To whom all Communications (post paid) must be addressed.
SOLD BY ALL THE BOOKSELLERS IN THE UNITED KINGDOM.
PRINTED BY WILLIAM BLACKWOOD AND SONS, EDINBURGH.
133
BLACKWOOD’S
EDINBURGH MAGAZINE.
No. DLXVIII. FEBRUARY 1863. Vol. XCIII.
It would have required many
cycles of Cathay to bring to the
councils of the Court of Pekin the
enlightenment we have alluded to
in our last Number, if the populations
over which it ruled had not
threatened to outstrip the Government
in the adoption of European
ideas. Petty sedition, which had
always been acknowledged in China
as the expression of the will of
the people, suddenly assumed an
alarming form, and threatened to
subvert not only the present dynasty,
but, what was of far greater
importance, a much venerated constitution,
the result of the collective
wisdom and experience of twenty-five
centuries.
The two Kwang provinces, Kwang-tung
and Kwang-si, were the first
affected by the leaven of European
example, and were so the more readily
because our violent acts, irrespective
of any question of justification,
were congenial to the predatory
tastes of the inhabitants of
that portion of China. That region,
which contains from twenty-six
to twenty-eight millions of
Chinese, has always been the last
to submit to the rule of a new
dynasty, and the first to revolt.
Six centuries ago, the Mongol conquerors
of China had no easy task
in mastering these southerners; and
Arab historians, never very nice
in their estimate of the value of
human life, write in strong terms
of the terrible means by which
the subjection of Kwang-tung was
accomplished. “The blood of
the people flowing in sounding
torrents,” was a strong metaphor
applied to the Mongol conquest;
yet, four centuries afterwards, the
Manchous had to repeat the same
frightful lesson before they could
say that they ruled over the cities
and plains of Kwang-si. Even then,
large bodies of the disaffected fled
to the mountains on the north, and
to the sea on the south, and, as
banditti or pirates, have never been
entirely reconciled to any form of
government. In the lawless seafaring
population of Kwang-tung,
our armed smugglers found willing
allies against a weak executive, and
the leaven of our example at length
brought about a rebellion, which,
under the name of Taepingism, has
been the most appalling scourge
that ever fell upon a nation. We
will endeavour to trace its origin,
analyse the character of its reputed
leaders, and, from the testimony of
impartial witnesses, show what Taepingdom
has done during the fourteen
years it has had existence.
The elements of revolution were,
as we have said, always ready to
hand in Southern China; and even
before the establishment of our
sovereignty at Hong-Kong, there
were thousands of lawless Cantonese
ready to work any wickedness,
whether as land or sea pirates,
it mattered little, and they were
merely kept in anything like subjection
by excessive severity on the
part of the mandarins and the
executive of China. We stepped
in, destroyed the prestige of Imperial
fleets and armies; and our
smugglers, in armed merchantmen
called opium-clippers, brought into
utter contempt the police of the
Empire, and showed the natives of
all classes how to evade the payment
of all dues or taxes. Smuggling
and piracy were divided by too
narrow a distinction for the appreciation
of the Cantonese, and their
defiance of the Government was
actively supported by the opium-clippers.
The visitors to our settlement
of Hong-Kong might have
seen fleets of heavily-armed native
vessels, loading with salt, opium,
and other goods, all of which were
to be run in the teeth of mandarins,
war-junks, or forts. Fast boats, each
manned with a hundred men, flaunted
their flags, and beat their gongs.
They became quite as ready to fight
the European as their own rulers.
When these ruffians had no other
work in hand, they cut off their
own lawful traders, or the little
coasters under European flags. Gradually
increasing in numbers and
audacity, they attacked outlying
Chinese towns; and when their own
Government offered a sufficiently
high pecuniary reward, they were
equally ready to assist Governor-General
Yeh to exterminate us.
We do not care to pass any opinion
upon the iniquity or otherwise
of the opium trade. It may have
been a political and commercial necessity;
but we should be false to
history if we failed to trace much
of the evil under which China is
now suffering to that melancholy
source. Owing to the enormous
profits made upon the drug as a
contraband article, the native traders
formed themselves into powerful
guilds, with ramifications at
Hong-Kong, Macao, and Canton,
which actually guaranteed the success
of smuggling ventures—a smuggling
assurance company, so to
speak, against the lawful tax-gatherers
of China; and the writer
has heard the officers and crew of
more than one English opium-clipper
boast of having protected these
ruffians, and beaten off the Government
boats. This defiance of the
native authorities extended itself
to the interior. Bands of armed
men were led by opium-brokers
through the provinces, fighting their
way with smuggled goods. To
this fact we have the testimony of
the Roman Catholic missionaries;
and indeed Monsieur Chauveau,
the head of the Catholic mission in
Yunnan, insists—and we believe
him—that the Taeping rebellion was
inaugurated by a large band of six
hundred opium-smugglers forcing
their way from Yunnan to Canton,
and compelling some influential personages
in Kwang-si to assist them.
After the smugglers had retired,
the authorities naturally called
the gentry to account. The mob
took part with their neighbours; a
secret society gave its aid; sedition
spread, and, like a ball of snow,
gathered weight as it rolled through
a turbulent province. Hither hastened,
as official reports state, the
soldiery and braves that had been
disbanded after the first war with
us; hither went the disaffected of all
classes, the ruined opium-smokers
and roués of Canton; in short, the
rowdies of a population equal to
that of the French empire in extent
soon collected at the base of
the Kwang-si mountain-ranges, and
devastated the best part of that
province. In the year 1850, these
troubles assumed the distinct phase
of rebellion. After shirking the
difficulty for as long a time as
possible, the ‘Pekin Gazette’ began
to publish reports of the state of
Kwang-si. It told how vast districts
had been swept over by
banditti, how the entire eastern circuit
of the province “had been atrociously
dealt with by bands, who
carried banners inscribed with the
information, ‘We are dealing justice
on behalf of Heaven.’” These
justice-dispensing robbers “fired
the villages wherever they came,
violated the women, murdered the
well-disposed, and took care to
carry off all guns, horses, and
arms.”
Directly the ‘Pekin Gazette’ officially
recognised the rebellion, the
European residents, instead of sympathising
with the Government and
the well-disposed Chinese, at once
testified their interest in the movement,
and openly avowed a hope
that by the swords of these rebels
China would be reformed and converted.
Each one had his reason
for adopting what at first sight
seemed so unfair a course. The
European official was sick of mandarin
arrogance; the missionary was
wearied with the slowness of his
progress in dealing with the stolid
self-sufficiency of the Chinese character,
and in trying to establish
breaches in the obstinacy of his
belief in Confucius and Mencius;
the trader longed for extended commerce
or larger profits; and our
smugglers were at war, as well as
the Kwang-si rebels or Canton pirates,
with all law and order.
The Taepings were speciously represented
as men battling for religious
and political freedom; and a
Swedish missionary, Mr Hamberg,
claimed for our reputed converts
the credit of having organised and
guided the rebellion. Himself deceived
by the cunning of the Asiatic,
he put forth a strange fable,
called the ‘Revelations of Hung-siu-tsien,’
and was thus mainly instrumental
in enlisting on behalf of
an organised system of land-piracy
the religious sympathy of this country.
Hordes of armed robbers,
ravaging the interior of a distant
country, because they said they believed
in Heaven, were forthwith
pronounced Christians, engaged in
war upon heathenism. And, forgetting
the first principle of our
faith, that it is not to be propagated
by the sword, we shut our
ears and hearts against the wail of
perishing multitudes, and dreamed
that the light of the Gospel had
dawned on Cathay. Years have
elapsed since our credulity was
thus imposed on, and from the experience
gathered we are now able,
we think, to tear the veil from the
monstrous imposition.
The rebellion in Kwang-si first
obtained political importance when
it secured the adhesion of a few
literary expectants for office, who
had been rejected at the competitive
examinations in Canton. By
those examinations, every man in
China may hope to reach the highest
posts in the empire. The necessities
of the Court of Pekin during
the reign of the last three inefficient
monarchs had compelled it to dispose
of certain appointments by
purchase. Every disappointed candidate
at the provincial examinations
traced his failure to this
abuse, and a formidable body of
ambitious, half-educated enemies
to the State was thus formed.
This was exactly the class needed
by the hard-fighting brigands of
Kwang-si and pirates of Kwang-tung
to bind them together under
a common banner, and they were
not long in finding their way to a
theatre where they might play at
being kings, ministers, and generals
to their hearts’ content.
For one of these disappointed
candidates for office, named Hung-siu-tsien,
and for a society of reputed
converts at Hong-Kong,
known as the Christian Union, Mr
Hamberg claims the credit of the
Taeping movement. They are perfectly
welcome to the honour; but
we, in the first place, impeach the
testimony of the Chinaman who
persuaded Mr Hamberg that the
leader of the Taepings was a Christian
convert; and, in the next place,
we declare that the members of the
“Christian Union” were as arrant
knaves as ever imposed upon the
good-nature of a confiding clergyman.
The Christian Union at Hong-Kong
was instituted for the purpose
of training Chinese in Protestant
Christianity, and sending them
as missionaries into the interior of
the country. Mr Gutzlaff had the
charge of this Union, and seems
to have been utterly deceived by
them; for we are assured by one
who was immediately brought up
amongst them as an Englishman
studying the Chinese language, that
they were dissolute characters, pretending
to be converts for the sake
of a livelihood. There was no duplicity
they did not practise, and no
lie they did not invent. Our informant
one day entered the study
of one of these missionaries, as he
was poring over a long and well-written
Chinese letter. His face
was lit up with joy and interest,
and he exclaimed, “Ah, when you
are able to compose like that!”
The young English student took
up the letter, and found it to be
from a convert named Wang-pin,
giving an account of a mission
upon which he had been despatched
into the interior. It described his
adventures and difficulties, his
hopes and anxieties; how some
officials had maltreated him; how
he had escaped: it recounted labours
amongst his brethren, and,
lastly, the conversion of two women
and a youth, and the joy with
which he had welcomed by baptism
such and such persons into
the fold. The imposition was perfect;
but, unfortunately, the writer
had allowed himself to be seen very
recently in Hong-Kong. Search was
made for him. Aided by a policeman,
the task of discovering Wang-pin
was not difficult. He was
dragged out of a brothel, where,
no doubt, he had penned his interesting
report.
Such profligacy was the rule
rather than the exception amongst
the Christian Union. At a recent
meeting of the Royal Geographical
Society, Mr Lay related another
instance of moral turpitude. It
appears that the Union was supposed
to consist of men from various
provinces of China, and a
number of Bibles adapted for circulation
in their respective districts
were regularly issued to these natives,
when they were despatched
upon their tours of duty. As there
was reason to suppose that these
Bibles were often returned to the
office, and had to be paid for as
new ones supplied from the Chinese
publisher at Hong-Kong, a number
of them were secretly marked with
the names of the converts who were
supposed to distribute them gratis
in remote parts of the empire.
Before many days, every one of
these marked Bibles returned to the
hands of Mr Hamberg, and it was
then discovered that they had been
sold to the Chinese publisher, who
had again presented them as new
Bibles. Of course this system of
pillage was put a stop to, but we
leave the reader to guess how
many more frauds were daily perpetrated
by such a set of scamps
upon innocent-minded missionaries.
We might fill a volume with further
details of the tricks of the
Christian Union, but we forbear.
Amongst these reputed converts
to Christianity was one who can at
any rate claim the credit of having
so thoroughly deceived us, that
even so recent a writer as Commander
Lindesay Brine, of the
Royal Navy, did not succeed in discovering
the wolf under the skin
of the oily Hung-jin. Mr Hamberg
first met Hung-jin (or, as he now
styles himself, Kan-wang) in 1852, at
a time when the minds of our residents
in China were much excited.
Mr Hamberg was full of curiosity,
Hung-jin all ready to gratify it.
Hung-jin quite delighted the missionary
“with the interest he displayed
in Christianity, and his acquaintance
with its precepts.” The
rogue, be it known, had actually
studied Christianity for two entire
months, some years previously, under
Mr Roberts, an American missionary
in Canton. As a near connection
of two out of three of the most prominent
leaders in Kwang-si, Hung-jin
could give information about
them; and, still more to delight Mr
Hamberg, he invented a fable he
knew would be very palatable to
the outer barbarian, and promote
the fortune of himself and family.
Hung-jin, having converted us to
Taepingism, was much treasured by
our religious societies in China, and
every care and expense were lavished
upon him to render him a fit instrument
for keeping up the connection
between us and the leaders of
the Taeping movement. He and his
brother, we know, were in the employ
of two missionaries in Hong-Kong
about the year 1853. Hung-jin
was above the average of his countrymen
in ability; and, under the
care of the Rev. Mr Chalmers for
three years, made considerable progress
in secular studies. In 1854
he was baptised, and repeated unsuccessful
attempts were then and
subsequently made to send him
back to his friends in Kwang-si and
Central China. Our missionaries
were almost hysterical over their
treasure; they declared he had quite
established himself in the confidence
and esteem of the Shanghai
missions; that he exhibited “much
talent, evinced much sweetness of
disposition, and, above all, had
given undoubted proofs of the sincerity
of his attachment to the
Christian faith.” Early in 1859 he
contrived at last to rejoin his relative
in Nankin: a relative whom
he had left years before as a mere
conspirator in Kwang-si, he now
found self-installed as an incarnation
of the Deity in a yamun of
Nankin. The discontented and unsuccessful
candidate for literary
honours of Canton was now the
King of Heaven, the Tien-wang of
Nankin. Hung-jin was welcomed as
he deserved, for he had well served
the King of Heaven by throwing
dust in the eyes of the much-feared
foreigner; and Hung-jin, the Christian
impostor, stepped into royal
robes as the “Kan-wang,” “Shield
King,” or, in other words, the prop
and stay of Taepingism; and, having
shown such ability in bamboozling
the foreigner, his especial
province appears to have been to
feed us with hopes of a general
conversion and extension of trade,
but to take care that we did not
test their sincerity. Feeling that it
was not yet time to throw off the
cloak of piety which had hitherto
served him so well, Commander
Brine tells us that the Kan-wang
wrote to the Rev. Mr Edkins, deploring
his unfitness for the high
post to which his distinguished relative
had appointed him; expressing
his own anxiety “to promote the
diffusion of true religion;” adding,
that he was more than ever impressed
with the superhuman wisdom of
the Tien-wang, or King of Heaven!
Just after he had thus given utterance
to these expressions of diffidence
and zeal, our late pupil, now
an assistant-king in Nankin, started
on an expedition into Ngan-hwuy
province, to spread the knowledge
of Perfect Peace. A traveller who
happened to be on the river Yang-tsze
at that time, tells us that it
was easy to trace the path of the
mission by “the smoking and flaming
villages.” Every impostor must,
however, eventually be exposed,
and so it was with the Kan-wang;
for the missionaries, taking him and
his relative at their word, thrust
themselves into Nankin. Mr Roberts,
the quondam instructor in
divinity of the Taeping rulers, had
preceded the Kan-wang, and the latter
found Mr Roberts clad in regal
robes, and holding some sort of
office. About this time also (1860),
the Rev. Mr Holmes visited Nankin;
he came away shocked at what
he had seen and heard. We shall
avail ourselves presently of his testimony
as to the character of the
Taeping rebellion; but for the present
we shall confine ourselves to the
career of Hung-jin, or Kan-wang. In
the ‘North China Herald’ of October
19, 1861, under the signature
“Rusticus Expectans,” we next
hear of the scamp. The anonymous
writer turns out, by the evidence
of Captain T. W. Blakiston,
to be Mr Forrest, an interpreter in
the British consular establishment.[1]
Mr Forrest draws a vivid picture of
the homes of the different Taeping-wangs.
He tells us of his Excellency
Le, who was building a gorgeous
yamun, “upon which upwards
of a thousand workmen were
engaged—some building, some carving
stone and wood, and not a few
standing with a bundle of rattans in
their hands ready to inflict blows on
any one shirking his work. A great
portion of the building is already
completed, and the whole will be a
good specimen of a Chinese yamun
of the old style, with its network
of beams at the gables, its large
wooden columns, and fantastic carvings.
Asking what the workmen
were paid, Le laughingly replied,—‘You
English pay for work; we
Taepings know better. Is not ours
a truly great Empire?’”
In front of the Kan-wang’s palace
were two orchestras, painted over
with dragons, diablerie, Chinese
characters, and the beatitudes from
St Matthew! The Kan-wang is, it
seems, a hearty fat individual, forty
years of age, and very intelligent.
He can shake hands like an Englishman,
and say, “How do you do?”
Mr Chalmers’s care in his education
was evinced by his knowledge of
geography especially, and the number
of books of reference by which
he was surrounded.
“His sanctum is quite a museum in
its way; a fine cheerful room facing a
garden of flowers, with a large bed of
Soochow manufacture for its principal
article of furniture. The bed is covered
with jade ornaments, and hung with
rich yellow curtains. Tables line the
sides of this chamber, and they are
loaded with the strangest conglomeration
of articles: a telescope on a moving
pedestal, a gun-box, three Colt’s revolvers
useless from rust, a box of percussion-caps,
ditto of vestas, Windsor
soap, a Woolwich manual of fortification,
and a Holy Bible; any amount of
Chinese books, five clocks, broken barometers,
ink-stones, and dirty rags, fans
mounted in silver, jade-stone drinking-cups,
gold and silver platters, chopsticks,
English port-wine bottles, and
Coward’s mixed pickles. About the
apartment were suspended an English
naval sword, some dragoon-caps, a couple
of Japanese knives, two French plates,
an engraving of the Holy Well in Flintshire,
and lying on the bed was a mass
of silver ingots tied up in a cloth.”
Amidst this collection of loot,
the Kan-wang could give a neat
dinner and plenty of wine, for which
he had an especial dispensation.
Our informant then adds that Kan-wang
is “a good fellow, and merely
accommodates his Christianity to
his tastes and habits”—an opinion
in which we agree, only substituting
the words arch-knave for good
fellow. Hear, for instance, what
Mr Roberts says of him, in January
1862:—
“From having been the religious
teacher of Hung-siu-tsuen in 1847, and
hoping that good—religious, commercial,
and political—would result to the
nation from his elevation, I have hitherto
been a friend to his revolutionary
movement, sustaining it by word and
deed, as far as a missionary consistently
could without vitiating his higher character
as an ambassador of Christ. But after
living among them fifteen months, and
closely observing their proceedings—political,
commercial, and religious—I have
turned over entirely a new leaf, and am
now as much opposed to them—for good
reasons, I think—as I ever was in favour
of them. Not that I have aught personally
against Hung-siu-tsuen; he has been
exceedingly kind to me. But I believe
him to be a crazy man, entirely unfit to
rule without any organised government;
nor is he, with his coolie kings, capable
of organising a government, of equal
benefit to the people, of even the old
Imperial Government. He is violent in
his temper, and lets his wrath fall heavily
upon his people, making a man or
woman ‘an offender for a word,’ and
ordering such instantly to be murdered
without ‘judge or jury.’ He is opposed
to commerce, having had more than a
dozen of his own people murdered since
I have been here, for no other crime than
trading in the city, and has promptly
repelled every foreign effort to establish
lawful commerce here among them, whether
inside of the city or out. His religious
toleration and multiplicity of chapels
turn out to be a farce—of no avail in
the spread of Christianity—worse than
useless. It only amounts to a machinery
for the promotion and spread of his own
political religion, making himself equal
with Jesus Christ, who, with God the
Father, himself, and his own son, constitute
one Lord over all!! Nor is any
missionary who will not believe in his
divine appointment to this high equality,
and promulgate his political religion
accordingly, safe among these rebels,
in life, servants, or property. He told
me soon after I arrived, that if I did
not believe in him I would perish, like
the Jews did for not believing in the
Saviour. But little did I then think
that I should ever come so near it, by
the sword of one of his own miscreants,
in his own capital, as I did the other
day.
“Kan-wang, moved by his coolie elder
brother (literally a coolie at Hong-Kong)
and the devil, without the fear of God
before his eyes, did, on Monday the 13th
instant, come into the house in which I
was living, then and there most wilfully,
maliciously, and with malice aforethought,
murder one of my servants with
a large sword in his own hand in my presence,
without a moment’s warning or
any just cause. And after having slain
my poor harmless, helpless boy, he
jumped on his head most fiend-like,
and stamped it with his foot; notwithstanding
I besought him most entreatingly
from the commencement of his
murderous attack to spare my poor boy’s
life.
“And not only so, but he insulted me
myself in every possible way he could
think of, to provoke me to do or say
something which would give him an
apology, as I then thought and think
yet, to kill me, as well as my dear boy,
whom I loved like a son. He stormed
at me, seized the bench on which I sat
with the violence of a madman, threw
the dregs of a cup of tea in my face,
seized hold of me personally and shook
me violently, struck me on my right
cheek with his open hand; then, according
to the instruction of my King for
whom I am ambassador, I turned the
other, and he struck me quite a sounder
blow on my left cheek with his right
hand, making my ear ring again; and
then, perceiving that he could not provoke
me to offend him in word or deed,
he seemed to get more outrageous, and
stormed at me like a dog, to be gone
out of his presence. ‘If they do these
things in the green tree, what will they
do in the dry?’—to a favourite of Tien-wang’s—who
can trust himself among
them, either as a missionary or a merchant?
I then despaired of missionary
success among them, or any good coming
out of the movement—religious, commercial,
or political—and determined to
leave them, which I did on Monday,
January 20, 1862.”
We may add, that subsequent to
the departure of Mr Roberts, the
Taeping leaders signified that they
had no farther need of missionaries
at Nankin.
Let us now trace the career of
the head of Taepingism, Hung-siu-tsuen,
from the ‘Pekin Gazette’
and other documents.
In the year 1837, a man twenty-three
years of age, whose family
resided near Canton, went up for
his literary examination—a competitive
examination for office under his
Government. He was plucked—it
was not the first time. Perfectly
satisfied with his own merits, he
had assumed the title Siu-tsuen, or
“Elegantly perfect,” in addition to
the family name of Hung. As Siu-tsuen
we shall speak of him. Between
1837 and 1843, Siu-tsuen
was again repeatedly unsuccessful at
the examinations; disappointment
brought on brain fever, and for
some years he was a dangerous
lunatic. Recovering from this attack,
he accidentally obtained possession
of a number of tracts on
Christianity by a native convert
called Leang-Afah. They were in
style and translation enough to
puzzle a stronger brain than Siu-tsuen’s.
Naturally excitable, he
was now seized with a religious
mania, and fancied he had personal
interviews with the Trinity. He
had witnessed the proceedings of
Western nations against the Government
of his country; and our
combination of civilisation, religion,
and war no doubt struck him
as the right means for gratifying
his spleen and his ambition. From
a crack-brained enthusiast, Siu-tsuen
sobered down into a conspirator
against his sovereign and the order
of the State. From 1843 to 1846,
he was, we are told, busy inoculating
a small circle of his immediate
friends with his views. His disciples
believed that he was in direct communication
with the Deity, and he
appears at first to have merely contented
himself with the character
of a second Moses. He formed a
society which he called the “Congregation
of the Worshippers of God”
(or “Shangti”). Hung-jin, or Kan-wang,
and another relative of
Siu-tsuen’s, named Fung, likewise
joined it. As the society increased,
Siu-tsuen bound the members by
oaths “to live or die with him, and to
exert all their efforts to assist him;”
and in return he promised to ascertain
from heaven for the members
“wherein lay their respective interests
and profits,”[2] an essentially
Chinese way of looking at Christianity.
They soon worshipped
Siu-tsuen as an incarnation of
Shangti, or God. Both he and his
relative Fung had ecstatic fits. The
latter performed miracles; and like
other arch-impostors, they passed
unconsciously from deluding others
into deceiving themselves. The disordered
condition of Southern China
favoured the propagation of any doctrines,
however wild and bizarre;
and the mountains and secluded
valleys of Kwang-si afforded the
necessary hiding-places for a sect
whose first article of faith was disobedience
to the Emperor. In
either 1846 or 1847 Mr Roberts, residing
in Canton, was so interested
in the doings of Siu-tsuen that he
invited him to stay at his house,
and promised a kind welcome on
the part of his brethren. Siu-tsuen,
accompanied by his relative Hung-jin,
accordingly went to Mr Roberts,
and stayed two entire months studying
Protestantism. Their conduct
was exemplary, but Mr Roberts did
not feel justified in baptising the worthies
before they left, which is just
as well, for, in “the 3d month of
1848,” Siu-tsuen announced to his
flock that “our Heavenly Father
had come down into the world,”
and on “the 9th month he was
followed by the Saviour, who
wrought innumerable miracles!”
About this time the plot of sending
Hung-jin to the Europeans, and
intrusting him with the office of
misleading us as to the real character
of the intended insurrection,
must have been decided upon,
for we now find him in communication
with Mr Hamberg. What
occurred between 1850 and 1853,
when Hung-jin rejoined his relative
at Nankin, we will condense in a
few words. Siu-tsuen and Fung,
aided by another disappointed candidate
for office named Tai-tsuen, or
Tien-teh, raised the standard of
revolution, and declared openly
their intention of subverting the
present dynasty. Siu-tsuen styled
himself the King of Perfect Peace,
or “Tae-ping-wang,” and nominated
the other two as subordinate kings.
They sacked several cities in
Kwang-si, but finding the province
getting too hot to hold them, they
decamped with the loss of Tien-teh,
their best leader, and crossed into
Honan province, so as to strike
the great water-communication
which circulates through Central
China. The Taeping leader, then
captured, made a full confession,
which, tested by the experience
of to-day, is a most truthful account;
and though vaunting the
courage of his brother rebels, he
distinctly says that, after all, Siu-tsuen
was a mere profligate and
winebibber, rejoicing in no less
than thirty-six mistresses.
In June 1852, we find that the
Taepings, ten thousand strong, had
reached a large river flowing through
Honan into the Yang-tsze. The
water-communication once reached,
they had but to embark, and the
current would waft them to Nankin,
and as far north as Tien-tsin.
By Christmas 1852 they had
reached the commercial heart of
the Empire in the great emporiums
which lie about the confluence of
the rivers Han and Yang-tsze. Two
centuries of peaceful industry, of
buying and selling, giving and taking
in marriage, without one thought
of a sudden and bloody awakening
from a dream of luxury, were here
ready for the strong-handed. The
writer met a man who witnessed
the destruction of the three great
cities of Wuchang, Hankow, and
Han-yang, the slaughter of the ill-starred
inhabitants, and the conflagration
of the vast fleets of junks
and trading-boats there assembled.
For eight days and nights the place
was, he said, wrapt in flames—a
perfect hell upon earth. The horrors
of this scene were sufficient to
frighten all the inhabitants of the
lower valley of the Yang-tsze into
subjection, but it did not save them
from pillage and rapine. The officials
were everywhere slaughtered
when they dared to remain at their
posts, and the Manchou garrisons,
with their children and women,
perished to a soul. Wherever the
current of the river would float
these Taepings, they conquered, unopposed.
Nankin in its turn fell into
their hands with frightful slaughter,
and Chin-Keang, at the entrance of
the Grand Canal, shared the same
fate. Still aided by the water-communication,
they aimed a blow at
Pekin, and actually advanced to
the head of the canal. Directly,
however, the water-communication
failed them, their progress was arrested,
and they sustained a defeat
that deterred them from a second
attempt on the capital. There can
be no greater fallacy than the notion
that the stability of the dynasty has
been really jeopardised, or that the
raid of the Taepings towards Pekin
was the result of organisation or
military skill, instead of being entirely
due, as we have said, to the
immense water facilities at their
command, from the very mountains
of Kwang-si to the Tung-ting Lake,
and from the lake to the Yang-tsze,
and from it to Tien-tsin by the
Grand Canal.
Siu-tsuen, alias Tien-wang, or
King of Heaven, now sat (in 1853)
in Nankin, and Taepingism was
thoroughly established as an evil
which it would require years to
extirpate; and what was worse,
damage had been done to the extension
of Protestant Christianity
in the minds of the better classes
in China, from the artful manner
in which Siu-tsuen had succeeded
in dragging us in as his allies
against the Government and peaceable
classes of China.
That he and his emissaries did
not confine themselves to converting
sanguine and anxious missionaries,
is well attested in the Blue-Book
of 1853. There we find one
of our consular body officially reporting:—
“All I have heard tends to strengthen
my previously expressed conviction that
the insurrectionary movement is a national
one of the Chinese against the
continued rule, or rather misrule, of the
Manchous; and that the power of the
latter is already irrevocably subverted in
the southern half of the Empire. The
interference of foreigners in their behalf
would now only have the effect of prolonging
hostilities and anarchy for an
indefinite period; while, if they abstain
from interference, it is highly probable
that the valley of the Yang-tsze, with
the southern provinces, will speedily
come under the rule of a purely Chinese
dynasty as one internally strong State,
governed according to the old national
principles of administration.”
Ten years have elapsed since that
prophecy. The Manchou has had
during that period two wars with
Great Britain and France, and rebellions
in every one of the eighteen
provinces of China. Yet Pekin
rules while Nankin plunders. The
dynasty was not quite so sick as Mr
Meadows supposed.
Following the weak example of
the United States representatives
in 1853, our authorities actually put
themselves into official communication
with the Taeping kings. The
insolence of their communications
was as gross as their mendacity.
Take the following extract for
example, written by two subordinate
rulers, Lo and Woo, who perhaps
had formerly been of the
Christian Union:—
“Well do we remember how, in conjunction
with Bremer, Elliot, and Wanking,
in the province of Canton, we together
erected a church, and together
worshipped Jesus, our Celestial Elder
Brother; all these circumstances are as
fresh as if they had happened but yesterday.
We are grieved to hear that Bremer
has met with a misfortune, and we can
never forget the nobleness of his character.
As to Elliot and Wanking, we hope
they have enjoyed health since we last
met—we feel an irrepressible anxiety to
meet our old friends.”
So much for the dodge of Christianity,
for the whole idea of building
a church with Sir Charles Elliot
and “Wanking” was evidently
coined with the aid of one Mang,
the teacher of Mr Meadows, and
who, like all these teachers, was
handing his master over as a sheep
to be shorn by his countrymen.
Then in another place a sop is held
for the commercial interest:—
“Our Royal Master has received the
command of Heaven to show kindness
to foreigners, and harmonise them with
the Chinese” [Mr Roberts’s testimony,
dated ten years afterwards, to wit], “not
restricting commercial intercourse, or
levying transit duties upon merchandise.”
We may have done right, after
all, in allowing these Taepings
time to show by their acts how
little they intended to fulfil their
promises. In ten years they have
utterly wrecked the richest portion
of China. All the wonders of
Chinese art and industry are levelled
with the dust and destroyed.
The Porcelain Pagoda—the Iron
Tower—the Ming Cemetery of
Nankin—the beautiful temples and
valuable libraries of Golden Island,
exist no longer. A district once
teeming with hamlets and farms,
rich in silks and teas, and all the
products of the Flowery Land, is
now a wilderness; and the Englishman
who looked upon the wondrous
scene of Asiatic civilisation
and industry, as spread before him
in the valley of the Yang-tsze in
the year 1842, would never recognise
it again in the famine-stricken
desolation of to-day. Lest
we should allow our indignation
at such unchecked barbarism to
carry us away, we will quote from
two recent visitors, the one a soldier,
the other a clergyman. Colonel
Wolseley, in 1862, says: “Having
had some little experience of the
imbecility of the Imperial Government,
I went to Nankin strongly
prejudiced against it, and only too
anxious to recognise any good which
we might discover in its rival....
The Imperial Government, with all
its weakness, is as far removed
above that established at Nankin,
as the true religion of our Saviour
is above that set up by the impostor
Tien-wang.” He confirms the fact
that no man of worth or station in
China has joined the movement;
and after describing all the ruin,
crime, and nastiness of the interior
of the Taeping stronghold, he urges
his countrymen to assist the better
classes of Chinese in sweeping away
the abomination, because it is the
barrier to true progress in China.
Mr Holmes, whose zeal for the
spiritual welfare of the Chinese subsequently
led to his being slain by
some rebels in Shan-tung, bears the
following testimony to the hopelessness
of anything good from
Taepingism. After visiting Nankin
in the end of 1861, he says:—
“I went to Nankin predisposed to
receive a favourable impression; indeed,
the favourable impressions of a previous
visit to Suchau led me to undertake
this journey. I came away with my
views very materially changed. I had
hoped that their doctrines, though crude
and erroneous, might notwithstanding
embrace some of the elements of Christianity.
I found, to my sorrow, nothing
of Christianity but its names, falsely
applied—applied to a system of revolting
idolatry. Whatever there may be in
their books, and whatever they may
have believed in times past, I could not
escape the conclusion that such is the
system which they now promulgate, and
by which the character of their people
is being moulded. Their idea of God is
distorted until it is inferior, if possible,
to that entertained by other Chinese idolaters.
Their willingness—if indeed they
are willing to receive Christian missionaries
among them—is doubtless founded
upon a misapprehension of their true character.
They suppose that the missionary
will prove an instrument which they
can bend to suit their own purposes.
Exceptions might, perhaps, be made in
favour of individuals: it is of those who
hold the reins of power that I speak.
“The city of Nankin is in a ruinous
condition. It would be no exaggeration
to say that half the houses have been
destroyed. The country around is not
half cultivated. Provisions are very
scarce and expensive. Their trade is
very limited. We observed instances
in which workmen were compelled to
labour without compensation. All indicates
a policy that has little regard to
the welfare of the people, or to any interests
other than those immediately
connected with war, and with the indulgence
of their rulers.
“The present state of their political
affairs would indicate that Hung-siu-tsuen’s
career must close before the
present dynasty can be supplanted. His
horrible doctrines, which have served to
break down every distinction between
right and wrong in the minds of his
soldiers, and send them forth to perform
every enormity without remorse, have
secured him the lasting hatred of the
masses of the people. The scenes of
internal discord which so nearly proved
their destruction a few years since,
would doubtless be enacted again, and
upon a large scale, when, with their
enemies vanquished, they came to a
final division of the spoils.”
And if any farther testimony were
necessary, we might, in the pages
of the last Blue-Book for 1862,
cull evidence enough to convince
the most sceptical that the people,
as well as the Government, are hostile
to the robbers who pretend to
be inaugurating a new rule.
This Taeping movement has never
had at any time a national character.
It has not been joined by any
influential class. The Taepings have
never organised any sort of government,
and they have never held
any ground but that on which their
camps stood. Had they shown any
disposition to gain the suffrages of
the Chinese people, already dissatisfied
with their mandarins, their
chances of subverting the dynasty
would have been great. They
have not done so, and the consequence
is, that the popular feeling
is strongly against them. Hear, for
instance, what thirty-two of the representative
elders of the districts
between Soochow and the Yang-tsze
river say in a petition to our
Minister, and then decide on which
side our humanity should be enlisted:—
“Living to the east of the river, we
have the misfortune to be visited by the
murderously ferocious rebels, who have
burnt our dwellings, carried off our people,
dishonoured our wives and daughters,
robbed us, and murdered innumerable
of us, till the land is covered with
corpses, and the roads run with tears
and blood. We ourselves have suffered
so in our persons, and our families overwhelmed
with bitterness, refugees from
our homes, that there is no name for our
misery; our lives can scarcely be called
our own. It seems that not one of us
will escape. In desperation, therefore,
we piteously implore the Minister, that
in his great goodness, surpassing all
things, he will pity us, and speedily
rescue us, and will despatch his energetic
soldiers to sweep the abomination out
of the land, that our death may be
turned to life, our gratitude be unimaginable;
and unless his goodness
does rescue us, there will be no escape
for us, and the people and property
on the east of the river will be destroyed,
and the land left a desert, without
hope of recovery. We implore him,
therefore, the more earnestly, that millions
of the poor people are lying, leaning
on each other, in this deep snow, in
misery unspeakable, waiting for his will.”
Could any words be more expressive?
And it is not only the
Imperialists who suffer, but there
are tens of thousands who have
joined the Taeping ranks from
compulsion and to save their lives.
These poor creatures are, if possible,
more to be pitied than any other
class. They stand between two
fires,—the sword of the Taeping
and the Imperial executioner. On
their behalf we ought as soon as
possible to place the Imperial Government
in such a position that an
amnesty could be safely granted,
or arrangements made for allowing
these compromised people to emigrate
to Borneo, the Straits settlements,
to Burmah, and elsewhere.
The compromised might embark
with their wives and families, and
in less populated regions found
colonies as creditable to their mother
country as they would be profitable
to European civilisation and
commerce. This would be a triumphant
solution of the Taeping
difficulty; and we feel justified in
hoping that the Court of Pekin may
be persuaded to temper justice with
mercy, inasmuch as one of its highest
officers has recently recognised
the evils of over-population, and
legalised emigration from the provinces
under his jurisdiction.
Our collision with the Taepings
has been denounced as if it had
been sought by the British authorities
in China. But this is by no
means the case. In 1858, when
Lord Elgin ascended the Yang-tsze,
the escorting squadron was deliberately
attacked, although the smallest
vessel was sent considerably in
advance with a flag of truce flying,
and a person was expressly sent in
her to afford every explanation of
our Ambassador’s motive in desiring
to pass Nankin.
Both then and subsequently the
Taeping chiefs were told that we
entertained no hostile feeling towards
them, and that so long as
they respected British property we
should be strictly neutral. In spite
of these warnings and the promises
of their leaders, the Taepings, not
satisfied with the sack of the great
cities in the districts around Shanghai
and Ningpo, actually attacked
our settlements. Necessity has
compelled us to act upon the defensive.
We had to drive them from
the neighbourhood; and in order to
prevent their starving out the vast
numbers of Chinese who had taken
shelter in Shanghai, we had to
mark certain limits within which
we would not suffer their presence.
Such is the history of our “war”
against the Taepings. Troops have
been sent for from India, and
Shanghai and Ningpo are virtually
under the protection of the British
and French forces. As a temporary
measure this may answer, but it
is beset with inconveniences and
risks if prolonged. Temporary protection,
as our Indian experience
abundantly teaches us, leads to permanent
occupation, and ultimate
absorption of territory. The foot
of a vigorous European nation, once
placed firmly on the soil of an
Eastern state, cannot be withdrawn.
Yet the present state of China
leaves us no alternative. There are
other important considerations upon
which our space forbids us entering,
but there is one we will allude
to in passing—the evils inflicted
upon the country by the influx of
adventurers now swarming thither,
who are amenable to no law, with
no fortunes or characters to lose,
but abundance of appetite to acquire.
The misdeeds of these miscreants
are a great obstacle to
friendly intercourse with the Chinese
people; and to watch and keep
them within bounds, the operation
of a high and powerful police is
absolutely necessary. Our trade
and property must be protected by
some Power, or be sacrificed. How
that protection shall be afforded is
the problem to be solved.
This country is decidedly opposed
to direct intervention, while
the assumption of a protectorate
over China by any other Power
would be directly opposed to our
interests.
It might be well, if it were possible,
to leave the Chinese to work
out their own regeneration; but
unfortunately our commercial interests
and revenue are so interwoven
with the wellbeing of China, that
we cannot afford to wait the time
that might elapse before the restoration
of order.
In respect to ourselves, were we
disposed to look on and abide the
issue, other Powers whose interests
differ, and whose risks are by no
means as great, would not refrain
with such a temptation before
them. We have already a glut of
territory in Asia; it is quite natural
that other European powers should
crave an India likewise. In respect
to China herself, she is fully
alive to the necessity of calling in
European vigour and intelligence,
and has made up her mind to procure
it; a step the natural consequence
of contact with Europeans,
and over which we have no control.
If the Governments of Europe
were to agree to withhold the service
of their troops, this would not
prevent the employment of private
individuals from Europe or America,
and we have seen only recently
how easy it is to evade the jurisdiction
of the foreign consul by
the simple process of hailing for a
Chinaman, or from any State not represented
on the spot. The Chinese
Government can command foreign
aid if so disposed, but irresponsible
enlistment of foreigners is on all
grounds objectionable and dangerous.
It has been tried, and the results
have been what might have
been anticipated—waste, peculation,
and danger to the State. What
indeed is the experience of those
European Powers who have at different
times independently raised
foreign legions?
The Taoutai of Shanghai long
since tried the experiment upon
his own responsibility of forming
a European-Chinese fleet, and utterly
failed, after spending millions
of dollars. He bought up in 1853
a number of vessels, manned and
officered them with all the dregs
of our settlements; without proper
status or discipline they were sent
up to fight Taepings at Nankin, and
of course ran away. Other mandarins
hired lorchas under European
flags to protect trade on the coast;
these likewise turned upon their
employers, and, instead of fighting
pirates, frightened their employers.
The last item of news from China
is, that the crews of some hired
lorchas had passed over in a body
to the pirates, and that one of
Ward’s regiments had mutinied
after his death, and looted the yamun
of a high official.
In our opinion, there is, in view
of the interests of all European
Powers, but one mode of giving aid
to the Chinese Government—to
wit, encouraging officers of character
and respectability, subjects of those
Powers, to enter the service of the
Chinese Government.
We have with China an enormous
and profitable trade; we want it
guaranteed and developed. This
duty properly devolves upon China,
but she is as yet unable to discharge
it. It is by the aid of men
who possess both character and
status, the guarantee of good behaviour,
that she will acquire
strength and knowledge to fulfil
her obligations, and through their
influence be induced to adopt the
results of European science and
skill—the steamship, railways, and
electric telegraph—thus insuring
progress profitable to herself and
the world at large. This end, we
take it, should be our object in
giving help to China. She should
not be strengthened out of hand,
but by a slow process with a small
force, whose action should be spread
over a period sufficient to enable us
to open the country, throughout its
length and breadth, to Christianity
and commerce.
Views in consonance with the
foregoing remarks appear to have
found favour at Pekin, but owing,
doubtless, to the different views
entertained by the Ministers of
England, France, Russia, and America,
the Regency has been dragged
first in one direction and then in
the other. Russia is evidently
ready for direct intervention. In
1860 she persuaded the Emperor
of China to barter square miles of
territory for old rifles, and we hear
that the Czar’s ships are ready to
retake Nankin. The capture of
that city is just now worth a province
to the Court of Pekin. The
French and ourselves have been
flirting with the question, watching
and checkmating each other, rather
than promoting the real interests of
China. Not, perhaps, because Sir Frederick
Bruce has not been aware of
what was really essential, but because
he was apprehensive, probably, of
compromising our Ministry in any
direct line of policy. The result has
been that small bodies of Imperialists
have been drilled by English
and French officers upon totally different
systems, in spots scattered all
over the sea frontier of China. Every
one of these half-trained braves
will be as dangerous as a Taeping,
unless he be under efficient discipline
and thorough control. No
regular organisation has been attempted,
and we cannot but fear
that such trifling with a very serious
question will lead to great evils.
As an instance, permission has
just been given to all our military
officers, of any stamp, to accept
commissions in China. The officer
of repute is thus placed on a footing
with discharged seamen and
marines now holding the rank of
Colonels and Majors in the Chinese
army, while the Chinese Government
is unfairly left to discriminate
between the good and the worthless.
A surer method of bringing
discredit upon ourselves, and involving
us eventually in direct
intervention, could scarcely be devised.
Surrounded with difficulties,
Prince Kung appears to have
rightly turned his first attention to
the organisation of a maritime police,
and given a willing ear to the
counsels of the Acting Inspector-General,
Mr Hart, supported by our
able Minister. Instructions have
been issued for a certain sum to be
set aside from the customs revenue,
and the chief of that department
has been authorised to take such
steps as would accomplish the desired
object. These instructions are
interesting, and evince a real desire
to master the subject; whilst the
admission that a departure from
ancient custom is necessary, is highly
significative of the dawn of progress
in China. Prince Kung writes
from Pekin in February last as follows:—
“The Foreign Office repeat the instructions
they have already given the
Inspector-General, to give effect to the
arrangement for the purchase of foreign
steamers with the utmost despatch. The
orders to the various customhouses to
get ready their quota were issued some
time back; and these orders have been
repeated, coupled with a caution against
delay, as it is the Emperor’s particular
wish that not a day should be lost. The
Board understand that there are several
classes of foreign steamers—the mail
steamer, the merchant steamer, and the
war steamer; that the first is very small,
the second the reverse of handy, and that
neither are available like the third for
warlike purposes. They are further informed
that the mail and merchant
steamers are paddle-wheel steamers,
while the war steamers are ‘secret
wheel’ (screw) vessels. This is a point
of great importance, to which they would
draw the special attention of the Inspector-General.
The money being now
ready for transmission, there is no reason
why there should be any, the slightest,
delay.”
The despatch gives instructions
upon other points, and concludes
with again urging the Inspector-General
to lose no time, closing
with the words, “Hasten! hasten!!”
The Inspector-General, obliged by
ill-health to return to England, was
the better able to work out the desires
of the Emperor’s Council, and
put himself in communication with
Her Majesty’s Government, with a
view to obtain their necessary sanction
before he could legally purchase
a vessel or employ a British
subject. He was, above all, desirous
to insure the thorough respectability
and good character of the European
force destined to guide as well
as aid the Chinese—at the same
time, to take care that the help should
be granted in a way to insure real
progress at Pekin, and thus guard
against a return to the old policy
of exclusion as soon as the officials
were relieved from the fears and
difficulties of their present position—and
to effect this in such a manner
as should not supersede, but
merely supplement, the action of the
Chinese themselves. This maxim
should ever be borne in mind in
our dealings with China. To supersede
the native authority, besides
humiliating him, brings about
no beneficial result.
Her Majesty’s Government met
the proposals of the Inspector-General
on behalf of the Emperor
of China in an enlightened spirit,
guarding themselves, however,
carefully against any risk of being
charged with intervention. Mr Lay
offered the post of Commander-in-Chief
of the European-Chinese naval
force to Captain Sherard Osborn,
C. B., which office, under the sanction
of Her Majesty’s Secretary of State
for Foreign Affairs and the Board
of Admiralty, he gladly accepted.
The necessary authority from Her
Majesty in Council was issued, authorising
the Inspector-General Horatio
Lay and Captain Sherard Osborn
to purchase such vessels and enter
such British subjects as might be
necessary, without an infringement
of the Foreign Enlistment Act.
With the permission of the Admiralty,
Captain Osborn selected the
following officers:—Captain Hugh
Burgoyne, V.C., as second in command;
Commander C. S. Forbes;
Lieutenants Arthur Salwey, Noel
Osborn, F. C. Vincent, H. M. Ommanney,
Allen Young, and G. Morice;
Mr Henry Collins in charge
of the Paymaster’s and Storekeeper’s
Departments; and Doctors John Elliot,
F. Piercey, Fegan, and others,
of the hospital arrangements. Officers
of the highest stamp have
been likewise selected from the
mercantile marine, and no seamen
or marines have been entered except
such as could show years of good
conduct.
It is, moreover, Mr Lay’s intention
to enlist presently in this force
the subjects of the other Treaty
Powers, so as to render it a European
Chinese force, in accordance
with the principle successfully carried
out in the customs administration.
As the funds arrived from China
the vessels and stores were purchased.
The Admiralty afforded
the same facilities from our arsenals
as would have been conceded to
any other friendly Power. From
the superabundant ships in our
navy the Emperor of China was
allowed to purchase the Mohawk,
Africa, and Jasper, and they were
re-named respectively the Pekin,
China, and Amoy. There being
no others available, and the private
yards having been swept by the
Federals of such vessels as could
carry guns or serve for warlike
purposes, it became necessary, in
spite of the delay it would entail, to
enter into contracts for the construction
of three other vessels, which
will be launched in March. The six
vessels—three of them despatch-vessels
fit to cope with the stormy seas
of the Chinese seaboard, and the
other three for river service—form
as small a force as it is safe to begin
with. It is intended that they shall
carry about 40 guns, and be manned
by 400 European officers and seamen,
of the very best character. During the
interval occupied in the building of
some of the vessels and equipment
of the others, there has been abundant
occupation in arranging the
details necessary for a sound organisation.
A code of laws for the good
order and comfort of all, based upon
the customs of a European navy,
has been compiled, so that Prince
Kung’s seal may render it the future
naval law of China. The scale of pay,
rations, prize-money, and pensions
for wounds, has been carefully
considered, to meet the requirements
of the special service. A
signal-book has been adapted for
intercommunication; and, strange as
it may sound, even an ensign—green
ground intersected by two yellow
diagonal bands, and bearing the
Imperial crest—had to be improvised,
inasmuch as in China every
armed native vessel flies her own
colours according to the whim of her
master,—an irregularity to which
it is very necessary a stop should
be put.
No one will deny that the task
about to be undertaken is an arduous
one; yet, after having carefully
weighed all its difficulties, we cannot
help feeling sanguine of a successful
issue. A good maritime
police is the secret of government
in China. If the water-ways of
China are in a state of security
and order, peace will re-establish
itself everywhere. The rivers, the
seas, and lakes and canals, within
the area of the Empire, cut it up
into such sections that rebellion
will be destroyed in detail, or
rather starve, directly a strong executive
is placed upon the Emperor’s
waters. The Taepings and other
banditti spread over the area they
have devastated, by availing themselves
of the extensive water-communication.
The Government of
Pekin, if it is wise, will pursue the
same course in its measures of repression.
The steam gunboat and the
electric telegraph, by their very appearance
in the disturbed districts,
will re-assure those who have almost
ceased to believe in any government,
and frighten away the evildoers;
whilst the fall of Nankin will
break the neck of a scourge which
is on its last legs. The fleets of
piratical junks which now infest
the coasts of China, and whose depredations
are known only to the
natives, will, we hope, disappear
before the vigorous operations of a
steam flotilla under the Imperial
flag. These “vikings” of the East
occupy every creek between Canton
and the borders of Cochin-China;
they have quite cut up the native
trade of the whole seaboard, and
occasionally pirate even European
traders. It is mainly owing to
these gentry that we have been
unable as yet to establish relations
and open a customhouse at Kiung-Chow
in the island of Hainan, a
point which we hope one day to see
the centre of an enormous trade.
