repeated 
 reference to the Sermon as a " Protestant Sermon." 
 
 ' I remain, 
 
 ' Very faithfully yours, 
 
 'W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 11 Carlton House Terrace, June 21, 1865. 
 
 'My Dear Sir, — In thanldng you yesterday for what 
 you had so modestly announced as a pamphlet I was not 
 a. ware of the manner and degree in which, in the character 
 of " Scrutator," you had laid me under obligation. 
 
 ' I must not speak of the opinions you have expressed, 
 for they are far too favourable to me ; but I may do justice 
 to the remarkable talent you have displayed in the method 
 of handling the subject. It reminds me, though on a 
 widely different subject, of the ability which struck me so 
 much in the first letter which I ever had the pleasure to 
 receive from you. 
 
 'I remain, my dear Sir, with many thanks for your 
 generous appreciation and your able effort, 
 
 ' Very faithfully yours, 
 
 ' W. E. Gladstone,' 
 
 Hawarden, August 6, 1865. 
 
 ' My Dear Sir, — My acquaintance with you for some 
 years has given me a high idea of your abilities as a writer, 
 of your knowledge and skill in subjects belonging to your 
 sacred profession, and of your open mind and liberal 
 opinions ; and I can well believe that you would discharge 
 in the most efficient manner the duties of an Inspector of 
 Schools. You are quite welcome to use this note, if you 
 should think fit, by way of testimonial. 
 
 ' I have had occasion thankfully to acknowledge the 
 aid of your pen, rendered with great ability, in regard to the 
 
 ^ Newman's sennon on ' Wisdom and Innocence,' preached while he was 
 Vicar of St. Mary the Virgin, Oxford.
 
 246 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Oxford Election, but I do not think it has biassed my 
 opinion : I should readily have rendered the same testimony 
 before that aid was given. 
 
 ' I remain, my dear Sir, 
 ' Faithfully yours, 
 
 ' W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 11 Carlton House Terrace, S.W., June 3, 1866. 
 
 ' My Dear Sir, — I have read with great interest Dr. 
 Newman's Review of ' Ecce Homo ' in the Month. The 
 laudatory part of it appears to me admirable. With a 
 riper and more practised mind (I think) than the author, 
 he draws out the author's thought, with a fineness and 
 clearness greater than any ^vith which the author had 
 himself presented it to his own consciousness. 
 
 ' I also go along with part of the rebukes administered. 
 But part seems to me needless and misplaced. I do not 
 see why Dr. N. assumes that the writer attacks the Church of 
 Rome. He may mean it, but that construction was hardly 
 necessary. In another point I withhold sympathy from 
 the review, but not on the author's behalf. Dr. N. seems 
 to think that no one but a Roman Catholic can duly com- 
 bine the reciprocal and joint testimonies of Scripture and the 
 Church, or the great stream of Christian History and Tradi- 
 tion. I am sure he thinks so or he would not have written 
 thus. This reminds me how, when that beautiful Apologia 
 came out people said, " You see Dr. Newman never was a 
 Churchman properly so called " ; and how twenty-five years 
 ago I read with astonishment an article of his in the British 
 Critic with a defence of the Church of England founded upon 
 principles that seemed to me weak and strange. And why 
 does he talk of the necessity of sacrificing private judgment ? 
 Can there be such a thing in a well-constituted mind ? 
 Is it not this, that our private judgment teaches us to 
 recognize the higher authority where the evidence of its title 
 is clear, and consequently that in following it we do not 
 abdicate but really obey the faculties which God has given 
 for the guidance of our mind and conduct ? 
 
 ' Very faithfidly yours, 
 
 ' W. E. Gladstone.'
 
 GLADSTONE 247 
 
 Hawarden, June 12, 1874. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I have received your letter 
 and I return the enclosure ; the painful subject of it ^ brings 
 me many letters. I knoAv not what to say of a measure 
 which seems to shift its ground eventually every time it is 
 discussed. The arrow rightly aimed may miss if the target 
 is removed after it has left the bow. I expect, however, to 
 be in London next week, and I shall not fail, please God, 
 duly to attend to the Bill when it reaches the House of 
 Commons. 
 
 ' I have not read a great deal in the Liberal or any other 
 Press lately ; this has been a main article of my relief. 
 But, as regards the Liberal party, the clergy can hardly 
 expect much from them in the way of aid against their 
 own Bishops. 
 
 ' I thought it seemed imprudent in the Bishop of Lin- 
 coln 2 to mix this case wdth that of the strange Bill relating 
 to Church Patronage in Scotland. It will be much more 
 imprudent if the Churchpeople mix their cause with that 
 of the Roman Bishops in Germany. Both parties in a 
 quarrel may be wrong : but their Bishops have, in my 
 opinion, by subscribing to the Vatican decrees, assumed 
 a position inconsistent with full allegiance, and with civil 
 right. 
 
 ' Most truly yours, 
 
 ' W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 Hawarden Castle, August 22, 187G. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I am very glad you and 
 Canon Liddon are going. ^ 
 
 ' I enclose a letter asking Sir A. Buchanan to give his 
 aid in directing you to the best quarters for information. 
 I could do the same to Sir H. Elhot if you were going to 
 Constantinople. (I cannot comprehend his conduct in some 
 particulars but I pause before condemning him.) At 
 Belgrade I am sorry to say I know no one. 
 
 ' I am afraid I must say " Beware of Nardi," 
 
 ' The r.W.R. Bill. - C. Wordsworth. •' To Servia.
 
 248 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' The Pope's game with the Turk is I suspect even deeper 
 than you imagine. 
 
 ' Perhaps you know that a few years ago he robbed the 
 Armenian Roman Catholic Church of its right to elect 
 its Bishops. A number of its members, they say the large 
 majority, resisted. The Pope behaved with impartiality 
 and was encouraged by us (the late Government) in so doing. 
 My belief is that the Porte is now selling the Armenian 
 rights to the Pope for his support in the disturbed provinces. 
 
 ' If you like to call at 73 Harley Street, and show this 
 letter 'which ivill be her authority, the housekeeper will let 
 you see all Parliamentary papers delivered for me this 
 month and take away such as you please. The older 
 Turkish papers are in a closet on the north side of the room. 
 
 ' When do you go ? 
 
 ' Sincerely yours, 
 
 ' W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 Hawarden Castle, Chester, August 11, 1877. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I thank you much for what 
 you have told me about Bishop Moriarty : and perhaps 
 if you have an opportunity you would kindly at some time 
 let him know how much pleasure it would give me if next 
 year he would be so very kind as to announce himself on 
 any Thursday for breakfast at ten. 
 
 ' From what you say of him, I have little doubt the case 
 is the same with Dr. Russell of Maynooth. 
 
 ' It certainly would not be safe to put aside, as a thing 
 out of the question, a DisraeUtish coup during the recess. 
 He is a man who is never beaten. Every reverse, every defeat, 
 is to him only an admonition to wait and catch his oppor- 
 tunity of retrieving, and more than retrieving, his position. 
 
 'I have written to the Daily Neivs suggesting for 
 consideration whether they could not move the Liberals 
 who have taken a prominent and more or less independent 
 part on the question to estabhsh an understanding before 
 the Prorogation with a view to such a contingency. 
 
 * Yours sincerely, 
 
 ' W. E. Gladstone.'
 
 GLADSTONE 249 
 
 Hawarden, December 21, 1877. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — The position is indeed a 
 singular one. All that flourish of trumpets which preceded 
 the late Cabinet was never intended to usher in a mere 
 announcement about Parliament meeting on the 17th. A 
 greater plan has been proposed and rejected. This is a 
 compromise. Will it be followed by a proposal for men 
 and money ? Will it at once encourage the Turks to hold 
 out ? I fear both the one and the other. Ought we to 
 take steps in resistance, and when ? To one thing only 
 I see my wa}'^ at this moment — wherever there is a Press 
 in our sense, it ought in the strongest and plainest language 
 to declare that neither in war nor in warlike measures will 
 we acquiesce, but will to the best of our ability stir the 
 country upon those issues. 
 
 ' I return Froude's letter, an excellently staunch one, and 
 the loathsome epistle from a Jew. I was in hopes I was 
 the only person on whom ordure of this kind was discharged. 
 Nothing can more painfully exhibit the nature of the cause, 
 than that it should stir up such advocacy. 
 
 ' Yours very faithfully, 
 
 ' W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 Ha warden, September 30, 1878. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — Thanks for your letter. I have 
 not seen the Times, for I do not find it pay to read that 
 journal. I must own that neither does it pay at present 
 to read the articles of the Daily News ; and I have just 
 been writing to a gentleman who has relations with it to 
 ask him whether it has gone stark mad. 
 
 ' I am not often made unhappy by criticisms, but the 
 criticisms of my American article,^ in the passage which said 
 that at a future time our commercial primacy might and 
 probably would pass on, did make me rather unhappy. I 
 did not before know that the mind of any set of Englishmen 
 had fallen into a state of such contemptible effeminacy. 
 I said more in 1866 when leader of the House of Commons, 
 
 * ' Kin beyond Sea,' in the North American Revieto,
 
 250 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 and I believe without the slightest objection. Those were 
 not very good times, but the country had not then had 
 five years of Lord B.'s primacy, 
 
 ' I learn that Cairns has or is to have an estate left 
 him : and he has, I imagine, deserved a reward for intense, 
 unflinching support of his leader in the Cabinet. 
 
 ' Yours most faithfully, 
 
 ' W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 Hawarden, October 13, 1878. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — The Duke of Argyll is actually 
 here and goino; to-morrow. He would much have liked to 
 meet Lord Bath for whom he has a great respect. I am sure 
 my wife has told Lady Bath, if not Lord Bath, how very 
 welcome they would be here, but it seems a strong measure 
 to ask them at any particular time to come so far. I will, 
 however, bear in mind your considerate suggestion. 
 
 ' The truth is I have felt deeply for Lord Bath in this 
 business without feeling that I had a right to assure him 
 of my sympathy. I feel a scruple about appearing to fish 
 indirectly for the political aid of a man of his mark and 
 standing who has been so upright and loyal a Party man. 
 His position is one of great difficulty. The instrument of 
 Party is indispensable for working out our pubhc duty, 
 but it brings us at times into sore dilemmas. 
 
 ' Since I last heard from you I have read your article 
 in the Oentlemari's Magazine. Sir H. Layard should have 
 it answered if he can. That passage about the subsidy 
 from our Consul is a most awkward one, and I suppose 
 the matter cannot rest where it is. 
 
 ' Yours sincerely, 
 
 ' W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 Hawarden, November 7, 1879. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I thank you for your sugges- 
 tion about Lord and Lady Bath, and I have at once written 
 it to my wife who has not yet joined me. I should be 
 greatly pleased to see Lord Bath join the Liberal party : 
 but I always feel a particular scruple in doing anything
 
 GLADSTONE 251 
 
 which might seem like a desire to turn to political account 
 the manly, philanthropic, and Christian-like feeling he has 
 shown in the Eastern Question. 
 
 ' I am glad to find that I have unconsciously imposed 
 upon you as to my personal estimate of Lord Beaconsfield. 
 I have always felt there were special reasons for reserve in 
 expressing my feehngs and judgment about him — of which 
 the principal are, the manner in which we have been pitted 
 against one another, and the very peculiar features of his 
 career and character. That these ought to be fully before 
 the public I cannot for a moment doubt : but I think the 
 matter to be one on which it is not well for me to enter. He 
 probably would get less than justice at my hands, though 
 I should not be intentionally unjust towards him. Of 
 one thing I am sure : it will take a long time to rid EngUsh 
 pontics of the odour which he will have left upon them. 
 You will doubtless consider well, if you Avrite, the question 
 of Name or No Name. There is something to be said both 
 ways. I rather think that, were I doing a thing of that 
 sort, I should not affix my name, but I would make no 
 secret about my authorship, as Hay ward generally tells 
 what article he has written in the Quarterly. 
 
 ' Believe me, 
 
 ' Sincerely yours, 
 
 ' W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 ' I am sorry to hear that they have not in the Scotch 
 Episcopal Church a preacher who could turn to account 
 the opening afforded by the new Cathedral in Edinburgh. 
 Surely this void might be filled.' 
 
 Hawarden, December 13, 1879. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — The whole Scotch journey 
 
 was wonderful, and really beyond description. I always 
 
 thought it would be a serious affair : something like 
 
 Lancashire in 1868, or in some respects a little beyond. 
 
 But my expectations were left behind, at an immeasurable 
 
 distance. , „ 
 
 ' Yours smcerely, 
 
 ' W. E. Gladstone.'
 
 252 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 10 Downing Street, March 27, 1881. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — You will have conceived and 
 represented the idea I tried to convey to you on Sunday last 
 better than I can explain it on paper ; yet I am not easy 
 without writing a few words to help in making the record. 
 
 ' What I want to have, as the basis of Palmer's work, is 
 a setting forth, according to the methods which theological 
 science provides, of the Civitas Dei, the city set on a hill, 
 the pillar and ground of truth, the Catholic and Apostohc 
 Church, the Vorsetzung der Fleischiverdung , exhibited, not 
 as against Nonconformists, nor even principally as against 
 the aggressive Church of Rome, but as a positive dispen- 
 sation, a form divinely given to the religious idea, Avhich 
 challenges with authority, but agreeably to reason, the 
 assent of the rational and right-minded man, in competi- 
 tion with all the other claimants on that assent. I want 
 some solid scientific work which shall set up historical or 
 institutional Christianity to take its chance in that melee 
 of systems, dogmatic and undogmatic, revealed and un- 
 revealed, particularist, pagan, secular, antitheistic, or others, 
 which marks the age. 
 
 ' Having spent fifty years of adult life in this melee, 
 I find the method I describe the most rational of all, and 
 I wish that there should be a text-book of it for the help 
 of doubtful or uninstructed minds. x\lso that this text- 
 book, founded on the principle I have described, should 
 apply the principle, for the benefit of Englishmen, to the case 
 of the English Church, under the shadow of which our lot is 
 providentially cast. 
 
 ' Yours sincerely, 
 
 ' W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 Hawarden Castle, October 18, 1882. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I have to acknowledge your 
 letter and I return the inclosure. Both are very interest- 
 ing. But the Green affair is moving so far as I, or as the 
 Chancellor, can make it move.^ I hope the scandal and 
 
 1 The Rev. S. F. Green, Vicar of St. John the Evangelist, Miles Platting, 
 was now in prison under the P.W.R. Act.
 
 GLADSTONE 253 
 
 dishonour are near their end, but I have no positive know- 
 ledge. Much good may be the ultimate result which Mr. 
 Green may have purchased for the Church in ways he may 
 not have dreamed of. 
 
 ' But I have other matters to touch. Weeks ago I told 
 Dr. Dollinger what I knew and thought of the plan for 
 the republication of Palmer, and expressed the hope that 
 his aid if required would be forthcoming. He remained 
 silent, and I could not be surprised, for I had touched a 
 formidable subject. However, I had from him yesterday 
 afternoon a long letter on many subjects. Among them 
 he gives a marked place to the republication of Palmer's 
 book. He has stated the case with very great ability in 
 the extract which I send you herewith. The upshot of it 
 I take to be that he thinks a very heavy labour must be 
 performed in order to bring the book up to the demands 
 of the period ; that if this condition can be satisfied the 
 republication would be an event for Christendom ; and that 
 he is ready to give his hearty assistance, if such a person as 
 he names will go to Munich to receive it. 
 
 ' All this, I hope, will be carefully considered, for 
 although time is of importance in getting out the work, 
 it is still more material that it should be thoroughly 
 worthy of so considerable a vocation as Dr. Dollinger 
 assigns to it. 
 
 ' In case any further aid should be desirable, I suggest 
 these names for consideration : 
 
 ' Rev. R. Jenkins, Rector of Lynn. 
 
 ' Rev. W. E. Scudamore, Author of " England and 
 Rome." 
 
 ' Rev. Dr. Nicholson, who worsted Cardinal Manning. 
 
 ' And, query ? Rev. N. Pococke — a very able man, 
 rather given to railing at the Reformation. 
 
 ' I am due in London on Friday for Cabinet and — 
 alack ! House of Commons. 
 
 ' BeUeve me, 
 
 ' Yours sincerely, 
 
 ' W. E. Gladstone.'
 
 254 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 10 Downing Street, June 30, 1884. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I return Lord Bath's letter, 
 reciprocating all his kind sentiments and sympathizing with 
 the real difficulties of his position. My own are limited by 
 the nearness of my horizon. 
 
 ' One remark only will I offer. His son's opinions are, 
 it appears, Conservative. What does this mean ? Is it 
 that they echo the current notions of our Public Schools 
 and Universities, or is it that he has read and considered 
 the recent history of this country, and that he regards 
 Conservatism as that which has brought us through that 
 history safer than any other country, and stronger by far 
 than we ever were before ? 
 
 ' The same statement was made to me twenty years 
 back by a Liberal Peer, who asked my advice about his 
 eldest son. Knowing but one book which details the 
 political history of the last half-century, Erskine May's 
 " Constitutional History," I recommended the father to 
 advise its perusal. The person so advised read the book, 
 and has ever since been one of the soberest, but firmest, 
 of Liberals. 
 
 ' Why do I thus seem to throw a fly ? Simply because 
 I fear that, in the absence of wise guidance for the House 
 of Lords, conflicts dangerous to it may lie, not indeed in 
 my future, but in a future by no means distant. 
 
 ' Yours sincerely, 
 
 ' W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 1 Richmond Terrace, July 6, 1885. 
 
 ' My^';Dear Mr. MacColl, — 1. I am sorry for the great 
 error of judgment into which, as it would appear from your 
 account. Bishop Strossmayer has fallen. He wants to con- 
 vert the orthodox Slavs in order to save them from an 
 extraneous pohtical influence. This is exactly the poHcy 
 pursued by England towards Ireland for so long a time and 
 with such ruinous effects. That a wise and enhghtened 
 Bishop should seek to renew it, after the warnings of 
 experience for 200 years, is indeed deplorable.
 
 GLADSTONE 255 
 
 * 2. I am delighted with your account of Dr. DolHnger's 
 health and strength, which I conceive to be of the utmost 
 importance. But do not let him argue from the calm and 
 self-possession of his life to the tumult, strife, and tension of 
 mine. Give me his outward conditions, and I then accept 
 all his reasoning. 
 
 ' 3. With regard to Palmer, I think it plain that it would 
 still be possible to publish a work based upon Palmer's, 
 as Liddell and Scott first pubhshed their Lexicon " based 
 upon Passow." 
 
 * 4. But I do not know how far you have looked in the 
 face the question of material means for the execution of this 
 work. I had always hoped that the Ripon Canonry would 
 improve your position in this respect, and I cannot helj) 
 feeling happy that the Bishop has decUned to accept your 
 resignation. I regret that I cannot carry on a discussion 
 of this question with the Dean of St. Paul's. My head and 
 time are much too full for me to undertake this operative 
 part. 
 
 ' I have written somewhat hastily to answer your letter 
 without delay. 
 
 ' Believe me, 
 
 ' Sincerely yours, 
 
 ' W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 Hawarden, September 26, 1885. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — I am shocked to find that you 
 have not been thanked for your salmon. Nothing could 
 exceed its claims upon our acknowledgments : it was as good 
 as good could be, 
 
 ' About Parliament I hardly assume more at present than 
 that there has been talk in the Tory party on the method 
 of postponement. Unless they are even more anarchical 
 than I suppose, the point could hardly be decided without 
 a Cabinet, and there has been none. 
 
 ' I view the Bulgarian occurrences with mixed feelings, 
 glad of the union in itself but fearful lest mischief should 
 come, as it might come possibly — in any case from Turks, 
 in the event of a widening of the sphere — from Greeks,
 
 256 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Servians, or Austria more formidable than either with 
 Germany at her back. 
 
 ' You will probably have left Aboyne, but if this finds 
 you there pray remember us kindly to your host and hostess. 
 
 ' Sincerely yours, 
 
 'W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 Hawarden, December 23, 1885. 
 
 'My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I have received your 
 interesting letter. 
 
 ' When I saw you I was not aware that you were going 
 to see or communicate with Lord Salisbury. 
 
 ' However, I am only anxious it should be clearly 
 understood that, while you stated to him what you con- 
 ceived to be the manifest purport of my conversation 
 with you, you had no authority, and conveyed no message, 
 from me. 
 
 ' Unless you are quite sure that Lord S. clearly under- 
 stands this, I beg you to convey it to him. 
 
 ' I say nothing adverse to the accuracy of your account. 
 It was an account given on your responsibility of what you 
 conceived to be my present view. Of the conditions of any 
 measure for Ireland, or of my own intentions about one, 
 I have not given to any human being any binding indica- 
 tion : beyond this that, if the Government take up the 
 question, my desire is to give them the best aid that with 
 a reasonable freedom of judgment I may. 
 
 ' Yours sincerely, 
 
 ' W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 Hawarden, December 10, 1886. 
 
 ' My Dear Canon, — I think your comments on the 
 Unionist declarations very just, and the time for next 
 breaking my silence will be fixed by me, not by Lord 
 Hartington. At all times I am against threats and violence, 
 unhke R. Churchill, who leads the Government, and for 
 law and order. In this sense some colleagues of mine, who 
 have speeches in prospect, wiU, I think, make them, but so as
 
 GLADSTONE 257 
 
 not to let o£E the Government. As to Dillon, I learn there 
 are hopes that he will retract or greatly qualify, as without 
 doubt he ought. 
 
 ' I do not think the Crown can cede any territory that 
 has been dealt with by Statute without a Statute for the 
 purpose. 
 
 ' I hear you are to be here early in January and shall be 
 glad of a word on Palmer's book. 
 
 ' Believe me, 
 
 ' Sincerely yours, 
 
 'W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 18 James Street, S.W., May 20, 1889. 
 
 ' My Dear Canon MacColl, — I am most willing to see 
 you ; but I can supply beforehand in very few words what 
 I have to say.^ 
 
 ' The only rule I can tolerate is stout resistance to (what 
 is perhaps) the extremest debasement of which our poor 
 human nature is susceptible. A debasement which I can- 
 not recollect to have been included, or at least avowed, 
 among the refinements of vice that were invented by the 
 ancient inhabitants of the Greek and Italian Peninsulas : 
 and which I beheve multitudes of the " fallen women " of 
 London would repel with disgust. 
 
 ' According to the old rule " corruptio optimi pessima," 
 I fear that the last developments of evil in this branch are 
 worse under the reign of Christianity than they were before 
 the Advent. 
 
 ' Yours sincerely, 
 
 'W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 Hawarden, December 27, 1889. 
 
 ' My Dear Canon, — I have now examined books of 
 authority as to the permanence of sex. Your correspondent, 
 I think, states the matter with great ability, though I hardly 
 
 The reference is to Neo-Malthusianism.
 
 258 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 travel with him all the way. The question is interesting, 
 I should call it seductive, for my inclination and judgment 
 are rather to this effect — that, knowing nothing, so to speak, 
 of the thousands upon thousands of the conditions of the 
 new existence in the world unseen, I ask of myself, why 
 this also should not be allowed to remain unexamined, 
 and whether it is not best to leave the solution in the 
 hands of the great Father. I am not, then, keen upon the 
 scent. 
 
 ' I admit that some arguments against the permanence 
 of gender may seem to arise from its original absence, 
 and from the Darwinian incidents pointing to an original 
 unity. 
 
 ' But in the actual development is included a distinction 
 of moral and spiritual type. The man and the woman are 
 not, ought not to be, the same. And the law of nature for 
 each is to be built up and corroborated, by the vast power of 
 habit, in its own type. The more character is opened and 
 matured, therefore, the more I should expect it to be 
 differentiated, and the distinctness of the form of existence 
 to harden. At the same time, not only is each the supple- 
 ment of the other, but each may borrow and appropriate 
 from the other. 
 
 * I cannot, from defect of the man's physique, and 
 consequent approach to feminineness, be ready to draw a 
 broad conclusion, for it would rest on a ground not normal 
 but abnormal. 
 
 ' All this seems to lie in the region of metaphysics. If 
 divinity is taken in, one can conceive that questions may 
 arise as to the office and character of the B.V.M. : questions 
 which may readily enough become dangerous. 
 
 ' The longer I live, the more does human nature seem 
 to me profound and wonderful, and the less able I am to 
 arrive at definitive solutions respecting it. 
 
 ' I own, therefore, to being much out of my depth, and 
 indisposed to push any observation or inference which the 
 matter suggests to a logical conclusion. 
 
 ' Sincerely yours, 
 
 'W. E. Gladstone.'
 
 GLADSTONE 259 
 
 * Many thanks for your deeply interesting passages about 
 Bishop Lightfoot. That is indeed a 
 
 Stately pillar broke, 
 and a pillar that grew.'' 
 
 10 Downing Street, Whitehall, August 27, 1893. 
 
 ' My Dear Canon, — I cannot wonder at the terms of 
 your letter, based as it is on Swedish experience and Royal 
 conversation. And the case is undoubtedly one of great 
 difficulty. But pray do not make up your mind upon it 
 until you have read the fundamental pact between the 
 two countries. It is contained in the Constitution and 
 in a preliminary international document. It describes 
 Norway as an independent nation ; and this pact Norway 
 does not ask to break. I do not say she is right in what 
 she asks. 
 
 ' Yours sincerely, 
 
 'W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 Black Craig, Blairgowrie, September 12, 1893. 
 
 ' Dear Canon MacColl, — I find that five Bishops re- 
 frained from voting on the 8th ^ — Manchester, Newcastle, 
 St, David's, Llandaflf, Hereford. Have you learned any- 
 thing of the causes of this abstention ? One or two might 
 be barred by age — Hereford, I think, is 75. Two only were 
 recommended by me — Llandaff and Newcastle. Voluntary 
 abstention may be regarded as highly creditable in the face 
 of such a torrent. 
 
 ' I cannot but think that for the Bishops to appear in 
 such force was a great mistake. As to one or two, I am 
 a good deal disappointed. It now stands on record that 
 the lay Peerage gave Ireland one vote in every two ; but 
 the Episcopal body not a single one, 
 
 ' The case of the Bishop of St. Asaph is singular. Early 
 in the year he came to see me on the Welsh Church, 
 and at the close of the conversation he said, quite spon- 
 taneously, that, if the Irish Bill reached the House of Lords 
 
 1 On the Second Reading of the Home Rule Bill. 
 
 s 2
 
 260 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 he earnestly hoped it would pass. I could not print this, 
 but there was no note of conMence attached to it. 
 
 ' I was very glad to see you looking really well again. 
 
 ' Sincerely yours, 
 
 ' W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 ' My recollection of the Bp. of St. Asaph is as clear 
 as it can be : but I admit that a recollection is not a 
 facsimile.' 
 
 A blind 
 man's blot. 
 
 Pitlochrie N.B., July 12, 1894, 
 
 ' Dear Canon MacColl, — 1. I will send you a paper 
 of my preface on Heresy and Schism. Please to consider 
 critically whether I have overstated the amount and 
 character of the relation maintained by the Almighty with 
 the schismatic kingdom of Israel. 
 
 ' We are here until Monday the 8th — after that due 
 at DoUis. 
 
 ' 2. Private. Do you know anything of the new Bishop ? ^ 
 He may be perfection. But I am absolutely at a loss to 
 comprehend why it was necessary to travel to the other 
 side of the world for a Bishop, over the heads of so many 
 obvious men presenting the varied qualities of earnestness, 
 years, experience, force, service — and lastly sound poHtics. 
 What is the moving cause, who has been consulted, I have 
 not an idea. Pray tell me everything you know. 
 
 ' This is a lovely spot. . . . 
 
 ' Ever yours, 
 
 ' W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 Cannes, March 6, 1896. 
 
 ' My Dear Canon, — I have read your letter with great 
 interest. The more fully the Armenian case is opened to 
 the world by the Italian and by any other Government, 
 the better shall I be pleased. 
 
 1 Gladstone was now afflicted with cataract. 
 
 2 G. W. Kennion, Bishop of Bath and Wells, translated from Adelaide.
 
 GLADSTONE 261 
 
 * You and I are closely united in opinion and in sympathy 
 upon it, but I am afraid you ask me to do the impossible. 
 Even if I had read the Italian Green Book and made up 
 my mind that it ought to be pubHshed, I ought not to ofEer 
 advice to a Foreign government. In my position I am quit 
 of all responsibility, and I consider that such interventions 
 — without responsibihty— are unwarranted, and may be 
 mischievous. 
 
 ' The Italians have, so far as I know, been more sympa- 
 thetic during the last twenty or thirty years than any other 
 European people, the French having, it must be admitted, 
 had enough of their own sorrows to fill their minds. 
 
 ' This Abyssinian business is a terrible lesson for the 
 Italians. For the last twenty-five years they have been 
 playing fast and loose with their own dearest interests, 
 and have endangered all their institutions, which, so far 
 as I can see, can only be made safe by a total change of 
 poHcy, and by keeping themselves to themselves. 
 
 ' With us at home folly is a less perilous experiment 
 and is freely indulged in. I think the 22 miUions of 
 Navy Estimates positively shocking ; and would send the 
 promoters of them to Bedlam. 
 
 ' We are due in London on Tuesday evening. Splendid 
 weather here.' 
 
 ' Yours sincerely, 
 
 ' W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 Hawarden, September 16, 1896. 
 
 ' My Dear Canon MacColl,— The apprehension that any 
 coercive measure taken against the Assassin is to produce 
 war with what used to be called the Northern Powers 
 appears to be speculative only. 
 
 ' Were England to adopt measures with a view to her 
 own advantage, this miglit be a case for active resistance 
 to her. But I apprehend we have a casus belli against the 
 Sultan for non-fulfilment of the Treaty of Cyprus. 
 
 ' For the last twelve months we have, for the sake of 
 European Concert, pursued a course which has given him a 
 complete triumph over the Six Powers, and sho^n him that.
 
 262 MALCOLMj^MACCOLL 
 
 so far as they are concerned, he may with safety prosecute 
 his work of extermination. 
 
 ' Suppose the Sultan were required to give Armenia 
 reparation for the past and security for the future by pro- 
 visions which might be briefly set forth, and to render an 
 unconditional reply within three days, with an intimation 
 that, failing such a reply, we should at once dismiss the 
 Assassin's Ambassador, and remove ours, and consider 
 further of the measures necessary for enforcing our just 
 demands ; 
 
 ' With two accompanying measures : 
 
 ' 1. A gradual but larger strengthening of our force in 
 the Eastern Mediterranean. 
 
 ' 2. A Declaration to the Powers that our objects were 
 Armenian, and that whatever our means would be, the3'^ 
 would in no case include acquisition for ourselves (the 
 form used before the Crimean War would supply the proper 
 language). 
 
 ' Supposing all this, where would a vested ground of 
 objection lie on the part of the Northern Powers ? 
 
 ' Remember that, whatever the Governments may be, the 
 public opinion of Europe, not wholly excluding their own 
 countries, would be a powerful check. 
 
 ' People talk as if the seizure of Constantinople or of Asia 
 Minor were the only mode of proceeding. But there is the 
 method of material guarantees, which appear likely to have 
 great force in the present condition of the Empire of the 
 Assassin. Our endeavour to organize a mild plan of this 
 kind in 1880 sufficed, even before it was ripe, to obtain for 
 Greece and Montenegro territories they now enjoy, though 
 Turkey had at that time three Great Powers on her side. 
 
 ' What the guarantees should be, could only be deter- 
 mined in consultation with the naval and military authori- 
 ties. Smyrna, Crete, Salonica, are among the names which 
 at once occur for consideration. 
 
 ' But, if this were to be held a provocation to the three 
 Northern Powers — if, upon our announcing our intention to 
 coerce, they told us they would unitedly meet force with 
 force — and if we were without support anywhere — the
 
 GLADSTONE 263 
 
 British Nation would have to consider its course, and to 
 choose between the contest or retirement, and the casting 
 of responsibihty and disgrace where it would then be 
 visibly due. 
 
 ' In my opinion these ifs would never be realized. But 
 if they were, and if we retired in consequence, it would be a 
 vast improvement upon the present state of things. 
 
 ' It is difficult and hazardous for those outside, without 
 authentic information, to map out a course for governments. 
 They can only do it under reserve. It is particularly 
 repulsive to me. But I find that we actually are the 
 unwilling accomplices of monstrous guilt ; and I yearn and 
 groan for relief from that association. 
 
 I remain, 
 
 ' Sincerely yours, 
 
 ' W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 Hawarden, September 25, 1896. 
 
 ' My Dear Canon, — I was unwell for some days before 
 the Liverpool meeting and spared myself all I could. To- 
 day I have sent Knowles four or five pages to wind up his 
 Symposium.^ I thank you for the curious and important 
 information you have conveyed to me, and I have referred 
 to it in general terms without any indication of channel or 
 source.^ 
 
 ' I must now shut up ; my task yesterday was difficult 
 and I am not equal to the repetition of such experiments. 
 
 ' The feehng of the meeting was excellent. God save us 
 from the Clubs. 
 
 ' I do not wonder that you find your work hard. 
 
 ' When I noted the absence of references, it was only by 
 way of suggestion to supply them as far as might be, and not 
 in order to draw an answer. 
 
 ' I must now turn to the Pope and his proceedings in the 
 matter of Anghcan Orders. At present I am inclined to 
 think that the proceeding at Rome is one which, as between 
 men of the world, would be considered dishonourable. 
 
 ^ On The Massacres m Ttirkey. 
 
 * Seo Lord Salisbury's letter on p. 145.
 
 264 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' I will not say a word upon Rosebery's letter published 
 this morning : for what I should have to say would be 
 disagreeable without being useful. As far as one can see, 
 Salisbury has been much better, so that I ought to prefer 
 " Bury " to " Bery " in this great matter. 
 
 ' Yours very sincerely, 
 
 'W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 Hawarden, October 5, 1896. 
 
 ' My Dear Canon MacColl. — I am very glad to hear 
 your papers are about to be repubHshed : they cannot but 
 do good. 
 
 ' As regards Rosebery, I deplore, as you know, the course 
 he has taken,^ and I take it to be pretty clear that he has 
 mistaken the set of the currents, and is in great difficulties. 
 A curious article in the Speaker two numbers back, while 
 lauding his sentiments, treats him as having in effect lost 
 the leadership. 
 
 ' If he speaks at the Scotch meeting it will be a sign, I 
 think, of a desire to set things straight, for he never could 
 be so mad as to go there for the sake of creating discord. 
 
 ' I do not wish to add anything to increase his difficulties 
 and hope he may find a clean way out of them. If I did, 
 it would be most unseemly in me to take a part, for his 
 letter on sole action must be taken as meant to aim a mortal 
 blow at what I was recommending. Perhaps he thinks he 
 has reason (nay, he may have from his point of view) to 
 complain of me, but whether or not, I cannot do anything to 
 embarrass him, and wish rather better than I hope for him. 
 
 ' Ever yours sincerely, 
 
 ' W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 Hawarden, December 1, 1896. 
 
 ' My Dear Canon, — I can only reply succinctly to the 
 points raised in your very full letter. 
 
 ' 1. Armenia. — We are on our backs — we have done 
 what we could. The great Avenger may yet show that He 
 has an account to settle vnt\\ the great Assassin and his 
 works. 
 
 ^ In resigning the Liberal leadership.
 
 GLADSTONE 265 
 
 * 2. Egypt. — I am sorry we are not at one. My reasons 
 are three : 
 
 ' (1) We must keep faith. 
 
 ' (2) We have no right to pronounce the Eg^T)tians per- 
 manently incapable of seK-governm t. 
 
 • (3) The occupation is a source of weaknesf ourselves, 
 
 as well as a needless augmentation oi risk. 
 
 ' 3. I would venture to recommend great caution in 
 handling the character of Gordon, who was a hero, and 
 was wholly unfit to be employed by non-heroes. 
 
 ' 4. I long ago gave the history of the Crimean War, 
 in my version of it, in the Historical Review. It may be 
 reprinted shortly. There is no doubt that, as to the cura- 
 bility of Turkey, we were misled by authorities such as 
 Stratford and Palmerston. 
 
 ' 5. I am glad you are pleased with the Essays,^ but I 
 think your kind nature leads you to heighten Dr. DoUinger's 
 sufl&ciently liberal estimate of my theological capacity. 
 
 ' 6. With regard to the letter which I inclose, I entirely 
 agree with you, and in what I may have to say about 
 Dr. Clark I shall be glad of any opportunity to notice the 
 loathsome but rather necessary topic. 2 
 
 '7.1 conceive that my Preface presupposes, even by its 
 title, your work, and will have to be built upon it, rather 
 than your work upon my Preface. But I have already 
 published in America a notice of Clark which I could send 
 you subject to return. I think it contains the bulk of what 
 I have to say. 
 
 '8. I do not quite recollect what was the line of argument 
 which pleased you, and you do not describe it. 
 
 * 9. Forgive me for again saying my sight makes MS. a 
 great difficulty with me. You will be surprised when I say 
 that it took me, I think, near half an hour to read your 
 letter. 
 
 ' Ever yours sincerely, 
 'W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 ' Many of the letters sent me I never read at all.' 
 
 ' On the works of Butler. 
 
 ' MacColl was goinsj; to write the Life of Sir Andrew Clark, M.D., and asked 
 Mr. Gladstone, who had been Clark's patient, to furnish a preface.
 
 266 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Hawarden, January 26, 1897. 
 
 ' Deae Canon MacColl, — We are commonly in pretty 
 close accord, but I am sorry to say that in your present 
 letter and article I cannot concur. 
 
 ' As it appears to me, with my imperfect means of 
 judgment : 
 
 ' 1. Lord S. committed a fundamental error in abandon- 
 ing from the first the duty, and surrendering the right, of 
 sole action. 
 
 ' 2. He seems not to have reserved that right uncon- 
 ditionally, but only the right of withdrawal from the action, 
 or courses of inaction, of others. 
 
 ' 3, The present prospect of Coercion is nil, unless to 
 enforce what does not exist and what any one of the Powers 
 can prevent. 
 
 ' 4. He has warmly lauded the Rosebery speech. 
 
 ' So we are rather wide apart. 
 
 ' I doubt whether we know exactly the attitude of Lord 
 R. or of his Cabinet at the moment of their strange and 
 unhappy resignation.^ 
 
 ' I hope you saw a very weighty and conclusive speech 
 of Herbert's on Lord R.'s declarations such as they stood 
 up to a recent date. No one has repUed. I imagine because 
 no one can. 
 
 ' London (D.V.), to-morrow ; Cannes, Saturday. 
 ' Always sincerely yours, 
 
 ' W. E. Gladstone.' 
 
 ' I wish the Czar would get upon the Cutty Stool ^ at 
 once. But his translating you is good.' 
 
 The beginning of MacColl's acquaintance with Lord 
 Salisbury may be given in his own words : 
 
 ' I first met Lord SaUsbury, then Lord Robert Cecil, at 
 the house of Colonel Greville,^ and the conversation turned 
 
 ^ When defeated on a vote about cordite, June 1895. 
 
 * For the ' Cutty Stool ' see Jeanie Dean's interview with Queen Caroline 
 in The Heart of Mid-LotMan. MacColl's book on the Armenian Question was 
 translated into Russian by the Czar's command. 
 
 ' Afterwards Lord Greville : married Lady Rosa Nugent, heiress of the 
 Marquess of Westmeath.
 
 LORD SALISBURY 267 
 
 on Ireland after Lady Rosa Greville and Lady Robert Cecil 
 had left the dining-room. I was the other guest. Colonel 
 Greville expatiated on the wrongs of Ireland and sketched 
 out a scheme of legislation for the reform of the land-system 
 and the disestablishment of the Irish Church. Lord Robert 
 Cecil listened, attentively, with an ironical smile, and said, 
 when Colonel Greville had finished : " Well, you have just 
 sketched out as pretty a scheme of revolution as I have seen 
 for a long time." Lord Robert lived to see and agree to 
 legislation in regard to Ireland in comparison with which 
 Colonel Greville's suggestions were mild and moderate 
 indeed. 
 