Lastly, we see every reason to expect
most important results from
the information the officers of the
European-Chinese flotilla will be
able to gather of the interior of the
Chinese Empire, and of the commercial
advantages likely to flow
therefrom. As employés, though
merely temporarily so, of the Emperor,
they will have access to every
part of that vast county, and excite
no fears or jealousy; their opportunities
will be immense, and we
have reason to believe that they will
bear well in mind the duty they
owe to their fellow-men of gathering
and storing well every crumb
of information, geographical and
otherwise. What they may effect
for the benefit of our commerce, we
may estimate from the fruits that
have already followed in the wake of
their brethren of the navy of England
who first penetrated to Shanghai
in 1842, and to Hankow in 1858.
There are cities as rich as the former,
rivers as large as the Yang-tsze,
and lakes equal to those of Canada,
to be re-discovered. Those almost
unknown provinces of the interior
are not wastes profitable only to the
geographical enthusiast, but countries
equal to states of Europe,
thickly dotted with cities, and
densely populated, with a people
second only to ourselves in commercial
energy and respect for law and
order. England for years has spent
wealth, energy, and precious lives
in opening China to Western influence
and civilisation. To-day, her
success is certain. The Government
and people of China both ask
us to aid them in their hour of
trouble, and in return they will
assuredly grant us that access and
commercial freedom for which we
have so long laboured and so often
fought. The portals of ignorance
and heathenism are opening. Shall
we, who are in the vanguard of
nations, hesitate? No—assuredly
not! Our motto must ever be
“Forward;” and will not all enlightened
Christendom join us in
wishing “God speed” to those
about to put forth in this fresh
enterprise to the land of Cathay?
CAXTONIANA: A SERIES OF ESSAYS ON LIFE, LITERATURE, AND MANNERS. — PART XIII. — NO. XIX.—MOTIVE POWER ( continued ).
149
By the Author of ‘The Caxton Family.’
The next morning the sun shone
into my windows so brightly that I
rose at an earlier hour than I had
been accustomed to do for months,
and strolled into the gardens, interesting
myself in considering the
painter’s charge against dressed
ground and Tracey’s ingenious reply
to it. The mowers were at work
upon the lawns. Perhaps among
rural sounds there is none which
pleases me more than that of the
whetting of the scythe—I suppose
less from any music in itself, than
from associations of midsummer, and
hay-fields, and Milton’s ‘Allegro,’ in
which the low still sound is admitted
among the joyous melodies of
Morn. As the gardens opened upon
me, with their variety of alleys
and by-walks, I became yet more
impressed than I had been on the
day before, with the art which had
planned and perfected them, and
the poetry of taste with which the
images of the sculptor were so placed,
that at every turn they recalled some
pleasing but vague reminiscence of
what one had seen in a picture, or
in travel; or brought more vividly
before the mind some charming
verse in the poets, whose busts
greeted the eye from time to time
in bowery nook or hospitable alcove,
where the murmur of a waterfall,
or the view of a distant landscape
opened from out the groves, invited
pause and allured to contemplation.
At last, an arched trellis overhung
with vine leaves led me out
into that part of the park which
fronted the library, and to which
the Painter had given his preference
over the grounds I had just quitted.
There, the wildness of the scenery
came on me with the suddenness of
a surprise. The table-land, on which
the house stood on the other side of
the building, here abruptly sloped
down into a valley through which
a stream wound in many a maze,
sometimes amidst jagged rocklike
crags, sometimes through low grassy
banks, round which the deer were
grouping. The view was very extensive,
but not unbrokenly so; here
and there thick copses, in the irregular
outline of natural groves,
shut out the valley, but still left
towering in the background the
wavy hill-tops, softly clear in the
blue morning sky. Hitherto I had
sided with Tracey; now I thought
the Painter right. In the garden,
certainly, man’s mind forms a visible
link with Nature, but in those
scenes of Nature not trimmed and
decorated to the book-lore of man,
Thought takes a less finite scope,
and perhaps from its very vagueness
is less inclined to find monotony
and sameness in the wide expanse
over which it wanders to lose
itself in reverie.
Descending the hillside, I reached
the stream, and came suddenly upon
Henry Thornhill, who, screened behind
a gnarled old pollard-tree, was
dipping his line into a hollow where
the waves seemed to calm themselves,
and pause before they rushed,
in cascade, down a flight of crags,
and thence brawled loudly onward.
As I know by experience how
little an angler likes to be disturbed,
I contented myself with a nod and a
smile to the young man, and went my
own way in silence; but about an
hour afterwards, as I was winding
back towards the house, I heard his
voice behind me. I turned; he
showed me, with some pride, his
basket already filled with trout; and
after I had sufficiently admired and
congratulated, we walked slowly up
the slope together. The evening
before, Captain Thornhill had prepossessed
me less than the other
members of the party. He had
spoken very little, and appeared to
me to have that air of supreme indifference
to all persons and things
around him, which makes so many
young gentlemen like—so many
young gentlemen. But this morning
he was frank and communicative.
“You have known Sir Percival
very long, I think?” said he.
“Very long. I knew him before
I had left Cambridge. In my rambles
during a summer vacation,
chance brought us together; and
though he was then one of the most
brilliant oracles of the world of
fashion, and I an unknown collegian,
somehow or other we became
intimate.”
“I suppose you find him greatly
altered?”
“Do you mean in person or in
mind?”
“Well, in both.”
“In person less altered than I
could have supposed; his figure
just the same—as erect, as light,
and seemingly as vigorous. In mind
I cannot yet judge, but there is still
the same sweetness, and the same
cheerfulness; the same mixture of
good-tempered irony and of that
peculiar vein of sentiment which is
formed by the combination of poetical
feeling and philosophical contemplation.”
“He is a very fine fellow,” returned
Henry Thornhill, with some
warmth; “but don’t you think it is
a pity he should be so eccentric?”
“In what?”
“In what? Why, in that which
must strike everybody; shirking
his station, shutting himself up here,
planning gardens which nobody sees,
and filling his head with learning
for which nobody is the wiser.”
“His own friends see the gardens
and enjoy them; his own friends
may, I suppose, hear him talk, and
become the wiser for his learning.”
“His own friends—yes! a dozen
or two individuals; most of them
undistinguished as—as I am,” added
the young man, with visible bitterness.
“And, with his talents and
fortune, and political influence, he
might be, or at least might have
been, anything; don’t you think
so?”
“Anything is a bold expression;
but if you mean that he might, if
he so pleased, have acquired a very
considerable reputation, and obtained
a very large share of the rewards
which ambitious men covet,
I have no doubt that he could have
done so, and very little doubt that
he could do so still.”
“I wish you could stir him up to
think it. I am vexed to see him so
shelved in this out-of-the-way place.
He has even given up ever going to
Tracey Court now; and as for his
castle in Ireland, he would as soon
think of going to Kamtschatka.”
“I hope, at all events, his estates,
whether in the north or in Ireland,
are not ill-managed.”
“No, I must say that no estates
can be better managed; and so they
ought to be, for he devotes enormous
sums to their improvement,
as well as to all public objects in
their district.”
“It seems, then, that if he shirks
some of the pomps of wealth, he
does not shirk its duties?”
“Certainly not, unless it be the
duty which a great proprietor owes
to himself.”
“What is that duty?”
The young man looked puzzled;
at last he said—
“To make the most of his station.”
“Perhaps Sir Percival thinks it
is better to make the most of his
mind, and fancies he can do that
better in the way of life which
pleases him, than in that which
would displease; but he is lucky
in stewards if his estates thrive so
well without the watch of the master’s
eye.”
“Yes, but his stewards are gentlemen—one,
at Tracey Court, is a Mr
Aston, an old schoolfellow of Sir
Percival, who was brought up to
expect a fine property at the death
of an uncle; but the uncle unluckily
married at the age of fifty, and had
a large family. Sir Percival heard
he was in distress, and gave him
this appointment; it just suits him.
The Irish steward, Mr Gerrard, is
also a capital fellow, who travelled
in the East with Sir Percival. Being
half Irish himself, Gerrard understands
how to make the best
of the population; and being half
Scotch, he understands how to
make the best of the property. I
have no doubt that the estates are
better managed in Sir Percival’s
absence than if he resided on them,
for you know how good-natured
he is. A bad tenant has only to
get at his heart with a tale of distress,
in order to renew his lease
for whipping the land on his own
terms.”
“So then,” said I, “we have
come at last to this conclusion, that
your wise relation, knowing his own
character, in its merits and its failings,
has done well in delegating to
others, in whose probity and intellect
he has a just confidence, the
management of those affairs which
he could not administer himself
with equal benefit to all the persons
interested. Is not that the way in
which all states are governed? The
wisdom of a king in absolute governments,
or of a minister in free ones,
is in the selection of the right persons
for the right places; thus
working out a wise system through
the instrumentalities of those who
best understand its details.”
“Yes; but, talking of ministers,
Sir Percival makes nothing of his
political influence; he shuns all
politics. Can you believe it?—he
scarcely ever looks into the leading
article of a newspaper!”
“To a man who has been long
out of the way of party politics,
there is not the interest in leading
articles which you and I take.”
“I rather think that Sir Percival
does not like to be reminded of politics,
for fear he might be induced
to take an interest in them.”
“Ah, indeed! Why do you think
so?”
“Because, three years ago, Lady
Gertrude was very anxious that he
should claim the old barony of
Ravenscroft, which has been in
abeyance for centuries, but to which
the heralds and lawyers assured him
there could be no doubt of his
proving his right. Lady Gertrude
was so intent upon this that at one
time I thought she would have prevailed.
He looked into the case,
invited the lawyers here, satisfied
himself that the proof was clear,
and then suddenly forbade all steps
to be taken. Lady Gertrude told
me that he said to her, ‘For my
family this honour is nought, since
the title, if revived, would again
die with me; but for myself it is a
temptation to change, to destroy
the mode of life in which I am happiest,
and in which, on the whole,
I believe I am morally the least
imperfect. If I once took my seat
in the Lords, a responsible legislator,
how do I know that I should
not want to speak, to act, to vie
with others, and become ambitious
if successful—and fretful if not?’”
“So he declined. Well, after all,
a life most in harmony with a man’s
character is that in which he is probably
not only the happiest, but the
best man. Ambition is but noble
in proportion as it makes men useful.
But, from your own account,
Tracey’s private life is useful already,
though its uses are not obtrusive.
And for public life, three
parts of the accomplishments, and
perhaps of the virtues, which make
his private life beautiful, would not
be needed.”
I uttered these defensive suggestions
on behalf of my host somewhat
in rebuke of the young relation
whose criticisms had called
them forth, though in my own mind
I felt a sort of melancholy regret
that Percival’s choice of life should
be in walks so cool and sequestered,
and the tenor of his way so
noiseless: And did not his own
fear to be tempted into more active
exertions of intellect, if once brought
under the influence of emulative
competition, indicate that he himself
also felt a regret, on looking
back to the past, that he had acquired
habits of mind to which the
thought of distinction had become
a sensation of pain?
When our party assembled at
breakfast, Tracey said to me, “I had
no idea you were so early a riser, or
I would have given up my ride to
share your rambles.”
“Are you too, then, an early riser?”
“Yes, especially in summer. I
have ridden twelve miles with
Bourke to show him the remains of
an old Roman tower which he has
promised to preserve a few ages
longer—in a picture.”
Here the entrance of the letter-bag
suspended conversation. The
most eager for its opening was
young Thornhill; and his countenance
became at once overcast
when he found there was no letter
for him; as mine, no doubt, became
overcast when I found a large
packet of letters forwarded to me.
I had left town long before the
post closed; and two or three hours
suffice to bring plenty of troublesome
correspondents upon a busy
Londoner. My housekeeper had
forwarded them all. I think Lady
Gertrude was the only other one of
our party for whom the postman
sped the soft intercourse from soul
to soul. When I looked up from
my letters, Henry Thornhill had already
glanced rapidly over the panorama
of the world, displayed in the
‘Times’ newspaper, and, handing it
to the Librarian, said disdainfully,
“No news.”
“No news!” exclaimed Caleb
Danvers, after his own first peep—“no
news! Why, Dr ——’s
great library is to be sold by auction
on the 14th of next month!”
“That is interesting news,” said
Tracey. “Write at once for the
catalogue.”
“Any further criticism on the
Exhibition of the Royal Academy?”
asked the Painter, timidly.
“Two columns,” answered Mr
Danvers, laconically.
“Oh,” said the Painter, “that is
interesting too.”
“I beg your pardon, Mr Danvers,”
said Lady Gertrude, “but
will you glance at the foreign intelligence?
Look to Germany;—anything
about the Court of ——?”
“The Court of ——? yes, our
minister there is convalescent, and
going to Carlsbad next week.”
“That’s what I wanted to know,”
said Lady Gertrude. “My letter is
from his dear sister, who is very
anxious about him. Going to Carlsbad—I
am glad to hear it.”
Meanwhile Clara, who had possessed
herself of the supplementary
sheet, cried out, joyously—“O dear
Henry, only think—Ellen has got
a baby. How pleased they will be
at the Grange! A son and heir at
last!”
“Tut,” growled Henry, breaking
an egg-shell.
“So,” said Tracey, “you see the
‘Times’ has news for every one except
my friend here, who read in
London yesterday what we in the
country read to-day; and Captain
Thornhill, who finds nothing that
threatens to break the peace of the
world to the promotion of himself
and the decimation of his regiment.”
Henry laughed, but not without
constraint, and muttered something
about civilians being unable to understand
the interest a soldier takes
in his profession.
After breakfast, Tracey said to
me, “Doubtless you have your
letters to answer, and will be glad
to have your forenoon to yourself.
About two o’clock we propose adjourning
to a certain lake, which is
well shaded from the sun. I have
a rude summer pavilion on the
banks; there we can dine, and
shun the Dogstar. Clara, who
happily does not know that I am
thinking of Tyndaris, will bring
her lute, Aunt Gertrude her work,
Bourke his sketch-book; and the
lake is large enough for a sailing
excursion, if Henry will kindly exchange,
for the day, military repose
for nautical activity.”
All seemed pleased with the proposal
except Henry, who merely
shrugged his shoulders, and the
party dispersed for the morning.
My letters were soon despatched,
and my instincts or habits (which
are, practically speaking, much the
same thing) drew me into the
library. Certainly it was a very
noble collection of books, and exceedingly
well arranged. Opening
volume after volume, I found that
most of those containing works
of imperishable name were interleaved;
and the side-pages thus
formed were inscribed with critical
notes and comments in my host’s
handwriting.
I was greatly struck with the
variety and minuteness of the
knowledge in many departments,
whether of art, scholarship, or
philosophy, which these annotations
displayed, and the exquisite
critical discrimination and taste by
which the knowledge was vivified
and adorned. While thus gratifying
my admiring curiosity, I was
accosted by the Librarian, who had
entered the room unobserved by
me.
“Ay,” said he, glancing over my
shoulder at the volume in my hand—“Shakespeare;
I see you have
chanced there upon one of Sir
Percival’s most interesting speculations.
He seeks first to prove how
much more largely than is generally
supposed Shakespeare borrowed, in
detail, from others; and next, to
show how much more patently
than is generally supposed Shakespeare
reveals to us his own personal
nature, his religious and political
beliefs, his favourite sentiments
and cherished opinions. In
fact, it is one of Sir Percival’s
theories, that though the Drama is,
of all compositions, that in which
the author can least obtrude on us
his personality, yet that of all dramatists
Shakespeare the most frequently
presents to us his own. Our
subtle host seeks to do this by
marking all the passages of assertion
or reflection in Shakespeare’s plays
which are not peculiarly appropriate
to the speaker, nor called for
by the situation—often, indeed,
purely episodical to the action; and
where in such passages the same or
similar ideas are repeated, he argues
that Shakespeare himself is speaking,
and not the person in the
dialogue. I observe in the page
you have opened, that Sir Percival
is treating of the metaphysical turn
of mind so remarkably developed
in Shakespeare, and showing how
much that turn of mind was the
character of the exact time in which
he lived. You see how appositely
he quotes from Sir John Davies,
Shakespeare’s contemporary—who,
though employed in active professional
pursuits, a lawyer—nay,
even an Attorney-General and a
Serjeant; a member of Parliament,
nay, even a Speaker, and in an
Irish House of Commons—prepared
himself for those practical paths
of life by the composition of a
poem the most purely and profoundly
metaphysical which England,
or indeed modern Europe,
has ever produced: at this day it
furnishes the foundation of all our
immaterial schools of metaphysics.
You will see, if you look on, how
clearly Sir Percival shows that
Shakespeare had intently studied
that poem, and imbued his own
mind, not so much with its doctrines,
as with its manner of
thought.”
“Tracey was always fond of
metaphysics, and of applying his
critical acuteness to the illustration
of poets. I am pleased to see he
has, in the tastes of his youth, so
pleasing a resource in his seclusion.”
“But it is not only in metaphysics
or poetry that he occupies
his mind; you might be still more
forcibly struck with his information
and his powers of reasoning if you
opened any of the historians he
has interleaved—Clarendon, for instance,
or our earlier Chronicles.
I cannot but think he would have
been a remarkable writer, if he had
ever acquired the concentration
of purpose, for which, perhaps,
the idea of publishing what one
writes is indispensably necessary.”
“Has he never had the ambition
to be an author?”
“Never since I have known him;
and he never could conceive it now.
You look as if you thought that a
pity.”
“Well, is it not a pity?”
“Sir,” quoth the Librarian, taking
snuff, “that is not a fair question
to put to me, who have passed
my life in reading books, and cherishing
a humane compassion for
those who are compelled to write
them. But permit me to ask
whether a very clever man, himself
a voluminous writer, has not
composed a popular work called
the ‘Calamities of Authors’?—did
you ever know any writer who
has composed a work on the ‘Felicities
of Authors’? Do you think,
from your own experience, that
you could write such a work yourself?”
“Rhetorically, yes; conscientiously,
no. But let us hope that
the calamities of authors lead to
the felicities of readers.”
Thus talking we arrived at the
Librarian’s own private sanctuary,
a small study at the end of the
library, looking on the wilder part
of the park. Pointing to doors on
the opposite side of a corridor,
he said, “Those lead to Sir Percival’s
private apartments—they are
placed in the Belvidere Tower, the
highest room of which he devotes
to his scientific pursuits; and those
pursuits occupy him at this moment,
for he expects a visit very
shortly from a celebrated Swedish
philosopher, with whom he has
opened a correspondence.”
I left the Librarian to his books,
and took my way into the drawing-room.
There I found only Clara
Thornhill, seated by the window,
and with a mournful shade on her
countenance, which habitually was
cheerful and sunny. I attributed
the shade to the guilty Henry, and
my conjecture proved right; for
after some small-talk on various
matters, I found myself suddenly
admitted into her innocent confidence.
Henry was unhappy! Unreasonable
man! A time had been
when Henry had declared that
the supremest happiness of earth
would be to call Clara his! Such
happiness then seemed out of his
reach; Clara’s parents were ambitious,
and Henry had no fortune
but “his honour and his sword.”
Percival Tracey, Deus ex machinâ,
had stepped in—propitiated Clara’s
parents by handsome settlements.
Henry’s happiness was apparently
secured. Percival had bestowed on
him an independent income, had
sought to domicile him in his own
neighbourhood by the offer of a
charming cottage which Tracey had
built by the sea-side as an occasional
winter residence for himself; had
proposed to find him occupation as
a magistrate—nay, as a commanding
officer of gallant volunteers—in
vain—
“He was all for deeds of arms;
Honour called him to the field.”
The trophies of Miltiades would not
suffer him to sleep.
Henry had been moving heaven
and earth to get removed into a regiment
which was ordered abroad,
not exactly for what we call a war,
but for one of those smaller sacrifices
of human life which are always
going on somewhere or other
in distant corners of our empire,
and make less figure in our annals
than they do in our estimates.
Such trivial enterprises might at
least prepare his genius and expedite
his promotion.
“Mox in reluctantes dracones,” &c.
Percival, who was in secret league
with Clara against this restlessness
for renown which it is to be fervently
hoped the good sense of
Europe will refuse to gratify, had
done his best, by a pleasant irony
and banter, to ridicule Henry out
of his martial discontent. In vain—Henry
only resented his kinsman’s
disapproval of his honourable
ambition, and hence his regret
that Sir Percival did not “make
the most of his station.” Surely,
did he do so, a word from a man
of such political importance in
point of territory would have due
effect on the War Office. Henry
thought himself entitled not only
to a chance of fighting, but to the
dignity of Major. All this, by
little and little, though in her own
artless words, and in wifelike admiration
of Henry’s military genius
as well as ardour, I extracted from
Clara, who (all women being more
or less, though often unconsciously,
artful in the confidences with which
they voluntarily honour our sex) had
her own reason for frankness; she
had seen Sir Percival since breakfast,
and he had sought to convince
her that it would be wise to let
Henry have his own way. The
cunning creature wished me to
reason with Tracey, and set before
him all the dangers to limb and
life to which even a skirmish with
barbarians might expose a life so
invaluable as her Henry’s. “I
could see him depart without a
tear, if it were to defend his country,”
said she, with spirit. “But
to think of all the hardships he
must undergo in a savage land,
and fighting for nothing I can
comprehend, against a people I
never heard of—that is hard! it is
so reckless in him—and, poor dear,
his health is delicate, though you
would not think it!”
I promised all that a discreet
diplomatist under such untoward
circumstances could venture to promise;
and on the Painter entering
the room, poor Clara went up-stairs,
trying her womanly best to smile
away her tears.
Left alone with the artist, he
drew my attention to some pictures
on the wall which had been painted
by Sir Percival, commended their
gusto and brilliancy of execution,
and then said, “If our host had
begun life on fifty pounds a year,
he would have been a great painter.”
“Does it require poverty in order
to paint well?”
“It requires, I suppose, a motive
to do anything exceedingly well;
and what motive could Sir Percival
Tracey have to be a professed
painter?”
“I think you have hit on the
truth in his painting, and perhaps
in his other accomplishments: all
he wants is the concentration of
motive.”
“Is it not that want which
makes three-fourths of the difference
between the famous man
and the obscure man?” asked the
Painter.
“Perhaps not three-fourths; but
if it make one-fourth, it would go a
long way to account for the difference.
One good of a positive profession
is, that it supplies a definite
motive for any movement which the
intellect gives itself the trouble to
take. He who enters a profession
naturally acquires the desire to get
on in it, and perhaps in the profession
of art more ardently than in
any other, because a man does not
take to art from sheer necessity,
and without any inclination for it,
but with a strong inclination, to
which necessity gives the patient
forces of labour. I presume that I
am right in this conjecture.”
“Yes,” said the Painter, ingenuously.
“So far back as I can remember,
I had an inclination, nay
a passion, for painting; still I
might not have gone through the
requisite drudgery and apprenticeship;
might not have studied the
naked figure when I wished to get
at once to some gorgeous draperies,
or fagged at perspective when I
wanted to deck out a sunset, if I
had not had three sisters and a
widowed mother to think of.”
“I comprehend; but now that
you have mastered the fundamental
difficulties of your art, and accustomed
yourself to hope for fame
in the fuller and freer developments
of that art, do you think that you
would gladly accept the wealth of
Sir Percival Tracey, on the condition
that you were never to paint
for the public, and to renounce
every idea of artistic distinction?
or, if you did accept that offer for
the sake of your sisters and mother,
would it be with reluctance and
the pang of self-sacrifice?”
“I don’t think I could accept
such an offer on such conditions
even for them. I am now, sir,
utterly unknown—at best one of
those promising pupils, of whom
there are hundreds; but still I
think there is a something in me
as painter, as artist, which would
break my heart if, some day or
other, it did not force itself out.”
“Then you would not lose your
motive for becoming a great painter,
even did you succeed to the wealth
and station which you say deprive
Sir Percival of a motive, supposing
that, in accepting such gifts of fortune,
you were not required to sacrifice
the inclination you take from
nature?”
“No, I should not lose the motive.
Better famine in a garret than
obscurity in a palace!”
Our conversation was here broken
off by the entrance of Lady Gertrude.
“It is just time for our expedition,”
said she. “I think it is
about to strike two, and Percival is
always punctual.”
“I am quite ready,” said I.
“And I shall be so in five minutes,”
cried the Painter; “I must
run up-stairs for my sketch-book.”
“Oh, I see what is keeping my
nephew,” said Lady Gertrude, looking
out of the window; and as I
joined her she drew my attention
to two figures walking slowly in
the garden; in one I recognised
Tracey, the other was unknown to
me.
“He must have come by the
early train,” said Lady Gertrude,
musingly. “I wonder whether he
means to stay and go with us to
the lake.”
“You mean the gentleman in
black?” said I; “I think not,
whoever he may be, for, see, he is
just shaking hands with Tracey like
a man who is about to take leave.
By his dress he seems a clergyman.”
“Yes, don’t betray me—Percival’s
London almoner. My nephew
has employed him for seven years,
and it is only within the last year
that I discovered by accident what
the employment is. He comes here
when he likes—seldom stays over a
day! One of those good men who
are bored if they are not always
about their work; and indeed he
bores Percival by constantly talking
of sorrow and suffering, which
Percival is always wishing to relieve,
but never wishes to hear discussed.
You don’t know to what
a degree my nephew carries his
foible!”
“What foible?”
“That of desiring everybody to
be and to look happy. A year ago,
his valet, who had lived with him
since he came of age, died. I found
him another valet, with the highest
character—the best servant possible—not
a fault to find with him; but
he had a very melancholy expression
of countenance. This fretted Percival;
he complained to me. ‘Dolman
is unhappy or discontented,’ he
said. ‘Find out what it is; remedy
it.’ I spoke to the poor man; he
declared himself most satisfied, most
fortunate in obtaining such a place.
Still he continued to look mournful.
Percival could not stand it. One
day he thrust a bank-note into the
man’s hand, and said, ‘Go, friend,
and before sunset look miserable
elsewhere.’”
I was laughing at this characteristic
anecdote, when Percival entered
the room with his usual beaming
aspect and elastic step. “Ready?”
said he; “that’s well: will you ride
with me?” (this addressed to myself).
“I have a capital sure-footed
pony for you.”
“I thought of giving your friend
a seat in my pony-chaise,” said Lady
Gertrude.
Percival glanced at his aunt
quickly, and replied, “So be it.”
I should have preferred riding with
Tracey; but before he set off he
whispered in my ear, “It makes the
dear woman happy to monopolise
a new-comer—otherwise——” He
stopped short, and I resigned myself
to the pony-chaise.
“Pray,” said Lady Gertrude, when
we were fairly but slowly in movement
along a shady road in the
park,—“pray, don’t you think it is
very much to be regretted that Percival
should be single—should never
have married?”
“I don’t know. He seems to me
very happy as he is.”
“Yes, happy, no doubt. I believe
he would make himself happy in a
dungeon; and——” Lady Gertrude
rather spitefully whipped the ponies.
“Perhaps,” said I, as soon as I
had recovered the first sensation
of alarm, with which I am always
seized when by the side of ladies
who drive ponies and whip them—“perhaps,”
said I—“take care of
that ditch—perhaps Percival has
never seen the woman with whom
it would be felicity to share a dungeon?”
“When you knew him first, while
he was yet young, did you think
him a man not likely to fall very
violently in love?”
“Well, ‘fall’ and ‘violently’ are
two words that I should never have
associated with his actions at any
time of life. But I should have said
that he was a man not likely to form
a very passionate attachment to any
woman who did not satisfy his
refinement of taste, which is exquisitely
truthful when applied to
poems and statues, but a little too
classically perfect for just appreciation
of flesh and blood, at least in
that sex which is so charming that
every defect in it is a shock on the
beau ideal.”
“Nevertheless,” said Lady Gertrude,
after acknowledging, with a
gracious smile, the somewhat old-fashioned
gallantry conveyed in my
observations—“nevertheless, Percival
has loved deeply and fervently,
and, what may seem to you strange,
has been crossed in his affections.”
“Strange! Alas! in love nothing
is strange. No one is loved for his
merits any more than for his fortune
or rank; but men, and women too,
are married for their merits, and
still more for their rank and their
fortune. I can imagine, therefore,
though with difficulty, a girl wooed
by Percival Tracey not returning his
love, but I cannot conceive her refusing
his hand. How was it?”
“You see how I am confiding in
you. But you are almost the only
friend of his youth whom Percival
has invited as his guest; and your
evident appreciation of his worth at
once opens my heart to you. In the
course of that lengthened absence
from England—on the eve of which
you took leave of him nearly thirty
years ago—Percival formed a close
friendship with a fellow-traveller in
the East: Percival considers that to
the courage, presence of mind, and
devotion of this gentleman, a few
years younger than himself, he owed
his life in some encounter with robbers.
Mr Gerrard (that is this
friend’s name) was poor and without
a profession. When Percival
was about to return to Europe, he
tried in vain to persuade Mr Gerrard
to accompany him—meaning,
though he did not say so, to exert
such interest with Ministers as he
possessed, to obtain for Gerrard
some honourable opening in the
public service. The young man refused,
and declared his intention of
settling permanently at Cairo. Percival,
in the course of his remonstrances,
discovered that the cause
of this self-exile was a hopeless attachment,
which had destroyed all
other objects of ambition in Gerrard’s
life, and soured him with the
world itself. He did not, however,
mention the name of the lady, nor
the reasons which had deprived his
affection of hope. Well, Percival
left him at Cairo, and travelled back
into Europe. At a German spa he
became acquainted with an Irish
peer who had run out his fortune,
been compelled to sell his estates,
and was living upon a small annuity
allowed to him either by his creditors
or his relations; a man very
clever, very accomplished, not of
very high principle, and sanguine
of bettering his own position, and
regaining the luxuries to which he
had been accustomed, through some
brilliant marriage, which the beauty
of his only daughter might enable
her to make. Beauty to a very rare
degree she possessed—nor beauty
alone; her mind was unusually cultivated,
and her manners singularly
fascinating. You guess already?”
“Yes. Percival saw here one
with whom he did not fall in love,
but for whom he rose into love. He
found his ideal.”
“Exactly so. I need not say that
the father gave him all encouragement.
Percival was on the point of
proposing, when he received a letter
from Mr Gerrard (to whom he had
written, some weeks before, communicating
the acquaintance he had
made, and the admiration he had
conceived); and the letter, written
under great excitement, revealed the
object of Gerrard’s hopeless attachment.
Of Irish family himself, he
had known this young lady from her
childhood—and from her childhood
loved her. He had been permitted
to hope by Lord ——, who was at
that time in a desperate struggle to
conceal or stave off his ruin, and
who did not scruple to borrow from
his daughter’s suitor all that he
could extract from him. Thus, when
the final crash came, Lord ——’s
ruin involved nearly the whole of
Gerrard’s patrimony; and, of course,
Lord —— declared that a marriage
was impossible between two young
persons who had nothing to live
upon. It was thus that Edmund
Gerrard had become an exile.
“This intelligence at once reversed
the position of the rivals.
From that moment Percival devoted
himself to bless the life of the man
who had saved his own. How he
effected this object I scarcely know;
but Lord —— gave his consent to
Gerrard’s suit, and lived six years
longer with much pomp and luxury
in Paris. Gerrard settled with his
wife in Percival’s Irish castle, and
administers Percival’s Irish estates,
at a salary which ranks him with the
neighbouring gentry. But Percival
never visits that property—I do
not think he would trust himself to
see the only woman he ever loved
as the wife of another, though she
is no longer young, and is the mother
of children, whose future fortunes
he has, doubtless, assured.”
“What you tell me,” said I, with
emotion, “is so consistent with
Tracey’s character that it gives me
no surprise. That which does surprise
me is, not the consent of the
ruined father, but the consent of
the accomplished daughter. Did
Percival convince himself that she
preferred his rival?”
“That is a question I can scarcely
answer. My own belief is, that her
first fancy had been caught by Gerrard,
and that she had given him
cause to believe that that first fancy
was enduring love; but that, if her
intimate acquaintance with Percival
had continued longer, and had
arrived at a stage at which his
heart had been confessed to her,
and her own heart frankly wooed,
the first fancy would not have
proved enduring love. But the
acquaintance did not reach to that
stage; and I have always understood
that her marriage has been a
very happy one.”
“In that happiness Tracey is
consoled?”
“Yes, now, no doubt. But I
will tell you this, that as soon as
all obstacles to the marriage were
removed, and Gerrard on his way
from the East, Percival left Germany
and reached Lausanne, to be
seized with a brain fever, which
threatened his life, and from the
effects of which it was long before
he recovered. But answer me candidly
one question, Do you think
it is too late in life for him to
marry yet?”
Poor Lady Gertrude asked this
question in so pleading a tone of
voice, that I found it very difficult
to answer with the candour which
was insisted on as the condition
of my reply. At length I said,
bravely—
“My dear Lady Gertrude, if a
man hard upon sixty chooses to
marry, it becomes all his true friends
to make the best of it, and say that
he has done a wise thing. But if
asked beforehand whether it be not
too late in life for such an experiment,
a true friend must answer,
‘Yes.’”
“Yet there have been very happy
marriages with great disparity of
years,” said Lady Gertrude, musingly,
“and Percival is very young
for his age.”
“Excellent after-reflections, if he
do marry. But is he not very happy
as he is? I know not why, but
you all seem to conspire against his
being happy in his own way. One
of you wants him to turn politician,
another to turn Benedict. For
my part, the older I grow, the more
convinced I am of the truth of one
maxim—whether for public life or
for private—‘Leave well alone.’”
By this time we had arrived into
the heart of a forest that realised
one’s dreams of Ardennes; a young
man would have looked round for
a Rosalind, a moralising sage for a
Jacques. Many a green vista was
cut through the mass of summer
foliage, and in full view before us
stretched a large wild lake; its
sides, here and there, clothed with
dipping trees or clustered brushwood.
On the opposite margin, to
which, in a neck of the lake, a rustic
bridge gave access, there was a
long and picturesque building, in
the style of those quaint constructions
of white plaster and black
oak beams and rafters, which are
still seen in Cheshire, but with
ruder reliefs of logwood pilasters
and balconies; a charming, old-fashioned
garden stretched before
it, rich in the genuine English
flowers of the Elizabethan day; and
scattered round, on inviting spots,
were lively-coloured tents and awnings.
The heron rose alarmed from
the reeds as we drew near the water;
but the swans, as if greeting
the arrival of familiar friends, sailed
slowly towards us. Tracey had
already arrived at the cottage, and
we saw him dismounting at the door,
and talking to an old couple who
came out to meet and welcome him.
“I believe,” said Lady Gertrude,
“that Percival’s secret reason for
building that cottage was to place
in it these two old servants from
Tracey Court. They had known
him there when he was a boy, and
are so attached to him that they
implored him to let them serve him
wherever he resided. But they were
too old and too opinionated to suit
our moderate establishment, which
does not admit of supernumeraries,
so he suddenly found out that it
would be very pleasant to have a
forest lodge for the heats of summer,
built that house, and placed
them in it. The old woman, who
was housekeeper at Tracey Court,
is, however, as I hope you will acknowledge,
a very good cook on
these holiday occasions; and her
husband, who was butler there, is
so proud and so happy to wait on
us, that——. But no doubt you
understand how young it makes us
old folks feel, to see those who remember
us in our youth, and to
whom we are still young.”
Our party now assembled in front
of the forest lodge, and the grooms
took back the ponies, with orders
to return before nightfall. Tracey
carried me over the lodge, while
Henry Thornhill and the Painter
busied themselves with a small sailing
vessel which rode at anchor in
a tiny bay.
This rustic habitation was one for
which two lovers might have sighed.
Its furniture very simple, but picturesquely
arranged, with some of
those genuine relics of the Elizabethan
age, or perhaps rather that
of James I., which are now rarely
found, though their Dutch imitations
are in every curiosity-shop.
As in the house we had left there
was everywhere impressive the sentiment
of the classic taste, so here
all expressed the sentiment of that
day in our own history which we
associate with the poets, who are
our most beloved classics. It was
difficult, when one looked round, to
suppose that the house could have
been built and furnished by a living
contemporary; it seemed a place
in which Milton might have lodged
when he wrote the ‘Lycidas,’ or
Izaak Walton and Cotton have
sought shelter in the troubled days
of the Civil War, with a sigh of
poetic regret as they looked around,
for the yet earlier age when Sidney
escaped from courts to meditate
the romance of ‘Arcadia.’
“I have long thought,” said Tracey,
“that if we studied the secrets
of our English climate a little more
carefully than most of us do, we
could find, within a very small
range, varieties of climate which
might allow us to dispense with
many a long journey. For instance,
do you not observe how much cooler
and fresher the atmosphere is here
than in the villa yonder, though it
is but five miles distant? Here,
not only the sun is broken by the
forest-trees, but the ground is much
more elevated than it is yonder.
We get the bracing air of the northern
hills, to which I have opened
the woods, and here, in the hot
relaxing days of summer, I often
come for days or weeks together.
The lodge is not large enough to
admit more than two, or at most
three other visitors, and therefore
it is only very intimate friends
whom I can invite. But I always
look forward to a fortnight or so
here, as a time to be marked with
the whitest chalk, and begin to
talk of it as soon as the earliest
nightingale is heard. Again, on the
other extremity of my property,
by the sea-side, I have made my
winter residence, my Tarentum, my
Naples, my Nice. There the aspect
is due south—cliffs, ranged in semicircle,
form an artificial screen from
the winds and frosts. The cottage
I have built there is a sun-trap. At
Christmas I breakfast in a bower
of geraniums, and walk by hedgerows
of fuchsia and myrtle. All
this is part of my philosophical
plan, on settling down for life—viz.,
to collect all the enjoyments this
life can give me into the smallest
possible compass. Before you go,
you must see my winter retreat.
I should like to prove to you how
many climates, with a little heed,
an Englishman may find within
a limit of twenty miles. I had
thought of giving Bellevue (my sea-side
cottage) to the Thornhills, and
delighted in the thought of becoming
their guest in the winter, for
aunt. Gertrude does not fancy the
place as I do, and wherever I go
cannot live quite alone, nor quite
without that humanising effect of
drawing-room scenery, which the
play-writers call ‘petticoat interest.’
But when a man allows himself to
be selfish, he deserves to be punished.
Henry Thornhill disdains
Bellevue and comfort, and insists
on misery and bivouacs.”
“Ah, my dear Tracey,” said I,
mindful of my promise to Clara,
“Henry Thornhill is much too fine
a young fellow to be wasted upon
ignoble slaughter, and still more
ignoble agues and marsh fevers.
I hope you do not intend to gratify
his preposterous desire to plant
laurels at the other end of the
world, and on soil in which it may
be reasonably doubted whether any
laurels will grow——”
Tracey’s brow became clouded.
He threw himself on a seat niched
into the recess of a lattice window,
looked out at first abstractedly, and
then, as the cloud left his brow,
observantly.
“See, my dear friend,” said he—“see,
how listlessly, for a mere holiday
pleasure, that brave lad is running
up the sails. Do you think
that he would be thus indifferent
if he were clearing decks for a
fight, if responsibility, and honour,
and duty, and fame were his motive
powers? No. If he stayed at
home inactive, he would be miserable
the more Clara and I tried to
make him happy in our holiday
way. That which a man feels,
however unphilosophically (according
to other men’s philosophy), to
be an essential to the object for
which he deems it noble to exist—that
the man must do, or at least
attempt; if we prevent him, we
mar the very clockwork of his
existence, for we break its mainspring.
Henry must have his own
way. And I say that for Clara’s
sake; for if he has not, he will seek
excitement in something else, and
become a bad man and a very bad
husband.”
“Hem!” said I; “of course you
know him best; but I own I do
not see in him a genius equal to
his restlessness or his ambition; and
I think his wife very superior to
himself in intellect. If, besides
giving him your sea-side villa, you
gave him a farm, surely he might
become famous for his mangold-wurzel;
and it is easier for all
men, including even Henry Thornhill,
to grow capital wurzel than
it is to beat Hannibal or Wellington.”
“Pish!” said Tracey, smiling,
“you ought to know mankind too
well to think seriously what you
say in sarcasm. Pray, where and
what would England be if every
sharp young fellow in the army did
not set a Hannibal or a Wellington
before his eyes; or if every young
politician did not haunt his visions
with a Pitt, a Fox, or a Burke?
What Henry Thornhill may become,
Heaven only knows; but if
you could have met Arthur Wellesley
before he went to India, do
you think you would have guessed
that he would become the hero of
England? Can any of us detect
beforehand the qualities of a man
of action?—Of a man of letters,
yes, to a certain degree, at least.
We can often, though not always,
foresee whether a man may become
a great writer; but a great man of
action—no!! Henry has no literature,
no literary occupation, nor
even amusement. Probably Hannibal
had none, and Wellington
very little. Bref—he thinks his
destiny is action, and military action.
Every man should have a
fair chance of fulfilling what he conceives
to be his destiny. Suppose
Henry Thornhill fail; what then?
He comes back, reconciled to what
fate will still tender him—reconciled
to my sea-side villa—to his
charming wife—reconciled to life
as it is for him. But now he is
coveting a life which may be. A
man only does that which fate intends
him to do, in proportion as
he obeys the motive which gives
him his power in life. Henry
Thornhill’s motive is military ambition.
It is no use arguing the
point—what man thinks, he is.”
I bowed my head. I felt that
Tracey was right, and sighed aloud,
“Poor little Clara!”
“Poor little Clara!” said Tracey,
sighing also, “must, like other
poor dear little loving women, take
her chance. If her Henry succeed,
how proud she will be to congratulate
him! if he fail, how proud she
will be to console him!”
“Ah, Tracey!” said I, rising, “in
all you have said I recognise your
acute discernment and your depth
of reasoning. But when you not
only concede to, but approve, the
motive power which renders this
young man restless, pray forgive so
old a friend for wondering why you
yourself have never found some motive
power which might, long ere
this, have rendered you renowned.”
“Hush!” said Tracey, with his
winning, matchless smile—“hush,
look out on yon woods and waters.
Has not the life which Nature bestows
on any man who devoutly
loves her a serener happiness than
can be found in the enjoyments
that estrange us from her charms?
How few understand the distinction
between life artificial and
life artistic! Artificial existence is
a reverence for the talk of men;
artistic existence is in the supreme
indifference to the talk of men.
You and I, in different ways, seek
to complete our being on earth,
not artificially, but artistically.
Neither of us can be insincere
mouthpieces of talk in which we
have no faith. You cannot write
in a book—you cannot say in a
speech—that which you know to
be a falsehood. But the artificial
folks are the very echoes of falsehood;
the noise they make is in
repeating its last sounds. An artist
must be true to nature, even though
he add to nature something from
his soul of man which nature cannot
give in her representations of
truth. Is it not so?”
“Certainly,” said I, with warmth.
“I could neither write nor speak
what I did not believe to be, in
the main, truthful. A man may
or may not, according to the
quality of his mind, give to nature
that which clearly never can
be in nature—viz., the soul or the
intellect of man. But soul or intellect
he must give to nature—that
is, to everything which external
objects present to his senses as
truthful—or he is in art a charlatan,
and in action a knave. But then
truth, as Humanity knows it, is
not what the schoolmen call it,
One and Indivisible; it is like
light, and splits not only into elementary
colours, but into numberless
tints. Truth with Raffaelle is
not the same as truth with Titian;
truth with Shakespeare is not the
same as truth with Milton; truth
with St Xavier is not the same as
truth with Luther; truth with Pitt
is not the same as truth with Fox.
Each man takes from life his favourite
truth, as each man takes
from light his favourite colour.”
“Bravo!” cried Tracey, clapping
his hands.
“Why bravo?” said I, testily.
“Can the definition I hazard be
construed into a defence of what I
presume to be your view of the individual
allegiance which each man
owes to truth as he conceives it?
No; for each man is bound to
support and illustrate, with all his
power, truth as truth seems to him,
Raffaelle as Raffaelle, Titian as
Titian, Shakespeare as Shakespeare,
Milton as Milton, Pitt as Pitt, Fox
as Fox. And the man who says,
‘I see truth in my own way, and I
do not care to serve her cause;’
who, when Nature herself, ever
moving, ever active, exhorts him
to bestir himself for the truth he
surveys, and to animate that truth
with his own life and deed, shrugs
his shoulder, and cries ‘Cui bono?’—that
man, my dear Tracey, may
talk very finely about despising renown,
but in reality he shuffles off
duty. Pardon me; I am thinking
of you. I would take your part
against others; but as friend to
friend, and to your own face, I condemn
you.”
To this discourteous speech Tracey
was about to reply, when Lady
Gertrude and Clara Thornhill entered
the room to tell us that the
boat was ready, and that we had
less than two hours for aquatic
adventure, as we were to dine at
five.
“I am not sorry to have a little
time to think over my answer to
those reproaches which are compliments
on the lips of friends,” said
Tracey to me, resting his arm on
my shoulder; and in a few minutes
more we were gliding over the
lake, with a gentle breeze from the
hills, just lively enough to fill the
sail. Clara, bewitchingest of those
womanliest women who unfairly
enthral and subdue us, while we
not only know that their whole
hearts are given to another, but love
and respect them the more for it,—Clara
nestled herself by my side.
And I had not even the satisfaction
of thinking that that infamous
Henry was jealous. He did indeed
once or twice pause from his nautical
duties to vouchsafe us a scowl;
but it was sufficiently evident that
the monster was only angry because
he knew that Clara loved him so
well, that she was seeking to enlist
me on her side against his abominable
ambition of learning the art of
homicide.
“Well,” whispered Clara to me—“well,
you have spoken to Sir
Percival!”
“Alas, yes! and in vain. He
thinks that for your sake Henry
must fulfil that dream of heroism,
which perhaps first won your heart
to him. Women very naturally love
heroes; but then they must pay
the tax for that noble attachment.
Henry must become the glory of
his country, and the major of a regiment
in active service. My dear
child—I mean, my dear Mrs Thornhill—don’t
cry; be a hero’s wife!
Tracey has convinced me that Henry
is right; and my firm belief is that
the chief motive which makes Henry
covet laurels is to lay them at your
feet.”
“The darling!” murmured Clara.
“You see your parents very naturally
wished you to make a better
worldly marriage. That difficulty
was smoothed over, not by the
merits of Henry, but the money of
Sir Percival Tracey. Could you respect
your husband if he were not
secretly chafed at that thought?
He desires to lift himself up to you
even in your parents’ eyes, not by
a miserable pecuniary settlement
effected through a kinsman, but by
his own deeds. Oppose that, and
you humiliate him. Never humiliate
a husband. Yield to it, and
you win his heart and his gratitude
for ever. Man must never be put
into an inferior position to his helpmate.
Is not that true? Thank
you, my child—(come, the word is
out)—for that pressure of my hand.
You understand us men. Let Henry
leave you, sure that his name will
be mentioned with praise in his
commanding officer’s report after
some gallant action, looking forward
to the day when, in command
himself, Parliament shall vote him
its thanks, and his sovereign award
him her honours; and your Henry,
as you cling in pride to his breast,
shall whisper in words only heard
by you—‘Wife mine, your parents
are not ashamed of me now! All
this is your work! all results from
the yearning desire to show that
the man whom you had singled out
from the world was not unworthy
of your love!’”
“But Henry does not say those
pretty things,” sighed Clara, half
smiling, half weeping.
“Say them? In words, of course
not. What man, and especially
what Englishman, does say pretty
things? It is only authors, who
are the interpreters of hearts, that
say what lovers and heroes feel.
But a look says to the beloved one
more than authors can put into
words. Henry’s look will tell you
what you, his own, his wife, have
been to him in the bivouac, in the
battle; and you will love and reverence
him the more because he
does not say the pretty things into
which I mince and sentimentalise
the calm Englishman’s grand, silent,
heartfelt combination of love
with duty and with honour. My
dear Clara, I speak to you as I
would to my own daughter. Let
your young soldier go. You and I
indeed—the woman and the civilian—may
talk as we will of distinctions
between the defence of the
island and the preservation of the
empire. But a soldier is with his
country’s flag wherever it is placed—whether
in the wilds of Caffraria
or on the cliffs of Dover. Clara, am
I not right? Yes! you again press
my hand. After all, there is not a
noble beat in the heart of man
which does not vibrate more nobly
still in the heart of the wife who
loves him!”
Just at this time our little anchor
dropped on a fairy island. There
was as much bustle on board as if
we had discovered a new Columbia.
We landed for a few minutes to enjoy
a glorious view of the lake, to
which this island was the centre,
and explore a curious cave, which,
according to tradition, had been the
dwelling of some unsocial anchorite
in Gothic days. The rocky walls
of this cell were now inscribed with
the names or initials of summer
holiday visitors from provincial
towns.
“See,” said the Painter, “how
instinctive to man is the desire to
leave some memorial of himself
wherever he has been.”
“Do you acknowledge then,” said
Tracey, “that the instinct which
roused Joseph Higgins to carve on
the rock, for the benefit of distant
ages, the fact, that in the year 1837
he visited this spot in company
with ‘Martha Brown,’ is but a
family branch of the same instinct
which makes genius desire to write
its name on the ‘flammantia mœnia
mundi?’”
“Perhaps,” replied the Painter,
“the instinct is the same; but if
it be so, that truth would not debase
and vulgarise the yearning of
genius—it would rather elevate
and poetise the desire of Joseph
Higgins.”
“Well answered,” said I. “Has
any one present a knife that he will
not mind blunting? if so, I should
like to carve my name under that
of Joseph Higgins. It is something
to leave a trace of one’s whereabout
twenty years hence, even in the
rock of this lonely cave.”
Henry produced the knife, and I
carved my name under that of Joseph
Higgins, with the date, and
these words—“A Summer Holiday.”
“I have not had many holidays,”
said I, “since I left school;
let me preserve one from oblivion.”
I passed the knife to Tracey.
“Nay,” said he, laughing, “I
have no motive strong enough to
induce me to take the trouble. I
have no special holiday to record—my
life is all holiday.”
We re-entered our vessel, and
drifted along the lake—the Painter
jotting down hints of scenery in his
sketch-book, and Percival reading to
us aloud from a volume of Robert
Browning’s Poems which he had
brought with him. He was a great
admirer of that poet, and was bent
upon making Clara share his own
enthusiasm. Certainly he read well,
and the poems he selected seemed
in harmony with the scene; for
there is in Robert Browning a certain
freshness and freedom of music,
and a certain suggestiveness of quiet
thought reflected from natural images,
which fit him to be read out
of doors, in English landscapes, on
summer days.
When we returned from our
cruise, we found our rural banquet
awaiting us. We were served under
an awning suspended from the
trunks of two mighty elms, whose
branches overhung the water. Lady
Gertrude had not exaggerated the
culinary skill of the ci-devant housekeeper.
What with the fish from
the lake, various sorts, dressed in
different ways, probably from receipts
as old as the monastic days
in which fresh-water fishes received
the honours due to them—what
with some excellent poultry, which,
kept in that wild place, seemed to
have acquired a finer flavour than
farmyard coops bestow—and what
with fruits, not rendered malefic by
walls of pastry—the repast would
have satisfied more refined epicures
than we were. Cool, light, sparkling
wines, innocent as those which
Horace promised to Tyndaris, circled
freely. All of us became mirthful,
even Clara—all of us except
Henry, who still looked as if he
were wasting time; and the Painter,
who became somewhat too seriously
obtrusive of his art, and could with
difficulty be kept from merging the
whole conversation into criticisms
on the landscape effects of Gainsborough
contrasted with those of
Claude.
After dinner we quietly settled
ourselves to our several amusements—Lady
Gertrude to some notable
piece of female work. Clara, after
playing us a few airs on her lute,
possessed herself of Tracey’s volume
of Browning, and pretended to
read. The Painter flung himself on
the grass, and contemplated with
an artist’s eye the curves in the
bank, and the lengthening shadows
that crept over the still waters.
Henry, ever restless, wandered away
with a rod in his hand towards a
distant gravelly creek, in which the
old man at the lodge assured us
he had seen perch of three pounds
weight.
The Librarian alone remained
seated at the table, finishing very
slowly his bottle of claret, and apparently
preparing himself for a
peaceful slumber.
Tracey and I strolled along the
margin of the lake, the swans following
us as we walked: they were
old friends of his.
“So,” said Tracey at last, “you
think that my course of life has
not been a wise one.”
“If all men lived like you, it
might be very well for a paradise,
but very bad for the world we dwell
in.”
“Possibly; but it would be very
bad for the world we dwell in if the
restless spirits were not in some
degree kept in check by the calm
ones. What a miserable, unsafe,
revolutionary state of society would
be that in which all the members
were men of combative ambition
and fidgety genius; all haranguing,
fighting, scribbling; all striving,
each against the other! We sober
fellows are the ballast in the state
vessel: without us, it would upset
in the first squall! We have our
uses, my friend, little as you seem
disposed to own it.”
“My dear Tracey, the question
is not whether a ship should carry
ballast, but whether you are of the
proper material for ballast. And
when I wonder why a man of great
intellect and knowledge should not
make his intellect and knowledge
more largely useful, it is a poor answer
to tell me that he is as useful
as—a bag of stones.”
“A motive power is as necessary
to impel a man, whatever his intellect
or knowledge, towards ambitious
action, as it is to lift a stone
from the hold of a vessel into the
arch of a palace. No motive power
from without urges me into action,
and the property inherent in me is
to keep still.”
“Well, it is true, yours is so exceptional
a lot that it affords no
ground for practical speculation on
human life. Take a patrician of
£60,000 a year, who only spends
£6000: give him tastes so cultivated
that he has in himself all
resources; diet him on philosophy
till he says, with the Greek sage,
‘Man is made to contemplate, and
to gaze on the stars,’ and it seems
an infantine credulity to expect that
this elegant Looker-on will condescend
to take part with the actors
on the world’s stage. Yet without
the actors, the world would be only
a drop-scene for the Lookers-on.
Yours, I repeat, is an exceptional
case. And those who admire your
mind, must regret that it has been
robbed of fame by your fortune.”
“Flatterer,” said Tracey, with his
imperturbable good-temper, “I am
ashamed of myself to know that
you have not hit on the truth. If
I had been born to £200 a year, and
single as I am now—that is, free to
choose my own mode of life—I
should have been, I was about to
say as idle as I am, but idle is not
the word; I should have been as
busy in completing my own mind,
and as reluctant to force that mind
into the squabbles of that mob which
you call the world: in fact, I am
but a type—somewhat exaggerated
by accidental circumstances, which
make me more prominent than
others to your friendly if critical
eye—of a very common and a very
numerous class in a civilisation so
cultivated as that of our age. Wherever
you look, you will find men
whom the world has never heard of,
yet who in intellect or knowledge
could match themselves against those
whose names are in all the newspapers.
Allow me to ask, Do you
not know, in the House of Commons,
men who never open their
lips, but for whose mere intellect,
in judgment, penetration, genuine
statesmanship, you have more respect
than you have for that of the
leading orators? Allow me to ask
again, Should you say the profoundest
minds and the most comprehensive
scholars are to be found
among the most popular authors of
your time; or among men who
have never published a line, and
never will? Answer me frankly.”
“I will answer you frankly. I
should say that, in political judgment
and knowledge, there are many
men in the back benches of Parliament,
who are the most admirable
critics of the leading statesmen. I
should say that, in many educated,
fastidious gentlemen, there are men
who, in exquisite taste and extensive
knowledge, are the most admirable
critics of the popular authors.
But still there is an immense difference
in human value between even
a first-rate critic who does not publish
his criticisms, and even a second
or third-rate statesman or author
who does contribute his quota of
thought to the intellectual riches
of the world.”
“Granted; but the distinction
between man and man, in relation
to the public, is not mere intellect,
nor mere knowledge; it is in something
else. What is it?”
“Dr Arnold, the schoolmaster,
said, that as between boy and boy
the distinction was energy, perhaps
it is so with men.”
“Energy! yes: but what puts the
energy into movement? what makes
one man dash into fame by a harum-scarum
book full of blunders and
blemishes, or a random fiery speech,
of which any sound thinker would
be heartily ashamed; and what
keeps back the man who could
write a much better book and make
a much better speech?”
“Perhaps,” said I, ironically,
“that extreme of elegant vanity,
an over-fastidious taste; perhaps
that extreme of philosophical do-nothingness,
which always contemplates
and never acts.”
“Possibly you are right,” answered
Tracey, shaming my irony by his
urbane candour. “But why has
the man this extreme of elegant
vanity or philosophical do-nothingness?
Is it not, perhaps, after all,
a physical defect? the lymphatic
temperament instead of the nervous-bilious?”
“You are not lymphatic,” said I,
with interest; for my hobby is—metaphysical
pathology, or pathological
metaphysics—“You,” said
I, “are not lymphatic; you are
dark-haired, lean, and sinewy; why
the deuce should you not be energetic!
it must be that infamous
£60,000 which has paralysed all
your motive power.”
“Friend,” answered Tracey, “are
there not some some men in the
House of Lords with more than
£60,000 a year, and who could
scarcely be more energetic if they
lived on 4d. a day and worked for
it?”
“There have been, and are, such
instances in the Peerage, doubtless;
but, as a general rule, the wealthiest
peers are seldom the most active.
Still, I am willing to give your implied
argument the full benefit of
the illustration you cite. Wherever
legislative functions are attached to
hereditary aristocracy, that aristocracy,
as long as the State to which
they belong is free, will never fail
of mental vigour—of ambition for
reputation and honours achieved in
the public service. It was so with
the senators of Rome as long as the
Roman Republic lasted; it will be
so with the members of the House
of Lords as long as the English
Constitution exists. And in such
an order of men there will always
be a degree of motive power sufficiently
counteracting the indolence
and epicurism which great wealth
in itself engenders, to place a very
large numerical proportion of the
body among the most active and
aspiring spirits of the time. But
your misfortune, my dear Tracey,
has been this (and hence I call your
case exceptional)—that, immeasurably
above the average of our peers,
both in illustration of descent and
in territorial possessions, still you
have had none of the duties, none
of the motive power, which actuate
hereditary legislators. You have
had their wealth—you have had
their temptations to idleness; you
have not had their responsible duties—you
have not had their motives
for energy and toil. That is why I
call your case exceptional.”
“Still,” answered Tracey, “I
say that I am but a very commonplace
type of educated men who
belong neither to the House of
Lords nor the House of Commons,
and who, in this country, despise
ambition, yet in some mysterious
latent way serve to influence opinion.
Motive power—motive power!
how is it formed? why is it so capricious?
why sometimes strongest
in the rich and weakest in the poor?
why does knowledge sometimes
impart, and sometimes destroy it?
On these questions I do not think
that your reasonings will satisfy me.
I am sure that mine would not satisfy
you. Let us call in a third party
and hear what he has to say on the
matter. Ride with me to-morrow
to the house of a gifted friend of
mine, who was all for public life
once, and is all for private life now.
I will tell you who and what he is.
In early life my friend carried off
the most envied honours of a university.
Almost immediately on
taking his degree, he obtained his
fellowship. Thus he became an
independent man. The career most
suited to his prospects was that of
the Church. To this he had a conscientious
objection; not that he
objected to the doctrines of our
Church, nor that he felt in himself
any consciousness of sinful propensities
at variance with the profession;
but simply because he did not
feel that strong impulse towards the
holiest of earthly vocations, without
which a very clever man may
be a very indifferent parson: and
his ambition led him towards political
distinction. His reputation
for talents, and for talents adapted
to public life, was so high, that he
received an offer to be brought into
Parliament at the first general election,
from a man of great station,
with whose son he had been intimate
at college, and who possessed
a predominant influence in a certain
borough. The offer was accepted.
But before it could be
carried out, a critical change occurred
in my friend’s life and in
his temper of mind. A distant
relation, whom he had never even
seen, died, and left him a small
estate in this county: on taking
possession of the property, he naturally
made acquaintance with the
rector of the parish, and formed a
sudden and passionate attachment
for one of the rector’s daughters,
resigned the fellowship he no longer
needed, married the young lady,
and found himself so happy with
his young partner and in his new
home, that before the general election
took place, the idea of the
parliamentary life, which he had
before coveted, became intolerable
to him. He excused himself to
the borough and its patron, and
has ever since lived as quietly in
his rural village, as if he had never
known the joys of academical triumph,
nor nursed the hope of political
renown. Let us then go and
see him to-morrow (it is a very
pretty ride across the country), and
you will be compelled to acknowledge
that his £600 or £700 a year
of wood and sheepwalk, with peace
and love at his fireside, have sufficed
to stifle ambition in one whose
youth had been intensely ambitious.
So you see it does not need
£60,000 a year to make a man cling
to private life, and shrink from all
that, in shackling him with the
fetters and agitating him with the
passion of public life, would lessen
his personal freedom and mar his
intellectual serenity.”
“I shall be glad to see your
friend. What is his name?”
“Hastings Gray.”
“What! the Hastings Gray who,
seventeen or eighteen years ago,
made so remarkable a speech at
some public meeting (I own I forget
where it was), and wrote the
political pamphlet which caused so
great a sensation!”
“The same man.”
“I remember that he was said
to have distinguished himself highly
at the university, and that he was
much talked of in London, for a
few weeks, as a man likely to come
into Parliament, and even to make
a figure in it. Since then, never
having heard more of him, I supposed
he was dead. I am glad to
learn that he only sleepeth.”
Here we heard behind us the
muffled fall of hoofs on the sward;
our party was in movement homeward,
Lady Gertrude leading the van
in her pony chaise. I had to retake
my place by her side; Clara and
the Librarian followed in a similar
vehicle, driven by Henry Thornhill,
who had caught none of the great
perches; I suspect he had not tried
for them. Percival and the Painter
rode. The twilight deepened, and
soon melted into a starry night,
as we went through the shadowy
forest-land.
Lady Gertrude talked incessantly
and agreeably, but I was a very
dull companion, and, being in a
musing humour, would much rather
have been alone. At length we
saw the moon shining on the white
walls of the villa. “I fear we have
tired you with our childish party
of pleasure,” said Lady Gertrude,
with a malicious fling at my silence.
“Perhaps I am tired,” I replied,
ingenuously. “Pleasures are fatiguing,
especially when one is not
accustomed to them.”
“Satirist!” said Lady Gertrude.
“You come from the brilliant excitement
of London, and what may
be pleasure to us must be ennui to
you.”
“Nay, Lady Gertrude, let me tell
you what a very clever and learned
man, a Minister of State, said the
other day at one of those great
public ceremonial receptions which
are the customary holidays of a
Minister of State. ‘Life,’ said he,
pensively, ‘would be tolerably
agreeable if it were not for its
amusements.’ He spoke of those
‘brilliant excitements,’ as you call
them, which form the amusements
of capitals. He would not have
spoken so of the delight which
Man can extract from a holiday
with Nature. But tell me, you
who have played so considerable
a part in the world of fashion, do
you prefer the drawing-rooms of
London to the log-house by the
lake?”
“Why,” said Lady Gertrude,
honestly, and with a half-sigh; “I
own I should be glad if Percival
would consent to spend six months
in the year, or even three, in London.
However, what he likes I
like. Providence has made us
women of very pliable materials.”
“Has it?” said I; “that information
is new to me—one lives to
learn.” And here, as the pony
stopped at the porch, I descended
to offer my arm to the amiable
charioteer.
Nothing worth recording took
place the rest of the evening. Henry
and the Painter played at billiards,
Lady Gertrude and the Librarian
at backgammon. Clara went into
the billiard-room, seating herself
there with her work: by some fond
instinct of her loving nature she
felt as if she ought not to waste the
minutes yet vouchsafed to her—she
was still with him who was all in
all to her!
I took down ‘The Faithful
Shepherdess,’ wishing to refresh
my memory of passages which the
scenes we had visited that day
vaguely recalled to my mind. Looking
over my shoulder, Percival
guided me to the lines I was hunting
after. This led to comparisons
between ‘The Faithful Shepherdess’
and the ‘Comus,’ and thence to that
startling contrast in the way of
viewing, and in the mode of describing,
rural nature, between the
earlier English poets and those
whom Dryden formed upon Gallic
models, and so on into the pleasant
clueless labyrinth of metaphysical
criticism on the art of poetic genius.
When we had parted for the night,
and I regained my own room, I
opened my window and looked
forth on the moonlit gardens. A
few minutes later, a shadow, moving
slow, passed over the silvered
ground, and, descending the terrace
stairs, vanished among the breathless
shrubs and slumbering flowers.
I recognised the man who loved to
make night his companion.
(To be continued.)
HENRI LACORDAIRE. [3]
169
There are few of the leaders or
servants of the public who interest
the general mind so profoundly as
the great preachers, whose fame
reaches the humblest as well as the
most exalted, and within the reach
of whose influence, more or less, an
entire generation passes. Not to
reckon the secondary class of preachers,
whose biography is as inevitable
as their decease, and whose lives
are studied as a matter of religious
duty by vast sections of the population
who lie in a kind of underground
out of the reach of ordinary
literature, it is enough to instance
such a life as that of Chalmers, to
prove how wide a hold upon the
public interest is taken by a man
with whom, for once in their lives,
most people of his generation have
come in momentary contact in the
slight but often momentous relation
of hearers to a speaker. Only
a very limited number can or do
hear a great speaker in any other
kind, compared with those who
think it indispensable to hear the
notable preacher of their day; and
multitudes who have the most visionary
conception of their rulers
and statesmen, and all other public
notabilities, have a certain personal
knowledge of the orator whose
sphere is the pulpit, which makes
them as eager to hear his life as if
their own history were somehow
involved in it. The life which we
have now to unfold to our readers
is, however, one with which in this
country we are unfamiliar. It is a
religious existence of a fashion unknown
to us. A strange atmosphere
breathes out of its acts and sentiments;
its strength and its feebleness
are alike novel to our experience;
but under all these puzzling distinctions,
the life itself is very remarkable—interwoven
with the entire history
of its country and period—and
opens to us so strange yet so instructive
a glimpse of a Christianity not
less fervent, pure, and true, than anything
in our Protestant records, but
couched in terms so different from
ours, and wearing an aspect so unlike,
that the mingled resemblance
and dissimilarity add a charm to
its own merits. The life of Henri
Lacordaire, priest, preacher, and
monk, told by his eloquent countryman
and loving friend, M. de Montalembert,
is for us not only a religious
biography, but a novel study
of character and life. The picture
is fascinating but strange. Stranger
than the eremites in the ancient
wilderness, or those early followers
of Benedict and Francis, with whom
the same hand has lately made us
familiar, is the apparition of the
monk of the nineteenth century as
he appears in these pages. For it
is no picturesque lay figure which
rises in the white Dominican tunic
before our unaccustomed eyes,
but a modern Frenchman, acute,
brilliant, unimpassioned—full of
sound sense and inexorable logic—a
politician, a liberal, a man of his
day, no less than a great preacher
and a pious Catholic. The story of
his life is without private events,
for he was a priest, and debarred
from any private life save that which
makes a passion of friendship and
finds an outlet there; but his career
is that of a man strong in personal
identity, who acts and thinks for
himself, and throws his entire being
into his occupation, whatever that
may be. M. de Montalembert, always
eloquent, is perhaps too rhetorical
and declamatory for biography,
at least in narrating a life which to
a great extent he shared, and the
vicissitudes of which, as he records
them, naturally rouse his enthusiasm,
his indignation, and grief, and
tempt him into many digressions.
The volume which he has dedicated
to the memory of his friend is more
of an eloge than a biography, and
the lines of the picture are vague in
consequence, and want the distinctness
of portrait-painting; nevertheless
the figure rounds out of its
dim background into unquestionable
individuality, and the English
reader who has not already heard
of the great French preacher will
herein meet with another man well
worthy the remembrance of the
world.
Henri Lacordaire was born in the
beginning of the present century,
almost a contemporary of our own
great preacher Edward Irving, in
whose life one remarkable point of
resemblance shows only the full
force of the contrast between the
French priest and the Scotch pastor.
He was of moderate origin, undistinguished
either in his birth or
training, without any brilliant prognostics
to mark the beginning of
his career. It is thus that his biographer
sums up the simple story
of his early days:—
“Nothing could be more simple or
ordinary than the life of this young
priest. Those who seek romances or
stormy passages in the lives of historical
personages, or at least in their youth,
must find them elsewhere. No adventure,
no stroke of fate or of passion,
troubled the course of his early years.
The son of a village doctor, educated by
a pious mother, he had, like almost all
the young men of the time, lost his faith
at college, and did not regain it either in
the school of law or at the bar, where he
ranked for two years among the advocates.
In appearance nothing distinguished
him from his contemporaries.
He was a Deist, like all the youth of the
time; he was, above all, liberal, like
all France, but without excess. He
shared the convictions and the generous
delusions which we all breathed
in the air which had been purified
by the downfall of imperial despotism,
but he desired only a liberty strong
and legitimate; and without having
yet been enlightened by the lights of
faith, he already foresaw the supreme
danger of modern society, for at twenty
he wrote ‘Impiety leads to depravity,’
‘Corrupt morals produce corrupt laws,’
and ‘Licence carries the nations on to
slavery.’ He himself remained always
virtuous and regular in his morals, without
any other passion than for glory.
Even before he became a Christian he
respected himself.”
Life, however, soon quickened
into warmer bloom, in the heart of
this virtuous young heathen. Providence
had other occupation for
him than the practice of the French
bar, and the excitement of those
politics which present such a fantastic
succession of revolution and
stagnation, violence and apathy. He
woke up out of his classic convictions
into Christian life, and with
characteristic promptitude, as soon
as he believed, devoted himself to
the service of religion. “Neither
man nor book was the instrument
of his conversion,” says his biographer.
“A sudden and secret
touch of grace opened his eyes to
the nothingness of irreligion. In
one day he became a Christian,
and the next, being a Christian,
determined to become a priest.”
This prompt and clear spirit, swiftly
logical, unimpassioned, and master
of itself, pervaded his entire life.
It was not argument or exhortation
that convinced him. He perceived
in his rapid young soul—aware as he
was of forces in himself which must
have work to occupy them, and of
unspeakable want in the world
around him—“the nothingness of
irreligion”—a notable and significant
discovery. That elegant, classic,
unproductive blank of Pagan virtue—could
anything ever come of it,
even in its highest development?
Swiftly the alternative presented itself
to the young Frenchman. Out
of this “nothingness” he did not
come by halves. From the first freedom
of his young manhood and accomplished
education, he went back
again steadily to the rules and studies
of a new training. After three years
at the seminary of St Sulpice he became
a priest, at a time when priests
had little honour and no popularity
in France. The young advocate,
glowing with all the inspirations of
undeveloped eloquence—a man destined
to play so notable a part in his
generation, and no doubt aware in
his heart of the genius which nobody
else as yet suspected—fell, in
the flush of his youth, into obscure
priestly offices, such as doubtless
demonstrated to him a “something”
in the Christian faith enough to exercise
and employ all the helpful
energies of man. He became the
almoner of a convent, then of a
college, following the common order
of the youthful priesthood. Except
the fact that he had thus suddenly,
by prompt exercise of will,
joined himself to that unpopular
class, nothing as yet appeared to
distinguish him from his brethren.
“The only thing singular in him
was his liberalism,” says M. de
Montalembert. “By a phenomenon
then unheard of, this convert,
this seminarist, this almoner of
nuns, was steadfast in remaining a
liberal, as in the days when he was
only a student and advocate.” This
was, to bystanders, the one remarkable
feature in him—he was a priest,
and yet he was a liberal—to wit, a
radical, a democrat, all but a republican.
From his convent he
wrote like any other enthusiastic
young man, in the days when men
found a gospel in political privileges,
of “the imprescriptible rights
of the human race.” His dream
was to place these imprescriptible
rights under the protection of the
Church—to ally the old religion
with the new freedom. “Christianity
is not a law of slavery,” he wrote,
in youthful boldness, from his “little
convent of the Visitandines,” when
Paris surged with the subterranean
heavings of the Revolution of July.
“She has not forgot that her children
were free when all the world
groaned under the iron of so many
horrible Cæsars; and that they
created, underground, a society of
men who spoke of humanity under
the palace of Nero.” “In his
youth and his solitude,” he who
had forsaken the bar and its triumphs,
the world and its ways, for
the humble offices of the priesthood,
arrived at this conclusion
which nobody else had dreamed of.
It is a conclusion which, since then,
has been tried on a sufficiently large
scale and found impracticable, but
it is not the less an idea which must
have been full of charms and of inspiration
to the young priest, whom
a higher call than that of political
right or wrong had drawn within
the bosom of an institution supposed,
and with justice, to be the
foe of liberty.
Across this calm and soft perspective—from
which the young
priest, palpitating with all the impulses
of youth and genius, looked
forth with hopes that seem Utopian,
and warm ideal conceptions of
good and glory yet to be attained—a
light more brilliant suddenly
streams. This path of life, as yet so
humble, enveloped in profound personal
obscurity, unknown to man,
is suddenly crossed by a dazzling
meteoric radiance, and thrown into
strong illumination before the
world. It is the Abbé de Lamennais,
strange Quixote of French religious
history, who suddenly appears
upon the scene, without introduction
or description, with
a suddenness somewhat confusing
to an English reader, who is less
instructed in the notable facts and
persons of Gallican ecclesiastical
history in recent years, than the
audience which M. de Montalembert
especially addresses. The point
of junction between the distinguished
ecclesiastic of La Chenaie
and the young almoner of the Visitandines,
is this same belief common
to both, that the Church, so far
from being the enemy, ought to be
the chief supporter of political freedom.
M. de Lamennais, “then the
most celebrated and the most venerated
of French priests,” had started
from the opposite ground of high
ultramontane Papalism, but, by
dint of the lofty view taken by a
lofty and visionary though wilful
and uncertain mind, of that unique
spiritual despotism, had come to the
conclusion—a conclusion falsified
by all experience, but not inconceivable
in theory—that the Holy
Father of Christendom ought to be
the guardian of all men’s liberties.
It was 1830, a year of Revolution,—another
violent crisis had
come in the fortunes of France.
The freedom, the boldness, the bewilderment
of such a sudden change
of affairs, excited and stirred up all
questions and spirits. This new
theory of the small but enthusiastic
religious band, which aimed at nothing
less than re-conquering for
the Church the love and heart of
the country, came into the field
with many others. It is at this
point that M. de Montalembert,
who for some little time has been
preluding tenderly in strains of
love and lamentation, suddenly
dashes into his story, and introduces
us, with an affectionate abruptness,
into this agitated society,
to the beginning of his friendship
with Lacordaire, and to the person
and character of his friend.
“It was in November 1830 that I saw
him for the first time in the cabinet of
the Abbé de Lamennais,” he writes,
“four months after a revolution which
seemed for a moment to confound in a
common ruin the throne and the altar,
and one month after the beginning of
the journal ‘L’Avenir.’ The motto of
this journal was—Dieu et la liberté! It
was intended by its founders to regenerate
Catholic opinion in France, and to seal
its union with the progress of liberalism.
I hastened to take part in this work,
with the ardour of my twenty years,
from Ireland, where I had just seen
O’Connell at the head of a people whose
invincible fidelity to the Catholic faith
had worn out three centuries of persecution,
and whose religious emancipation
had just been won by the free press and
freedom of speech. A very small number
of laymen shared the convictions of M.
de Lamennais, with a still more limited
number of priests. Among the latter,
the Abbé Lacordaire, whom as yet no
one knew, was named to me. Not only
was he not of those who had made themselves
a name by reproducing the doctrines
of the celebrated author of ‘L’Essai
sur l’Indifference,’ but he could not even
be called his pupil.... There
needed nothing less than the Revolution
of July and ‘L’Avenir’ to engage in a
common work two natures so profoundly
distinct. I saw them both for the
first time: dazzled and swayed by the
one, I felt myself more sweetly and
more naturally drawn towards the other.
If I could but paint him such as he appeared
then, in all the radiance and the
charm of youth! He was twenty-eight.
He was dressed as a layman, the state
of Paris not then permitting priests to
wear their proper costume. His graceful
figure, his fine and regular features,
his sculpturesque forehead, the commanding
carriage of his head, his dark
and sparkling eye, an indescribable something
of pride and elegance, as well as of
modesty, in all his person—all this was
but the cover of a soul which seemed ready
to pour itself forth, not only in the free
encounters of public speaking, but in the
overflowing of affectionate intercourse.
The flash of his eye disclosed gleams at
once warlike and tender; it sought not
only enemies to combat and to overthrow,
but hearts to fascinate and conquer.
His voice, already so nervous and
energetic, frequently assumed accents of
an infinite sweetness. Born to fight and
to love, he already bore the seal of the
double royalty of the soul and talent.
He appeared to me charming and terrible,
as a type of the enthusiasm for good—virtue
armed for the support of truth. I
saw in him one of the elect, predestined
to all that youth adores and desires the
most—genius and glory. Yet he, still
more attracted by the gentle joys of
Christian friendship than the distant
echoes of fame, made us understand that
the greatest struggles moved us only by
half—that they still left us power to
dream, above all, of the life of the heart—that
the days began and ended according
as a loved remembrance had risen or
had been silent in the soul. It was he
who spoke to me thus; and he added
immediately, ‘Alas! we ought to love
only the infinite, and this is the reason
why that which we love is so complete
in our soul.’ The morning after this first
meeting he took me to hear his mass,
which he said in the chapel of a little
convent of the Visitandines in the Pays
Latin, and already we loved each other
as men love in the pure and generous
impulses of youth and under the fire of
the enemy. He condescended to rejoice
over that meeting which he had desired,
and upon which he congratulated himself
in terms which expressed his classic
and democratic thought. He wrote,
some time before, ‘My soul, like Iphigenia,
awaits its brother at the foot of
the altar.’ Afterwards, speaking of his
new friend to an older one, he said, ‘I
love him like a plebeian.’”
Such was the fervent young man
with whom, in the year of the Revolution,
in the warmth of their
youth, the young Montalembert
formed an everlasting friendship.
They lived henceforward in a union
close as that of the classic models
of amity, and effusive as is natural
to young Frenchmen. The two had
hard enough work in hand in those
brilliant, agitated, youthful days,
over which M. de Montalembert
lingers with a natural fondness. In
the reign of utter prose which had
begun, this Young France stood all
glowing and poetic—believing in a
new beginning as youth always believes—hoping
everything grand, exalted,
and generous from the new era
and its own toils. They had their
journal, choice vehicle of assault upon
the world and all its wrongs; and
from that little battery thundered,
day by day, at all the injustice and
oppression which came under their
quick observation, taking summary
vengeance upon the offenders. To-day
it was a petty official, “lui, ce
sous-préfet!” whom the young Abbé
tossed in the air on the point of
that dazzling spear of youthful scorn
and beautiful indignation—to-morrow
it was the new Government itself
which felt the diamond point
of their virgin weapons. Young
ardour, daring hardihood, wild
rushes at conclusions, grand assumption
and display of wisdom,
mixed with a thorough enjoyment
and relish in the dangerous sport,
shine through the tale. The young
men were in the flush of youth and
conscious power, exercising a censorship
which somehow comes natural
to youth, and which, in its
brilliant impertinence and freshness
of life, earns its own excuse
almost from its victims. Lamennais,
though not young, was of that
character of genius—generous, susceptible,
and wilful—which commends
itself to the young, and leads
without controlling them. He who,
in the wild retirement of La Chenaie
amid the Breton woods, made for
himself a little family of the youths
whom he had devoted himself to
train for the service of the Church,
and attached them to him with a kind
of passion, seems to have exercised
no subduing influence over the young
men whom he associated with himself
in the work of ‘L’Avenir.’ They
tilted frankly at the world with an
inexhaustible delight in their work.
“Neither the old clergy nor the new
Government were disposed to receive
this new doctrine,” says M.
de Montalembert, with unconscious
humour, in explanation of this
work; “but the violence and mistakes
of the latter might be counted
upon to enlighten, little by little,
and bring back the former. It was
necessary, then, at once to point out
the arbitrary acts of certain functionaries
against religion, and to
teach Catholics to draw, from liberal
institutions and ideas, arms which
the fall of a dynasty could no more
break in their hands. This was
the double task to which the young
Henri Lacordaire devoted his untried,
and till then unknown, talent.”
Into this enterprise the young
Abbé rushed with all his joyous
youthful forces. Violent Radicalism
and lofty High-Churchism, both
the one and the other of a more
fiery character than are known in
our tamer atmosphere, here took
hands together and defied the world.
The young champion went to the
wildest extremities in his vivid and
rash eloquence. The French priest
even, in the inspirations of his
genius, antedated the equally fiery
priests of Scotland, and loftily suggested
to his brethren of the clergy—while
discoursing to them of the
sacrilege committed by a sous-préfet,
who had forced an entrance into
a country church for the corpse
of a man who had been refused the
rites of burial—an expedient which
has only been adopted on the northern
side of the Tweed. “You
will make him grow pale” (to wit,
the sous-préfet), cries the young
orator, “if, taking your dishonoured
God, with staff in hand and hat on
head, you bear Him into some hut
made with fir planks, swearing not
to expose Him a second time to
the insults of the State-temples.”
“These words,” says Montalembert,
“indicate the extreme, unjust, and
dangerous conclusion from which
‘L’Avenir’ drew not back. It said
to the clergy that they should be
prepared to renounce the budget du
culte, sole remnant of their ancient
and legitimate patrimony, sole guarantee
of their material existence, to
give up even the churches of which
the State assumed to be owner, to
enter into full possession of the invincible
powers and inexhaustible
resources of modern liberty.” Nor
did these bold assaults end in mere
words. “A series of contests,” continues
the biographer, “the details
of which would encumber this narrative,
but which were all designed
to promote the emancipation of the
priests and the Catholic citizens,
took him more than once to the
court of the police correctionelle,
sometimes as the accused, sometimes
as client, sometimes even as
advocate; for until he was interdicted
by a decision of the Council
of Discipline, he still retained the
right to plead in that capacity; and
I remember the surprise of a president
of the Chamber, in discovering
one day at the bar, in the robe of
an advocate, the priest whose name
already began to be famous.”
Into these encounters the young
man entered with a certain relish
and delight which sometimes amazed
his friend. “I know not what attraction
drew him to those combats,”
says M. de Montalembert; “one
would have said that he was trying
the temper of his arms, and endeavouring
to render his blows more
sure.” “I am convinced,” he wrote,
in issuing from one of his skirmishes,
“that the Roman senate
would not have frightened me.”
And not only did he find enjoyment
in the fight for itself, but
occasional triumphs rewarded the
young orator—triumphs of his
frank and open youth over the big
popular spectator that loved not
the name of priest. One day, in
answering an avocat du roi who
had ventured to say that the priests
were the ministers of a foreign
power, Lacordaire cried, “We are
the ministers of one who is nowhere
a stranger—of God.” Upon
which the audience, “composed of
that people of July so hostile to
the clergy,” applauded, exclaiming,
“My priest, my curé, what do you
call yourself? you are a brave man!”
He was not less frank nor less successful
when he appeared as the
defendant in a Government prosecution
along with Lamennais, on
account of some of the plain-speaking
of the ‘Avenir’ touching an
appointment of bishops. In his
speech before this tribunal, Lacordaire
defended himself, in his capacity
of priest, with a touching
simplicity and dignity. “I rise,”
he says, “with a recollection that
will not leave me. When the priest
in former days rose amid the people,
something which excited a
profound love rose at the same time
with him. Now, accused as I am,
I know that my name of priest is
mute for my defence, and I am
resigned to it. The people deprived
the priest of that ancient
love which they bore him, when
the priest deprived himself of an
august part of his character—when
the man of God ceased to be the
man of freedom.... I never
knew freedom better,” he continues,
with a burst of professional enthusiasm,
“than the day when I received,
with the sacred unction, the
right of speaking of God. The
universe opened before me, and I
learned that there was in man
something inalienable, divine, eternally
free—speech! The message
of the priest was confided to me,
and I was told to bear it to the
ends of the world without any one
having the right to seal my lips a
single day of my life. I went out
of the temple with these grand
doctrines, and I met upon the
threshold, law and bondage!” After
this brilliant address, M. de
Montalembert comes in with a
tender touch of description—a little
sketch which in a word or two
makes us of the party, and reveals
the entire scene in all its agitation
and triumph.
“The two accused were acquitted.
The verdict was not given till midnight.
A numerous crowd surrounded
and applauded the victors of the day.
When they had dispersed we returned
alone, in the darkness, along the quays.
Upon the threshold of his door I saluted
in him the orator, of the future. He was
neither intoxicated nor overwhelmed by
his triumph. I saw that for him the
little vanities of success were less than
nothing; but I saw him eager to spread
the contagion of self-devotion and of
courage, and delighted by the evidences
of mutual faith and disinterested tenderness,
which in young and Christian
hearts burn with a purer and dearer
light than all the victories.”
Generous and tender dreams!
but who could refuse to believe
that the young companion, more
intoxicated with his triumph than
himself, who wandered along those
dark banks of Seine in the cool
midnight, in the silence, so grateful
after that day’s toil, by his side,
affectionate and rejoicing, gave a
dearer and more flattering homage
to the young orator than all the
applauding crowds? This single
sentence is one of the most perfectly
distinct touches of human
personality and affection in the
book.
These pious young revolutionaries,
“young and Christian hearts,”
continued for some time longer to
get themselves into all kinds of
trouble. From freedom of speech
they proceeded to contend for freedom
of teaching—constituted themselves
into an agency for the defence
of religious liberty—and set up, at
their own hand, a free school,
taught by three of themselves, in
Paris. A curious scene followed.
The three young teachers, of whom
Lacordaire was one and Montalembert
another, began their volunteer
labours with twenty children to
each. Next morning an officer of
the university appeared to stop
this irregular assembly. He addressed
himself first to the children.
“In the name of the law, I
summon you to depart,” cried this
functionary to the assembled urchins.
“In the name of your
parents, whose authority I have, I
command you to remain,” immediately
answered Lacordaire. The
small citizens, doubtless charmed
to be able to rebel so soon against
law and government, immediately
gave their shrill suffrage in his
favour. “We shall remain,” cried
the little rebels, with one voice.
The result, of course, was, that
scholars and teachers had equally
to succumb to the power of the
law, and that once more there ensued
a trial, and brilliant appearance
of the eloquent Abbé, which
this time was before the Chamber
of Peers, the most illustrious assemblage
in France, one of the culprits,
M. de Montalembert himself,
being a member of that august
body. We have no room to quote
this speech; but the prosecution,
like the former, seems to have
ended in nothing.
“I will be pardoned for lingering
upon the events of that year, so memorable
for us,” says Montalembert,
with touching grace. “There is no
one, however obscure and useless
may have been his life, who, at the
decline of his days, does not feel
himself drawn by an irresistible
current towards the moment when
the first fires of enthusiasm were
lighted in his soul and on his lips—no
one who does not breathe with
a sort of intoxication the perfume
of these recollections, and who is
not tempted to boast beyond measure
their charm and their brightness,—days
at once happy and
sad,” he says—“days devoured by
labour and by enthusiasm—days
such as occur but once in a life.”
The apology is beautiful, but it
is unnecessary. Few will read the
history of those young days and
friends, differing so totally from
ourselves, yet so entirely in accord,
without feeling their hearts warm
to the historian, whose own youth
rises so fair before him as he writes,
and of whom the world is fully
advised that his maturer days have
well borne out the promise of that
youth.
We, too, are tempted to linger,
but must not, space and time preventing.
‘L’Avenir’ came at last to
a sudden check, as was inevitable.
After it had affronted the clergy,
the bishops, and the Government,
united its own little band of retainers
in such bonds as unite men
“under the fire of the enemy,” and
fought its way for thirteen months
through all manner of prosecutions
and oppositions, the daring little
journal came to a close in a manner
as remarkable and Quixotic as had
been its career. “In announcing the
suspension,” says M. de Montalembert,
“we announced at the same
time the departure of the three
principal editors for Rome, in order
to submit to the Pope the questions
in controversy between us and our
adversaries, promising beforehand
an absolute submission to the Pontifical
decision.” Strange mission
of the three—two of whom only
had youth to excuse them in this
mad embassage—to persuade wise
Rome to embroil herself, and compromise
her infallibility, in the decision
of questions so complicated,
for the satisfaction of the editors of
‘L’Avenir!’ The two young men
went lightly upon their mission,
not without natural excitement in
the prospect of visiting the sacred
city; but matters were different
with Lamennais, whose genius and
lofty intention seem to have been
shipwrecked by that spirit of unmaturing
youthfulness, always sanguine
of its own triumph, expecting
everything to yield to its will,
absolute and petulant, and incapable
of contradiction, which is as
undignified as it is unnatural in a
man of mature age. The confidence
which led Lacordaire and Montalembert
to state their difficulties to
his Holiness, and beg his decision
upon them, was sufficiently romantic
and high-flown. “But how explain
or excuse it,” says our author,
“in a distinguished priest, already
mature in age, as was the Abbé de
Lamennais, who was then more
than fifty, and who had already
lived at Rome, where the Pope had
received him with the greatest distinction?”
The pilgrims were received
with paternal kindness and
unresponsive civility. They got
no reply, as was natural. Lacordaire,
always prompt and clear-sighted,
with a native vein of good
sense and practical wisdom running
through all the fiery impulses of his
genius, was the first to perceive
how great a mistake they had made.
He remained more than two months
in Rome endeavouring to reconcile
Lamennais to the failure of their
mission, and, for his own part, refreshing
his soul in that wonderful
shrine of all memories and thoughts.
“I can see him still,” says his
affectionate biographer, “wandering
for long days among the ruins
and the monuments, pausing, as
overpowered, to admire, with that
exquisite feeling of true beauty
which never forsook him, all that
Rome presents of the profound and
the antique—fascinated, above all,
by the tranquil and incomparable
charm of her horizons; then returning
to the common hearth to preach
reserve, resignation, submission—in
a word, reason—to M. de Lamennais.”
At last the young priest announced
to his fretful and rebellious
senior his intention of returning
to France, to await there in
silence, but without remaining idle,
the verdict of authority. “Silence,”
said he, “is, after speech, the second
power in the world.” They parted
so; and although they again met
after an interval, the erratic and
devious career of Lamennais had no
further influence worth noting upon
the clear, straightforward course of
his young associate. ‘L’Avenir’ and
such brilliant follies were over.
Life, serious and grave, now awaited
the young priest and orator, whose
time for trying the temper of his
weapons and the steadiness of his
strokes was past.
After this agitating and fruitless
journey, Lacordaire returned to
Paris, where he lived in seclusion,
in duty, and silence, for three
years. Immediately after his return
the cholera broke out, and he
gave himself up with grave enthusiasm
to the necessities of the
time, attaching himself to one of
the temporary hospitals. “The
prejudices against the clergy were
still in full force,” says M. de
Montalembert; “the authorities refused
the help of the Archbishop of
Paris, and priests could not show
themselves in the streets en soutane.”
But the attendance of Lacordaire
and a few of his more zealous
brethren was tolerated. “Each day I
make a little harvest for eternity,”
he writes. “Most of the patients do
not confess, and the priest is here
only a deputy of the Church, coming
timidly to seek, if there may happen
to be some soul which belongs
to the flock. Here and there one or
two confess—others are dying without
ear and without voice. I put
my hand upon their forehead, and,
trusting in divine mercy, I say the
words of absolution. It is seldom
that I go away without a feeling of
satisfaction in having come.” But
amid these unappreciated labours,
and in the loneliness, deeper than
actual solitude, of a great town, the
young priest amused his lonely
heart with dreams of the tranquil
country and a secluded life. He
thought of becoming a rural curé,
and in imagination chose Franche
Comté, the country of his friend.
“I would bury myself in the depths
of the country,” he writes again,
with an effusion of visionary yet
profound sadness. “I would live
only for a little flock, and find all
my Joy in God and in the fields.
It should be manifest that I am a
simple man and without ambition.
Adieu, great works! adieu, fame and
great name! I have known their
vanity, and I desire nothing more
than to live obscure and good.
Some day when Montalembert shall
have grown grey in the midst of
ingratitude and celebrity, he will
come to see upon my forehead the
remains of our common youth. We
shall weep together at the hearth
of the presbyterié—he will do me
justice before we die. I shall bless
his children.... For me, a
poor Catholic priest, I shall neither
have children growing up under my
eyes to survive me, nor domestic
hearth, nor Church brilliant with
knowledge and sanctity. Born in
degenerate times, I shall pass from
the earth among things unworthy
of the memory of man. I shall
endeavour to be good, simple, pious,—hoping
disinterestedly in the future,
since I shall not see it—working
for those who perhaps will see
it—and not accusing Providence,
which might weigh down with
heavier evils a life which deserves
so little.”
Such were the sad thoughts of
the young man thus stopped short
in the beginning of his career. He
was not, however, permitted to
leave Paris; he returned to his
little convent of the Visitandines,
where he lived, strengthening himself
“in prayer and labour, in
charity, in solitude—in a life grave,
simple, unknown, truly hidden in
God;” but where that sadness and
wistful uneasiness which so often
tries to persuade itself into contentment,
by dwelling upon the
advantages of solitude, betrays itself
in his utterances. “How happy
are they,” he writes, “who are
born and die under one roof without
ever having quitted it.” Then
he congratulates himself on his retirement.
“I have always needed
solitude, if only to say how much
I loved it.... My days all
resemble each other. I work regularly
in the morning and afternoon.
I see no one, save some country
ecclesiastics, who come to see me
now and then. I feel with joy the
solitude which encircles me—it is
my element, my life. Nothing can
be done but with solitude—it is
my great axiom.... A man
makes himself from within and
not from without!” “Nevertheless,”
adds the biographer, “a certain
instinct of the future which
awaited him combined with this
passionate inclination for solitude,
and disclosed itself now and then
in his soul like a gleam in the
night. To speak and to write,
to live solitary and in study, this
is my whole desire,” he wrote.
“However, the future will justify
me, and still more the judgment of
God. A man has always his hour;
he must wait for it, and do nothing
contrary to Providence.”
All this was the natural language
of a young and exuberant life,
whose hour had not yet come, and
which was fully occupied in the
endeavour to content and satisfy
itself in its compulsory calm. During
this interval he preached his
first sermon, which, after all the
brilliant orations which he had
made at the bar and before the
public courts, was a failure. “He
is a man of talent, but he will
never be a preacher,” said his disappointed
friends; and he acknowledged
and tried to reconcile himself
to the fact. “But I may one
day be called to a work which requires
youth, and which will be
devoted solely to youth,” says the
preacher, with a sigh of disappointment,
yet hope. But soon the
skies opened, and the work for
which he longed presented itself at
last.
It was as lecturer to the pupils
of the College Stanislas, “the most
humble in Paris,” that he recommenced
in 1834 his public work.
After his second lecture the chapel
could not contain the crowd of
hearers who joined his young auditory.
At once, without any interval,
he seems to have vindicated
his own gifts and flashed into immediate
popularity. But the shadow
of ‘L’Avenir’ and all its combats
was still upon him. After
two winters occupied thus, the
Archbishop, who was his friend,
and had sanctioned his lectures,
changed his mind, and forbade
him to continue them. Lacordaire
obeyed without a murmur. “Obedience
is hard,” he wrote, “but I
have learned by experience that it
is sooner or later rewarded, and
that God above knows what is best
for us; light comes to him who submits,
as to a man who opens his
eyes.”
Shortly, however, his reward
came. The heart of the Archbishop
melted; at the repeated petition
of a deputation of law students,
headed by the celebrated Ozanam,
he called the preacher of the College
Stanislas to the pulpit of Notre
Dame, to a lectureship which had
been established a year before for
the students of the metropolis.
Here Lacordaire rose at once to the
height of fame as a preacher. His
genius had been maturing in the
silence and disappointment of the
past. Now there were no longer
two opinions on the subject. The
venerable walls of Notre Dame had
never seen such an audience, says
M. de Montalembert; and the
highest applause, the applause of
his gratified diocesan, crowned the
triumph. The Archbishop, “who
was present at all the sermons, and
who for the first time since the
violences of which he had been the
victim after the Revolution of July,
found himself in the presence of
the crowd, was transported by a
success which avenged him so nobly
by associating him with the popularity
of this new-born glory. One
day, rising from his archiepiscopal
throne before that immense audience,
he bestowed on his young disciple
the title of the new prophet.”
Around this new prophet a circle
of young and fervent souls occupied
the closest place. The Society of
St Vincent de Paul, newly formed,
and in all the ardour of its first
love, whom the preacher apostrophised
as “that chivalry of youth,
purity, and brotherhood,” formed
the nucleus of the congregation;
and, looking back upon the image
of his friend triumphant amid such
a surrounding, it is not wonderful
that M. de Montalembert breaks
sharply off with a cry of indignation
over the downfall of that admirable
Society, “the most beautiful
work of the nineteenth century,”
as he exclaims, with natural fervour,
“the most pure and spontaneous
fruit of Christian democracy.”
“Imagine Lacordaire in his strength,
and with the liberty of the press,
before such an act!” says his
biographer, recalling the days of
‘L’Avenir;’ “imagine the justice
which he would have done with
that pen which of old had stigmatised
much smaller culprits by burning
invectives, the echo of which
still vibrated in the pulpit of Notre
Dame: Lui, ce sous-préfet!”
When he had thus reached the
height of popularity, and attained
the sphere of labour for which he
had longed, Lacordaire stopped
short in a manner which cannot
fail to amaze the English reader.
Here terminated the first chapter
in the life of the great preacher.
In the midst of his triumphant
success, and of this work so congenial
to his mind and satisfactory
to his highest ambition, he
came of his own will to a sudden
pause in his career. “By one
of those marvellous intuitions, of
which he had more than any one
else the secret, he recognised,”
says M. de Montalembert, “that
self-examination, labour, silence,
and solitude were still necessary to
him.” He paused at the height of
his triumph. “I leave in the hands
of my bishop this pulpit of Notre
Dame, founded by him and by you,
by the pastor and by the people.
This double suffrage has shone for a
moment on my head; suffer me to
remove it, and to find myself again
alone for a time with my weakness
and my God.” With these words
he concluded his second Lent in
1836. “After he had left the pulpit,
he declined, notwithstanding
the repeated entreaties of the Archbishop,
to re-enter it, and departed
for Rome.”
No outward circumstances accounted
for this sudden pause. It
was an internal need to which he
responded by such a simple and
actual withdrawal from life as
seems unprovided for, even in the
conceptions of Protestant piety.
The spirit of Lacordaire, says one
of his closest companions, his maternal
friend, Madam Swetchine,
required only the power of “subduing
and containing itself in obscurity,”
to become sublime; a
great and general necessity of all
others the least easily attainable.
To accomplish such a victory over
ourselves, we, in our heretical pride
of reason and self-command, have
no external aids. What we can do
towards this greatest of conquests
we must do under the cover of
ordinary circumstances and labour,
and few and happy are the men
who do not find this perennial conflict
recur in their disengaged moments
all through their lives. But
the Catholic Church has ordained a
system of helps and stimulants in
the great work of ruling their own
spirit, which is harder to most men
than taking cities. When the young
Father Lacordaire felt the reins gliding
out of his hands, in whatever
way that occurred—for we have
no information on the subject—the
expedient of flight suggested itself
to him, as it would have been very
unlikely to do to an Englishman
in similar circumstances. The Catholic
priest thought it no shame
to acknowledge to himself that his
spirit stood in need of discipline.