 'Those who know Lord Sahsbury in later hfe would 
 have hardly recognized him as the tall, sUm man with 
 the stoop, to whose conversation I listened with interest 
 that first evening of our acquaintance. He was then, as 
 afterwards, a keen and brilliant talker, full of anecdote 
 and repartee, with a keen sense of fun. The first time 
 I heard Lord Salisbury, then Lord Robert, speak was in 
 a debate on the abolition of Church Rates. John Bright 
 made a strong speech against Church Rates and was 
 followed by Lord Robert Cecil from one of the back 
 seats on the Opposition side below the gangway. It was 
 a vigorous speech, and I remember one sarcasm in it. 
 " We have heard in this debate," he said, " more than one 
 allusion to the Secular Arm, which I take to mean the 
 brawny arm of the Hon. Member for Rochdale," which 
 Bright then represented. The House laughed at this 
 oratorical hit at the fighting qualities of the eloquent 
 Quaker. Lord Sahsbury, like his son Hugh, proved his 
 aptitude for debate very early in his parliamentary career, 
 and Lord Palmerston, who was then Prime Minister, Mas 
 quick to recognize the fact. " Beware of that young man," 
 he said to a friend, " he possesses one of the secrets of 
 success, for instead of defending himself and his cause, 
 he attacks the other side." But there was no venom or 
 malice in Lord Sahsbury's sarcastic sallies ; and in private 
 life he was one of the most amiable men, as well as one of 
 the simplest and humblest.'
 
 268 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 MacColl's correspondence with Lord Salisbury began 
 with the following letters, written when Gladstone's Irish 
 Church Suspensory Bill was before Parhament : 
 
 June 22, 1868. 
 
 ' My Lord, — I have had the pleasure of meeting you 
 twice at the house of Colonel Greville-Nugent ; but that, 
 of course, does not entitle me to take the Uberty of asking 
 you to read the two pamphlets which I send along with 
 this. My apology must be the importance of the subject. 
 The pamphlets are from the pen of Mr. Gladstone. One 
 is his speech on the Jew Bill, repubHshed in 1847 with an 
 elaborate preface, in which are contained, as it seems to 
 me, the germs of all his ecclesiastical poHcy since. I wonder 
 that preface was not quoted in any of the recent debates, 
 if for no other reason than to show the absurdity of quoting 
 against him his book on Church and State, since he 
 deUberately and explicitly discards that book in the preface 
 to his speech on the Jew Bill. 
 
 ' The other pamphlet is a letter addressed to the late 
 Bishop Skinner of Aberdeen in the year 1852. That 
 pamphlet also shows that Mr. Gladstone's present views 
 on Church and State are not the sudden birth of Party 
 exigence. 
 
 ' Both pamphlets are, I beheve, out of print, else I would 
 have sent your Lordship clean copies. The pencil-marks 
 which are scattered over them were made for my own use. 
 
 ' If I may venture to do so without impertinence I 
 would beg your Lordship's attention especially to pp. 16-17 
 of the preface of the Jew Bill ; for it seems to me that 
 the disregard of the caution there recommended is now 
 mainly the cause of Bills Hke Mr. Coleridge's Tests Bill ; 
 and Mr. Gladstone's far-sighted warning was never more 
 needful than now, when Mr. DisraeH has hoisted " a banner 
 with the strange device " — " The Protestant Church of 
 England " (speech at Merchant Taylors'). I regret to 
 observe all over the country High Churchmen, hke Arch- 
 deacon Denison and Mr. Gregory of Lambeth, attending
 
 LORD SALISBURY 269 
 
 meetings in defence of this Irish EstabHshment — meetings 
 at which that mongrel negation, " our Common Protes- 
 tantism," is placed in the front as the thing to be fought 
 for ; yet Mr. Gregory and Archdeacon Denison affect great 
 indignation when this " Common Protestantism " insists on 
 equal rights at the Universities ! 
 
 ' At this moment, my Lord, I believe that there is no 
 man in the kingdom who is looked up to with greater 
 confidence and respect than yourself, and that by all parties. 
 Even a man so extreme as Mr. Goldwin Smith remarked 
 to me the other day that the aristocracy of England had 
 nothing to fear from Democracy provided they had men 
 like you to lead them ; but that a few years more of 
 Mr. Disraeli's leadership would destroy them. 
 
 ' It is because I believe that your Lordship's attitude 
 in the debate on the Suspensory Bill will affect, perhaps 
 vitally, not only the Church of England but the House of 
 Lords also, that I presume to ask you to be so good as to 
 read the two pamphlets which I now send you. 
 ' I have the honour to be, my Lord, 
 
 ' Your obedient servant, 
 
 ' Malcolm MacColl.' 
 
 The Suspensory Bill having been thrown out by the 
 Lords, the country was making ready for the General Elec- 
 tion, at which the Disestablishment of the Irish Church was 
 the dominating topic. 
 
 October 19, 1868, 
 
 ' My Lord, — I feel I ought to apologize to your 
 Lordship for having taken the liberty of asking Messrs. 
 Longmans to send you a copy of a pamphlet of mine on 
 the Irish Church. I have presumed to differ from some 
 of the views you expressed in your able speech on the 
 Suspensory Bill ; but I have tried at the same time to 
 express the respect and admiration which I sincerely feel 
 for your Lordship's ability and character. 
 
 ' Would that the Conservative party had you for its 
 leader ; for then I should feel that, whether I could or 
 could not always go along with the party, I could place
 
 270 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 unstinted confidence in its chivaby and honour. I was 
 brought up as a Conservative, I was created among Con- 
 servative traditions, and one of my ancestors fell fighting 
 for Charles Edward on Culloden Field. I feel, therefore, 
 all the more bitterly the dishonour and discredit which 
 Mr. Disraeli's tactics have brought upon the party. 
 
 ' It is impossible for me to express the energy of my 
 aversion to that man. I beHeve there is not a single insti- 
 tution in England, from the Throne downwards, which he 
 would not sacrifice to his own personal ends. The Con- 
 servative party will be irretrievably ruined, for a generation 
 at least, if it is to be led much longer by Mr. Disraeli. 
 
 ' I know, too, that no one would rejoice more than 
 Mr. Gladstone to see the Conservative party marshalled 
 under your leadership.' 
 
 ' Your obedient servant, 
 
 ' Malcolm MacColl.' 
 
 July 23, 1869. 
 
 ' Dear Sir, — It was certainly my impression, as it was 
 that of many other Peers, that Mr. Gladstone's tone and 
 manner in dealing with our amendments ^ was not courteous. 
 I did not, however, hear his remarks myseK — and I dare say 
 your judgment was more impartial. I regarded it merely 
 as an indication that he meant to coerce the House of 
 Lords if he was able — but I did not feel that we could 
 properly take such an indication without showing our own 
 feelings on the subject. 
 
 ' To speak frankly, I have been not a little puzzled 
 at the attention and feeling which the adjective I used 
 appears to have excited.^ If anyone said of me that I had 
 an arrogant will I do not think I should regard it as a 
 severe censure. I certainly had no intention of saying 
 anything to give Mr. Gladstone pain. I only desired to 
 do what I could to induce the Peers to resist him on points 
 where I sincerely thought him wrong. 
 
 ^ To the Irish Church Bill. Gladstone had likened the Lords to men in a 
 balloon. 
 
 * ' It is the will — the arrogant will — of a single man to which you are now 
 called upon to submit.'
 
 LORD SALISBURY 271 
 
 ' You doubtless remember when Sir Robert Peel 
 applied a similar epithet to the English aristocracy — and 
 being taken to task for it, replied that it was " Superbiam 
 quaesitam meritis." I may shelter myself under the same 
 defence. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 March 12, 1871. 
 
 ' Dear Mr, MacColl, — I am much obliged to you for 
 the copy of your book on the origin of the late war. 
 
 ' I thoroughly concur with most of your views — but I 
 doubt if they are good material for Parliamentary debate. 
 I cannot help feeUng that when we are so disinclined to 
 act — and indeed so incapable of acting — there is something 
 humiliating in attempting to make up for our inaction by 
 energetic denunciations in Parliament. 
 
 ' Believe me, 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 I copy the following passage from a memorandum 
 written by MacColl : 
 
 ' A few years after the Disestablishment of the Irish 
 Church I heard a conversation in a railway-carriage on 
 Lord Salisbury's unbending Toryism. The five occupants 
 of the carriage were all strangers to me except one, whom 
 I knew by sight though he did not know me. They were 
 all Liberals, and referred to Lord Salisbury's violent oppo- 
 sition to the Disestablishment of the Irish Church as a proof 
 of his contempt for the verdict of the nation. I ventured 
 mildly to say that, on the contrary, Lord Salisbury sup- 
 ported and voted in favour of the Disestablishment of the 
 Irish Church. My fellow-travellers looked upon me with 
 an expression of pitying surprise at my extraordinary 
 ignorance, and exclaimed in chorus, " Oh no." I said no 
 more, but having occasion to write to Mr. Delane that 
 evening, for I was then on the staff of the Times, I men- 
 tioned this incident of forgetfulness on the part of men 
 who took a keen interest in politics. I received a note
 
 272 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 from Mr. Delane the following morning in which he said, 
 " You are partly right and partly wrong : Lord Salisbury 
 spoke in support of Mr. Gladstone's Disestablishment Bill, 
 but did not vote." If any man ought to know the facts 
 it was the great Editor of the Times, yet I felt sure I was 
 right, though being out of town I had not the means of 
 verifying my impression. Having, therefore, occasion to 
 write to Lord Salisbury on another subject, I put the 
 question to himself.' 
 
 November 7, 1871. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — You were certainly right ; 
 I both spoke and voted for the Second Reading of the Irish 
 Church Bill — and on the ground that it was the duty of the 
 Lords (generally speaking) to defer to a decided national 
 opinion unmistakably expressed. I was careful^I may 
 say in passing — to draw a strong distinction between the 
 national opinion and the opinion of the House of Commons, 
 to which as such the Lords are in no way bound to defer. 
 The two were identical in that case because a General 
 Election had been held with the particular question in 
 issue full in view. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 February 20, 1872. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — My experience of Lord Napier 
 was, of course, very short ; but the impression I formed 
 was entirely of the kind you mention. His characteristics 
 appeared to me to be not only great energy and freshness, 
 but freedom from the spirit of routine which is so powerful 
 in India. 
 
 ' The Athanasian Creed is receiving hard measure from 
 many who ought to defend it. It is very much to be wished 
 that when the Bishops pick to pieces the Creeds of the 
 Church they would have the prudence to turn the reporters 
 out of doors. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.'
 
 LORD SALISBURY 273 
 
 July 10, 1872. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — I am very much obliged to you 
 for a copy of your work on the Athanasian Creed, which I 
 received at Hatfield on Saturday, before I got your letter. 
 I have read it — or at least the greater part of it ; and have 
 derived from it no less pleasure than instruction. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 MacColl was now busily occupied in organizing a pubUc 
 meeting in defence of the Athanasian Creed, and he asked 
 Lord Salisbury to preside. 
 
 October 29, 1872. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — I only received your circular 
 this morning. I am sorry that I shall not be able to be in 
 town to-morrow. I only write now to beg that the propo- 
 sition that I should take the chair at the proposed meeting 
 may not be made, as I should be compelled to decUne it. 
 I deprecate any such meetings under existing circumstances 
 very much. We are too weak for such a policy. We shall 
 only call forth much more powerful meetings on the other 
 side ; and we shall thus, possibly enough, irritate the anti- 
 Church party in the House of Commons into taking action. 
 Our extreme weakness in both Houses of Parliament must 
 not be forgotten. In the present state of lay feeling, our 
 best and only safe organ is the Lower House of Convocation. 
 
 ' I am bound to add that the " Platform " of the proposed 
 meeting is not quite to my mind. I do not know what 
 will come of the dehberations of the Bishops ; but I am 
 not prepared to protest beforehand against any measure 
 the Church may think fit to adopt with reference to the 
 times or circumstances under which the Creed shall be 
 used in the public service. Such a course seems to be 
 hardly consistent with any kind of ecclesiastical order or 
 subordination. 
 
 ' Pray, therefore, suggest some other chairman to the 
 meeting to-morrow. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 * Salisbury.'
 
 274 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 December 8, 1872. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — I have thought much on your 
 letter. I do not think my speaking would be of much 
 use — because as a layman I could not treat the Creed doc- 
 trinally, and to treat it from a political point of view, i.e. 
 from the point of view of expediency, would be incongruous 
 before an assembly such as this is likely to be. But I agree 
 so far that speaking is a very different thing from taking 
 the chair. The latter commits one to responsibility for the 
 holding of the meeting. The former does not. 
 
 ' As to the impolicy of the meeting I still feel strongly. 
 I have had an opportunity of speaking to Mr. Gladstone on 
 the subject, and I find that the inclination of his mind is 
 in the same direction as mine. He is equally impressed 
 with our extreme weakness in Parliament. Any aggressive 
 action on our part would only give new vigour to our 
 opponents : and it is not our game to precipitate a struggle. 
 
 ' My information as to the Archbishop differs widely from 
 yours. I beheve he will be satisfied with an Explanatory 
 Note. If I am right, then I think our policy clearly is to 
 let him lead : not to attempt to take the lead out of his 
 hands. He can do what we cannot do — silence the Broad 
 Churchmen. If he takes a sound line, we may then, by 
 the help of the Prime Minister and the Chancellor, prevent 
 Parliament from moving. If it does move, we certainly 
 shall have the secular penalties removed ; even if we can save 
 the rubric from alteration. I am very anxious, therefore, 
 that nothing should be done to put the Archbishop wrong. 
 
 ' As to speaking — it is a matter of minutest importance — 
 but I had rather not pledge myself till I have had the 
 opportunity of seeing the Archbishop, which I hope to have 
 shortly. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 December 13, 1872. 
 
 ' Dear Mr.. MacColl, — Dr. Liddon's opinion joined to 
 your own undoubtedly is an element of great importance 
 in this matter.
 
 LORD SALISBURY 275 
 
 ' I am ashamed to keep you waiting for an answer on so 
 trivial a question as whether I should speak at a meeting 
 or not. But the momentous character of the subject 
 makes each man's course a matter of severe personal 
 responsibility. I am not able to decide on my own course 
 till I have seen the Archbishop. I am not usually afraid 
 of a combative policy : but on this question I am nervously 
 apprehensive of the dangers of such a course. 
 
 ' I will write again in two or three days. I am afraid 
 I shall have guests on Tuesday so that I cannot come up. 
 
 * Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 Christmas Day, 1872. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — I re-enclose Mr. Kingsley's 
 letters. I am much obliged to you for having given me 
 the opportunity of reading them. 
 
 ' From what I hear I do not think the proposed meeting 
 can do any harm now — and therefore if you wish it I shall 
 be willing to move or second the second resolution. But 
 I quite concur in Canon Kingsley's feeling as to discussing 
 such subjects from the platform : and therefore, if you have 
 engaged any better man for the part, I shall very gladly 
 give way. 
 
 ' I think on all sides the magnitude of the task of inter- 
 fering with the present status of the Creed is growing on 
 men's minds. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury/ 
 
 The meeting was held at St. James's Hall on January 31, 
 1873. Lord SaUsbury made a vigorous speech, from which 
 the following is an extract : 
 
 'It is a small matter comparatively that consciences 
 would be wounded, and deep resentments would be excited, 
 and probably a formidable schism would be created ; it is 
 a small matter compared with that frightful evil that men 
 would come to look upon the Church as having deserted 
 her sacred mission, and having sunk to the level of those 
 
 T 2
 
 276 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Protestant communities abroad — at Geneva and in Paris — 
 where the faith which the Athanasian Creed proclaims has 
 been openly abandoned. Such a result might be obtained 
 by the help of those scrupulous consciences whom we re- 
 spect, though we regret their efforts ; but it would not be 
 the scrupulous consciences that would reap the ultimate 
 resiilts. Behind the thin line of scrupulous consciences we 
 see the vast forces of unbelief. The scrupulous consciences 
 would win the battle ; the forces of unbeHef would gather 
 the spoils of victory.' 
 
 February 17, 1873. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — I enclose the corrected proof. 
 As far as we have gone, the events have justified your 
 view. The politicians have met a bigger obstacle than they 
 expected, and are fighting shy. I trust it may continue 
 so : but the tactics were hazardous. 
 
 ' I have not at present heard of any intention to moot 
 the question in either House of Parliament. 
 
 'Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 The Session of 1874 was signalized by the debate on the 
 Public Worship Regulation Bill. 
 
 June 9, 1874. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — I have been unwell and have 
 consequently been rather hard pressed, or I would have 
 replied to you before. 
 
 ' The objects in the Bill which I have been most anxious 
 to secure and which at one time seemed very doubtful, 
 were the appointment of an independent lay-judge, and 
 the Bishop's Veto on all suits. These are now in the Bill. 
 But a consent to the latter could not have been obtained 
 in certain influential quarters without a "neutralization" 
 clause. 
 
 ' I agree that, if the clause is to be looked on as a bargain, 
 it is a bad one. But I cannot see that in itself it can do 
 harm. No one would advocate litigation on the points 
 named in it : why then not remove the penalties ? The 
 clause is, I understand, framed on the principle of including 
 
 i
 
 LORD SALISBURY 277 
 
 only ambiguous and obsolete rubrics— those of which the 
 meamng is much disputed, and those which for generations 
 have been disregarded without challenge. The only other 
 rubric that might come into this list is the Vestments rubric. 
 But here you are confronted with the practical difficulty — 
 that either you must make all vestments (including surphce) 
 optional — which is more than we should like : or you must 
 specially name chasubles in the Bill— which would make 
 nine tenths of both Houses faint with horror. 
 
 'All this discussion on my part is, however, wholly 
 speculative. The line taken by Lord Limerick and his 
 supporters has so profoundly irritated the House of Lords, 
 that the Government has lost all hold over them. After 
 the ill-advised division of Thursday last the Archbishop has 
 become practically supreme. He has found it out — too 
 late, fortunately, to recall some of his concessions. The 
 Government (even if I could direct its action, which of course 
 I cannot) is powerless now. Last night we were beaten 
 two to one by the Bishops — both Front Benches and Lord 
 Shaftesbury voting in the minority. So that we are the 
 last people to whom you should appeal. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 August 15, 1874. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl,— I am much obliged to you for 
 your letter. I was very glad indeed that we were able to 
 keep the Bishop's Veto unbroken, as I looked upon that 
 safeguard as intensely important. 
 
 ' Touching the scene in the Commons on Wednesday 
 week, I think it is fair to say that the tone which his re- 
 marks seemed to bear was disavowed by him immediately .^ 
 Whether it occurred to him while he was speaking, or whether 
 he received any suggestion on the subject when he sat down, 
 I do not know : but, within a couple of hours of his sitting 
 down, I received a note from him saying that he had 
 attempted a humorous defence of me, that he feared it had 
 
 ' Lord Salisbury had criticized the Bill, and Disraeli, referring to those 
 criticisms, described their author as ' a great master of gibes and flouts and 
 jeers.'
 
 278 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 been badly executed, and would look ill in the report, 
 and disclaiming any unfriendly meaning. The extreme 
 promptitude of this explanation precludes the idea of any 
 intervening change of feeling. 
 
 ' That Sir V. Harcourt has some such idea as you suggest 
 is very possible. 
 
 ' But it rests apparently with him alone. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 November 10, 1876. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — I am very much obliged to you 
 for your kind letter. 
 
 ' The task they have put upon me is undoubtedly a very 
 stiff one.^ It depends more on others than on us, whether 
 anything satisfactory can be effected. 
 
 ' Believe me,- 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' in great haste, 
 * Salisbury.' 
 
 August 24, 1884, 
 
 ' Dear Canon MacColl, — I am much obliged to you for 
 your letter. The rumour ^ in question has not reached me — 
 and I should certainly not have believed it — if for no other 
 reason, on the ground of style. The article to which you 
 refer evidently comes from the camp-followers of the Con- 
 servative army, who want plunder, and are angry with me 
 because they think, perhaps justly, that I am not going the 
 right way to get it. Escott is a good deal mixed up with 
 these people. But T am puzzled at the writer's having heard 
 of the contents of Disraeli's letter, which was known to very 
 few. It was written almost immediately after the speech 
 was made (at a morning sitting), and I got it that afternoon 
 before I left the India Office : and therefore, as D. never 
 kept copies of his letters, it could hardly have been seen by 
 many on liis side — and on mine only I think by three or four. 
 
 ^ Lord Salisbury was just setting out for the Conference at Constantinople. 
 
 * It was rumoured that MacColl was the author of an article in the 
 Fortnightly Review, in which the incident described in the letter of August 15, 
 1874, was narrated.
 
 LORD SALISBURY 279 
 
 ' I am much indebted to you for the favourable criticism 
 in the Spectator. Mr. Hutton's interpolation is a curious 
 case of survi%'al of expressions. That impersonation of 
 " the people " as a thing you can love or hate— or be the 
 " foe " of— belongs to the dialect of the French Convention. 
 It means nothing. However unchristian he may think me, 
 does he imagine I hate the people who vote Tory as well as 
 the people who vote Radical — the people who cheer me as 
 well as the people who hoot me ? 
 
 ' The only restraint I should like to impose on the liberty 
 of the Press would be to make political abstractions penal. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 October;:13, 1884. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — I am afraid that I shall have 
 so much to do when I go back that I cannot venture to 
 accept any such engagement as that which you propose ; ^ 
 though otherwise it would have given me great pleasure to 
 do so. But my time is more fully engaged with somewhat 
 unprofitable occupations than I like to think of. 
 
 ' I regard such conspiracies ^ as you mention with much 
 philosophy. Cantabit xmcuus coram latrone. They can strip 
 me of nothing that I value. The story about Bismarck is 
 a curious myth. I have not had the slightest communica- 
 tion with him. Do they imagine he cares for such as me 1 
 He cares for people who dispose of armies— and for no 
 one else. 
 
 ' I think you have noted the essential issue between me 
 and my opponents in this Franchise controversy. They 
 imagine that the large majority of the people are neutral, de- 
 ciding according to current events on each election. I do not 
 think so. As long as the EstabHshed Church lasts, it can- 
 not be so. There is a huge kernel of permanent RadicaHsm 
 consisting of Nonconformists of all grades, and of a small 
 number of anti-religious sectaries of the Continental type. 
 Round them is a zone of professional politicians — men who 
 
 1 MacColl's Parochial Luncheon. 
 
 " Contrivances to oust Lord Salisbury from the Conservative leadership.
 
 280 INIALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 are Liberal by family tradition, and by reason of their 
 own pledges and exertions in past times ; whose per- 
 sonal importance depends on their political creed. This 
 zone is also comparatively permanent. Outside them, 
 again, comes the zone of temporary adherents, who fall 
 away in times of rebuke. I do not beHeve the permanent 
 element to be a majority of the people ; but they are quite 
 large enough to be capable of being invested with the 
 powers of a majority by a suitable distribution of seats. 
 
 ' I am, 
 
 ' Yours truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 November 18, 1884. 
 
 * Dear Mr. MacColl, — I only write a line to thank you 
 for your letter. 
 
 ' You will have seen that terms were offered to us which 
 we thought we could accept, without betraying our trust ; 
 and that being so, we were glad to take a step towards 
 closing the controversy.^ 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 March 22, 1885. 
 
 * Dear Mr. MacColl, — ... I quite agree with you in 
 disliking the Soudan war. It promises no good results. 
 
 ' Our complaint is that we have been brought into such 
 a position that retreat will be even more injurious than 
 persistence. 
 
 * Ever yours truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 December 10, 1886. 
 
 * Dear Mr. MacColl,— I only got your letter yesterday. 
 ' I am afraid that I cannot agree with you about Irish 
 
 Home Rule. Even if I thought it desirable — which is to 
 me an impossible supposition — I should not think that I 
 was at liberty to propose it. The effect of Peel's conduct 
 
 * On the Franchise Bill.
 
 LORD SALISBURY 281 
 
 in 1829 and 1846 has always seemed to me deplorable. 
 The only person among our statesmen who has a right to 
 propose a Home Rule Bill is Mr. John Morley. But I 
 believe and hope that our resistance to it will be successful. 
 
 ' Yours faithfully, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 December 13, 1887. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl,— The matter to which you refer 
 has passed by — and is now a matter to me of complete 
 indifference.^ I am much obhged to you for asking my 
 opinion, but I do not desire to influence your action in 
 the matter in either direction. 
 
 ' I think that Lord Derby and Lord Beaconsfield had 
 both acquired an exaggerated view of Turkish vitality 
 and power, and they both thought that my recommenda- 
 tions sacrificed too much of the Turkish Empire. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 February 25, 1897. 
 
 ' Dear Canon MacColl, — I am much obhged to you 
 for your letter of the 22nd conveying to me the very 
 sorrowful intelligence that Lady Waterford had gone from 
 among us.^ 
 
 ' Her life, in many respects, was too sad for words, 
 though she had all the material conditions of happiness for 
 which men struggle. Throughout her sorrows she pre- 
 served a saintly character, and her influence has brought 
 help and guidance to many minds. Though it is a sad 
 bereavement for many friends, one cannot regret that one, 
 with such a character, has found unalloyed peace at last, 
 and that her sorrows have ceased. 
 
 ' The daughters are deeply to be pitied. 
 
 ' Believe me, 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 * A supposed frustration of Lord Salisbury's policy in Eastern Europe, 
 by Lord Derby when Foreign Secretary. 
 2 See p. 241,
 
 282 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 October 19, 1897. 
 
 ' Dear Canon MacColl, — I am much obliged to you for 
 your letter of yesterday, and for the Russian translation of 
 your work on the Eastern Question which you sent me at 
 the same time. You commend to me its beauties as a 
 specimen of Russian printing. I am afraid those are the 
 only ones of its merits I am qualified to appreciate, and 
 I fear I am too old to learn. 
 
 ' Believe me, 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 October 14, 1898. 
 
 ' Dear Canon MacColl, — I am much obUged to you 
 for your letter of yesterday. It is rash to be sanguine with 
 respect to the issue of any Eastern negotiation ; but I hope 
 we are in sight of a satisfactory conclusion to the Cretan 
 negotiation. 
 
 ' I am afraid the upshot of our experience during these 
 last two years is that the Concert of Europe is too ponderous 
 a machine for daily use. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 September 6, 1901. 
 
 'My Dear Canon MacColl, — I agree— and have long 
 agreed — in the expediency of a closer friendship with Russia, 
 By predilection I am an old Tory, and would have rejoiced 
 if we had been able to maintain the friendship with Russia 
 which existed in 1815. 
 
 ' But the possibiHty of improving our relations is con- 
 stantly growing more questionable. Other Statesmen are 
 acutely watching the Chess-Board of Europe : and they 
 perfectly know that a real sympathy between Russia and 
 England would place the other Great Powers in a very 
 inferior position. Therefore they will lose no opportunity 
 of hindering such a consummation : and unfortunately they 
 have too many opportunities of doing so, for they can offer 
 enlargement of Russian territory on the Chinese, the Persian,
 
 CARDINAL NEWMAN 283 
 
 and the Turkish frontier, and we cannot do so. Another 
 insuperable difficulty lies in the attitude of what is called 
 pubhc opinion here. The diplomacy of nations is now 
 conducted quite as much in the letters of special corre- 
 spondents, as in the despatches of the Foreign Office. The 
 result is that there is a raw state of irritation between the 
 upper classes in the two countries, which makes any advance 
 on the part of either Government quite impracticable. If a 
 letter could be made to give room for further reasons, my 
 catalogue is far from being exhausted. 
 
 ' I wish it were otherwise : but wishing is no good. 
 
 ' I do not, however, draw from this state of things as 
 gloomy inferences as you do. I understand you to fear 
 that if we cannot cure the present evil, we run the risk 
 of the ports of Rotterdam and Antwerp falHng into hostile 
 hands. I cannot convince myself that there is any chance 
 of such a calamity, until we have fallen far lower in the 
 scale of nations than has happened yet. 
 
 ' Believe me, 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 September 9, 1901. 
 
 ' My Dear Canon MacColl, — I am much obliged to 
 you for your paper on " Bismarck's fall " — which I will 
 read. When I was at Berhn in 1878, Odo Russell told us 
 one morning that Bismarck had been saying to him " I have 
 spent a sleepless night thinking of the entirely exposed 
 condition of my country's frontier towards Russia." This 
 is in harmony with Lord Dufferin's story. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 ' Salisbury.' 
 
 MacColl left the following account of his intercourse 
 with Cardinal Newman : 
 
 ' Newman's beautiful style always fascinated me, I read 
 everything of his on which I could lay my hands, and my
 
 284 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 mind became so imbued with his style that I think I could 
 after a time recognize it anywhere. When I found a clue to 
 anything of his that was buried in some magazine or review 
 or journal I went to the Reading-room of the British Museum 
 to read it. On one of these occasions I chanced to pick 
 up a thin pamphlet bound in boards which consisted of 
 letters addressed to the Times and signed " Catholicus." 
 They were a criticism of an address delivered by Sir Robert 
 Peel at Tamworth, in which the great Statesman expatiated 
 on the advantages of secular knowledge in elevating 
 humanity. Newman's criticism on this address led him to 
 criticize some similar utterances by Lord Brougham. I 
 doubt if Newman ever wrote anything quite so brilliant in 
 a light yet most penetrating vein. I concluded at once 
 that " Catholicus " was Newman, and was greatly surprised 
 on finding a notice of the pamphlet in a rehgious magazine, 
 which confessed an entire ignorance of the authorship. 
 
 ' It was said, I know not with what truth, that the 
 Editor of the Times was so struck b}'- the brilHancy of his 
 letters that he offered Newman £1800 a year if he would 
 join his staff, and that Newman asked if he could have a 
 free hand, or, on the contrary, be always bound to express 
 the opinions of the Times. The answ^er was that he would 
 be expected to express the opinions of the Times. Newman, 
 though comparatively a poor man, dechned the offer. 
 
 'I forget what induced me to write to Dr. Newman, 
 as he then was ; but I received a most kind letter from him 
 in reply written in that clear, small, neat hand which was 
 characteristic of some other Tractarian leaders, including 
 Keble. My correspondence with him lasted till his death. 
 On his invitation I paid him a visit at Edgbaston, and 
 whenever he came to London he called upon me. When 
 in London he stayed with his old friend, Dean Church, and 
 I used to meet him there. He had a keen sense of fun and 
 humour, and I remember his laughing heartily over a story 
 told in my hearing by the Rev. William Palmer of Magdalen, 
 brother of the late Lord Selborne. The story, which I 
 repeated to Newman in Palmer's own words, was this : 
 
 ' A lady asked Palmer if the Russians were not very
 
 CARDINAL NEWMAN 285 
 
 superstitious, and fasted a great deal too much. " Let me 
 tell you a story," said Palmer, who spoke in a rather thick 
 voice, as if his tongue was rather too large for his mouth. 
 " A German Lutheran pedlar was once travelling in the 
 interior of Russia with his bag upon his back, and arrived 
 one night at the house of a poor peasant, who made him 
 welcome, and entertained him as he best could. It was 
 Lent, and the peasant asked the pedlar to share his Lenten 
 fare, which consisted of some black bread and cucumbers. 
 The pedlar, not relishing the fare, opened his bag and took 
 out a fat sausage and, opening a clasp-knife, cut off a slice 
 which he began to eat. The pious peasant was so shocked 
 by this outrageous breach of the Lenten fast, that he got 
 up and went behind the pedlar and split his skull open 
 with a hatchet." Newman was immensely tickled by this 
 exhibition of " Piety." 
 
 ' On another occasion I met Newman at breakfast at 
 the Deanery of St. Paul's. The Dean left Newman and 
 myself sitting at the breakfast-table, while he and the rest 
 of the family went to Cathedral. Presently Newman said 
 to me : "I have not heard chanting in an English church 
 for a long time. I should like so much to hear it again. 
 Do you think I could go quietly into the Cathedral without 
 disturbing the congregation ? " 
 
 ' " Of course you can," I said. " The service is only 
 just beginning. I will take you in : but I am sorry I cannot 
 stay Mdth you for I am obliged to go to Clifton this morning." 
 I took him into the Cathedral and left him. In the next 
 Church Times I was surprised and grieved to read the 
 following : 
 
 ' " Last Monday, a venerable white-haired clergjinan, 
 with rather shabby clothes and hat, was seen to make his 
 way into St. Paul's Cathedral just after the service had 
 begun. Presently a verger went to him and said, ' We 
 want none of your sort here,' and turned him out." 
 
 ' I dined at the Deanery a few days afterwards and asked 
 the Dean if he had seen the paragraph in the Church Times. 
 He smiled and pulled a letter out of his pocket, which he
 
 286 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 handed to me. It was from Newman. He, too, had seen 
 the paragraph, which he pasted on the top of a sheet of 
 notepaper followed by these words : 
 
 ' " My Dear Church, — On the contrary, it was a good 
 coat and a new hat, for I was on my way to pay a visit to 
 my friend Hope Scott, and I always make it a rule to dress 
 well when I visit my friends." 
 
 ' The Dean wrote back : 
 
 ' " My Dear Newman, — But I hope the story is not true 
 at all. For it would annoy and grieve me exceedingly 
 that you should be treated so rudely. So I hope to hear 
 that there is not truth in the story." 
 
 ' To this Newman replied : 
 
 ' " My Dear Church, — Yes there is, though it is not 
 quite accurate. What happened was this : I wanted so 
 much to hear the chanting, and MacCoU kindly took me 
 into the Cathedral. Presently a verger came to me and 
 offered politely to put me in one of the stalls. I thanked him 
 for his courtesy, and said that I preferred to remain where 
 I was. Presently another verger came and made the same 
 offer. Him also I thanked and said that I preferred to 
 remain where I was. By and by I saw another verger 
 coming from a distance with a menacing aspect, so I thought 
 I had better leave, and I left accordingly." 
 
 ' Newman always wrote to me with exceeding frank- 
 ness, but never tried to shake my allegiance to the Church 
 of England or induce me to join the Church of Rome.' 
 
 [The Oratory], May 29, 1861. 
 
 ' My Dear Sir, — I am glad to find that I am to have 
 the pleasure of a call from you here, when you come to 
 Birmingham. You do not know my feehngs, if you think 
 it would not be a subject of great interest to me to hear 
 from you what has impressed you as to the present position 
 and prospects of the Anghcan Church — in which there are
 
 CARDINAL NEWMAN 287 
 
 so many truly earnest and religious men, wishing with all 
 their hearts to learn God's truth and to do God's will. 
 
 ' You must not, however, suppose that it was good news 
 to me to find that Mr, Cheyne ^ was likely to resume his 
 position in the Scotch Church. I know his son-in-law and 
 daughter well ; and many have been the good prayers 
 offered that the harshness with which he has been treated 
 in his own communion might be the means under Providence 
 of bringing him under the shadow of the Mother of Saints. 
 
 ' As to my writing on Faith and Reason, I feel most 
 keenly the vast controversy which is in progress ; but I am 
 too old for such an undertaking. 
 
 ' Very truly yours, 
 
 ' John H. Newman.' 
 
 [Ventnor], October 14, 1861. 
 
 ' My Dear Sir, — Your letter has been forwarded to me 
 here, where I am for a day or two. 
 
 ' As to Anglican Orders, the onus prohandi of course 
 lies with those who assert them — since a new succession 
 was begun in Parker, etc. Now I have never been able to 
 feel that they were proved to me. 
 
 ' However, the validity of Anglican Orders seems to 
 me a narrow argument on a large question. First, if the 
 essence of the Church lies in validity of Orders, then the 
 Church is nothing else than a family — and Rome and England 
 are one only in the sense in which the Israelites and 
 Ishmaelites were one. Yet is this sufficient to the idea of 
 a Church ? Surely the Church is not merely a family, but 
 a polity. England and the United States are one race, 
 but not one state — is the Church one only in the sense in 
 which John Bull and the Yankees are one ? 
 
 ' But surely the Church is one, not only as a state, polity, 
 or government, but in its essence, in all times, as well as 
 places. 
 
 ' Now if I ask myself what is that body in the world 
 now, which, in spite of all changes, St. Ambrose or St. 
 Augustine would acknowledge as like what they were used 
 
 ^ See p. 15.
 
 288 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 to — what is that Church whose service, did they enter the 
 sacred walls, they would find their own, it is plain^ that it 
 would not be any dissenting body, nor the kirk, nor the 
 Anglican Church, if its Sunday service represents it, but 
 either the Greek or the Latin — and then, when we consider 
 the questions of government, autonomy, action, certainly 
 not the Greek. 
 
 ' But these are large subjects which can be spoken of 
 better, than run through in a few pages of note-paper. 
 
 ' Yours, my dear Sir, 
 ' Very sincerely, 
 
 ' John H. Newman, 
 
 ' of the Oratory.' 
 
 ' P.S. — Any number of copies of my Essay on Develop- 
 ment of Doctrine may be had at Toovey's, Piccadilly, tho' 
 the booksellers say that it is out of print. 
 
 ' As to your question about the growth of Church 
 principles in the Anglican Church, I rejoice in the foci — 
 but as to the why, there is another hypothesis besides that 
 of serving as a Note of the apostolicity of Anglicanism — it 
 may be to prepare for a large addition of members to the 
 Roman Catholic Church.' i 
 
 May 25, 1865. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — I am not the person to consult 
 when you want an opinion on so difficult a book as " Ecce 
 Homo." I have not had time to do it justice ; nor did 
 I find the book carry me on, as I had expected — and then, 
 I was perplexed at the hypothesis started (which your 
 information seems to confirm), that the writer was a man of 
 orthodox belief, simulating liberaUsm. And it seemed to me 
 there was a spirit in the book, for which I had no sympathy 
 
 MacColl wrote to Gladstone on August 1, 1862 : 
 ' Perhaps the enclosed may interest you. What he says about St. Ambrose 
 and St. Augustine seems specious at first sight ; but surely it may be a question 
 whether the omission, in the service of the English Church, of a good deal of 
 what they were used to would not shock them less than the addition, in the 
 Roman Church, of a good many things they were not used to.* 
 
 I
 
 CARDINAL NEWIVIAN 289 
 
 — and its fancifulness indisposed me to take much interest 
 in it on its own account. 
 
 ' I tell you just what I have felt about it, because you 
 ask me— but not as at all depreciating it— or thinking 
 hghtly of the abiUty of the writer (though there seemed to 
 me a haziness about his fundamental position), or being 
 insensible to its importance, as a sign of the times. The 
 sensation it has made is certainly very remarkable, and 
 means something or other. 
 
 ' If you wish to see more definitely what I think of it, 
 I must refer you to an article in the forthcoming number 
 of the Month (for June), which expresses what I should 
 say about it, if called on to bring out my meaning fully. 
 At the same time I by no means consider that Article a 
 complete or adequate review of it. 
 
 ' Excuse a hasty note, 
 ' and believe me, 
 ' Very truly yours, 
 
 'John H. Newman.' 
 
 ' PS, — I know from what Mr. Gladstone wrote to me 
 how kindly he thinks of me.' 
 
 February 4, 1866. 
 
 ' My Dear Sir, — Your letter is far too kind and friendly 
 — but I gladly welcome and accept it, as showing the feehngs 
 you entertain towards me, and testifying to those of others. 
 Of course I desire the good opinion of such persons as you 
 represent, and I only have to pray that God will keep me 
 from desiring it, or taking pleasure in it, inordinately. 
 
 ' I will beg your acceptance of my Remarks on Dr. Pusey's 
 " Eirenicon," and, while I do so, I am going to ask you to 
 let me leave your question without any answer, at least 
 for the present. I have been much indisposed, and am 
 only just recovering, and have so much writing, that I do 
 not know how to get through it, and am very tired. 
 
 * I had seen portions of your vindication of Gladstone 
 already, and am glad to have it and your other Pamphlets. 
 
 ' You must not suppose I have not read your and 
 
 V
 
 290 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Mr. Oxenham's correspondence with interest, because I do 
 not remark upon it, but it is impossible to say what has 
 to be said in a few words.^ 
 
 ' I ought to have stated above that, as I wrote my Letter 
 to Pusey with the set view of lessening the difficulties which 
 Anglicans feel in our cultus of the Blessed Virgin, what 
 you say about my Letter is especially gratifying to me. 
 
 ■ I am, my dear Sir, 
 
 ' Very truly yours, 
 
 'John H. Newman.' 
 
 February 1, 1867. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I am sorry to say I have 
 not read your article yet. The book has been on my table, 
 and I have wished to do so, but my time is so cut up that I 
 have not been able. Besides, so great an object cannot be 
 taken up in an odd moment ; and perhaps I find the con- 
 sideration of such more fatiguing than heretofore, and my 
 mind goes off speculating on some suggestive remark of the 
 author I am reading, and so I lose my time. You may 
 be sure it is one of those Essays which I shall find it a 
 duty to read, because I expect I shall gain a good deal 
 from it. 
 
 ' I sold the copyright of the " Arians " to Lumley about 
 ten or twelve years ago. The reprint is simply his — and, if 
 my memory does not mislead me, I should have liked, but 
 was not given an opportunity, to make any literary correc- 
 tions in it. I am not aware that there are any mistakes 
 in the reprint — perhaps they will be found in the original 
 edition also. It is a very imperfect work, from the cir- 
 cumstances of its composition. I have nearly always had 
 to write by the piece and to order. 
 
 ' Very sincerely yours, 
 
 'John H. Newman.' 
 
 ' P.S. — Very many thanks for, as before, your friendly 
 language about me. As to my Parochial Sermons, I believe 
 
 ^ On ' The Catholic Doctrine of the Atonement.'
 
 CARDINAL NEWMAN 291 
 
 they will soon be published from the last Anglican Edition. 
 A writer in the Guardian has put about a strange report 
 about my feeling towards them, which I never heard 
 before.' 
 
 November 4, 1868. 
 
 'My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I thank you sincerely for 
 your Pamphlet.^ It is very able and forcible. I hope it 
 will be widely read. I think already I have observed use 
 made of it in speeches at the Hustings. 
 
 ' Very truly yours, 
 
 ' John H. Newman.' 
 
 November 12, 1869. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, —I should have answered you 
 before this, had I not been so very busy. I will gladly send 
 you another copy of my article, Avhen I come upon one. As 
 to Dr. Temple's appointment,^ it is a subject on which I 
 don't see how a person can have an opinion, unless he is 
 bound to have one. So much can be said on either side 
 that, unless duty enjoined it, I should never be able to make 
 up my mind. The only point I see is, that, if all Bishops 
 but two have spoken of his Essay severely, it is an incon- 
 sistency in them to consecrate, unless he explains first — 
 but perhaps they have not spoken severely, in Convocation, 
 as has been said. 
 
 ' It is quite a mistake that I am writing anything on such 
 subjects as the papers have said. It was originally given out 
 as a piece of gossip — perhaps half with an unfriendly feeling 
 on the part of some Catholics, who, having first spread their 
 misstatement, next, when no book came out, follow it up 
 with a second, viz. that it had been suppressed for some 
 reason or other. A lie is like a shuttlecock, which two 
 battledores can keep up with great success, if skilfully used, 
 ^vithout its falling to the ground. The next move ought 
 to be that it has been sent for to Rome, etc., etc. 
 
 ' I am writing a small work on a definite subject, but 
 
 On the Disestablishment of the Irish Church. 
 To the See of Exeter. 
 
 u 2
 
 292 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 not directly on any subject of the day, but as an enquiry 
 into certain logical principles, and I venture to say that, 
 after all the talk that has gone on about it, it will disappoint 
 friends and opponents when it appears. 
 
 ' Very truly yours, 
 
 ' John H. Newman.' 
 
 ' P.S. — What I am writing is not a " first part," but all 
 I have to say — which is little enough.' 
 
 November 29, 1869. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I cannot tell whether 
 anciently books were condemned without their authors 
 being allowed to defend them, but we must consider how 
 few instances were possible, in the rarity of books then 
 published, if we can talk of publication. 
 
 ' There was no public then ; and if one wrote a heretical 
 book, and his diocesan lived next door, he would naturally 
 talk to him about it, and hear what he had to say. On the 
 other hand, the great multitude of publications in a day like 
 this, not only preclude a personal treatment of them, but 
 make another treatment imperative. A book is thrown 
 upon the world with the best intentions, and yet may do 
 a vast deal of mischief. There are wrong-headed men who 
 always have a good sense, though they use most erroneous 
 language. Volat irrevocabile verbum, with a substantive, 
 definite meaning. The Church claims to pronounce in- 
 fallibly when the legitimate meaning of a book is bad, 
 and warns the faithful. I do not mean to say that the 
 pronouncements of the Congregation of the Index are 
 infallible, but that the duty and the power of determining 
 the absolute sense of a book is quite intelligible. Whether 
 it is exercised judiciously or not in a particular case is quite 
 another thing, but for myself I have no doubt about the 
 principle. 
 
 ' Some Catholic papers delight in putting in gossip about 
 me. It is a great thing to set up a puppet in order to knock 
 it down. There is just as much truth in saying I ever 
 dreamed of writing on Faith or Rationalism, as in saying 
 
 I
 
 CARDINAL NEWMAN 293 
 
 that any person in authority ever dreamed of hindering me ; 
 and that is, no truth at all. 
 
 ' I make it a rule not to notice these things except under 
 special circumstances, for, if I said A, I must say B and C. 
 The best answer to the present gossip will be the appearance 
 of my little book, which will show I neither have been 
 Avriting on Rationalism nor have been stopped from 
 writing. The book is about " Assent," and is a very 
 humble affair.^ 
 
 ' I heard that Archbishop Manning considers the Day 
 of Judgment certain to come in a few years. Whether this 
 is better than the above gossip about myself I know not — 
 but it is an answer anyhow to your astonisliment about his 
 Pastoral.^ 
 
 ' Very sincerely yours, 
 
 ' John H. Newman.' 
 
 November 8, 1870. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I ought long ago to have 
 thanked you for the account of the Ammergau Represen- 
 tation, which you were so good as to send me. 
 
 ' My silence was not from neglect. I read it with great 
 interest, having already read it once, and most of it, in the 
 Times. Only I have so many letters to write, I put off my 
 thanks from time to time, but the book has all along been 
 on my table to remind me of my duty. 
 
 ' It forms a valuable record of a very remarkable relic 
 of medieval Christianity. 
 
 ' I am, most truly yours, 
 
 'John H. Newman.' 
 
 May 1, 1872. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl,— I am very glad to hear you 
 are going to write in defence of retaining the Athanasian 
 Creed in the Anglican Prayer Book. 
 
 ' In answer to your question, first I would say, as you arc 
 aware, that the Apostles' Creed is emphatically our Creed. 
 As we always impose it in the sense and according to the 
 
 ^ An Essay in aid of a Qrammar of Assent. 
 
 " The. (Ecumenical Council, and the Infallibility of the Roman Pontiff.
 
 294 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 teaching of the Church, it stands for our whole faith, a.s 
 being the symbol and substance of the Apostolic depositum, 
 which, received from the beginning, is defined with greater 
 and greater accuracy and fulness of explanation as time 
 goes on. 
 
 ' The only question is whether the so-called Athanasian 
 Creed is one of our popular devotions, or expositions of our 
 faith, as regards its sacred subject, recommended to the 
 laity. 
 
 ' Here first you must recollect we have nothing answering 
 to the Anglican Prayer Book with us, no Common Prayer. 
 Devotions are in great measure left to the private judgment 
 of the individual. As to the Breviary, it is not, properly 
 speaking, congregational at all. It is the solemn prayer of 
 the clergy, the united prayer, said by each separately from 
 the impracticability of saying it together, though such union 
 is recommended, and actually said by them together in 
 chapters, collegiate churches, monastic bodies, etc. 
 
 ' Such public service the laity may attend — may join 
 in — in some countries, as in France, have been used to 
 join in — but they might come to church, while it went on, 
 and say their own private prayers under (so to say) the 
 Shadow and in the power of it, joining in heart with the 
 Latin service, but using the while their own private prayers 
 — under the feeling that all Christians are one, and have 
 substantially the same needs and petitions, and that their 
 hearts are all open to God. They would join with the choir, 
 as being helped by them and helping them also. 
 
 ' The Athanasian Creed, as you know, comes into the 
 Office of Prime as one of its Psalms on Sunday, and is not 
 presented to the laity by the Church . . . except in this 
 very indirect way. 
 
 ' But again, I have said that devotions, regarded as 
 private and personal acts, are left to each individual, 
 ecclesiastic or lay ; this is simply the case, except that, if 
 anyone suspected his forms of prayer to be unadvisablc, 
 he would take the opinion of his priest. 
 
 'And further, of course the Church does express 
 her opinion in a general way — at Rome especially, by
 
 CARDINAL NEWMAN 295 
 
 indulgencing certain devotions. These prayers are collected 
 together in a book called the Raccolta, and, though 
 obligatory on no one, have a special sanction and recom- 
 mendation from the reward annexed to their use. Not 
 that this is decisive or final— for I recollect our Jesuit 
 director telling us at Rome, that, if certain prayers suited 
 us better, we ought to keep to them rather than to 
 indulgenced prayers. 
 
 ' Here again the Athanasian Creed is wanting, for it is 
 not (I beHeve) one of the indulgenced devotions. 
 
 ' But further, in each country the local ecclesiastical 
 authority not exactly provides, but sanctions certain 
 devotions. Hence we have various popular prayer-books, 
 of a miscellaneous character, containing prayers and offices 
 for all classes of the faithful and for all circumstances, 
 such as the " Garden of the Soul," etc. 
 
 ' Now, as to the French and Irish prayer-books, some of 
 them, as the " Key of Heaven," and the " Ursuline Manual," 
 do not contain the Athanasian Creed ; but the English all 
 of them do, viz. the " Garden of the Soul," which dates from 
 the time of Bishop Challoner a century ago, the " Golden 
 Manual," the " Crown of Jesus," and the " Path of 
 Heaven." The Athanasian Creed is in all these popular 
 books, and the use, or at least the perusal and knowledge 
 of that Creed, is part of our good EngHsh tradition. 
 
 ' I am sorry to have had a new edition of the " Garden of 
 the Soul " by Washbourne sent me within the last few days, 
 in which it was left out. I wrote to remonstrate at once. 
 Since such Manuals must be portable, the new devotions 
 are thrusting out the old ones ; but it is very hard the 
 Athanasian Creed should go. I hear Mr. Washbourne's 
 edition is found fault with on other accounts — and I hope 
 the Creed will be added in an Appendix. 
 
 ' 1 am glad you are pleased with my lately republished 
 Essays. It is always a toss up whether what was written 
 for an ephemeral purpose will bear the broad daylight of 
 a later year. 
 
 ' Very truly yours, 
 
 * John H. Newman.
 
 296 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 May 3, 1872. 
 
 • My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I am sorry to hear from you 
 that any old Edition of the " Garden of the Soul " omits the 
 Athanasian Creed. I see by the Guardian that M. Michaud 
 (is that the name ?) confirms what I feared about its omission 
 in the French prayer-books. I should heartily rejoice to 
 find it used in our popular devotions. A Jesuit Father 
 lately suggested to me its introduction into the rite of 
 Benediction — but I doubt AA^hether it could be done without 
 special leave from the Bishop. 
 
 ' Dr. Murray is a great authority, but he speaks vaguely 
 and irrelevantly. But perhaps / misunderstand your ques- 
 tion, not he. I thought you wished to know the position of 
 the Creed in reference to the faithful generally, whether it 
 was taught them, whether it was tised by them. That it is 
 the authoritative Word of the Church, and the infallible 
 ansAver of the Church to all her children who ask questions 
 on the subjects of which it speaks, is quite certain. But 
 I cannot call it the Creed of the Church, except as we talk 
 of the " Creed of Pope Pius IV." All the faithful know by 
 heart the Apostles' Creed — all the faithful use the Nicene 
 Creed in Mass ; but nowhere do the faithful use — nowhere 
 is enjoined upon them — the Athanasian Creed. The nearest 
 approach to it is its insertion in our prayer-books ; and 
 it grieves me, as I have said, to find that, from the press 
 of new matter, it is losing its place in them. 
 
 ' As to your specific question, " holds the sa77ie place," I 
 don't think that our use of the Creed admits of being com- 
 jmred to yours. You impose it authoritatively on all your 
 members in public worship — they all use it A'-ocally. We 
 have nothing answering to your Prayer Book. If all our 
 "Gardens of the Soul," "Keys of Heaven," etc., etc., 
 contained it, still this would not be more than a recom- 
 mendation of its use — its use would be left to the discretion, 
 the private judgment of each individual. You im^pose it ; 
 but your method is one of imposition. It is no sound 
 argument that you should remove it from your Common 
 Prayer, because we haven't it in our Common Prayer, for 
 we have no united, vocal, Common Prayers ; and you might 
 
 J
 
 CARDINAL NEWMAN 297 
 
 as well say that you might leave out the Ten Command- 
 ments becaur^e we have not the Ten Commandments read 
 in Church, for we have no imperative common prayers, 
 such as yours. 
 
 ' The Athanasian is imposed upon our clergy, but the 
 clergy is not the laity. 
 
 ' Very truly yours, 
 
 ' John H. Newman.' 
 
 May 26, 1872. 
 
 'My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I have little to say, except 
 that your pages read very well, in spite of their having 
 to embody a quotation. 
 
 ' In my own words I have nothing to alter, and send 
 them back with the imprimatur of a friend. 
 
 ' I have noticed one sentence in page 11, and should add 
 that one omission of the Creed would by itself scarcely 
 constitute a mortal sin, though, if it were omitted again and 
 again, or omitted once through contempt of the authority 
 enforcing it, it would be such. 
 
 ' Very truly yours, 
 
 ' John H. Newman.' 
 
 May 30, 1872. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — I have read your sheets (pp. 1-80) 
 with great pleasure ; you have written very forcibly, and, 
 when the subject required it, eloquently.^ I hope the 
 pamphlet will have a wide circulation, and will do the good 
 which it promises to do. 
 
 ' I wish you had divided your subjects and arguments 
 from each other, either by " 1, 2, 3," etc., at the beginning 
 of the paragraph, or by a line. 
 
 ' Also, to go on criticizing, though of course I am truly 
 pleased and grateful at your various references to me, I 
 doubt the rhetoric of it. It tempts a reader to say, " What 
 is Dr. Newman to me ? " — e.g. at p. 21 might you not, instead 
 of repeating my name, say, "as my informant says," or 
 
 ' The Damnatory Clauiies rationally explained.
 
 298 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 the like ? At p. 3, " Half the controversies in the world, 
 says the same writer," or the like ? At p. 24, instead of 
 " Dr. Newman's observation," " This observation," though 
 a word must be inserted to hinder disarrangement of the 
 type. I hope I don't take a liberty in thus observing. 
 
 ' P. 2. — I have written in my life more letters of course 
 than I can recollect — so I am not surprised at not remem- 
 bering that I wrote to Mr. Archer Butler,^ but I did not 
 know till now that he had published any letter of mine, 
 and at least I don't think I ever gave him leave. 
 
 ' P. 3. — Will you be so kind as to correct a false print 
 in my last Edition (from which you have quoted) of my 
 University Sermons, and for " each other mean," in the last 
 line but one, print " each other means." 
 
 ' P. 32.— I quoted Jeremy Taylor's " State of Man " in 
 the first two editions of my Letter to Dr. Pusey, and Arch- 
 deacon Churton wrote to (I think) the Guardian to say that 
 it was not Taylor's— consequently I left the reference out 
 in my 3rd ed., wording my sentence " the work which had 
 the sanction of Jeremy Taylor," for that I think it had. 
 It is contained in Heber's edition, but, I am told, left out 
 in Eden's. 
 
 ' I have marked one or two false prints. 
 
 ' Very sincerely yours, 
 
 ' John H. Newman.' 
 
 July 6, 1872. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I thank you very much for 
 your pamphlet. I have not yet read it through — but have 
 read enough to be very glad it runs to so many pages — and 
 hope and expect it will have a very wide circulation. 
 
 ' I see an agitation is beginning again under Lord 
 Shaftesbury ^ — what is the value of it, I do not know ; but 
 John Bull does not like to be beaten, and I suppose Lord S. 
 will do all he can in corroboration of the efforts of Dr. Stanley, 
 etc., who are strange alHes for him in any rehgious matter. 
 I am glad that Dr. Pusey is out of the way in Switzerland, 
 
 ^ William Archer Butler, a Roman priest who joined the Established Church. 
 * Against the public use of the Athanasian Creed. 
 
 i
 
 CARDINAL NEWMAN 299 
 
 during this fresh attack — the whole question tries him 
 so much. 
 
 ' Thank you for what you say of me in your letter. 
 ' Yours very sincerely, 
 
 ' John H. Newman.' 
 
 December 10, 1872. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl,— Mr. Ffoulkes i is one of the 
 most impertinent men that I ever came across. Though 
 very different, I think he is another Golightly.^ 
 
 ' I should be seriously annoyed, if he is damaging your 
 pamphlet. You know I cautioned you against introducing 
 my name. 
 
 ' You may publish any letters of mine with all my 
 heart — but take care you are not making too much of what 
 may be very insignificant ; it becomes great, if you make it 
 great. A line of yours in the Guardian tossing off the 
 insinuation might be enough. To answer Mr. Ffoulkes 
 seriously is like fighting with a blue-bottle fly. 
 
 ' As to the Guardian's criticism of me in September, in 
 re Capes, 3 I said to a friend when I read it, " The Editor is 
 away — here is an occasional hand making play." It seems 
 I was right — not that I know the Editor ; but the paragraph 
 seemed out of keeping with the Guardian — somewhat elabo- 
 rate. Be assured I did not think of it twice. My answer 
 to Capes was quite deliberate— rightly or wrongly the very 
 style and tone of it had a meaning. 
 
 ' Yours very sincerely, 
 
 'John H. Newman.' 
 
 The Oratory, December 13, 1872. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl,— Certainly I ought to have 
 observed the passage about the Bishop of St. David's 
 "hounding."^ 
 
 1 The Rev. E. S. Ffoulkes. an Anglican clergyman who seceded to the 
 Church of Rome and returned to the Church of England. Published a treatise 
 on the Athanasian Creed in 1871. 
 
 - The Rev. C. P. Golightly, known as ' The Oxford Spy.' 
 
 ^ The Rev. .J. M. Capes, an Anglican clergyman who seceded, returned, and 
 seceded again. 
 
 " MacColl had spoken of the Anglican Bishops as having ' hounded ' Newman 
 out of the Church of England.
 
 300 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' And my only excuse is that my eyes are not so good 
 as they were, and I do not catch every word in a sentence 
 in reading. 
 
 ' On the contrary, I have made him an exception to 
 the Bishops in a note on the 5th Lecture of my AngUcan 
 Difficulties, which runs as follows : 
 
 ' " The author can never forget the great kindness of 
 Dr. Bagot, etc., etc. He has also to notice the courtesy 
 of Dr. Thirlwall's language, a prelate he has never had the 
 honour of knowing." 
 
 ' I am not aware that he made any protest against the 
 hounding — or did anything to hinder it ; but of course he 
 may have done so in private, for what one knows. In his 
 Charge at the time I think he took a distinct part against 
 me — but in a very temperate and gentlemanhke way. 
 
 ' Yours most sincerely, 
 
 ' John H. Newman.' 
 
 ' P.S. — Since writing the above I have found Thirlwall's 
 Charge in October 1842, and I transcribe on a separate 
 paper some extracts of it. 
 
 ' The whole passage takes up 12 pages oct. If you 
 think it worth while to reprint it, I wiU willingly, since 
 your mistake arose from my carelessness against my better 
 knowledge, bear the expense of it. I think I was occupied 
 with the subject of your book, and my eye passed over 
 whatever did not directly belong to it.' 
 
 [From the Bishop of St. David's Charge, October 1842. 
 
 ' , . . Some much more important, as well as difficult 
 questions are suggested by the last Tract of the Series, 
 entitled " Remarks on certain passages in the 39 Articles." 
 
 ' . . .It has been sometimes represented as if he (the 
 author) held it allowable for one who subscribes the Articles 
 to reject their obvious, liberal, and grammatical sense, and 
 to substitute another more conformable to his own. pre- 
 conceived notion of Catholic doctrine. This is a principle 
 which would be alarmingly dangerous, if it were not so 
 flagrantly absurd. But I do not perceive that it is implied
 
 CARDINAL NEWMAN 301 
 
 either in the account which the author gives of his object 
 at the outset, or in the concluding remarks with which he 
 meets a supposed objection (p. 60). 
 
 ' . , . The arbitrary misuse of the word Protestantism 
 by which its meaning has been hmited to a mere negation of 
 everything that men on both sides profess to revere (p. 69). 
 
 ' . , . I have yet to learn that such views and feelings 
 are inconsistent with the obligations of a minister of our 
 Church, or with a sincere attachment to her (p. 70). 
 
 ' . . . I am aware, my Reverend Brethren, that the 
 language of moderation is commonly least welcome where it 
 is most needed. . . . Be on your guard against the illusions 
 of names and phrases, and against the influence of authority 
 in this matter, etc. (p. 72).'] 
 
 December 29, 1872. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — Accept from me for yourself 
 and all dear to you the best wishes of the Sacred Season. 
 
 ' How could the Dublin say, or whence did it gain the 
 report, that I had " revised " your Pamphlet ? I never 
 see the Dublin, and did not know that it had said so, till 
 you told me of Mr. Ffoulkes' impertinence. I am sure the 
 report did not come from this place. We have no deaUngs 
 with the Dublin or the Tablet, and, though it is just possible 
 that some one in this house saw your proof-sheets on my 
 table, yet it is very unlikely — and even if anyone did, he 
 would not think about it, understand it, or report it. 
 
 ' I have a very dim memory about Dr. Thirlw all's name, 
 but I now think I did see the passage — passed it over, 
 saying to myself, " I suppose he is referring to something 
 that has come out, or that was done at the time which I 
 do not know." My knowledge went no further than 1842. 
 But my memory has got so confused that I might easily 
 be made to contradict myself, if I were cross-examined in 
 court. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' John H. New^ian.* 
 
 ' P.S. — I am amused to find that Mr. Ffoulkes has been 
 overset after all by a Palaeographer. As to his book you
 
 302 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 were kind enough to send me, shall I send it you back, 
 or add it to others which I have on the controversy ? I 
 don't especially esteem it, but I have already some to 
 match it.' 
 
 January 19, 1873. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — Had I known what Bishop 
 Thirlwall had said in his Charge of 1845, I don't think 
 I should have thanked him for his courtesy in 1842. 
 
 ' Very truly yours, 
 
 ' John H. Newman.' 
 
 January 4, 1875. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — On Mondays I have no proofs 
 from London — so I take up my pen to wish you a very 
 happy new year, and to try to make up, as far as a few 
 words can do so, for my silence hitherto. 
 
 ' As to Mr. Ward,-^ you can tell me nothing more 
 extravagant about his view of me than I know already. 
 He has told my friends that I am in material heresy, that 
 he would rather not have men made CathoHcs than have 
 them converted by me, and that he accounts it the best 
 deed of his life that he hindered my going to Oxford by the 
 letters he sent to Rome, etc. He is so above-board, and 
 outspoken, that he is quite charming. It is the whisperers, 
 and I have long suffered from them, whom (as Dickens 
 says) I " object to." But both whisperers and out-speakers 
 had received a blow over the knuckles from Fessler's 
 pamphlet, which has the Pope's approbation, and simul- 
 taneously with its being known in this country I have been 
 afforded an opportunity ... by answering Mr. Gladstone, 
 to break a silence which I so long have observed. 
 
 ' In saying this, you must not suppose that my direct 
 reason for writing was to protest against men like Mr. Ward 
 — time will answer them without me. But it so happens 
 that the intense indignation, which Mr. Gladstone has excited 
 among CathoUcs, has led to their being very pressing with 
 
 * W. G. Ward, Editor of the Dublin Review. 
 
 t
 
 CARDINAL NEWMAN 303 
 
 me to come forward, as otherwise I should never have done. 
 Of course, I may make mistakes as well as others — but 
 it is well for the world to be told that those wild views, 
 which have been put forward as the sole and true Catholic 
 ones, are not what they pretend to be. 
 
 ' As to Mr. Gladstone's letter, I think it quite shocking. 
 I should not have thought it possible that a statesman could 
 be so one-sided. With you I agree most fully that " he 
 wears his heart upon his sleeve," but that does not seem 
 to me an excuse for charges so serious, so inaccurate, and 
 so insulting.^ 
 
 ' I suppose I shall be out in a week or ten days. 
 ' Very sincerely yours, 
 
 ' John H. Newman.' 
 
 March 6, 1875. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — I should have answered your 
 letter before this, had I not been so busy. Not that I have 
 done a great deal, but when the time is taken out of the day 
 which my Priesthood and our Rule, and meals, and exercise, 
 and the weariness of old age exact, httle time is left for 
 work or letters. 
 
 ' Nothing, of course, can be kinder than Mr. Gladstone's 
 language about me — it is of a character indeed to frighten me. 
 As to his argument, I feel about it, so far as it concerns me, 
 what I felt about his first pamphlet — that it is most difficult 
 to find what he means to be his reasons for the definite and 
 specific positions which he takes up against me ; and, while 
 I am waiting for them or looking about for them in the jungle 
 in which they he, I find he suddenly proclaims himself 
 victor and marches off to another point. I hope I don't 
 seem ungrateful to him in your eyes for thus speaking, for 
 I really do believe one reason of this appearance in his 
 controversial method, is his great desire to deal tenderly 
 with me ; but in consequence it has cost me some trouble 
 
 ' In November 1874'Glaclstone issued a pamphlet called The Vaticayi Decrees 
 considered in their hearing on Civil Allegiance, and in February 1875 a second, 
 called Vaticanism : an answer to replies and reproofs. Newman's reply to 
 Gladstone's attack was called A Letter to the Duke of Norfolk.
 
 304 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 to do justice to his arguments. However, I have no thought 
 of provoking the controversy, though in the next edition 
 of my Letter I shall add a Postscript making two or three 
 remarks on his " Vaticanism," in defence of what I have 
 said. 
 
 ' One of the incidental disadvantages of a General Council 
 is that it throws individual units through the Church into 
 confusion and sets them at variance ... so was it at the 
 first century, the third, the fourth, the sixth, and the 
 seventh. The consequence is schism and heresy. I am 
 neither surprised then at the rise of the Alt-CathoUcs on 
 one side, nor at the extravagances of Dr. Ward, etc., on 
 the other. Of course no one can write without mistakes, 
 and in details my recent Pamphlet doubtless may be 
 rightly criticized by Catholics ; but it is my great comfort 
 and happiness to find it has been generally accepted by all 
 shades of Catholic opinion both in England and Ireland, 
 as substantially unexceptionable, and, as time goes on, I 
 think this will be felt more and more. 
 
 ' Most truly yours, 
 
 'John H. Newman.' 
 
 July 11, 1877. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I am very glad to have your 
 two valuable books, and thank you for them. They are 
 books for a hbrary, not only interesting at the moment — 
 and I have to thank you also for your friendly language in 
 them about me. 
 
 ' I was very glad, too, to meet you at the Deanery the 
 other day. Did not you promise, when here, that you would 
 come here again, if you came this way ? 
 
 ' Very truly yours, 
 
 ' John H. Newman.' 
 
 August 15, 1877. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — You must not look upon the 
 book which I am about to send you as a polemical mission — 
 but you have been kind enough to send me several books, 
 of great interest, and I do not like not to show that I am 

 
 CARDINAL NEWMAN 305 
 
 grateful for them — and I have no other means of doing so 
 than what at first sight is an awkward one. 
 
 ' You must not forget your promise to call here if you 
 come this way. 
 
 ' Very truly yours, 
 
 ' John H. Newman.' 
 
 [RednaU], April 16, 1883. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — I feel some shame in having to 
 say that I have a very vague notion what the Affirmation 
 Bill is, and a simple ignorance what the Amendment to it 
 may be. 
 
 ' This has led me to read your printed letter over 
 twice or three times, and I have come to the conclusion, 
 which on the whole I suppose is right, that the Government 
 propose to substitute an affirmation for an oath on fresh 
 M.P.'s, and that the Conservatives prefer a profession of 
 Theism in some shape, with the option of not taking it 
 granted to each Member. 
 
 ' You will think my want of interest to be strange ; but 
 I think it imphes that in the main I agree with you. At 
 least, two years ago, when the question of protesting against 
 abolishing the Parhamentary recognition of Almighty God 
 came before me, I felt that, since Christianity had ceased 
 to be the reUgion of Parhament for many years, the God of 
 the Christians was no longer the God of Parliament, and 
 I did not see what was gained by acknowledging any God 
 but Him Who in Scripture and the Creed is defined to be 
 " Maker of heaven and earth " and " Father of our Lord 
 Jesus Christ." I had other reasons for being indisposed to 
 protest, but this I beheve was the main one. But when you 
 ask me whether you may print my words, I do not feel that 
 it is my place to do now what I did not do two years ago. 
 
 ' Very truly yours, 
 
 'John H. Card. Newman.' 
 
 [RednaU], April 26, 1883. 
 
 * Dear Mr. MacColl, — There is one consideration which, 
 since I wrote, I learn from the Papers, which I think would
 
 306 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 weigh with me, if I had to give an opinion, not to take so 
 active a part as you are taking. 
 
 ' Perhaps I am mistaken in my fact, but it is stated that 
 great numbers of Anghcan laymen all through the country, 
 as represented by parochial petitions to Parhament, are 
 shocked at what seems to them a sanction of atheism. 
 Perhaps you will say that the petitions are really the work 
 of one or two men, e.g. the Incumbent in each parish ; and 
 that the people did not get nearer to the truth than to sup- 
 pose that Gladstone was an atheist. But if, on the contrary, 
 it is a genuine protest against atheism, and a fear of its 
 spreading, have we a right to throw cold water on what we 
 may at a later date seek in vain for in the rehgious sentiment 
 of the nation ? 
 
 ' This consideration would be sufficient to lead me to 
 keep neuter, though one might think the vox populi illogical. 
 
 * Very truly yours, 
 
 ' John H. Card. Newman.' 
 
 Api-U 28, 1883. 
 
 ' Dear jVIr. JVL^-cColl, — Don't think me inconsiderate, if 
 I send you a brief letter. Tliinking and writing tire me. 
 
 ' The logic of the passage you have marked is undeniable 
 — but a case, which is clear in the abstract, does not stand, 
 it may be, with the same strength in the concrete. I suppose 
 this is what is meant by " Summum jus, summa injuria." 
 
 ' The Arians had an animus, a directness, and a purpose 
 which cannot be imputed to the statesmen who in the course 
 of years have altered the ParUamentary Oath. 
 
 ' For myself I have declined taking part for or against the 
 present Bill. It never has been my hne to take up pohtical 
 or social questions, unless they came close to me as matters 
 of personal duty ; and this Bill, by being rejected, would 
 bring so little gain to religion, and by being passed, would 
 be so Uttle loss, that I did not see reason for taking a side. 
 
 ' I hope you got my second letter which I posted at 
 Rednall. 
 
 ' Very sincerely yours, 
 
 'John H. Card. Newman.'
 
 CARDINAL NEWMAN 307 
 
 May 3, 1883. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. JMacColl, — Thank you for your kind 
 interposition. To suppose that Hurrell Froude and I had 
 contemplated even the bare idea of being admitted to 
 communion at Rome is monstrous — too monstrous to gain 
 credit, and I think every reader of Sir WiUiam Palmer will 
 think with you. The Spectator will insert a letter of mine. 
 
 ' Most truly yours, 
 
 ' J. H. Card. Newman.' 
 
 February 6, 1884. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I recollect nothing of the 
 occurrence you relate, and cannot fancy my having a view 
 of Mr. Gladstone so precise and confident as that you report. 
 I much doubt whether I ever formulated in my mind a 
 view of him, though I always should have spoken of him 
 with friendly feehng and interest, and of course admiration 
 of his gifts moral and intellectual. 
 
 ' I am too near dear Hope-Scott ^ to write of him — also, 
 I am not up to any serious exercise of mind now. 
 
 ' My brain works slow, and gets soon tired. 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' John H. Card. Newman.' 
 
 April 27, 1887. 
 
 ' Dear Canon MacColl, — I am glad that the neghgence 
 of the London Booksellers allows me to ask your acceptance 
 of the volume which contains the " Dream of Gerontius " 
 Burns and Gates have it always on hand, and it is advertised 
 in every copy of every volume of mine, whether theological 
 or not. 
 
 ' It is an old complaint that bookshops save themselves 
 trouble by saying that books are out of print. I am glad of 
 this opportunity of hearing from you and writing to you, 
 so this neglect is my gain. 
 
 * Did not poor Palmer die suddenly ? 
 ' Very truly yours, 
 
 ' John H. Card. Newman.' 
 
 1 J. R. Hope-Scott died April 29, 1873. 
 
 z 2
 
 308 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 January 16, 1890. 
 
 ' Dear Canon MacColl, — I have always felt the 
 flattering words you have used of me, and I acknowledge 
 them still. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' J. H. Card. Newman.' 
 
 The immense authority attaching to the character and 
 intellect of Dr. D51hnger, and to his action at and after 
 the Vatican Council, seems to justify a copious selection 
 from his letters to MacColl. 
 
 'It was,' says MacColl, 'in the month of May 1870 
 that I first met Dr. Dollinger. I was on my way to witness 
 the decennial representation of the Ober-Ammergau Passion 
 Play, which was then very little knowai in England, and 
 of which I promised Mr. Delane a description for the 
 Times. It was also the year of the Vatican Council, and 
 Dr. DoUinger was the foremost figure in the opposition to 
 the Dogma of Papal InfaUibility, which was the great and 
 absorbing question of debate. For this reason, and also 
 because of his immense learning and his great personal 
 charm (of which I had heard from friends of his), I was 
 anxious to make his acquaintance. I chanced to mention 
 my wish to Mr. Gladstone, who at once kindly offered 
 me an introduction, and gave me at the same time an 
 interesting account of his first meeting with Dr. Dollinger, 
 tAventy-five years before. I called on DoUinger in company 
 with a friend of Welsh origin. On greeting him, Dolfinger 
 said : " You are Welsh " ; and went off forthwith into a 
 digression on the unsuspected traces of Celtic origin which 
 still survive in the language and nomenclature of persons 
 and places in England. His mind was a wonderful store- 
 house of knowledge on a vast variety of subjects, and the 
 knowledge was so well digested and assorted that it was 
 always ready to his hand. He was a great linguist and 
 an omnivorous reader in the Hteratures of modern Europe 
 and America, as well as ancient Greece and Rome ; and
 
 DR. DOLLINGER 300 
 
 his acquaintance with men was as various as his acquaintance 
 with books. Hardly any man of note passed near Munich 
 \vithout calling, not always with an introduction, on the 
 great German theologian and scholar : and many made 
 long journeys on purpose to see him. He was an excellent 
 correspondent, considering the vast number of letters which 
 he received from all parts of the world, from Royalties 
 downwards. But he never allowed his correspondence to 
 interfere with his hours of study and recreation. He pre- 
 ferred to wTite in German, but wrote fluently in Enghsh, 
 French, and Itahan. He read Spanish with ease, but 
 I do not know whether he wrote or spoke that language. 
 A man may be highl}^ intellectual and full of knowledge 
 without being necessarily a good talker. It is impossible 
 to define a good talker, for the accompUshment is infinitely 
 various. Dr. Dollinger seldom dined out : but he once 
 did me the honour of dining with me in the Four Seasons 
 Hotel, Munich, to meet some friends, including the then 
 Bishop of Southwark, and Mr. Talbot. He dehghted the 
 men with a variety of his knowledge and charmed the 
 ladies with the brightness and hghtness of his conversation, 
 and with his famiharity with topics which they had supposed 
 must have been beneath his notice. He w^as full of humour, 
 and I have never known a man with a keener sense of the 
 ridiculous, or who laughed more heartily. But there was 
 never any mahce in his humour : like summer lightning 
 it irradiated without hurting the object upon which it 
 played. Mr. Gladstone declared in an obituary notice 
 of this great theologian that he never heard him speak an 
 unkind word even of those whom he might reasonably 
 regard as his enemies. . . . One subject which was very 
 near the heart of Dr. DoUinger was the reunion of Christen- 
 dom. He beheved that union between the Christian 
 bodies outside the Roman Obedience must precede reunion 
 with Rome. With that end in view he invited two Con- 
 ferences at Bonn, in 1874 and 1875, of representatives of 
 the Orthodox Church in Russia, Greece, and Turkey ; of 
 the Anglican Church ; the American Church ; and leading 
 Nonconformists. He himself drew up the programme
 
 310 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 of each Conference, which embraced the cardinal differ- 
 ences which divided Christendom with a view to a 
 possible concordat. I attended the second Conference, 
 and I can never forget that tact, learning, intellectual 
 grasp, and debating ability of the venerable President, 
 Dr. Dollinger. On the last day of the Conference he stood 
 in the middle of the room where we were assembled and 
 spoke for five hours, three hours before luncheon, and two 
 hours after luncheon. He had not a single note ; he never 
 hesitated for a word ; his voice never failed him for a 
 moment, and he looked as fresh and vigorous at the close 
 of his address as if he had been a listener instead of a speaker. 
 It was a marvellous exhibition, both of mind and body, for 
 a man of sevent3^-one. He was a man of wiry frame, slim, 
 agile, and with a thatch of hair which began to show 
 streaks of grey only within the last few years of his life. 
 He lived a regular and abstemious life. Rising at five in 
 the morning, he said Mass (before his excommunication) 
 after dressing, and breakfasted at eight. After breakfast 
 he went to his Library and worked steadily till one, when 
 he dined. After dinner he took a long walk for about 
 two hours, and happy was any man who was privileged, 
 as I often was, to share his walks. He poured out a stream 
 of information, interspersed with anecdotes, on every variety 
 of subjects ; sometimes standing for a while to elucidate 
 more plainly some point that particularly interested him. 
 After his midday meal he never tasted anything more that 
 day. He went to bed between eight and nine. During 
 the latter years of his life he used to spend a month or two 
 of each year at Tegernsee with Lord Acton and family, and 
 I was invited, one year, to join him there. He led a very 
 active life to the last, and was accustomed while at Tegernsee 
 to have a good swim in the lake every morning before 
 breakfast. He continued this habit while he was well 
 over eighty. Indeed his activity was, humanly speaking, 
 the cause of his death. For before he had quite recovered 
 from a severe attack of influenza, he took his usual cold 
 bath and received a chill, which carried him off at the age 
 of ninety-two.'
 
 DR. DOLLINGER nil 
 
 Munich, March 23, 1872. 
 
 ' My Dear Sir, — Pardon my laziness in answering your 
 first letter. I wished to be able to communicate to you 
 something not quite commonplace respecting the Athanasian 
 Creed, and began to make researches ; but now I must 
 not wait longer for an uncertain result, and besides, I 
 believe that your English controversialists have pretty 
 much exhausted the matter. So I confine myself to 
 answering your questions, 
 
 ' In the Roman Cathohc Church the Athanasian Creed 
 is part of the Sunday Office in the Breviary, as you are 
 aware ; consequently it is read aloud by all the Canons 
 and Vicars in every Cathedral or Collegiate church ; but 
 otherwise it is not in use. Whenever a profession of faith 
 is to take place (or ordination, or academical promotion, 
 or admission to the Roman Catholic Church from Protes- 
 tantism) it is always the creed of Pius IV which alone is used. 
 
 ' Laymen are generally not acquainted with the Athan- 
 asian Creed, they don't find it in their prayer-books, and 
 I believe the damnatory clauses would sound rather shocking 
 in their ear. Of course the theologians in their scholastic 
 treatises on Trinity and Incarnation use the formulas 
 contained in the Creed as a paramount authority. 
 