All the saints and holy men of his
Church had at some period of their
lives fled from the attractions of the
world, and used sharp methods of
subduing the flesh, which they did
not hesitate to acknowledge was
too strong for them. Lacordaire,
too, withdrew to get the mastery of
his own spirit. This was his object
in going to Rome. He was in the
height of manhood, thirty-four years
old—the very noon of life. He was
no superstitious or visionary priest,
but a man already versed in the
ways of the world, who had acquitted
himself with intuitive good
sense in more than one difficult
crisis. He had passed through
scepticism, through criticism, to that
dutiful and steadfast faith which
knew both how to reason and how
to obey. He was not disappointed
or unfortunate, but, on the contrary,
glowing with success and triumph
of the kind most gratifying to such
a man. He was not even of an
archæological type of mind, nor
romantically prejudiced in favour
of the antique institutions of
Christendom; he was a liberal, a
man of his day, an educated modern
mind—able, surely, if ever priest or
Catholic was, to form his opinion
freely. He had arrested himself by
his own will in a career abundantly
flattering to all his tastes and vanities,
and now stood thoughtful in
the mid-current of his life to determine
how he should best perfect
and utilise that existence still in its
highest force and power. Wandering
about Rome, among its monuments
and relics, praying to God,
as he himself says, in its basilicas,
he pondered this great question.
Nowhere could have been found a
fitter scene. Amid the ruins of
many a grand ambition, over the
traces engraven in the earth by many
a haughty and undisciplined spirit,
the thoughtful priest wandered,
meditating the highest uses of his
own life. His thoughts came to a
conclusion which, to our eyes, seems
the most inconceivable and astonishing
ever made by man. He decided
upon becoming a monk. Aware by
many a mortifying experience that
the very name of priest was still
suspected and disliked in his own
country, where all his power and
influence lay, this man, so sensible,
so moderate, so dutiful, whose
genius had not made him eccentric,
and whose sympathies were all with
his own age, decided that the best
thing he could do for France and the
glory of God was to clothe his own
vigorous life and personality in the
obsolete dress of the cloister. It was
not the cloistered indolence of an
Italian convent to which he looked
forward. In the strength of his life
and genius he felt no need of that
repose, which would but have chafed
him. Eager for work, conscious of
his own powers, devoted to his own
country, and seeking to qualify
himself for renewed and advancing
labour, this was the decision to
which Lacordaire came; a decision
altogether inexplicable and amazing,
which we are unable to account
for at this distance, much
less to explain.
Nor was this resolution adopted
by any capricious impulse, or in
any flash of imaginative ardour.
It was a conclusion obtained not
without pain and resistance of the
flesh. “I persuaded myself then,”
he explains, in one of his latest productions,
quoted by M. de Montalembert,
“while wandering about
Rome, and praying God in its
basilicas, that the greatest service
which could be rendered to Christendom
in the times in which we live,
was to do something for the restoration
of the religious orders. But
this persuasion, though it was for
me the very light of the Gospel, left
me undecided and trembling, when
I came to consider how unfit I was
for such a great work. My faith,
thank God, was profound. I loved
Jesus Christ and His Church above
everything created. I had loved
glory before I loved God, but nothing
else. Besides, in descending
into myself, I found nothing there
which seemed to me to answer to
the idea of a founder or even restorer
of an order. When I contemplated
these Colossi of Christian
strength and piety my soul
fell under me, like a horseman
under his horse—I was struck to the
ground discouraged and wounded.
The mere idea of sacrificing my
liberty to a rule and to superiors
overwhelmed me. The son of an
age which scarcely knew how to
obey, independence had been my
couch and my guide. How could
I transform myself suddenly into a
docile heart, and henceforward trust
only in submission for the light of
my conduct?” The question was
hard to answer. Of all men the
young editor of ‘L’Avenir’ might
have seemed the least likely to attain
such a height of virtue; but
from this difficulty he escapes, after
much further self-argument, by the
following conclusion:—
“I encouraged myself by these
thoughts, and it occurred to me that all
my previous life, and even my faults,
had prepared for me a certain access to
the heart of my country and my time.
I asked myself if I should not be guilty
if I neglected these openings by a timidity
which was good for nothing but repose,
and if the greatness even of the
sacrifice was not a reason for attempting
it?... Urged by the situation,
and solicited by a grace stronger than
myself, I at last made up my mind; but
the sacrifice was terrible. It had not cost
me nothing to leave the world for the
priesthood, but it cost me everything to
add to the priesthood the burden of monastic
life. However, in the second case
as in the first, as soon as I had consented
to it I knew neither weakness nor repentance,
and went forward courageously to
meet the trials which awaited me.”
It is not difficult to recognise in
this second great decision of his
life the same prompt and steadfast
spirit which, having convinced the
young advocate of the nothingness
of irreligion, bore him at once,
without pause or lingering, into the
service of that faith in which there
was something, a power owned by
all human hearts. It is the same
principle which again moves him.
Common means and modes of working
this power have been sadly
unsuccessful of recent years. What
is this grand, unused, obsolete instrument,
the traces of which are
marked all over that Roman soil
among the vines and the ruins?
Who can tell if perhaps that, restored
to efficient working, and
new-tempered and polished, might
accomplish, as of old, those prodigies
of labour and service, for
which the usual tools seem no
longer practicable? As soon as he
settles in his mind the undoubted
duty of trying this forgotten weapon,
and restoring it to the armoury
of the Church, no further
pause is necessary. In the height
of his fame and strength, the great
preacher returns upon the new preparations
and training necessary for
his new life. He disappears into
“the depths of an Italian cloister”
for his novitiate, assured that he is
thus doing his highest duty to God
and his country. “I believe that
this act is the dénouement of my
life—the result of all that God has
done before—the secret of His
graces, of my trials and experiences,”
he writes. “I am like a
man who has gained some credit,
and who can apply it to some useful
and generous work. Without
the past I could do nothing; by
continuing only the past, it would
be a life of which the effect was
not proportioned to the grace which
God has given me.” This was the
strange result of his retirement and
pondering. In Notre Dame, amid
the throng of impressed and admiring
hearers, the preacher felt that
he was not doing enough, nor making
sufficient use of God’s gifts.
A noble discontent had seized him—he
had to make better usury yet,
and greater, of his talent. To see
him, after all his questioning, disappear
into that Italian cloister, is
to us the strangest anticlimax—the
most wonderful apparent contradiction;
but it was the calm conclusion
of his mind—a mind ripe and well
able to judge, unimpassioned and
sensible. We do not attempt to offer
any explanation of the act, nor do
we profess ourselves competent to
understand the convictions that led
to it; but strange as it is, here is
the fact, let us draw what conclusions
we will. According to Lacordaire’s
deliberate and thoughtful
decision, he could serve God best
as a monk, and a monk accordingly
he became.
Five years afterwards he reappeared
in the pulpit of Notre
Dame, “with his shaven head and
his white tunic.” He preached
with his usual eloquence upon La
Vocation de la Nation Française,
and spoke only in passing of his
own monastic vocation. He made
but one appearance, contenting
himself apparently with “inaugurating
in France,” as M. de Montalembert
says, “the monastic frock,
which she had not seen for fifty
years.” He disappeared from Paris
after this for two years more, dividing
his time between the Italian
cloister and the southern provinces
of France, until in 1843 a new war
began to rage in the French world,
on that old question of liberty
of teaching, for which the young
‘L’Avenir,’ years ago, had fought so
stoutly, and for which its editors
had made their appearance at the
bar of the Chamber of Peers. Under
the influence of this strife, and
just as the Government awoke to
alarm, and began to regard with
apprehension the appearance of the
Dominican frock in the pulpit and
in the streets, the new Archbishop
invited Lacordaire to resume his
lectureship in Notre Dame. The
Frère Prêcheur took his place again
in the metropolitan pulpit: it was
at once a defiance of the alarmed
Government, and a re-proclamation
of those principles of religious liberty
on which the preacher had
long ago taken his stand. For this
question “de la liberté d’enseignement”
involved also the question of
liberty of association, the power of
forming communities—a power nominally
accorded to the French nation
by its charter, but which had
never been actually granted to it.
The Church, wise as a serpent, seized
upon this public right. She, too,
had bethought herself of the long
disused and valuable instrument of
monasticism. Without monks no
thorough hold could be got upon
popular educational institutions;
but without the power of forming
corporations and organising bodies
of men, the invasion of a new race
of monks was impossible. On the
other hand, alarmed statesmen and
the public in general foresaw, with
this power in the hands of the
Church, an immediate inroad of the
dreaded Jesuit and his brethren, to
lay insidious hold upon the education
of the people. “While the
bishops and Catholic publicists,”
says M. de Montalembert, “claimed
the liberty promised by the
charter with all its consequences,
the numerous orators and writers
of the University party defended
its monopoly, and made use especially
against the Jesuits of that unpopularity
which the heirs of the
perverse doctrines and cruel persecutions
of the eighteenth century
could everywhere re-awaken against
the religious orders. We owe them
nothing but expulsion! this cry of
a deputy too famous for his interruptions,
seemed to the world of
so-called liberals the best response
to the claims raised for religious
associations in the name of liberty
and equality.” The Church mustered
her forces gallantly, and went
into the conflict with might and
main. With cunning boldness she
placed two of the feared and suspected
monks in the pulpit of Notre
Dame—Lacordaire, in his white Dominican
robe, and the Jesuit De
Ravignan—to fire between them
the new-born enthusiasm of French
Catholics, and show what voices
were these which the timidity of
the State and the prejudices of the
vulgar would banish from France.
Into that pulpit politics did not
enter—but an instrument more efficacious
was there. “Lacordaire did
not himself enter into the controversy,”
says M. de Montalembert,
“and not the least allusion to it is
to be found in all his discourses....
But the universal popularity
of his preaching, the immense
audiences which everywhere collected
around the pulpit in which
he appeared, were arguments much
more eloquent than discussions of
politics or public law. It sufficed
him to establish his victory by
preaching in Paris and throughout
France, and by assuming the right
of living in a community, and attiring
himself as he pleased, which
no one dared to contest with him, in
the different places where he lived
with his brethren.” Such was the
unquestionably potent line of argument
set up by the Gallican
Church. Here was the greatest
preacher of the age, a man pure and
pious, incapable of self-aggrandisement,
full of ardour for God’s service,
known to have hazarded his life in
hospital and public pestilence, a
champion of popular liberty, altogether
of spotless reputation and
well-deserved fame; was the order
to which such a man belonged, by
free will and choice, to be feared
and banished? were such as he to be
interrupted in their great work because
they preferred to wear a certain
garb and conform to certain
rules? No, in the name of liberty!
A more effective plea could scarcely
be imagined. Lacordaire’s colleague,
the Père de Ravignan, claimed
for himself, as M. de Montalembert
tells us, “as a citizen, and in the
name of the charter, and of the liberty
of conscience guaranteed to
all, the right of being and of calling
himself a Jesuit.” But the Frère
Prêcheur does not seem to have
done even so much as this. Never
abandoning the idea for which
others were now fighting as he had
once fought, he devoted himself to
his duties in the midst of the strife—made
his monkish frock splendid
with the eloquence of a voice worthy
the old renown of the French pulpit—made
it familiar to all eyes as
he travelled through the country
collecting crowds of eager hearers
everywhere; finally, with quiet resolution,
established here and there,
in different quarters, houses of his
order, assuming for himself, in the
strength of his character and fame,
the very right for which his colleagues
were struggling, and giving
calm intimation, as he did so, that
he would defend this right, if attacked,
before the tribunals of his
country. Nobody ventured to attack
Lacordaire. The white Dominican
went all over France, leaving
behind him here and there a little
nucleus of monks. Public opinion
melted before the great preacher.
If men’s minds did not change, at
least their opposition was hushed
and put down by the unquestionable
eminence of the man. “Henceforward,”
he himself says, “in all
the pulpits, and upon all the roads
of France, the monastic robe has
recovered the right of citizenship
which it lost in 1790.” He restored
the credit of the monks, and
gained a certain degree of toleration
for the Jesuits themselves, and
thus won what is in the eyes of M.
de Montalembert “the great victory
which shall immortalise his
name.”
This struggle, which Lacordaire
himself calls “the most perilous
and the most decisive of all his
campaigns,” was brought to a conclusion
by the renewed political
agitations of 1848. In that strange
hubbub and overthrow of existing
affairs, the tide of public commotion,
by way of demonstrating the
hold he had obtained on the public
mind, drew the monk from his retirement
to plunge him into the
newly-formed Assembly of France.
His appearance there did not, in the
excitement of the time, shock the
sensibilities of any; his election
even “charmed and reassured all
religious men;” and the preacher
himself was sufficiently sanguine to
believe that the mild Lamartine
sway was to maintain the constitution
of France, and that great charter
for which he had fought so
long, and to introduce a new era
in the history of the nation. He
obeyed the voice of the people, like
other great Elects, and took his
seat always in his Dominican frock
in the revolutionary parliament—and
he assisted in founding another
paper, ‘L’Ere Nouvelle,’ which was
neither so long-lived nor so brilliant
as ‘L’Avenir’ of his youth.
But the natural good sense of the
man shortly interposed. His parliamentary
career lasted but ten days,
and erelong he retired also from the
newspaper, and withdrew to one of
his new convents to recover himself
and throw off the excitement
of this renewed essay at politics.
Then having shaken himself free
of this interruption, he went back
to his beloved pulpit, where he
preached and laboured as before
for three years. But in April 1851,
when concluding his lectures, he
took an unlooked-for and unintended
farewell—some subtle shadow
of coming events, which, however,
he denies to be a presentiment,
having moved him to special tenderness
and pathos—of the pulpit
in which, more or less, he had
laboured for twenty years. “Oh,
walls of Notre Dame! sacred arches
which have borne my words to so
many intelligences deprived of God!
altars which have blessed me! I will
never separate from you!” he cries,
his heart moving within him as he
recalls his past life, and all that
has happened there, since, young
and in the dawn of his fame, he
made his first appearance in the
metropolitan church. But he never
again entered the pulpit thus endeared
by the labours of a life;
once more only he preached in Paris,
and once again, in 1854, delivered,
at the request of the Archbishop, six
discourses in Toulouse. His career
as a preacher had come to an abrupt
and unexpected conclusion: for in
the mean time that virtuous republic,
which Lamartine and his brethren
had begun so mildly, had fallen into
desperate troubles, and the sharp
and sudden stroke of the coup d’état
had shocked society in France into
a new mood. Freedom of speech,
eloquence itself, went suddenly out
of fashion. Silence was best when
there was so little to say that could
be anyhow consolatory to the people
or satisfactory to the ruler. With
a delicate but indignant reticence,
M. de Montalembert indicates thus
the reason of his friend’s sudden
withdrawal from the pulpit:—
“I do not think that any formal interdiction
emanating even from the temporal
authorities had ever been pronounced
against him; but there was a
general sentiment that this bold and
free language which he had used for
twenty years, under all changes, without
meeting any obstacle, without recognising
any curb but that of orthodoxy,
was now out of date. Evil days had
come for the struggles and the triumphs
of eloquence. It was universally repudiated,
and made responsible for all the
misfortunes of the country, for all the
dangers of society, by a triumphant revenge
of those who had never been able
to make any man listen to them. The
prince of sacred eloquence had thus to be
silent. He said afterwards, ‘I left the
pulpit in a spontaneous fear of my liberty
before an age which was no longer free.
I perceive,’ he added, ‘that in my
thoughts, in my language, in my past,
in what remains to me of future, I also
was a kind of freedom, and that my
hour had come to disappear like the
others.’”
He preached no more. He was
not yet fifty—still in the full vigour
of his powers—but the day of discussion,
of agitation, of eloquence
was over, and Lacordaire, with instinctive
wisdom, seems to have
perceived the expediency of submission.
It is a strange conclusion
to a singular career. After the chivalrous
pugnacity of his earlier
years; after his steady struggle all
his life through, by every possible
means to link together democracy
and Catholicism, the old unmoving
Church and the new ever-varying
world; after ‘L’Avenir’ of his youth,
with its daring hopes and efforts—the
brilliant youthful future which
he and his colleagues were to work
out of revolution and anarchy—and
‘L’Ere Nouvelle’ of his later years,
which had less of the future, less
of hope, yet was still a new beginning;—it
is a strange sight to see the
champion suddenly drop his arms
and stand silent, arrested for ever
before this new, strange, silent figure
of absolutism which has suddenly
erected itself against the agitated
firmament. When this unlooked-for
apparition rises between him
and the skies, the great preacher
has nothing more to say. All is
over in a moment. “I have never
feared but one thing—the absolute
triumph of an individual,” said his
friend, Madame Swetchine. And
when, at last, after a world of controversy
and discussion, that dreaded
event arrived, the public life of
the great orator came to an almost
instantaneous conclusion. He retired
not by compulsion, but by some
internal sense of necessity. “He
had no violence, no persecution to
complain of,” says his biographer,
“and I only render homage to truth
by declaring that I have never seen
in him the least trace of bitterness
or of animosity against the new
power. This power inspired him
only with the sentiment of neutrality,
dignified and a little disdainful,
which existed in his nature in
respect to all powers.” But whatever
his sentiment might be, the
fact is certain. Before all other
developments of power the orator
had held up bravely the banner
of the Church, and kept his
place. Before this new potency he
gave way and yielded. It is one
of the strangest acts of homage
ever done to an unquestionable
strength—“Le prince de la parole
sacrée dût donc se taire.” He gave
up that right over which he had
rejoiced in the fervent days of
his youth as “something inalienable,
divine, eternally free”—the
right of speaking of God. He
made neither resistance nor public
protest. The shadow of the new
Empire fell over him in sudden
chill and silence, and the words
died upon his fervid lips. He
who had spoken so freely, laboured
so hard, spent himself so liberally
for the service of his Church and
country, was in himself, as he expresses
it, “a kind of liberty”—a
personified freedom; and, as with
other freedoms, the day was over
for him. He saw by intuition that
resistance was useless. The silent
despot overawed, as by a species
of fascination, the eloquent priest,
who, in his heart, was “a little disdainful”
of all kinds of powers.
This new kind of power, personal,
self-concentrated, standing alone in
an inexorable mute mystery over
the destinies of France, silenced
the preacher as if by force of instinct.
His voice died out of the
country, which had fallen into a
sudden paralysis, half of fear, half
of admiration, before this basilisk
Emperor. The spell was upon
Lacordaire as upon France. He
never opened his lips again in
public after that one series of provincial
lectures, which were themselves
broken off and left imperfect,
because one of them contained
“some outbursts of truth, of grief,
and of boldness, which were no
longer in season. He had to renounce
public speaking definitively,”
says M. de Montalembert, with
significant reserve; and here, according
with the beginning of the imperial
power, ended his public life.
He withdrew after this to Soraye,
an ancient abbey, first of the Benedictines,
then of the Dominicans, to
which order he himself belonged,
and where there now flourished a
large public school. He devoted
himself to the regeneration and
perfection of this institution, to
“the teaching of youth, which had
always been the supreme vocation
of his life.” Here he consoled the
sadness and disappointment of his
heart, wounded as it was by the
sudden overthrow of all the work
of his life, and by the sad and rapid
change of affairs which had taken
place in France, among the children
whom he loved. But though he
made no public complaint, and
manfully devoted himself to the
favourite occupation which Providence
had still left to him, the
lamentable downfall of all his hopes
went to the heart of the liberal
monk. His country, his age,
“which scarcely knew how to
obey,” had become all at once
eager “not only to accept but to
implore a master.” His Church
and religious party, “clergy and
Catholics, who had so long applauded
the masculine independence of
his eloquence, had fallen all at once
a prey to a delusion without excuse,
and to a prostration without example
in all the history of the
Church. Names which had been
honoured to appear beside his own
in the memorable manifestoes by
which Christian liberty had invoked
the sole shelter of public
freedom, appeared all at once affixed
to harangues and mandiments
which borrowed the forms of Byzantine
adulation to salute the mad
dream of an orthodox absolutism.”
“Till the last day of his life,” adds
M. de Montalembert, “the grief
and indignation with which the
sight of this great moral catastrophe
inspired him was not weakened.
But his affliction, his magnanimous
wrath, breathed forth in his letters.
This treasure remains to us, thank
God! it will be preserved for posterity;
and when the time shall
come when all may be said, it will
appear as the most brilliant and
most necessary of protests against
those who have so miserably
divided, disarmed, and discredited
Catholicism in France.”
We have no space to quote, as
the biographer does, those melancholy
and indignant letters.
Whilst thus breathing forth to
his friends the disappointment
which consumed his soul, Lacordaire
lived on in his southern
seminary, far from the busy world
which had deceived him, a life of
usefulness and silence. It was a
“retreat laborious and animated”
in which he now found himself;
and, with a true Christian philosophy,
the great orator bent all his
faculties to his work. “One of
the consolations of my present life,”
he writes, with touching sadness, “is
to live only with God and children:
the latter have their faults, but
they have still betrayed nothing
and dishonoured nothing.” He
made Soraye “the most flourishing
and popular scholastic establishment
in the south;” he formed
a tender paternal friendship with
many young souls, over whom he
had immense influence. With the
same eloquence which he had displayed
in Notre Dame he preached
to his pupils in their provincial
chapel. In short, he accepted his
position like a true man; and, hiding
his mortification, his profound
disappointment, his injured heart
in his own breast, devoted himself
to the important but obscure position
in which he was to end his life.
Here another great event happened
to him in his seclusion. It was
from Soraye he came, in his Dominican
frock, to receive from the
French Academy “the noblest recompense
which can, in our days,
crown a glorious and independent
life.” He sat one day only in that
illustrious assembly, where he appeared,
as he himself said, as “the
symbol of freedom accepted and
fortified by religion.” This last
honour was the last public event
which occurred in his life. He
went back laureated for his dying,
and ended his life in Soraye, after
a painful illness—so far as we are
able to make out, for M. de Montalembert
is indistinct in the matter
of dates—in the winter of 1861.
“It is the first time that my body
has resisted my will,” he said, with
a half-playful melancholy, in the
midst of his sufferings; and died
exclaiming, “My God, open to me,
open to me!” with a sublime simplicity.
God opened to him, and
his agitations were over. Whether
on the other side of that wonderful
gateway he might discover that
his monkish frock was less worth
fighting for than it appeared, who
can inquire? He lived a life full
of worthy labour and service, and
doubtless found his reward.
Our space does not permit us to
follow M. de Montalembert, in his
quotations from the letters and sermons
of his friend, though there
are in these letters many snatches
of brilliant and tender eloquence
on which we are much tempted
to linger. It is not, however, in
his productions that Lacordaire is
most remarkable; it is in his character
and career. “The principal
thing is to have a life,” he himself
said, when deprecating the over-production
of modern literature;
and no man has more exemplified
the saying. He had a life, this man
of conflict and strife, of self-denial
and silence, of independence and
duty—a life too human to make any
formal anatomical consistency over-visible
in its flesh-and-blood details—broadly
contradictory, yet always
in a harmony with itself more true
than consistency. With his heart
full of the agitations and the hopes
of his time, he lived in his cloister
in the practice of self-mortifications
and punishments as severe as those
with which any antique son of
Dominic had subdued the flesh.
“When all the events of this generous
life shall be known, the orator
will disappear before the monk,”
says his sympathetic and admiring
biographer, “and the prestige of that
eloquence which has moved, enlightened,
and converted so many
souls, will seem a less marvel than
the formidable austerity of his life,
the severity with which he chastised
his flesh, and his passionate love
for Jesus Christ.” This is the side
of his character and existence least
comprehensible to the English spectator.
How he, so unimpassioned,
so temperate, so sensible—he
who had only loved glory, and nothing
else, before he loved God—should
have needed “excessive
macerations” to subdue that flesh
which, so far as appears, was far
from exercising any despotic sway
over the spirit, is a curious question,
and one which perhaps never can
be answered to the satisfaction of
our practical understandings; but
the interest, the individuality, and
sincere nobleness of his life seem
unquestionable. From his little
convent he passes to the bar and
public tribunal, where even the unwilling
crowd applauds; to the pulpit,
where admiring multitudes surround
him; yet returns to his Visitandines
and his almonry, obedient
and silent, when the hour of his
triumph is over. From the height
of popular fame and success, driven
by that noble intuition in his heart
that he is not sufficiently using the
talent God has given him, he withdraws
to take up the monk’s frock,
most despised of habits, not to hide
a mortified life or wounded heart, as
a sentimental bystander might suppose,
but for the sake of the labour
and use of which he believes it
still capable. Deeply contradictory
as such a proceeding is of all our
convictions and theories, it is far
from our thoughts to blame Lacordaire
for this singular vestment in
which he enwrapped all his later
life. It may be that to the eyes of
this languid and over-refining age,
the forcible type and symbol which
antedate all arguments is, after all,
the thing most wanted; and that
the apparition of the monk, self-denuded
of all possessions, even of
his own will, for the glory of God
and the service of his neighbour,
may startle the confused intelligence
into a belief of that work
and its importance, which no philosophy
could give. Such at least
seems to have been the conviction of
Lacordaire. Like his great contemporary
Irving, the French preacher
felt the inefficacy of common means
for the work on which his heart
was set. To both the world came
open-mouthed, wondering and admiring;
but neither in the London
modern church, nor under the
noble arches of Notre Dame, was
the report of the prophet believed
as he felt in his heart it ought to be.
This uneasiness in the passionate
heart of our great countryman gave
rise, by some subtle magnetic influence,
to a wild dream of miraculous
aid and voices from heaven; and
in the self-controlled and unimpassioned
soul of the French priest it
wrought an issue almost as strange—the
restoration, to some extent, of
monasticism in his country, and
the dedication of his own life to
that disused and discredited vocation.
No two men could be more
unlike, but here both met in a
strange concord and agreement.
Something had to be done beyond
the ordinary routine of evangelism
to seize upon the dull ear and sluggish
heart of the time. Supernaturalism,
or monasticism, or any
other martyrdom—what matter, so
it did but startle that slumbering
generation to some thought of its
evil ways? Let us build the sepulchres
of those prophets whom our
fathers, by their apathy and indifference,
drove into such a noble
desperation. We too, doubtless, will
do our share of the same work. Yet
it is a kind of penitence of humanity
for its ever-recurring mistakes and
misconceptions, which prompts one
generation to decorate the tombs
into which the sins of a former
generation have urged and driven
the not perfect yet noble dead.
LADY MORGAN’S MEMOIRS. [4]
188
In a small house furnished in
the tawdry-brilliant style, in a
small street adjoining Lowndes
Square, there dwelt, between the
years 1828 and 1859, a small woman,
who, though very old, persisted in
believing herself to be young, and
dressed and spoke and acted as if
she were the observed of all observers.
She was not handsome;
she never could have been, for there
were defects both in face and form
at variance with beauty; but she
was bright, or rather brisk, in the
expression of her countenance, and
her air was jaunty, though neither
graceful nor elegant. The career of
this little woman had been a remarkably
busy, and, on the whole,
a successful one. She was a voluminous
writer, and had made a
good deal of money out of her
publishers. By a process which is
perhaps better understood on the
other side of St George’s Channel
than here, she succeeded in making
her way into what is called “society,”
and she never loosened her
hold, having once made it fast,
upon man or woman, whom, for any
reason of rank, worth, or talent, she
considered it worth while to cultivate.
It is curious to observe likewise
the skill with which she makes
it appear that the balance of advantage
in the matter of acquaintance
was always on the side of her
friends, especially when they happened
to be gentlemen; for she
laboured under the happy delusion
of believing that she was not only
the cleverest, but the most beautiful
woman of the age, and that
no man, young or old, married or
single, ever approached except to
fall in love with her.
Time, however, overtook her, as
he overtakes other people, and beat
her in the race. Latterly she went
out little in search of society, either
because invitations came sparsely
in, or that the fatigue was too great
for her, or that she grudged the
fly-hire. But she had weekly receptions
in her own little drawing-room,
and moved heaven and earth,
and a variety of penny-post men,
to get them attended. A few old
Whigs, including the Marquess of
Lansdowne and good-natured Lord
Carlisle, when he happened to be
in town, looked in occasionally at
her soirées. Now and then a Tory
man of genius—Sir E. B. Lytton, for
example—would make his appearance;
and it has even been whispered,
though we doubt the truth
of the story, that a learned divine,
sometimes two, might occasionally
be seen in the throng. But the
bulk of her guests consisted of
fashionables of a second or third
order, with a few small celebrities,
literary, musical, and artistic. The
little woman was very great on
these occasions. She dispensed her
weak tea and weaker conversation
with equal fluency; she flattered
and received flattery to any conceivable
amount. Every man his
own trumpeter, and every woman
too, was with her an article of religious
belief; and she did what
religious professors are suspected
of not always doing—she carried
her faith into practice. A judicious
application of rouge to the
cheeks, the frocks and furbelows
of a girl, a mincing gait, and a perpetual
smile, set her forth to the
best advantage. At eighty-three
years of age she was still a butterfly;
and if she could not flit, she
floundered from flower to flower.
One day it became known,
through a paragraph in the ‘Morning
Post,’ that Lady Morgan was
dead. London was not thrown into
a state of consternation by the
announcement, neither did any of
its leading habitués array themselves
in mourning: on the contrary,
we are afraid that, having
read the brief sketch which accompanied
the notification, and commented
upon it, most people forgot
within five minutes or less that
such a person as Lady Morgan
had ever existed. But this was a
consummation which, though common
enough where others were concerned,
her ladyship had made up
her mind should not occur in her
case. Having engrossed, as she
believed, a large share of public
attention while living, she determined
that she should not cease to
be talked about when dead. Accordingly,
she conceived the brilliant
idea of immortalising herself
in a posthumous work, and occupied
herself, early and late, in preparing
the materials. She availed
herself of the assistance of kindhearted
Miss Jewsbury in this
work, and appointed by will that
Mr Hepworth Dixon should be the
guardian of her literary reputation.
We never heard whether in her
lifetime she made Mr Dixon aware
of the honour which was intended
for him: we think it probable
that she did not; because Mr
Dixon is reputed to be a man of
sense; and it strikes us that, knowing
his woman, he would have got
out of the scrape had the chance of
doing so been afforded him. But
it is one thing to object to a proposed
arrangement before it is completed,
and quite another to refuse
carrying into effect the last wish
of a relative or dear friend. The
struggle was doubtless severe; but
sentiment prevailed with Mr Dixon
over the remonstrances of good
taste and good feeling. He took
home the box which contained the
precious documents; and now, at
an interval of three years from the
old lady’s death, the results are before
us.
But Mr Dixon, though a pious
executor, is not the less a wise
man. He seems to have read her
ladyship’s papers through, and arrived
at a just appreciation of their
merits. They would not bear
handling in any shape; they must
come before the public exactly as
they came before him, or he at
least could have nothing to say to
them. Here is his preface:—
“Lady Morgan bequeathed her papers
and journals to me, with a view to their
publication. The collection was large,
as she had preserved nearly every line
written to her from the letters of princes
and statesmen, the compliments of
poets, of exiles, and heroes, down to
the petitions of weavers, chimney-sweeps,
and servant-girls—even the invitations
sent her to dinner, and the address
cards left at her door. Many of these
trifles of the day have no value now; a
hundred years hence, if kept together,
they may serve to illustrate with singular
brightness and detail the domestic
life of a woman of society in the reign of
Victoria. My duty in the matter of
their publication was clear enough. Lady
Morgan had not only proposed to write
her own memoirs, but had made a considerable
progress in her task. A good
part of a volume had been prepared
under her own eyes for the press. Much
of the correspondence to be used had
been marked, and the copious diaries, in
which she had noted the events of her
life and the course of her thoughts, supplied
nearly all the additions which
could be desired. Under these circumstances,
it appeared to me that Lady
Morgan could be judiciously left to tell
her own story in her own way.”
If Mr Dixon had followed any
other course, he would have done
great injustice both to himself and
to Lady Morgan. Her ladyship’s
story, as told by herself, is indeed
a literary curiosity: had it been
told by him, or by anybody else,
we doubt whether it would have
found a dozen readers. It is probable,
for example, that Mr Dixon
would have endeavoured to settle
the dates of events as they occurred.
Possibly, too, he might have narrated
these events exactly as they
befell: we are pretty sure that he
would have done his best to draw
a faithful portraiture of his heroine—coloured,
perhaps, with the
tints which biographers are apt to
shed over the objects of their laudation,
but not absolutely blazing.
Lady Morgan knew a great deal
better than this. She starts with
the frank avowal, “that she never
means to be trammelled by attending
to dates.... What has a woman
to do with dates?—cold, false,
erroneous, chronological dates! New
style, old style, procession of the
equinox; ill-timed calculation of
comets long since due at their stations,
yet never come.” Don’t let
the reader suppose that this is a mere
empty flourish of trumpets. Lady
Morgan was never more earnest in
her life than when she wrote these
sentences. It formed part of her
plan to be considered as enjoying
a perpetual youth, and she took
the readiest, and, as she believed,
the surest means of effecting that
purpose. In like manner, Lady
Morgan had resolved that from beginning
to end, her career, as the
world was to follow it, should be
a romance. She throws an air of
mystery, therefore, not only over
the date of her birth, but over all
the incidents of place and condition
into which she fell; till circumstances,
as wonderful as they are
fortunate, combined to plant her
in the foremost ranks of literature
and fashion. This gives her an
immense advantage over autobiographers
in general. She is free to
say what she pleases, and to say it
as she pleases; and if the public
be perverse enough to discredit her
statements wholly or in part, what
is that to her? The public will
read her book and talk about it, and
the subject of it; and her manes, if
she have any manes, will for a while
be gladdened.
There are two ways of telling
the story of Lady Morgan’s infancy
and girlhood. The first, or poetical,
which is her own, describes her
as descended from an old Irish
family—as the daughter of a man
of brilliant genius and the highest
sense of honour—as coming into
the world at a moment when this
great and good man’s affairs happened,
unfortunately, to be in confusion;
and as thus forced, without
any fault of his or her own, to
make a too early acquaintance with
poverty and its attendant evils.
The other, or prosaic, which has
no foundation to rest upon except
vulgar fact, says that Sydney
Owenson was the daughter of a
strolling player, who could never
clearly distinguish between meum
and tuum—who was always rollicking,
light-hearted, and merry—who
spent every farthing which he
earned faster than it came in, was
often in prison, and perpetually in
debt. The poetic, or Lady Morgan’s
reading, further shows that
the Owensons or M‘Owens came
from one of the great houses of
Connaught, which at some remote
period, date unknown, had lost or
forfeited their enormous estates;
that her grandfather, a handsome
young yeoman, ran away with her
grandmother, and that, though very
poor, they lived, upon the whole,
comfortably and respectably together.
The other, or prosaic version,
seems to say that it was Miss Owenson’s
grandmother who ran away
with her grandfather; that she fell
in love with his illigant Hibernian
proportions on the occasion of a
great curling-match, and never let
him alone till he had made her his
wife. It is not, however, so easy,
as we advance in this interesting
history, to follow the line which
separates the ideal from the real;
but this much at least is certain,
that before the end of a year the
ci-devant Miss Crofton became the
mother of Robert M‘Owen, and
that Robert M‘Owen became in
due course of time the father of
Sydney Lady Morgan.
There is nothing to show very
clearly under what circumstances
the patronymic M‘Owen made way
for the more euphonious Owenson.
We are inclined to believe that the
change must have occurred at the
time when young M‘Owen became
a dependant upon the Blakes, and
hereby hangs a tale. Mrs M‘Owen,
it appears, was a sweet singer, and
played skilfully on the Irish harp.
She possessed likewise a large share
of that inventive faculty which descended
to her granddaughter, for
she managed to get up such a story,
and to tell it so effectively, as to
induce a rich neighbour to become
the patron of her son. A Mr Blake,
a man of enormous wealth, had
purchased the property on which
M‘Owen’s cabin stood. He called
one day on the inmates, and was
struck, of course, with the ladylike
manners of one of them, who soon
made him aware of the gentility of
her own descent, and got up a
pedigree still more startling for her
husband and son. Mr Blake was
assured, with great solemnity and
perfect effect, that at some period
indefinitely remote a Blake had
diddled a M‘Owen out of his estate.
The millionaire’s sympathies were
awakened, either by the tale, or by
the manner of telling it; and as he
had previously been struck by the
boy’s exquisite voice (for young
M‘Owen sang like a thrush, and
formed one of the choir in the
morning at the chapel, and in the
afternoon at the church), Mr Blake
forthwith proposed to take him
into his family and do for him. It
was too good an offer to be refused.
Young M‘Owen, henceforth to be
spoken of as Owenson, left the
cabin for the hall, and received just
such an education as a horribly
selfish bachelor with some fine
tastes considered would suffice to
render the boy useful to himself,
and amusing to other people.
We hear nothing after this of
Grandfather M‘Owen, and not much
of Grandmother. They probably
continued to live, the rest of their
days, the cat-and-dog life which
usually falls to the lot of persons
circumstanced as they were; but
the son goes with his patron to
Dublin, where for the first time he
is present at a play. By-and-by,
after exchanging his frieze for
broadcloth, he removes to London.
There wits and beauties flock about
him. He is very clever—he sings
divinely. Oliver Goldsmith is his
first cousin, five times removed, and
Madame Weichsel takes a fancy to
him. This is too much, and the
lad’s head gets turned. Mr Blake
has occasion to visit Ireland, or
says that he has, and goes away,
after charging young Owenson to
keep at home and look after his
property. In particular, he charges
the lad not to go to the theatre in
his absence, or to any other place of
public amusement; but no sooner
is the patron’s back turned, than
the protégé hurries off to Vauxhall,
and is easily persuaded to take part
in the duet of ‘Fair Aurora’ with
his friend Madame Weichsel, who
has an engagement there. He little
knows what eyes are upon him all
the while. Mr Blake has not gone
to Ireland; he has come to Vauxhall
to be amused, and after listening
to the duet, and probably applauding
it, he goes straight back
to his house in Russell Street. We
are not prepared to say what might
have happened had young Owenson
returned home to sleep. But
he did nothing of the sort; he
was out on a spree for three days
and three nights, and found, when
the fun was over, that his trunk
stood ready roped in the hall, and
that a letter from Mr Blake, containing
a bank post-bill for £300,
requested him to go about his
business.
On the whole, we are inclined to
believe that this is a not incorrect
statement of the case. Some allowances
must of course be made for
over-colouring. Probably Owenson
was not quite the accomplished
gentleman whom his daughter represents
him to have been, nor Mr
Blake the sybarite and the brute
she describes. At all events, we
think he did perfectly right in getting
rid of a scapegrace whom he
could not trust out of his own sight.
Such, however, were not young
Owenson’s views of the matter.
He indignantly re-enclosed the
bank-note to Mr Blake (we have
some doubts about that fact), and
marched off, proud and penniless,
to Oliver Goldsmith. The upshot
was that he took to the stage, and
sang and acted with moderate success.
He accepted an engagement
in Shrewsbury, and there persuaded
the mayor’s daughter to marry him
privately. It was a decided mésalliance
on both sides, for the good
blood of old Ireland got contaminated
by intermixture with that of
a provincial magnate; while the
magnate took so little to the honour
conferred upon him, that he refused
to make any settlement on the
young couple, or even to see them.
Miss Hill, now Mrs Owenson,
was a follower of Lady Huntingdon,
and hated the stage. She prevailed
upon her husband, great as he was
in such characters as Sir Lucius
O’Trigger and Major O’Flaherty,
to abandon it, and he confined himself
to singing at oratorios. This
continued for a while, very much
to the singer’s discontent; but
by-and-by Richard Daley, Esq. of
Castle Daley (let us not withhold
the title), persuaded the facile
Owenson to violate his pledge, and
to connect himself with the Theatre-Royal,
Crow Street, Dublin, of
which he of Castle Daley was the
patentee. There followed upon
this a removal to Drumcondra,
where the deputy-manager—for such
was Mr Owenson’s rank—took a
“pretty villa,” and Mrs Owenson
bore as she best might her banishment
to the land of Papists and
potatoes. And here, in passing,
we would venture to point out,
that when Lady Morgan speaks of
“pretty villas,” “elegant cottages,”
“lovely villages,” and suchlike, she
does not always intend that we
should believe her au pied de la
lettre. The “pretty villa” in the
“lovely village” was, we suspect,
in the present instance, a tumbledown,
half-ruinous house on the
outskirts of a dirty lane, much frequented
by long-legged swine and
half-naked children. And we arrive
at this conclusion from recollecting
a little incident in her ladyship’s
after-history, which may be worth
recording. She went out of town,
on one occasion, to write, as she
said, “in quiet,” a book on which
she was engaged. Her correspondence
with her fashionable friends
was not, however, intermitted;
and in a letter to Lady Charleville,
not given in this collection, she
describes herself as “sitting beside
a glass door, which opens upon a
velvet lawn, and commands a lovely
view over one of the fairest landscapes
that ever delighted the eye
of a painter.” Lady Charleville,
happening not long after to be near
the place of “Glorvina’s” retreat,
had the curiosity to go and see the
spot which had been thus delineated,
and found it to be a small
and rather dirty room in a cottage,
with a single window looking out
upon a cabbage-garden, beyond
which, at about ten yards’ distance,
uprose a stiff quickset hedge, impervious
to the vision!
We must pass lightly over what
remains to be told of the family
history of the Owensons. It is
rather confusedly narrated, and
seems to imply that the circumstances
of the household were generally
straitened, and that they
either shifted their habitat very
frequently, or were often in two
places at the same time. We have
just ascertained, for example, that
on the arrival of Mrs Owenson in
Ireland, “my father took a pretty
villa for her at Drumcondra.” Yet
the authority for this fact relates:
“I was born on Christmas Day, in
that land where all holy days are religiously
celebrated, as testimonials
to faith, and are excuses for festivity
in ancient ould Dublin.” And
here again there is a blank, which
we are left to fill up as we please.
On the Christmas Day of what year
might this memorable event occur?
Taking collateral circumstances into
account, it might not unfairly
be assumed that some Christmas
Day about the middle of the last
century witnessed the remarkable
occurrence. But the inference, we
suspect, would be erroneous. Having
taken a good deal of pains to
settle the matter, we are glad that
it is in our power to save Lady
Morgan from the reproach of having
lived many years beyond eighty.
She was born in 1776. “Bells
tolled, carols were intoned—the
streets resounded with joyous
sounds; an uproarious party sat
about the board of as fine a type of
the Irish gentleman as Ireland ever
set forth, when another birth” (another
than what?) “was announced
by a joyous gossip to the happy
father, who instantly disappeared.”
We cannot too much commend the
taste, not to say the piety, of this
whole sentence. No wonder that
the guests, waiting, “not with empty
glasses,” till the happy father’s
return, should have considered the
event a “reason fair to fill their
glass again,” or that they were with
difficulty dispersed on the assurance
“that they should all meet again
that day month, to be present at the
christening of the young heathen.”
The christening of the “young
heathen” took place in due time.
The ceremony is well described,
and the style eminently characteristic,
for it is light, airy, graceful,
and considerably profane. Then
comes a pause, extending, as it would
appear, over some years—and after
that a graphic account of the lumbering
of a post-coach, “on the
evening of a dreary winter’s day,
up the ill-paved hill of an old street
in the oldest part of Dublin, called
Fish Shambles Street.” Where the
coach came from we are not told,
but it conveyed Mrs Owenson and
her two daughters (for by this time
Olivia likewise had been born, and
both she and Sydney were able to
take their share in conversation) to
the new home which Mr Owenson
had prepared for them. And here
comes another mystery. The house
is evidently a ruin—but why a
ruin, and how, if ever, repaired, we
never learn. It is enough for us to
know that Mr Owenson, in breach of
his engagement with Mr Daley of
Castle Daley, had taken the National
Theatre Music Hall, and that it was
opened with the representation of
three pieces,—“‘The Carmelite,’
‘The Brave Irishman,’ and ‘The Poor
Soldier.’ A medley of Irish airs
made up the overture, which ended
with the Volunteers’ March, and my
father wrote and spoke the prologue
in his own character of an
Irish Volunteer.” Now, if we recollect
aright, the Irish Volunteers were
in their glory about 1782, and as we
learn that Miss Sydney, when the
“post-coach” set down its burden,
had held an interesting conversation
with her mother about Handel,
it appears to us that on this eventful
night she could not have been
less than six years old at the least.
Mr Owenson’s theatrical adventure
was not a fortunate one. The
Government went against him, by
granting to Mr Daley a patent for
the exclusive performance of the
regular drama; and the Dublin
gentry, though they took plenty of
boxes at the Music Hall, objected
or forgot to pay for them. Neither
was he more successful in trade.
His cousins, the Ffrenches, an old
family, of course, exiled on account
of their religion, or for some other
cause, made him their agent for
the sale of wines which they grew
at Bordeaux; and though he certainly
managed to get rid of large
quantities, he was never able to remit
to them negotiable bills for the
same. He went, in short, to the
dogs, his course thither being a
good deal accelerated by the death
of his amiable but gloomy and Calvinistic
wife. And now began in
earnest the education of the two
Misses Owenson. They were placed
under a French emigrée, a Mme.
Terson, who kept school first at
Portarlington, and afterwards at
Clontarf, and learned from her imperfectly
a good deal, living at the
same time with “many girls of
rank, and some of distinguished
talent.” How Mme. Terson got
paid we are left to conjecture. Probably
she never got paid at all;
but being a benevolent person, and
a sort of sister of mercy, she allowed
the player’s daughters to remain
with her for four years, and then
handed them over to a Mrs Anderson
in order to be finished. Mrs
Anderson, however, was a different
sort of person from Mme. Terson.
Her pupils “were the daughters of
wealthy mediocrities; their manners
were coarse and familiar;” and Mrs
Anderson herself had a vulgar desire
to receive quid pro quo. The
young ladies could not, under such
circumstances, remain long with her.
Yet “the school in Earl Street had
its advantages too, for it brought
us constantly in contact with our
dear father, who walked out with
us every Sunday on the Mall in
Sackville Street, where the fashionables
of Dublin most did congregate,
who seldom passed us without
the observation, ‘There goes Owenson
and his two dear little girls.’”
Having thus early established for
herself an interest in the esteem
and admiration of “the fashionables,”
it is not to be wondered at
that Sydney Owenson’s after-career
should have been brilliant. She
went with her father to Kilkenny,
where he built “a beautiful little
theatre,” and mortgaged it, before
it was roofed in, “to a wealthy and
fashionable attorney.” The usual
results followed—Mr Welch, the
wealthy and fashionable attorney,
“foreclosed his mortgage suddenly”
(we have heard that he never
could get a farthing of interest),
“and bills to an enormous amount
were presented.” They were accepted
as a notice to quit. Mr
Owenson carried his daughters back
to Dublin, where he placed them in
lodgings under the care of their
faithful maid Molly, and then bolted.
The truth seems to be, that
everybody came down upon him.
The players were clamorous for their
salaries; the workpeople insisted
upon having their accounts settled;
the attorney claimed the amount
of his mortgage; and the Ffrenches
required that some portion at least
of the value of the wine which Mr
Owenson had undertaken to sell
for them should be accounted for.
What could the poor manager do
under such circumstances? He hid
himself till a commission of bankruptcy
could be taken out, and then,
like many a wiser if not better man,
walked at large again, as if nothing
particular had happened.
From this date, about 1794, Mr
Owenson ceases to be the prominent
figure in the family tableau.
His daughter Sydney assumes her
proper place. Though barely eighteen,
she has already had lovers
without end at her feet. The first
is a poor scholar called Dermody
(a thorough scamp, by the by, who
abused everybody’s patience, and
died at last of delirium tremens in the
purlieus of Westminster), to whom
her father had been kind. It is by
no means certain that he ever seriously
proposed, but he wrote many
letters full of nonsense, most of
which are printed in this collection.
Then came the officers of the garrison
of Kilkenny, two of whom at
least fairly died because beautiful
Sydney was cruel.
“Captain White Benson and Captain
Earl” (says Miss Jewsbury, writing from
Lady Morgan’s memoranda) “were two
young officers quartered in Kilkenny
during the period when Mr Owenson
had his daughters with him, while his
theatre was being built. She refers to
the young men in one of her Dublin
letters to her father, telling him that
they had called....
“Molly was a very dragon of discretion,
and the two girls might have had
a worse guardian. Lady Clark often told
of the Kilkenny days, when she, an unformed
lump of a girl, whose greatest
delight was to go rambling about the
fields, armed with a big stick and followed
by a dog, once returned from her
rambles covered with mud, and her
frock torn from scrambling over hedges
and ditches, her hair all blown over
her face (she had the loveliest long
golden hair that ever was seen), and
found her sister Sydney and these two
young officers sitting in the parlour,
talking high sentiment, and all three
shedding tears. Molly came in at the
same moment to lay the cloth for dinner,
and thinking they had stayed quite long
enough, said, in her most unceremonious
manner, ‘Come, be off wid yez! an’ the
master will be coming in to his dinner,
and what will he say to find you here
fandangoing with Miss Sydney?’ Sydney,
who the moment before had been enjoying
her sorrows, burst out laughing at
this sally, and, shaking her black curly
head, danced away like a fairy.”
What an exquisite piece of word-painting!
What a charming scene!
Who can wonder that the results
should have been so serious? Of
Captain Earl, to be sure, we hear
nothing more, but Captain Benson
wrote two letters at least to his
lady-love, both of which, dated in
1798, are given in extenso. Miss
Jewsbury’s remarks concerning them
are edifying:—
“These two letters,” she says, “are
much worn and torn, as though from frequent
reading and handling. On the back
of the latest of them is written, ‘This elegant-minded
and highly-gifted young
man drowned himself near York a few
months after I received this letter.’”
Tender as her heart was, Miss
Owenson had something else to do
than to indulge its weaknesses.