 ' A layman who assists in a Cathedral church (or a 
 Collegiate one) to the Sunday service, at an early hour (for 
 instance here in the Theatine Church at 6) may hear the 
 Canons reciting the Athanasian Creed, in Latin, but gene- 
 rally nobody pays attention to it, and so it comes that the 
 laity is scarcely acquainted with the formulas. 
 
 ' With regard to the question of the author, I have 
 looked over again what has been written in the seventeenth 
 and eighteenth centuries, but I find that everything is 
 conjecture, and that no name, that has been proposed, can 
 claim a particular probability above the others. 
 
 ' The second volume of the " Documenta " pubhshed 
 by Friedrich, I will send immediately. 
 
 • Believe me, dear Sir, 
 
 ' Yours truthfully, 
 
 ' I, DOLLINGEE,'
 
 312 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 October 8, 1874. 
 
 ' My Dear MacColl, — We have sadly missed you in 
 Bonn, and I wo aid have given much to have seen you in 
 the ranks of your countrymen, who all, I must say, behaved 
 excellently, and claim the praise of having decided the 
 victory which the spirit of peace and brotherly love gained 
 over sectarian prejudices in our conference. When I left 
 Munich for Bonn, my hopes were mixed with fears, and 
 I could not help feeling rather depressed, but the event 
 surpassed my hopes and gave the lie to my apprehensions. 
 What you propose, a journey to England and my forth- 
 coming at the Brighton Congress, would be a burden too 
 heavy for my shoulders. I would perhaps follow your 
 call, if my age, instead of being 75, were only 45. But 
 I trust that others, you among them, will plead there the 
 noble cause, in which we feel interested, with more eloquence 
 and better success than I could do. I feel confident that 
 those questions, which we have not touched or not settled 
 in this first meeting, may be brought to a satisfactory 
 conclusion in a future meeting. The more I study those 
 questions, the less I can discover insurmountable difficulties. 
 One of the most knotty points is the Eucharistic doctrine, 
 particularly with regard to the Oriental churches. But 
 even there I don't despair. 
 
 ' But now the most important concern is, not to let 
 the movement once auspiciously begun get asleep again. 
 Gladstone, with whom I have had long conversations, is 
 full of interest for it, and, I trust, will lend it his support. 
 He entertains the idea of getting published a collection 
 of the irenical writers of the seventeenth century, if he 
 can find a fit man to do the work. Then we must try to 
 obtain for our next meeting at the end of August the parti- 
 cipation of one or two delegates of the Eastern Patriarchate. 
 This, I suppose, will principally depend on our finding the 
 money for defraying the expenses of their journey. And 
 what may be done to keep alive the goodwdll and the interest 
 of the English ? Pray let me hear soon from you. 
 
 ' Yours, 
 
 ' I. DOLLTNGEJl.'
 
 DR. DOLLINGER ni3 
 
 July 23, 1875, 
 
 ' My Dear MacColl,— I trust you will not sit in judg- 
 ment upon the sins of omission which as a correspondent 
 I am guilty of too often— 7ia6e5 confitentem reum, but 
 let me tell you, in a few words, first, that I thank you 
 heartily for the kind gift of your last work ; ^ (2) that I 
 congratulate you upon the highly favourable reception it 
 has met with in England ; (3) that I expect to meet you 
 on the twelfth of August in Bonn, where a good work is 
 to be done by us in common. The Orientals will be there 
 in good representation by competent men, and with peace- 
 ful intentions. Two Archimandrites from Constantinople 
 have just arrived. 
 
 ' Try to persuade Gladstone to come with you. . . . 
 ' Ever yours, with true friendship, 
 
 ' I. DOLLINGER.' 
 
 'I am told that the Bishop of Winchester 3 finds 
 himself unable to go to Bonn this year — is there no 
 other Bishop or Dignitary who might be persuaded to 
 come ? 
 
 ' I had almost forgotten to thank you for the copy of 
 the translation of the " Bericht," as well as for the trouble 
 you took in it. I could scarcely hope that in such a short 
 time you would become such a good German scholar. The 
 meeting at Bonn will make you even more perfect in that 
 respect.' 
 
 December 8, 1882. 
 
 ' My Dear MacColl, — Since I expressed my readiness 
 of assisting the editors of Palmer's work with my advice 
 and help, circumstances have come to my knowledge Avhich 
 are changing the whole aspect of the enterprise. A fact, 
 which I was not aware of, is that the author himself is 
 to concur in the revision of his work, a concurrence which 
 will make your task much more easy ; but then also it 
 would be quite inconvenient to take liberty with the text, 
 
 1 Lawlessness, Sacerdotalism, and Ritualism. 
 ' E. Harold Browne.
 
 314 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 to change or modify passages, etc., for in many cases such 
 attempts could not have the author's approbation ; an 
 exchange of letters with proposals, objections, questions, 
 would become unavoidable, and as Mr. Palmer and myself 
 are both aged men, such an expense of time would become 
 burdensome to him as well as to me, for you must not forget 
 that I am near my 84th year, and have plenty of Hterary 
 and academical business on my hands. 
 
 ' Then there is another fact which changes the position. 
 Until lately I beheved that our friend Dr. Liddon would 
 throw his great energy and knowledge into this work, and, 
 as he is already acquainted with German language and 
 theological literature, I thought I might assist him by 
 pointing out to him the best books or articles in Reviews, 
 etc., to be consulted, as well as by conversation and personal 
 debate in case he should come to Munich and stay here some 
 time. But now Dr. Liddon is, I suppose, entirely taken up 
 by writing the Life of Pusey,^ and I don't know how far 
 your acquaintance with German language and theology can 
 be reckoned upon. And here allow me to observe, that 
 the statement in your announcement of my ecclesiastical 
 position is not a correct one. The fact is, I have not ceased 
 to be a member of the Roman CathoHc Church, but I am 
 under excommunication, simply because I refuse to change 
 the faith which I have been taught and have been teaching 
 myself for 50 years. I refused to swear that I believed 
 the truth of a newly made dogma, which ruins the whole 
 economy of rehgion and church ; and you know that, 
 according to the general doctrine of divines and canonists, 
 an unjust excommunication is in itself void and null. 
 Consequently I consider myself as being still a member of 
 the Church in which I was born and educated. I am still 
 in undisputed possession of the ecclesiastical dignity which 
 was conferred upon me some 30 years ago. 
 
 ' I think I need not point out to you, that under these 
 circumstances a connexion of my name with the forth- 
 coming work would be utterly preposterous. 
 
 ' Pray observe that I don't wish to be made the 
 
 1 E, B. Pusey died September 16, 1882,
 
 DR. DOLLINGER 315 
 
 object of a public rectification ; it is only for your own 
 information I have mentioned the matter. 
 
 ' BeUeve me, dear Sir, with the greatest regard and 
 friendship to be 
 
 ' Truly yours, 
 
 'I, DOLLINGER.' 
 
 December 14, 1882. 
 
 ' My Dear MacColl, — Mr. Greig ^ shall be welcome in 
 Munich. I think this plan a very good one, and I will do 
 my best to make it succeed. Munich, with its excellent 
 library and the facilities of use they offer, is perhaps a more 
 fit place for such a literary task than even Oxford or 
 Cambridge. Mr. Greig may choose his time, I shall be in 
 Munich till the beginning of August without interruption. 
 I congratulate you on the acquisition of a previous 
 collaborator in the person of Dr. Littledale ; pray tell him 
 that I think his " Plain Reasons " as excellent in its kind, 
 and a model of fair discussion." 
 
 ' Believe, with true friendship and kindest regard, 
 
 ' Yours, 
 
 ' I. DOLLINGER.' 
 
 March 17, 1883. 
 
 ' My Dear MacColl, — I have to thank you for the books 
 which you were so kind to send me. Being all of them the 
 offsprings of your elastic, fruit-bearing brains, these children 
 certainly do credit to the parent. Up to this day I have 
 only found time for a superficial glance, but I propose to 
 read them attentively. 
 
 ' Meanwhile I beg to be allowed to differ from your 
 tenderness for the damnatory clauses of the Athanasian 
 Creed, which I could never digest. 
 
 ' You will soon see Mr. Greig ; he will tell you more about 
 the book in hand than I have time to write. The great 
 
 1 A clergyman who was to collaborate in the revision of Palmer's book on 
 the Church. 
 
 • Plain Reasons against joining the Church of Borne, by R. F. Littledale, LL.D,
 
 316 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 difficulty — and to a certain extent it is unconquerable — 
 consists in the difference of views. 
 
 ' A work like the " Treatise of the Church " must be 
 and remain the creation of one mind, and here we are 
 three, each of whom has his own darling ideas. If there 
 are to be four, I fear the book would only fare worse. I 
 have tried to convince Mr. Greig, that what Sir Wilham 
 Pahner has written, must in the main and essentially remain 
 unchanged. But for the details I refer to Mr. Greig's oral 
 communications with you. 
 
 ' Yours sincerely, 
 
 ' I. DOLLINGER.' 
 
 [June 8, 1885. 
 
 ' My Dear MacColl, — I am obliged to stay in Munich 
 till the beginning of August. I am kept in town by a mass 
 of occupations resulting principally from my position as 
 President of the Academy of Sciences — but we shall find 
 time sufficient for conversations, and, if I can be of use to 
 you, I hope also to get information from you respecting 
 the state of English affairs, etc. 
 
 ' Meanwhile, 
 
 ' Yours sincerely, 
 
 ' I. DOLLINGER.' 
 
 [Tegemaee], August 26, 1887. 
 
 ' My Dear MacColl, — I hasten to answer your letter 
 and begin by correcting a mistake which seems to have 
 been produced by a loose or inexact expression in my last 
 letter. Lord Acton could not invite you to occupy a room 
 in the villa we hve in (1) because the house does not belong 
 to him but to his mother-in-law Countess Arco ; (2) because 
 every nook and corner in the villa is filled up by the 
 two famihes — the Arcos and the Actons, their children, 
 governesses, etc. But there are here three or four good 
 hotels, at a distance of eight or ten minutes walk from the 
 villa. 
 
 ' In my opinion it would be more convenient not to wait 
 till the whole work is finished ; because the adoption or
 
 CHARLES KINGSLEY 317 
 
 introduction of a view or principle or even the change 
 of a passage in the former part of the work will pro- 
 bably with necessity lead to changes or additions in the 
 latter part. 
 
 ' I think it most desirable that Dr. Liddon should come 
 along with you, his presence at our consultations could not 
 but be most welcome and useful. Pray tell him, that it 
 would give the greatest pleasure to myself as to Lord Acton 
 to see him here. 
 
 ' Many thanks for your notice respecting Mr. Gladstone's 
 good health ; of course he is the theme of daily conversation 
 between Lord A. and me. 
 
 ' Always yours 
 * with the kindest feelings of friendship, 
 
 ' I. DOLLINGER.' 
 
 November 8, 1888. 
 
 ' My Dear MacColl, — As far as I can now recollect, 
 the fact which you mention is stated and discussed in the 
 Analecta Juris Pontificii} a French periodical, pubhshed 
 in foUo in Paris and Rome. But I cannot quote the volume 
 and the page, I have it not at hand, and I cannot spare the 
 time which a search would require. 
 
 ' Yours faithfully, 
 
 'I. DOLLINGER.' 
 
 The attack on the Athanasian Creed, which was pro- 
 moted by Archbishop Tait in 1871-3, had the unexpected 
 result of rallying Charles Kingsley to the defence of the 
 imperilled symbol. There can be no need to describe that 
 remarkable man, so we may go direct to his letters 
 
 ^ [The reference is Analecta Juris Pontificii, huitieme serie, pp. 1670-1685 
 — ' Is the Cephas reproved by St. Paul the same as the Apostle Peter ? ' 
 Analecta Juris Pontificii, vii. 897. 
 
 For American ordination seo Analecta xxiv. 1119, under the heading of 
 ' Ignorance.' 
 
 The reference to the South American ordination of descendants of native 
 Indians to the fourth generation is in Analecta Juris Pontificii, vol. 4, 
 pp. 1681-3 (huitieme aerie).— M. M.]
 
 318 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 addressed to Malcolm MacColl as Organizing Secretary of 
 the meeting to which reference has been made on p. 273. 
 
 October 30, 1872. 
 
 ' My Dear Sir, — Engagements will render it quite 
 impossible for me to attend your Committee, and absence 
 from home yesterday prevented my receiving your letter 
 in time to answer by yesterday's post. 
 
 ' You may be aware that I have signed the addresses 
 from both Archbishoprics, recommending some change : 
 but, in my case, only in the sense of an alteration in the 
 Damnatory Clauses. I should allow even that with very 
 great reluctance, as a concession to the invincible ignorance 
 of eschatology which fills the modern Puritanic and Lockite 
 mind. 
 
 ' But I would rather have no alteration at all, than lose 
 the Creed as an element of public worship. 
 
 ' But — and this is most important to me — may I ask if 
 it is altogether the best way of doing our work, to organize 
 public meetings about England — or even to have a central 
 meeting in London ? I dread, from experience, all pubUc 
 meetings when discussion of high and holy things is 
 likely to be mixed — as it must be — with somewhat of 
 controversial temper. . . . My dread is lest we should cast 
 that which is holy to the dogs of criticism, and our pearls 
 before the swine of frivolity and ribaldry. Surely this is 
 a matter rather for prelates, divines, and scholars, than for 
 public meetings, which are always of the world, worldly, 
 and of the flesh, fleshly ; let us try as we may to keep them 
 spiritual. I could not attend such a meeting : because I 
 could not speak my heart about that precious and noble 
 Creed, as I could in the pulpit. My rule has been, to preach 
 the Athanasian Creed from the pulpit, in season and out of 
 season ; to ground not merely my whole theological, but 
 my whole ethical, teaching, formally and openly on it ; 
 to prevent as far as I could people from thinking it a 
 dead formula, or even a mere string of intellectual dogmas. 
 And if I seem (from my experience) to dare to offer a 
 suggestion to your Committee, it would be — to call on all 
 
 II
 
 CHARLES KINGSLEY 319 
 
 clergy who value the Creed to preach on it continually and 
 make the congregations feel something at least of its value. 
 ' But I only speak with hesitation, and am ready to be 
 convinced if I am wrong. 
 
 ' In any case, let me say that any matter which puts 
 me into communication with you, gives me pleasure. 
 ' Believe me, my dear Sir, 
 
 ' Yours very faithfully, 
 
 ' C. KiNGSLEY.' 
 December 24, 1872. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — Of course, after the kind words 
 from you and others which your letter contained, I must, 
 if possible, be present at the meeting. But my plans (I am 
 about to leave home for some time) are so unsettled that 
 I cannot promise unreservedly. I shall have little more 
 to say than what I said in the paper which I sent you. 
 
 ' I wish I had seen the latter half of Liddon's letter. 
 What you sent me ended with a But — and I am naturally 
 anxious to know if he had an objection to my opinion, as 
 any objection of his would carry great weight with me. 
 Can you let me know more of what he thinks on it all ? 
 I don't know him, or would write to him. 
 
 ' I have meant often to write to you : but I have had 
 most painful parish business, and also a dying Mother, 
 now, thank God, recovering ; so you must not misinterpret 
 my silence, 
 
 ' But believe me, 
 
 ' Faithfully yours, 
 
 'C. KiNGSLEY.' 
 
 January 9, 1873. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — Will you kindly thank Canon 
 Liddon from me for his courteous and able letter, and tell 
 him that I am sorry any vagueness of words of mine should 
 have caused him the trouble of writing it ? I fully accept 
 his statement as the " safe, probable, and orthodox " view 
 of a difficult question, and I am sincerelj^ pleased to find that 
 he and I are of the same mind on it. I quite see the force
 
 320 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 of your argument, that the Committee could not put this 
 view forward prominently, considering that it has to con- 
 ciliate men of different opinions. Still, I hold to my 
 belief that only by putting it forward (at least in the 
 Explanatory Note) can we finally save the Creed.-' 
 
 ' If I can come to the meeting I will. But my plans are 
 most unsettled, owing to illness in my household. 
 
 ' Yours sincerely, 
 
 ' C. KiNGSLEY.* 
 January 31, 1873. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — I am, to my regret, unable to 
 be present at the meeting to-night. But I cannot let it 
 pass without asking leave to express my strong sympathy 
 Avith its object. 
 
 ' I have long held that the general use and understanding 
 of the Athanasian Creed by the Church of England would 
 exercise hereafter (as it has exercised already) a most 
 potent and salutary influence, not only on the theology, 
 but on the ethics, and on the science, physical and meta- 
 physical, of all Enghsh-speaking nations. 
 
 ' I beheve that that influence was never more needed 
 than now since the great French Revolution of the last 
 century ; and I am therefore the more jealous at this 
 moment of the safety of the Athanasian Creed. 
 
 ' I feel for, though I cannot feel with, the objections of 
 many excellent persons to the so-called Damnatory Clauses. 
 But I beheve that those objections would die out were the true 
 and ancient Cathohc doctrine concerning the future state 
 better known among us ; and therefore, in the event of an 
 explanatory rubric being appended to the Creed in our 
 Prayer Book, I should humbly pray that it may express, or at 
 least include and allow, that orthodox and salutary doctrine. 
 
 ' Believe me, 
 * Yours with sincere good wishes, 
 
 ' Charles Kingsley.' 
 
 1 Kjngsley's view was that the ' Warning Clauses ' of the Athanasian Creed 
 refer to an intermediate discipline, not to final reprobation.
 
 J. A. FROUDE 321 
 
 If there was no need to describe Charles Kingsley, there 
 can be still less to describe James Anthony Froude. 
 
 MacCoU and Froude had little in common, either in the 
 sphere of religion or in that of domestic politics, but they 
 were drawn together, by their hostility to Turkey, in the 
 Eastern Question of 1876-8. 
 
 October 14, 1877. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I will attend to-morrow if I 
 can, but it is uncertain whether I shall be able, and you will 
 not expect me. Meanwhile, good service might be done in 
 the direction which you indicate, by collecting the speeches 
 of D 'Israeli and other Conservatives during the Crimean 
 War when they were in opposition. Our delightful Premier 
 has seen an opportunity of setting Europe on fire, and ter- 
 minating his own political career with an illumination like 
 the last scene of a pantomime with himself to grimace and 
 bow like Harlequin on the front of the stage. 
 
 ' The editors of the Pall Mall Gazette, Telegraph, and 
 Standard must, I conceive, hold Turkish securities. 
 
 ' Yours faithfully, 
 
 ' J. A. Froude.' 
 
 December 18, 1877. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I fully meant to attend the 
 meeting of which you sent me a card, but I mistook the 
 day and went yesterday afternoon. I am very sorry. 
 
 ' I suppose you know that there is fresh danger in the 
 wind, and that watchfulness is more necessary than ever. 
 Lord B. will again try to commit the country to a position 
 from which there will be no retreat, under this appeal for 
 mediation. If he can be baffled this once, I think the Turks 
 will give in. I believe we are safe while Lord Salisbury 
 and Lord Carnarvon are in the Cabinet. But Lord B. is 
 as subtle as Satan and as determined. He knows as well 
 as we do that his own reputation is at stake, and that, 
 if Turkey has to submit to terms imposed upon her by 
 Russia and Germany, he will be held responsible even by
 
 322 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 the Turks themselves for all that they have suffered and 
 will suffer. 
 
 ' Watch, therefore, you know not the hour, etc. 
 
 ' Yours faithfully, 
 
 ' J. A. Froude.' 
 
 ' Madame Novikoff's letters are being reprinted. I have 
 written a few words of Preface to them.' 
 
 December 31, 1877. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I return Gladstone's letter 
 with my best thanks — the crisis is now very near. May the 
 country be as wise and staunch as I believe it to be ; but 
 I cannot conceal from you that among the best affected 
 there is a real fear that the War Party will soon be in a 
 majority if they are not so already. Lord B.'s hope is that 
 Russia will return an answer to the communication which 
 he has made that will irritate the national vanity, and 
 that he will have the game in his hands at the moment 
 when Parliament meets. Those who retain their senses 
 are afraid that we are too weak to make an effective 
 demonstration before the opening — that if we try and fail, 
 we shall strengthen Lord B.'s hands ; and they think that 
 we ought to reserve our strength, whatever it be, till he has 
 betrayed his real intentions. No harm can be done by 
 spontaneous Neutrality meetings, but an organized agita- 
 tion is held to be premature. 
 
 ' I heard it said to-day confidently that, if Russia 
 refuses to allow our mediation, or to state her demands in 
 so moderate a form that for shame's sake we must admit 
 them to be just, even Gladstone himself will then withdraw 
 his opposition to war. I cannot believe this — but such an 
 opinion is in the air. 
 
 ' Pray let me know what you hear from him. 
 
 ' Faithfully yours, 
 ' J. A. Froude.' 
 
 December 19, 1878. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I read the pamphlet last 
 night without guessing it to be yours . The publication of the
 
 J. A. FROUDE 323 
 
 Report (1) of the Rhodope Commission, i.e. of the pretended 
 opinions of Fawcett and Layard, is unfortunately only one 
 of the many disgraceful things which the present Govern- 
 ment has done. Retribution is slow in this world, but it 
 is sure. One of my greatest regrets in the whole matter is 
 that the old Tory party in England has committed suicide, 
 and that the wreck of it can exist henceforth only as a 
 faction. 
 
 ' I have not seen the Bishop of Gloucester's letter, nor 
 shall I look for it.^ I have but a very slight acquaint- 
 ance with Ellicott — my chief remembrance of him is at 
 a dinner many years ago when I made a fourth with him, 
 John Parker, and Buckle. Buckle talked, as he generally 
 did, the eloquent commonplaces of Atheism. Ellicott and 
 I sat afterwards for some hours talking him over by John 
 Parker's fire, and while Ellicott was giving me his opinion 
 of Buckle, he was enabling me to form mine of him. 
 
 ' I suppose he is bidding to succeed Tait at Canterbur3^ 
 
 ' Faithfully yours, 
 
 ' J. A. Froude.' 
 
 ' I have many strange correspondents. You will be 
 interested in reading the accompanying letter from General 
 Cluseret (who commanded the Communist army in Paris 
 in 1870). He is now at Constantinople — you will see he 
 evidently looks to a war between England and Russia as a 
 signal for a fresh effort of the Internationalists in Europe. 
 Russia is their more formidable enemy, from whom the 
 English aristocracy are to deliver them ! ! You will send 
 me back the letter when you have read it.' 
 
 May 21, 1880. 
 
 'My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I should have liked 
 extremely to have joined your agreeable little party on 
 the 26th. Unluckily I am engaged and cannot extricate 
 myself. 
 
 ' I fear it is for the present true that the Government have 
 decided against Sir B. Frere's recall. The Liberal party, 
 
 ^ C. J. Ellicott, Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol, 
 
 Y 2
 
 324 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 however (or a large part of them), are not satisfied with this 
 resolution. A deputation goes to the Colonial Office on 
 the 27th to press the appointment of a Commission — and 
 perhaps Lord Kimberley may find it prudent to consent. 
 Chesson tells us that he expects you to be present. I hope 
 it is so to be. 
 
 * Faithfully yours, 
 
 ' J. A. Froude.' 
 
 Mr. Richard Holt Hutton, one of the most original 
 characters, and one of the most influential writers, of 
 his time, was editor of the Spectator from 1861 to 1897. 
 Between him and MacCoU there existed a very close sym- 
 pathy, founded in great part on their common devotion to 
 Gladstone ; and, though Hutton renounced Gladstone's 
 leadership when Home Rule was propounded, and became 
 a melancholy critic of his former idol, his friendship with 
 MacCoU remained unabated. 
 
 ' My connexion,' said MacColl, ' with the Spectator 
 extended over twenty years, and I look back upon it mth 
 unalloyed satisfaction. My close contact with two such minds 
 as Mr. Meredith Townsend and Mr. R. H. Hutton was in 
 itseK a hberal education. . . . Hutton was, perforce, erudite 
 in general hterature, especially the hterature of England, 
 Germany, and France, wdth a strong bias towards philo- 
 sophical and theological studies, as anyone who has read 
 his two volumes of Essays, Literary and Theological, will 
 admit. I remember Mr. Gladstone saying to me once that 
 he regarded Hutton as the " finest critic of the nineteenth 
 century." And \vith it all Hutton was one of the most 
 genial, affectionate, and lovable of men. If ever a man was 
 doing good in his generation and deserved to be happy 
 in this Hfe, this is certainly true of Hutton. Yet his life 
 was in his later years overshadowed mth sorrow and ended 
 prematurely in pain. His death made a great blank in 
 my hfe, as I am sure it did in the lives of not a few who 
 never knew him personally. His middle articles in the 
 Spectator week by week, so full of thought and insight and
 
 R. H. HUTTON 325 
 
 originality, were a joy to many who never saw the author. 
 He left instructions that no Life or Memoir of him should 
 be written. It was like his modesty, his humihty, and 
 reserve in all that concerned his inner life. Brought up a 
 Unitarian, the theology of that religious community failed 
 to satisfy his religious needs and cravings, for reasons which 
 he has fully explained in his Essay on " The Incarnation 
 and the Principles of Evidence." 
 
 ' I made his acquaintance through my Uttle book on the 
 Ober-Ammergau Passion Play, which interested him and 
 induced him to see the play with his own eyes. On his 
 return he asked me to become a regular contributor to the 
 Spectator, which I did. He was a man of profoundly 
 religious mind.' 
 
 Button to MacColl 
 
 'April 22, 1880. — I have been thinking of the great 
 desirability of the extraordinary fidelity of the Welsh 
 getting itself acknowledged in the new Government. 
 Would it be possible to acknowledge it better or more 
 gracefully than by making Mr. DillwjTi, the Member for 
 Swansea, the new Chairman of Committees in Mr. Raikes's 
 place ? There is no fairer-minded man in the House and 
 none more sensible, and hardly one who has studied the 
 forms of the House so carefully and given so much time to 
 matters of that description. There has been no follower 
 of Mr. Gladstone more personally loyal, and there is no 
 man below the gangway, except Sir Charles Dilke, whose 
 appointment to any office of trust would do more to 
 strengthen the Government with the Radicals. 
 
 ' Mr. Dillwyn is very popular, too, personally, with the 
 Tories ; he is a good shot and a good angler, and in that 
 way knows almost all the country gentlemen who were 
 Members of the last House. Of course, like all the Welsh 
 Members, he is for Disestablishment, but that will hardly 
 come up at present, and certainly his appointment to 
 that kind of position will not give any support to the idea
 
 326 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 that the Government favoured DisestabHshment. Indeed 
 it might do something to make that party reasonable and 
 moderate.' 
 
 ' April 5, 1885. — I am staying away from Church 
 though it is Easter Sunday and though it is a great 
 sacrifice to me to lose the Communion on that day 
 (there was no early service in these parts) because the 
 Athanasian Creed so jars me ; so I may as well put in 
 writing what I want you to consider as the subject. My 
 view is that when a Church says solemnly to its people, 
 " Whoever wishes to be safe, he must before all things " 
 either be or do anything, it should really specify some- 
 thing that ninety-nine men out of a hundred can be and 
 do, and will find it to be to their moral and spiritual 
 benefit to be or to do. Now, undoubtedly, if the Creed had 
 gone on to say that to believe in a God of perfect righteous- 
 ness is " before all things " necessary for the formation of 
 the character by which alone w^e can enter the state of the 
 blessed, I should have accepted it with all my heart. But 
 what does it go on to say ? It says he must " before all 
 things " accept the Catholic faith as it goes on to define 
 that faith. Now I reply that of all good men and women 
 living, of all who are, so far as we can say, likely to enjoy 
 the blessed Vision of God for ever and ever, not perhaps 
 one or two in a hundred, at least in England, do or can hold 
 the Cathohc faith as so defined ; because they cannot even 
 appreciate the difficulties which lead to their definitions or 
 understand at what the definitions are aimed. Well, then, 
 I say that the Creed is not for such people a practical one, 
 and that the solemn words with which it opens, and the 
 more solemn words with which it concludes, fail of their 
 effect because all the exposition, which makes the drift of 
 the Creed, is not adapted for the state of mind in which 
 ordinary English men and women go to have the conditions 
 of salvation announced to them. What they do want is 
 a clear announcement of the law of righteousness, and of 
 the law of belief so far as it is essential to righteousness. 
 The Apostles' Creed answers the last demand admirably.
 
 R. H. HUTTON 327 
 
 The Nicene Creed, which is accompanied, by no solemn 
 warning of eternal punishment, yet announces the mystery 
 of the Incarnation in words which make everyone sensible 
 of the supernatural character of the redeeming love. But 
 the Athanasian Creed, which is implicitly preceded and 
 explicitly followed by much more solemn denunciations of 
 wrath against those who fail of justifying belief than either 
 of the others, goes into minute subtleties of belief quite 
 unfitted for the popular mind, and wholly unfitted to the 
 character of the warnings by which these definitions are 
 accompanied. If such warnings had been annexed to any 
 Creed, it should clearly have been to the Apostles'. Any 
 man can follow that, and it may be said that very few who 
 cannot accept such a Creed will have faith enough in God 
 to make his life what it ought to be. But I do hold that 
 to select the one Creed which goes into distinctions of the 
 utmost complexity and difficulty as the Creed to which 
 awful warnings of this kind should be attached, is one of 
 the greatest blunders ever made by the Church.' 
 
 ' January 24, 1886. — Your pamphlet arrived (unsewn) 
 only on Friday afternoon, quite too late for notice, and 
 I can only just now read it. 
 
 ' It is a very good ex parte statement, but how you can 
 regard it as impartial, or venture to call it " Arguments for 
 and against Home Rule " I cannot imagine. If you had 
 called it " Arguments for Home Rule and vague, loosely 
 conceived pleas against it," it would have been nearer the 
 mark. 
 
 ' Of course there is much of your pamphlet with which 
 everyone will agree, but I venture to think that it will not 
 be the critical portions of it. It seems to me that the whole 
 pamphlet is penetrated by one or two most important and 
 most serious suppressions of evidence, — of course I do not 
 mean intentional on your part, but quite unconscious. 
 
 ' You throughout argue for Home Rule in the assump- 
 tion that Ireland has been in the same wholly oppressed 
 and wholly unrepresented condition that Bulgaria was in 
 before the Congress of Berhn. What can be more utterly
 
 328 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 inconsistent with the facts ? And the importance of it is 
 this. You assume that we have no means of judging how 
 freedom can act on Ireland. To a very great extent Ireland 
 has had freedom ; at all events a freedom of which Bulgaria 
 never dreamed. We have seen how she has used it — to 
 complain of anything like justice enforced against grave 
 crime ; to obstruct the government of the one man who had 
 given her the Land Act in every way in her power ; to en- 
 courage the refusal to pay any but a rent at " prairie value " ; 
 to turn out a Government for inflicting righteous punishment 
 on a gang of murderers. How is it possible to speak, as you 
 do, as if Home Rule were a terra incognita that could bring 
 out all the best side of the Irish people ? The Irish party 
 of Mr. ParneU are the party Ireland approves : their tactics 
 are what she approves ; their crimes are what she regards 
 as virtues ; their ingratitude and hatred of the Liberals 
 are what she glories in. We are hound to argue from what 
 the Parnelhtes recommend and do now, to what they would 
 recommend and do if they were in complete command of 
 Ireland. It is perhaps not absolutely certain that it would 
 be just the same ; but it is by far the most reasonable and 
 wise basis of an argument which we can assume. Bulgaria, 
 with all the influence Ireland has wielded for 20 years back 
 in such a Parhament as the Enghsh, would have got all 
 she wanted long ago. 
 
 'Your argument appears to assume throughout that 
 Home Rule is always good. You say America and 
 Austria are strengthened by it. Austria was strengthened 
 by it only because she was so composite and heterogeneous 
 before, that she must have gone to pieces without it. 
 America was not strengthened by it, for she never had 
 anything else. But your argument, as apphed to England, 
 is hke saying that France or Italy would be strengthened 
 by it. Home Rule in a very composite empire is in- 
 evitable, but instead of strengthening a real kingdom, it 
 eminently weakens it. Nor is it a bit true that Mr. ParneU is, 
 as you say on page 71, asking for nothing near so large as 
 the American State Government. He is, in one respect at 
 least, asking for something much larger. He asks for the
 
 R. H. HUTTON 329 
 
 whole taxing power including any change he pleases in 
 tariffs. You never even deign to consider the enormous 
 difficulties of withdrawing what is once given ; and the 
 unwillingness of Parhaments to declare war practically, 
 so that interference would be sure to be postponed till the 
 gravest mischief had been done. But a more one-sided 
 argument I never read ; though it is able enough as a 
 mere barrister's case.' 
 
 ' January 27, 1893.— I fear this letter of thanks may 
 never reach you, for I believe you said you were leaving 
 to-day, and I never took the address of your yacht. 
 But I believe they have it in the office below, and will 
 get it before posting this letter. It is so good of you to 
 have thought of giving me something, and w^hat you 
 have sent me is as convenient and beautiful as the 
 thought of it was kind. If it would please God to give 
 me a little direct communion with His spirit, how^ easy 
 it would be to tell Him one's wants and hopes for others 
 and all one's most eager thoughts and desires. But He 
 keeps me so far away from Him that it seems almost like an 
 impertinence to pray for one's friends, for if one cannot get 
 one's own " daily bread " — consciously at least — it is almost 
 an act of arrogance to meddle in the spiritual and moral life 
 of others. Nevertheless, my dear MacCoU, I often think of 
 you with the heartiest affection, and would even pray for 
 you if I did not feel my prayers about as useless as those 
 of the bad king in Hamlet. 
 
 My words fly up, my thoughts remain below : 
 Words without thoughts never to heaven go. 
 
 ' Thank you from my heart for this last proof of your 
 unvarying kindness and the patience with which you have 
 constantly borne my own irritable and too hasty political 
 expressions. 
 
 ' I trust you will find warmth, brightness, and peace 
 in Egypt — I mean peace of mind and heart (as well of course 
 as the peace of the poor country itself). I have begun to 
 think peace nearly unattainable on this earth, but that is
 
 330 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 only the result of personal calamity, and I trust you prosper 
 better both spiritually and in matters of a more temporary 
 nature. It will be something to escape from the depression 
 of these eternal fogs and darknesses. God bless you.' 
 
 ' October 30, 1893. — You are, like the rising generation 
 of Liberals, a most sanguine man. Fancy advocating 
 a Court of Arbitration which should have power to 
 determine with what rate of profit the various bodies 
 of employers are bound to be contented ! I believe, as 
 it is, that most retail tradesmen get, and expect to get, 
 15 per cent. Large companies like the railway companies, 
 the mining companies, etc., are generally content with 5. 
 But do you think they would be content if, instead of 
 limiting themselves to 5 per cent, of their own free 
 choice, a State Court were to decide for them that they 
 should only have 5 per cent, (or less) ; or again that the 
 labourers would be content if a State Court decided for 
 them that they were bound to accept 45. a day or less ? It 
 seems to me that trade is possible at all only while both 
 parties keep their free right of choice undisturbed. 
 
 ' I think a Court of Arbitration which had to decide on 
 very minor questions — such as this, whether at a given rate 
 of wages the employers could secure the rate of profit they 
 might think essential, whatever that was, or whether at 
 a given rate of profit the labourers could be paid the 
 rate of wages they thought essential and get the number 
 of days' work in the week they thought essential — 
 might be useful. But your idea of a final authority as to 
 the rate of wages to be paid and accepted, and the rate of 
 profit to be gained, would be fatal to trade. You cannot 
 make employers throw their heart into work with the 
 terms of which they are utterly dissatisfied, and you cannot 
 make labourers throw their heart into work with the terms 
 of which they are utterly dissatisfied. I am alarmed and 
 amazed at your rapidly growing belief in State authority. 
 I believe in commerce the free consent of the parties 
 on both sides is of the very essence of anything like 
 success.
 
 R. H. HUTTON 331 
 
 ' As to Gladstone, I feel very little doubt that your view 
 of his character is much truer than Townsend's,^ but I think 
 you underrate his unconscious eagerness and haste to see 
 the fruit of his own passionate desire to solve the Irish 
 question. I never knew a more premature act (even assuming 
 that the poHcy were right) than the launching of the Home 
 Rule pohcy on the world in 1885 before the effect of the land 
 poHcy had been so much as gauged. That Gladstone prays 
 to be guided right I have no doubt. That the precipitation 
 of his own impatience constantly leads him to misunder- 
 stand God's teaching, I have no doubt either. I feel no 
 manner of doubt that the whole disaster of our modern 
 situation is due to his impatience and utter carelessness as 
 to the reflex effect of this Irish policy on Wales, Scotland, 
 and England. He is setting up self-will in all corners of 
 the United Kingdom, as a consequence of his violent 
 haste to find something for which the Irish will be 
 grateful. 
 
 ' As to your sermons, I do think you might preach a most 
 valuable course of subjects of the day on Democracy, its 
 lessons and its dangers. You will probably be too democratic : 
 but you might perhaps gain a hearing for some very needful 
 warnings by your too great sympathy with democratic cries. 
 At all events you are the last man to ignore the tyranny 
 of the multitude, which is often as blind and selfish as the 
 tyranny of the classes. 
 
 ' I think I agree more with W. G. Ward about Pusey 
 than I do with you. I regard the Enghsh Church as a 
 compromise and as one to which it is impossible to be loyal 
 in the sense in which Romanists are loyal to Rome, 
 because I don't think her infalhble and I do think that the 
 evidences of her fallibility are conspicuous on the very face 
 of her compromises. But she is wide and liberal and allows 
 a good deal of freedom even in rejecting her own tenets 
 as far as the laity are concerned. But I can't look upon her 
 as a mother to whom great deference is due. 
 
 * Now I must close this captious letter.' 
 
 ' Meredith Townsend, joint editor of the Spectator — a passionate 
 Unionist.
 
 332 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' November 23, 1896. — I am really very uneasy about 
 you, and wish you would go to see Dr. Archibald Garrod. 
 You neglect yourself too much. I am afraid that long 
 stretches of misery harden one's heart and put one out of 
 sympathy with others, unless one is a saint, which it is 
 not easy to be. But I don't think you are hardened by 
 it as I am ; and I am sure, though it is of a different kind 
 of misery, you have had as much, or perhaps more, to 
 bear than I have — more of loneliness, though less perhaps 
 of poignant grief. And very likely the lonehness is worse, 
 God grant that all the sacrifices you have made in so just 
 a cause ^ may bear their full fruit at last. Do let me 
 know that you are better.' 
 
 Richard WilHam Church, Dean of St. Paul's from 1871 
 to 1890, is admitted on all hands to have embodied all 
 that was best in the Oxford Movement — its culture, its 
 spirituality, and its passionate unworldliness. He had a 
 profound admiration for the great elements in Gladstone's 
 nature, but was keenly sensible of his defects and errors. 
 
 Church to MacColl 
 
 ' February 7, 1885. — It is very kind of you to write 
 about Paget.2 It is a matter in which I shall do nothing — 
 he is much too close to me. I shall not even advise. 
 Indeed, my own opinion is that he is doing such a good 
 work, and learning so much, that it is doubtful whether he 
 should be taken from it yet. But I shall say nothing. 
 
 ' The storm has indeed burst upon us, and the conse- 
 quences may be very serious : and that it should have come 
 just by the accident of a few hours makes the blow doubly 
 keen. 3 I shall ever think that Mr. Gladstone is distinguished 
 from all the political actors of his time by the lofty mag- 
 nanimity with which he has sought to subject even national 
 
 ^ The Armenian cause. 
 
 " The Pastoral Professorship at Oxford was vacant, and MacColl had 
 suggested the Dean's son-in-law, Francis Paget, as the best man for the post. 
 ^ The death of General Gordon.
 
 R. W. CHURCH 333 
 
 fame and material interest to the rules of justice and honesty 
 — especially for that great attempt which bullies and 
 ribalds sneer at now, the attempt at " European Concert " 
 to bring the combined force of Christian and civilized 
 Europe, acknowledging the duties of high civilization, to 
 bear on the affairs of the uncivilized states. His beginning at 
 Dulcigno was true statesmanship, and showed how things 
 ought to be done. But he had to deal, East and West, 
 with a very different order of people : and what seems to 
 me his characteristic weakness came in. Being honest 
 himself, he could not but try to treat others as if they 
 were honest : and as if they would recognize and respect 
 honesty in him. He has been utterly mistaken. The 
 French began when they left us in the lurch at Alexandria. 
 The Emperors followed suit when they saw the chance of 
 a quarrel between England and France over Egypt ; and 
 Germany has done nothing else but blow up jealousies and 
 heartburnings, together with insults and annoyances that 
 in old times would have provoked a war. And it seems 
 to me that Mr. Gladstone has hoped too long against hope 
 that he could work with them on the basis of equity and 
 honesty, and satisfy them of his integrity of purpose ; and 
 so he has subordinated his policy to an absolutely hopeless 
 condition. They never will believe us. They never will 
 cease to hate us. They never will act honestly with us. 
 I cannot help thinking he ought to have seen this long ago, 
 and acted with a strong hand in Egypt. The consequences 
 could not have been more serious than they are likely to 
 be now. French and Germans would have called us names : 
 they will call us names and do something more now. It 
 is the most dreary part of the outlook that a policy of 
 honesty and real friendship, with no selfish ideas of aggran- 
 disement in view, was tried at the end of the nineteenth 
 century by the most wonderful and most honest of English 
 statesmen, and to all appearance, for the present at least, 
 has failed. 
 
 ' The Gordon incident is tragic enough ; but it is only 
 an incident, though it now naturally appeals to feelings. 
 But it seems to me that the core of the matter is deeper.
 
 334 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 It is that Gladstone wanted the eye to see the real charac- 
 ter of Continental diplomacy early enough. How dishonest, 
 how corrupt, how hopelessly selfish it is — that he did not 
 take his own line, strongly and decisively, early enough — 
 that he did not make up his mind early enough that he 
 must act alone in Egypt, and according to what he, not the 
 Powers, judged right. 
 
 ' Now all the villainy of the world is let loose upon him, 
 and it is hard to say which is more hateful, French triumph 
 or German bullying. " The very abjects come together, 
 making mouths and cease not. The busy mockers gnash 
 upon me with their teeth." How the world remains the 
 same ! 
 
 ' Of course we ought to wait for his full explanation of 
 his Egyptian policy, which has never been adequately given. 
 It has always seemed to me a mistake that he did not do 
 this before, on a scale worthy of the occasion — challenging 
 the issue to the very utmost. I suppose in his own 
 Cabinet he has had queer elements to deal with in this 
 matter. 
 
 ' There's a long story. It must be a bore to be at Ripon 
 just now.' 
 
 ' July 13, 1885. — I have been thinking over the im- 
 portant matter of which you talked to me yesterday.^ 
 
 ' The question has now become one, not about editing, 
 with whatever corrections, an existing book, but about 
 writing an entirely new one : and that on almost the most 
 important religious subject conceivable. 
 
 ' It seems to me essential that such a book, to be worthy 
 of the subject, should not be merely a volume of essays, 
 but substantially the work of one man and one mind, 
 however much helped by contributions from others. He 
 should not be merely an editor, but an author. 
 
 ' It seems to me that the person among us most qualified 
 to speak to our generation is Mr. Gladstone himself, if he 
 were able to take up once more the thread of his book on 
 
 ' The reissue of Palmer's Treatise on the Church.
 
 H. P. LIDDON 335 
 
 " Church Principles," and throw his thoughts once more 
 into a serious treatise on those lines. I cannot tell whether 
 this is possible. I only am sure that in this way his object 
 would be best answered, and our wishes fulfilled. If he 
 cannot do this, who is to be the author, whose mind could 
 mould and inform the proposed book ? To save trouble, 
 let me say at once that for me it would be impossible. 
 Apart from any question about qualification, I am already 
 committed to much more than I shall ever do at my age, 
 and treacherous strength. 
 
 ' Do you see your way to undertaking it, and throwing 
 your strength into it ? I, for my part, should be content. 
 Of course, it would be a big job, and need both time 
 and help ; bat it would be worth the pains. The plan 
 might admit of large contributions from without ; but 
 the backbone must be yours, as author, not merely as 
 editor. 
 
 ' This is the way in which the matter comes out to me. 
 I do not think that we are ripe yet for any such meeting 
 as you spoke of. For instance, no one yet knows what 
 Dr. Salmon is as a Churchman : and so of others. It seems 
 to me preferable, if Mr. Gladstone would allow two or three 
 of us to call on him at any convenient time, and discuss 
 the preliminaries with him more freely than could be done 
 in a meeting of people who do not know one another. You, 
 and the Bishop of Chester^ and myself, would be enough, 
 if Mr. Gladstone would appoint us a time. 
 
 ' Two or three names of helpers have occurred to me. 
 1. Gore of the Pusey House. 2. Dr. Littledale (he, e.g. could 
 do a chapter on Casuistry). 3. Ahhey, and 4. Overton, the 
 writers on English Church History in the eighteenth century. 
 5. Curteis.^ 
 
 MacCoU was first brought into close contact with 
 Dr. Liddon through the controversy about the Athanasian 
 Creed ; and the friendship so begun was cemented by their 
 common zeal for the Christian cause in Eastern Europe. 
 
 1 William Stubbs.
 
 336 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Liddon to MacColl 
 
 ^February 7, 1873. — You see what the Guardian says 
 about Mr. Kingsley's supporting the Athanasian Creed " as 
 including and allowing views with regard to the future state 
 allied to those of Mr. Maurice." 
 
 * Mr. Kingsley's own assurances to you would alone 
 satisfy me that the suggestion made in this paragraph is 
 entirely without foundation. That suggestion, I appre- 
 hend, is this — that Mr. K. does not simply hold the CathoUc 
 doctrine of an Intermediate State, in such a sense as enor- 
 mously to diminish the gravity of the moral difficulties 
 which attach, in the popular mind, to the Revealed doctrine 
 of an Eternal punishment ; hut that he denies Eternal 
 Punishment itself. I do not like to suggest that Mr. 
 Kingsley should write to the Guardian and explain himself, 
 (1) partly because of his expressed aversion to any letters 
 in newspapers on these great subjects ; and (2) partly 
 because I feel the disinterestedness and generosity of his 
 recent line much too sincerely to suggest anything which 
 could embarrass his relations with his old friends any 
 further. But if you could get his permission to say to 
 the Guardian what he said to you, it would be very de- 
 sirable indeed, in my opinion, to do so. The Guardian 
 appears to suggest that in order to get support for the 
 Athanasian Creed we are wilhng to shut our eyes to all 
 the Truths we have been contending for heretofore — to 
 the Real Presence, in Dean MacNeile's case ; to the end- 
 lessness of the future world, in Mr. Kingsley's. There 
 can, I fear, be no doubt about the Dean's meaning ; and 
 it is useless to cry over spilt milk ; but the Guardian does 
 Mr. Kingsley an injustice, and the cause of " orthodoxy " 
 an injury, by doing so — and, if this can be set right 
 without creating new difficulties, I know, from several con- 
 versations which I have had, that much good will be done. 
 
 ' I shall be anxious to hear any impressions you may 
 have gained since our meeting as to the real worth of 
 the Demonstration at St. James's Hall.^ Evidently the 
 
 ^ In defence of the Athanasian Creed.
 
 H. P. LIDDON 337 
 
 Guardian is impressed. It is sad that a " Church " paper 
 should care for truth in itself so much less than for the 
 risks which will be involved in tampering with it. 
 However, that article is a complete vindication, to my 
 mind, of the policy of the meeting.' 
 
 ' Ju7ie 6, 1874. — The result of the Debate of last night 
 is as serious as, to me at least, it is surprising. It seems 
 to imply that the false and invidious premise of the 
 Primate that " something must be done " is accepted by 
 so large a majority of the House of Lords, that the 
 success of the Bill is hardly doubtful. The acceptance 
 of Lord Shaftesbury's amendment which destroys the 
 Episcopal jurisdiction, punishes the cowardly bishops 
 who have placed their consciences at the disposal of 
 the Primate, and it punishes them quite rightly ; but 
 that does not make it less ruinous to the structural 
 integrity of the Church. What is clear is that the essence 
 of the Bill — a cheap and easy method for crushing the 
 High Church School — is accepted by Parhament, and that 
 we may look forward to the worst. 
 
 ' In particular, I see no reason to think or hope more 
 highly of the Bishop of Peterborough ^ than heretofore. In 
 talking to you, he was suiting himself to his man, not express- 
 ing his convictions. Nothing could be worse, in my opinion, 
 than the tone and drift of his speech at the Peterborough 
 Conference, as reported ; and he only spoke last night to 
 damage Lord Beauchamp so far as he could. He is a clever 
 Irishman with no hold on principle ; wilhng to win a little 
 popularity if he can, with us, by legally conceding a position 
 which is ours by right ; but equally willing to degrade 
 the Holy Sacrament by procuring legislative sanction for 
 breaking undisputed rubrics, like that which provides for 
 administering the Elements separately to each communi- 
 cant. You will find, I apprehend, that he voted with the 
 majority last night against the Duke of Marlborough. 
 
 ' Things will never be better until the Bishops — one and all 
 — are out of the House of Lords, and have no temptation to 
 
 1 W. C. Magee.
 
 338 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 sacrifice the Church of God to the supposed exigencies of a 
 temporal position. I hope and trust that this will be borne 
 in mind ; and that, with the next turn of the political tide, 
 something may be done. Meanwhile, you will, I trust too, 
 write to Mr. Gladstone, and ask him to attack the Bill in the 
 Commons. It would rally to him the heart of the High 
 Church party : . . . Unless Lord Sahsbury lets the Bill 
 into Committee with a view of getting it so disfigured 
 by amendments that it will ultimately be withdrawn, I 
 confess I am disappointed at his line last night. As for 
 Lord Selborne, he is an Erastian Low Churchman who 
 trades upon the reputation of his better days.' 
 
 ' June 7, 1874. — I wrote to Lord Salisbury yesterday 
 about this truly Irish " compromise." 
 
 ' You are, I think, right as to our line. (1) Resist in the 
 first instance ; (2) If beaten, insist on a fair bargain. 
 
 ' The effect is as you say. The State withdraws coercive 
 jurisdiction. The Church's law remains untouched. One 
 knows how this would work in the hands of an Erastianism 
 which substitutes Acts of Parliament for the Holy Ghost ; 
 but — even as regards the Athanasian Creed (by far the most 
 serious part of the matter) — the Church's law would remain 
 as it is. 
 
 ' I still ho'pe that you may be quite mistaken about Lord 
 Salisbury. He will mangle the Bill now that he has got 
 it into Committee : at least I hope so. With Mr. Disraeli, 
 no doubt, it is as you say.' 
 
 ' August 3, 1881. — Thank you much for the two articles : 
 I am very glad to have them. That matter of the relation 
 of the Koran to the civil rights of the non-Mohammedan 
 populations admits of being worked out at much length. I 
 have read what you say about the Tractarians, too, with 
 great pleasure and gratitude. In some cases the modern 
 world has begun to build their sepulchres ; but, if they 
 were still living prophets, it would kill them all the 
 same.'
 
 H. P. LIDDON 339 
 
 'August 25, 1881. — I thank you for allowing me to 
 see Lord Derby's interesting letter.^ 
 
 ' We must both feel that the spirit in which it is written 
 contrasts very favourably with the manner in which our 
 report was viewed in many quarters at the time. 
 
 ' But Lord Derby supposes that we came " prepared " 
 to see something of the sort, and that our imaginations 
 were too much excited to do justice to the real evidence of 
 our senses. Certainly the idea of encountering any such 
 object never crossed my mind ; and, as for imagination, I 
 was in as prosaic a mood as are ordinary English travellers 
 on a steamboat after dinner. 
 
 ' The whole story is an instructive commentary on the 
 worthlessness of first-hand evidence of facts, in face of 
 political or any other strong prejudice.' 
 
 ' July 22, 1884. — I am very glad to see from The Times 
 of yesterday that the Ripon Canonry is settled ; and (as 
 you will be sure), I hope and trust that it will bring with 
 it many opportunities of usefulness and the sort of 
 happiness which such usefulness implies. In time, too, 
 it will lead no doubt to something else more entirely 
 
 August 14, 1881. 
 
 ^ ' Sir, — I have your letter of the 12th, and received the article of the 
 Contemporary Review with it. 
 
 ' I thank you for the courteous tone, and the spirit of fairness, in which you 
 write. 
 
 * As to the question of whether your friends and you saw, or only thought 
 you saw, the body of a man impaled, it is long since I have looked at any 
 correspondence on the subject, and so many things have figured since, that I 
 hardly like to express an opinion upon it. 
 
 ' Nor does it seem to mo that much turns en the matter in dispute. 
 
 ' On the one hand it seems to bo admitted that cases of impalement have 
 occurred in Turkish provinces, so that the question at Lssue is only whether this 
 was or was not one of such cases— not whether the practice itself existed in 1876. 
 On the other hand, it is so common for the most honest and trustworthy men 
 to suppose themselves to have seen something which they came expecting to see 
 — especially when their feelings and imaginations are excited — that a mistake 
 of the kind imputed to you conveys no censure. If it happened, it was an 
 accident that might happen to any man. It is like a case of mistaken 
 identity, which occurs continually in courts of justice. The matter is not one 
 on which certainty will ever be arrived at; and may very well bo left 
 at rest. 
 
 ' I remain, 
 
 ' Your obedient servant, 
 
 'Derby.' 
 
 z 2
 
 340 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 congenial — at least I hope so — although in these matters 
 we should both agree that it is not well to look forward. 
 * I am amused at the theological account of you which 
 some penny-a-Uner has put into The Times, but it is not 
 worth noticing. It would be curious to see how " the school 
 of Maurice and Kingsle}^" supposing it to be theological 
 and not merely sociological, would be described : or what 
 are the many points which you have in common with so 
 odd a conglomerate.' 
 
 ' September 25, 1889. — Let me thank you for your 
 article in the Spectator. You do my little preface ^ more 
 honour than it deserves : and you treat Mrs. H. Ward — 
 or rather the theory of creedless Christianity which has 
 come to be associated with her name — with quite as much 
 tenderness as she can claim from a Christian. 
 
 ' The French Elections have, I suppose, turned out pretty 
 much as was expected. I should feel more satisfaction at 
 Boulanger's defeat, if it were possible to have any sort of 
 respect for the existing Republic' 
 
 December 10, 1889. 
 
 ' My Dear MacColl, — It may be as you say with the 
 future of the City Churches, and Sir Henry Peek.^ I am 
 no prophet ; but perhaps in political matters the French 
 proverb holds good, that nothing is probable except the 
 unforeseen. 
 
 ' It may be that before Parliament deals with the City 
 Churches it will disendow the Church of England altogether. 
 We must leave the Goths and Huns to their own devices. 
 But serious adherence to religious principle on the part of 
 Churchmen is more important than the retention of material 
 resources : and in the long run it commands the respect of 
 our opponents. . . . 
 
 ' I cannot answer your question as to what should be 
 done now — as I am ^ of a corporation which in its entirety 
 
 1 To the Thirteenth Edition of the Bampton Lectures. 
 
 * Sir Henry Peek, M.P., was in favour of closing City churches.
 
 BRET HARTE 341 
 
 has only half a voice in the matter as Patron. But I think 
 that less harm will be done if the church is closed, than if the 
 Chapter takes the initiative in pulhng it down. 
 
 ' Your affectionate 
 
 ' H. P. LiDDON.' 
 
 In an earlier part of this book we have seen that the 
 old-fashioned and timorous Chapter of Ripon, when they 
 learned of MacColl's appointment, thought that Gladstone 
 had performed an act akin to that of ' bringing in a lion 
 among ladies.' But their fears were allayed by the new 
 Canon's genial character and open-hearted hospitahty, and 
 they enjoyed the opportunity of meeting at his table 
 eminent men who have won their fame in fields afar from 
 theology and politics. One of these was Bret Harte. 
 
 Bret Harte to MacColl 
 
 ^January 7, 1889. — I think I can manage to be with 
 you after the 15th, but will let you know positively before 
 the 12th. Will that do ? T need not say how dehghted 
 I should be to compass the visit. As it is, I am avoiding 
 an}'' engagements for that week. . . . 
 
 ' The weather here in London is simply monstrous ! A 
 high barometer, where specific levity playfully tumbles 
 back on us all the smoke, filth, and exhalations of four 
 milhons of people, a cold fog of impure yellow waxiness, 
 muffling you up like deadly cerements ; blinded eyes, 
 muffled ears, and smarting throats — this is what the 
 London winter is giving us ! 
 
 ' And you write of a " brilhant sky, woods, and green 
 fields ! " Even thus Falstaff " babbled " in extremis.'' 
 
 ' March 1, 1890. — I am sending you to-day, per Parcels 
 Post, the book referred to in the enclosed.^ I am presuming 
 you haven't quite forgotten your fatal request for an early 
 copy! 
 
 ^ A Waif of the Plains,
 
 342 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' It is a book of boyish adventure written ostensibly for 
 hoys, who in my opinion, however, are a httle more critical 
 and healthy than the average grown-up reader in taste, 
 and a great deal less likely to be deceived by any affectation 
 of style. 
 
 ' I am not responsible for the illustrations (which 
 appeared when it was published as a serial), nor do I believe 
 the hoys should be held responsible for them either — but 
 it is the old style of " picture-teaching " that belongs to 
 the trade, and is considered " proper." The same may be 
 said of the cover. 
 
 ' I hope you are not lonely at Ripon, and that your ears 
 are kept warm this cold weather by the burning praises 
 I have heard from some of your late guests.' 
 
 ' July 26, 1890. — Very, very many thanks for the review 
 of " A Waif " in the Spectator. I am almost inclined to 
 get the book myself and read it ! 
 
 ' But, honestly, I am more than pleased ! It is so 
 unpremeditated in manner that I should think you had 
 just laid down the book ; it is so intelligently appreciative 
 and yet so free from the reviewer's superior attitude that 
 I have no sense of being patronized, and even forget to feel 
 flattered ! And I am so glad that you did not think it 
 necessary to 'point a moral from me, nor belabour anything 
 or anyhody else while you were praising me. That used 
 to be my style of reviewing when I was young and 
 sinful. 
 
 ' If I hadn't already promised to come and dine with 
 you on Monday, I should make it an excuse for attempting 
 there all that I am trying to say here.' 
 
 ' December 11, 1891. — I was so sorry to have been 
 obliged at the last moment to telegraph to the Devonshire 
 Club this morning tliat I could not come to Ripon. I 
 had M^aited until then — even changing my plans that I 
 might take the later (12.20) train — but the weather M-as 
 so bad, and my cold still so troublesome that I thought 
 it better not to handicap your small house-party Avith a
 
 BRET HARTE 343 
 
 detrimental, draught-evading, weather-fearing, self-anxious, 
 invalid again. As the last time, I was not ill enough to 
 be left conveniently in bed, nor strong enough to be taken 
 out in all weathers. 
 
 ' I am sorry to lose your after-dinner talks in the dining- 
 room. I have just received my latest book from 
 Longman's : I had put it in my box to bring to you, 
 but have now sent it by post. You may get a com- 
 fortable nap out of it when you are travelhng.' 
 
 ' September 4, 1892. — How provoking that your con- 
 valescence should be so tardy and tedious ! You do not 
 say what Baths you are going to. I hope they are 
 in England for your friends' sake as well as your own, 
 and that you will not again expose yourself to the 
 Continent where extravagances of disease and weather 
 seem to be rampant. Let me know where you are 
 going. Although I am still uncertain of my own move- 
 ments this autumn, 1 hope to compass that long-deferred 
 visit to Ripon. And it would be delightful to meet 
 Mrs. Henniker and her brother. 
 
 'Now that "the King has come to his own again," I 
 have been looking for you high up among the honoured 
 faitliful. Why nolo episcopari ? What would you like ? 
 Frightened as I ahvays am of Mr. Gladstone, I nevertheless 
 should feel strongly tempted to remind him of your just 
 deserts, if I met him. 
 
 ' Will Mrs. Henniker really go to Ireland ? I do not 
 know where she is, or I would write her my congratulations 
 on her brother's appointment — if he is to be congratulated. 
 I hear it is expensive and simply ornamental. I should 
 think he would find the first a detriment, and he certainly 
 does not require the second.^ 
 
 ' Let me know where and when you are going for your 
 baths. I expect to be in London before the end of the week.' 
 
 ' February 4, 1889.— It's really too bad that the 
 
 ^ The allusion is to Mrs. Arthur Henniker, sister of Lord Houghton 
 (afterwards Lord Crowe), who had just been made Viceroy of Ireland.
 
 344 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 autographic fiend and public dinner-giver — who start 
 into hfe whenever the newspapers happen to record 
 my modest movements — should drop themselves into 
 your letter box, and make you forward their effusions 
 and pay their postages ! It reminds me, too, that 1 never 
 paid for those papers I asked you to buy for me — Punch 
 and Truth, and something else, I think — for which I now 
 apologetically enclose twelve stamps and ten thousand 
 thanks. 
 
 ' I hope you are not getting lonely up there ! It is 
 very lively here in London — raining, snowing, sleeting, 
 blowing — with brief Ughtning-Uke flashes of sunshine.' 
 
 ' May 31, 1899. — I was sorry I had to answer your 
 kind note with a vnve that I was engaged. I know I 
 should have been delighted to come ! I carmot remember 
 whether I was ever at the Residence in summer ; you 
 have a way of making your company forget the seasons 
 in your own sunshine, and the pleasant folk who bask 
 in it. 
 
 ' I should like to have seen Mrs. Munro-Ferguson again, 
 for I think I have met her once, though she has probably 
 forgotten it, and I have my pleasant memories of her 
 relations. Let us hope that I may fit in — even if I rattle 
 round a little in it ! — some future hole you may have left 
 in your engagements. 
 
 ' I am going to read your book.^ I am less than a grass- 
 hopper at these polemics, but I should like to understand 
 what people are talking and writing about. And I always 
 experience an unhallowed satisfaction in what disturbs 
 people who are so much better than myself ! ' 
 
 ' July 29, 1890.— I should have been proud if your 
 mantle had fallen, even accidentally, upon my shoulders, 
 but the fact is that I came home in my own overcoat (a 
 black Inverness cape) with my own name and that of my 
 tailor legibly inscribed under the collar ! It must be 
 somebody else who is now devastating the hearts of a 
 
 * The Reformation Settlement.
 
 LORD BATH 345 
 
 susceptible sex and ruthlessly breaking the peace of families 
 in your familiar garments.' 
 
 The most copious and outspoken of all MacColl's cor- 
 respondents, and certainly one of the most interesting, 
 was the 4th Marquess of Bath. Lord Bath was a man 
 of remarkable distinction alike in person and in character. 
 He was a high Tory and a High Churchman, staunch 
 to his principles in Church and State , and he detested all 
 compromises, equivocations, vote-catching devices, and 
 sacrifices of faith to expediency. He differed, in some 
 material points, from the modern leaders of the Con- 
 servative party, and he was a passionate defender of the 
 Eastern Christians against Turkish oppression. It was in 
 the Eastern Question of 1876-8 that he first became 
 intimate mth MacColl, and the intimacy continued and 
 increased till Lord Bath's death. 
 
 Bath to MacColl 
 
 ' November 3, 1878. — There is no security against war 
 with Russia except in this — that when the Russians declared 
 war wdth the Porte, and also last February and March, 
 there were the same reasons for war and tlie same in- 
 fluences helping it on ; we should now enter on it under 
 much less favourable circumstances ; the only additional 
 reasons for war are that the Government are so deep in 
 the mire that war would seem the only extrication, and 
 that SaHsbur}^ now goes with Lord Beaconsfield. In the 
 spring of 1877 he was decidedly against war, and in the 
 spring of this year still hampered by his position if not 
 by his opinions. We have no Indian troops to summon. 
 All depends on France, and France, I suspect, intends 
 to make us pay for the Suez Canal shares and for 
 Cyprus. 
 
 ' The Government will find, and the country also, that 
 we cannot continue keeping the nerves of the whole world
 
 346 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 at tension without suffering in consequence. Everyone 
 owes us something. 
 
 ' On the 9th, at the Lord Mayor's dinner, Lord Beacons- 
 field will make an effort to recover himself and party there, 
 the occasion is one on which he always speaks best, and 
 his especial talent is in party intrigue and in misleading 
 the public mind. If the Liberal leaders, Forster, etc., are 
 awaiting his performance there before speaking, they are 
 doing wisely, but it wiU behove them after then to declare 
 themselves.' 
 
 ' November 14, 1878. — I cannot tell you how many 
 praises I have heard of Lord Beaconsfield's speech ^ as 
 anticipated in the Echo, although I kept to myself the 
 name of the composer. I may also congratulate you on the 
 very bitter attacks that have been made on you by the 
 Pall Mall. I always think that all denunciation on the 
 part of an opponent is more gratifying than praise from 
 a friend. 
 
 ' Lord Beaconsfield has taken a new turn in his last 
 speech, although so far true to himself as to persist in his 
 lies and misrepresentations. His object is apparently to 
 smooth matters over, to calm feehng, and, if they obtain and 
 maintain it, to take the credit for peace — the half-menace, 
 after he had obtained assurances they profess to consider 
 satisfactory, is shameful. 
 
 ' I cannot make out what has been and is going on — 
 certainly my impression was that Lord SaHsbury had failed 
 in obtaining French support to pressure on Russia, but that 
 on the contrary France is pressing very seriously the Greek 
 claims upon Turkey. If so, what is the meaning of the con- 
 cessions Russia is making ? I hope she is not about to give 
 up Eastern Roumeha to the Turks, or to Enghsh Commis- 
 sioners who would be as bad ; I hope, also, she will not 
 evacuate the other provinces tiU she has secured material 
 guarantees for the protection of the Christians. I confess 
 I am very nervous as to what is going on, and fear that 
 
 1 See p. 61.
 
 LORD BATH 347 
 
 Russia may find herself exhausted, I am very gloomy and 
 uneasy. 
 
 ' The state of things at home and the prospects for the 
 winter must cause the Government great anxiety ; when 
 people are starving they A\dll cease to admire a spirited 
 foreign policy that has contributed to their sufferings, 
 although it may have been accompanied by ribands and 
 bouquets.' 
 
 'November 17, 1880. — Our views a httle cross: you 
 anticipate difficulty, if not danger, to the Government on 
 account of the concessions they propose making the Irish 
 people not being sufficiently extensive ; ^ I, on the contrary, 
 see a great danger ahead in those concessions, whatever they 
 may be, being considered too large ; in the Government being 
 reproached with want of vigour in the maintenance of order. 
 On these grounds advantage may be taken of the respect 
 for law, on the attachment of all, who have anything , for pro- 
 perty rights, and on the dislike for Irishmen that prevails 
 among the lower orders here, to harass the Government 
 in the House of Commons, defeat them in the Lords, and 
 enable the Queen to change the Ministry and risk another 
 dissolution. Something of the kind has, I am certain, 
 been in contemplation, 
 
 ' DufEerin the other day was very strong in wishing the 
 Government to take decisive action, and in complaining 
 of that present torpor representative of moderate Liberal 
 views,' 
 
 ' November 20, 1880. — Read the Northern Echo of the 
 18th and 19th, and you will see therein a very detailed 
 and probably true account of all that has occurred in the 
 Cabinet. There is also a threat of resignation on the part 
 of Chamberlain and Bright. Stead, of the Northern 
 Echo, is now on the Pall Mall, and John Morley is very 
 intimate with Chamberlain. These hot indiscretions are 
 most reprehensible — they involve a direct breach of the 
 
 ^ Gladstone was now Prime Minister.
 
 348 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Ministerial oath and of all good faith with his colleagues ; 
 it is an attempt to bully his colleagues on the part of 
 Chamberlain and to raise up a feeling in the country 
 against them, and is on a par with the proceedings of 
 Beaconsfield through 1876-7, when he made use of the 
 Press to overpower the resistance in his own Cabinet. The 
 curious thing is that the Pall Mall has, with such different 
 objects, and under different management in each case, been 
 a principal instrument. The Pall Mall also first had 
 the information that the pressing of the Greek claims 
 would be abandoned. I think attention should be called 
 to these proceedings, and to the way in which, in 
 Chamberlain's interest, Morley is working all the Provincial 
 Press. 
 
 ' As to the East, the position appears to me to be that 
 the English Government has tried to settle matters by an 
 understanding with France. This Bismarck has contrived 
 to defeat ; but I am by no means sure that he himself would 
 not be ready to come to terms with them, and, as he has no 
 real interest in the matter, those terms need not necessarily 
 be very unfavourable.' 
 
 ^November 21, 1880. — Have received your letter of 
 yesterday. In the face of Randolph Churchill's and 
 Salisbury's speeches, I admit it would be an act of 
 madness on the part of the Government to incur the risk 
 of Chamberlain and the extreme Radicals leaving the 
 Cabinet and supporting the Irish, with the certainty of 
 a section, we do not know how large, of the Conservatives 
 joining with them to trip up the Ministry. 
 
 •' I oscillate according as I read Salisbury's and Bright's 
 speeches ; the former make me a supporter of the Govern- 
 ment, while the latter send me into opposition. 
 
 ' I have often suggested to you that you should withdraw 
 from politics and devote your mind and pen to theology, but 
 I can no longer repeat that advice. The political situation 
 is just now so momentous that everyone is bound to exer- 
 cise what little influence be can in the cause he thinks 
 right.
 
 LORD BATH 349 
 
 ' Can you tell me if the report you have heard of the 
 Conservative meeting tallies with my own ? I was told 
 that Northcote objected to any attempt to force on a dis- 
 solution, and was supported in that view by Cairns and 
 Cranborne. I have also heard that Gorst has been detached 
 from the Fourth Party and made a salaried manager of the 
 main party under Northcote's direction ; but from all I see 
 of the meetings, etc., it seems to me as if Northcote has fallen 
 under Salisbury's influence and brought such of the party 
 as follow him with him. I am trying to make out what is 
 the temper of the Irish Peers, and how far they are prepared 
 to make concessions ; the action of the House of Lords must 
 depend greatly on their disposition. 
 
 ' The state of Ireland is getting daily worse, and the 
 agitation and its consequent — the refusal to pay rents — 
 is spreading ; yet I cannot blame the Government for 
 hesitating to ask for coercive powers after the speeches 
 lately made by Randolph Churchill and Salisbury.' 
 
 ' December 4, 1880. — I have seen a good many old Whigs 
 lately — their bitterness against the Government is indescrib- 
 able. I do not think they will have much influence on any 
 elections, for most of them were neutral if they did not 
 openly support the late Government last spring ; still their 
 tone and language, no doubt, raise hopes and encourage 
 the Conservatives in a vigorous attack, the result of 
 which, if damaging to the Ministry, will increase the power 
 of the extreme Radicals and not of the Conservatives. I do 
 not know what is thought of the Woodstock meeting, and 
 whether it is considered as a test of the leanings of the 
 Conservative party. So far as I can make out, Salisbury, 
 in joining the Fourth Party, has taken Northcote and the 
 Party organization with him. I am, however, still watcliing 
 to see what such men as Hicks-Beach may do. 
 
 ' I am more anxious about Ireland, whence the accounts 
 are daily worse. What will, what can, the Government do ? 
 I fear they are allovvdng it to get out of their control, and that 
 not even a civil war will be able to restore order. The desire 
 to avoid a spUt in the Cabinet (already a section of the
 
 350 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 extreme Liberals have become identified with the Parnellites) 
 is possibly one reason, the want of material force to suppress 
 outbreaks another, for this inaction.' 
 
 ' December 17, 1882. — What strikes me is, not that the 
 Ministry have gained, but the Conservative Opposition have 
 lost, both in the confidence of the country and their own. 
 Salisbury I hear spoken against by men who were two years 
 ago among his warmest supporters ; there are loud complaints 
 against the Party organization, the management of which 
 Smith and Gorst have given up, I see signs of an approaching 
 break-up in that party : the Fourth Party no longer abuse 
 Northcote, but direct their attacks against Cross and Smith, 
 whom they call Marshall and Snelgrove ; there is a section 
 working with Chaphn and bidding for the extreme men. 
 Lord Percy works wdth Smith for the same object, and I 
 believe Safisbury and Arthur Balfour are in aUiance with 
 them. Randolph Churchill, with Drummond-Wolff to sup- 
 port him, is bidding to lead the whole party and to form a 
 Government if ever they recover power. His programme 
 is that it is of no avail for the Tories to remain hampered 
 by the landed interest — that they must propose some 
 strong measures to win and keep the democratic Tory 
 working men in the North ; he, in fact, adopts DisraeH's 
 view that both principle and pohcy are to be subordinate 
 to the acquisition of power, or rather of office, and thinks 
 that he can play again, with the present leaders of the 
 Conservative party, DisraeH's game with Peel ; he forgets 
 how changed are the surrounding circumstances, and how 
 impossible that the accidental separation of the bulk of the 
 party from its leaders should occur again. I am as much 
 impressed, however, with the extent of DisraeH's influence 
 over the characters of men as I have been mth the smallness 
 of it over events. Randolph ChurchiU may succeed, but, if 
 he brings the whole party with him, the moderate Liberals 
 who have joined it will leave when they find the Tories are 
 Radicals under another name ; while, if he influences only a 
 limited number, he will break it up into two divisions ; it 
 is to this that I look forward — a moderate section of the
 
 LORD BATH 351 
 
 Conservatives supporting a Liberal administration, while the 
 extreme men, making common cause Avith the Radicals and 
 even Parnell in opposition, eventually become united to them. 
 ' What a triumph the late Archbishop's correspondence 
 with Mackonochie ! ^ Such a letter from the author of the 
 Pubhc Worship Act, who said, when it was under discussion, 
 that there never was a rituaUst over whom some High 
 Churchman was not to be found ready to hold a shield of 
 protection ! I hear that the Bishop of Winchester has refused ; 
 on the other hand I have been told that he would accept 
 if it was offered to him. He is a good man, but would make 
 a bad archbishop — " dignissimus imperii nisi.^' ^ Benson, 
 if the Queen is reasonable, will be, I suppose, the man, but 
 I am not sure he will do, he is a dark horse. I really do not 
 know how Church would do, but doubt his nerve in speaking, 
 etc. — not in action.' 
 
 ' April 24, 1883. — In almost all, if not in all, you write, 
 I cordially agree. As a test the oath is useless if not 
 oppressive to a religious Christian mind. 
 
 ' The real objection to the Affirmation Bill is that 
 Bradlaugh attempted to take his seat in a manner insulting 
 to the Christian, or supposed Christian, feeling of the House, 
 and to treat his seat therein as a denial of the supposed 
 National Christianity. He failed, not because others 
 in the first instance resented his aggressive infidelity, but 
 because they sought to turn the false position into which he 
 brought the Ministry, whose professed supporter he was, 
 to their own political advantage. The Ministry, placed in a 
 difficulty, bring the Bill in to extricate themselves therefrom ; 
 the Opposition, to further and increase the embarrassment, 
 oppose it. The principle supposed to be involved does not, in 
 fact, exist, but the introduction of the measure is a tactical 
 error ; at this moment it has the appearance of relieving a 
 man from the just consequences of his own intolerance and 
 
 ^ Archbishop Tait, on his deathbed, tried to abate the persecution of Mr. 
 Mackonochie, Vicar of St. Alban's, Holbom. 
 
 * E. H. Browne. The primacy was not offered to him, because Gladstone 
 thought him too old — being himself older.
 
 352 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 offensiveness, and to condone, if not to sanction, an outrage 
 on the religious feelings of the country.' 
 
 ' January 15, 1884. — I cannot, I fear, share your 
 views of Chamberlain's exercising little, if any, influence. 
 That Gladstone dislikes him and dislikes his views I agree 
 with you in believing ; but we have so often seen Gladstone 
 forced by circumstances and his followers into courses he 
 would have had repudiated, that there is too much reality 
 to fear he will again be forced by the influences, so much 
 more powerful, that Chamberlain can bring to bear. 
 
 ' 1 believe Chamberlain to be thoroughly unprincipled and 
 without scruples ; to be anxious to appear to guide Glad- 
 stone's policy now in order to be able to lay claim to the 
 inheritance when the latter retires from public life ; with 
 that object he desires to commit him to measures as dis- 
 tasteful to the moderate Liberals as to ourselves, and will, 
 I much fear, succeed in the attempt. 
 
 ' I much fear that Chamberlain's identification with 
 hostility to religious belief may help him with the classes 
 to whom the franchise is to be entrusted. Among the 
 working classes, in town or country, religion, I fear, counts 
 for very little. 
 
 ' What you say of the difficulty of bringing in redistribu- 
 tion with the lowering the franchise, on account of the Irish 
 vote, is true ; but to my mind only proves the risk of 
 dealing with the question in the present state of politics. 
 The present constituencies, with a lowered franchise, would 
 be in so anomalous and, in some respects, intolerable a 
 condition that any scheme of redistribution suggested by 
 the Government would have to be accepted ; in other 
 words, in accepting the lowering the franchise, the 
 country would commit itself to an unknown measure of 
 reform. 
 
 ' Much may happen in the next twelve months. I am 
 at one with you in thinking it would be madness for the 
 House of Lords on any pretext to reject the Franchise Bill ; 
 but it is a mania that I think very likely to influence their 
 conduct.'
 
 LORD BATH 353 
 
 ' January 26, 1884. — I have no wish to see Gladstone 
 retire from pubHc hfe ; I cannot pretend to say what the 
 result would be ; but, so far as I can look into the 
 future, the extreme Radicals seem alone possessed of the 
 talent required in these days ; they know what they want 
 and how to get it. 
 
 ' It is useless to wish to see a middle party formed. The 
 Conservatives are the impediment, nor will they ever consent 
 to it till they are so beaten that their adhesion will be of 
 no value. They will insist on the moderate Liberals coming 
 over to them, whereas such a party must be formed on a 
 moderate Liberal basis ; it must be Liberal in name and 
 personal composition, dependent on an impartial and 
 discerning but genuine. Conservative support, like Palmer- 
 ston in his last administration ; but that is, I fear, in 
 the present day impossible. 
 
 ' I cannot share your Utopian views in respect to 
 Parnell ; I believe he, or the sentiments he represents, 
 will gain strength in Ireland. What I especially dread 
 in the immediate future is a union between the extreme 
 English Radicals and the Irish, and that is what any 
 sort of Conservative triumph will give us.' 
 
 ' February 1, 1884. — I agree in all you say as to the 
 inexpediency of the pohtical division being lateral instead 
 of vertical — of all the landlord class being on one side. 
 
 ' Why has this been the case in Ireland ? Because 
 all, even nominal, grievances having been redressed, the 
 agitators, in order to raise a cry to which they could rally 
 the people, advocated measures that no man who had the 
 interest of society at heart could support. 
 
 ' The same is happening here already, in anticipation 
 of the reduction of the franchise to a level below which it 
 cannot go. We have Broadhurst with his Leasehold Bill, 
 George with his nationalization of land, advocating their 
 respective schemes ; the former winked at by Dilke, the 
 latter acquiesced in, although in a modified form, by 
 Chamberlain. 
 
 2 A
 
 354 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' I entirely agree in the absence of statesmanship among 
 Conservative leaders, but has there not been wanting a 
 spirit of compromise in the Liberal chief when compromise 
 was still possible, which now it is, alas, no longer ? The 
 only chance for the country would be a coahtion between 
 Conservatives and moderate Liberals ; to succeed, it must 
 be on a nominally Liberal basis ; to this the Tories will 
 never assent. 
 