She determined, as soon as she became
acquainted with the real state
of her father’s affairs, to earn her
own livelihood; and however ridiculous
her vanity may be, however
gross her many breaches of truth
and common propriety, we are
bound to acknowledge, and we do
it with hearty goodwill, that she
went gallantly through with that
purpose. Her first impulse was to
turn authoress; her next and wiser,
to go out as a governess or companion,
if any lady, young or old,
would have her. She was now
about twenty-one, but looked considerably
younger. There was difficulty,
therefore, in finding a place
for her, though her old music-master,
M. Fontaine, did his best
to make her merits known, and
the Countess O’Haggerty, an emigrée
and a distinguished harpist,
took her up. Accident, however,
introduced her at one of Fontaine’s
parties to Mrs Lefanu, a sister of
Richard Brinsley Sheridan, who
behaved to her then and ever
afterwards with marked kindness.
The result was, that a Mrs Featherstone
sought her out, and, after a
little preliminary negotiation, it
was settled that she should proceed
on a visit to Bracklin, near Castletown,
in the county of Westmeath,
and, if approved and approving,
that she should undertake the education
of two young ladies, the
daughters of her new friend. If we
are to believe Lady Morgan, she
seems to have won the hearts and
clouded the judgments of all whom
she approached.
Her account of her journey to
Bracklin, and of the manner of her
reception there, is of course too
good to be quite true, but it is very
characteristic. She was to travel
by the night-mail, but, being invited
to a petit bal d’adieu at M.
Fontaine’s, she was startled in the
middle of a country-dance by hearing
the guard’s horn sounding at
the end of the street. “Then all
that could be done was for Molly
to throw a warm cloak over me,
with my own bonnet, and my little
bundle of things, so that I might
dress when I got to Kinigad. One
of the young gentlemen snatched
up my portmanteau, and so we all
flew along the flags, which were
frosted over, and got to the mail
just as the guard lost patience and
was mounting. So I was poked in
and the door banged to, and ‘my
carriage’ drove off like lightning
down College Green, along the
quays, and then into some gloomy
street I did not remember.”
A smart young officer is taken
up at one of the barrack-gates, but
being told by the guard that there
was an old lady inside, he declines
to enter, and jumps up beside the
coachman. Imagine his chagrin on
discovering, when the coach stops at
Kinigad, how grossly he had been
deceived. “What!” he exclaims,
as Miss Owenson is about to step
out; “‘let such a foot as that sink
in the snow?—never!’ ... and he
actually carried me in his arms into
the kitchen, and placed me in an old
arm-chair before a roaring turf-fire.”
Of course he did, and of course he
was overawed and subdued when
he heard that Mr Featherstone’s
carriage and horses were waiting to
carry the young lady to Bracklin.
But what must the astonishment of
the quiet country family have been
when the future governess of their
children walked in, “pinched, cold,
confused, and miserable, in a balldress
and pink silk shoes and stockings,
without an article wherewith
to change, her luggage having gone
forward with the mail?” All, however,
comes right in the end. The
old gentleman looks grave, the
young ladies laugh; mamma puts
the stranger in charge of her future
pupils, who dress her up in suits of
their own. There is a capital dinner—she
sings ‘Emunch ach Nuic’
(‘Ned of the Hills’), and ‘Barbara
Allen’ (we presume, at the dinner-table),
and after tea the whole entertainment
is wound up with a
dance, in which Miss Owenson
comes off with flying colours. Why
could not the old lady stop there?
“Public for public,” she continues,
in her imbecility. “It may be worth
while here to contrast my last jig in public
with this my first out of the schoolroom.
During the Viceroyalty of the
Duke and Duchess of Northumberland,
by whose attentions I was much distinguished,
as indeed were all my family,
it happened that Lord George Hill came
on a little embassy from Her Excellency
to beg that I would dance an Irish jig
with him, as she had heard of my performance
with Lady Glengall in a preceding
reign. He said if I would consent
I should choose either the Castle or
the Viceregal Lodge for the exhibition,
and that his brother, Lord Downshire,
would write to Hillsboro’ for his own
piper, who was then reckoned the best
in Ireland. As it was to be a private
and not a court exhibition, my husband
permitted me to accept the challenge
from the two best jig-dancers in the
country, Lord George himself and Sir
Philip Crampton. I had the triumph
of flooring my two rivals. Lord George
soon gave in, and the Surgeon-General
felt a twinge of gout, he said, which
obliged him to retire from the lists.”
The ball is now at Miss Owenson’s
foot, and she keeps it going.
Her life at Bracklin is a sort of heaven
upon earth. Everybody takes
to her. Mr Featherstone himself,
though reserved at the outset, becomes
one of her thousand lovers,
and carries her with him into all
the society which the county can
afford. So it is when the family
goes to Dublin for the season.
How the education of the Misses
Featherstone got on at all, we don’t
pretend to understand, for the
teacher seems to have plunged into
the very vortex of fashionable life.
Among other acquaintances which
she formed were Sir John Stevenson
and Tom Moore, the latter of
whom she did her best to captivate,
with, as it would appear, only indifferent
success. But if she failed
to bring the poet to her feet, she
caught from him the furor of authorship.
She had already completed
her first novel, and needed
only a publisher to bring it out.
Her account of the manner in which
that want was supplied is too rich
not to be given in detail:—
“The Featherstone family were shortly
to leave town, and I resolved on the
desperate step of publishing my novel,
though I did not know the difference between
a bookseller and a publisher; and
I intended to take my chance of finding
one in the streets of Dublin. I had observed
that the Domenich Street cook, a
relic of the Dowager Steele regime, was
in the habit of hanging up her bonnet
and cloak in the back hall. I slipped
down quietly one morning early, put on
the cloak and bonnet, and with the MS.
tidily put up under my arm, passed
through the open hall-door, at which a
milkman was standing, and started on
my first literary adventure. I wandered
down into Britain Street, past the noble
edifices of the Lying-in Hospital and the
Rotunda, quickened my steps down the
aristocratic pavement of Sackville Street,
then occupied by the principal nobility
of Ireland. When I got to the bottom,
with Carlisle Bridge and the whole world
of commerce ‘all before me where to
choose,’ I was puzzled; but as chance
directed, I turned to the right into Henry
Street, proceeding along, frightened
and uncertain. To the left rose the
Church of St. Peter, where I had gone to
be confirmed; opposite to it were Stella’s
lodgings, where she and Mrs Dingley
held their bureau d’esprit. At the other
end of the carrefoure, and on a line with
the church, and on the same side with it,
my eyes were dazzled by an inscription
over a door,—‘T. Smith, printer
and bookseller.’ As I ascended the steps
a dirty-faced boy was sweeping the shop,
and, either purposely or accidentally,
swept all the dust into my face. He
then flung down the brush, and, springing
over the counter, leaned his elbows
on the counter, and his chubby face on
his hands, and said, ‘What do you please
to want, Miss?’ I was stunned, but
after a moment’s hesitation replied, the
gentleman of the house. ‘Which of
them—young or ould?’ Before I could
make any selection, a glass door at the
back of the shop opened, and a flashy
young yeoman in full uniform, his musket
on his shoulder, and whistling the
‘Irish Volunteers,’ marched straight up
to me. The impudent boy, winking his
eye, said, ‘Here’s a young Miss wants
to see yez, Master James.’ Master James
marched up to me, chucked me under
the chin, ‘and filled me from the top to
the toe choke-full of direst cruelty.’ I
could have murdered them both. All
that was dignified in girlhood and authorship
beat at my heart, when a voice
from the parlour behind the shop came
to my rescue by exclaiming, ‘What are
you doing there, Jim—why ain’t you off,
sir, for the Phœnix?—and the lawyers’
corps marched an hour ago.’ The next
moment, a good-looking, middle-aged
man, but in a great passion, with his face
half shaved, and a razor and shaving-cloth
in his hand, came forth and said,
‘Off wid ye now, sir, like a sky-rocket.’
Jim accordingly shouldered his musket
‘like a sky-rocket,’ and Scrub, leaping
over the counter, seized his broom and
began to sweep diligently to make up
for lost time. The old gentleman gave
me a good-humoured glance, and saying,
‘Sit down, honey, and I’ll be with you
in a jiffy,’ returned in a few minutes
with the other half of his face shaved,
and, wiping his hands with a towel, took
his place behind the counter, saying,
‘Now, honey, what can I do for you?’
This was altogether so unlike my ideas
of the Tonsons, the Dodsleys, and the
great Miss Burney, that I was equally
inclined to laugh and cry; so the old
gentleman repeated his question, ‘Well,
what do you want, my dear?’ I hesitated,
and at last said, ‘I want to sell a
book, please.’ ‘To sell a book, dear,—an
ould one, for I sell new ones myself?
And what is the name of it, and what’s
it about?’ I was now occupied in taking
off the rose-coloured ribbon with
which I had tied up my MS. ‘What!’
he said; ‘it is a MS., is it!’ ‘The same,
sir,’ I said: ‘St Clair.’ ‘Well, now,
my dear, I’ve nothing to do with Church
books, neither sermons nor tracts, do
you see. I take it for granted it is a
Papist book by the title.’ ‘No, sir, it
is one of sentiment, after the manner of
Werter.’ He passed his hand over his
face, which left the humorous smile on
his face unconcealed. ‘Well, my dear,
I never heard of Werter, and am not a
publisher of novels at all.’ At this
announcement, hot, hurried, flurried, and
mortified, I began to tie up my MS.
In spite of myself the tears came into
my eyes, and poor good-natured Mr
Smith said, ‘Don’t cry, my dear; there’s
money bid for you yet. But you’re very
young to turn author; and what’s your
name, dear?’ ‘Owenson, sir,’ I said.
‘Owenson!’ he repeated; ‘are you anything
to Mr Owenson of the Theatre-Royal?’
‘Yes, sir; I am his daughter.’
‘His daughter—you amaze me!’”
And so on, and so on; for such,
in fact, is the point up to which the
whole twaddle is leading. The illustrious
Owenson of the Theatre-Royal
has friends and admirers
everywhere. His name is a talisman
which opens all doors, and
softens all hearts. Mr Smith introduces
Miss Owenson to Mr Brown,
Mr Brown allows her to leave her
MS. behind, and, without a word of
agreement, spoken or written, on
either side, he brings it out to his
own great satisfaction. Miss Owenson
thus becomes famous before
she is aware of it.
Though very happy at Bracklin,
Miss Owenson is not sorry to leave
it. She returns to the bosom of her
own family, and thus speaketh:—
“We” (that is to say, her sister Olivia
and herself) “are seated at our little
work-table, beside a cheerful turf-fire
and a pair of lights. Livy is amusing
herself at work, and I have been reading
out a work of Schiller’s to her; whilst
Molly is washing up the tea-things in
the background, and Peter is laying the
cloth for his master’s supper. That dear
master! In a few minutes we shall hear
his rap at the door, and his whistle under
the window; and then we shall circle
round the fire, and chat and laugh over
the circumstances of the day. These are
the scenes in which my heart expands,
and which I love to sketch on the spot.
Ah! I must soon leave them.”
To be sure she must; the simple
truth being this, that she quarrelled
with both father and sister, and
had an insuperable objection to all
their domestic arrangements. “In
spite of her romantic love for her
father,” observes Miss Jewsbury,
“and her sincere attachment to her
sister, the beautiful illusion of living
a domestic life with them soon
wore off. Accustomed as she had
been so long to the plentiful comfort
and regularity of Mrs Featherstone’s
well-ordered household, she
felt the difference between that
and the scrambling poverty and
discomfort of life in an Irish lodging.”
So she levanted, and is next
heard of in the family of Mr and
Mrs Crawford, at Fort-William, in
the north of Ireland. Her letters
from that place are all in the old
style. One of them indeed, addressed
to her sister, begins by confessing
that while surrounded “by
that happy circle to which her heart
was accustomed to expand,” “her
spirits sank beneath the least appearance
of discord, and she was
too conscious that she was not so
fortunate as to please every member
of her own dear family.” The
case is quite different at Fort-William.
“Here I am almost an
object of idolatry among the servants,
and am caressed by all ranks
of people.” She not only goes
wherever the family are invited,
but receives separate invitations for
herself. To be sure, Mrs Crawford
now and then runs rusty, and the
self-love of the little governess receives
a wound. “We had a very
pressing invitation sent us for a
ball at Clough-Jordan, given by a
club there. Mine was, as usual,
separate, but Mrs Crawford would
not go. It is the third she has refused.
Is it not provoking? Be
content with your situation; you
are young, you are beautiful, you
are admired, and foolish women do
not torment you!” Provoking!
it was intolerable. Happily, however,
crosses of this kind were rare—at
all events, we don’t find many
allusions to them in Miss Owenson’s
correspondence with her old friend
Mrs Featherstone.
“The other day we had upwards of
forty people to dinner, among others
Lord Dunally, Lord and Lady Clanbrock,
Hon. Mrs Dillon, the Vaughans
of Golden Grove, &c. We sang and
played a good deal, and the night finished
most pleasantly with my Irish jig, in
which I put down my men completely.
This has produced an ode to a jig, which
I will send, when I can get a frank, to
your papa, for I know it will please him....
Well, the other night we were
at an immense row at Lady Clanbrock’s,
to whom I owe so many obligations for
her marked attention to me since my residence
here, that I am at a loss how to
mention them. It was quite a musical
party, and—give me joy—on the decision
of Lord Norbury, who was of the party,
I bore away the palm from all their
Italian music by the old Irish airs of
‘Ned of the Hill’ and ‘Cooleen,’ to which
I had adapted words, and I was interrupted
three times by plaudits in the
‘Soldier tired.’”
Having thus got into the good
graces of a few lords and ladies, it
is scarcely to be wondered at that
Miss Owenson should become disgusted
with Mrs Crawford and her
pruderies. “As I found that these
good people” (the Crawfords) “were
determined on going for life to
Castle Tumbledown” (Fort-William),
“and as I never had any
strong propensity for the society of
crows who have established a very
flourishing colony in the battlements,
I gave in my resignation
last week.” It was time that she
should, for her mind was so completely
divided between authorship
and gaiety, that it could scarcely be
expected to stoop to the trivialities
of teaching. ‘St Clair,’ brought out,
as we have stated, surreptitiously,
had made some stir. Miss Jewsbury
says it was translated into
German; but we doubt whether
it was much read at home beyond
the circle of the authoress’s acquaintances.
The complimentary
notes which it drew from her
friends, however, induced her to
begin another, which was to be
completed in six volumes, and to
which she gave the name of the
‘Novice of St Domenich.’ Part
of the ‘Novice’ she seems to have
written in her father’s lodgings at
Enniskillen, whither, after her breach
with Mrs Crawford, she appears to
have retired; part in the house of
a family called Crossley, to whom
she paid a visit. There were several
sons in that family, one of whom, as
a matter of course, fell in love with
her. His letters—for he wrote
many—are all carefully preserved;
and on the back of the envelope in
which they were wrapped up Miss
Jewsbury found the following inscription:—“Francis
Crossley, aged
eighteen, chose to fall in love with
me, Sydney Owenson, aged eighteen.
He was then intended for a merchant,
but the ‘Novice of St Domenich,’
which he copied out, as regularly
as it was written, in six huge
volumes, and its author, turned his
head. He fled from his country-house,
went to India, and became a
great man.” With exceeding naïveté
Miss Jewsbury observes on this—“Lady
Morgan, when she endorsed
these papers, had of course forgotten
her own age. It is so sweet to be
eighteen.” Forgotten her own age!
We should think that she had, just
as she forgot everything which did
not minister to her vanity or jump
with the humour of the moment.
But Lady Morgan could remember
as well as forget, when it suited her
purpose. “Among her memoranda
of 1822 and 1824,” says Miss Jewsbury,
“are two or three entries on
the subject of Captain Crossley,
which may be given in this place:”
“Francis Crossley, my fast friend of
the other sex, met me at my sister’s
house at dinner after an absence of
eighteen years. It was a singular
interview. What was most singular
in it is, that he remains unchanged.
He insists upon it that, in person, so
am I.” “August 24th: Received this
day a letter from Captain Crossley,
acquainting me with his intention
of marrying. I have written him
an answer à mourir de rire, and so
ends our romance of so many years!”
“August 26th: Captain and Mrs
Crossley dined this day here, and I
never saw such a triste-looking
couple. My poor Francis silent
and sad.” How could he be otherwise,
poor man! under the circumstances—with
the new and old love
both before him, and cut off, by his
own rash act, from choosing between?
We take leave from this date of
Miss Owenson the governess, that
we may follow the fortunes of Miss
Owenson the authoress. Her pen
is never idle. She writes, with
equal facility and speed, songs,
which are set to music or arranged
by her father, odes, and novels.
She has learned, likewise, how to
attend to her own interests in disposing
of her copyrights. The
Dublin publisher seems to have
rendered her no account, so she
opens a correspondence with Sir
Richard Phillips of London. The
story which she tells, and her manner
of telling it, take with the
bibliopole, and she packs up the
‘Novice,’ and sets off alone, personally
to negotiate with him. With
all her foibles (for, indeed, Lady Morgan’s
worst faults scarcely deserve
to be described by a harsher title),
there was something about her
which made friends wherever she
went. Mr Quintin Dick, for example,
a chance fellow-passenger in
the coach from Holyhead, never lost
his interest in her to the day of his
death. Phillips could not resist her
insinuating manners. He bought
her MS. (she does not say what he
gave for it); and, though married
and of middle age, made love to her
in his own way. Gruff, stern, old
Mrs Inchbald, alone of the Londoners
to whom she recommended
herself, repulsed her. But the repulse
made no lasting impression.
She returned to Ireland gratified
and hopeful, and extended day by
day her reputation, and the circle,
already not limited, of her correspondence
and acquaintances.
Lady Morgan’s novels have long
since passed into the oblivion which
is their rightful portion. They are
all cast in the same mould. Whether
we look into ‘St Clair,’ ‘The Novice,’
‘The Wild Irish Girl,’ ‘The
O’Briens and the O’Flahartys,’ or
any other of the multitudinous
brood which made their appearance
at intervals from 1801 to 1826, each
resembles the other as closely as pea
resembles pea. We have in all of
them the same characters, almost
the same incidents, certainly the
same opinions, and the same style
of conversation throughout. Miss
Owenson herself is the universal
heroine; Mr Owenson figures in
most of them, sometimes as a prince,
otherwise as a nobleman. The
officers with whom she associated
in Kilkenny—the friends who sheltered
her in her hour of need—her
lovers, real or imaginary—her lord
and lady acquaintances—an interesting
priest, and a griping parson,—all
come upon the stage. The love-passages
are warm, the learning is
ludicrous; the delineation of national
manners and national modes
of thinking one-sided; and the
style lively and incorrect, or else
turgid and pompous. They attained
to a degree of popularity for which
it seems difficult in this age to account.
The truth, however, is, that
Miss Owenson caught the top of the
wave. By writing up Liberalism just
as it began to struggle into fashion,
she became to the Whigs, as a novelist,
pretty much what Moore was as
a poet; and she reaped her reward.
For the Tories, as is their wont,
while they abused her principles,
followed the lead set them by their
rivals, and spoke of the authoress as
a woman of genius, whom it would
be generous to praise and entertaining
to cultivate. Hence both parties
were as ready to receive her advances
as she was willing to make
them. Moreover, when she attained
to the height of her popularity, at
the date of the publication of ‘The
Wild Irish Girl,’ public taste was
wretched in the extreme. The
Waverley Novels had not yet begun
to purify the atmosphere which the
Minerva Press had long darkened,
and Miss Edgeworth and Miss Austin
stood wellnigh alone among
lady-novelists. Now, Miss Owenson,
though neither an Edgeworth
nor an Austin, was far superior to
your ‘Anna Marias’ and ‘Girls of
the Mountain.’ She had a good deal
of intuitive perception into the
realities of woman’s nature, though
not, perhaps, into the best parts of
it; and hence, in spite of frequent
outrages to good manners, and
sometimes to decency, she commanded
attention.
“I read ‘Ida,’” writes Lady Charleville,
“before it was all issued from the
press, a volume being sent me as soon as
sewed; and I read it with the same conviction
of the existence of excellent talent,
great descriptive powers; and in
this work I find particular ingenuity in
the novel attempt to interest us for a
woman who loved two. And for each of
the lovers the episode was happily contrived
on this plan, and executed with
great taste and spirit. I could have
wished the situations had been less critical
in point of delicacy, as the English
gentleman has incurred great blame on
all sides for having suffered her to escape;
and the poor Turk too. The politics of
Athens are ingenious; but, alas! one
poor Emmet, hanging so recently in our
streets, does not suffer us to enjoy our
miseries in any fiction for some years to
come. I have not read the ‘Monthly
Review,’ where it is criticised. I choose
to be pleased with what you write now,
though I do heartily reprobate your putting
off the period of polishing and purifying
your language, for pique to those
censors, who, after all, may be the best
of friends, if they point out a path so
attainable to fame. Assuredly, to those
to whom God has given fancy, and a
touch of the ethereal spark, it is doubly
a duty to write pure language, under the
penalty of else rendering the best gift of
Heaven valueless. Where little is to be
done, it is inexcusable to neglect that;
and assuredly you promised me that
‘Ida’ should be more correct than your
former publications, even, as you imagined,
at the expense of fancy. Now,
we found as much imagination as ever,
and not more of the square and compass
than hitherto.”
If it was thus that ladies of taste
and delicacy, however awkwardly
they might express themselves,
thought and wrote of Miss Owenson’s
manner of handling the tender
passion, and if ladies of taste and
delicacy could dispense their criticisms
with so gentle a hand, it is
little to be wondered at if the mass
of subscribers to circulating libraries
devoured such books as ‘Ida,’ and
pronounced them divine.
Miss Owenson was now the fashion,
and Lord and Lady Abercorn
invited her to pay them a visit at
Baronscourt. They had read ‘The
Novice of St Domenich’ and ‘The
Wild Irish Girl,’ and, being bored
with each other’s society, yet equally
taking a fancy to the authoress, they
urged her to come and live with
them, and amuse them over their
dull fireside. Miss Jewsbury, writing,
we presume, from her friend’s
notes, thus describes the pair:—
“He” (the Marquess) “was extremely
handsome, noble, and courtly in his
manner; witty, sarcastic, a roué as regarded
his principles towards women,
a Tory in politics, fastidious, luxurious,
refined in his habits, fascinating in his
address, blasé upon pleasure and prosperity,
yet capable of being amused by
wit, and interested by a new voice and
face. Altogether, he was as dangerous a
man for a brilliant young woman to be
brought near, as could easily be found.
Miss Owenson had, however, the virtue
for herself which she bestowed upon her
heroines. Her own sentiments and romances
found their outlet and exercise
in her novels; and she had, for all practical
purposes, the strong hard common sense
which called things by their right
names, and never gave bewildering epithets
to matters of plain right and wrong.
She had no exaggerated generosity, nor
sentiments of delicacy about other people’s
feelings. The Marchioness of Abercorn
was as genuine a fine lady as the
Marquess was a fine gentleman. In after
years Lady Morgan drew her portrait in
‘O’Donnel’ as Lady Llamberis. She was
good-natured and inconsequent; she took
up people warmly, and dropped them
easily; she was incapable of permanent
attachment, except to those belonging
to herself.”
With this amiable couple Miss
Owenson lived rather more than
two years. She does not appear to
have been altogether pleased with
her position, and no wonder. Lady
Abercorn was the Marquess’s third
wife, who
“Lived with him on terms of excessive
politeness, and poor Miss Owenson
was expected to bear their tempers and
attentions, to sit in the cross-fire of
their humours, and to find good spirits
and sprightly conversation when they
were dull. Add to this, that heavy pressure
of anxiety about family matters,
which was laid upon her before her
nerves and sinews were braced to meet
it, and before she had any worldly knowledge,
produced a feeling of exhaustion.
In the material prosperity of her life
at Baronscourt the tension relaxed, and
the fatigue of past exertion asserted itself.
Her own ambition had never allowed
her to rest—she had been wonderfully
successful; but at Baronscourt and
Stanmore Priory all she had attained
looked dwarfed and small when measured
by the hereditary power and consequence
of the family in which she was
for the time an inmate. She did not
become discontented, but she was disenchanted
for the time with all that belonged
to herself, and saw her own position
on its true comparative scale. Sydney
Owenson, from earliest childhood,
had depended on herself alone for counsel
and support. There is no sign that
she ever felt those moments of religious
aspiration, when a human being, sensible
of its own weakness and ignorance,
cries for help to Him who made us.
There are no ejaculations of prayer or of
thanksgiving; she proudly took up her
own burden, and bore it as well as she
could; finding her own way, and shaping
her own life, according to her own
idea of what ought to form her being’s
end and aim. She was a courageous indomitable
spirit; but the constant dependence
on herself, the steady concentration
of purpose with which she followed
out her own career without letting
herself be turned aside, gave a hardness
to her nature, which, though it did not
destroy her kindness and honesty of
heart, petrified the tender grace which
makes the charm of goodness.”
Lord and Lady Abercorn were
very fond of Miss Owenson in their
own way. They had formed a plan
for her happiness, which, in spite
of the opposition in the outset of
the two parties most interested,
they ultimately succeeded in carrying
into effect. Lord Abercorn had
for his family physician Dr Morgan,
a dull, priggish, and most conceited
individual, between whom
and the authoress of ‘The Wild
Irish Girl’ he and the Marchioness
determined to make a match. How
the affair went on from its dawn to
its consummation; how Miss Owenson
compelled the reluctant doctor
to fall in love with her in spite of
himself; how, frightened at the results
of the frolic, she would have
drawn back at last, had not the
lord and lady proved too clever
for her,—Lady Morgan, with her
usual taste, has described in detail.
All the doctor’s letters, with some
of her own, are printed in this collection;
the latter of which, by the
by, rather contradict the text of the
narrative. According to her ladyship’s
version, placed on record
after the event, things ran thus:—There
had been a great deal of love-making
on his side, with something
very like it on hers; but in the
end—
“Any romance she had felt about Sir
Charles was frightened out of her for
the time being; and she said she would
have given anything to be able to run
away again. Neither was much delay
accorded to her. On a cold morning in
January she was sitting in the library
by the fire in her morning wrapper, when
Lady Abercorn opened the door and said,
‘Glorvina, come up-stairs directly and be
married; there must be no more trifling.’
Her ladyship took Miss Owenson’s arm
and led her up-stairs into her dressing-room,
where a table was arranged for the
ceremony; the family chaplain standing
in full canonicals with his book open,
and Sir Charles ready to receive her.
There was no escape left—the ceremony
proceeded, and the Wild Irish Girl was
married past redemption.”
All this took place, it will be observed,
in January 1812, possibly upon
the third day of the month. On
the 29th of the previous December,
Miss Owenson, being in Dublin on
some mysterious millinery business,
wrote thus to the Doctor—“Oh,
Morgan! give me all your love,
tenderness, comfort, and support,
for in five short days I am yours
for ever.” Thus, whether by accident
or through design, Miss Owenson,
at the age of thirty-six, gave her
hand to a man six or seven years
her junior, on whom the noble Marquess
had persuaded the Lord-Lieutenant
to confer the honour of
knighthood, for no other ostensible
purpose than that he might have
the satisfaction of filling his glass
after dinner, and drinking to the
health of Sir Charles and Lady
Morgan.
Little more remains to be told of
the personal history of our heroine—not
much of her future efforts as
an authoress and a politician. Sir
Charles and Lady Morgan soon discovered
that the stately restraint of
Baronscourt and the Priory were
too much for a newly-married
couple. They parted from the
Abercorns, therefore, apparently on
decent terms, and took possession
of a house of their own in Kildare
Street. Sir Charles then endeavoured
to get into practice as a
physician, but failed. Nobody
called him in, so the gifted couple
devoted themselves conjointly and
severally to literature. We say
conjointly and severally, because
the lady, with her usual prudence,
had stipulated in the marriage-contract
that her earnings should belong
exclusively to herself; while
the gentleman, who was a widower,
settled his private patrimony on a
daughter whom his first wife had
brought him. Lady Morgan had by
far the best of this bargain. Her
novel of ‘O’Donnel,’ which Colburn
brought out in 1813, she sold for
£500; and as the book went through
not fewer than three editions, we
are of opinion that, looking at the
matter in a mercantile point of
view, she was not paid too much
for it.
This was clearly Lady Morgan’s
opinion likewise, and she determined
that Mr Colburn should not
for the future purchase her favours
so cheaply. As to her husband, he
had utterly failed. He put forth a
volume, which he called ‘Outlines
of the Physiology of Life,’ and his
publisher never sold copies enough
to cover the cost of the paper. No
wonder. It was a dull, impudent,
most unphilosophical piece of materialism,
which disgusted even the
believers in that wretched creed
by the boldness with which it asserted
as facts points which they
had never ventured to treat except
as open to speculative discussion.
But the failure of Sir Charles in nowise
daunted his wife. The battle
of Waterloo having restored peace
to Europe, and re-established, as was
assumed, the throne of the Bourbons
in France, Sir Charles and
Lady Morgan went forth to spy the
land; and after remaining, chiefly
in Paris, about six weeks, came
back and entered into negotiation
with Mr Colburn for the publication
of a volume of their travels.
A very diplomatic correspondence
ensued. Colburn offered £750 for
the copyright, and spoke of the
great things which he was in a
condition to do, for what he called
his books and his authors, through
the instrumentality of his ‘New
Monthly Magazine and Literary
Gazette.’ Her ladyship stood out
stiffly for £1000, and she carried
her point. “To conclude at once,”
wrote Colburn, “though at a really
great risk, I will consent to undertake
to pay the £1000, and, on my
honour, if it succeed better than
expected, I will consider myself
accordingly your debtor, besides
making up to you the other £50 on
‘O’Donnel,’ that you may no longer
regret the third edition.”
Nobody reads Lady Morgan’s
‘France’ now any more than he
reads ‘O’Donnel.’ It is full of
the most ridiculous blunders, and
abounds in misstatements which
could have hardly been accidental
at the time. Yet it sold well. The
‘Quarterly’ fell upon it mercilessly,
doubtless promoting the sale by
the virulence of its criticisms. This
attack Lady Morgan ingeniously met
by assuring her friends that Croker
was one of her rejected lovers, and
that he had taken this opportunity
of avenging himself for the sufferings
he had undergone! On the
other hand, all who delighted in
scandal were charmed with the
book, and Mme. Paterson Buonaparte
wrote from Paris to assure
the authoress that her manner of
detailing it was quite as agreeable
to French people as to English.
“Public expectation is as high as
possible,” she says, “and if you had
kept it a little longer, they would have
purchased it” (the book) “at your own
price. How happy you must be at filling
the world with your name as you
do! Madame de Staël and Madame de
Genlis are forgotten; and if the love of
fame be of any weight with you, your
excursion to Paris was attended with
brilliant success. I assure you—and you
know I am sincere—that you are more
spoken of than any other person at the
present day. Mr Moore seldom sees
me; I did not take with him at all. He
called to show me the article of your
letter which mentions the report of the
Duke of Wellington’s loves. I am not
the Mrs —— the great man gives as a
successor to Grassini. You would be
surprised if you knew how great a fool
she is, at the power she exercises over
the Duke; but I believe that he has no
taste pour les femmes d’esprit, which is,
however, no reason for going into extremes,
as in this case.”
The prince of puffers was Henry
Colburn. He spent a fortune in
advertising his own books, and succeeded,
till the trick was found out,
in cramming many a trashy production
down the throat of a gullible
public. It is certain, also,
that he believed in his own power,
and made a boast of it. He was so
well pleased with the success of
‘France,’ that, besides purchasing
‘Florence Macarthy,’ with some
dead weight, from Sir Charles for
£1200, he suggested that the Morgans
should visit Italy, and promised
£2000 for the copyright of
the book of travels to be written.
The terms were accepted, and in
due time appeared ‘Italy,’ by Lady
Morgan. “Her ladyship’s criticisms
on the public buildings and
pictures,” observes Miss Jewsbury,
“may be open to question, but the
spirit of the book (being ultra-liberal)
is noble, and its fascination
undeniable.” Agreeing with the
former clause of this sentence, we
may let the latter pass unnoticed;
for the bubble of Lady Morgan’s
reputation was on the eve of bursting.
She and Mr Colburn fell out.
She never could believe but that
the monarch of Marlborough Street
was growing rich at her expense;
so, having visited France a second
time, and written a second book
about it, she determined to bring
him to reason. While the work
was yet in progress, she wrote to
Colburn, who did not immediately
answer the letter. She wrote again,
but no reply came; whereupon she
opened a correspondence about
terms with Messrs Saunders and
Otley. Colburn no sooner heard of
this, than he remonstrated against
it in no very becoming terms.
“I can now only say,” he wrote
to Sir Charles, “that if Lady
Morgan does not break off the negotiation,
which is simply done on
the plea of misunderstanding, it
will be no less detrimental to her
literary than to her pecuniary interest.
As to myself, it is a very
different feeling, and not merely
pecuniary interest, that makes me
urge this matter; as I can prove, if
necessary, I have lost considerably
by the last two or three works.”
Could bibliopolic insolence go beyond
this? He lost by her ladyship’s
works! He threaten to injure
her literary reputation! Let
him do his worst. A bargain was
concluded with Messrs Saunders
and Otley, and under their auspices
‘France Revisited’ came out. The
day after its appearance men read
with astonishment in all the newspapers
an advertisement headed in
large letters, “Lady Morgan at half-price.”
The base-born miscreant
had the audacity to declare “That
in consequence of the great losses
which he had sustained by Lady
Morgan’s former works, Mr Colburn
had declined this present book on
France, and that all the copies of
her ladyship’s works might be had
at half-price.” The cruel announcement
had the desired effect. Messrs
Saunders and Otley found themselves
losers by a good deal more
than the thousand pounds which
they had given for the copyright,
and Lady Morgan’s popularity as a
writer collapsed.
We must not devote more of our
space to the poor dead old lady.
She had pretty well feathered her
nest by this time, and though she
could not sell her books as she had
heretofore done, she did what was
far better. She got the Government
to settle upon her a pension
of £300 a year, the very highest
reward which Imperial generosity
ever bestows in this rich country
on literary eminence. This enabled
her to keep house in William Street,
and to maintain such social intercourse
with the gay world as we
have elsewhere indicated. She had
always been a ready correspondent,
and she continued the practice of
letter-writing to the last. Generally
speaking, that portion of her correspondence
which has found its
way into these volumes is harmless
enough. It contains little else,
when her ladyship writes, than
descriptions of the fine people
whom she meets, and the pleasant
things which they say to her.
When fine ladies and gentlemen address
her, it is always in a strain of
exaggerated flattery. But poor Lady
Caroline Lamb might, we think,
have been permitted to lie still in
her grave. Not that her letters to
Lady Morgan tell anything which
we did not know already; for Lady
Caroline never made a secret of her
weaknesses, and was evidently incapable
of understanding that other
people might call them by a harsher
name. But for the sake of Lady
Morgan herself, and the reputation
of good-heartedness, which was
really not undeserved in her case,
it is a pity that she should be made
the means of recalling to the world’s
recollection so pitiable a story. We
suspect, however, that Miss Jewsbury
and Mr Dixon had no choice
in the matter. They must print
all or nothing; and so, having
spared very few of the old lady’s
male friends, they could find no
good reason for being more tender
towards her friends of the other
sex. In the name, however, of the
women of society living under the
reign of Victoria, we must protest
against these volumes being accepted,
either now or a hundred years
hence, as illustrative of the sort of
domestic life to which they are
accustomed.
A SKETCH FROM BABYLON. — CONCLUSION.—CHAPTER X. — CHAPTER XI. — CHAPTER XII. — CHAPTER XIII. — CHAPTER XIV. — CHAPTER XV.
205
Madame Mélanie was a milliner
much affected in aristocratic and
financial circles.
Finance sympathises with Hungary,
Poland, and oppressed nationalities,
and Mélanie appertained
to this section of mortality. Moreover,
she made dresses beautifully,
and the employment of her gratified
the double sentiments of charity
and vanity.
Mélanie was the daughter of a
French maid-servant, in the service
of a Hungarian lady. Brought up
in her maternal profession—for her
sire was not known—she lived under
the roof of her Hungarian mistress
till what she was pleased to call the
“Hongarian Strockle.” Of this
event she narrated striking scenes.
Assuming to herself the name of
her mistress, whom she had betrayed,
she told how Haynau had
threatened her with chastisement,
and how, barefooted, she had reached
a place of safety. More than once
she had been invited to publish her
adventures, but she was far too
wise. Her ancient nobility obtained
for her much greater consideration
as a seamstress, and a better livelihood
than Kossuth himself could
procure; and in the humility of
her station she was more free from
detection than in a more elevated
sphere.
She had begun poorly enough—working
away gradually, and accumulating
capital by labour and
saving, by gifts from her patronesses,
and also by occasionally abstracting
small pieces of jewellery
and money from the aristocratic
dressing-rooms to which, in her
capacity as a distressed noblewoman,
she obtained freer access than
others of her equals. True, she
soon gave up the latter pursuit. Not
only was it dangerous, but increasing
business, by removing her from
want, enabled her to resist temptation.
Still she derived considerable
emolument from what Italian
servants term “incerti.” She did
not object, for a consideration, to
usurp the office of the Postmaster-General,
nor did she refuse the
shelter of her roof when business
or charity required an interview
between opulent monades of opposite
sexes. On the whole, Madame
Mélanie is a deserving creature.
The sums she spends in alms
astound the more credulous of her
customers. She has sent more than
one packet of linen to the lying-in
hospital of the parish, and the initial
“M., through a friend,” for
Garibaldi’s muskets, has been traced
to the same benefic source. She will
not marry again, for she never can
forget the Count of her early days,
when they lived and loved in Hungary;
but a French courier, about
three years younger than herself,
dwells in her house under the designation
of adopted son, keeps her
accounts, and transacts business
with her solicitor.
Such was the person let loose in
her respectable household by that
careful mother, Lady Coxe. ’Ungary
has done much for many disreputable
foreigners. The respectability
of a few has floated the depravity
of the many.
On the credit of a lying assumption,
Madame Mélanie had access to
the homes and toilet-tables of England
which would be denied to any
respectable Englishwoman of the
same class, however deserving.
“Good morning, Mélanie,” said
Lady Coxe, as she lay back in her
chaise longue.
“Good morning, miladi—always
so charmante and gracieuse.”
“Git along, Mélanie,” replied
miladi, playfully: when away from
her daughters she laid aside that
staidness of demeanour maintained
before them towards her inferiors.
“Mélanie, we are going to Lady
Ilminster’s dejooner.”
“Miladi go everywhere fashionable.”
“Oh yes, Mélanie, and I don’t
know ’ow ever I shall be able to
bear up against it. I feel so exhausted.”
“Oh, miladi does not care herself.”
“What can I do, Mélanie?—I
feel so weak!”
“Miladi look very pale.”
“I think I must send for Dr
Leadbitter.”
“If miladi would take a little
drop of port-wine once or twice in
the day.”
“You really think so, Mélanie?”
“Yes truly, miladi.”
“Just like a good creature open
that cupboard. I always keep a
bottle there in case Sir Jehoshaphat
should drop in; you will find a
glass. Per’aps there are two. Bring
them, Mélanie, and take a glass
yourself.”
The seamstress did as she was
bid, and, placing the decanter and
glasses respectfully on the table and
in the manner of a skilled practician,
she sat herself down in the
same deferential attitude near her
employer.
Lady Coxe took a bumper; then
she took another, and declared herself
better.
Madame Mélanie’s first glass was
not half emptied.
“Well, Mélanie, what would you
advise about my dress for this party?
You know it is to be very shwosi.”
“Miladi shall be the best dressed
and the youngest-looking miladi in
the house.”
“Git along, Mélanie,” retorted
miladi, stealthily filling herself another
bumper.
A flush pervaded the cheek of
the matron. Perhaps it was of
pride.
“Miladi, I recommend moire
antique—magenta, with quilled
ribbons—chapeau of blonde with
magenta trimmings—parasol to
match.”
“Your taste is so good, Mélanie.”
“Magenta so well become miladi.
Bootiful complexion—she young as
Miss Constance.”
“Oh, you flattering thing! but
what will you give my daughters—the
Miss Coxes.”
“Oh, I talk to them myself.
They not be Miss Coxe long, I
think. Miss Florence make a very
nice bride, and Miss Constance
bootiful Comtesse.”
“Git along; but what do you
mean? Fill your glass.” Lady Coxe
as a fugleman showed the way.
“They tell me such a ’andsome
man want to marry her—noble and
rich.”
“English or furrin, Mélanie?”
“Not English.”
“You know ’im to be rich?”
“Oh yes, I know him rich. Miladi
know poor woman like me obliged
to make affair with all sort of
people. One of my customers, Mademoiselle
Dulaugier of Opera Comique.
I send all her bill to Comte
Rabelais, and he pay, what you call,
on the nail.”
“Very satisfactory,” responded
Lady Coxe. “Let me ’ope Constance
may be the means of leading
’im to better things.”
“Indeed, let us hope so,” said
Mélanie, and this time she held her
glass to her lips for some seconds,
though the liquid within was not
much diminished.
“Nothing is settled, believe me,
Mélanie. But then the world is
talking of it.”
“Of nothing else. Who occupy
London so much as your family,
miladi? The Duchesse of Wiltshire,
when I go to her, say to me, ‘Mélanie,
tell me all about that bootiful
Miladi Coques and her bootiful
family. None so bootiful as the
mother.’”
At this moment the door admitted
Florence and Constance.
Mélanie rose in admiration.
“What bootiful colour! What
roses in cheeks.”
The girls acknowledged her salute,
and the rose left the cheek of Constance.
Mélanie whispered Lady Coxe,
“I will make for Mademoiselle
Constance bootiful dress like used
to wear La Dulaugier—the Comte’s
own choice.”
“Mélanie is come to take orders
for Lady Ilminster’s dejooner.”
“I shall have a very simple
dress,” said Florence.
“And so shall I,” chimed in Constance,
in a voice low and tremulous.
“Impossible!” broke in the
seamstress—“impossible!”
“Nonsense!” said Lady Coxe.
“You will ruin Constance, Mélanie,”
retorted Florence.
“Mademoiselle Constance will
marry a rich man, and think nothing
of the trifles she spends now,”
responded Mélanie, somewhat tartly.
“You know what to make,” said
Lady Coxe, in a voice that admitted
of no reply.
With an obsequious courtesy
Mélanie left the room, and Constance,
retiring to her own chamber,
threw herself on her bed and wept
bitterly.
It was dusk when Mélanie left
the house—that dangerous summer
dusk, when that is seen which you
wish concealed, but when you can
with difficulty perceive what you
wish to discover.
Mélanie wended her way towards
Grosvenor Street, where she resided.
As she reached the corner of
the Square, however, she stopped
at the corner of Charles Street,
under a gas-lamp.
She did not wait many minutes
when a Clarence stopped at the
crossing.
A man jumped out. It was
Count Rabelais.
Holding open the door of the
carriage, he admitted the dressmaker,
who took her seat next a
woman already inside. Jumping
in again with a bow, the Count
gave an order to the coachman,
who dashed off under the gas-lamp.
Augustus Bromley, who was
passing at the moment, saw the
whole transaction, as well as the
face of the third occupant. It was
that of Madame Carron. For the
first time an idea entered his mind,
how much like the face of the
Count was to that of the actress.
Hurrying homeward to write a
line of excuse to a friend with whom
he was engaged to dine, he seated
himself not many minutes later in
a stall of the St James’s Theatre.
The first play, a short one, was
over, and in the next Madame
Carron was to appear. Her part
that night involved one or two
songs, and a piano was wheeled
into the orchestra.
Bromley, who was sitting at one
end, could see Madame Carron in
the wings with Angelo Magens, a
pianist and composer of some celebrity.
They were together engaged
earnestly over a sheet of music
paper, beating time and giving or
demanding explanation.
At length Bromley perceived
that the play was about to begin,
from Madame Carron plucking at
her skirts, and from Mr Magens’s
appearance in the orchestra. The
musician turned round, and, at a
signal from Bromley, came to the
neighbourhood of his stall, and
leaned over to speak to him.
“How d’ye do, Angelo?” asked
Bromley. “Ages since I’ve seen
you. How are Mrs Angelo and
Adelaide?”
“Quite well, thank you, Mr
Bromley. How well you’re looking!”
“Rather hard at work, that’s
all.”
“I can understand that, in your
important avocations.”
“By the way, Angelo, do you
know the Carron well?”
“Well, Mr Bromley, she’s been
very kind to a poor man like me.”
“Do you think we’ve time to
go round and have a glass of
sherry?”
“Not now; at the end of the
next act;” and the bell rang for
the curtain to rise. As it rose,
Bromley perceived behind Madame
Carron the figure of Rabelais.
The act was soon over, and
Magens came for his glass of sherry.
Bromley led him to the public-house
adjoining, and the liquor
was poured out.
As they both sipped it, Bromley
again began, “How well she did
that last scene!”
“Admirably; she is a wonderful
woman!”
“Indeed she is, Magens. By the
way, where is Monsieur Carron?”
“Oh! he is dead, I believe.”
“Then is that story true about
her?”
“If you have heard anything
against her reputation, I can undertake
to declare it false.”
Little Magens, when under the
united influence of sentiment and
sherry, could be very fiery.
He was a grateful homuncule.
“Of course not,” rejoined his interrogator.
“I mean that other
story.”
“Are you trying to pump me,
Mr Bromley?”
“It would take a cleverer man
than me to do that, Angelo—another
glass—there’s lots of time.
We’ve only been five minutes, and
the entr’acte at a French play is
never less than a quarter of an hour.
(Glasses filled.) You were saying—”
“Well, the only story I have ever
heard is about her family. They
say, with I do not know what
foundation, that she is of a good family,
and is devoting all her profits
to the support of it. She certainly
does not live in the style of a
person earning the immense salaries
she receives.”
“Rabelais, I suppose, knows all
about it.”
Magens shook his head, swallowed
the remainder of his glass,
and silently led the way back to
the theatre.
“By the way, do you know
anything of Madame Mélanie, the
seamstress? She is much employed
by actresses, I believe? A young
lady was asking me, whether she
made Mademoiselle Dulaugier’s ballet-dresses.”
“I know her very little myself.
Mrs Magens knows her.”
“Well, Magens, good evening.
Can you come and dine with me
to-morrow at the Garrick?”
“To-morrow, I am engaged here
all the evening, and I suppose your
hours are fashionable.”
“Well, another day.”
When he resumed his stall, Bromley
perceived that a box near the
stage was newly filled.
He looked up, and there was
Lady Coxe and her three daughters.
Near Constance sat the Count.
Her eye caught his, and she blushed
deeply.
Bromley went revolving in his
mind many things. At length he
made up his mind, and sauntered
into the box.
The Count greeted him with unusual
civility. Lady Coxe invited
him to a chair next her.
“Mr Bromley,” she whispered,
“do me a favour. The Congte is
most anxious to go to Lady Ilminster’s.
Can you, do you think—can
you manage this?”
“Impossible, my dear Lady
Coxe. I have already exceeded
my powers.”
A wink, supposed to be imperceptible,
announced to the Count
the result of the negotiation. A
dead silence ensued. When Bromley
left the box, no effort was made
to detain him.
It was early the following afternoon
when Bromley took a light
dinner at his club. The waiters,
as they brought him portions of
soup and fish, speculated on the
causes which induced Mr Bromley
to dine at four o’clock. In the
hall he had left a carpet-bag containing
six bottles of sherry and
two of whisky, one of Curaçoa, and
one of pale brandy.
He was not long at his dinner.
Having finished, he sent for a cab,
and, placing in it his carpet-bag,
desired the driver to take him to
the Strand to a celebrated fish-shop.
Here he bought two lobsters, two
bundles of dried sprats, a pork-pie,
a Bologna sausage, two loaves of
brown bread, and a pound of butter.
The civil shopman, at Bromley’s
request, sent out for some fine
Spanish onions, which were added
to the packet. With these provisions
Bromley ordered himself to
Kennington.
The driver at length drew up as
directed at a nursery garden. Here
Bromley alighted, paid his fare, and,
shouldering his baggage, walked
up the garden path.
“Is Mrs Magens at home?” he
asked a maid-servant.
“Yes, sir, she’s up-stairs.”
“Will you tell her I’m here?
How are you, my dear?”
“Very well, thank you, sir. It’s
some time since we saw you.”
“Yes, my dear, and I think you’ve
grown. Will you take some of
these parcels, while I take the
others, and put them in the drawing-room?”
“It looks as if it held good
things, sir.”
“You’re a knowing young creature,
my dear. Just go and tell your
mistress I am here.”
Bromley knew it would be a long
time before mistress would make
her appearance. As he sat in the
little sitting-room, 12 feet by 8, he
heard cries for warm water. “Jane,
where’s the soap?—My brush, Jane,
quick!—Where are them pins?”
which told how the lady was occupied.
Half an hour at least must elapse
before the appearance of Mrs Magens,
and this period Bromley divided
between reading the ‘Era,’
which lay on the table, and drumming
thereon.
Mr Angelo Magens was the natural
son of a rackety Irish peer; at
least so report said, and there was
circumstantial evidence in support
of the theory. Angelo had brothers,
but they were not a bit like himself.
Lord Rattlecormick had never
taken any notice of them as he had
of Angelo. The cast of Angelo’s
face was decidedly Rattlecormick,
and so was his character—quiet in
manner, but reckless and thoughtless,
a mixture of good nature, common
sense, loose principle, and imprudence.
From his childhood
Angelo had lived exclusively with
Lord Rattlecormick, with the exception
of a short interval, during
which his patron had managed to
thrust him into the Navy. The
life did not suit young Angelo, accustomed
as he was to the rough
luxury of Castle Rattlecormick, the
good-natured and reckless liberality
of the peer, who acted in loco parentis,
and boon companions, who
enlivened that patrician hearth.
So young Magens one morning
left H.M.S. Bruiser in Cork Roads
without leave, and betook himself
without invitation to the House
of Rattlecormick, to pass his time
in warbling songs to the crowd
of guests, to perform odd jobs on
the premises, and to unfit himself
for doing his duty in that state of
life to which it might please Providence
to call him.