 ' The rising prophet, Randolph Churchill, is, I fear, 
 gaining strength, and he makes no secret of his desire to 
 bid for the Radical element in the constituencies ; he is, 
 in short, a scarcely disguised Radical. Quis custodiet ? 
 
 ' Meanwhile I dread measures against property that 
 will drive capital from the country, and involve the nation 
 and every member of it in equal ruin. Already land is 
 practically unsaleable in England, except in cases where 
 there are residential amenities. 
 
 ' Now, as to India. Are we to hold it as a continuous 
 
 possession, or only till the Indians are fit to govern 
 
 themselves ? If the latter be your view, if we are to 
 
 give it up whenever the people are, or think they are, fit 
 
 for self-government, I have nothing to say against your 
 
 argument. But if we are to hold India as a possession 
 
 in our own poUtical, and also commercial and economical 
 
 interests, we must recollect that it is by the prestige of race 
 
 alone that a few thousand Europeans govern those many 
 
 miUions of natives ; abolish that prestige, equalize the races, 
 
 numbers will tell, and it is not to be supposed that the 
 
 natives will consent to be ruled by foreigners whose power 
 
 they can shake off ; besides, the Hindoos, who pass through 
 
 school into our service, are in no sense the recognized leaders 
 
 of the people or the men who would come to the front 
 
 in the event of their acquiring independence. To place 
 
 Englishmen, above all English gentlemen and ladies, at the 
 
 mercy of a native, whatever his position, is impossible. 
 
 The Turkish case offers no analogy ; what shocked the 
 
 feehngs was the oppression of a barbarous race over a 
 
 civiUzed one — in my case, of the Infidel over the Christian. 
 
 If we occupied Bulgaria or Roumania we could give —
 
 LORD BATH 355 
 
 subject of course to control required by their inexperience 
 — Bulgar or Roumanian magistrates equal jurisdiction with 
 English ; but if we took Asia Minor or Syria we could not 
 do so in fact, however we might do so in name. 
 
 * It was a fatal mistake to give Englishmen in India 
 any rights of citizenship ; they ought to have remained 
 under the despotism of the Service, benevolently exercised 
 for the protection of the natives. 
 
 ' The country has progressed during the past hundred 
 years, not only by the impulse of Liberal ideas, but under 
 that impulse checked, controlled, and directed by a very 
 powerful Conservative element that has held a place even 
 in the most Liberal Government ; in short by a compromise 
 between the two. That compromise has been broken by 
 Gladstone, still more by Disraeli ; and we have on the 
 one side the disastrous Irish poUcy which began in 1869, 
 and on the other an equally fatal foreign policy in the 
 labyrinths of which we seem to be getting deeper involved 
 every day.' 
 
 ' August 12, 1884. — The correspondence you showed me 
 has impressed me much ; it explains Salisbury's character 
 and actions.^ A pessimist by nature, he thought his mission 
 was to fight a hopeless battle well. Disraeli took him out 
 of his pessimism and dangled success and office before him ; 
 he was dazzled by the prospect ; the defeat of 1880 has 
 driven him back into his former and natural condition of 
 mind and course of action. 
 
 ' Gladstone wants to settle the Reform question for his 
 successors, and then retire from public life ; he forgets 
 that, when that question has been settled, a hundred others 
 more difficult to be dealt with, more bitter, more to be 
 fought out, will at once come to the front ; in fact they are 
 before the public already. 
 
 ' I go through town on the 24th or 25th ; if I pass 
 Sunday night (the 24th) in London, I will try to arrange 
 that we may meet.' 
 
 * See pp. 89 ct seq. 
 
 2 A 2
 
 356 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 'June 11, 1885. — My position is this. I have a 
 work to do, a duty to perform, to sustain the nation, the 
 country, society, property, and order in the microcosm in 
 which I am placed, and for that smaller but most im- 
 portant duty have given up all attention to greater things. 
 I have, in plain English, concentrated my mind on the hard 
 fight that my brother and son have before them in this 
 neighbourhood. They have both accepted an avowedly 
 difficult, in one case what is considered a hopeless, task, 
 in preference to wrangling with their own party for safer 
 seats ; how matters will go with them it is not easy to fore- 
 tell, but their chances at present seem quite as favourable 
 as we had any grounds to anticipate. I shall hope to see 
 you when here next week, and think I may rely on your not 
 profiting by the intervals of repose from fishing, to attempt 
 to inculcate any pernicious views or views hostile to our 
 cause among the population in the neighbourhood. 
 
 ' I am disposed to agree with you that the vote the other 
 night ^ was a strategical blunder, it would have been better 
 to have allowed the Ministry to, as seemed probable, fall 
 to pieces of itself, whereas now, whether the Conservatives 
 take or refuse office, their rehabilitation seems more than 
 probable. It would have been better to have awaited the 
 inevitable dissolution in November, whatever its result. 
 I believe the division was wished for by the Government, 
 and has extricated it from a great embarrassment. 
 
 ' Still I sympathize with what I must assume to have 
 been the motive principle of the Opposition (for I have 
 seen or heard from no one on the subject). I have before 
 told you I look on Gladstone's principle as vae victis, 
 he ever in politics seeks to make his opponents eat the 
 leek ; he drives men to despair and never realizes what 
 desperate men may do. There can be no question but 
 that the increased Succession duties will be absolute de- 
 struction to landed property or to its position under present 
 circumstances. And I write on this subject from within 
 my own knowledge. I have a property of £4000 a year in 
 
 ^ Gladstone's Government was defeated on an amendment to the Budget, 
 June 8, 1885.
 
 LORD BATH 357 
 
 Shropshire that for the past three years has not paid me a 
 shilHng, that I beUeve to be unsaleable at any reasonable 
 price. How can Succession duties be paid on that ? While 
 on my Wiltshire property, on which I depend, the payment 
 of Succession duty would be made on the nominal value, 
 without deductions for the voluntary outgoings, but out- 
 goings which are a necessity for anyone occupying this 
 position. My successor will have to cut this all down as 
 with a knife, and then will be asked— naturally and appar- 
 ently justly — how can you expect to occupy a position the 
 duties of which you do not perform ? when he will not have 
 the means of performing them. Succession duty or money 
 can be paid over the counter, but land is unsaleable, in fact 
 even in good times it was not easy to sell it — the duty can 
 only be paid by borrowing. Landed property is already 
 over-charged; the next heir must retrench by cutting down 
 all his estate expenditure, in short by neglecting what all 
 around him, himself included, consider his natural duties. 
 And this is how Gladstone avenges himself on the country 
 gentlemen for having supported Beaconsfield and opposed 
 his Government. 
 
 ' Now as to Gladstone's pohcy. Take Ireland. Glad- 
 stone is responsible for all in his Church Bill and Land Act 
 of 1869-70. The Land Act of 1881 I believe, under the 
 circumstances, to have been necessary, and taken by itseK 
 did not much practical injustice. I believe the reduction 
 in arable land not very unfair, only rather excessive, but 
 reductions were made in grass land absolutely unjust. But 
 what we have a right to complain of is, that even by accept- 
 ing that measure we gain no security. Gladstone cannot 
 protect us against Parnell and Chamberlain, and will not, 
 or would not, till too late, adopt the only measure that can 
 save for us something, the enforcement or carrying through 
 purchase clauses. You write about Randolph Churchill, 
 etc., and the British taxpayer, but there is surely such a 
 thing as justice in the world, and the unfortunate Irish land- 
 lord is not to be kept to be devoured piece-meal by his 
 enemies. 
 
 ' You say there is an element of conservatism in
 
 358 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Gladstone's nature ; its existence is a national misfortune 
 as it prevents his seeing the necessary result of his policy ; 
 he is hke a man who rolls a stone down the hill, expect- 
 ing it to stop half-way and astonished to see it roll on to 
 the bottom. I prefer the man who can contemplate and 
 provide for the necessary result of his actions. 
 
 ' At home I believe Gladstone was wise in taking Dilke 
 and Chamberlain into his Cabinet, but he should have kept 
 them in order, whereas he has so managed affairs that it has 
 been but too evident that, whenever he retires, the power 
 must fall to them. I do not wish Gladstone to retire, 
 although I wish he never had Hved. I see no good in any- 
 thing that can succeed him on either side, the only chance 
 would be a moderate Liberal Government under Goschen, 
 and that Gladstone has, I beheve, rendered impossible.' 
 
 ^December 1, 1885. — To me Gladstone's position is as 
 inexplicable as the one you claim for him. If he sought 
 power for the purpose of governing the country, I could 
 understand it, but he seeks an electoral triumph in order 
 to acquire power for the purpose, after a year, of 
 resigning it, while he will not tell us who are the persons 
 or their principles into whose hands he will place it. 
 If the Liberal party is to go to pieces, now is the time, 
 not in a year hence. Sahsbury, deprived of the section 
 of his party who now adhere to Randolph Churchill, could 
 not remain in power, nor could the support of moderate 
 Liberals, even if at first given, be depended on ; and moderate 
 Liberal support would bring no strength, as the Liberals 
 joining must soon become Conservative and depend on 
 Conservative support for their seats. 
 
 ' Gladstone could not avoid justifying Sahsbury 's 
 conduct in foreign affairs, but he who allows himself to be 
 dragged by Chamberlain through the mire cannot expect 
 Salisbury to throw over Randolph Churchill. The latter is 
 pledged to no policy with the Irish, nor anything pledged to 
 him. 
 
 ' "While I am cheered by the spirit the country has shown, 
 I see no good to result therefrom ; and what I have ever
 
 LORD BATH 359 
 
 hoped for, a moderate Liberal Government leaning on a 
 modicum of Conservative support, seems farther off than 
 ever. 
 
 ' Chamberlain had completely eclipsed Gladstone, but is 
 now behind a cloud himself. Salisbury and not Randolph 
 Churchill has come out as the leader of the Conservative 
 party. I was against Salisbury taking office, but confess 
 that events seem to have justified his doing so. 
 
 ' As to Fair Trade, the Tories have made no promises 
 thereon, or are in any way committed thereto, but I see a 
 strong movement in its favour rising among the artisans in 
 the towns.' 
 
 ' March 21, 1886. — On the moderation, the friendliness 
 to England, of the Nationalist Press, I do not believe ; I 
 look on it as being adopted in obedience to a 7not d'ordre, 
 to smooth the way in England for Home Rule, which 
 adopted, the disguise will be thrown off and bitter hostility 
 to England preached ; outrage then will only be deprecated 
 when, all resistance to the Nationalist party and the confis- 
 cation of the land being broken, outrage will be unnecessary. 
 Boycotting and the tyranny of the Land League are 
 increasing, extending, and, to my own knowledge, more 
 paramount than ever. 
 
 ' I do not defend the late Government,^ and I do not 
 believe the influence of Randolph Churchill is an improving 
 one, but I should have condoned much if at the opening of 
 Parliament he had brought in a vigorous coercive measure. 
 
 ' I see all the objections to coercion, the evils, the almost 
 fatal evils, that will attend it. I will add the difficulty, the 
 almost impossibility, of carrying it through in a Parliament 
 composed as this one is, but I see no alternative between 
 coercion and separation, and Ireland separated will be a 
 hostile State, leaning on American support against England. 
 
 ' Personally I should welcome a land-purchase scheme, 
 and look on the situation as so desperate that I should be 
 prepared to accept moderate terms, but I do not see how 
 it can be carried, or how the country or the House of 
 
 ^ Gladstone was now again Prime Minister.
 
 360 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Commons will ever assent to an expenditure of over 
 £100,000,000, probably £200,000,000 for the purpose. 
 
 ' I have noticed since 1870 that the Tory leaders have 
 been ready to sacrifice the interests of Irish landlords to 
 Party exigencies, and in the present crisis they are justified 
 in saying they will not raise such a sum for the purpose of 
 making Ireland independent of and hostile to England, 
 and reducing the latter thereby to the condition of a third- 
 rate power. 
 
 ' As a landlord, I wish to be bought out ; as a 
 Conservative, I wish to see the Irish members out of the 
 House of Commons ; but even / hesitate as to whether the 
 price is not too great ; I do not mean in the money required, 
 but the creation of a State hostile to our existence on our 
 coasts. 
 
 ' In what you say of Chamberlain in the past I agree, so 
 far, of course, as I have means of knowing ; except that I do 
 not believe Parnell had accepted his and Dilke's programme 
 when they contemplated their Irish tour, which was upset, 
 not by the hopes held out by Carnarvon and Ashbourne, 
 but by the fact that Parnell had never acquiesced therein 
 and by Dilke becoming incapacitated by the public scandal 
 in which he became involved. 
 
 ' In your appreciation of Chamberlain's views and 
 intentions, I entirely agree. I have met him, and much that 
 he said bears out your views ; I think only that he hates 
 Goschen, Spencer, but still more Hartington. I do not 
 write more as to his intentions, and their consequences, 
 because I entirely agree with you and must be brief. I 
 believe he will give us (the landlords) no terms at all, rather 
 than less favourable terms. You may be right as to John 
 Morley, but I should not have looked on him as a man with 
 an equitable mind. 
 
 ' I shall view with no satisfaction the rejection of Glad- 
 stone's proposals, though I cannot say I like them. But 
 I do not see how the purchase proposals with the large 
 expenditure required can be carried in the face of the 
 economical depression, commercial as well as agricultural. 
 
 ' The Tory party are desperate and disposed to fight like
 
 LORD BATH 361 
 
 men with ropes round their necks ; a situation that precludes 
 at the same time prudence in council and success in the 
 contest. They are difficult to lead and control, and Salis- 
 bury has it not in him to control them ; he fears Randolph 
 Churchill, who only seeks an imbroglio. I am looked on 
 askance, I am powerless. I work with difficulty and 
 slowly, and have to give my whole time to a subject, and 
 have other affairs of sufficient importance to distract me 
 from giving my whole time to this. 
 
 ' I will not quote you, but will write these your 
 views about Chamberlain to others, but expect no success. 
 I can only suggest that you should write to Salisbury as 
 you have written to me, but from what I know of him, can 
 hold out no hopes of success to you. 
 
 ' The new Electorate is out of Gladstone's hand ; it is 
 out of Chamberlain's also, who must seek some means of 
 recovering his command over the advanced members of the 
 House of Commons. Chamberlain is a strong man, and has 
 Imperial instincts, but he is ignorant of details, ignorant of 
 the economical and social conditions of the country, of 
 economical laws, and pohtical economy. In Imperial matters 
 he has, I beheve, with destruction some ideas of construction ; 
 but in home matters none, and will topple down the edifice 
 before he appreciates the necessity of erecting something 
 in its place. The best chance for the State seems to me to 
 be that the House of Commons shall be broken up into many 
 sections ; the Liberal party shows a tendency to becoming 
 so already, and I hope the Tory party may become so also ; 
 it has an organization that militates against that result, 
 but I see some signs of disintegration. 
 
 ' I do not wish to cry over spilt milk, but after all I was 
 not wrong in my view on the extension of the Franchise. 
 I had adhered to Gladstone and done all I could to help him, 
 till that measure was determined on.' 
 
 ' July 17, 1886. — I am glad you have a good word 
 for Hartington, but cannot understand your attack on 
 Goschen ; no man in England has been so straight and 
 honest. As to Chamberlain, I do not know anything
 
 362 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 about his principles, but I feel sure he is ambitious, 
 perhaps selfish ; he believes that he will rule England 
 and he wishes the England he is to rule to be united, 
 wealthy, and prosperous. To this must be added a strong 
 personal feehng in his contest with Gladstone, where I 
 cannot think the blame lies with him. Chamberlain is a 
 strong man, representing a principle, a class, a power ; if 
 admitted at all into the Cabinet that position ought to have 
 been recognized ; he attempted to take a line of his own, 
 was snubbed, and hinc illce lacrymce. It might have 
 been wise not to have admitted him in the Cabinet, but 
 once there, his position ought to have been acknowledged, 
 and Gladstone's public treatment of him in the House of 
 Commons was indefensible. 
 
 ' I have, as you know, always admired your fidelity to 
 Mr. Gladstone, but I cannot follow your example. The 
 question to me is not whether or not people turn against 
 him, but whether I can believe him a safe guide and ruler to 
 the country. I believe he is absolutely destructive ; it 
 appears to me that, if not actually losing his senses, the 
 balance, the regulative power, of his mind is going, although 
 unfortunately much of the power remains. His intolerance 
 of all contradiction, his bitterness against all opposition, the 
 silly as well as violent language in his letters to his sup- 
 porters, so unworthy of one of his position, intellect, and 
 antecedents, all bear out this view. . . . 
 
 ' Gladstone's tactics have been most faulty, he ought to 
 have gone at the Conservatives and let the Union Liberals 
 alone, many of whom desired nothing better than to come 
 to terms with him. He would have gained on us, and kept 
 his party together, instead of which, fortunately, he has 
 accentuated the difference in the Liberal ranks, and given 
 us a power we should not otherwise have had. He can 
 brook contradiction from no one ; he does not believe he 
 is the voice of the Divinity, but that he is the Divinity 
 itself. 
 
 ' I do not complain of your defending your friend, even 
 when he is wrong, but cannot go with you to the extent of 
 sacrificing my country to friendship ; if his policy is right
 
 LORD BATH 363 
 
 now, and the arguments he uses to support it, it was wrong 
 up to this year, and so has been that of every Enghsh 
 Minister since the Union. 
 
 ' I have not time now to enter into the Irish Question ; if 
 I did I could not describe the position so well as so many 
 letters and articles in the Times and elsewhere have done. 
 If Gladstone was ten years younger, he would have listened 
 more to the remonstrances of friends, supporters, and col- 
 leagues. When the history of his political life is written, it 
 will be an account of a wonderful oratorical power, of a 
 facility of persuading people and classes, but of failure 
 ever5rwhere, in Ireland, in Egypt, in Foreign affairs ; and 
 finally that he tried and failed, or succeeded (for we do not 
 yet know the result), in an attempt to dismember the 
 Kingdom. 
 
 ' I do not judge of Gladstone's sanity by the line of pohcy 
 he takes, but by the mode in which he pursues it, by his acts, 
 by his conduct to individuals. 
 
 ' It is no use for him and his friends to scold, or to scream 
 at Goschen and Chamberlain ; both are establishing their 
 position, although I think that of Chamberlain to be much 
 the greater in the future.' 
 
 'July 11, 1895. — I am entirely in sympathy with 
 the objects of the proposed meeting on the 16th,i but I 
 am thoroughly convinced that no less drastic measures 
 will have any effect than the expulsion of Turkish 
 rule altogether from the Armenian provinces ; this 
 the present Ministry will not attempt (I beheve no 
 Ministry could effect), and in the present condition 
 of pohtics in this country I am not prepared to force it 
 upon them. 
 
 ' I have another reason, that pubhc speaking is always 
 a great effort to me, and I require a few days' leisure 
 before attempting it, which I am not likely to enjoy next 
 week. 
 
 ' For these two reasons I must decline to take the chair 
 
 On the Armenian Question.
 
 364 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 and speak on the 16th. I will attend the meeting if I possibly 
 can. 
 
 ' I ought to have written that the only real and practical 
 solution is the occupation of the provinces in question by 
 Russia. 
 
 ' I have written to you confidentially ; my formal answer 
 to your letter is that I have too many engagements before 
 me to be able to undertake to attend a meeting on the 16th.' 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS 
 
 From Mrs. Charles Kingsley 
 
 October 31, 1875. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — I return you the enclosed 
 Sermons with many thanks for lending them to me, and 
 still more for your very kind letter, which has been a real 
 comfort and help. 
 
 ' The Notes on the Creed I venture to keep a few days 
 longer, as I have mislaid our own copy among the mass of 
 papers brought from Eversley, and I should like to take 
 a fresh copy. 
 
 ' What you say of his helping us in that Life where he is 
 now, makes me crave for more words on that subject. It 
 is a lovely thought ; and, if one dared enjoy it and clasp it, 
 which I could not do unless I had some more solid ground 
 than mere lovely fancies, it would be a great help — but one 
 is too terribly in earnest and too terribly craving for any 
 glimmer of light from the land that doubtless is near but 
 seems at times so terribly far off, when one has lost {for a 
 time, only for a time !) such a husband, to dare indulge in 
 fancies, however beautiful. 
 
 ' The door seems so fast shut, the veil so thick. I can 
 only say, All is right because God has done it ; and he lives — 
 he must live — and he loves, for he must love to all Eternity. 
 He rests — and he works doubtless, for he needed rest, and 
 he could not be happy without work. And this should be, 
 and is at most times, enough for me. But, when you say he
 
 GOLDWIN SMITH 365 
 
 helps us still, one's soul cries out, Tell me how you know 
 that ? how you guess it ? — for clearly you mean more than 
 merely the help which a blessed memory of a noble life 
 and the blessed influence of spoken and written words gives. 
 But I do not mean to ask you to write again. Every one, 
 especially the clergy, are overworked in these days, by 
 letters as well as work. And the unseen Avorld must be 
 ever an unseen world till God in His great mercy trans- 
 plants us there. 
 
 ' Yours most sincerely, 
 
 ' F. G. KlNGSLEY.' 
 
 From Goldwin Smith 
 
 April 14, 1878. 
 
 ' Dear Sir, — I hope I shall not seem obtrusive in 
 expressing to you the pleasure with which I have read your 
 " Three Years of the Eastern Question." The tide is 
 running so hard against the better cause just now that 
 one feels specially impelled to offer one's thanks to those 
 who stand firm, particularly when they state our case so 
 admirably as you have. 
 
 ' I only wish your preaching could be heard by the un- 
 converted as well as by the converted ; but I am afraid the 
 present frenzy has stopped their ears. 
 
 ' The prospect is dark. Russia, I fear, is very much 
 exhausted, and she may have to fall back and allow the Jew, 
 for a time, to set the Turk up again. It will only be for 
 a time ; but they will be years of horrible havoc and 
 misery. 
 
 ' And for this the " high-principled " Marquis of Salis- 
 bury is going to make himself responsible, as the instrument 
 of a man of whom he has constantly spoken in terms not 
 merely of mistrust and aversion but of loathing. 
 
 ' Your parallel between the eve of the Franco-German 
 war and the present moment in this country is excellent, 
 and is likely to prove true to the end. Our Chauvinists, 
 too, may have their march to Berlin ; and to us, as to the 
 French, the disaster may be a blessing in disguise.
 
 366 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' Freeman transmitted to me some time ago an invitation 
 to be on a committee of yours. I was very sorry to be 
 obliged to decline, having already declined a similar invita- 
 tion from another, less known, quarter. 
 ' I am, dear Sir, 
 
 ' Yours truly, 
 
 ' GoLDwiN Smith.' 
 
 From Sir Samuel Baker 
 
 September 30, 1878. 
 
 ' My Dear Sir, — Many thanks for your interesting 
 letter. I have not the slightest doubt that the body you 
 saw was actually that of some poor wretch who had been 
 impaled.-^ Your description is so perfectly clear that it is 
 unquestionable, 
 
 ' I am only glad that those who denied the fact did not 
 get hold of the sketch I sent you, as they would have made 
 the most of it. 
 
 ' I was two years in Turkey about twenty years ago, and, 
 having had considerable experience of Turks, Egyptians, 
 Arabs, and very brutal fanatics of all kinds, I should not 
 be in the least surprised at any atrocities such as impale- 
 ments or other tortures committed by infuriated soldiery. 
 
 ' My own Arabs informed me that one of their friends 
 was impaled at Khartoum in about the year 1855, and that 
 he lived for two days upon the stake in the public market- 
 place. 
 
 ' Why people should discredit stories of impalement 
 I cannot conceive, as this form of torture was common in 
 Turkey until within the last five-and-twenty years. 
 
 ' The present Marquess of Winchester told me that he 
 himself saw several men impaled in Turkey while he was 
 travelling many years ago from Constantinople to Belgrade 
 through Adrianople and Philippopolis, and he described the 
 operation as performed by driving the stake through 
 the nave of a cart-wheel that had been detached from the 
 axle. The wheel was laid upon the ground with the stake 
 
 J- See p. 48.
 
 LORD GRANVILLE 367 
 
 standing up in the centre like a candle in a chamber candle- 
 stick. The victim was then hoisted and placed in a sitting 
 posture upon the pointed stake and pressed down until 
 his body arrived at the wheel. 
 
 ' When we consider the horrors that have been committed 
 upon each other by Christians of opposing sects, and that 
 witches were burnt in England only 120 years ago, it is 
 easy to believe in the brutal excesses of fanatical Orientals, 
 whether Christian or Mussulman. 
 
 ' Our Statesmen legislate too much upon theories, without 
 a practical knowledge of the peoples of the East — especially 
 those of the Ottoman Empire. It will require very many 
 years to reduce those countries to any degree of what we 
 may term civilization. 
 
 ' Sincerely yours, 
 
 ' Samuel W. Baker.' 
 
 From Lord Granville 
 
 March 5, 1879. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — When I met you yesterday I 
 was on my way to tell Gladstone that I intended to question 
 the Government about the understanding with Russia as 
 to Afghanistan and with regard to the ratification of the 
 North- Western Frontier. 
 
 ' This made me read even with greater interest than I 
 should otherwise have done your excellent statement. 
 
 ' The only suggestion that I can make is that with 
 respect to passages which I have marked on page 232. 
 I do not remember having given Russia any assurance as 
 to the countries on their side of Afghanistan. Russia gave 
 a positive assurance that Afghanistan was beyond the 
 sphere of her influence, and she adopted the English view 
 of the boundaries of Afghanistan instead of that which 
 she had previously maintained. 
 
 ' On the strength of this concession I agreed that all 
 the influence of England, which we believed to be strong, 
 would be exercised to prevent the Ameer from attacking 
 the Khandis of Turkistan.
 
 368 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' You seem to take too favourable a view of the Russian 
 account as to the assurances which the Emperor gave 
 about Khiva. 
 
 ' They were volunteered by the Emperor. I had asked 
 for no assurance. It is probable that good reasons might 
 occur for departing from his assurance, but he ought to 
 have been aware of the probability of such circumstances 
 when he volunteered the assurance. 
 
 ' Both he and Schouvaloff at the time thought that they 
 had departed from the assurance which had been given 
 to me. It was an act of amiable weakness on the part of 
 the Emperor to volunteer assurances which he could not 
 be sure of fulfilling. 
 
 ' When in a confidential conversation Schouvaloff made 
 me a sort of apology, I said I thought it was for the Emperor 
 to complain at having been placed in so false a position, 
 
 ' Your work will be of great use. 
 
 'Yours sincerely, 
 
 ' Granville.' 
 
 From the Right Hon. John Bright 
 
 November 23, 1881. 
 
 ' Dear Sir, — I thank you for the two volumes you have 
 sent me. They teach a great lesson on some parts of our 
 foreign poHcy. 
 
 ' I have not seen the article in the Times to which you 
 refer. The Times is generally wrong. In this case I sup- 
 pose they want to give comfort to the richer classes by telling 
 them that nothing is changed. I think much is changed, 
 and for the better — but I am not certain that greater changes 
 are not before us, and not remote. The territorial system 
 of this country has broken down, and the multitudes may 
 rejoice at it. 
 
 ' I thank you for the sympathy you express with the 
 friendly proceedings on the occasion of my birthday. 
 
 ' Believe me, 
 
 ' Very sincerely yours, 
 
 'John Bright.'
 
 LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE 369 
 
 From Lord Edmond Fitzmaurice 
 
 January 7, 1883. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. Malcolm MacColl, — Many thanks for your 
 very kind congratulations. i I can only hope I may prove 
 myself worthy of them. It will always be a source of great 
 pleasure to me to have the beneiSt of your wide knowledge 
 of foreign pohtics ; and you will, I trust, find your way to 
 my room at the Foreign Office. 
 
 ' I cannot understand what the Pall Mall Gazette means 
 by saying that I was originally an opponent of Bulgarian 
 autonomy. It so happens that I am the oldest supporter 
 of it in the House of Commons. I was only prevented by 
 commands from our front bench in 1876 from moving a 
 vote of censure on the late Government for rejecting the 
 Berlin Memorandum instead of making a counter proposi- 
 tion to it, with a view to receiving autonomy ; and I gave 
 way to those commands most unwilhngly. My motion was 
 on the paper for ten days ; I nevertheless made my speech, 
 taking the occasion of Tom Bruce's motion for papers : 
 the speech was well reported and is in Hansard. It is an 
 argument from beginning to end in favour of autonomy, 
 and I received the strongest approval of Mr. Gladstone 
 and Lord Russell, This was three weeks before the 
 appearance of Mr. G.'s famous pamphlet. 
 
 ' Since then I never said one word to lead anybody 
 to suppose I had altered my opinion. It is true that when 
 the Government in 1878 asked for the six millions, and 
 Lawson opposed them, I voted against Lawson. I did so 
 
 (1) because it is a very grave matter to refuse the supphes 
 asked for by the responsible Government, at a moment of 
 great national emergency, even if you are not a supporter 
 of the Government, or are opposed to it altogether in pohcy ; 
 
 (2) because I considered that peace would be the more 
 difficult to maintain with the Russians inside than outside 
 Constantinople ; (3) because T did not consider that we 
 
 ^ Lord Edmond had just been made Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs. 
 He was created Lord Fitzmaurice in 1906.
 
 370 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 should advance the cause of Bulgar liberty by strengthening 
 the grip of the Russians on the country. 
 
 ' There was, I quite admit, a great deal to be said on 
 the other side. But I cannot on that occasion be said to 
 have voted (T did not speak) against Bulgar autonomy ; 
 or even against my party, for the great mass of the party 
 ran away ; and Mr. Gladstone, without telling anybody 
 his intention, voted with Lawson ; while about 20 Liberals 
 voted with Government, including Arthur Peel, Cotes, and 
 Tom Brassey. 
 
 ' I felt very strongly that it was not an occasion for 
 running away ; and, though it may sound illogical, I should 
 probably, had I known Mr. Gladstone's intentions — which 
 his speech gave no clue to at all — have followed him. 
 
 'Ill health obUged me to leave town early in 1878; 
 as also that of a near relation whom I was obliged to 
 accompany abroad, but I took special pains to pair against 
 Government in the vote of censure on the Berlin Treaty. 
 
 ' Neither did I speak, as the P.M.G. asserts, against 
 Egyptian autonomy at Bristol on November 13. What 
 I said was that, owing to the absence of a reliable Christian 
 population, it would not be easy to introduce the same 
 kind of autonomy as in Bulgaria and RoumeUa. 
 
 ' I am glad to hear so good an account of Mr. Gladstone, 
 with whom I have had a most pleasant correspondence. 
 
 ' It has been my misfortune, I use the word advisedly, 
 to differ occasionally from him ; but I shall always consider 
 him the biggest and most commanding genius, with the 
 possible exception of the younger Pitt, who has ever been 
 connected with English politics. 
 ' I am, 
 
 ' Yours truly, 
 
 ' Edmond Fitzmaurice.' 
 
 ' P.S. — I may add, in regard to another matter, that I 
 have, like Emile de Laveleye, been an advocate of Hapsburg 
 extension in Bosnia ; but solely because I believe that the 
 future of Austria is that of a Federal State, in which the 
 Sclav element will play, to say the least, an equal, perhaps
 
 CANON LOWE 371 
 
 a preponderating, part, and the extension in question must 
 ultimately, by strengthening the Sclav element, bring this 
 about. It also relieves the economic blockade of Dalmatia 
 by Turkey. I am a strong philo-German, and I admire the 
 Magyar, but I have no notion of their being allowed to 
 quash everybody else, e.g. in matters of language. If 
 you see Mr. Arthur Evans you can tell him I shall be very 
 glad to make his acquaintance.' 
 
 From Professor Freeman 
 
 February 21, 1883. 
 
 ' My Dear MacColl, — Arthur Evans's address is 
 32 Broad Street, Oxford. But he shall know the contents 
 of Lord Edmond Fitzmaurice's letter before you can write. 
 They are the best piece of news I have seen for a long time. 
 I had fancied that Lord E. F. had rather gone in the way 
 of Balaam the son of Bosor. But what say you to this 
 
 expected promotion of the scoundrel L ? I was in 
 
 the same room with the skunk at Rome — at old Bowen's 
 — and avoided him. There were a lot of men with orders, 
 but he did not bear his ; so I let out to Lady B. in her own 
 tongue : 6 Oeo/jbd-^oii alSetrai, (f)opelv top aravpov. 
 
 ' I am coming to London to-morrow for Commission 
 and go to Oxford on Saturday. It is hopeless ever to think 
 of finding anybody in the howling wilderness which men 
 call a " metropolis." I shall be quartered for two nights 
 with Bonney the earthkenner at 23 Denning Road, Hamp- 
 stead, N.W. I expect to be at Macmillans' some time 
 on Friday, and that time must be before 3.30, which is 
 Commission hour. 
 
 ' But when will you come and see us here, which is more 
 practical ? I had a glimpse of Liddon last month. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Edward A. Freeman.' 
 
 From Canon Lowe 
 
 March 29, 1883. 
 
 ' Dear Sir, — Allow me, tho' a stranger, to thank you 
 heartily for your letter in this week's Guardian on the 
 
 2 B 2
 
 372 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 Affirmation Bill. It expresses well much that was in my 
 thoughts when I declined taking any part in the agitation 
 against it. But for the restrospective action of the Bill, 
 and the bearing of this on the wretched case of the 
 Northampton Election, I should be very glad to see a move- 
 ment among Churchmen in support of it. But for the 
 present I am constrained to stand aloof ; and am therefore 
 all the more grateful when others state in public, so ably 
 as you have done, the opinions I entertain on the question. 
 ' I am, dear Sir, 
 
 ' Yours faithfully, 
 
 ' Edward C. Lowe.' 
 
 From Sir Henry Drummond Wolff 
 
 April 26, 1883. 
 
 ' My Dear Mr. MacColl, — I am much obliged for your 
 letters and the inclosure. 
 
 ' You cannot write anything which is not interesting and 
 striking ; but I fear all your arguments, however ably 
 expressed, will not alter the one result of the passing of 
 this Affirmation Bill — i.e. that men will, under it, be 
 admitted to Parliament who exceptionally reject the 
 rule of conduct recognized by others. I place my views 
 on the lowest but perhaps the most practical ground. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 'H. Drummond Wolff.' 
 
 From Sir Thomas Erskine May 
 
 June 25, 1883. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — At last I have been able to read 
 your masterly article in the Fortnightly ; ^ and I hasten to 
 thank you for your kindness in sending it to me. 
 
 ' I am not quite so deep as I ought to be in the con- 
 troversies with which it deals so ably ; but I must say you 
 make out a very strong case against some of the decisions 
 of the Judicial Committee. I do not see how their 
 
 ^ On ' The Clergy and the Law.'
 
 LORD HARTINGTON 373 
 
 contention that a rubric " by necessary implication 
 abolishes what it does not retain," can, either logically 
 or legally, be supported. 
 
 ' I think also that your observations upon the 
 " Advertisements " are conclusive. 
 
 ' I heartily agree in the opinions you have so well ex- 
 pressed in favour of toleration and comprehension in the 
 Church of England. I, too, have often declared them, but 
 not so well as you have presented them on this, and 
 I have no doubt, on other occasions. 
 
 ' I am, 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 'T. Erskine May.' 
 
 From Lord Hartington 
 
 February 3, 1886. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — I ought to have thanked you 
 earlier for your letter of January 24, and for sending me 
 your pamphlet, which I had already seen. I have read 
 the latter with much interest though I am unable to agree 
 with your conclusions. 
 
 ' I believe that the extract from my speech at Belfast 
 is an accurate report of what I said, but I can scarcely think 
 that it indicated an opinion that anything which is generally 
 understood by Home Rule must be conceded in the near 
 future. I do not think that I expressed cordial approval of 
 Mr. Gladstone's views on Ireland expressed in his Manifesto, 
 but rather quoted them as approaching the extreme limit 
 to which any English statesman would be likely to go. 
 I did not make a speech in favour of Lord Ramsay's 
 candidature for Liverpool, but I wrote a letter in which, so 
 far as I remember, I expressly dissociated myself from agree- 
 ment with him on the subject to which you refer. The 
 animadversions on me were made in consequence of my 
 giving him a general support notwithstanding this difference 
 of opinion. 
 
 ' I remain, 
 
 ' Yours sincerely, 
 
 ' Hartington.'
 
 374 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 I sincerely trust that Mr. Gladstone may succeed in 
 the attempt which he is making to settle this momentous 
 question, though I have felt that I am too deeply committed 
 to opinions opposed to those which he has recently expressed 
 to be able to co-operate with him. — H.' 
 
 From Archdeacon Denison 
 
 April 6, 1886. 
 
 ' Dear MacColl, — We may as well shake hands 
 privately, at parting publicly, and put into the fire all 
 words about " Ninth Commandments." 
 
 ' We can never by any possibility agree, and I should 
 never have assailed you, if you had not begun. You know, 
 as well as I do, that my utter distrust of Gladstone is of very 
 old date. It grows, if possible, day by day. 
 
 " I see that in the Spectator of April 3 our letters are 
 not published in the order that they came into the hands 
 of the Editor. Mine, which has no date put to it, was 
 in his hands March 29 or at latest 30 — yours is dated 
 March 31. As published, mine looks like an answer to 
 yours of March 31 — whereas it was an answer to a previous 
 letter of yours. I suppose they are so published because 
 mine finally shuts up on my side further public controversy 
 with you in the Spectator. 
 
 ' I see that in the passage you cite (1868) I did declare 
 that I was against the Bill of 1867 in respect of representa- 
 tion of minority — a point I had specified in my first answer 
 to you — Tou take no notice of this fact. Again for "House- 
 hold Suffrage in Counties " — no doubt I was in favour of 
 that. But then this was before " Cow and 3- Acre " little 
 scheme. 
 
 ' These are my last words in this matter. If you rejoin 
 to shake hands I shall be glad. But whatever you may 
 add to it, I shall make no reply. 
 'Yours always, 
 
 ' George Anthony Denison.' 
 
 ^ The Archdeacon had published a violent attack on Gladstone, and 
 MacColl had replied to him.
 
 SIR HENRY JAMES 375 
 
 From Lord Lothian 
 
 July 4, 1886. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — (If you will allow me to address 
 you thus) I have received to-day your note in which you 
 propose to call on me. I am sorry to say that partly owing 
 to my being somewhat knocked up, and partly because of 
 much work in Scotland, I was unable to adhere to my 
 intention and go to London last week. 
 
 ' I regret this much, because I should have much wished 
 to confer with you upon the question of the Edinburgh 
 Bishopric. 1 
 
 ' I am in great hope, from what I hear, that Canon 
 Liddon's decision as announced maybe looked upon as not 
 final, and that if he could be again induced to consider the 
 matter, he might possibly come to a different conclusion. 
 Be this as it may, I write now only to say that if any- 
 thing occurs to you in which I could be of use, I hope you 
 will not hesitate to let me know. 
 
 ' I have written to the Duke of Buccleuch to ask if he 
 would be inchned to see Canon Liddon. 
 
 ' Believe me, 
 
 ' Yours faithfully, 
 
 ' Lothian.' 
 
 From Sir Henry James ^ 
 
 December 3, 1886. 
 
 ' My Dear Canon,— Many thanks for your letter. 
 I share with you the desire to preserve the unity of the 
 Liberal Party, but I do not gather from your letter what 
 practical step you suggest should be taken to procure that 
 most desirable result. 
 
 ' There is a great gulf between us, I fear. 
 
 ' You beheve in Home Rule — I do not. I beheve that 
 the two-thirds of the Irish people to whom the Government 
 of Ireland would be confided are not fit to govern the three- 
 thirds. I beheve that to place the executive and legislative 
 
 1 The Bishopric of Edinburgh was offered to, and refused by, H. P. Liddon. 
 
 2 Afterwards Lord James of Hereford.
 
 376 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 power in the hands of these two-thirds — such as they are and 
 will be — would be a positive crime . Give me credit for earnest 
 belief in this view, and then tell me what I ought to do. 
 
 ' I cannot be a party to the commission of this crime 
 in order to put Liberal pohticians into office. 
 