Thus days and years passed, till
Angelo was about twenty. He had
picked up a certain knowledge of
music. The village priest, skilled in
thorough bass, had taught him the
mysteries of counterpoint. Nature
had blessed him with an agreeable
tenor voice, and a rather agreeable
manner, and a very decided taste
for alcohol. Just at this particular
juncture, Lord Rattlecormick died.
As might have been expected, no
will was found. Angelo was thrown
on his own resources—viz., one
hundred pounds, the remnant of
divers tips from his patron, a suit
of clothes or two, and such expectations
as might be warranted by
the extensive acquaintance and
clientela of his late father or patron.
He set up as a music-master. He
composed pretty little songs, popular
from their melodies. He even
aspired to an opera, and was not
wholly unsuccessful. Once he hired
a theatre for himself, and was
wholly unsuccessful. At one time
he was poor, at another time he was
not rich; but one day he would
have nothing, the next a considerable
sum of money. He was like
those figures one sees in a bottle,
which go dancing up and down according
to the pressure on the cover.
The accidents of his fortune were
abrupt and immoderate. Now at
the bottom of the bottle with a
sudden fall—now at the top with
as unexpected a rebound—seldom in
the centre, but when there wriggling
and twisting and curveting,—discontented
for mediocrity, and burning
to risk great success or great
disaster on the turn of the nearest
die. But with increasing years the
taste of Angelo for alcohol increased,
specially with reference to sherry.
He had a mania for that particular
beverage, and he passed but few
hours of the day without appealing
to that cherished friend. He was
well known at the public-houses of
the metropolis,—at some of them,
I fear, too well known to insure the
gratification of his tastes. He was
always convivial, however; always
hospitable, always willing to accept
hospitality. When in funds he
would volunteer a glass of sherry
at his own expense; when not in
the best plight, he would volunteer
it at yours. In early days Augustus’s
friends often declared that
Angelo had led him into expenses
and extravagance. It may be so;
but in justice to his memory, Augustus
often declared his belief
that not a sixpence more was spent
for Angelo than Angelo ever spent
for him.
His wife was a very different kind
of person. The daughter of a chemist
at Worcester, and possessed of
a good voice, the musical festivals,
and the love of Church dignitaries
for the ars musica, had indicated
music as her profession. As a little
girl, her talents in this respect had
made her a favourite in the cathedral
town, and she could with veracity
boast acquaintance with bishops,
deans, and canons, whose names
sounded oddly enough when coming
from her lips. Nevertheless these
worthy and guileless men had contributed
to her education, proudly
looking forward to the time when
her rich contralto should resound
through their own cathedral, and
they should share in the plaudits
showered on their pupil and protégée.
So they sent her to study in
London,—and she did study in
London. She came out in London;
sang in an oratorio, and created a
sensation. But Kate Robins was a
peculiar person. She was the daughter
of a chemist, and in her physical
composition there was much oxygen
of a certain quality—not enough,
however, to feed the vestal flame.
Moreover, she was very pretty, with
an arch smile. She sang little
songs with ineffable grace. So no
wonder she studied the doctrine of
affinities. A cathedral town presented
but few attractions. Deans
were atoms of a nature not sufficiently
volatile. She found the obstacles
in the way of Platonism so
numerous as to be absolutely insurmountable.
So she assumed the
toga affected by her equivalents
in Babylon. She drove in little
carriages, and radiated in fine
linen. She accepted engagements
at theatres, took parts where a good
leg, an arch smile, and a rich voice
were everything requisite; earned
a good livelihood from her art, and
a considerable amount of pocket-money
from her artlessness.
Hers was a pleasant Bohemian
life till she was five-and-thirty. The
bishops and the deans, the friends
of her youth, were replaced—in another
fashion, be it understood—by
the young nobles, the friends of her
womanhood. As the spiritual peerage
had contributed to the formation,
so did the temporal assist in the
completion of her education. This
went on very well for some time.
But at length the contralto rather
deteriorated; the arch smile partook
rather of the stereotype. Managers
were no longer so eager. Dukes
began to cease their visits to her
greenroom. Scarlet and fine linen
are expensive in the absence of
means to purchase them. Kate
Robins found her assets running
low; while several tradesmen, heretofore
satisfied by the dukes, were
not so civil as formerly. So, taking
a judicious resolution, she determined
on a provincial tour, relying
for rural successes on her fading
reputation. She planned with a
friendly author an attractive entertainment.
She engaged Magens,
who had then just culminated, as
her accompanyist, and she sallied
forth with Angelo from Babylon to
fresh fields and pastures new. For
economy’s sake they occupied the
same apartments, till, for propriety’s
sake, they assumed the same name.
They went the round of England
and Ireland earning a livelihood
and realising a good round sum, not
sufficient, however, to meet their
joint liabilities. Therefore, as assets
would go farther when legally
united than when filtered by division,
as union in fact is force, Angelo
obtained from the Church a
benediction on the marriage already
practically solemnised, turned his
wife’s brevet rank into substantive
rank; and having thus consolidated
their names and their liabilities,
went through the Insolvent Court
like a man, and, in purging himself,
whitewashed his wife’s account-book
simultaneously with her
reputation. From that moment
Mrs Magens collapsed into private
life. A long and severe illness deprived
her of all that remained of
looks, voice, and attraction. She
became a good wife, a prudent
housekeeper, endeavoured to remedy
by self-denial the dilapidations
inflicted by sherry on their small
means, incited her husband to exertion,
made his house as pleasant as
possible, and retained nothing of
her former life but an unattractive
girl she designated her niece, and a
dramatic phraseology.
In his early youth, Bromley had
nursed thoughts of studying music,
and hence his first acquaintance
with Magens. Through his agency
the young man had made the acquaintance
of gentlemen and ladies
acquainted with the theatrical profession,
not all of them of the highest
caste. One whole winter he had
spent in their exclusive society. He
had learnt their ways, their tastes,
their virtues, and their weaknesses.
Lobsters were amongst the tastes of
Mrs Magens. She cultivated them
with a sauce which was a virtue;
while her devotion to sprats, or to
boiled onions, may be classed among
the more venial weaknesses of that
estimable matron.
At length the door creaked up-stairs,
and a rustling overhead betokened
that such preparations were
completed as she had undertaken
for Bromley’s reception. A note in
G was heard quavering—as though
in innocence of heart.
“Bravo, my songstress,” murmured,
or rather soliloquised, Bromley.
“Now for the roulade;” and
there sure enough it came. “And
now for Floreski as she comes down-stairs.”
The thoughts of no medium could
have been more rapid. The voice,
or rather the remnant of a voice,
descended the stairs slowly and
musingly, warbling that well-known
and beautiful romance,
“Adieu, my Floreski, for ever,
And welcome the sorrows I prove.
Why, Fate, still delights thou to sever
Two bosoms united by love?”
The last notes floated in the air
as the door opened, and in rushed
Mrs Magens nicely got up in a drab
silk dress.
“How d’ye do, Mr Bromley, my
kyind friend?” She held out both
hands, and emphasised the “do,”
after the manner of genteel comedy.
“Charming as ever, or may I be
freckled,” responded Bromley, in
the same tone.
“’Tis ages since we met. Let
me look at ye.” She drew him towards
the window, and scanned his
features anxiously.
“A shade of care has fallen across
that brow since last we met. Let’s
see how long ago is it? A year—no—can
it be? Time spares us not,
Mr Bromley.”
“It spares the beautiful Magens.”
“Flatterer—the same as ever—the
same gay-hearted, kyind——”
“A truce, I beseech ye,” broke
in Bromley. “In yonder basket I
have brought an offering I fain
would make your household deities—some
few articles, little luxuries,
sent me from the country.”
The country always served as a
veil in which to envelope Bromley’s
presents to Mrs Magens. Had he
avowed the purchase, she would
have been offended or feigned offence.
But the country saved her pride.
“From the country, Mr Bromley—from
some kyind old aunt, I
warrant me, or, mayhap, a grandmother.
Jane!”
“Women are ever thoughtful,
lady,” responded Bromley.
Jane entered the room.
“Open the basket, maiden.”
“I knowed as it was full of good
things.”
“Pity the poor vulgarian!”
“Ingins, I do declare!” cried
the maiden. “My, what fine ingins!”
“The produce of your land,
doubtless, Mr Bromley.”
“And sprats—oh my!”
The mouth of Mrs Magens was
watering beyond concealment.
“And lobsters—oh my, what
lobsters!”
Mrs Magens could stand it no
longer.
“The cares of a household do
not degrade a woman, Mr Bromley.
B’ your leave, I’ll go and see them
lobsters properly served up.”
“Perhaps you will allow me to
partake your meal?”
“Of course,” screeched Mrs
Magens from the adjacent kitchen,
where, had Bromley seen her, he
would have discovered the skirts
of her garment already pinned
round the waist of the neat-handed
Phyllis.
It was not very long before the
repast was ready, and Bromley sat,
opposite his hostess, at a little table
spread with a clean cloth, decorated
with some spoons rescued from Mr
Commissioner, a nickel cruet-stand,
and two carnations.
“I do love this new Russian
fashion,” observed Mrs Magens, as
a species of grace.
Half a lobster fell before her.
“In that carpet-bag, I have ventured
to bring, for Angelo, a few
bottles of sherry, of a particular
quality, lately sent me by some
friends from the country.”
“How very thoughtful! Don’t
trouble yourself—allow me.” The
phraseology was less flowery, and
the bottle was soon uncorked.
At length the meal was over.
The onions had been discussed—a
portion of the feast had been reserved
for Angelo—another portion
allotted to Jane—candles were introduced—Bromley
was allowed to
light a cigar, and to mix a glass of
whisky and water—even Mrs Magens
sipped a glass of toddy, and the
room was soon as redolent as a tap.
“Now, Mr Bromley, I daresay,
when in that brilliant world which
your position throws open to you—in
that world of beauties and nobles,
you often long for the repose of an
evening like this, passed equably
in gentle converse, and with a frugal
but wholesome meal to which
fatigue has lent an appetite and
friendship a relish.”
“Very true, Mrs Magens. And
your society is especially delightful.
Angelo, poor man, is deprived of it.
He is very busy.”
“Very much so. The Fates are
propitious.”
“I hope he is making a pot of
money.”
“Fie, what a word! Heaven ever
befriends the just.”
“Money is wanted at present,
Mrs Magens. In these days, a man
with a good income is not a rich
man.”
“Indeed, it is true—too true.
The extravagance of the age is
hawful.”
Sometimes Mrs Magens was off
her guard, and as uncertain about
her aspirates as a beginner in the
Greek tongue.
“It is indeed,” answered Bromley,
“awful——”
“Awful,” repeated Mrs Magens,
correcting herself.
“Dress is ruinous for ladies.”
“Yet gaudy attire is no evidence
of a sound heart.”
The h was inserted this time with
a slam.
“Very true, often the reverse;
but it is no less ruinous.”
“The sums lavished on it are
enormous, Mr Bromley.”
“I daresay many ladies in your
profession spend large sums on their
toilettes.”
“Enormous; why, there’s Miss
Sepop of the Bower has a new
dress every night. Mrs Macvey of
the Blackfriars is never satisfied
without embroidery all round.”
“Whom do you consider the
best dressmaker, Mrs Magens?
your taste is so good.”
“Why, for myself, I should
say, Madame Mélanie Mickiewicz.
She is generally known as Madame
Mélanie. Poor thing! She
is a Hungarian princess. Her
story is harrowing—harrowing—Ha’nau——”
“I think I have heard it—poor
thing! Do you know her?”
“Intimately—a charming person—quite
the lady.”
“I suppose she has lots of stories—of
experience.”
“Delightful creature. She was
telling me the other day of the
awful effects this extravagance
produces on the high-born and
wealthy. Many young ladies run
up bills of enormous amounts, trusting
to their marriage for the means
of payment. But gentlemen do not
marry.”
“And their bills run on.”
“Exactly—you have hit my very
thought. There is one family, she
tells me, where mother and daughters
are deeply in debt to her, none
of them daring to confide in the
others for fear that the father and
husband—a very strict man—should
discover their embarrassments.”
“Did she tell you who they
were, Mrs Magens?”
“No; but she would if I asked
her, in a moment.”
“I daresay, Mrs Magens, your own
dresses amount to no small sum.”
“Oh, I am so very ’umble.”
“But have you no little bill with
your friend, no little sum Angelo
ignores?”
“How cunning you are, Mr
Bromley! However, it don’t amount
to a very large figure.”
“By the way, is not Madame
Mélanie a friend of Madame Carron’s?
I see them driving together.”
“Yes; I believe they knew each
other in Hungary. There, again,
Madame Carron is deeply in debt
to her.”
“But I thought she made such
enormous sums. Does she owe
more than you, Mrs Magens?”
“Oh, my liability is not more
than what you would call a ‘pony,’
Mr Bromley.”
“But how does Madame Carron
manage to contract debts?”
“She is obliged to dress expensively
for her parts, and she is very
charitable, especially to some worthless
relative who absorbs all her
income.”
“A husband?”
“No, a brother, I believe; although
Mélanie is so charming a
person it is horrible to be under an
obligation to her.”
“Well, Mrs Magens, I daresay
we can find some way of relieving
you from yours.”
“I could never think of such a
thing, Mr Bromley.”
“Well, do me a little favour; we
are old friends, Mrs Magens. Find
out the name of the family who are
so much indebted, and of Madame
Carron’s brother. Write to me.”
“Certainly, I will. There’s a
knock. Won’t you stay to see
Angelo?”
The door opened, and Mélanie
entered the room.
Lady Ilminster was a very
charming woman—kind, gracious,
and good-natured. Very rich
herself, the wife of a rich man,
she delighted in throwing about
her the pleasures which wealth
confers, and in inviting others
to share them.
She was sensuous; that is to say,
she loved good things. She loved
to gaze on pretty and happy faces,
and the harmony of colours. She
loved the sound of music, the smell
of flowers, the gliding sensation of
a boat; nay, she was not averse to a
good dinner, and quaffed iced champagne,
not to excess, but à discrétion.
She had no children herself,
and so surrounded herself
with those who loved her. These
were not toadies, but men of equal
rank, whose tastes chimed in with
her own. At first she was accused
of flirting; but the scandal soon
subsided, for it was pure scandal.
Even had there been any foundation,
a hostess so bountiful would
soon have overcome the charge;
but with Lady Ilminster there were
no thoughts of evil. She did a
thousand things others could not
do. She rode, she drove, she even
smoked, as fancy prompted her;
but she was faithful to her lord,
though, perhaps, her example stimulated
in others freedoms of which
she disapproved. Like many women
whose conduct is pure, her
conversation was not the reflex of
her conduct.
The party Lady Ilminster gave
was to be, as Lady Coxe had declared,
very “shwosi.” Her recovery
from indisposition was the
pretext assigned—one of those excuses
the hospitable find when, for
the sake of pleasure to others, or
for the maintenance of their social
renown, they think fit to display
their leading quality.
Preparations had been made,
astounding in their extravagance
and beauty. The grounds, which
sloped down to the river were covered
with flowers, tents, and temporary
palaces. Lady Ilminster
had taste enough to draw that delicate
line which separates fairy-land
from a tea-garden.
In one of these temporary structures
a large party of young ladies
and gentlemen were assembled eating
ices and drinking tea. Lady
Coxe was presiding in her magenta
dress, nodding from the heat, and
fanning with magenta fan her magenta
countenance. Florence was
talking merrily with a young
guardsman; but the conversation
generally assumed that tone which,
as Mr Whiting describes it, smacks
less of the lady than of the reduplicate
Φ.
“Let us take up our position here,”
said one young lady to her partner;
“I hate being with the swells.”
Lady Coxe heard this; her face
more magenta than ever. She
ranked herself with the nobility.
“Did you see Croquet in the
park yesterday,” asked another,
“with the prettiest pony?”
“Yes; but not such a habit as
Julia Fitzwiggins,” burst in a third.
“What a waist she has!”
“Quite like an hour-glass,” illustrates
a guardsman, aloud.
“I doubt if it be all real,” interposed
another young lady.
“What are you talking of?” asked
the guardsman.
“Of course the rest must be
filled with sand,” retorts the first.
“A sand-glass in every respect,”
murmured Whiting.
Lady Coxe nods, puffs, fans, and
smiles, not quite understanding
what Mr Whiting meant.
“Toole, who makes her habits,
declares she pads them with brown
paper,” resumed the guardsman.
“I’m sure I wouldn’t purchase a
waist at that price,” rejoined the
partner.
“You’ve a very pretty little one
of your own, Lady Janet.”
Oh, young ladies, young ladies,
why are you in such haste for the
freedom and abundance of married
life? Why compete for magenta
dresses with I won’t say what? Why
adopt the language of I won’t say
whom? You may attract young
men from the society of the first
by using the phraseology of the
second, but will you retain them
with you? They may in time give
up Richmond dinners and midnight
orgies with Thaïs, for a quiet meal,
loving looks, and worthy sentiments
with Lucretia. If this will
not attract them, so much the worse
for them and so much the better
for Lucretia. But Lucretia will
never win them by the arts of
Thaïs. Thaïs, on her own ground,
will always beat Lucretia. She
knows her weapons better. However
far Lucretia may go, she can
never come up to Thaïs. Thaïs has
a grammar of her own, a syntax,
and a prosody—winged words and
winged actions. Lucretia may study
the accidence, she can never master
the rhetoric. Lucretia may unveil
her ankle, Thaïs blushes not if her
garter be exposed. Think you Lord
Tom Noddy will marry Lucretia if
she shows him her garter? Thaïs
dresses expensively. Thousands
will not pay her milliner’s bills.
But at the end of six months or a
year Lord Tom Noddy leaves her,
and she retrenches.
But if Lucretia rivals Thaïs in
her dress, Lord Tom Noddy knows
that, if he marries her, six months
will not see the end of it. Sir
Cresswell Cresswell even cannot
untie the knots of ribbon and the
tangles of lace which figure on that
long lithographed linear document,
and the lands of Noddy will soon
melt in the basilisk smiles of furbelowed
Lucretia.
Thaïs is a dashing river, which
receives a thousand tributaries, the
drainings of the country and the
sewers of the town, till it is lost in
a morass or absorbed in the ocean.
But Lucretia should be a gentle
brook, pure from its source, content
to murmur innocently and calmly
onward, reflecting the light of heaven
in its pellucid waters, till it
mingles with and strengthens a
stronger current than itself. To
such as these, tranquil and tranquillising,
will man return for happiness
and peace, when, jaded with
the roar of cities and the struggle
of life, he seeks to reconcile his
existence with his Creator, to pursue
and accomplish his allotted
task before the night cometh.
“’Ow de do?” said Lady Coxe,
blandly, as Bromley appeared for
the first time.
Drawing a chair near the table,
he took his seat near Constance.
“You are very late,” she began.
“I have had so much to do to-day;
some one ought to write a Song
of the Shirt for me. Scratch, scratch,
scratch—in lieu of stitch, stitch,
stitch.”
“But recollect all the good you
are doing,” answered Constance.
“Yes, that is a reflection which
conveys great comfort to me.”
Augustus smiled somewhat in
his answer.
“Why are you always sarcastic?”
“I feel I am very sincere.”
“You are never in earnest.”
“You think so; you will find I
am in earnest in some things.”
“’Ow de do?” said Lady Coxe.
The couple looked up at the new-comer—it
was the Count.
“Oh, Congte, I did not know you
were asked.”
“I go to St James’s Club to read
papers and meet Gorillian Minister.
He great friend Lady Ilminster—bring
me and present me.”
“You dance this waltz with me,”
said Bromley hurriedly to Constance.
She was pale and red by turns,
and heard not what he said.
Touching her hand slightly, he
repeated his observation.
With an effort she answered—
“Oh yes; of course, I remember.”
The music struck up in the distance,
and the whole party left for
a distant lawn dedicated to dancing.
A circle was formed. A band was
stationed in a kiosk, and the first
strains had just begun, when Lady
Ilminster beckoned to Augustus.
“Do you know that Count Rabelais?”
“A little.”
“He is not a friend of yours?”
“No, I cannot say he is.”
“The Gorillian Minister brought
him. I have asked Madame Carron
to come and superintend some charades.
She told me that an acquaintance
of hers, Count Rabelais,
was a capital actor, and I asked
Don Marmosetto Uran y Babon
to bring him. Now the Bushman
Minister, who hates Don Marmosetto,
tells me this Count is very
disreputable.”
“Well, it can’t be helped now he’s
here. You had better set him at
charades.”
Augustus returned for his partner.
There she was, twirling in the arms
of the Count.
“He has asked her to take a turn,
but no. There they are stopping
opposite, as though to avoid me.
Shall I go and take her away, and
kick the Count? No good.”
The waltz was over, and Bromley,
with entire self-possession, walked
over to Constance.
“You have disappointed me this
time, Miss Coxe,” he said, good-naturedly.
“Will you dance the
next quadrille?”
“Mademoiselle is already engaged
to me,” grinned the Count.
“Then perhaps the waltz after
that.”
Bromley looked steadily at the
Count, in a manner the latter did
not seem to admire.
“Oh yes, yes,” almost screamed
Constance, whose countenance during
this scene had betrayed the
emotion she underwent.
Bromley, with a slight bow, turned
away. He cannot, this time, deny
his knowledge of her being engaged
to me.
He directed his steps to the room
used as a theatre, which abutted on
the garden. A verandah outside
was covered in for a greenroom.
The large oriel window was to serve
as a stage. Entering the house by
the ordinary doorway, he proceeded
to the body of the theatre. He arranged
a few of the ornaments, and
then sat down to muse.
There is certainly nothing so discreditable
as eavesdropping. Nothing
can justify it, and no possible
excuse can be alleged in palliation
of such an offence; but in this life
the best of us occasionally commit
an unjustifiable action. We have
all of us said foolish things which,
in the retirement of our bed-clothes,
flash across us, and make us burn
with shame. We have all put up
from friends with affronts which we
should have resented; for, alas! in
this age we are as afraid of being
called tetchy as of being considered
dishonourable.
We have all of us, except myself
and you, kind reader—we have all
of us, at least once in our lives, been
the authors of some little act which
Paley would not have approved, and
Butler would have refused to ratify.
So, on this occasion, Bromley was
guilty of a great moral offence. He
heard voices—voices not unknown
to him—and he listened.
“Not dancing, Achille?” spoke a
voice in French.
“The dancing is suspended for
a tombola, and I come to pay my
homage to my sister.”
“Hush, Achille, for Heaven’s
sake! We may be overheard.”
“And if so?”
“The object of my life would be
at an end. Yes, Achille, my pride
is foolish, ridiculous. To it I have
sacrificed my life, my position, nay,
my love. When my mother commended
you to me as the heir—the
ruined heir of our house—it was my
resolve that you should once again
resume the place my father had forfeited.
It might have been done
sooner, Achille, in time even for me
to enjoy the sweets of life. Already
had my pen achieved more than
success, when that fatal passion
which has destroyed us before, displayed
itself in you. For you I
have slaved and worn out my life.
For you have I polluted my existence
by publicity. For you, or
rather, for our name, I have sacrificed
the hopes and joys of a household.
Even now, ruined as we are,
my daily labour supplies your extravagance.
If once the stage could
be connected with your name,
Achille, my heart would break.”
“This is all very well, belle dame—very
pretty and very dramatic.
The charades have not yet commenced.
I meant to say that,
if overheard calling you my sister,
all would perceive the joke.”
“It must end some day, Achille.
Heaven make you kinder to that
lovely girl than to me. When once
you are married I shall retire to
beautiful Italy.”
“The dream of actresses.”
“Thank you, Achille. The actress
will not sully your name by her
presence.”
“Ah, bah! cousine. Once married
to the little Cogues, and, actress
or no actress, you share the booty.”
“Achille, the pride that has enabled
me to support you in affluence
will not admit of your affluence to
support me. It is you who have
chosen the way to riches by marriage.
Opposed to it at first, I
yielded to your wishes, though I
had offered to you many a more
honourable career. I presented to
you that detestable woman Mélanie
to inform you of the girl’s movements
and her friends. I disliked,
I loathed the intrigue, but it was
undertaken, and it must be accomplished,
for my strength is giving
way.”
“Mélanie is a cleverer woman
than you, Adelgonde. She has shown
me a way to success that you would
never have dreamt of.”
“Indeed! I hope it is honourable.”
“Honourable, inasmuch as it profits
her as well as myself.”
“What is it?”
Bromley bent forward to listen,
but the Count spoke in too low a
tone.
“Good heaven! Achille! Have
you stooped to this?” cried the
actress.
“Come, no heroics, belle dame.
I hear the music of the dance, and
I go to pulverise my rival.”
“Have we fallen as low as this?”
murmured the actress. Bromley
heard a window open, the retreating
steps of the Count, and the
chords of the distant music. Noiselessly
he left the theatre, and hurried
to the lawn.
The Count had reached Constance
about a minute before him.
She was standing with her mother
apart from the dance. No one was
near the group as Bromley approached.
“This is my dance, Miss Constance,”
he observed, offering his arm.
“Forgive me, Monsieur Bromley.
It is mine.”
“You must be mistaken, Count.
You yourself heard the engagement.”
“One word apart, Monsieur
Bromley.”
“Certainly.” The two retired
to a grove adjacent.
“You recollect the compact we
made, my friend, the night of the
ball at Conisbro’ House.”
“I recollect the compact you
proposed.”
“My part of it is complete, I
dare say, with your assistance.
Rely on me as regards la petite
belle-sœur la Florence. Mademoiselle
Constance, with the consent
of Miladi Cogues and her own, is
my affianced bride.”
“Indeed, Monsieur le Comte!
till this moment I believed she
was mine. You will pardon me
in your turn, but for such a statement
I must, under the circumstances,
demand a little corroboration—especially
as the waltz is
already begun.”
Taking the Count’s arm, he forced
rather than persuaded him to the
spot where Lady Coxe and her
daughter were still standing. Constance
was pale as death—Lady
Coxe a deep magenta.
“Lady Coxe, the Count tells me
I may congratulate you on having
secured him as a son-in-law. May
I do so?”
“’E ’as my full consent.”
“And, Miss Constance, may I
offer you my felicitations?”
“Y—y——” The word was never
completed, for Constance fell
to the ground.
As the Count hurried with the
crowd to assist the swooning girl,
a strong arm took his, and a firm
voice whispered in her ear. “Your
place is not here; it is with your
sister in the theatre.”
Rabelais turned towards the
young man with the eyes of a
frightened ape, and slunk away.
In a few minutes Bromley had
lifted Constance into her carriage,
and, with Florence and Lady Coxe,
was driving towards London.
The skirts had much contracted
for the occasion.
“Did ’e tell any one but you?”
asked Lady Coxe, in an anxious
whisper.
“No one.”
“Then, for ’eaven’s sake, don’t
breathe it to Sir Joshphat, and
take the carriage on for Dr Leadbitter.”
Bromley bowed reassuringly, and
hurried on, in the family coach, to
Bedford Square.
Dr Leadbitter was at home, and
Constance was raving in a fever.
There is a wonderful inclination
to practical paradox in the human
mind. If a man be dull, the world
charitably sets him down as sound.
If he be clever, the world, with
equal charity, sets him down as
unscrupulous. If a man be courteous,
he is instantly condemned as
designing; if brutal, lauded as
straightforward.
But if this natural impulse to
moral compensation be the general
bias of the human intellect, it assumes
twofold force in the special
case of medical men. Perhaps with
such men personal characteristics
are more prominently displayed;
perhaps the confidence of the patient
reposing in the individuality
of his advisers gives a factitious
importance to minor peculiarities.
Be it how it may, you have never
yet seen an Asclepiad whose manners
were not, in some respect, different
from those of his fellow-creatures.
Great or small, clever or stupid,
he has managed to inspire confidence,
or to impose successfully on
some circle of patients, however
contracted.
Amongst these he is an authority.
His individual influence is so great,
that but little trust is reposed in
his art when practised by another.
If in large practice, his patients
consider him deserving of it; if in
small practice, they esteem him an
ill-used man. He is their guide
and their friend as well as their
philosopher; godfather to their
children, trustee to their settlements,
legatee to their wills. He
is present at their births and deaths,
generally at their weddings. He
knows their pecuniary difficulties,
their family quarrels; the husband’s
distrust, or the wife’s jealousy; the
son’s folly, and the daughter’s infatuation.
He can go down the
street and schedule out each house
as to its specific non-observance of
the decalogue. He can tell you
who steals, who commits murder,
or who commits any other sin of
the first magnitude.
There are thousands of little
secrets confided to the diary of a
physician; thousands of fees to his
pocket, for little occurrences which,
like the fees, go no further than
himself.
By the highest he is treated almost
as an equal; by the wisest he
is respected as a man of science and
of power. If not profoundly versed
in our constitution, he knows us in
our moments of weakness, and that
knowledge alone makes him the
master of most of us.
But before we admit him to this
position, we minutely examine his
qualities, or accept the judgment
of them passed by the universal
suffrage of mortal men.
Science of anatomy is sufficient
for the surgeon; but science of the
world is the best passport for the
medical man.
We require him to cure our bodies—most
doctors can do that.
But we occasionally require from
him medicaments for our minds.
This requires the skill of a man of
the world.
From such premises we conclude
that perfection in art is not the
keystone of medical fame. The serpent
was dedicated to Æsculapius,
the emblem of his foresight as well
as of his craft. Nor would the
symbol misrepresent the physicians
of Babylon.
Sir Erasistratus will be enabled
to discover that Duke Antiochus is
fearfully in love with Countess
Stratonice. Sir Paulus will gain
favour with the patrons of art by
the number of statues decorating
his country-place at Ægina. Sir
Democritus exposes somnambulism,
mesmerism, homœopathy, and spirit-rapping.
Dr Andrew Machaon
displays administrative qualities
in the army medical department;
while Sir Podalirius, K.C.B., after
exhibiting geniality at the mess-table
and intrepidity in the field,
marries the daughter of King Damætas,
and sets up in Grosvenor Square.
Dr Chrysippus, who has not yet
attained the purple, manages to
oppose the dogmatists, and to soar
into practice by his agreeable conversation
and sparkling jests. Heraclitus
is the man-hater, declines
to visit sovereigns, and frightens
poor women into new diseases by a
savage laugh and peremptory brutality.
Sir Oribasius, who ushers
young peers into the world, endears
himself to the mothers by affectionate
epithets and profuse gossip; and
Sir Sextus Empiricus drives a flourishing
trade and a chariot by periodic
journeys to the equator, and
the administration of stimulants
to statesmen. All have some quality
independent of their art. Few
rely on their craft, and their craft
alone, for practice or popularity,
competency or knighthood. Writers
require an ars celare artem;
physicians an art to thrust their
skill into prominence. In France
this is considered charlatanerie; in
England it is styled humbug. Yet
what great man is, consciously or
unconsciously, free from this vice?
Has Bumcombe no place in our
social, political, scientific, or ecclesiastical
system?
Some few have tried the narrow,
narrow path. They labour in their
youth, they labour in their manhood.
“They live forgotten—they
die forlorn.” An hospital is the
scene of their triumphs, a parish-rate
forms their emolument. The
parson and the overseer compose
their society, and the blessings of
the poor their fame.
Yet there are first-rate men amidst
the great physicians of Babylon.
Heaven bless them! How would
the young Babylonians be born
without them, or how could the
Babylonian ladies take their strong
waters innocuously?
But Dr Leadbitter was an exception
to every rule.
He was devoted to the science of
medicine. It absorbed his whole
mind; and, indeed, together with
dinners and the price-list, formed
the staple of his conversation.
He lived near an hospital; and
spent a useful life, pleasantly to
himself, in constant attention to
revolting diseases.
The hospital had been endowed
chiefly from his own purse—an expenditure
owning a double origin
in his charity and his love of
science.
Hitherto he had never been permitted
to sate himself sufficiently
in the least agreeable works of his
profession. His universal popularity
had induced his colleagues in
other hospitals to take from him
this portion of his duties. To Dr
Leadbitter this indulgence was
purgatory. The dirtier the patient,
the more complicated his disorder,
the more grateful was the treatment
to this worthy man. Pity and love
of science formed a curious combination
in his phrenology. His professional
skill, therefore, had reached
a height where envy had ceased to
criticise or malice to detract. Yet,
unknowingly to himself, he possessed
other than technical qualities;
and these caused him to be
sought after by those whose search
is considered honourable.
In his career Leadbitter had
studied deeply and variously. In
his ideas every knowledge tended
to enhance the value of his heart.
So intimate is the connection of
our moral and physical structure,
that to the eye of the accomplished
physician few disorders of our frame
can be disconnected from some indirect
and intellectual cause. As
mental emotions form the features
of manhood, so is the innermost
thought of man betrayed by some
external indication.
Those best practised to command
expression can ill disguise their
feelings from the true physiologist.
The smile is forced that dissembles
anger, the gravity overcharged that
suppresses mirth.
However perfect the acting, there
are some, even among mortals, to
whose far-seeing eye acting can
never compete with nature. Such
a one was Dr Leadbitter, fat, foolish,
as he looked. In him intuitive
perception was refined by rare and
delicate study. To know the
diseases of a singer he would hear
her song, of an orator his speech.
He would examine the portrait of
a statesman, and study his biography,
then tell you his organic
disorders. Nor was his rare skill
unknown or unappreciated. To
him would the singer and statesman
repair, as a last resource, glad
to stand in his anteroom and vie
with a pauper for an audience.
Yet Leadbitter, though astute,
was simple. He made more by
speculation than by his profession.
His kindness of heart and his
passion for disagreeable affections
gave to the pauper, in his eyes, a
higher value than the statesman.
He might have been a baronet, but
he had no wife to urge him thereunto.
A comfortable dinner was
his sole vice, a few good cases his
only desire.
He wore the traditional black
clothes and white neckcloth, the
capacious watch in the capacious
fob. He carried the rattan with
the gold knob, and, at times, even
buckles in his shoes.
A little flower or sprig bedecked
his upper button-hole. His walk
was a trot, and a smile ever on
his lips.
Moreover, nothing could be more
commonplace than his ordinary
conversation. A few truisms, parliamentary
interjections, many
technical references. His action
was as that of one feeling a pulse,
and he was always in a hurry to
turn away and leave the room.
“Won’t you have a glass of wine,
Mr Bromley?” asked the doctor,
hospitably.
“Thanks, I am going to dine
later.”
“Commodeque, Erasistratus dixit,
sæpe, interiore parte humorem non
requirente, os et fauces requirere.”
Dr Leadbitter lost no time in
getting into the carriage.
The doctor overcame the gourmet,
and, though at dinner, the voice
of duty and of friendship prevailed.
“My dear doctor,” said Bromley,
“Miss Constance has fallen very
ill. She fell to the ground at Lady
Ilminster’s breakfast. She was insensible
all the way home. I suppose
they have put her to bed, for
I drove off at once for you.”
“Hear, hear!” responded the
doctor.
“Now, doctor, between ourselves,
I think Miss Constance has something
on her mind.”
“Hear, hear! Eros, I suppose.
Soon cured.”
“Something more than that.”
“Nothing cryptogamic, I hope?”
“I have a moral certainty of the
cause, but no legal evidence yet.
If you will accept my assurance
without seeking any corroboration,
I will tell you my surmises—to me
certainties—which, perhaps, may
guide you in your treatment.”
“Hear, hear!”
“My impression is that Lady
Coxe and Miss Constance Coxe are
deeply in debt to Madame Mélanie
the dressmaker. They are
afraid to own it to Sir Jehoshaphat.
Count Rabelais has got possession
of the secret, and holds it in
terrorem over Constance.
“He has conciliated the friendship
and advocacy of Lady Coxe—perhaps
by the same means; and
he has extorted from Constance a
promise of marriage. Now, what
would you advise?
“The whole thing should be
told to Sir Jehoshaphat. Yet, I
think, he would never forgive
Lady Coxe, whatever treatment he
might pursue towards his daughter.
I have known him from boyhood.
His temperament is bilious and
nervous. About money matters,
though more than liberal, he is
obdurate.”
“At any rate, it would be better
avoided, for the present at least.”
“Hear, hear!”
“I should think the woman
Mélanie might be frightened for
having inveigled a girl under age.”
“Hear, hear! But suppose
Lady Coxe knew of her daughter’s
debts?”
“But perhaps she does not. As
soon as I can get my surmises into
shape, I will, with your permission,
consult you.”
“Hear, hear! Come to me
directly you have any news—day
or night. Meanwhile, I will pursue
the soothing system—calming
draughts. I shall tell Lady Coxe
at once that I know the whole
story. That will keep her quiet.”
By this time the carriage had
again arrived in Grosvenor Square.
“How is Miss Constance?”
“Very bad, sir.”
“Hear, hear!” murmured the
doctor, mournfully.
Constance was in a high fever.
Bromley found a letter on his
table. He opened it. It was but
a few lines.
“My dear Friend,—The family
is that of Sir J. Coxe, Bart., M.P.,
the banker. Her ladyship owes
about £2000; her daughter Constance
about £900. The rest of the
news I hope to obtain in a day or
two.—Yours very sincerely,
“K. M.”
A paper fluttered forth and fell
to the ground. Bromley picked
it up. It was folded, flimsy as a
bank-note. He opened it. It was
headed with the image and superscription
of Madame Mélanie. Below
were items representing a total
of £27, 4s. 8d.
“Hear, hear! Well, you’ve not
lost much time, Mr Bromley,” said
the doctor, as Bromley entered the
room where he was resuming his
interrupted meal.
“How have you found Miss
Constance?”
“I can say nothing till to-morrow.
However, I do not think
there is much to fear. Lady Coxe
will do all I tell her. I gave her
a quietus, by informing her I knew
of all her difficulties. It rather
relieved her, I think. Experimentum
periculosum. It succeeded,
however.”
“One glass of wine? Lætificat
cor hominis.”
“Thank you, I have not yet dined.”
“Well, I’ll ask you again—the
third time of asking, and you’ll
take one. Three scruples make
one dram! Ho, ho! Hear, hear!”
He poured out a bumper of burgundy,
and motioned his young
friend to proceed.
“Since leaving you, my suspicions
have been confirmed.”
Bromley showed the letter, and
told Dr Leadbitter the whole story.
“Hear, hear, young man,” said
the doctor, as his young friend
finished. “The disease is plainer
than the remedy.”
“The sum is very large, or I
could manage it.”
“I should not allow Constance
to pay her—at least for some time.
I am an old man. You are a
young one. I should not wonder
if there were some few figures in
my favour at Coutts’s. Sir Jehoshaphat
is an old friend of mine—as
honourable a man as ever
lived. Good digestion, though bilious.
I should like to break the
force of the blow.”
Sir Jehoshaphat Coxe sallied
forth the next morning with a
heavy heart and a glowing brow.
He marched down Grosvenor
Street slowly. At length he reached
the house of Madame Mélanie.
With stately steps, and firm determination,
he walked up the
stairs, and entered the room of the
dressmaker. She received him with
a curtsy and a smile.
“Woman!” he burst out, “I
hear you have profited by the folly
of an old woman and the imprudence
of a young one. Give me the
bills of my wife and daughter that
I may pay them.”
“They owe me nothing, Monsieur.”
“What, woman! do you still
carry on the farce? They themselves
have told me of this.”
“They owe me nothing, Sir Jehoshaphat.
Their bills were paid
an hour since.”
“By whom?”
“By Mr Augustus Bromley.”
The sequel is well known to my
readers. Mr Bromley espoused
Miss Constance. He has been
standing for a county, and the result
of the poll is expected by
telegraph this evening.
Madame Mélanie having, in a
moment of forgetfulness, returned
to her old habits, and abstracted a
small casket from the house of one
of her customers, is expiating her
crimes in a spot set aside for such
purposes. Count Rabelais has disappeared
from the social horizon,
and is supposed to be gaining an
honest livelihood as a courier.
Madame Carron, under the advice
of Dr Leadbitter, laid aside
her family pride, and married a
very respectable impresario, who
turns her talents to advantage, and
lays by her earnings for that rainy
day to which managers more than
ordinary mortals are liable. Lady
Coxe will not contract any more
debts, though she still nourishes a
partiality for port. Florence married
on the same day as her sister,
and Letitia seems likely to justify
the surmise of Count Rabelais, by
blessing the hearth of Mr Whiting.
OUR NEW DOCTOR.
223
There was great excitement at
Mudford when it was ascertained
beyond a doubt that we were really
going to have a New Doctor. Poor
old Mole, who was bidding fair to
shortly attain the proud position of
“Oldest Inhabitant,” had at length
found it useless to struggle longer
with his infirmities, and had advertised
his practice for sale to the
best bidder. I don’t think he
would ever have given in; but his
old pony, which had carried him
well and faithfully for more than
twenty years, was gone at last, and
he felt that he could never mount
another. His hands were so crippled
that he could not drive; and,
besides, he had no horse and gig—nor
would his practice pay for keeping
one; and as for walking, the
state of his poor old feet and legs
rendered that quite out of the question.
So he did the best thing he
could do—sold his practice; and,
in spite of the teetotallers, I verily
believe that, if he had stopped at
Mudford and spent the whole of
his time, as he had previously spent
nine-tenths of it, with his gin-and-water
and pipe, in his own special
corner at the White Hart, he would
be there, as well as ever, at the
present moment, and would be
able to enjoy many a good growl,
and tell many a prosy tale, for years
to come yet. But, alas! he did not
stop here. He left the old place
altogether, and retired to his native
village, to be killed with care and
fidgets by three old maiden sisters.
Poor old Mole! He had come into
Mudford I don’t know how many
years ago—for it was before even
my time—a smart, buckish, good-looking
young fellow, in top-boots
and spotless white neckcloth; telling
a good story, singing a good
song, fond of the ladies, fond of his
glass, fond of sport, and up to any
hounds. But, dear me! it was all
changed, except the neckcloth and
the glass, which endured to the
end; and he left the place a poor,
testy, prosy, gouty old bachelor,
with no one to care for or regard
him, except the few who remembered
what he had been, or who
took the trouble to look for the
genuine good qualities which lay
beneath the prickly outer rind.
But enough of Mole: for what
have we to do with old friends in
this world? When they go away
or die, there’s an end of ’em. And
our business is, to turn our attention
to the new-comers, and try
what we can get out of them in
the way of money, custom, amusement,
or whatever else they may be
able to give us to our advantage.
So farewell to poor old Mole, my
dear old brother fogy; and attention
for his successor!
As intimated, I am an old fogy.
I have no business to attend to, no
wife nor family to bother me, and
but few means of passing away my
time. In the mornings I wade
through the papers at the Reading-room,
and afterwards discuss their
contents with others of my own
stamp. I confess that the tradesmen
and business people who run
in for half an hour to glance at the
news, get pretty considerably annoyed
at being interrupted while
reading, by our loud, and—as far
as Rooks is concerned, the most
wrong-headed fellow I ever knew—often
stupid and illogical arguments:
and they not unfrequently
dare to tell us, without scruple,
that the room is for reading in, and
not for talking in. But I, for my
part, take no notice of them; for
is not my subscription as good as
theirs? And is not the passing of
my time of far more consequence
to me than the getting through
theirs is to them, who have a hundred
other things to do, and who
ought to be attending to their business
instead of reading the papers
in the mornings? Right or wrong,
I do it; and I intend to keep doing
it: and if Broad and Brown don’t
like it, they may leave it—and a
good thing for them, too; for I
happen to know that Brown’s business
is falling off considerably; and
the new shop at the corner is certain
to injure Broad: it is time for
them to put their shoulders to the
wheel, I can tell them! Well, so
I get on until dinner, and then a
glass of port and a snooze pass the
time until tea. After that, there
is my pipe and glass of grog at
the White Hart, in the chair opposite
to old Mole’s—now, alas! no
longer sacred to his use, but occupied
by any chance customer who
may happen to drop in. Disagreeable
to me the company is sometimes—noisy,
uncongenial, disrespectful.
Things in this world
change for the worse every day.
Heigho!
These are my principal employments,
with an occasional whist-party
of an evening. Bright oases
in the desert of my life are these
evenings when they do come; but,
to my sorrow, they are few and far
between. People sit so late and
drink so much grog at these parties,
that wives don’t like ’em. And,
besides, there are really not above
four people in the place who can
play a rubber. As for taking a
hand, with such a person as Jones
or Johnson for a partner, I vow I
would rather never touch a card
again! And the worst of it is, the
wretches actually think they know
the game! I had Jones for a partner
once, and lost 17s. 6d. by his
confounded stupidity. Catch me
placing myself twice in such a position!
If I were absolute monarch
of this country, I would make a
law that any man who takes the
money out of another’s pocket by
such gross ignorance and stupidity,
should be considered guilty of felony—just
as the poor, overworked
engine-driver, who once in his life
makes a blunder by which somebody
is killed, is found guilty of
manslaughter!
Mudford is not a large nor a gay
place; on the contrary, it is a particularly
small and dull one: so
that, with such a limited round of
amusements as is available to me,
it is no wonder, and not at all a
thing to be ashamed of, that I
should have been considerably interested
in the question, what the
New Doctor would be like. Of
course, it was a matter of some importance
to me whether he would
talk like a reasonable man at the
Reading-room in the mornings;
and whether he would have the
nous to listen to and appreciate
my stories, when I am in the humour
for telling them in the evenings.
The people here, in this
little out-of-the-way place, are so
confoundedly narrow in their views
and ideas, that they take no interest
in anything outside their
own little, paltry, peddling sphere
of action; and I have really not
had a listener for a very long time,
except a chance commercial traveller
now and then—not even
poor old Mole, who was always for
spinning his own prosy old yarns,
that I was sick and tired of years
and years ago. He could never see,
poor old fellow, how people laughed
at him about them! Then I was
anxious as to whether the New
Doctor would understand the treatment
of my complaint, which I
have suffered from for so many
years, and which nobody knew anything
about except old Mole: for,
as for putting myself into the hands
of that ignorant fellow Green, who
can neither spell correctly nor write
grammatically, or of that methodistical
quack Higgins, I might as
well go and order my coffin at once.
Then, of course, it was a matter of
importance to me whether he would
be able to take a hand at whist
like a Christian; and, above all,
whether he would give a nice little
snug card-party himself now and
then; for, as I have already said,
parties of that sort had become very
scarce, owing to the late hours and
the expense. I do not much wonder
at it; for Stevens, and Jones,
and Johnson, and Briggs, and one
or two more I could mention, will
never go home till morning, if they
are winning; and when they are
losing, they are never satisfied without
their revenge: and the amount
they do guzzle of an evening, at the
expense of other people, is certainly
most extraordinary. I gave a whist-party
myself once; but I shan’t do
it again in a hurry, for I know
what it is. They drank enough to
last me for a twelvemonth: and I
was so annoyed about one thing
and the other, that I could not
play; or, I should rather say, I never
held a hand for the evening; and
I positively heard the scoundrels
laughing at me as they left my door,
and went down the street! No,
I shan’t give another party in a
hurry: men of my means, who have
barely enough for their own little
comforts and indulgences, can’t be
expected to do it.
Altogether, then, it is evident that
I had good reasons for feeling interested
as to what sort of person the
New Doctor would be; but I was
not the only one to whom it was
a subject of speculation. Curiosity
is the mark of vulgar people, and
vulgar enough they are in Mudford,
in all conscience. And there were
some, too, besides myself, who really
had reasons for feeling interested in
the subject. There was Simpkins,
the indefatigable Secretary of the
Rifle Corps, who was all alive at the
idea of getting an effective member
and annual subscriber; and Timmins,
the equally indefatigable
Secretary of the Literary Institution,
who was sanguine that the
New Doctor would give a lecture
during the ensuing season, and who
was actually holding back the syllabus
from the press until he had
seen him on the subject. Then
there was Rooks, the only chess-player
in the place, who, not having
anybody to play with him, is always
bragging of the game, and his skill
thereat, and depreciating whist in
an equal degree. He always seizes
the ‘Illustrated London News’
directly it comes into the Reading-room,
turns to the chess problems
first of all, and stays half an hour
poring over them, before he will
look at the pictures himself or
allow anybody else to do so. He
pretended to be very anxious that
the new-comer should be a chess-player;
but I verily believe that
his anxiety was all the other way,
and that he most devoutly hoped
to the contrary: for I don’t believe
Rooks can play the game any more
than I can. At all events, nobody
ever heard of his playing; and
when old Harding, the Collector of
Excise, spent an evening here—a
good player he is, as everybody
knows—and, at my instigation, sent
a very polite note to Rooks, inviting
him to play a game at the White
Hart, he never came near the place;
and Boots brought back word that
Mr Rooks was exceedingly sorry,
but he was gone to bed very bad
with a headache. I don’t believe
he ever had a headache in his life!
Then there was Rowe, who had
been fool enough to buy a boat that
was the worry and torment of his
life, and that cost him just as much
as a horse or a wife. It was always
getting into scrapes and difficulties
somehow: the oars would get lost;
and the rudder would get broken;
and the painter—whatever that may
be—would get cut; and the boat
would get capsized; and the boys
were always taking her away, and
making her in a mess, and never
bringing her back again. Poor Rowe
was always in trouble with her
some way or other, and positively
got no peace of his life for her. The
fact is that Mudford is no place for
a boat, and no one but a donkey
would have brought one here; for
I verily believe that we have only
got the tide for one hour out of the
twenty-four, and that only once a fortnight
or so; and then it is always
running up when you want
to go down the river, and down
when you want to go up; and it is
always leaving you stuck upon
banks and shoals, so that you have
to wade out through the mud,
which takes you up to your middle.