 ' I agree entirely in all you say as to the probable fate 
 of the Liberal Unionists ; and it may be that it may be 
 necessary to place the making and execution of the laws 
 in Ireland in the hands of men Uke Mr. O'Brien and Mr. 
 Dillon, or of Parnell (who, with the power to prevent their 
 present action, stands by and takes all the advantages he 
 can derive from it), but my conscience rebels against becom- 
 ing a party to such a policy. 
 
 ' I fancy that a good many like me will be quite wiUing 
 to stand aside and let this policy — if it be inevitable — be 
 effected by others. 
 
 ' It is useless for you and me to argue over the past. 
 How could one vote for the Second Reading of a Bill and so 
 assert a principle he disapproves of ? 
 
 ' There was another course which might have been 
 pursued, and which would have produced the results you 
 and I in common desired. 
 
 ' If Mr. Gladstone's Bill had been withdrawn before the 
 Second Reading division, no Dissolution would have 
 occurred, and then ample time would have been given to 
 consider a fitting measure by men who had not made a rigid 
 record of their positive views upon the principle of Home 
 Rule. I have never called the Home Rule Party " separa- 
 tists," but, notwithstanding, I have never appreciated their 
 sensitiveness in relation to this epithet. They desire a 
 separate Parliament for the two countries. So far as a 
 Legislative Union is affected they desire separation. They 
 regard Unionists as their political opposites. To us the 
 union by virtue of the Crown is as nothing — the distinct 
 power of making separate laws for the two countries to 
 us means separation. 
 
 ' I am, dear Canon, 
 
 ' Yours most truly, 
 
 ' Henry James.'
 
 ROBERT BROWNING 377 
 
 From the Duke of Argyll 
 
 December 9, 1887. 
 
 ' Dear Canon MacColl, — I recollect very well hearing 
 from a friend — a Peer — that in early life he had seen men 
 impaled at more places than one in Turkey. 
 
 ' But I think you are mistaken in your impression that 
 my friend's own escort had impaled the victims. I have no 
 recollection of this — and indeed my recollection is pretty 
 distinct that it was not so. 
 
 ' But this is wholly immaterial in your controversy ; 
 the 'point is that executions by impalement were common 
 in Turkey some fifty years ago — and of course this makes 
 occasional " survivals " all the more credible and probable. 
 
 ' I think my informant was the late Lord Winchester. 
 He died last year at a ^ery advanced age. 
 
 ' My book on the Eastern Question had a slow sale at 
 the time, and I am surprised to hear of it being out of print. 
 But it would be wholly unsaleable now, I think. 
 
 ' Huxley is a provoking controversialist. But I had 
 hit him pretty hard for his attack on Liddon. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Argyll.' 
 
 From Robert Browning 
 
 May 23, 1889. 
 
 ' Oh, no, dear Canon MacColl, you by no means were 
 likely to " offend me " by asking about my photograph, 
 for such a purpose too ! The fact was, in my haste I 
 replied to your last letter, not the previous one in which 
 there was a mention of your desire ; and I remember that, 
 at the time, I thought if you could wait a little I would be 
 happy to give you examples of a photograph I am going 
 to have made by a practitioner who has, people think, 
 been the most successful in his reproductions of my poor 
 face ; but I cannot find time to attend at his place just 
 now. If you wish for a copy of Mr. Cameron's work, his 
 studio is in Portland Street : samples are, I suppose, also
 
 378 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 to be procured at the exhibition-room of his works and 
 (better, perhaps) those of his mother, in Bond Street. 
 
 ' I am unfortunately engaged on Saturday — and for 
 many days before and after that day, unluckily. I can only 
 thank you for your kindness which, I am sure, I do very 
 heartily. 
 
 ' Ever truly yours, 
 
 ' Robert Browning.' 
 
 From the Rev. Professor Milligan 
 
 December 15, 1890. 
 
 ' My Dear Canon MacColl, — It was a great pleasure 
 to me to receive your long letter some time ago, and I 
 would have answered it at once had I seen my way more 
 clearly than I do. Then just as I was about to write came 
 this horrible crash in the political world, beyond which it 
 was altogether impossible to let one's thoughts travel even 
 for a moment.^ I must, however, make no further delay. 
 
 ' As to trying to persuade our people not to demand 
 that Disestablishment, before steps are taken to effect it, 
 shall be made a leading, if not even a single, issue at a 
 General Election, I believe that all labour spent by me 
 would be utterly in vain. I may have great difficulty in 
 seeing how the thing can be done ; but I should be at once 
 reminded that we have been led to expect that such a course 
 would be taken ; and I would be told that it was not asking 
 too much, when the proposal was to set aside provisions 
 insisted on in the most solemn way in the Treaty of Union. 
 I do not think that there is the slightest chance that under 
 any circumstances whatever that demand will be departed 
 from. 
 
 ' My own impression is quite distinct that a large 
 majority of the people of Scotland do not, under existing 
 circumstances, desire Disestablishment, while at the same 
 time they are keenly opposed to the secularization of the 
 Endowments. Many of this majority have no love for 
 the Established Church as it is, but then they do not 
 believe that Disestablishment would cure the evils from 
 
 ^ The Parnell Divorce Case.
 
 THE RIGHT HON. A. J. BALFOUR 379 
 
 which we suffer. Whether they will oppose at the polls a 
 candidate whose political opinions they approve of, because 
 he goes in for DisestabHshment, I can hardly say. 
 Sometimes I think that more is expected in this way than 
 is likely to be realized. 
 
 ' The great question, however, which you ask is whether 
 a union might not be brought about between us and the 
 Free Church. I answer that, so far as I can see, any such 
 arrangement is out of the question. The Free Church dare 
 not break its understanding with the United Presbyterians ; 
 and so deeply is it committed, that, if it did break it, it 
 would not be worth uniting with. If we are to have union 
 it must be on a wider scale than with the Free Church 
 alone ; nor do I see how union of any kind is possible 
 without a revision of the whole situation. Yet there are 
 thousands and tens of thousands looking eagerly for it ; 
 and, could the initiative only be taken by some one of 
 commanding authority outside all our denominations, it is 
 hard to say what a following he would have. I have often 
 thought that an advice from Mr. Gladstone or a hope 
 expressed by him would have a powerful effect. 
 
 ' In the meantime I suppose that we must get through 
 this present crisis in the poHtical world before the ecclesi- 
 astical position in Scotland can again be touched. Should 
 it be otherwise, and you have any further questions or 
 explanations to ask, please do so without hesitation. 
 
 ' Believe me, 
 
 ' Very truly yours, 
 
 ' Wm. Milligan.' 
 
 From the Right Hon. A. J. Balfour, 31. P. 
 
 February 16, 1895. 
 
 ' My Dear Sir, — Pray allow me to thank you for the 
 books which Messrs. Longman have sent me at your request, 
 and for the letter by which you have accompanied them. 
 
 ' As regards the former, I need not say with what pleasure 
 I shall read them, knowing your qualifications for the task 
 you have undertaken.
 
 380 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' As regards the latter, it is a source of very deep gratifica- 
 tion to me that 3'^ou approve my labours in the same field. 
 
 ' Yours truly, 
 
 ' Arthur James Balfour.' 
 
 From Sir Horace Seymour 
 
 January 1, 1896. 
 
 ' Dear Canon MacColl, — In the Times of December 28, 
 a letter from T. W. Legh caught my eye on the subject of 
 Armenia. He talks of the threat to send our fleet up to 
 Smyrna in 1880 as an "imaginary" ultimatum. 
 
 ' He goes on to say that the Government of that day, 
 " impatient at the delay " (and pretty rightly so I should 
 say), "proposed a kind of piratical expedition to Smyrna." 
 " This project met with so cold a reception that it was in- 
 continently dropped, and it cannot therefore be said to have 
 contributed to the surrender of Dulcigno." " This modest 
 achievement, etc., has generally been attributed to the 
 influence of Prince Bismarck." I am astonished that any 
 man can launch into print in this matter without any 
 knowledge of what he is writing about. There is not the 
 slightest doubt that the Sultan gave way because of our 
 threat, and because of that only. Mr. Goschen was our 
 Special Ambassador at the time, and he acted with much 
 vigour in the matter, and made the Sultan understand that 
 we were in earnest. Hence he gave way — and Mr. Goschen 
 held him to his word when he subsequently shuffled. It is 
 a poor, mean course for Legh to adopt to try and depreciate 
 the successful action of his own country, because it was 
 carried out by his political adversaries. 
 
 ' It is contemptible to rob Mr. Goschen and Lord Gran- 
 ville of their success in a most difficult task, and to attribute 
 it to Bismarck. It is all the more shabby as Legh was in 
 the Diplomatic Service (a humble member no doubt), 
 and should know better. I wrote to the Times to put the 
 facts forward, but they did not put my letter in. It was 
 anonymous — but I sent my own name with it, and they 
 are usually civil to me in these matters.
 
 THE DUKE OF ARGYLL 381 
 
 ' I agree with you, and said so some time ago, that if 
 the Government had made a similar threat they would have 
 saved many a life. 
 
 ' The present state of things is most discreditable. 
 
 ' Yours truly, 
 
 ' Horace Seymour.' 
 
 From the Duke of Argyll 
 
 October 5, 1897. 
 
 ' Dear Canon MacColl, — Thanks for your letters, 
 books, and articles. 
 
 ' I have been holding my tongue — for the best of all 
 reasons — that I don't see anything useful to say, and I am 
 sorry that your letter, etc., does not help me. Of course I 
 agree with you entirely that the coercion of Turkey was a 
 duty or a necessity — if the obligations under which we all 
 lie are ever to be discharged. 
 
 ' But I do not see my way to overcoming the disgraceful 
 poHcy of the Three Emperors. We can't act alone. The 
 fate and redistribution of Turkey is clearly a European 
 problem, and we have no right to attempt an individual 
 solution. Both Austria and Russia feel that problem to 
 be one so specially critical for their own nearest interests 
 that they are quite prepared to fight, rather than allow any 
 action by outsiders which may conflict with their respective 
 ambitions, whilst at the same time they can't agree between 
 themselves on any plan of partition. This is why they 
 support Turkey, as the best interim Government for them. 
 
 ' I have not made up my own mind as to the best solu- 
 tion. Autonomous States like those already established is 
 the one I like least. But surely the rule of Austria over a 
 great part of the Balkan would be a great gain to Humanity. 
 ' As for Greece, her democracy has thrown her away. 
 Her action, alone, was idiotical. The terms of Peace are 
 onerous, but she deliberately risked even worse — dismember- 
 ment or extinction. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Argyll.'
 
 382 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 From the same 
 
 October 16, 1897. 
 
 ' Dear Canon MacColl, — I return enclosures in case 
 you may want them. There is much in your letter which 
 is new to me. 
 
 ' But I confess I doubt the effect you ascribe to Rose- 
 bery's speech. I read it merely as his dissent from a Party — 
 which he assumed to exist — urging England to act alone 
 in the Turkish Question. 
 
 ' I don't think even you come under this description. 
 But I did not so interpret the speech as to ascribe to it the 
 policy of doing nothing except in aUiance with the three 
 Emperors. 
 
 ' At all events I don't think Rosebery can influence any 
 large portion of the pubhc. He could do something to 
 checkmate a purely Party movement against our F.O., and 
 this is what I think he meant and no more. 
 
 ' I do not know any facts which prove that Greece was 
 not the aggressor in the Thessaly War. I sympathize with 
 her in her desire to do all she could. But it was folly to 
 think she could alone. 
 
 ' The hatred of Greece among the Emperors may be due 
 to the cause to which you assign it — hatred and fear of 
 Greek democracy — very Ukely. It clearly is a bitter hatred 
 — whatever be the cause. 
 
 ' When in Corfu lately I heard a good deal which makes 
 me distrust Greece as a good Government. 
 
 ' I fear it is very corrupt, as all modern democracies are, 
 
 ' As to Austria, I cannot dread her as you do. The rival 
 Priesthoods of the West and East must fight it out between 
 them. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Argyll.' 
 
 From the same 
 
 November 28, 1897. 
 
 ' Dear Canon MacColl, — Thanks for your very interest- 
 ing Review. I can't undertake one myself. All I have
 
 THE DUKE OE WESTMINSTER 383 
 
 ready to say is said in my little Poem of an Elegy on Tenny- 
 son — published in my volume of poems called " The Burdens 
 of Belief." 
 
 ' Old Lord Tennyson liked them much, and they are the 
 only lines I saw which gave any idea of his reHgious teaching. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Argyll.' 
 
 From the Duke of Westminster 
 
 January 23, 1898. 
 
 ' My Dear Canon, — I have to offer an excuse for the 
 delay that has occurred in answering your letter and in re- 
 turning the interesting communication from the King of 
 Greece. But a three weeks' chest-cold and cough have 
 pulled me down and made me unable for everything. We 
 must all most sincerely hope that Prince George may be 
 appointed to Crete, it would be certainly what we should 
 most desire, and the happiest solution of the difficulty — 
 indeed so happy that one almost doubts the possibiHty of 
 its reahzation ! 
 
 ' The Mandarins must be fairly puzzled just now and in 
 a very tight place. Will they have the pluck to take our 
 money ? I doubt it. 
 
 ' With kind regards, believe me to be, 
 
 ' Yours very trul}^ 
 
 'Westminster.' 
 
 From the same 
 
 October 18, 1898. 
 
 ' My Dear Canon, — I am obliged to you for letting me 
 see the two letters, which I return. I had read your article 
 in the Observer of Sunday last, and am truly glad that the 
 " Powers " will allow of no sort or scrap of Turkish garrison 
 in Crete. 
 
 ' I hope now that at last brighter days are in store for 
 that island, and that some of us may live to see a stable 
 government, I hope under Greece, estabUshed there. 
 There must be difficulties for some time in keeping the peace
 
 384 MALCOLM MACOOLL 
 
 between the Christians and Mohammedans ; and the misrule 
 of centuries cannot be remedied in five minutes. 
 
 ' Beheve me to be, 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Westmtnster.' 
 
 From the Right Hon. Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman 
 
 May 9, 1899. 
 
 ' Dear Mr. MacColl, — I am very much obliged for your 
 letter, but especially for your book,^ which seems to me to 
 be admirably clear and equally temperate and reasonable. 
 I have only read parts of it yet, and the case you make out 
 for many of your theses is very strong. Of course I am 
 not one of your own people, and therefore my judgment is 
 academical merely, like that of a neighbour witnessing 
 domestic quarrels. 
 
 ' I have not found anyone here — not even Sam Smith 2 
 himseK — who has a word to say for the Bill,3 but when people 
 wish to vote for a bad Bill they always declare it to be a 
 mere form of protest. I confess I can hardly take that 
 view myself. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' H. Campbell-Bannerman.' 
 
 From the Duke of Argyll 
 
 August 17, 1899. 
 
 ' My Dear Canon, — Thanks for your letter of the 
 12th. I am very sorry to hear you have been so ill. 
 
 ' I find on enquiry that the spiritual functions of the 
 Eldership in Scotland have fallen into complete desuetude. 
 But in the ceremony of admission, besides the " right hand 
 of fellowship " there is an address for the Minister implying 
 that Elders are to pray with the sick, visit, see to discipline, 
 etc. All this is fallen out of use and few (rural) Elders would 
 now be fit for such work. 
 
 ' My point remains — they are " Ofjice-Bearers " hut not 
 ecclesiastics in any ordinary sense of the word. They are 
 
 1 The Reformation Settlement. ^ M.P. for Flintshire. 
 
 2 The Church Discipline Bill. 
 
 II
 
 THE BISHOP OF BRISTOL 385 
 
 gamekeepers, gardeners, overseers, shopkeepers, and a jtw 
 gentlemen, except in cities. 
 
 ' How far the General Assembly could join in Legislation 
 is a difficult question. 
 
 ' But in having the unlimited power of interpretation 
 it practically can largely modify the creed of the Church. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Akgyll.' 
 
 From Lord Crewe 
 
 February 22, 1900. 
 
 ' Dear Canon MacColl, — I am in your debt for a kind 
 letter received from you before I left England : a sharp 
 rheumatic attack kept me unable to attend either to 
 business or pleasure, under which latter head the receipt 
 of your letter certainly came. Later events have entirely 
 justified what you said of S. African affairs, and of the 
 curious entetement which affected the country. They 
 would have gone into any war during the last four years, 
 with France, Germany, Russia, or the U.S., with the same 
 light heart, I believe. 
 
 ' To my mind the gravest aspect of the whole matter is 
 this — that what would be called a " generous " settlement of 
 our relations with the Repubhcs is impracticable ; while the 
 probable settlement — one of a drastic and absorbing sort — 
 will lay us open to charges of having intended annexation 
 all through, which will be exceedingly hard to disprove. 
 
 ' We have had a pleasant time in Egypt, and I am quite 
 set up again, while it has also suited Lady C. admirably. 
 
 ' Yours sincerely, 
 ' Crewe.' 
 
 From the Bishop of Bristol^ 
 
 January 21, 1901. 
 
 ' My Dear Canon, — You are very good to send me your 
 9th edition. Few books have had so great a success ; 
 none, I think, of this nature. 
 
 ^ G. F. Browne, formerly MacColl's tutor at Glenalmond. 
 
 2 c
 
 386 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ' I have come to the conclusion that clear and definite 
 proof is not possible on either side. There will always be 
 enough ground for a well-balanced and really earnest mind 
 to hold with you and to hold against you. The main cause 
 of the present strife is that, while it is easy for you to maintain 
 your view with bonhomie, and without assault, the other 
 side is by nature the attacking side, and accusations of 
 unfruitfulness are a natural weapon. 
 
 ' I trust that the sorrow of the nation will feel the 
 unseemliness of all that goes beyond fair argument in 
 Church matters. It is wonderful what death can do for 
 those who remain. i 
 
 ' Our very kind regards. We are still living from hand 
 to mouth, in a very inadequate hired house. But I have 
 built a modest palace, which we hope to enter in April. 
 There we could see you. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' G. F. Bristol.' 
 
 From the Right Hon. Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman 
 
 June 29, 1801. 
 
 ' Dear Canon MacColl, — I am much obliged to you for 
 your cordial and cheering letter. What you say of the 
 change of tone in the country is most interesting, and I only 
 hope that sanity will be gradually restored. 
 
 ' Things are not easy in politics, as you will have seen ; 
 but I am delighted with the orderly, loyal, friendly spirit 
 of the great body of my people in the House of Commons. 
 I think they will effectively quell mutiny. 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' H. Campbell-Bannerman." 
 
 From Lord Spencer 
 
 January 26, 1902. 
 
 ' My Dear Canon, — Many thanks for your letter with 
 the excellent MS. article upon your article in the Fortnightly 
 
 ^ Queen Victoria died Januarj- 22, 1901.
 
 LORD SPENCER 387 
 
 Review. I have the Review and will read it. The quota- 
 tions from Lord EUenborough and Lord Cairns are very 
 applicable, and, coming from the centre of the Toryism of 
 the day, will be useful. 
 
 ' My heart is very sick as to Liberal politics just now. 
 I see as yet no daylight in the heavy cloud which over- 
 shadows us and spoils the vigour of our action. 
 
 ' But I have great confidence that we who work with the 
 bulk of the party are right, and that right will in the end 
 prevail. 
 
 ' What are to be the principles of the New Liberal 
 party ? I can see nothing which separates them from the 
 so-called Liberal Unionists of the Conservative Government. 
 
 ' I personally cannot give up the old principles of Grey, 
 Cobden, Gladstone. I am ready to hold my hand when the 
 occasion for applying them is not auspicious, and I am also 
 ready to work them out on fresh hnes to suit the constant 
 changes of circumstances in the condition of the people and 
 of the institutions which have to be dealt with. 
 
 ' As to the war, I agree with you that many things have 
 been done which merit the application of the words 
 " methods of barbarism," but at the same time I regret 
 that Sir Henry C.B. used them, for they were sure to be 
 misread by unscrupulous Party fighters in a way which, 
 however untrue, leave behind them everywhere an evil 
 odour. And a Party leader must, without abating the 
 force of his protest, be careful to use terms which cannot 
 be perverted. 
 
 ' In saying this you must know that no one more 
 strenuously supports Sir Henry C.B. than I do. He has 
 been shamefully treated by the so-called Liberal Imperiahsts, 
 who have copied the methods of the Tories in their attacks 
 on him. 
 
 ' The strange feature in the attitude of Liberals, and 
 especially of young Liberals, seems to me to be their excessive 
 sensitiveness, their inability to see that in working for great 
 principles the Liberal party must have its varying shades of 
 opinions (just as the Tories have), and that they can unite 
 to carry out great objects. But instead of that, they are 
 
 2 c 2
 
 388 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 ready to faint and fall out of the ranks if their Leader uses 
 an expression which they do not like, or if they find them- 
 selves in the same Lobby with politicians who are extreme, 
 say with Lloyd George or the Irish. 
 
 ' They seem terrified of the slightest contact with these 
 men, and care nothing as to the real policy of their Leaders, 
 who may dislike as much as they do the extreme utterances 
 of Welsh or Irish M.P.'s. 
 
 ' But I must not run on with a letter already too long. 
 I do not forget, however, pleasant talks at Nauheim, and 
 the recollection has led me on farther than I intended 
 when I began this letter. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' SPElSrCEE.' 
 
 From the Right Hon. A. J. Balfour 
 
 September 18, 1903. 
 
 ' My Dear Sir, — I am well aware how easy is mis- 
 representation, both of general policy and of particular 
 statements, when a question is at issue which so naturally 
 and so rightly arouses public sentiment, as does the 
 miserable condition of Macedonia. 
 
 ' My statement, however, in the House of Commons 
 was, I believe, perfectly accurate. The reforms proposed 
 by Austria and Russia were, no doubt, modest in their 
 character. Those Powers thought (and, can anyone say 
 wrongly ? ) that the great thing was to have genuine reforms 
 initiated, and that some substantial instalment of good 
 government was easier to obtain, and, therefore, far more 
 efficacious, than the most admirable "paper " constitution 
 which was too ambitious to be easily carried out. 
 
 ' The responsibility for not having given even this modest 
 instalment of reforms a chance must be divided between 
 the Porte and the Revolutionary Committees. Their 
 postponement was criminal, and I believe I was right in 
 saying in August that at that time the balance of criminality 
 lay with the Committees. 
 
 ' I can assure you there is no " apathy " on the part 
 
 II
 
 LORD SPENCER 389 
 
 of the Government. It would, however, be insanity, 
 in my opinion, to take independent action. In the present 
 condition of affairs it must be through the two Powers most 
 closely interested that European intervention in the affairs 
 of the near East must be exercised. The opposite policy 
 would, I think, not be better, but worse, for the populations 
 concerned.' 
 
 ' Yours truly, 
 
 ' Arthur James Balfour.' 
 
 From Lord Spencer 
 
 November 8, 1903. 
 
 ' My Dear Canon, — Your letter touches me very 
 much : you appreciate the noble character of my beloved 
 wife.^ Her purity, her high principles, her ability, her 
 marvellous courage and patience, were most remarkable 
 and uncommon. She was a very true Liberal, too, for 
 you refer to politics. 
 
 ' It is hard indeed to face the world alone without her 
 help and blessing and counsel. I thank you for your 
 sympathy. 
 
 ' Yours very truly, 
 
 ' Spencer.' 
 
 • Charlotte, Countess Spencer, died October 31, 1903.
 
 CHAPTER Xil 
 
 L ENVOI 
 
 Vattene in pace, alma beata e bella. — Ariosto. 
 
 LETTERS OF CONDOLENCE RECEIVED BY MRS. MALCOLM 
 MACOOLL ON THE OCCASION OF HER HUSBAND's DEATH 
 
 From the President of the Assembly of United Nonconfor- 
 mist Sunday School Teachers in the City of Ripon 
 
 ' A2)ril 5, 1907. — This assembly wishes to express its 
 deepest sympathy with Mrs. MacColl in her bereavement. 
 In doing so we would thank God for the great gifts He 
 bestowed upon the late Canon MacColl and for his soul of 
 goodness. He was a strong, courageous, high-souled man, 
 electric with the desire to advocate and defend every good 
 cause, and was possessed with a genuine devotion to God 
 and His reign on earth. We pray that Mrs. MacColl in 
 the remembrance of him and his noble life may have the 
 comforting of the God of all Comfort. 
 
 ' Signed on behalf of the Assembly, 
 
 ' W. Watts.' 
 
 From the Rev. S. E. Gladstone 
 
 April 7, 1907. 
 
 ' Dear Mrs. MacColl, — I Kttle realized when I called 
 last year that I should not see my dear friend again. It 
 is so long since I jfirst knew him, through my father, and 
 I seem to have known him so intimately — and to know 
 him was to love him — that I cannot at all realize that he 
 has been called away from this life where he has taken so 
 
 390
 
 L'ENVOI 391 
 
 strenuous, so notable, and so unselfish a part. He will 
 be very much missed by a very wide circle, and by people 
 of most various opinions. I shaU never forget, in particular, 
 his devoted, loving service towards my Father — and at a 
 time when but few Churchmen, alas ! followed him. And 
 liis great and exact knowledge, and his singular power of 
 grasping difficult problems, but most of all his chivalrous 
 and vehement championship of the cause of Eastern Chris- 
 tians, are indeed matters of justest honour. May God 
 comfort your heart in this unexpected cutting-short of 
 your earthly happiness! Yet you will be upheld by a 
 thousand memories of his single-minded, earnest, and indeed 
 brilliant personality. 
 
 ' Yours sincerely, 
 
 ' Stephen E. Gladstone.' 
 
 From the Synodal Secretary of the Convocatio7i of York 
 
 April 8, 1907. 
 
 ' Madam, — Will you allow me, as a fellow member with 
 Canon MacColl of the York House of Convocation, to offer 
 my most sincere expressions of sympathy in this your hour 
 of great bereavement ? 
 
 ' The extent of our loss in Convocation will only be 
 reahzed as time reveals how much we stand in need of 
 Canon MacColl's wise counsels and intrepid outspokenness ; 
 but our bereavement is as nothing compared with the 
 irreparable loss which has fallen upon yourself. 
 
 ' The charming combination of sweet reasonableness 
 together with the unflinching courage of his own convictions 
 won the hearts of all those with whom Canon MacColl 
 came in contact ; and there are many to-day who, although 
 unknown to you personally, will remember you in inter- 
 cession because of the esteem they felt for him whom you 
 now mourn. 
 
 'Believe me, 
 
 ' Yours most truly, 
 
 ' Henry Robinson.'
 
 392 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 From Sir Walter Phillimore 
 
 April 8, 1907. 
 
 ' Dear Mrs. MacColl, — My wife and I were much 
 shocked to see the sudden and to us quite unexpected death 
 of your husband, and we feel so much sympathy for you 
 in your great loss. 
 
 ' It seems but a short time since we all four met, well 
 and full of life, at Ripon ; and since then I all but died in 
 October, and now the Canon is taken from us. There 
 was no one quite hke him — none to fill his place in public 
 life, and we have stood side by side in several conflicts 
 for the good cause. 
 
 ' He had certainly a pecuhar and a great hterary gift, 
 when his feelings were roused and some object which he 
 had at heart was at stake. 
 
 ' But you ^\^ll be thinking more of him in private — of 
 his geniahty, and the warmth of his affection and kindness. 
 I fear you will miss him very much. 
 
 'We both beg you to remember that we are thinking 
 
 o^ y^^' ' Sincerely yours, 
 
 ' Walter G. F. Phillimore.' 
 
 From the Bight Hon. Herbert Gladstone 
 
 April 9, 1907. 
 
 ' Dear Mrs. MacColl, — The loss of one of my oldest 
 and best of friends I hope justifies me in expressing my 
 very great sympathy with you. My mind is full of the 
 memories and associations which endeared him to me. I 
 owe him more than I can say. He took me through my 
 first Election contest in 1880, working night and day. That 
 was for my Father, which sanctifies the recollection. But 
 ever since he was one of the dearest friends, the most genial 
 of hosts, and one of the readiest to give counsel. 
 
 ' My Father loved him to the end of his life, and I grieve 
 that he has gone. 
 
 ' Believe me, 
 
 * Most faithfully yours, 
 
 ' H. J. Gladstone.'
 
 L'ENVOI 393 
 
 From the Right Hon. James Bryce 
 
 April 13, 1907. 
 
 ' My Dear Mrs. MacColl,— My wife and I were deeply 
 grieved to hear of the terrible sorrow which has come upon 
 you. When I saw your husband and you in January last, 
 he seemed to have quite recovered from his illness ; and I 
 had looked for a long and useful hf e for him. His departure 
 is an unspeakable loss to many good causes, for he was 
 an indomitable advocate of righteousness and justice and 
 humanity — one with whom it was a real pleasure to work. 
 I cannot tell you how sad it makes me to think that in such 
 life as may remain to me that pleasure will never again be 
 mine. Courage and energy such as his are rare indeed. I 
 hope that in the thought that so many friends grieve with 
 you, there may be, not indeed consolation, for that can 
 come only from a higher source, but some help to you in 
 bearing so sore a stroke. 
 
 ' With our deepest sympathy, believe me, 
 
 * Very sincerely yours, 
 
 'James Bryce.' 
 
 From Sir Edwin Pears 
 
 April 15, 1907. 
 
 ' Dear Mrs. MacColl,— My wife and I desire to join 
 our sympathy with that of many friends with you in your 
 bereavement. As one who, for thirty years, has been a fellow- 
 worker with the Canon on behalf of the Christian races of 
 the Ottoman Empire, I am in a position to appreciate the 
 noble, the simply invaluable, work he has done for them. 
 The loss to them and to England is a terrible one. He 
 knew the facts of the case, watched and noted all their 
 developments, and kept the British public, and especially 
 our Churchpeople, from falling into the apathy which, 
 without his constant vigilance, there is fear it would have 
 fallen into. Yes, the loss appears irreparable. The Arme- 
 nian patriarch sends you his benediction. Those of his 
 Church, as well as the members of the Orthodox Church 
 and the Bulgarian Church, feel that they have lost a great 
 friend. And they have indeed. For while his sympathies
 
 394 
 
 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 went out always for those who were suffering, he was 
 especially mindful of those who were desolate and oppressed 
 under the misrule of the Turk. His name was well known 
 throughout this empire, and many a fervent prayer has 
 been offered up for him and many a blessing called down 
 upon his head. 
 
 ' As a fighter for noble causes, as a man who cared for 
 the truth and was fearless in defence of what he regarded 
 as the right, he will be long remembered, and his name will 
 pass down into history as the feUow-worker with his friend 
 Gladstone, and as one who like him reverenced his conscience 
 as his king. 
 
 ' Believe me, dear Mrs. MacColl, 
 
 ' Very sincerely yours, 
 
 ' Edwin Pears.' 
 
 From the Armenian Patriarch 
 
 April 16, 1907. 
 ' Madam, — The name of your venerated husband Canon 
 Malcolm MacColl has been indeed such a subject of gratitude 
 and of affection to all our nation that his loss could not be 
 felt but with profound grief. 
 
 ' Accept, Madam, the testimony of condolence which 
 I render to his memory in my name and in the name of our 
 nation. 
 
 ' The Divine Judge, Who requires above all things from 
 men the sentiments of kindness, and the works of benevolence, 
 will know how in His inscrutable mercy to reward the 
 beloved one in the eternal Peace. 
 
 ' May Heaven, Madam, be bountiful to you with its 
 graces of strength and comfort. 
 
 ' The Armenian Patriarch, 
 
 ' Malachea Ormanian.' 
 
 From the Prolocutor of the Convocation of York 
 
 April 26, 1907. 
 ' Dear Madam,— I have been instructed by my col- 
 leagues of the Committee of the Lower House of Convoca- 
 tion to convey to you, wdth all respect, the assurance of their 
 sincere sympathy with you in the severe bereavement you
 
 L'ENVOI 395 
 
 have been called upon to sustain. They, too, have under- 
 gone in Canon MacColl's death a great loss, for he was in 
 a very peculiar way one on whose help they counted in the 
 difficult, anxious, and compUcated duties to wliich they 
 have been called. His extensive and minute knowledge 
 of Liturgiology and Church History were, if not unique, 
 certainly hardly surpassed, and made him a helper in our 
 work of the greatest importance. The feeling of regret 
 and grief, which I was commissioned to express to you in 
 the name of this important Committee, was unanimous 
 and deep. It will, I am sure, be equally felt by the whole 
 of the Convocation. 
 
 ' Personally, I have to express my own sincere concern 
 at the loss of a friend of many years' standing, from whom 
 I have on various occasions received most useful counsel 
 and information. 
 
 ' I have the honour to be, Madam, 
 
 ' Yours very faithfully, 
 
 ' Thomas E. Espin, D.D., D.C.L.' 
 
 From Lady Frederick Cavendish 
 
 May 22, 1907. 
 
 ' Dear Mrs. MacColl, — I was abroad when I saw in the 
 paper the death of our old and true friend, your dear husband. 
 I say our, for you know how I have all my life been one with 
 my relations here.^ And I could indeed claim the Canon for 
 a personal friend of many years. He was one of the first to 
 come to me, full of warm sympathy, when dear Lord Frederick 
 had accepted the Chief Secretaryship of Ireland, and one 
 could always depend upon his faithful, kind heart. 
 
 * And what noble, strenuous, able work he has done 
 for the Church ! One may indeed feel that " his works 
 do follow him " and that there are many to whom his 
 memory will be dear. 
 
 ' Believe me, with true sympathy and sorrow, 
 ' Yours sincerely, 
 
 ' Lucy C. F. Cavendish.' 
 
 1 At Hawardon.
 
 396 MALCOLM MACCOLL 
 
 SERMONS 
 
 From a Sermon preached in the Parish Church of Hawarden, 
 on Sunday, April 7, 1907, by the Rev. Harry Dreiv, 
 Hector. 
 
 ' With the thought of friends departed in our minds, 
 there will come before us at this moment one, Canon MacColl, 
 to whose thoughtful and interesting sermons you have 
 often listened in this church, who was with us but a very- 
 short time ago, and v/hom it has pleased God to call at this 
 Eastertide without warning, without pain, into His nearer 
 presence in Paradise. In him we have lost one of our 
 oldest, truest links with the past — one who loved this place 
 and all its associations, and who was always ready to give 
 us his help when asked. We shall always think of him as 
 one of the bravest and best of friends, so loyal, so simple- 
 hearted, with his strong and clear intellect, so affectionate 
 and unselfish in character ; of whom it may safely be said 
 that he never made an enemy, though he never feared to 
 draw his sword on behalf of what at the moment might be 
 an unpopular cause if he felt it was a righteous one. " Of 
 such is the Kingdom of Heaven." For him our prayer 
 to-night wUl be that God may grant him that rest and 
 peace in Paradise on which he had himself so strong and 
 clear a hold.' 
 
 From a Sermon preached in St. Saviour's Church, Chelsea, 
 on Sunday, April 7, 1907, by the Rev. George Edmundson, 
 Vicar. 
 
 Peace, perfect peace, death shadowing us and ourn ? 
 Jesus has vanquish'd death and all its powers. 
 
 ' These words will be sung in the course of a few days 
 in a Yorkshire village churchyard over the grave of one who, 
 only a short week ago, took an active part in the services 
 of this church. Canon MacColl, on Easter Eve, gave an 
 address to Communicants from this pulpit ; on Easter Day 
 he was the Celebrant at the 8.30 a.m. Celebration of the 
 Holy Communion, and he was present as a worshipper at 
 Evensong. This service of his, as Celebrant on Easter
 
 L'ENVOI 397 
 
 Day, the Day of Hope and Resurrection, was to be the 
 last act of ministry the Master was to permit him to perform. 
 Only five days later the call came, and " he was not, for 
 God took him." In a moment, quickly, peacefully, without 
 pain, without a struggle he fell asleep. Surely, to one 
 prepared to meet his God, a bhssful end — a translation from 
 a lower hfe to a higher, without any passing through the 
 Valley of the Shadow of Death — a going home to rest. 
 Canon MacCoU w^as a man of conspicuous abiUty, unusual 
 learning, and indefatigable energy. He was a strenuous 
 and a ready controversialist, strong in his convictions and 
 fearless in upholding them. He spent a long hfe in the 
 service of the Master he loved, of the Faith he professed, 
 and of the Church of which he was a devoted son ; and 
 he is to be accounted happy in having been permitted to 
 fight the good fight and to finish his course while still in 
 the full possession of his powers. We none of us know 
 when the time of our departure is at hand ; and that man 
 alone is truly happy who can feel in his heart that, come 
 the summons when it may, he is ready to say, " Yea, Lord, 
 I come quickly ! Here such abilities and opportunities 
 as Thou hast granted me, I have used to the uttermost, 
 but I know Thou hast other and higher work for me to do 
 than any on earth. Into Thy Hands I commend my spirit ; 
 be it done unto Thy servant according to Thy Will." 
 
 ' So God giveth His beloved peace, for to him only 
 Cometh perfect peace, whose trust is stayed on God.' 
 
 FIDELIS USQUE AD MOETEM
 
 INDEX 
 
 Abbey, Rev. Mr., 335 
 
 Aberdeen, 15, 17 
 
 Aberdeen, Lady, 129 
 
 Aberdeen, Lord, 40, 129 
 
 Act of Union, 138 
 
 Acton, Lord, .310, 316-7 
 
 Adam, Mr., 141 
 
 Addington, Lord, 26 
 
 Affirmation BiU, 85-7, 305-6, 351, 372 
 
 Afghanistan, 59-60, 70 ; ' Causes of 
 the War in,' 70 
 
 Agram University, 53 
 
 Albemarle Club, 236 
 
 Anglo-Turkish Convention, 140, 177 
 
 Arco, Countess, 316 
 
 Argyll, Duke of, 60, 148, 250 ; letters 
 quoted, 377, 381-5 
 
 Axiosto, quoted, 390 
 
 Armenian massacres, 139 seq., 205 
 
 Armenian Patriarch, quoted, 394 
 
 Armenian Question, 206 n., 208, 229, 
 260-1, 332, 345 seq., 363, 380 
 
 Armenian ReUef Fund, 146, 161, 187 
 
 Armitstead, George, 208 
 
 Arnold, Matthew, quoted, 215, 236 
 
 Asquith, H. H., 155 
 
 Athanasian Creed, 35, 273, 317, 
 364; Lord Salisbury on, 276 
 Cardinal Newman and, 293-9 
 Dr. DoUinger and, 311, 315 
 Charles Kingsley on, 318-20 
 Button on, 326-7 ; Dr. Liddon and, 
 335 seq. 
 
 Athenaeum, 41 
 
 Athenaeum Club, 236 
 
 Athens, 196-8, 201-2, 240 
 
 Austria, 199-201 
 
 Bad Nauheim, 241-2, 388 
 Bagot, Dr., 300 
 Baker, Sir Samuel W., 366-7 
 Balfour, Capt. .C. B., 223 
 
 Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J., 82, 225, 350 ; 
 letters quoted, 379-80, 388-9 
 
 Barbauld, Mrs. A. L., quoted, 243 
 
 Barran, Mr., 114 
 
 Barry, Bishop Alfred, 3 
 
 Bath, Lady, 58, 60, 250 
 
 Bath, Lord, 58-60, 65, 76, 82, 
 101, 105, 236 n., 260, 254; his 
 ' Bulgaria,' 64 ; letters quoted, 237, 
 345-364 
 
 Bath, Lord (the younger), 174, 176, 
 179 
 
 Baxter, Mr., 59, 72 
 
 Beaconsfield, Lord, 27, 43-4, 71, 98-9, 
 104, 110, 140, 170, 184, 230, 
 268-70, 321, 338 ; quoted, 37 ; ill 
 health, 40 ; and the Bulgarian 
 atrocities, 45-7, 56 ; and the 
 Russo-Turkish war, 57 ; and 
 Afghanistan, 59 ; his speech fore- 
 casted, 61-2 ; resignation, 67-9 ; 
 death, 94, 113; and Cabinet 
 secrets, 186 ; Gladstone on, 248, 
 251 ; on Lord Salisbury, 277-8 
 
 Beauchamp, Lord, 337 
 
 Belgrade, 47-8 
 
 Benson, Archbishop, 217, 351 
 
 Beresford-Hope, A. J., 40 
 
 Berlin Congress, 58, 200, 283, 327 
 
 Berlin, Treaty of, 140, 177, 370 
 
 Bevan, Johnstone, 83 
 
 Bickersteth, Bishop, 78 n. 
 
 Bigg, Rev. Charles, 22 
 
 Bismarck, Count Herbert, 236 n. 
 
 Bismarck, Prince, 32, 56, 116, 348, 
 380; Lord Salisbury on, 279; 
 quoted, 283 
 
 Bonn, Conference at, 41, 54, 309-13 
 
 Boulanger, General, 340 
 
 Boyle, G. F. (afterwards Lord Glas- 
 gow), 15 
 
 Bradlaugh, Mr., 71, 85-7, 351 
 
 Brand, Mr. Speaker, 88 n. 
 
 Brassey, Lord, 370 
 
 399
 
 400 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Bright, John, 72, 130, 267, 347-8; 
 
 quoted, 25, 237-8 ; letter quoted, 
 
 368 
 Bright, Prof. WiUiam, 2, 4, 27, 36-8 
 British Critic, 246 
 Broadhurst, Mr., 353 
 Broglie, Due de, 189 
 Brougham, Lord, 284 
 Browne, Bishop E. Harold, 41, 313 ; 
 
 and the Primacy, 351 
 Browne, Bishop George F., 2, 385 
 Browning, Robert, 236 n. ; quoted, 
 
 237 ; letter quoted, 377-8 
 Bruce, Tom, 369 
 Bryce, Lord, 70, 393 
 Buccleuch, Duchess of, 65 
 Buccleuch, Duke of, 375 ; quoted, 
 
 104 
 Buchanan, Sii- A., 247 
 Buckle, G. E., 323 
 Bulgaria and Greece, 198-202 
 Bulgarian atrocities, 45-57, 230 
 Bulgarian Question, 117, 120, 193 
 Burke, Edmund, 119 
 Burns & Gates, Messrs., 307 
 Bute, Lord, 147 
 Butler, Bishop, 173 
 Butler, Rev. WiUiam Archer, 298 
 Byron Society, 161 
 
 Caine, Mr., 109 
 
 Cairns, Lord, 37, 59, 250, 349, 387 
 
 Cameron, Mr., 377-8 
 
 Cameron, Mrs., 378 
 
 CampbeU-Bannerman, Sir Henry, 131, 
 
 181, 387 ; letters quoted, 384, 386 
 Capes, Rev. J. M., 299 
 Cardwell, Lord, 120 
 Carington, Rupert, 47 
 Carlile, Prebendary, 234 n. 
 Carhsle House, 13 
 Cariton Club, 101 
 Carnarvon, Lord, 153, 321, 360 
 Carpenter, Bishop, 78 n. 
 Case, Canon, 83-4 
 Cashel-Hoey, Mr., 236 
 Cassels, Mr., 236 n. ; ' Supernatural 
 
 Rehgion,' 84 
 Castle Douglas, 5-6 
 ' Cathohcus,' 284 
 Cavendish, Lady Frederick, 395 
 Cavendish, Lord Frederick, 395 
 Cazenove, Rev. J. G., 24, 28 
 Cecil, Lord Hugh, 157, 169, 174, 
 
 231, 267; on the Education Bill, 
 
 226 
 Central African Mission, 34 
 Challoner, Bishop, 295 
 
 Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. Joseph, 99, 
 103, 131, 347-8 ; and Disestablish- 
 ment, 117; opposes Home Rule, 
 127, 132 ; and the Irish Question, 
 135 ; Colonial Secretary, 148 ; and 
 Crete, 197 ; and the Transvaal, 
 198; Lord Bath on, 352 
 
 Chambers, Rev. J. C, 13 
 
 Chaplin, Henry, 106, 107, 350 
 
 Chesson, Mr., 324 
 
 Chester, 144-7, 151, 155, 158 
 
 Chesterfield, Lord, 128 
 
 Cheyne, Mr., 287 
 
 Cheyne, Rev. Patrick, 15 
 
 China-Japanese Question, 208-9 
 
 Church Association, 75, 233 
 
 Church Congress, Brighton, 39, 225, 
 312 ; Plymouth, 54 
 
 Church DiscipUne Bill, 223, 225, 
 384 
 
 Church News, 27 
 
 Church Review, 28 
 
 Church Times, 27-8, 64, 285 
 
 Church, Dean R. W., 47, 73-8, 83 ; 
 and Cardinal Newman, 284-6, 351 ; 
 letters quoted, 332-5 
 
 Churchill, Lord Randolph, 82, 85, 
 107, 113, 119-20, 256, 348 seg. 
 
 Churton, Archdeacon, 298 
 
 Clark, Sir Andrew, 241, 265 
 
 Clayden, P. W., 184 
 
 CHfford, Dr., 177 
 
 Cluseret, General, 323 
 
 Coercion Act, 107 
 
 Coercion Bill, 132 
 
 Coleridge, Mr., 268 
 
 Connaught, Duke and Duchess of, 
 84 
 
 Constantinople, 140, 152, 156, 186-9, 
 201, 209, 210, 262, 323 ; German 
 officers at, 203 ; conference at, 
 278 
 
 Contemporary Review, 147, 176, 339 
 
 Cooper, C. A., 169 
 
 Corfu, 382 
 
 Cornhill Magazine, 186 
 
 Cotes, Mr., 370 
 
 County Government Bill, 106 
 
 Courtney, Mr., 132 
 
 Cowley Brotherhood, 238 
 
 Cranborne, Lord, 349 
 
 Cran brook. Lord, 22, 76 
 
 Creighton, Bishop Mandell, 218, 221 
 
 Crete, 152, 158, 160, 193-5, 199, 201, 
 205, 282, 383 ; Greeks in, 191-2 ; 
 massacres in, 196-7 
 Crewe, Lord and Lady, 385 
 Crimean War, 183, 194, 321 
 Crimes Act, 115
 
 INDEX 
 
 401 
 
 Cristich, Mr., 48 
 Crompton-Stansfield, Major-General 
 
 W. H., 240 
 Crompton-Stansfield, Consuelo Albinia 
 
 (afterwards Mrs. MacColl),'240 
 Cross, Lord, 165, 350 
 Cumbrae, Isle of, 15 
 Currie, Sir PhiUp, 143, 145 
 Curteis, Rev. Mr., 335 
 Curzon, George, 176-7 
 Cyprus, Treaty of, 261 
 
 Daily Chronicle, 21, 150, 155-74, 183-4, 
 190, 195, 203 
 
 Daily New8,2\, 85, 161, 163, 177, 181, 
 184-6, 189, 203, 248; MacColl's 
 letters to, 43-4, 57, 88, 116; Glad- 
 stone on, 249 
 
 Daily Telegraph, 21, 38, 165, 169-71, 
 321 
 
 Dalkeith, Lord, 64 
 
 Dardanelles, 173 
 
 Delane, J. T., 54, 271-2, 308 ; letters 
 quoted, 29-30, 237 
 
 Denison, Archdeacon G. A., 268-9; 
 letters quoted, 374 
 
 Derby, Edward Henry, 15th Earl 
 of, 45-7, 57, 65, 99, 126-7, 281 v. ; 
 letter quoted, 339 
 
 Devonshire Oub, 67, 99 n., 236-8, 
 342 
 
 Devonshire, Duke of, 148, 165 
 
 Diakovar, 49-50 
 
 Dicey, Mr., 130 
 
 Dickens, Charles, quoted, 302 
 
 Dickson, Dr., 209 
 
 Dilke, Sir Charles, 167, 325, 353, 
 358, 360 
 
 Dillon, John, 130, 257, 376 
 
 DiUwyn, Mr., 325 
 
 Dimitroff, Mr.. 198 
 
 Disabilities BiU, 18-20 
 
 Disestablishment, 25-8, 76 n., 103, 
 117, 325-6, 378-9; Dissenters and, 
 117 
 
 DoUinger, Dr., 32, 39, 47, 54, 115, 
 215; at Bonn, 41-2; and Glad- 
 stone, 253-5, 265; letters quoted, 
 308-17 ; Gladstone on, 309 ; his 
 Bonn Conference, 309-12 
 
 Drew, Rev. Harry, quoted, 396 
 
 Drummond Wolff, Sir Henry, 82, 
 350 ; letters quoted, 372 
 
 Dublin Review, 301-2 
 
 Dufferin, Lord, 283, 347 
 
 Duffy, Gavan, 82 
 
 Duncombe, Dean Augustus, 37 
 
 Eastbourne, 181 
 
 Eastern Question Association, 58 
 
 ' Ecce Homo,' 288-9 
 
 Ecclesiastical Discipline, Royal Com- 
 mission on, 226 ra. 
 
 Echo, 61, 346 
 
 Edhem Pasha, 203 
 
 Edinburgh, 186 
 
 Edinburgh Review, 33 
 
 Edmundson, Rev. George, 396-7 
 
 Education Bill, 157, 226, 242 
 
 Education League, 38 
 
 Education Question, 172, 226-9 
 
 Edward VIL King, 101, 165 
 
 Egerton, Major, 84 
 
 Egypt, 59, 88, 107, il3, 183, 185, 
 207. 265, 329, 332-3 
 
 EUenborough, Lord, 387 
 
 EUicott, Bishop C. J., 323 
 
 Elliot, Arthur, 127 
 
 Elliot, Sir H., 247 
 
 Escott, Mr., 278 
 
 Espin, Rev. Dr. Thomas E., 395 
 
 ' Essays and Reviews,' 18, 28 
 
 Evans, Arthur, 371 
 
 ' Ex-Tory,' 22, 64 
 
 Exeter, Bishop of, 225-6 
 
 Fawcett, Henry, 323 
 
 Fessler, Mr., 302 
 
 Ffoulkes, Rev. E. S., 299, 301 
 
 Field, Admiral, 181 
 
 Fishmongers' Hall, 77 
 
 Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond, 369-71 
 
 Forbes, Bishop Alexander, 7-12, 15, 
 
 215 
 Forster, W. E., 55, 94, 165,'"346 
 Fortescue, Rev. E. B. K., 2 
 Fortnightly Review, 176, 195, 198, 202, 
 
 204, 205, 218, 278 n., 372, 386-7 
 Fourth Party, 82, 349-50 
 Fowler, Henry, 109, 111 
 France, 202, 207-8 
 Franchise Bill, 88-112, 121, 
 
 352 
 Franco-Prussian war, 32 
 Freeman, Prof. E. A., 237; letter 
 
 quoted, 371 
 Freeman's Journal, 56 
 Frere, Sir Bartle, 323 
 Frome, 43, 65 
 Froude, Hurrell, 307 
 Froude, J. A., 249 ; letters auoted, 
 
 321-4 
 
 G , Rev. Mr., 72 
 
 ' Garden of the Soul,' 295-6 
 
 2d
 
 402 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Garrod, Dr. Archibald, 332 
 Getitlemari's Magazine, 250 
 George, David Lloyd, 353, 388 
 Germany, and Crete, 200-1, 205; 
 and the Turkish Army, 203 ; and 
 Greece, 207, 210-1 
 Germany, Emperor of, 205, 207 
 Gladstone, Herbert (afterwards Lord 
 Gladstone), 64-6, 81, 202,211, 266 ; 
 member for Leeds, 67 ; and the 
 Irish Question, 119 ; at Leeds, 183 ; 
 letter quoted, 392 
 Gladstone, Rev. Stephen Edward, 24, 
 
 36, 243 ; letter quoted, 390-1 
 Gladstone, W. E., 14, 18, 22 seq. ; 
 founder of Glenalmond College, 2, 
 8 ; his ' Church Principles ' 12, 75 w. ; 
 letters quoted, 12, 97-8, 244^66; 
 member for Oxford, 18, 22-4 ; on 
 MacCoU as pamphleteer, 21 ; and 
 the Irish Church, 26-8 ; his famous 
 Edinburgh article, 33 ; and Edward 
 King's appointment to Oxford, 36-7 ; 
 and Italian Unity, 39 ; his ' Vatican- 
 ism,' 41, 303-4 ; and ' Bulgarian hor- 
 rors,' 50 n. , 1 53 ; and the Russo-Turk- 
 ish war, 57-8 ; Midlothian Campaign, 
 63-7, 251 ; Prime Minister, 69 ; and 
 MacColl's promotion, 71-6 ; resig- 
 nation, 79 ; illness, 85 ; and the 
 Aflfirmation Bill, 85-7 ; his Franchise 
 BiU, 88-93 ; on the House of Lords, 
 91, 102 ; on Lord Salisbury, 94-5, 
 109, 120 ; anxiety to retire, 95-6 ; on 
 Redistribution Bill and obstruction, 
 97-8; visits Denmark, 116; an- 
 nouncement of Home Rule, 118-9; 
 his conservatism, 120 ; and the Irish 
 Question, 122 seq. ; his ' Plan of 
 Campaign,' 130 ; his second Home 
 Rule BUI, 138 ; on the Armenian 
 Massacres, 139, 260-1, 322 ; speech 
 at Chester, 143-7 ; supports Lord 
 Salisbury on the Eastern Question, 
 151 seq., 162, 174, 264 ; Liverpool 
 speech, 167-8, 173, 181, 195, 205, 
 208 ; and Bishop Butler's works, 
 173, 265 ; ' Letter to the Duke of 
 Westminster,' 194 n., 196 ; last 
 illness, 211-3, death, 214; 'Kin 
 beyond Sea,' 249 ; on Beaconsfield, 
 248, 251 ; on sex, 257-8 ; cataract, 
 260 ; on Lord Rosebcry, 264 ; and 
 Cardinal Newman, 302-7 ; and 
 Dr. DoUinger, 309, 312-3, 317; 
 on R. H. Hutton, 324; Dean 
 Church on, 332-5 ; and the 
 Primacy, 351 ; Lord Fitzmaurice 
 on, 370 
 
 Gladstone, Mrs. W. E., 63, 188, 236, 
 
 250 ; quoted, 88 
 Glasgow, Lord, 15 
 Glenalmond College, 2-4 
 Glenfiiman, 1-2 
 Globe, 146, 165 
 Glyn, George (afterwards Lord Wol- 
 
 verton), 29 
 Glyn, Mrs. Pascoe, 17 7i. 
 GoUghtly, Rev. C. P., 299 
 Goltz, General, 203 
 Goluchowski, M., 150, 167, 169 
 Gordon, General, 115, 182, 332; 
 
 Gladstone on, 265 
 Gore, Rev. Mr., 335 
 Gorst, Harold, 82 
 Gorst, Sir John, 82, 349, 350 
 Goschen, Lord, 76, 120, 165, 358-63 ; 
 
 and Turkey, 380 
 Graham of Gartmore, Mr., 10 
 Grant of Kilgraston, Mr., 10, 13, 
 
 18 
 Granville, Lord, 40 n., 65-9, 236, 
 
 380 ; letter quoted, 367-8 
 Greece, 193-5, 198, 202, 262 
 Greece, King George of, 191-6, 201-4, 
 
 383 ; honoxirs MacColl, 242 
 Greece, Crown Princess of, 198, 202 
 Greek Indemnity, Fund for, 207 ; 
 
 Loan, 210 
 Green, Rev. S. F., 216, 252-3 
 Greenwood, F., 170, 186 
 Gregory, Mr., 268-9 
 Greig, Rev. Mr., 315-6 
 Gre'^e, Lady Rosa, 267 
 Greville-Nugent, Colonel (afterwards 
 
 Lord GreviUe), 25, 136, 266-8 
 Grey, Albert, 127 
 Grosvenor, Lady, 174 
 Grosvenor House Committee, 48, 142, 
 
 147-50, 155-6, 159, 163, 193; as 
 
 the ' Byron Society,' 161 
 Guardian, 4, 21, 28, 35, 40-2, 51, 64, 
 
 75, 86-7, 159, 216, 291, 296-9, 336, 
 
 371 
 
 Hamilton, E. W., 108 n. 
 
 Hannah, Archdeacon John, 2, 4, 26, 
 
 86 
 Hanotaux, M., 203, 206, 211 
 Harcourt, Lewis, 237 
 Harcourt, Sir William, 38, 83, 132, 
 
 148-9, 163, 166, 175, 186, 236 n.. 
 
 278 ; attacks RituaHsm, 217-25 ; 
 
 and the Armenian Question, 208-9 ; 
 
 quoted, 237 
 Hardy, Gathorne (afterwards Lord 
 
 Cranbrook),' 22, 27 
 
 1
 
 INDEX 
 
 403 
 
 Harrogate, 174-5, 178-80 
 
 Harte, Bret, 81, 236 n. ; letters quoted, 
 341-5 
 
 Hartington, Lord, 55, 58, 65 n., 67-9, 
 96, 120, 130-3, 137-8, 206, 256, 
 360-1 ; quoted, 105 ; and Home 
 Rule, 127-8 ; letter quoted, 373-4 
 
 Hawarden Church, 159, 161 
 
 Hayter, Sir A., 237 
 
 Hayward, A., 94, 251 
 
 Helps, Sir Arthur, quoted, 233 
 
 Henniker, Arthur and Mrs., 343 
 
 Herbert, Sidney, 120 
 
 Hereford, Bishop of, 259 
 
 Herschell, Lord, 132 
 
 Hertford, 169 
 
 Hicks-Beach, Sir Michael (afterwards 
 Lord St. Aldwyn), 114, 120, 165, 
 176, 349 
 
 Historical Review, 256 
 
 Home Rule Bill, 128 seq., 256, 280-1 
 (see also under Irish Question) 
 
 Hood, Lord, 101 
 
 Hope-Scott, J. R., 2, 286, 307 
 
 House of Lords, 103-4, 122, 269-70, 
 352 ; Gladstone on, 91, 102 
 
 Household suffrage, 104 
 
 Hozier, Colonel, 130 
 
 Hubbard, J. G. (afterwards Lord 
 Addington), 26, 114 
 
 Humble, Mr., 17 
 
 Hunt, Holman, 236 n. 
 
 Huntly, Lord, 116 
 
 Hutton, Rev. Mr., 71 
 
 Hutton, R. H., 51, 77-8, 83, 129, 
 160, 221, 279 ; on Home Rule, 127, 
 133-4; letters quoted, 324-32 ; on 
 the Athanasian Creed, 326-7 
 
 Huxley, T. H., 377 
 
 India, 354 
 
 Irish Arms Bill, 83 
 
 Irish Church Disestablishment, 25, 
 
 26, 28, 136, 267-71 ; Bill, 127, 138, 
 
 367 
 Irish Church Suspensory Bill, 268-9 
 Irish Land Act, 91, 110, 328, 357 
 Irish Land League, 359 
 Irish Question, 118 acq., 347-9; 
 
 Round Table Conference on, 132 n. ; 
 
 MacColl on, 134-6 ; Hutton on, 
 
 327-31 
 Irish Tenants Bill, 82, 110 
 Irish University Bill, 57 
 Irving, Edward, quoted, 17 
 Italian Green Book, 261 
 Italy, 202, 208 
 
 Jackson, Bishop, 234 
 
 James, Sir Henry (afterwards Lord 
 
 James of Hereford), 83, 132; 
 
 letter quoted, 375-6 
 Jay, Rev. Osborne, 234 
 Jenkins, Rev. R., 253 
 Jew Bill, 268 
 Jowett, Prof., 18, 24 
 
 Keble, Rev. John, 10, 11, 215, 284; 
 
 quoted, 35 
 Reunion, Bishop G. W., 260 
 Kensit agitation, 224-5 
 Kenyon-Slaney, Col., 228 7i., 229 
 Kerr, Lord Charles, 10 
 Khartoum, Fall of, 115 
 Kimberiey, Lord, 148-9, 166, 324 
 King, Bishop, 36-7 
 Kingsley, Canon Charles, 35, 244-5, 
 
 336; defends Athanasian Creed, 
 
 275 ; letters quoted, 317-20 
 Kingsley, Sirs. Charles, letter quoted, 
 
 364-5 
 Kinnaird, the Hon. Arthur, 20 
 Kintail, 1-2 
 Kirkby Overblow, 243 
 Kitchener, Lord, 229 
 Kitchin, Dean G. W., 189 
 Knaresborough, Bishop of, 243 
 Knowles' ' Sjmiposium on Turkey,' 
 
 263 
 
 Labotjchere, Henry, 131 
 
 Land Purchase Bill, 135 
 
 Langhorne, Rev. W. H., 234 
 
 Langley, Archbishop, 21 
 
 Lansdowne, Lord, 165 
 
 Larissa, 203 
 
 Lawrence, Lord, 70 
 
 Lawson, Sir WUfrid, 171, 369 
 
 Layard, Sir H., 250, 323 
 
 Lee, Rev. F. G., 27 
 
 Leeds, 64, 67 
 
 Leeds Mercury, 179 
 
 Lefevre, Mr., 237 
 
 Legh, T. W., 380 
 
 Leigh, Gilbert, 106 n. 
 
 Letterfearn, 1 
 
 Lewis, Sir G. C, 20 
 
 Lewis, J., 217 
 
 Liddon, Dr. H. P., 35-6, 41-2, 78, 
 83, 274, 314, 317-9, 371, 377; 
 quoted, 45 ; investigates Bulgarian 
 atrocities, 45-52, 247 ; in Ireland, 
 56 ; letters quoted, 335-41 ; de- 
 clines Bishopric of Edinburgh, 375 
 
 Lightfoot, Bishop, 259
 
 404 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Limerick, Lord, 277 
 
 Lincoln, Bishop of, 247 
 
 Littledale, Dr. R. F., 113, 315, 335 
 
 Liverpool, 167-8, 173-4, 181 
 
 Llandaff, Bishop of, 259 
 
 Lloyd, Sampson, 106 n. 
 
 Lobanoff, Prince, 150, 163, 167-9, 
 
 188-9 
 Local Government Bill, 135 
 Longmans, Green & Co., 182, 269, 
 
 343, 379 
 Lothian, Lord, 375 
 Lowe, Canon Edward C, 371-2 
 Lowe, Rev. E. G., 85 
 Lowther, Mr., 107 
 Lumley, Messrs., 290 
 Lyttelton, Rev. E., 169 
 
 MacColl, Hugh (brother), 12 n. 
 
 MacCoU, John (father), 1 
 
 MacColl, Malcolm (' Galium '), birth, 
 1 ; education, 2 ; exhibitioner at 
 Glenalmond, 2-3 ; foimds debating 
 society, 3 ; first pamphlet, 4 ; 
 private tutorships, 5 ; ordination 
 to Castle Douglas, 6-7 ; dismissal, 
 7 ; letters to Mr. Gladstone, 9-14, 
 18 ; goes to London, 13 ; at 
 Carlisle House, 13-4; visits Italy, 
 15; publishes a sermon, 15; at 
 St. Barnabas, Pimlico, 17-9 ; in 
 St. Petersburg, 19-20 ; at Knights- 
 bridge, 21 ; degree of M.A., 
 21 ; as a pamphleteer, 21 ; his 
 pseudonyms, 21-2 ; connections 
 with the Press, 21 ; ' Mr. Gladstone 
 and Oxford,' 24; on the Irish 
 Church, 25, 27-8, 291; in Italy, 
 26 ; at Ober-Ammergau, 30-2, 
 293 ; the living of St. George's, 
 Botolph Lane, 33-4 ; his attitude 
 towards Confession, 33-4 ; and the 
 Athanasian Creed, 35, 273, 
 293-8, 311; and Edward King's 
 appointment to Oxford, 36-7; 
 lectiu-es in St. Paul's, 41 ; visit to 
 Servia, 45-55, 247 ; ' The Eastern 
 Question,' 55, 58, 69; tour in 
 Ireland, 56 ; forecasts Disraeli's 
 speech, 61-2 ; ' The Liberal Reason 
 Why,' 65; electioneering, 65-8 
 ' Causes of the Afghan War,' 70 
 contemplates resignation, 71-4 
 Gladstone's offers to, 73-6 ; accepts 
 Canonry of Ripon, 76 ; restores 
 St. George's, 76-7 ; discomfort 
 at Ripon, 78-80 ; lectures at 
 Ripon, 81; 'Ghost Stories,' 84; 
 
 correspondence with Lord Salisbury, 
 89-122, 266-83; on Gladstone, 
 96, 136 ; salmon fishing, 101, 236 ; 
 interview with Lord Salisbury, 
 102-11 ; and the Irish Question, 
 118 seq.; his 'Arguments for 
 and against Home Rule,' 126 ; 
 ' England's Responsibility towards 
 Armenia,' 140 ; urges Lord Salis- 
 bury to take action, 164; 
 influencing the Press, 165 ; ' The 
 Sultan and the Powers,' 182-3, 
 187-8, 229 ; the Czar's thanks to, 
 190, 266; in Greece, 195-8; 
 influenza, 213 ; and Ritualism, 
 216 seq., 313; 'The Reformation 
 Settlement,' 221-3, 242, 344, 384; 
 and the Education Question, 226-9 ; 
 and the South African war, 
 229 seq. ; ' Life Here and Here- 
 after,' 235 «.; Hon. D.D., 235 to. ; 
 his income from journalism, 236 ; 
 marriage, 240 ; receives Cross of 
 the Order of the Redeemer, 242 ; 
 death, 243 ; correspondence, 244 
 seq. ; first meeting with Lord 
 Salisbury, 266-7 ; Russian trans- 
 lation of ' The Sultan and the 
 Powers,' 266, 282 ; fimeral sermons 
 quoted, 396-7 
 
 MacColl, Mrs. Malcolm, marriage, 
 240; letters of condolence to, 
 390 seq. 
 
 MacColl, Martha (mother), 1 
 
 Macedonia, 156, 198, 200, 388-9 
 
 Mackonochie, Rev. Mr., 351 
 
 MacmUlan, Messrs., 371 
 
 MacNeile, Dean, 336 
 
 Macrae, Malcolm, 1 
 
 Magee, Bishop W. C, 337 
 
 Maitland, Professor, 224 
 
 Manchester, Bishop of, 259 
 
 Manners, Lord John, 107 
 
 Manning, Cardinal, 39, 54, 86, 263, 
 293 
 
 Marlborough, Duke of, 337 
 
 Marriage of divorced persons, 216 
 
 Masheder, R., 22-3 
 
 Massingham, Mr., 175 
 
 Maurice, Rev. W. F. D., 336] 
 
 May, Sir Thomas E., 254; letter 
 quoted, 372-3 
 
 Meynell-Ingram, Mrs., 236 
 
 Michaud, M., 296 
 
 Midhat Pasha, 59 
 
 Milan, King, 49 
 
 Milligan, Rev. Prof., 378-9 
 
 Moffatt, George, 20 
 
 Morah, 246, 289
 
 INDEX 
 
 405 
 
 Moriarty, Bishop, 57, 248 
 
 Morley, Lord, 84, 103, 131-2, 149, 
 
 175, 202, 220, 281, 347-8, 360; 
 
 quoted, 114, 237 ; MacColl on,_226 ; 
 
 on the House of Lords, 242 
 Morning Post, 165 
 Moscheles, FeLLx, 236 n. 
 Motley, Mr., 39 
 Mundella, Mr., 157 
 Munich, 30, 32, 39, 47, 80, 115, 309, 
 
 312-16 
 Munro-Ferguson, Mra., 344 
 Murray, Dr., 296 
 Murray, John, 194 7t. 
 
 Napieb and Ettrick, Lord, 19, 20, 
 
 26, 77-8, 272 
 Naples, 15, 241 
 National Liberal Club, 103 
 National Liberal Federation, 161 
 Nauheim, 241-2, 388 
 Nelson, Bishop of, 14 
 Nesselrode, Count, 20 
 Newcastle, Bishop of, 259 
 Newcastle, Duke of, 120 
 Newdegate, Mr., 20 
 Newman, Cardinal, 18, 86, 244-6; 
 
 letters quoted, 283-308; his'Arians,' 
 
 290 ; ' Grammar of Assent,' 293 ; 
 
 on the Athanasian Creed, 293-8; 
 
 and Gladstone, 302-7 ; on the 
 
 Affirmation Bill, 305-6 
 Nicholson, Rev. Dr., 253 
 North American Review, 249 n. 
 Northbrook, Lord, 61 
 Northcote, Sir Stafford. 58-9, 63, 76, 
 
 82, 94, 113, 349-50 
 Northern Echo, 347 
 Novikoff, Madame, 56, 322 
 Nubar Pasha, 59 
 Nuremberg, 30 
 
 Obee-Ammebgau. 29-32, 293, 308, 
 
 325 
 O'Brien, Mr., 376 
 Observer, 159, 169-71, 178, 190, 195, 
 
 202, 207, 219. 383 
 Ormanian, Malachea, 394 
 Ossinine, Prof., 42 
 Overton, Canon, 335 
 Oxenham, Mr., 290 
 Oxford, 36 
 
 Paget, Rev. Francis, 332) 
 Pall Mall Gazette, 40, 84, 129, 144-6, 
 165, 186, 321, 346-8, 369-70 
 
 Palmer, Sir William, 235, 252-7, 307 
 
 313-6, 334 
 Palmer, Rev. Wilham, 284 
 Palmerston, Lord, 98, 110, 265-7 
 Parker, John, 287, 323 
 ParneU, C. S., 90, 98, 107, 123, 328, 
 
 351-3, 357, 360, 376 
 Passaglia, Father, 83-4 
 Paul, Herbert, quoted, 244 
 Pears, Sir Edwin, 393-4 
 Peek, Sir Henry, 340 
 Peel, Arthur, 370 
 Peel, Sir Robert, 40, 69, 82, 88«., 
 
 119, 271, 280, 284, 350; quoted, 
 
 126 
 Percy, Lord, 350 
 Perth, 2, 4, 17 
 Phillimore, Sir Walter, 177; letter 
 
 quoted, 392 
 Phoenix Park murders, 91 
 Pius IV., Pope, 296, 311 
 Plumptre, Dean E. H., 36) 
 Pocock, Rev. N., 253 
 Portland, Duke of, 147, 150 
 Protestant Laymen's League, 223 
 Public Worship Regulation Bill, 
 
 37-8, 42-3, 216-8, 252 n., 351 ; 
 
 Gladstone on, 247 ; Lord Salisbury 
 
 and, 276-7 
 PuUey, Mr., 128-9 
 Pusey, Dr. E. B., 35-6, 289, 290, 298, 
 
 314, 331 
 
 Quarterly Review, 143-4, 251 
 
 Raikes, Mr., 325 
 
 Ramsay, Dean, 10 
 
 Ramsay, Lord, 373 
 
 Redistribution Bill, 89-90, 96, 102-12, 
 
 120 
 Reform Bill (1866), 25 
 Reform BiU (1867), 26, 99 
 Reform Club, 59 
 Reid, Sir Wemyss, 170, 175 
 Rhodope Commission, 323 
 Richardson, Sir John, 10 
 Ripon, Bishop, 161, 243 
 Ripon Cathedral, 79-81, 215, 235, 
 
 334 ; memorial to MacColl in, 243 
 Ripon, Dean of, 243 
 Ripon Liberal Association, 227 
 Ripon, Lord, 79 
 Ristich, M., 49-50 
 Ritchie, Mr., 174, 176 
 Ritual Commission, 81 
 Roberts CoUege, 202-4 
 Robinson, Henry, quoted, 391
 
 406 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Rochester, Bishop of, 172, 175 
 
 Rock, 83 
 
 Rogers, Dr. Guinness, 159 
 
 Rosebery, Lord, 83, 127, 142, 147-50, 
 158, 159, 163, 236 n. ; on Home 
 Rule, 164 ; and the Armenian 
 Question, 165-95, 203, 205-9, 229, 
 382; and Gladstone, 175-6, 264; 
 meets MacColl, 188 ; quoted, 237 ; 
 resignation, 264 
 
 Roumania, King Charles of, 201 
 
 Rowsell, Canon, 72 
 
 RusseU, Lord Odo, 283, 369 
 
 RusseU, Dr., 248 
 
 Russell, G. W. E., 182 ; his Committee, 
 184-6 ; ' Collections and Recol- 
 lections,' quoted, 233-4 
 
 Russia, 183-7, 321-2; and Crete, 
 199-201, 207-8; Lord Salisbury 
 and, 282-3 
 
 Russia, Czar of, 163, 165, 168, 205, 
 368 ; his thanks to MacColl, 190, 
 266 
 
 Russia, Tsar and Tsarina of, 168 
 
 Russian Sick and Wounded Fund, 
 68 
 
 Russo-Turkish war, 57, 156 
 
 St. Ambrose, 287-8 
 
 St. Asaph, Bishop of, 76, 259, 260 : 
 
 St. Augustine, 287-8 
 
 St. David's, Bishop of, 259, 299 
 
 St. James's Gazette, 144, 146 
 
 St. James's HaU, 54, 147, 163, 165, 
 171, 176, 275, 336 
 
 St. Paul's, Dean of (see under 
 Church) 
 
 St. Petersburg, 19, 187 
 
 Salisbury, Lady, 92, 94, 168, 186, 
 267 ; death of, 231 
 
 Salisbury, Lord, 35, 76, 321, 338, 
 345 seq; MacColl's correspondence 
 with, 89-100, 118-25, 266-83; 
 Gladstone on, 94-5, 174, 2'70 ; 
 on obstruction, 100 ; interview 
 with MacColl, 102-12; becomes 
 Premier, 115 ; and the Irish 
 Question, 122, 137-8 ; returns to 
 power, 142 ; and the Armenian 
 atrocities, 153 seq. ; his Eastern 
 policy, 190-1, 206-7; illness of, 
 212-3, 231 ; resignation, 231 ; 
 characteristics, 267 ; and Irish 
 Church Disestablishment, 271-2 ; 
 on the Athanasian Creed, 275-6 
 
 Salmon, Dr., 335 
 
 San Stefano, Treaty of, 117, 200 
 
 Sandwith, Dr., 48 
 Saturday Review, 21 
 Schouvaloff, Count, 56, 368 
 Scotsman, 166, 169 
 Scott, Sir Walter, quoted, 1 
 Scott Holland, Canon, 78 
 Scrutator, 21, 145 ; MacCoU's pseu- 
 donym, 21 ; ' Mr. Gladstone and 
 
 Oxford,' 24 ; ' Who is responsible 
 
 for the War ? ' 33 
 Scudamore, Rev. W. E., 253 
 Seabury Commemoration, 101 
 Seaforth, Lord, 1 
 Sefton, Lord, 65 
 Selborne, Lord, 217, 284, 338 
 Servia, 45 seq. ; attitude of, 117 ; 
 
 and Greece, 198-202 
 Sejrmour, Sir Horace, 380-1 
 Shaftesbury, Lord, 37, 277, 298, 337 ; 
 
 on Gladstone, 127 
 Skinner, Bishop, 268 
 Smith, Goldwin, 269 ; letter quoted, 
 
 365-6 
 Smith, Samuel, 384 
 Smith, Sydney, quoted, 113 
 Smith, Sir T., 212 
 Smith, W. H., 350 
 Soudan war, 280 
 South African war, 229-31{ 
 Southwark, Bishop of, 309 
 Sparta, Duchess of, 204 
 Speaker, 170, 175, 189, 196, 202-4, 
 
 264 
 Spectator, 21, 39, 83, 124, 134, 159-60, 
 
 279, 307, 340, 342, 374; letters 
 
 to, 61, 54 ; editor of, 72, 324 seq. ; 
 
 quoted, 77-8, 221-2; and Home 
 
 Rule, 127 
 Spencer, Lady, 389 
 Spencer, Lord, 120, 131-2, 236, 360; 
 
 letters quoted, 386-9 
 Staal, M. de, 187, 189 
 Stambouloff, M., 201 
 Standard, 118, 119, 156, 159, 165, 
 
 169, 321 
 Stanley, Dean, 35; death, 83 
 Stanley, Dr., 298 
 Stephen, Sir J. Fitzjames, 219 
 Stonehaven, 2 
 Story, Dr., 171 
 Stratford, Lord, 265 
 Strathmore, Lady, 58, 101 
 Strathmore, Lord, 58, 101-2, 147 
 Strossmayer, Bishop, 47-55, 254 
 Stubbs, Bishop William, 86, 335 
 Suda Bay, 200, 205 
 Suez Canal Shares, 345 
 Sunday Times, 159 
 ' Supernatural Religion,' 39
 
 INDEX 
 
 407 
 
 Tablet, 301 
 
 Tait, Archbishop, 17-9, 35, 37, 217, 
 317, 323 ; death, 351 
 
 Talbot, Bishop E. S., 172, 175, 309 
 
 Tautphoeus, Baroness, 29 
 
 Taylor, Bishop, 298 
 
 Tegernsee, 310 
 
 Temple, Archbishop, 28, 216, 291 
 
 Tennyson, Lord, 283 ; quoted, 182 
 
 Tests Bill, 268 
 
 Thessaly, 199, 202, 207-11 
 
 Thirlwall, Bishop, 300-2 
 
 Thomson, Archbishop, 37 
 
 Times, 21, 29-31, 41, 51, 54, 142, 
 161, 165, 169, 171, 184, 203, 205, 
 218, 227, 271-2, 291, 308, 339-40, 
 363, 368, 380; Delane on, 237; 
 Gladstone on, 249 ; Cardinal New- 
 man and the, 284 
 
 Toovey, Messrs., 288 
 
 Townsend, Meredith, 160, 324, 331 
 
 Trevelyan, Sir George, 131-3, 236 
 
 Triple Alliance, 202 
 
 Trower, Bishop Walter J., 5-7 
 
 Turkey, Sultan of, 144-52, 158-«3, 
 166-7, 171-2, 189, 193-4; and 
 Greece, 196-9, 205-7; bound by 
 his Faith, 209-10 ; our threat to, 
 380 
 
 Turkish massacres, in Bulgaria, 45- 
 52 ; in Armenia, 139 seq. ; in Crete, 
 196-7 ; impalement of victims in, 
 366-7, 377 
 
 Turner, Algernon, 59 
 
 Vatican Cottncil, 308 seq. 
 Victoria, Queen, 351 ; death, 386 
 Vienna. 47, 54-5, 150, 170, 180 
 ' Vindf x,' 206 n. 
 Vukovar, town, 49-50 
 
 Wales, Edward, Prince of, 101, 165 
 
 Ward, Dr., 304 
 
 Ward, Mrs. Humphry, 340 
 
 Ward, W. G., 302, 331 
 
 Warminster, 174, 176, 179 
 
 Washburn, Dr., 202, 204, 295 
 
 Waterford, Lady, 236, 241 ; death 
 of, 281 
 
 Waterford, Lord, 236, 241 
 
 Wemyss, Lord, 96 
 
 Westerton, Mr., 19 
 
 Westminster, Duke of, 143-7 ; ' A 
 Letter to the,' 194 n., 196, 227 
 letter quoted, 383-4 
 
 Westminster Gazette, 181, 189, 195, 203 
 Wharton, Mr., 134 
 White, Rev. George Cosby, 17 
 Whitehead, Rev. R. R., 75 n. 
 Wilberforce, Bishop, quoted, 28 
 Wilkinson, Bishop, 86, 224 
 Williams, Mr., 179 
 Winchester, Lord, 366, 377 
 Wolverton, Lord, 29, 85 
 Wordsworth, Bishop Charles, 2 ; 
 
 quoted, 14 
 Wordsworth, Bishop Christopher, 247 
 
 York, Convocation of, 76 n. 
 
 PRINTED BY 
 
 SPOTTISWOODE AND CO. LTD., OOUOHESTER 
 
 LONDON AND ETON
 
 ^ 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 Los Angeles 
 
 ^QalUl^DUE on the last date stamped below 
 
 
 Form L9-Series 4939
 
 J 
 
 CKW^!3, ^'ll3R9 
 
 /U 
 
 ^ 1158 01258 
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 AA 000 736 610 7