At least, I judge so from what I
see and hear; for catch me going
out boating in this place, if you
can! Well, Rowe thought that
perhaps the New Doctor would go
halves in his precious hobby, and
would join him in rubbing all the
skin off his hands in pulling that
tub of his up and down against the
tide. Then there was Driver, who
is for ever boring one about subscriptions
for the Cricket Club,
which, as far as I can see, has no
existence, except at the annual
supper, at the close of what they
are pleased to call their season;
when members who have never
handled a bat since they were
schoolboys—if they did then—come
and handle a knife and fork to
perfection, and drink punch, and
make speeches about the “fine
manly English game,” until you
would think that the glory and
prosperity of the country depended
entirely upon the prowess of the
members of the Mudford Club;
who talk most inexorably of the
fines that shall be enforced, and
most undauntedly of the matches
that shall be played, in the next
season; but who, of course, only
talk more and do less with each
succeeding year. Driver, then, was
full of hopes that the new-comer
would be a cricketer; that he would
help him to worry all the people
in the place for subscriptions, and
would play single-wicket matches
with him on the cricket evenings,
when nobody else came near the
ground.
And Grindley, again, was just as
bad; indeed, I don’t know whether
he wasn’t worse than any of them.
He has got his house full of musical
instruments of every sort and
description, and can’t play as much
as ‘God Save the Queen’ on any
one of them. He is always talking
of “staccatoes,” and “fugues,”
and “musical intervals,” and
“thorough bass,” and I don’t know
what all, though his voice is like a
cracked penny-trumpet, and he has
no more idea of joining in a chorus
than a jackass. He went about
the town boring everybody by
squeaking out with his voice that
was enough to set your teeth on
edge, “I say, won’t it be nice if the
New Doctor should be musical?”
I suppose though, that after all
nobody was so much interested
about the new-comer as the young
unmarried ladies,—except the middle-aged
unmarried ladies, who were
more interested still. I don’t blame
them, poor creatures! for really it
is very little chance they have of
getting husbands at Mudford, except
when strangers or visitors come
to the place. There are some half-dozen
families or so certainly, whose
pure ichor is so superior to the vulgar
blood that runs, or stagnates, in
the veins of the common inhabitants
of Mudford, who do occasionally
intermarry, once in ten or fifteen
years or so, like the royal families
of Europe, when a prince and princess
of their illustrious houses happen
to be of a marriageable age at
the same time. The coincidence is
of rare occurrence, but it does happen
occasionally. And the boys
and girls of the utterly plebeian
class, of course, here as elsewhere,
walk out together in the evenings,
and on Sunday afternoons; and
the young farmer lads in the
neighbourhood, and the young masons,
and all those, go courting to
the servant-maids in the evenings,
at the back-doors and in the back-kitchens;
and they get married before
they know what they are about.
But with the middle classes it is
different; and I don’t see that the
poor girls have got a chance, except
when some friend or relative at a
distance will have them on a visit,
or when a stranger happens to come
into the town;—rare chances these.
As for the young men of the place,
who have been flirting with ’em,
and kissing ’em, and seeing ’em flirted
with and kissed by brother Jack
and cousin Tom, and all the rest,
ever since they were children, why,
they would as soon think of seeing
anything a fellow could fall in love
with in their own sisters. (I speak,
as every one will understand, of
those who have no money; the few
that have, of course, nobody can
help loving, and they go off fast
enough.) And so it happens that
any fresh young man, coming into
the town, is to these poor creatures
quite a god-send: and though we
know nothing else of the New Doctor,
it had been ascertained, beyond
a doubt, through old Mole, that he
was young and unmarried.
Of course the young ladies did
not make an old fellow like me a
confidant of their hopes; but as I
hobbled up or down the street, I
could perceive that wherever two
or three bonnets, or turban-hats, as
I believe the vile things are called,
were met together, there was a
more than usually vivacious giggle,
which showed me plainly enough
what was the subject of conversation.
On the days, too, when the
Doctor began to be expected, about
the time that the omnibus arrives
in the afternoons, there were always
several very neat boots and white
stockings to be seen in the street;
and those girls of Johnson’s—who
never seem to have anything to do
in their own house, though I know
they keep but one servant, or rather
slavey, and their mother is always
up to her elbows in kitchen-work,
so that she can find no time to read,
or do anything else but talk, and is
the most uninformed woman of my
acquaintance—those girls took care
to have some business with Mrs
Cook, of the White Hart, about the
forthcoming Rifle Corps Bazaar, and
so have an excuse for being in her
little private sitting-room, that looks
out upon the street, at the time
when the omnibus arrives. Poor
old Mole! he could neither march
nor lecture, row, nor play at chess
or cricket: he had no more idea of
music than a cow; his day for courting
or getting married had long
passed by; and he was fit for nothing
but to make up gout pills, smoke
his pipe, drink his gin-and-water,
and tell his prosy old stories in his
corner at the White Hart; and so
all these people thought of course
that they would be sure to have a
change for the better in the New
Doctor.
At length came the day which
was definitely fixed for the Doctor’s
coming. It had been put off several
times for some reasons of his
own, but now he was to come without
fail. We knew it from Mole,
who had received a letter from the
New Doctor, whose name, I may as
well mention here, was Smith,—if
that can be called a name at all—saying
that he should positively
arrive on that day, and expressing
a hope that Mole would wait, and
introduce him to his patients. But
Mole would not wait any longer,
for he had given up his house, and
was living at expenses at the hotel;
so he went away to his sisters, the
three old maids, and left Mr Smith
to introduce himself in the best
way he could.
It so happened that, on the day
when the New Doctor was to arrive,
I could not compose myself exactly
to my usual after-dinner nap, all
owing to that fool of a servant, who
will never learn to send up a dinner
properly; and so I took my stick,
and clopped away down to the
White Hart, to try whether a glass
of gin-and-water would do me good;
and it so happened, oddly enough,
that I got down there just exactly
at the time the omnibus usually
arrives. For you must know that
the old respectable coach, which
lingered with us after it had disappeared
from the rest of the world,
is gone at length, and its place is
usurped by one of those vile innovations,
an omnibus—or ’bus, as it is
called in the wretched jargon of the
present day. I hate those sneaking
low-lifed things more than I do
the very railways themselves, which
they are employed to attend on.
And so, instead of the handsome
stylish coach, that a gentleman might
ride on without shame, with its
dashing four-in-hand, we have got
this dirty, shabby, yellow thing,
with its unicorn team of skin and
bone, a driver that old Jack Simons,
the coachman, would not have had
for a stable-helper, and an urchin for
guard, who would be a disgrace to a
dung-cart!
As I made my way down the
street, it was easy to see, by the
unusual number of people out, that
something strange was expected.
Peters, of course, was at the hotel
door; but then he always is there
when the ’bus arrives, for he fancies
that he is great upon the subject of
horses; and every day, like a fool,
throws away threepence or fourpence,
which I know he can ill afford,
in drink for the driver, who knows
nearly as little about horse-flesh as
he does himself, in order that he
may talk to him about the leader’s
mouth, and the off wheeler’s shoulder,
and Hobb’s colt, and that young
mare of Timmins’s. He was there
as a matter of course, and so was
Paul, who is just as regular an attendant,
and waits about every day
to see who comes and who goes, and
what parcels there are, and whom
they are for, and how much there
is to pay on them. These two
never miss; but that old woman,
Gabriel Mullins, was there also,
waiting to see the “New Doctor,”
that he might go gabble-gabble about
him all over the place. And Muggins,
whom no man ever saw, except
on Sundays, with his coat or
without his apron, was standing
outside his shop-door, with his
hands in his pockets, and that perpetual
smirk upon his countenance,
looking out for the ’bus. While
Cox, the bookseller and stationer,
who must, I am sure, live upon the
smell of his wares, for nobody in
Mudford, as far as I can see, ever
reads or writes, was peering out between
those eternal prints in his
window, making belief that he was
too busy, or too much above vulgar
curiosity, to come and look out
openly and honestly like Muggins.
It takes me some time to get down
to the White Hart, so that I had
leisure to look about me; and I saw
the two Miss MacClinkers, the Surveyor’s
daughters, walking down the
street, and finding an excuse for
loitering in each dowdy shop window,
every article in which they
must know by heart, for they are in
the street often enough, and can
use their eyes well enough, I’m
sure: there they were, with their
outrageous crinolines, showing their
anatomical-looking legs in a way
that could not fail to attract the attention
of any stranger coming up
the street on the omnibus, whether
doctor or not. The Miss Johnsons,
you may be sure, were in
Mrs Cook’s front parlour discussing
the work for the bazaar, as they had
been every afternoon for a week
past. And I hope—for the sake of
Miss Trimlett, the dressmaker opposite,
who, though she has been
engaged for the last twenty years,
and could not want another lover,
was looking out from behind the
geraniums in the ground-floor window—that
those young girls at the
window above, her assistants and
apprentices, worked by the piece,
and not by the day; for it was one
stitch and two minutes’ giggle, and
another stitch and another two
minutes’ giggle with them as long
as I looked. And even old Miss
Whittaker, who has been confined
to her bed for the last three years
with laziness and swollen legs, had
sent over that extra sharp little
girl of hers, to see whether the New
Doctor was come.
I went into the White Hart parlour,
sat down at my accustomed
side of the fire, and had the glass
of gin-and-water for which I had
come. Wretched spirit they do
keep there now, to be sure! and
the water is never half boiling! It
did not use to be so in old Cook’s
time. There is some extraordinary
fatality about it; but as I never require
the fire-shovel, and am in constant
want of the poker, the former
is always placed close to my hands,
and the latter on the opposite side
of the fireplace, so that I cannot
reach it without rising from my
chair,—a work of time and difficulty
to me, and involving the
necessity of turning down Mrs
Cook’s cat, which always gets upon
my knee with my full consent.
It is invariably the case, and of
course there was no exception to
the rule now; so I had to rise as
usual to get the poker, and at the
very moment when I was on my
legs, the ’bus drove up to the door!
Of course, I could not help looking
out of window to see it then; and
to my great joy—for I am delighted
when idle curiosity is baffled—there
was not a single passenger
there, except little Philips, the
commercial traveller, and fat Mrs
Biggs, of Great Pigton. I am the
best-natured man in the world, as
a general rule; but I confess I was
glad of this, and chuckled to myself,
as I ordered another glass of
grog on the strength of it.
Next morning, however, as I
went down the street as usual, to
look at the papers, everybody was
all alive with the news, that the New
Doctor had arrived, and in a most
strange and unaccountable manner.
The omnibus had not brought him,
as we know; there was no other
public conveyance; and no private
nor posting carriage had entered
the town during the night; for old
Mrs Thomas, who was awake all
night with the toothache, was ready
to swear that no carriage had passed
through the street; and the pikeman,
who keeps the turnpike gate
at the entrance of the village (the
inhabitants of the place are so
proud of it, that they would lynch
me if they knew that I called it a
village, but it really is little more),
actually did swear—and he was examined
and cross-examined enough
on the subject—that the gate had
been locked from twelve at night
until seven the next morning, and
he was certain that no carriage had
passed through. But that the Doctor
had really come there was no
doubt, for one or two persons had
seen him in the morning; and
among the rest Miss Cringle, who
lives opposite, and who had stated,
in a note written to Mrs Jones, while
she was taking her breakfast, that
she had positively seen Mr Smith
that morning, looking out of his
first-floor window.
I ought to have stated before that
the New Doctor had taken the house
which old Mole had occupied; and
that he had also bought his furniture
as well as his patients. Very
little there was of either of them;
and very little bought them. Both
purchases were very old and rickety;
but though Mr Smith might possibly
be able to dine off the tables,
it was not likely that he would ever
get much to put upon them out of
the patients; for they never had
anything but the gout, which is said
to keep away every other disease;
and they had each of them taken
in a stock of about a peck of his
celebrated gout-pills from old Mole,
before he left the place. But Mole
himself has told me that the new
doctor, in his correspondence,
scarcely made any inquiry about
the practice or the furniture, but
was most particular about the situation
of the house, making it a sine
qua non that it should be in a quiet,
retired situation. Mole’s description
of the house appeared to suit
him, and it was retired enough and
quiet enough in all conscience; indeed,
it would have found it difficult
to be anything else in Mudford.
It is a square detached house, situated
in the very outskirts of the
place, and not to be overlooked,
except from Miss Cringle’s window,
which commands a magnificent view
of the front door.
The men in Mudford are sociable
enough among themselves; but the
women are the very deuce! I suppose
you would hardly find any
two in the place agreeing that they
stand on precisely the same social
level. Green the surgeon and apothecary,
and Ferris the ironmonger
and tinman, are as friendly as possible
when they meet; and indeed,
Ferris is by far better educated
and better informed than Green,
who is one of the most ignorant
men I know. To tell the truth,
I am afraid that Ferris is rather
too much above his business, and
that Potts, that conceited little
monkey, who was his apprentice,
and has now set up in opposition
to him, will make him find it out
before long. Well, Green and Ferris
are friendly enough, as I said;
but catch Mrs Green speaking to
Mrs Ferris in the same way! Oh,
dear, no! And White and Black,
the two lawyers, though they are
always on opposite sides, and sometimes
make the most tremendous
onslaughts on each other at the
County Courts and Magistrates’
Meetings, are in reality, I believe,
good friends enough all the time,
and play into each other’s hands,
and help each other to fleece their
clients, like honest fellows. But
Mrs Black considers herself and
family immeasurably superior to
little Mrs White; because that near
customer, Sir Henry Burton, has
them once a year to dinner, when
the neighbouring gentry are gone
to town, where he never goes himself,
and gives them cape and marsala
with their dinner, and half a
decanter of port after it; and makes
use of their house whenever he
comes into town, putting his horses
into their little stable, and his
coachman into their little kitchen,
and has his cold chicken and sherry
in their little parlour, because he
won’t go to the expense of stopping
at the hotel. Because he does all
this for them, and does not know
the Whites, Mrs Black considers
herself—and, I verily believe, is
really and spitefully considered,
in their inmost hearts, by the other
ladies, Mrs White included (though
they never own it)—to be the leader
of fashion and society in Mudford:
so she is far above little Mrs White,
and speaks to her when she meets
her in the street with a sweet condescending
smile, for which I wonder
that Mrs White does not slap her
face then and there. Black and
White will both go to Jones’s whist
parties, and drink his grog with
the utmost heartiness; but catch
Mrs Black or Mrs White visiting
at that house, or permitting their
daughters to do so, even if they
felt inclined, which they don’t!
And I remember when that spoony
thread-paper boy, young White, took
it into his head to be sweet upon the
eldest Miss Jones—who, I happen
to know, was engaged at the same
time to her cousin in Devonshire,
where she was on a visit some time
since; a very much better match
for her than young White would
be—his parents and sisters were indignant
and outrageous about it;
and sent him away out of the town
with all speed, as if he had been a
royal prince about to marry a servant-girl.
But they need not have
troubled themselves;—Miss Jones,
as I have said, had met with a
much better match in her cousin.
It follows from all this, that,
unless we hope to get something
out of them, or think that we shall
be honoured by their acquaintance,
we in Mudford are not very prompt
in showing attention to strangers.
The men might call perhaps; but
they have something else to do, and
would rather, when possible, leave
that kind of thing to the women;
and, before long, they have met the
new-comer so often in the Reading-room
or at the White Hart, and
have become so friendly with him,
that a formal call, after all that,
appears an absurdity: besides, they
feel uncomfortable and out of their
element sitting about in people’s
drawing-rooms, holding their hats
and twiddling their gloves in their
hands; having no topic of conversation
of common interest with
the callees; and feeling that the
usual hour for their own dinner is
come, and that they are keeping the
people of the house in the fidgets,
from the thought that theirs is going
cold in the little back sitting-room,
whence they have been roused by
that tremendous flourish of the
knocker. The women don’t feel
this sort of thing when they are
the callers; but they take such a
long time in considering whether
the new people are eligible people
or not (always provided, as before
intimated, that it is not immediately
evident that anything is to be got
out of them in the way of profit or
honour), that before they have made
up their minds, the affair frequently
gets out of date altogether, and the
call is never made after all.
Now when I speak of becoming
intimate soon with new-comers at
the Reading-room or at the White
Hart, I am speaking generally, and
not of our New Doctor in particular;
for, on the contrary, he was
scarcely ever seen for the first week
or two. And yet people didn’t call
the more for this. Miss Cringle
told me, indeed, that nobody had
been to the house except Simpkins,
the before-mentioned indefatigable
Secretary of the Rifle Corps; and
Timmins, the also-before-mentioned
equally indefatigable Secretary of
the Literary Institution; Rowe,
Driver, and Grindley: no ladies, of
course, for it was well known that
Mr Smith was a bachelor, and so
the ladies could not be expected to
go. I believe these gentlemen were
all somewhat disappointed; for
though the New Doctor gave moderate
subscriptions where they were
asked for, and became an honorary
member of the Rifle Corps, and a
first-class member of the Institution,
he wouldn’t promise to go to drill,
nor to give a lecture, nor to go boating,
nor cricketing, and told Grindley
that he didn’t know a jig from
the old hundredth psalm.
I did not call myself, for these
things are out of my line, and nobody
expects them from me; and,
besides, those who did call did not
seem to take much by their motion,
for Mr Smith was generally “not
at home,” and most of those gentlemen
I have mentioned had to lie
in wait for him, after all, in the
street. Miss Cringle says, nevertheless,
that she is sure the Doctor
had not gone out when they called,
and she is likely to know; for, poor
creature! she was confined to the
house with a dreadful cold, and sat
all day long at the window, whence,
as has been said, a very fine view
of Mr Smith’s front door could be
obtained. It must have been very
tiresome for her, poor thing! to sit
there so many hours; and I am sure
it is an honour to human nature,
and speaks volumes for the kindness
of woman’s heart, that though
there was really nothing entertaining
nor agreeable in Miss Cringle,
the young ladies of Mudford, knowing
that she had nothing to amuse
her except her knitting, should have
devoted so much time to her during
this period of her indisposition.
Indeed, those kind creatures, the
Miss Johnsons and the Miss MacClinkers—who,
I know, at other
times were in the habit of calling
her a “spiteful old cat,” a name, I
own, not altogether undeserved,—now
that pain and anguish wrung
her brow, were such indefatigable
ministering angels that they kept
her company from morning till
night, until, as Miss Cringle told
me herself, she was absolutely
obliged to say to them that she
would rather have their room than
their company; and to throw out a
very broad hint that she was perfectly
aware that they didn’t come
to see her, but to look out for the
New Doctor! a hint which, however
undeserved, did not fail to keep
them away from the house for the
future.
As I have said, the New Doctor
was not seen out much at first; and
as Mole was not there to introduce
him to his patients, and there were
uncommonly few patients to introduce
him to, if he had been; and
as scarcely anybody called on him,
and he was seldom at home to those
who did call, and he rarely came
out, it was some time before people
in general had an opportunity of
making his acquaintance; indeed,
I think it must have been quite
three weeks before I saw him myself,
except from Miss Cringle’s
window. But of course I heard
plenty about him. The men who
had seen him did not, as a general
rule, appear to think very highly of
him; they said he was close and
reserved, and a rum sort of fellow,
and that he wouldn’t do for Mudford,
and all that sort of thing.
The verdict of the ladies was at first
more favourable. They said he was
certainly not handsome exactly, but
was very distingué-looking and
gentlemanlike indeed; the two Miss
MacClinkers talked a great deal of
his gentlemanly manners, because
he had lifted his hat to them in
passing, when they met him unexpectedly
in the narrow passage that
leads from the street down to
Slocum’s Backs (how he could pass
such expansive crinolines at all, in
such a narrow way, is a mystery to
me): and, to tell the truth, I am
pained to confess that it is somewhat
unusual to see a man lift his hat to
a lady in Mudford; a bob of the
head, like that of the nodding china
figure of a mandarin, being the usual
salutation.
The first time I saw Mr Smith to
speak to was one evening in the bar
of the White Hart. I happened
to be there chatting with Mrs Cook,
the landlady, when he stepped in
to have a glass of ale. Mrs Cook,
having the great natural and social
advantages of being fat, jolly, a
widow, and a landlady, was, of
course, always on friendly terms
with everybody, and Mr Smith
chatted away with her as I had
never heard of his doing with any
one else. She could clearly make
bold to introduce me, and did so
accordingly, and the New Doctor
and I then and there struck up an
acquaintance. I used to be considered
to have some little conversational
powers, before I got stuck
in the mud in this hole; and I
flatter myself that I rather amused
the New Doctor with some details
of the place and the people, for he
laughed, and had a second glass of
ale, and asked me to take something;
and the young lady in the
bar sniggered and giggled, and
Mrs Cook kept on lifting up her
hands, and shaking her fat with
laughing, and exclaiming, “Oh, fie,
sir! now that is really too bad!”
I may as well mention here that
Mr Smith was a young man of dark
complexion and gentlemanly manner,
with a well-trimmed beard and
mustache, who spoke like a man
of education, and dressed like a
gentleman—rather rare things in
the village of Mudford. And, apropos
to this, it was remarked that he
always dressed in precisely the same
way; there was never the slightest
variety in his costume—always the
same suit of black, the same black
necktie, and the same scrupulously
clean linen and glossy hat. Altogether,
I was pleased with the New
Doctor: there was certainly nothing
brutal nor sensual in his appearance,
and he did not look at all like a
man who would——. But I must
not anticipate.
I do not know how, or whence,
or when the rumour first took its
rise, but not long after Mr Smith’s
arrival it began to be whispered
about that there was something very
queer, to say the least, about him.
The mysterious manner of his arrival
probably first gave rise to this
rumour, and afterwards there were
many things to increase the impression
it had made. As I have said,
Mr Smith at first rarely came out;
and he never seemed to try or wish
to get a patient. Indeed, when
those two wild scamps, young Bones
and young Skinner, going home
late as usual, knocked him up about
one o’clock in the morning, and said
that he must go at once to Mr
Cheeks of Little Pigton, some four
miles off across the moors, who was
very ill, he told them very blandly
and courteously that he had no
horse, and was just going to bed,
and that they had better call Mr
Green or Mr Higgins. I must say,
I think that Green and Higgins
need not have been so bitter against
him, nor have called him “quack”
so often as they did, especially as
Green never passed the Hall in his
life, and only got through the college
by the skin of his teeth; and
what Higgins’s qualifications are,
except impudence, I believe nobody
ever knew. As a matter of course,
they are at daggers-drawn between
themselves, as medical men in small
towns always are, and say all sorts
of disparaging things of each other,—for
which nobody can blame
them, as there is truth on both
sides—but they certainly had no
right to speak of Mr Smith as they
did; at all events, at first, before
those matters which I am about to
relate were openly talked of.
One of the first things that people
began to remark about the New
Doctor was, that scarcely anybody
was admitted to his house; and
never, under any circumstances,
unless he was there himself to receive
them. Directly inside the
front door of the house was a lobby,
and on the right-hand side as you
entered was a small room, and on
the left hand side another; the former
being fitted up as a surgery,
and the latter as a sitting-room:
into one of these rooms all visitors
who entered the house at all were
ushered; and the very first thing
Mr Smith did after his arrival was
to get a carpenter to put up a strong
thick door in the middle of the
lobby, directly beyond the entrance
to these rooms, so as to cut them
off entirely from the remainder of
the building. The next step was
just as strange: he had the masons,
and built up the wall around the
garden and courtlage at the back of
the house at least two feet higher,
in places where it was not already
sufficiently lofty, so that no one,
without climbing to the top of the
wall, could possibly overlook the
garden and back of the house. The
gate which stood at the entrance to
the back door, too, was always kept
locked, and was furnished with a
bell, so that anybody having business
with the old servant or housekeeper
that he had brought with
him had to ring and be reconnoitred
before being admitted. Strange
precautions these of our New Doctor,
and, you may be sure, not made
the less of among the busy tongues
of Mudford.
Another very remarkable thing
about him was his most extraordinary
absence of mind, or forgetfulness,
or whatever it may have been.
He would be quite friendly with
people to-day—and he could be
very agreeable if he chose—and to-morrow
he would pass them in the
street as if he had never seen them
before. To be sure, he said he was
near-sighted—and I ought to have
mentioned that he always wore
spectacles—but people can’t be expected
to believe all they are told
in this world; and it was known
that he could see a long way off
when he liked: and, besides, a defect
of vision would not, at all
events, account for defects in hearing,
speaking, and thinking. You
might tell him a thing to-day, and
to-morrow he would appear to have
forgotten all about it: you would
have to tell it all over again, and
then, very likely, his comments on
it were totally different from what
they had been on the previous day.
And, strangest inconsistency of all,
the next day again, perhaps, he
would maintain his first opinion, as
if he had never departed from it!
When people made remarks to him
about this, he would say with a
laugh, “Ah, you must pardon me.
I do forget strangely sometimes, but
I am so very absent!” He was
certainly the strangest man! “Nil
erat unquam sic impar sibi.”
An instance of this strange absence
of mind, or whatever it was,
occurred with regard to myself,
directly after making his acquaintance,
as before related. On the
following day I met him full butt
in the street, and he would actually
have passed on without taking the
slightest notice of me, if I had not
stopped him and held him by the
button-hole.
“Mr Smith!” I exclaimed, “you
have not forgotten me already,
surely!”
“Why—a—really,” he said, looking
puzzled; “excuse me, pray; my
memory is so bad. Where had I
the pleasure of meeting you?”
“Why, last evening,” I replied,
“at the White Hart. Don’t you
recollect? We had a glass together.”
“Ah, to be sure,” said he, “in
the smoking-room, was it not?
Really, I beg your pardon.”
“No, sir,” said I, with some indignation,
“it was not in the smoking-room.
We were in the bar, and
Mrs Cook was present.”
“So it was,” said he; “I recollect
perfectly now. In the bar, and Mrs
Cook was present. What do you
say to a glass of ale now?”
But I was too much offended for
this, and left him with a somewhat
haughty salute. Now—will it be
believed—I met him again on the
very next day, and he positively
crossed the street to speak to me!
“Ah, my dear sir,” said he, “I
am delighted to meet you! I have
been looking out for you ever since
we met in the bar of the White
Hart, and you told me such amusing
stories of our neighbours.”
“So!” I said; “your memory
is better to-day, is it? Why,
yesterday you had forgotten all
about me!”
He burst into a hearty laugh.
“What! my dear sir,” he said, “I
was in one of my absent fits yesterday,
was I? You really must not
think anything of it. It is natural
to me, and I cannot help it for the
life of me.”
But I did think of it a little,
nevertheless; for I like to know
how to find people, and have no
fancy for being treated with that
sort of caprice.
I said that the New Doctor was
never very popular with the men,
but that the verdict of the women
was more favourable. Before long,
however, he became more unpopular
than ever—and with the ladies
most of all; and that not only on
account of the peculiarities I have
described, and of the rumours I
have hinted at—which spread more
and more every day, and which I
shall have to speak of presently—but
also for other reasons which I
had better mention here, before
going to more serious matters.
First, then, Mr Smith, whom almost
nobody had called on, and
whom scarcely anybody had asked
to his house, or introduced to his
family, was within a short time
after his arrival invited to five pic-nics;
one up the river, three down,
and one in Twiddleham Park—and
to not one of them did he go.
Now, not to go to a pic-nic to which
you are invited at Mudford, is to
give the greatest offence to those
who do go, especially if you happen
to be a stranger and a bachelor:
and that for these reasons.
Of course, if you do not go, there
is one gentleman the less to escort
the ladies, who, not having so much
to attend to at home, or having a
greater partiality for the pastime,
are always in a great majority over
the gentlemen at these parties. And
if you should happen to be a marrying
man, and a tolerably eligible
match, the loss is, of course, so much
the greater. This reason evidently affects
principally marriageable young
ladies, and those who are interested
in getting them off their hands; but
there is another reason which appeals
to the hearts and feelings of
everybody. It is this:—In these
parties the ladies provide the eatables,
and the gentlemen bring the
drinkables, and club together to
pay the costs of conveyance and
other miscellaneous charges. Now,
if one gentleman be subtracted from
the total number going—a very
small number generally, for reasons
which will now be thoroughly
understood—it follows that the
remainder will necessarily have to
pay more per head for conveyance,
&c., and will also have to provide
more each in the way of wine,
spirit, bottled ale, and other liquids
necessary to the success of pic-nics;
or else that each individual will
have less to drink. Human nature
revolts at such an alternative;
and we find it intelligible enough,
that to refuse to go to a pic-nic at
Mudford, should be considered by
those who do go to be adding injury
to insult.
But there was a reason greater
even than this for the falling off of
the New Doctor in the estimation of
the young ladies, until even the
Miss Johnsons and the Miss MacClinkers,
who had thrown themselves
at his head in every way
which was open to them when he
first came, had now nothing too
bad to say of him. And that was,
that he dared—he actually dared—how
shall I tell it!—he dared to
fall in love with a young lady who
was a stranger and sojourner in the
place, while there were so many
native virgins ready and willing to
be fallen in love with! Need I,
after this, describe the bitterness
with which he was spoken of by all
the female portion of Mudford society!
It was really most audacious
conduct! To think that
neither the Miss Johnsons, nor the
Miss MacClinkers, nor the Misses
Ferris, nor the Miss Skinners, nor
any among the marriageable young
ladies of Mudford, would suit his
taste, and that he must pitch upon
that little Laura Playfair from London,
who had now come down on
her second visit to her cousins, the
Skinners! And yet, highly as I
disapprove of the Doctor’s behaviour,
I cannot help saying that
Miss Playfair was a very nice and
very superior girl, and that, had
I been a young man myself, I
should——. But never mind; I
won’t have the bad taste to draw
comparisons on such subjects, but
will only go on to say that Laura
had not been two days in the place
before the wretch Smith saw her,
and procured an introduction to
her and to the three Miss Skinners
at the same time. Those three
sisters immediately put their innocent
heads together, and absolutely
prevailed on their mamma, who is
as stingy as the grave, to give a
party, and invite Mr Smith to it!
It is well known that young doctors
in country towns must marry, if
they wish to get into practice; and
those shrewd and benevolent young
ladies fondly hoped that one of
them might be destined to make
Mr Smith’s fortune, and to partake
of it. Think of their feelings when
it became most manifest that the
wretch was paying the greatest attention
to Miss Playfair, to whom the
same was evidently not unacceptable!
The indignation of the other young
ladies of the place was scarcely less;
but then, to be sure, they had considerable
consolation in the thought
of what a snubbing those forward
girls the Skinners had received. I
am afraid, from what I have heard,
that the Skinners’s hearts were
turned from Laura from that time
forth; but they did not dare openly
to break with her, for the Playfairs
were rather rich people, and kept
their carriage (a one-horse phaeton,
I believe), and occasionally invited
the Miss Skinners to Bayswater;
and Laura had one brother a clergyman,
and another in the army; and
the Skinners had always been fond
of talking largely in Mudford about
their connections; so, of course,
they still kept up appearances as
well as they could; but I know
that Miss Playfair had intended to
stay much longer than she did stay;
and I have no doubt that it was
owing to this affair of Mr Smith
that her visit was brought to an
untimely close.
The ingenious reader must have
remarked that I have several times
hinted at sundry dark and mysterious
rumours about our New Doctor,
which do not seem to harmonise
with the kind of events that I have
been narrating; but it must be
understood that these rumours at
first obtained no very serious notice
from any except the lower classes;
and some short time—a few weeks,
perhaps—passed away between the
little matters I have narrated, and
the general prevalence of the dark
suspicions which followed.
Here I see that I must attempt
a somewhat more detailed account
of the Doctor’s house than I have
hitherto given. It is a square detached
building, situated in the
outskirts of the place, facing the
road, and having no garden-railing
or other space of any sort in front of
it. What it appears, however, to want
in privacy here, is made up for by
the retirement to be obtained at the
back of the house, which, it will be
remembered, had been cut off from
the front by the heavy door which
the Doctor had erected in the middle
of the lobby, and which he kept
constantly locked, himself carrying
the key always about him. The
front of the house is continued, so
to speak, by two high walls, that, together
with the house itself, form
the front of a long parallelogram,
of which the sides and back are
also high walls of masonry. The
area within consists of a small
paved court, and of a large garden,
of which neither old Mole nor his
successor took any care, and which
is, and was, a perfect wilderness of
rank luxuriant weeds, of moss-covered
apple-trees, and of gooseberry
and currant bushes on which
the fruit never ripens. The walls
are covered with ivy instead of
fruit-trees, diversified here and
there by a piece of new masonry,
where the Doctor had them raised
higher; and the whole place is
dark, gloomy, cold, and tree-shaded.
The rumours about the Doctor,
which at first were vague, and confined
to the lower and more credulous
order of persons, after a time
began to be talked of among all
classes; and it is wonderful, after
they once began to be openly spoken
of, how rapidly they spread, and
how generally they were believed.
It was said, then, that strange
sounds were occasionally to be
heard proceeding from the New
Doctor’s house. A hoarse strange
voice was sometimes heard speaking
rapidly and threateningly for a
time, and then was suddenly hushed;
and it was said that occasionally a
shrill wild shriek of agony or terror
might be heard issuing from the
recesses of the building. And those
two young villains, Higgs’s boys,
who will never come to any good, I
fear, when they stole a ladder one
night, and got over the back wall
of the Doctor’s garden—to find their
ball, they said, but, I believe, to
steal the few apples that were on
the trees—were so frightened by
the strange ghostly lights that were
flitting about in the windows of
the house, that they ran off in the
utmost terror and affright, leaving
the ladder, and Bob’s, the youngest
boy’s, cap behind them. I and
some others did not pay much attention
to these stories, although
it was impossible to help believing
some part of them—and, indeed, I
had myself, on more than one occasion,
heard from Miss Cringle’s
room strange sounds proceeding
from the Doctor’s house;—but
amongst children and the ignorant
they made an immense impression;
so that, after a time, the
little boys and girls would run
away, screaming with terror, when
the New Doctor approached; and
even amongst grown persons there
were more than chose to own it,
who would as soon go a mile out
of their way as pass his house
alone after dark.
But there was soon a story out
about the New Doctor, which appealed
to the feelings of all, educated
as well as ignorant. Miss
Cringle, who had got into such a
state of nervous excitement about
him and his house, that she was
obliged to have a woman to sleep
with her, got out of bed one night
about twelve o’clock, went to the
window, and saw—what, I believe,
no one would have credited on her
unsupported testimony (not because
people would have been indisposed
to believe it, but because they
would have been sure to disbelieve
her). She called Mrs Rourke, the
woman who slept with her, to her
side; and they saw——They both
swore it was true, and I suppose
there can be no doubt about it now:—they
both saw a light in one of
the Doctor’s first-floor windows—a
most rare thing on that side of
the house—and plainly, distinctly
thrown upon the blind was the
shadow of a woman, evidently
young and handsome, and utterly
unlike the old housekeeper, doing
up her hair for the night; and in
such a state of deshabille that it
was evident she was just going to
bed! Presently passed also across
the blind the shadow of a man—of
the New Doctor; and in a moment,
as if he had instantly perceived the
imprudence of the woman in placing
the candle where it was, the
light was moved, the shadows vanished,
and no more was seen.
Here was a discovery! Not a
wink did Miss Cringle sleep that
night, and no sleep did she permit
to Mrs Rourke: indeed, it was as
much as the latter could do, to persuade
her not to send at once and
knock up her friends in the middle
of the night, that they might know
without delay what she had seen.
But next morning, before the shutters
were down from all the shop
windows, the news was over the
place. The servant-girls brought
the story in with the milk; the
postman was double his proper time
in going his rounds, owing to his
loitering about so long—a vice to
which he is rather prone—to discuss
the news. My landlady could
not wait until I got down-stairs;
but brought up my shaving-water
with her own hands, in order that
she might tell me the story, from
outside the door, before I got out
of bed; and Miss Cringle had such
a levée on that day as made her the
most important person in Mudford.
Indeed, I verily believe that all the
women in the place went to see her,
except the Miss Johnsons and the
Miss MacClinkers, who have never
forgiven to the present day the
deadly offence Miss Cringle gave
them.
It may be imagined how great
was the indignation throughout
Mudford; and no one can say that
it was without sufficient cause. To
think of this young bachelor Doctor
coming amongst us, being admitted
to our Institution, and even asked
to lecture there; getting introduced
to our wives and daughters, and meeting
with kindness and hospitality at
our hands (this was what people said;
the reader will judge, from what
he has read, how much attention
and hospitality had really been
shown him); going about looking
us in the face, as if he had been
an honest man, and all the while
being guilty of such flagrant misconduct
as this! It was really too
bad! And then, to think of his
conduct to Miss Playfair! There
could be no mistake about that;
for it was now a positive, declared
engagement. This was worse than
all; and I own that I myself felt desperately
indignant with Mr Smith.
The Miss Skinners, of course, told
the young lady all about it, and were
excessively kind in their expressions
of sympathy: so anxious, indeed,
were all the young ladies to condole
with her, that I am informed she had
nearly as many callers during the
day as Miss Cringle; but the ungrateful
girl made no reply to what
the Miss Skinners told her, shut
herself up in her own room for the
whole of the day, positively refusing
to see one of her visitors, and
only stepped out in the evening to
post some letters with her own
hand. So great was the commotion
in the place, that there was some
talk at the Literary Institution of
expelling the Doctor; but on the
Secretary’s stating that the low
state of the funds would prevent
the returning his subscription, the
idea was abandoned for the time.
After all, he didn’t trouble us with
his company there often, so it didn’t
much matter. There was even some
talk, I believe, of breaking his windows;
but we had a very stern and
inflexible Inspector of the County
Police force stationed at Mudford,
who, hearing of this project, at once
gave it to be understood that he
should not allow his private feelings
to interfere with his duty; and
that whoever was guilty of any unlawful
or riotous act, should be immediately
put in the lock-up: so
that method of administering justice
was at once abandoned.
I suppose there is no such thing
as perfect unanimity in this world—I
am sure there is not in the
world of Mudford;—and there were
not wanting persons who said that
Miss Cringle was cracked, and in
all probability Mrs Rourke was
drunk. But so great was the prejudice
against the New Doctor, that
even those who professed this opinion
were ready to own that if Miss
Cringle and Mrs Rourke had not
seen what they said they had, there
was no doubt that they might have
seen it, or something worse; so that
the Doctor’s reputation did not gain
much by their advocacy. And I
must say here, in justice to those
two ladies, that if any persons
doubted their story at first, they
could not in their hearts doubt it
long, for the Doctor did not even
attempt to deny it. Most people
cut him without a word; but some
few, and among them myself, told
him what was said, and thus gave
him an opportunity of contradicting
the story; but he would only
shrug his shoulders and turn away
his head, neither owning nor denying
it.
I don’t think the New Doctor
could have led a very pleasant life
just at this time; and there seemed
less chance than ever of his getting
into practice at Mudford. Miss
Play fair was gone, and the few
acquaintances he had made all
dropped off. Scarcely anybody
spoke to him; and, indeed, he now
rarely came out until evening;
when, as we knew from Miss
Cringle, he would walk up and
down the road for about an hour;
come back at the end of that time
to his house, stay in a few minutes,
and then go out again for another
walk in the same place. It must
not be supposed, however, that nobody
at all employed him. Two or
three people had sent for him; and
I don’t know that I shouldn’t have
done so myself, notwithstanding
all, if I had been unwell; for self
is the great thing in such cases, and
employ Green or Higgins I never
can nor will: and those who had
been the New Doctor’s patients all
spoke highly of his attention and
ability. This, however, did not influence
our opinion of him in the
least, as it is well known that the
most diabolical of all possible personages
can behave like a gentleman
when expedient to do so.
Several months had now elapsed
since the New Doctor came to Mudford.
Miss Playfair, as I have just
mentioned, was gone: indeed, she did
not remain long after Miss Cringle’s
dreadful discovery. One of the letters
which she had posted herself
on the following day was, as we
ascertained from the postmaster,
for her father,—no doubt informing
him of her intention to come home
at once. The other was to Mr
Smith himself:—of course, its contents
were not known to us, but it
was generally supposed that it upbraided
him with his conduct, and
bade him an eternal farewell. In
two days more she had left Mudford
for London.
The stories about the Doctor did
not fall off either in quantity or in
quality, as the novelty of the affair
died away. Perhaps they would
have done so in time, but the time
was not yet long enough; and, so
far, scarcely a day elapsed but some
new report of a startling character
was brought out about him—some
of these rumours being, I believe,
not without truth in them; others
being absurd, shocking, and incredible.
Even had I space or time, I
could not bring myself to narrate
one tithe of the tales about him
and the unhallowed doings in his
house that passed current among
the vulgar. But I must relate two
events which were nearly bringing
him into serious collision with the
laws of his country.
Dreaded as the New Doctor’s
house was, there were some of the
more daring spirits in Mudford in
whom curiosity was stronger than
fear; and these often went out at
night, by twos and threes, and
climbing by some means to the top
of the wall around the Doctor’s
garden, watched there by the hour
together, in hope of getting materials
for some fresh story with
which to horrify the inhabitants on
the next day.
One very dark night, that daring
young scamp, Flibbert, the blacksmith’s
son—the only one in the
place, I believe, who would have
had the courage to do it—went there
alone, and placed himself on watch
at the top of the wall; and not
long after, he came running home
to his father, pale, breathless, and
horror-struck. He said that he had
not been long at his post when the
Doctor came forth from his back
door, accompanied by his old housekeeper,
who held a lantern in her
hand, while the Doctor carried a
pick and a spade. They went to a
corner in the garden among the
apple-trees, and there the old
woman held the light, while the
doctor set to work to dig a small
grave! He took some time about
it, not being very expert in the use
of the tools; and all the while the
boy remained on the wall, close to
them, afraid to move, and scarcely
daring to breathe. When it was
finished, the Doctor returned to the
house, the old woman still remaining
with the lantern near the grave,
and presently came forth again,
bringing under his arm a rough deal
box or small coffin. He brought the
coffin to the edge of the grave, and
was just about to put it in, when
the boy’s hold on the wall having
become somewhat relaxed, he made
a slight movement to get into a
better position. The Doctor heard
the sound, and called out sharply,
“Who is there?” The boy made
no reply, but, dropping at once to
the ground outside the wall, ran
home as fast as he could go, and told
his father what he had witnessed.
Flibbert at first thought of putting
the matter into the hands of the
police; but on second thoughts,
having some vague notions about
obtaining a reward for the discovery,
he determined to go and make a
search himself in the place where
his son had seen the grave. Accordingly
on the next night, accompanied
by his son and a neighbour,
he went to the Doctor’s garden, and,
getting over the wall by means of a
ladder, proceeded to the spot indicated
by the boy. It was plain
enough, at first sight, that the earth
in that place had been recently
disturbed; but not all their digging
could discover anything in the
shape of a box or coffin. They
filled in the earth again, and were
about to make a search in other
parts of the garden, when a pale,
spectral light, proceeding they
knew not whence, shone forth
about them, making them look to
each other so pale, so ghastly, so
horrible, that they fled in the utmost
terror from the spot, and returned
to it no more.
It may be imagined what were
the comments of the people of
Mudford on this story, the truth of
which no one could doubt. Flibbert
reported it to the Inspector of
Police, who reported it to the Superintendent,
who reported it to the
Chief Constable; but that gentleman
did not think they could interfere
in the matter without
further evidence, and only gave
orders that the police should keep
a watchful eye on Mr Smith, and
take particular notice of his actions.
They say, “Give a dog a bad
name, and hang him;” and I suppose
that at this time the New
Doctor would have been by common
consent, with or without evidence,
considered guilty of any crimes
that might have been committed at
Mudford. But shortly after the
event just narrated, he really had
a very narrow escape indeed from
being sent to jail for a most serious
offence.
We had a cattle-market at Mudford
shortly after the affair of the
garden, and in the evening old
Jobbs the farmer was walking home
to his house, a short distance out
of the town, having in his pocket
about a hundred pounds in gold
and notes which he had received
for some cattle sold in the market.
He confesses that he was rather
tipsy, but swears that he was quite
sufficiently himself to know what
he was about. That night he was
knocked down close to his own
gate, and robbed of all the money
he had about him; and the suspicions
that the New Doctor was the
perpetrator of the deed were so
strong, that the magistrates issued
a warrant for his apprehension.
Of course, such an event as the
examination of our notorious Doctor
before the magistrates, called
together all the people in the place
who could possibly leave their
houses; and the number of persons
who tried to get into the
magistrates’ small office, would
have more than filled the long
room at the White Hart. I was
fortunate enough to get a place,
and will state the evidence given
as briefly as I can.
John Jobbs swore that he was
going home on foot about half-past
nine o’clock on the evening after
the cattle-market, having in his
pocket about a hundred pounds,
which he had received for some
oxen. He had been drinking
several glasses of grog, and was
rather “overtook,” but knew very
well what he was about. About
half-way between Mudford and his
house, his foot slipped and he fell;
and, not being exactly sober, could
not get up again as readily as
usual. At that time a person
came by, and helped him to rise.
He knew Mr Smith, the New Doctor,
very well by sight, and swore
that he was the man. Mr Smith
offered to see him home, but witness,
knowing his infamous character,
refused, and at the same time
seized the opportunity to give him
a bit of his mind in tolerably strong
language. Finding, however, that
he had hurt himself by his fall, and
was unable to walk alone, he at
length consented, and the Doctor
took him by the arm, put him as
far as his own gate, continuing to
receive bits of his mind all the
way, and there said “Good-night,”
and left him, or pretended to leave
him. Directly after, however, while
Jobbs was standing in the same
place, considering how best to
steady himself so as to escape a
scolding from his wife, he heard
somebody behind him, and immediately
was knocked down by a
severe blow on the head, which
rendered him insensible; and when
he recovered, he found that he had
been robbed of all the money in
his pocket. Jobbs’s statement was
corroborated by his wife, who deposed
to his having come in without
his money, and with the mark
of a severe blow on the head.
When he arrived, she looked at the
clock, and saw that it was half-past
ten. The man who keeps the
turnpike gate just out of Mudford,
swore that he saw Mr Jobbs going
home under as much as he could
carry; and that Jobbs was followed
shortly after by the prisoner, whom
he knew quite well, as he often
walked that way. He was certain
that prisoner was the man.
I believe that the magistrates
would have committed the Doctor;
but at this juncture Mr Burns, a
very respectable old man, forced
his way into the office with his
son; and both volunteering their
testimony, swore that Mrs Burns
had been taken suddenly and
alarmingly ill on the evening in
question; that they had sent for
Mr Green and Mr Higgins, both
of whom were out of town; and
that then, believing Mrs Burns
to be in a most critical state,
they had sent in desperation for
Mr Smith. The Doctor arrived
at their house, they both swore, at
nine o’clock, and remained there,
not being overwhelmed, as he said,
with practice, until twelve, when
the patient had fallen into a quiet
sleep. Both Mr Burns and his son
swore so positively as to the time,
and that the Doctor had never left
the house from nine until twelve,
that the magistrates could not but
consider the alibi sufficiently proved,
and the prisoner was discharged.
This was certainly a very narrow
escape for our New Doctor; and
though the magistrates discharged
him, the intelligent reader will not
doubt that he was fully convicted
in the minds of the public of Mudford;
each individual of that great
body having his or her own reason
to give, more or less probable, and
more or less charitable, for the
evidence of Mr Burns and his son.
Some believed that they had been
mistaken as to time; others that
they had perjured themselves; and
many among the lower orders never
doubted that the New Doctor had
the power of being in two places at
once, when to be so suited his purpose.
For my part, I believed that
Jobbs and the pikeman had been
mistaken as to identity; but in
this opinion I think I got no supporters.
If anything could have
increased the popular indignation
against the Doctor, it would have
been his escape in this manner
from the hands of justice after
having been so very nearly caught;
and I am sorry to say that, on the
evening after his discharge, he, Mr
Burns, senior, and Mr Burns, junior,
were burnt together in effigy.
Events with regard to the New
Doctor had been following thick
upon each other; and very soon
after this robbery business occurred
the most extraordinary event
of all.
One morning I found waiting
for me on my breakfast-table the
following note:—
“Mr Smith presents his compliments
to Mr So-and-so, and would
feel greatly obliged by his company
to-morrow morning at twelve, to
take a glass of wine, and listen to
a communication which Mr Smith
wishes to make.”
I was perfectly electrified when
I read this note; and before I had
finished my breakfast, Jones, Johnson,
and Ferris dropped in, each
to show me a similar invitation,
to inquire whether I had got one,
and to tell me that, as far as was
known, some seven or eight of
them had been issued altogether.
I believe the first impulse of all of
us was to return an indignant refusal;
but after some discussion
and consultation with others, the
desire to hear the promised communication
eventually determined
us on going,—though I believe that
an invitation to take wine with a
condemned criminal in Newgate,
and hear his confession, would
have had a less startling effect.
Next day came, and we walked up
to the door together to the number
of eight. We knocked and were admitted
by the old servant; and for
the first known time since the New
Doctor had been in the place, the
door erected in the lobby stood
open, and we were ushered into a
room at the back of the house,
where he himself was waiting to
receive us. The room was plainly
furnished—indeed it was old Mole’s
old furniture; but everything was
tastefully arranged, and there were
several pieces of lady’s work lying
about, which told plainly enough
of the presence of a woman.
At the Doctor’s invitation we
took our seats; but, as had been
previously concerted, we all refused
to take any wine until we had
heard the promised communication.
“Well then, gentlemen,” he said,
“we will commence with this robbery
affair, though it is the last, as
far as I know, in point of date.”
And, taking a newspaper from
his pocket, he showed us the confession
of a criminal convicted of
highway robbery at the assizes of a
neighbouring county, which stated
that he (the convict) was the man
who had robbed the old farmer
after the cattle-market at Mudford.
“So you see, gentlemen,” the
Doctor said, “I am innocent of
that crime at all events, and this
paper has come to me most opportunely,
so that I might convince
you. And now for something else.
I know well enough that there
have been reports of a very black
character in circulation about me;
and among the rest, that I, a bachelor,
have a lady closely shut up in
this house. Is it not so?”
We all said that it was so, and
that we should like to have it explained.
“Then, gentlemen,” said he,
“please to understand that the
lady in question is my wife, and
that she was so before I came to
Mudford.”
“Then, sir,” we all exclaimed
with one voice, “how do you account
for your conduct to Miss
Playfair?”
“Wait a moment, gentlemen,”
he said; “to explain that matter
I must fetch something from the
next room. I will be back again
directly.”
He left the room, and we gazed
on each other with looks of blank
astonishment; but before we could
say a word, he returned and resumed
his seat.
Finding that he did not speak
for some time, we began to grow
impatient, and asked him for his
promised explanation.
“Explanation?” said he, as if
he had forgotten all about it.
“What explanation, pray?”
“Why, your explanation about
Miss Playfair!”
“Gentlemen,” he said, in the
coolest manner possible, “I have
nothing to say about Miss Playfair,
except that she is a very charming
and estimable young lady, and that
I hope soon to make her my wife.”
“Your wife!” we exclaimed.
“Why, you have a wife already in
this very house!”
He looked from one to the other
with an appearance of the greatest
bewilderment; and then said, with
the utmost coolness,
“O dear, no, gentlemen! You
are mistaken, I assure you. I have
no wife, and never had such a
thing in my life.”
“Why, you told us but a minute
since that the woman who has been
in this house for we don’t know
how long was your wife!”
“I beg your pardon,” he replied.
“I never said anything of the sort.
I have no wife, and never had one
since I was born!”
We all started to our feet, exclaiming,
“This is unbearable; we
didn’t come here to be insulted!”
and were about to leave the room
and the house; but with a merry
laugh the Doctor exclaimed—
“Stop, gentlemen! Stop a moment,
I pray; and excuse my joking
with you. The farce has lasted
long enough.” And he touched
the bell.
Immediately the door opened,
and the New Doctor entered!
Yes, the New Doctor entered;
and yet the New Doctor had been
in the room before, and was there
still. We looked from one to the
other in the utmost astonishment.
There were two New Doctors! but
just exactly alike; the same features,
the same figure, the same
quality of voice, the same cut of
beard and mustache, and the same
style of dress, down to the minutest
particular!
“Gentlemen,” continued the one
who had been in the room before,
“this is my brother, Henry Smith,
the married man. I am Herbert
Smith, the bachelor; and as you
are now, I believe, satisfied that I
did not rob old Jobbs, I may as
well own at once that the alibi by
which I escaped was founded on a
mistake. It was I who put the old
farmer home to his gate, as a charitable
action, and there left him,
little thinking he was going to be
so attacked immediately after by
that scoundrel; and it was my
brother who attended on Mrs
Burns in her illness. It was the
first time, I believe, that we ever
ventured out at the same time in
Mudford; but such a call was not
to be disobeyed; and it was well
for me that it happened as it did.”
It may be supposed how much
we were all astonished: but having
heard and seen so much, we
were prepared for almost anything;
and we thought that we
might now venture to take a
glass of wine. We did so, and
the wine, being very good, warmed
our hearts, so that we felt more
favourably disposed towards the
Doctor, or Doctors, than a short
time before we should have thought
possible.
“Now, gentlemen,” continued
the one who had last spoken, “as
we are about immediately to leave
Mudford—for which Mudford, I
fancy, will not mourn excessively—and
should not wish to leave
behind us a character altogether
infamous, we have asked you, as
being the most respectable and intelligent
men in the place” (here
we all bowed, and took another
glass of wine), “to meet us here
to-day, in order to hear a short
explanation of this curious affair,
which has given rise to such dreadful
stories about us.
“My brother and I are orphans,
and were brought up to the medical
profession by an old uncle, very
rich, very eccentric, and with an excessive
fondness for money, which
has gone on increasing rapidly with
every successive year of his life. We
are twin brothers; we were educated
together, we passed through our professional
studies at the same time,
and a short time ago we lived near
each other in London, neither of us
having any fixed idea of where we
should ultimately settle. Shortly
before we came here, my brother
got married, and at about the same
time he got into debt. He had
taken a number of shares in a speculation
which has since proved a
success; but before that happy
time, a bank, in which he had deposited
his money, broke: he lost
all, and, being unable to pay up
the calls, his shares in the speculation
referred to were also forfeited.
These disasters threw him deeply
into debt; and our uncle, who was
most obstinate when he had once
made up his mind, and absolutely
miserly in some matters, not only
refused to assist him, but said that,
if he disgraced the family by going
to prison, he would not leave a
farthing of his fortune to him or
to me. We knew that he was
quite capable of carrying out this
threat, and were at our wits’ end
what to do; for my brother’s creditors
were so vindictive and watchful,
that for him to escape to the
Continent appeared out of the question,
when Miss Playfair, to whom
I had just become engaged——”
“What!” we exclaimed; “did
you know Miss Playfair before you
came here?”
“Yes,” he said; “and it was
she who first put into our heads
the notion of coming. She had
been on a visit at Mudford once;
and when she heard that Mr Mole’s
practice was to be sold, an idea
occurred to her. She suggested it
to me, and we all talked it over
between us, and at length determined
to carry it out, my uncle
being especially delighted with the
plan, from a cunning feeling of
pleasure at the trick itself, as well
as from the prospect of escaping
an advance of cash, and yet of the
family avoiding the disgrace of
Henry’s going to prison. The plan
was, that I should buy Mr Mole’s
practice, which did not require a
large outlay, and that we should
all come quietly down here together,
making it at the same time
be believed that Henry and his
wife had escaped to the Continent.
My brother and I being, as you
see, very much alike, we thought
that, by taking care not to go out
together, nor to be seen at the
same time—by trimming our beards
and mustaches in precisely the
same way, and by always wearing
exactly the same kind of dress—we
might cause it to be believed, especially
by strangers, that we were
one and the same person. My brother’s
wife, almost ever since her
marriage, had been an invalid, and
was confined almost entirely to the
house, so that there was no fear
of our being found out through
her; and for our housekeeper
we chose an old servant of the
family, on whose fidelity we could
depend. There were several reasons
which determined us on taking
the proposed step. My brother’s
wife was horrified at the idea of her
husband being taken from her and
sent to prison, and would have put
up with anything rather than that;
and Miss Playfair was coming down
here again on a visit, so that we
thought we should be able frequently
to see each other—a thing which
my uncle’s strange character, and
the uncertainty of my prospects
from him, made her parents rather
object to at home. Besides this,
my brother and I had jointly made
some rather important discoveries
in chemistry and electricity, and
we wished to remain together in
order to carry out a systematic
course of experiments, and conjointly
to write a work on the subject.
More than all, as I said before,
the notion took our uncle’s
fancy so much, that he made quite
a point of it, and we saw that we
could not refuse to go on with the
scheme without giving him the
greatest offence, which, under the
circumstances, we could not afford
to do.
“But we had not sufficiently calculated
the tattle and espionage of
a small town; and had no foreboding
of the dark rumours and
suspicions about us to which our
plot would give rise: else, I am
sure, we should never have ventured
to carry it out. Whatever had
been the consequence, we could, I
think, have gone on with it no
longer after what has occurred: but,
two days ago, we received a communication
stating that our uncle
had died almost suddenly, and had
left all his property—a very considerable
one—to my brother and myself:
so that my brother can now pay all
his debts, and meet his creditors in
the gate; and we have each of us
an income which enables us to dispense
with the active practice of
our profession. As, at the same
time, it fortunately happens that
our book and our experiments are
completed, and my sister-in-law
nearly recovered, we intend to
leave this place to-morrow: but,
before doing so, we thought it but
right to ask you gentlemen to meet
us here to-day, in order that you
may understand what has appeared
so mysterious about us, and explain
the same, as I hope you will
have the kindness to do, to your
friends. Come, gentlemen, a glass
of wine.”
“But,” said one of our party,
“young Flibbert saw a grave in
your garden, and a coffin, and all
that. What was that, Doctor?”
“Oh,” said Henry, the married
man, with a laugh, “that was my
wife’s pet cockatoo! The poor
thing died, and I promised my
wife to give it decent burial in the
garden; but when I heard the
fellow on the wall, I fancied they
would be for digging it up again;
and, determined to disappoint them,
I brought the bird back, and
stuffed it, having acquired the art
some years ago. Here it is, gentlemen.”
He opened a cupboard, and
showed us the stuffed figure of a
large white cockatoo, wanting only
a glass case to be really a very
handsome thing.
“Anything else, gentlemen?”
“Why,” said another of the
party, “the strange lights that
have been seen, and the strange
sounds that have been heard; we
should like to have them explained,
if not too much trouble.”
“Well,” said he, “our experiments
in chemistry and electricity
produced some strange lights now
and then; and we purposely
frightened the fellows when they
came to dig up the poor cockatoo;
and I daresay we occasionally
caused some strange sounds in the
same way: but I fancy that for
these latter the late lamented cockatoo
is principally responsible. He
was a deuce of a fellow to scream
and chatter, though you wouldn’t
think it, to look at him now. Take
another glass of wine, gentlemen.”
We took one more glass, and
then departed, feeling rather as
if we were walking with our heads
on the ground and our boots in
the air. As we went out at the
front door, I saw Miss Cringle at
her window, panting to hear the
news; and so I went up to communicate
them to her, the others
of the party not daring to breathe
a word to anybody until they had
told the whole story to their expectant
wives. Of course, the tale
was not long in circulating through
Mudford; and I am afraid that,
on the whole, it created a feeling
of disappointment: for, though
there was something very strange
about it as it was, I think people
in general would rather that the
New Doctor had been a robber, and
a murderer, and a villain of the
deepest dye.
Next day the two Doctors, with
Mrs Smith, and the housekeeper,
and the stuffed cockatoo, all departed
from Mudford, leaving instructions
with Knox, the auctioneer,
to sell the furniture for what
it would bring. A few months
after I got wedding-cards from Mr
and Mrs Herbert Smith; and last
Christmas I received a Stilton
cheese and a barrel of natives from
the same quarter.
And so ended the strangest
affair which has ever occurred at
Mudford during my long residence
in the place.
POLITICS AT HOME AND ABROAD.
245
Seldom has the opening of Parliament
been looked forward to
with less of public or party excitement
than at present. The country
is in a remarkably tranquil mood,
disposed to take all things very
quietly. And yet the circumstances
of the time are full of grave interest.
An unparalleled disaster has
befallen the gigantic fabric of our
manufacturing industry; and abroad
we behold an array of events which,
a few years ago, would have sufficed
to produce among us no small
degree of uneasiness and excitement.
But ever since the convulsions
of 1848 broke up the long
peace which settled on Europe after
Waterloo—still more since the ambition
of the late Czar led us to renew
our experience of the realities
of war—the people of this country
have been becoming used to crises.
Since 1859, especially, when the
conviction was forced upon us that
French Imperialism is still very
much what it was in the days of
our fathers, the public has begun
to “discount” the contingencies of
the future, and to insure itself
against damage from their occurrence.
We have made ourselves
secure—at least as secure as needs
be in present circumstances—against
external attack; and we are
well assured that we have no enemies
at home—that never before
were all classes of our people so
united in bonds of mutual sympathy
and goodwill, or so universally
contented with our national
institutions. A country so circumstanced
is virtually impregnable;
and therefore we can look forth
from our happy island-home upon
the troubles or wars of other States,
not indeed in selfish indifference,
but with a sense of security and a
consciousness of power, which invest
us with a tranquillity that
may be mistaken for apathy.
The great and sad feature of the
internal condition of the country
is the cotton famine, which for a
year past has weighed like a nightmare
upon our manufacturing districts,
extending its baleful influence
over four millions of our
people. The calamity came upon
us so suddenly that there was little
time to prepare for it. It is true,
our liability to such a calamity had
been pointed out, in language of
serious warning, by one or two of
our ablest political thinkers, and
foremost among these by Sir Archibald
Alison. But the parties most
interested, the great cotton-lords
and the manufacturers generally,
despised the warning, and took no
measures to avert disaster. Their
faith in the doctrine of demand
always producing supply blinded
them to their danger. It was a
noble fabric of industry, truly,
which they had reared up—a
mighty addition to the wealth and
resources of the country—a vast
field of employment for the ever-increasing
population of our isles.
The effect was as beneficial as if
several thousand square miles of
productive land had been gradually
added to the narrow area of the
British Isles—affording remunerative
employment to hundreds of
thousands of our people who must
otherwise have emigrated, and proportionately
adding to the power
of the country and the resources
of the State. But any thoughtful
man, as he viewed the annually increasing
growth of that great industry,
must have trembled for its
permanence; and now that the
blow has fallen, every one must recognise
the improvidence exhibited
by the great chiefs of that industry.
“We will buy only in the cheapest
market,” they said: “an efficient
demand will always secure an adequate
supply.” And as long as
there was the least hope of the cotton-dearth
being over in a year or
so, they resolutely declined to take
any steps to obtain new sources of
supply. They had overstocked the
markets with their goods, and as
long as there was a prospect of their
old source of supply being available
again by the time those surplus
stocks had run off, it seemed
to them better to content themselves
with working their mills only
half-time, than to procure future
stability for their industry by an
outlay of money. That outlay, indeed,
would amply repay itself in
the long-run; but no one likes putting
his hand in his pocket; and
month after month of increasing
distress passed away without the
manufacturers showing any disposition
to move. Recently this inaction
has partially given way; the
continued dearth of cotton at length
left the manufacturers no alternative
but to open new sources of
supply, or see their own fortunes
ruined. The pressure of adversity
is hard to bear, and we have no
desire to scrutinise too closely the
conduct of the manufacturers in
this most trying crisis. Yet as
a mere question of fact, as a
singular political souvenir, it deserves
to be noted that an influential
body of these free-traders
par excellence—men who had denounced
bounties and privileges of
any kind as alike unjust and impolitic—actually
memorialised the
Government to procure cotton for
them in India, by encouraging the
growth of cotton by means of bounties
from the State! Mr Bright
himself has recently advocated the
same proposal. We trust, however,
that the manufacturers are now convinced
of the hopelessness as well as
impolicy of such a project, and that
they will do what every other class
has to do—act for themselves, and
with that energy and ability which
so eminently distinguish them. The
country has responded, and is still
responding, nobly to the bitter cry
of distress from Lancashire; but it
is no part of the duty either of the
public or of the Government to
procure cotton for the mill-owners
by the offer of State bounties.
Lamentable as is the distress
which thus weighs upon so numerous
and industrious a portion of
our population, it is consolatory to
know that never yet was a material
calamity so redeemed by its moral
aspect. National virtue never before
was so strikingly displayed.
We may thank Providence that the
disaster has come in its present
form. In the opinion of many
good judges, the distress which now
so lamentably prevails in the manufacturing
districts, would have come
upon us in the natural course of
trade, as the result of the over-production
of previous years. In such
a case, it is not to be thought that
public sympathy would have been
so widely and heartily displayed,
and that the accusing voices of the
operatives would not have been
heard against their masters. But
happily the calamity has come in a
shape which silences cavil, and
unites the hearts and hands of all
in the mitigation of the distress.
The cause of the disaster was beyond
our control; and the very
over-production of previous years
now proves advantageous—for the
gradual sale of the surplus stocks
at good prices (which in other circumstances
would have continued
to glut the market and check production)
now helps to compensate
the mill-owners for their losses, and
enables them to act with liberality
to the suffering operatives. And
that, as a class, they do so act, we
have the testimony of the noble
Earl who, with princely munificence,
generous sympathy, and
statesmanlike intelligence, heads
the movement for the relief of the
distress. All classes, both high
and low, are nobly doing their
duty. The patient endurance of
the suffering working-classes is
heroic; the lively sympathy and
active co-operation of the other
classes of the community on their
behalf are without a parallel. The
change which has taken place, in
this respect, during a single generation,
is something marvellous.
Formerly, under the pressure of
hardships less great and equally
beyond the power of any one to
prevent, the working-classes became
reckless and broke into outrage;
and the rest of the community,
which had done little by its benefactions
to avert this outbreak of
suffering, found itself compelled to
take stringent measures against
these organised conspirators against
the public peace. Now all this is
changed. It is needless, and it
were unjust, to throw stones at the
old times. What is now could not
have been then. If we examine
the causes of the great change which
has supervened, we shall find it
first in the increased intercommunication
between all parts of the
country; and, secondly, in the
spread of education and intelligence.
Railways and newspapers
now bind together all parts and all
classes of the country. Ignorance
is the mother of apathy and disunion.
When each city, or district,
or class knew little of the
character and concerns of the other
parts of the country or classes of
the community, it was vain to expect
the ready sympathy and general
co-operation on behalf of a suffering
locality, such as, we rejoice
to say, has become common now.
Moreover, wealth has increased
enormously in this country since
the beginning of the century—and
it is only the surplus wealth of a
community that is available for the
relief of distress. Let us thank God
that we are as we are, without charging
it as a social crime against our
fathers that they acted differently.
Let us rejoice that, heavy though the
calamity be, it has at least become
a means of uniting all classes of our
people—classes who have so often
warred with one another—in the
bonds of sympathy and confidence;
and that the British nation has at
length perfected its social existence,
by growing into a compact and
harmonious community, every part
of which knows intimately and
sympathises heartily with the condition
and concerns of the rest.
It is a not less remarkable feature
of the times that in politics also
all England now is nearly of one
mind. We say “nearly,” for there
is one class which is an exception,
and the existence of which has an
important influence upon the relative
composition of the two great
parties in the State. But, unquestionably,
the great bulk of the nation
is now of one mind in regard to
political questions. In a country
like England this is a truly remarkable
condition of affairs, and suggestive
of but one inference. Homogeneous
nations under a centralised
form of government—as in
France—may readily conceive a
universal passion for change, the
nation acting together in its wisdom
or madness like one man. But
the case is very different in this
country. The United Kingdom is
an aggregate of the most opposite
forces—it is full of conflicting interests,
each intrenched in some vigorous
organisation, whether of aristocracy,
church, commerce, corporations,
leagues, or companies. In
such circumstances, a universal
agreement of opinion in favour
of altering a single part of our
constitution, either in Church or
State, would be an event little
short of a miracle. Unanimity
of political feeling in England,
therefore, cannot possibly signify
anything else than political contentment—the
wish to rest and
enjoy, satisfaction with the form
and machinery of the Constitution,
and a desire only to see
the machinery of Government ably
and honestly worked. And what
else is this than Conservatism? It
is Conservatism adopted by the
whole nation. It is a mistake to
attribute this universal Conservatism
to the breakdown of democratic
institutions in America. The “Conservative
reaction,” to adopt the
common but exceptionable phrase,
had unmistakably manifested itself
before a single shot had been
fired in America—before the bloodless
bombardment of Fort Sumter
announced the approach of that deplorable
conflict which has served
to expose democracy in its worst
and most contemptible form, and to
reveal, in the bosom of republican
America, a mass of corruption, imbecility,
meanness, and malignity
which, taken together, have never
been equalled in the whole world.
But if a Conservative feeling had
been steadily growing up in England
before the “bursting of the
American bubble,” it is equally true
that that great collapse of democracy
has done much to give to
that feeling its present universality.
Abstract reasoning cannot affect
mankind with the same force as
actual experiment and practical demonstration.
Every sensible man
in this country now acknowledges—what
nearly all sensible men for
some years past felt, but lacked the
courage to say—that we have already
gone as far towards democracy
as it is safe to go, and that
another step like that proposed by
Lord Russell would have carried
us irretrievably over the precipice.
This is the great moral benefit
which we have derived from the
events in America. The vast superiority
of our mixed Constitution is
now so demonstrated, that every
man may now say what he thinks
publicly and without reserve. Even
men who have been all their lives
supporters of the “Liberal” party—men
who, up to the last moment,
were in favour of a farther degradation
of the franchise—now see the
folly of their course, and, moreover,
have an excuse for avowing
their change of opinion. Hence it is
that England is now all of one mind.
And what is that, we repeat, but
that all England is Conservative,
and that the Liberal party in office
is an anachronism?
There might be some excuse for
this anomalous position of affairs,
if the Liberal Ministry ever professed
to believe that Liberal principles
are still popular. But they
do not—they cannot. After nearly
ten years of selfish and most reckless
trafficking in Reform Bills,
Lord Russell himself repudiated
his own work. He abandoned it
in the same spirit of selfishness as
he took it up. It was in the hope
of reviving his faded popularity
that he first proposed a further Reform
Bill in the end of 1851; and,
backed by a party as insincere as
himself, he kept playing off his
precious Bill, year after year, as a
convenient party manœuvre against
his Conservative rivals. But no
sooner, when reinstated in office,
did he and his colleagues find that
they were about to be “hoist with
their own petard,” than the Bill
was shelved. Reform was not only
abandoned, but treated with contempt
by the Whig occupants of
the Treasury Bench; and the Minister
who had once shed tears when
forced by his colleagues to postpone
his Bill, at length, on the 5th
of February 1861, not only buried
Reform, but, like a wild Irishman,
danced upon its grave! In their
projects of ecclesiastical innovation,
the members of the present Ministry
have been equally defeated.
When baffled in their attacks upon
the State, they still thought it was
a popular thing to assault the
Church. In this also they have at
length been undeceived: and now
what have they left to do? They have
not a single card left to play. Their
whole list of measures, after having
been deliberately considered by the
nation, has been condemned and
rejected with contempt. Like the
Federal generals at Fredericksburg,
they have tried attack after attack
upon every part of their rivals’ position,
and with every man they could
muster, only to see every attack
fail, and recoil in ruinous loss upon
themselves. The Federal general,
when condemned to inaction and
menaced by a superior force, wisely
abandoned his ground, and put a
river between himself and his foe.
It is time the Whig Ministry should
execute a similar “strategic movement,”
if they do not wish to fare
worse than General Burnside, and
be kicked across the Rappahannock,
instead of avoiding a catastrophe
by a timely retreat.
We have said that there is one
exception to the unanimity of political
feeling which now pervades
this country, and that exception,
we need hardly say, is the party of
Radicals whose mouthpiece is Mr
Bright. We can no longer call this
the “Manchester” party; for, whatever
may have been their sentiments
hitherto, we have reason to
believe that the views of Mr Bright
are now repudiated by the greater
part even of our manufacturing
classes. But Mr Bright is incurable.
All his life he has been a man of
one idea, and one-ideaed he must be
to the end. There must always be
men of this kind. We must lay our
account to have Radicals. Like the
poor, they are always with us. And
they are not without use in their
way. This is a free country, and
a few eloquent or blustering Radicals
serve to “let off the steam”
of their class, and serve to remind
the sober-minded portion of the
community what a very mad and
drunken thing Radicalism is. Mr
Bright and his followers may hold
a place in political England as
usefully as the drunken Helots did
in the social usages of Sparta. But
though we have no great zeal for the
conversion of this Abbot of Unreason
and his motley followers,
we think the country will agree
with us that they ought not to be
taken by the hand by those in high
places, and allowed to play their
pranks in the government of the
country. Yet this is just what
must happen in the present anomalous
position of parties. The
country has no objection to hear
Mr Bright speak on any subject and
in any way he likes, either in or
out of Parliament; but it cannot
regard with indifference a position
of affairs which makes his support
indispensable to the existence of a
Ministry. The Tories are not only
the strongest party in Parliament,
but now equal in number the
Whigs and Radicals put together.
By a slow and steady growth the
Conservative party is regaining the
predominant position which it held
from 1842 to 1847, when a question,
not of constitutional but of commercial
policy, so lamentably disrupted
its power. Now, as in 1841,
the Whig Ministry is at its mercy,
and is only spared for the sake of
the gallant old statesman who heads
the motley crew, and is worth all
the others put together.
We see nothing surprising in this
recovery of the Conservative party.
The only surprising thing would
have been if it had not taken place.
It is not necessary, nor would it be
correct, to attribute the recovery to
any extraordinary generalship on
the part of its leaders. In the five
years which followed the Reform
Bill, the Conservative party made
almost as great a rally as they have
done in the fifteen years which followed
the split on the Corn-laws;
and yet that split was not on a constitutional
question, and the Conservative
section which left the
main body might have remained as
good Conservatives as ever. The
Conservative “reaction,” now in
progress, and nearly accomplished,
has been slow and tardy, but it
promises unmistakably to be proportionately
enduring. In the opinion
of all, the work of Constitutional
Reform has been carried as far as
it is wise to carry it; and in the
opinion of all, the Whig Ministers
who, for a dozen years, have been
urging us towards further innovations
both in Church and State,
have proved themselves to be unsafe
leaders. As the sole means of
retaining office, the Whigs now repudiate
their old measures and principles—everything
that was peculiar
to them—and act the part of unwilling
Conservatives. Now in regard
to constitutional questions—which
are the grand tests of difference
between Whig and Tory—there
is a notable difference between a
change of opinion on the part of a
Liberal and of a Conservative. The
greatest and not least illusory boast
of the Liberals hitherto has been,
that all their distinctive measures
have been carried in the end,
and have been accepted by the Conservatives
themselves; and, therefore,
that the Conservatives have
always been in the wrong, and the
Whigs in the right. Such a boast,
partially fallacious as to facts, is
totally illusory in its logic, for it is
to be observed that, as the capacity
of the people for self-government
is always increasing with the increase
of wealth and intelligence,
it may be that the Conservatives
were right when they opposed a
particular change, and right also
when subsequently they adopted
or acquiesced in it. But with the
Liberals this is impossible. If Lord
Russell’s Reform Bill was bad and
worthy only of contempt in 1861,
it must have been still more mistimed
and worthy of all condemnation
in 1851, when he first announced
it. The same is true of
the Ballot question and the other
proposed innovations upon the
Constitution. Thus one of two
things must follow. Either the
Whig Ministers were right and the
whole country is wrong; or else,
a more probable supposition, the
country is right and the Whigs were
wrong. If we accept the first alternative,
what are we to think of
Ministers who repudiate what they
believe to be right for the sake of
retaining office, and act the part of
Conservatives when believing that
the welfare of the country calls for
“sweeping reforms?” If we accept
the other alternative, can we,
on a review of the last ten years,
imagine a deeper depth of degradation
than that to which Liberalism
and its chiefs have now sunk? for
while Liberalism has proved itself
a perilous absurdity, its chiefs have
not only endorsed that judgment,
but have gleefully repudiated their
old professions for the sake of postponing
their fall from office.
In truth, the greatest retarding
obstacle to the triumph of the Conservative
party is the completeness
of the triumph achieved by their
opinions. Conservatism is now so
universally the feeling of the nation,
that there is no room for rivalry.
Although the Liberals are in office,
they know that their creed is now
an absurdity—that the measures
which they have so long vaunted
and ventilated would now be scoffed
out of the House, and held up to
public ridicule in ‘Punch’ and the
‘Times.’ They feel that it is vain
to contend against the Conservative
feeling of the nation, and therefore
they fall in with it. Their best
defence, their best plea for being
allowed to retain office, is based on
the very fact that the triumph of
their rivals’ principles is now too
complete to be gainsaid. “It does
not matter who is in office,” say the
Ministerial apologists; “the country
is all of one mind, and the policy
of the Government must be the
same whether Whig or Tory be in
office.” They forget to complete
the exposition by saying that that
policy must be Conservative! Able
and willing to eject the party of innovation
from Downing Street, the
Conservatives are naturally somewhat
embarrassed to find the premises
occupied by a set of men professing
Conservatism. If Liberalism
and Conservatism were to come
into conflict, Liberalism would instantly
go to the wall, and the
Ministry be expelled by an overwhelming
majority. But the quondam
Liberals think of nothing so
much as eschewing Liberalism: they
will have nothing to do with it;
they will back it no longer; they
will not even name it lest they give
occasion for a challenge!
Even supposing the quondam
Liberals now in office were sincerely
convinced of the folly of the measures
which they so long supported,
but which the country so emphatically
rejected, they cannot be good
Conservatives if they wished it.
For to retain office they must propitiate
the Bright party. They
must throw them crumbs occasionally,
smuggle little Radical clauses
into otherwise good bills, and go
into the same lobby with them on
all questions which do not endanger
their existence as a Ministry. This
is a most irritating, vexatious, and
contemptible game, and would justify
the country in cutting it short
by a vote of want of confidence.
The Ministry now forswear all the
Liberal measures as Government
questions, but they support them
with their votes and influence.
They retain office in the character
of Conservatives, but they give all
the influence of office in favour of
Liberalism. Such a system cannot
last long.
A Cabinet so ignominiously circumstanced
has not often been
seen. Defeated again and again—impotent
to propose a single measure
of practical value—their only
skill is shown in the way in
which they evade a decisive trial
of strength with the Opposition.
And in the constituencies their
only hope lies in the longevity of
their supporters. For every two
Whig or Radical seats that become
vacant, a Conservative is sure to
get one of them—still further swelling
the triumphant phalanx of the
Opposition. The leading journal
itself now scoffs at the whole programme
of Liberalism. When alluding
to the programme of the
Ministerial candidate for Southampton—namely,
“Extension of
the franchise, the Ballot, abolition
of Church-rates, and progressive political
and ecclesiastical reform”—the
‘Times’ rightly calls it “dreary
old stuff,” and adds:—“There is
not in the programme either a sentiment
to raise the soul from the
street mud, or a measure which can
be said to be really before the British
public. As a political statement
it is at once hazy and pedestrian,
unpractical and unideal. No reasonable
being expects that either
the franchise will be extended, or
the Ballot introduced, or Church-rates
abolished, unless it be by
some compromise; or that there
will be any very remarkable reforms,
either in Church or State,
for many a day.” And the same
journal now claims for the Premier
as his highest credit that he has
“no principles!” As the ‘Times’
aims above all things to express
public opinion, these are remarkable
words, and show what a defunct,
petrified, and wholly antediluvian
thing Liberalism has become.
We use the word Liberalism,
of course, in its accepted sense, as
equivalent to the opinions and measures
of the party which has called
itself “Liberal,” though with no
special claim to the title—in fact,
with less real claim than the Conservatives
have; for the liberalism
of the Liberals has been all in the
air, and is now (happily for the
country) nowhere; whereas the liberalism
of the Conservatives, if of
a more homely, is of a more genuine
and practical kind, which pervades
the whole scope alike of their
measures and of their policy. To
be truly liberal is a very different
thing from being simply innovating;
and although the bastard liberalism
of the Whigs and Radicals
is now justly discredited, we need
not shrink from taking credit for
the genuine and practical liberality
which has characterised the administration
of recent Conservative Governments.
As regards administrative
ability, the statesmen of the
Conservative party can still more
unquestionably claim a superiority
over their rivals. One of the bitterest
antagonists of Conservative
principles lately admitted that Lord
Derby’s last Cabinet was the most
efficient Administration he had ever
known; and every one who contrasts
the activity and wise legislation
of that Cabinet, in all its departments,
with the “wasted sessions”
which have marked the career
of the present Ministry, cannot
fail to endorse that opinion. Nor
must we forget the immense negative
as well as positive benefits
which the country owes to the Conservative
party. At a time like the
present, when it is evident that the
Conservatives are again about to be
raised to power, with a fair prospect
of a long term of office, it is
right to remember what they accomplished
as a party in the “cold
shade” of the Opposition benches.
Ever since the short-lived Administration
of Sir R. Peel and the
Duke of Wellington in 1835, the
Conservatives have been able to
foil the attacks of their antagonists
upon the Constitution, both
in Church and State. At that time
the Appropriation Bill received at
their hands its quietus, despite
the shameful compact between the
Whigs and the O’Connell party;
and we can now name half-a-dozen
measures inimical to the Constitution
which have recently been resisted
with equal success, despite a
similar degrading compact between
the Whigs and the Radical followers
of Mr Bright. One has only to
look back upon the last thirty years,
and contrast the prospects of the
country then with its condition now,
to see how remarkable have been
the achievements and how valuable
the services rendered to the country
by the Conservative party. As Sir
Stafford Northcote well said when
recently addressing the Conservatives
of South Devon:—
“To the Conservative party the country
is indebted for the fact that we have
now a constitutional and ancient monarchy,
and that we do not live either
under a republic or a despotism; that
we have a House of Lords respected and
independent; that we have a House of
Commons such as he would not say was
ideally perfect, but such as fairly represented
all classes; that we have a
pure and Established Protestant Church,
which is at once established and regulated
by law, and yet is not a slave or
tool of the State; besides other blessings
which he need not enumerate. All this
they owed to the gallant stand made by
the Conservative party, and to the way
in which their exertions had been backed
up by the people throughout the length
and breadth of the land.”
The sole prestige of the present
Cabinet centres in the Premier.
In the estimation of the country,
Lord Palmerston is the Government.
Ministerial candidates swear
by no one else. Lord Russell is
already becoming a name of the
past, and in practical administration
has proved himself the greatest
blunderer of his day. As regards
Mr Gladstone, the country has got
sick of his clever and risky budgets,
and sighs for a plain business-like
balancing of income and expenditure,
accompanied by as much economy
as can be effected without
impairing the efficiency of our national
establishments. But Lord
Palmerston, with fourscore years
on his shoulders, has now a greater
reputation than he ever had, or
than is accorded to any of his
contemporaries. England loves old
statesmen. No Minister in these
days need expect to acquire the
confidence of the country under
sixty, but, if he avoid any great
failure, every year after that may
be expected to add to his reputation.
It is an additional sign of
the times that the only popular
statesman in the present Cabinet
is an old Tory—one who grew up
in the Toryism of Pitt, and for a
dozen years was initiated in the
management of war and the conduct
of foreign policy under Castlereagh.
In his old age, in the last
and brightest phase of his long career,
Palmerston acquires his fame
in the very character in which he
first entered upon office. It is as
a War Minister that the Premier
chiefly commands the confidence of
the country. As a legislator he was
never of any account; as a Foreign
Minister he was bold, astute, and
on the whole successful; but now
that, as Premier, he can direct both
the War Office and the Foreign
Office, he has the widest possible
scope for his peculiar abilities. And
he has this great advantage, that he
is not only a vigorous and sagacious
director of our foreign policy, but
the country fully believes in his
vigour and sagacity—nay, great as
they are, exaggerates them. He is
the only statesman in England that
the people would follow to war unhesitatingly.
In some respects this
may not be a matter of congratulation,
but in other respects it is a
great advantage. Foreign Governments,
when they see England well
armed, and know that she is ready
to use her power promptly and energetically,
if need be, will be cautious
how they seek either to injure
or insult us. This is unquestionably
a benefit which we derive from
the dictatorship of Lord Palmerston;
and we have much need to
acknowledge it, for it is the only
one! The Cabinet without Palmerston
is nothing. Fancy the
same set of men with Lord Russell
or Mr Gladstone for Premier, and
the Ministry would not last a day.
Foreign politics is still the great
affair of the time; and, failing the
present Premier, there are two
men to whom the eyes of the country
would by common consent turn,
and these are Lord Derby and Lord
Malmesbury. Beyond all question,
these two statesmen are our great
Foreign Ministers of the future;
and, however troubled that future
may be, the fortunes of the country
will be safe in their hands. In the
trying period of 1859, the Earl of
Malmesbury displayed a discernment,
firmness, and masterly tact,
which now, though tardily, are fully
acknowledged. When Palmerston
was at fault—when that veteran
statesman imagined that Napoleon
did not purpose war, and
when he kept repeating that “the
Treaty of 1815 must be respected”—Lord
Malmesbury had already
seen through the game of the
French Emperor, and took the
ablest means to meet it. If deprived
of Lord Palmerston, the
Liberal party would not have a
single man competent to direct the
foreign affairs of the country; but
there is no such lack on the side
of the Conservatives. And this is
fortunate—for it is evidently the
Conservatives who are to be the predominant
party in the State for a
good many years to come, and it
is upon them accordingly that the
onerous duty of maintaining the
honour and integrity of the country
will chiefly devolve.
Lord Palmerston, there is no
doubt, is the supreme director of
the foreign policy of the Government.
Lord Russell is allowed,
more suo, to write extraordinary
despatches, and to quote Vattel
and Puffendorf to show how little
he understands them; but whenever
he takes a view which Palmerston
thinks wrong, the Foreign
Minister has to do as the Premier
desires him. Thus it is no secret
that the Foreign Secretary was in
favour of the formation of Italy
into two States—an idea which his
chief very wisely negatived. And
although not generally known, it is
not less true that when, in May
1860, the French Government proposed
a joint intervention, in order
to prevent Garibaldi crossing from
Sicily into Naples, Lord Russell was
willing to acquiesce in the imperial
project, but was overruled by the
decisive and sagacious judgment of
the veteran Premier. But when
not thus in leading-strings, Lord
Russell plays most fantastic tricks,
so that Continental diplomatists
have often wondered that such a
mountebank should be the occupant
of the British Foreign Office.
The air of Germany seems especially
to disagree with his Lordship,
as three notable escapades suffice
to demonstrate. There was first
the grand mission to Vienna in
1855, whither his Lordship chose
to go en famille, and from which
he returned with such a progeny
of blunders as astonished his colleagues,
and induced even the model
young Whigs to sign a round-robin
begging him to resign, and
not pull down the Ministry along
with him. In the autumn of 1860
he was again in Germany, and the
fruit of his cogitations in that
foreign atmosphere was his memorable
despatch of August 31,
which he immediately afterwards
repudiated by his still more memorable
despatch of October 27.
Once more he has been in Germany,
and again the “black-fate”
seems to have fallen upon him:
for in the despatch which he wrote
on the Danish question at Cobourg
he has at once reversed the policy
of his own and of all our other
Governments during the last ten
years, and taken part against a
nation with whom we have especial
reasons to be friends, and at
the very time when such an act of
unfriendliness towards Denmark
was peculiarly out of place. Startling
and incomprehensible as have
been the blunders of Lord Russell,
alike in domestic and foreign policy,
it surpassed belief that he should
have reserved his masterpiece of
folly and incapacity to be directed
against a nation, between whose
dynasty and our own an official
announcement had just been made
of an impending matrimonial alliance.
Lord Russell’s despatch of 24th
September, by which, for the first
time, the British Government is
made to side with the Germanic
Diet in menacing the integrity of
Denmark, produces an embarrassment
for that country at the very
time when the difficulties of the
Scandinavian kingdoms were on the
eve of a most happy solution. For
two or three years past there has
been a growing desire on the part
of the Scandinavian peoples for
closer union, by the consolidation
of Sweden, Norway, and Denmark
into one State. The difficulty was
as to the means by which this was
to be accomplished, and as to the
form which the desired union of
the cognate kingdoms should take.
At one time it seemed as if an extraneous
influence would exercise a
malefic influence upon the process.
At the beginning of September
1861 the King of Sweden, grandson
of the French general Bernadotte,
went by invitation to visit the
Emperor Napoleon at Paris; and
by some of the strange means
which diplomatists have at command,
it transpired that a secret
arrangement had been come to by
the two sovereigns that the King
of Sweden should begin to play
an ambitious game in the Baltic,
supported by the Emperor of the
French. Charles XV., youthful
and ambitious of military glory,
longed to repeat in the North the
rôle which Victor Emmanuel had
played in the South; and the purport
of the agreement between the
monarchs of France and Sweden
was, that in return for co-operating
with France whenever a necessity
should arise, by disquieting or attacking
either Russia in Finland,
or Prussia through Holstein, the
dominions of the Swedish King
should be aggrandised by Finland
on the east, and on the west by the
absorption of Denmark. Of the
agitation which was immediately
commenced in Finland we need
not now speak; but a Swedish
propagandism was at the same
time commenced in Denmark,
both in the towns and in the rural
districts, for the purpose of altering
the succession to the throne of
Denmark in favour of the descendant
of Bernadotte. As the King of
Denmark has no heirs, it had been
settled by the “London protocol,”
and the act of succession based
upon it, that Prince Christian of
Holstein-Sonderburg should be recognised
as heir to the Danish
crown: hence the first object of
the Swedish party in Denmark was
to get this Act set aside. And as
it is stipulated by the Act that the
accession of Prince Christian to the
throne shall be conditional upon
the consent and approval of the
Danish people, every means was
employed to render the hereditary
prince unpopular.
The closing months of last year
witnessed a most happy change.
The jealous opposition of the King
of Sweden has recently given way
to feelings the very opposite. The
difficulty which his ambition threatened
to occasion has been solved in
a manner which will happily secure
the Scandinavian kingdoms against
any such danger in the future, and,
moreover, gives promise of uniting
them on equal terms and by mutual
consent into one powerful and harmonious
kingdom. Prince Christian,
the heir to the crown of Denmark,
has a tolerably large family;
Charles of Sweden has only one
daughter. It seems that it is now
arranged that the eldest son of
Prince Christian is to marry the
only daughter of the King of Sweden;
so that, when Charles of Sweden
on the one hand, and the present
King of Denmark and his immediate
heir (Prince Christian) on
the other, shall have passed from the
scene, the crowns of Denmark and
Sweden will be virtually united, as
the King of Denmark will then be
husband of the Queen of Sweden;[5]
and in the generation following the
crowns will be united de facto upon
the head of their offspring. This
will be a happy consummation in
the eyes of the Scandinavians; it
is desirable also as a matter of
European policy. The Scandinavian
kingdoms, though not rich
either in population or resources,
and at present of little weight as
military Powers, occupy a geographical
position of great strategical
importance in naval warfare. Severed
as they now are, neither of
them could defend its own position—Sweden
against Russia, Denmark
against Germany. But if united,
their seamen are so excellent, and
their position so insulated, as to
render their frontiers comparatively
secure. They would need little assistance
from any friendly Power;
and yet, if that Power were a maritime
one like England, they could
render it in return the most important
service. They hold the
gates of the Baltic. Rifled cannon
have now rendered the Sound totally
impassable in the face of the
batteries which crown the heights
on either shore. Even in former
times, Nelson only got through by
hugging the Swedish shore, the
batteries on which did not open
fire. At present we are at peace,
and we ever wish to remain at
peace; but should the old and formidable
project of a maritime confederacy
be again tried against us—a
project which it required all
the naval genius of Nelson, and
the secrecy and promptitude of the
Copenhagen expedition, to foil—we
shall be at no loss to comprehend
the importance of having the
gates of the Baltic held by a friendly
Power. The cutting off the co-operation
of the Russian fleet against
us would be equivalent to an addition
to our navy of fifteen sail
of the line. It is only natural,
then, that the Russian Government
should now express its approval
of Earl Russell’s proposal, which
cannot fail to estrange England
and Denmark, and also tends to
obstruct the formation of an independent
Scandinavian Power, which
would naturally be a rival of Russia
on the Baltic.
Seven years ago, when reviewing
the contingencies of the future,[6] we
pointed out the importance to England
of establishing a close alliance
with the Scandinavian Powers, and
dwelt on the natural ties and common
interests which ought to make
such an alliance easy of attainment
and permanent in duration. The
happy event, now about to be consummated,
of a matrimonial alliance
between the Royal Families of England
and Denmark, will naturally
cement an alliance also between the
two countries. Before Prince Christian’s
eldest son weds the only
daughter of the King of Sweden,
his eldest daughter will have become
the consort of the heir to the
British throne. This promises to
be a most happy, as it is of all
others, a most natural alliance. The
Danes and English are kindred
peoples. The former have given to
the British nation the best portion
of its blood. To our Scandinavian
forefathers we owe our national love
of the sea, our spirit of enterprise
and adventure which carries us into
all parts of the world; and also
from them, as much as from the
Saxons, we derive our love of freedom
and free institutions. Royal
matrimonial connections have not
the importance they once had,—for
the will of the nation has supplanted
the mere personal will of
the sovereign; but in the present
case the nations are so kindred in
blood, and have so many interests
in common, that the people of England
and Denmark are likely to be
as good friends as their respective
Courts could desire. Without attaching
undue weight to the new
relationship about to be formed
between the two countries, we may
at least hail it with satisfaction as
certain to make either nation think
more of the other, and in so doing
to perceive the striking similarity
of character and community of interest
which exist between them.
We are happy to feel assured that
it is not as a political match that
this marriage is to be contracted by
the son of our beloved Queen, and
that the bride-elect possesses in an
eminent degree those advantages of
person, charms of manner, and piety
and amiability of character which
captivate affection and secure domestic
happiness. Nevertheless,
while as a good princess and queen
she will win our hearts, it is an additional
pleasure to feel that, as sister
of the future Scandinavian King,
she will rivet an old and natural alliance,
and draw into closer bonds the
kindred races of Northern Europe.
In such a position of affairs, it
was to be expected that if any
change took place in the policy of
England towards Denmark, it would
be towards the side of friendliness.
Yet the very reverse has been the
case. Reversing the policy of his
predecessors, and even of the present
Government, Lord Russell has
withdrawn the support of England
from the Danish Government, and
now backs up the Germanic Diet
in its unfounded pretensions and
serious attack upon the integrity of
Denmark. His Lordship’s bizarre
blundering on past occasions has
prepared us for almost any folly
which it was in his power to commit;
but his cruel blunder in regard
to Denmark is so inexplicable,
so wholly devoid either of reason or
excuse, and it has been perpetrated,
too, in so insensate a fashion, that
it is extraordinary and intolerable
even for Lord Russell. The States
of Holstein and Lauenburg are
German duchies which for centuries
have formed part of the Danish
kingdom, but which are also members
of the Germanic Confederacy,
and over which, accordingly, the
German Diet can claim a certain
degree of control. When the present
King of Denmark framed a
common constitution for his whole
dominions, the German Powers objected,
and by hostile menaces compelled
the Danish Government to
give a separate Constitution to Holstein
and Lauenburg. Such an imperium
in imperio is a grave difficulty
for Denmark, as it would be
for any State; and recently the
Danish Government has agreed “to
accord to the Estates of Holstein
a legislative and supply-granting
power, in conformity with the decrees
of the Diet of 4th March
1860 and 7th February 1861.”[7]
So far as Holstein is concerned,
the Danish Government, to its own
great embarrassment, has virtually
consented to all that the German
Diet demands.[8] But the Diet
is not content, and has now undertaken
a similar interference with
the condition of Schleswig. Unlike
Holstein, Schleswig is a purely
Danish province. In 1823 the Prussian
Government itself declared that
“the Confederation was excluded
from interfering in the government
of Schleswig, as that duchy does
not form one of the Confederated
States (Bundeslande), and is therefore
beyond the influence of the
Diet.” The sole ground upon which
this assumption to interfere is now
made, is, that so many Germans
have migrated into Schleswig that
they now compose half of the population.
Upon this preposterous
ground the Germanic Diet demands
that Schleswig also shall have a
separate constitution! If this were
conceded, the small territory of
Denmark would contain no less than
four separate constitutions, and four
rival Estates—namely, of Lauenburg,
Holstein, Schleswig, and Denmark
Proper—each of which could
give check to the others, and bring
the whole administration to a dead-lock.
To add to the extravagance
of this project, the German Diet,
after long declining to formulate its
demands, proposes to accomplish
the autonomy of the Danish provinces
which it so modestly takes
under its charge, by the establishment
of a new constitution for
the Danish kingdom, in which each
of the four provinces or states of
the kingdom shall have as many
representatives as the other; so
that Lauenburg, with its 50,000
inhabitants, shall have as many
votes as Denmark Proper, with its
1,600,000 inhabitants. And as Holstein
and Lauenburg are both German,
and as Schleswig is half German,
it would follow that the whole
legislation and policy of the kingdom
would be regulated by the
German element, which numbers
only about 750,000 out of the two
and a half millions of the population.
The Germanic Powers have no
right of any kind to interfere with
the affairs of Schleswig, and their
attempt to do so is one of the most
glaring assumptions of power which
a stronger State ever put forward
at the expense of a weaker. The
Danish Government, with that simple-hearted
daring which distinguishes
the Scandinavian race, has
given a direct negative to the demands
of the Diet; and rather
than permit a foreign Power to interfere
in its domestic affairs, is
ready, with its handful of gallant
and dauntless forces, to give the
Germans a sample of Danish pluck
and prowess. The Danish Government
has not flinched an inch, although
Lord Russell has strangely
transferred his support to the other
side. His Lordship, indeed, does not
adopt in its exact form the Germanic
programme; he does not propose
that there shall be a common constitution
for the whole kingdom, in
which each province shall be equally
represented; but he would give
Schleswig (as well as Holstein and
Lauenburg) a separate constitution
from Denmark Proper, and would
give to each of these provinces a
co-ordinate power with the rest of
the kingdom. He would have a
“normal budget” on the lowest
scale, to be fixed every ten years by
agreement among the four Estates
of the kingdom, any one of which
can reject it, and thereby “stop the
supplies” at once. And all extraordinary
expenses—i.e., such as
exceed this minimum budget—must
be sanctioned annually by
each of the four Estates. Anything
so impracticable was never before
proposed by a statesman, and
two years ago was expressly condemned
as impracticable by Lord
Russell himself.[9] Lauenburg, with
its 50,000 inhabitants, could bring
all Denmark to a dead-lock. It is
extremely doubtful whether even
the normal or minimum budget
would ever be voted by all of the
Estates; but in regard to the extraordinary
expenses, which would
actually be called for every year,
disagreement would be inevitable.
Fancy Denmark wishing to increase
her fleet—that fleet which Germany
regards with so much jealousy, having
been made to feel its power—would
Holstein or Lauenburg agree
to the vote? Or in the case of a
rupture with the aggressive German
Powers, would not these provinces
avail themselves of the power which
Lord Russell and the Germanic Diet
propose shall be conferred on them,
in order to stop the budget being
voted in any form?
Of all the mad pranks which
Lord Russell has played, this is
certainly the most insensate. What
a precedent he makes! With equal
reason France might interfere in
the affairs of our own country, and
demand that Ireland should have
a Parliament of her own, and also
that the consent of that Parliament
should be requisite before a single
tax could be levied in any part of
the United Kingdom! With equal
reason Russia might demand separate
governments for any or every
part of the Turkish empire, and,
moreover, insist that each of these
parts should have a power of checkmating
all the others. We naturally
protest against the despatches
of Lord Russell on account of their
absurdity—we protest also on account
of their injustice and substantial
hostility to Denmark; and
not less do we protest against any
such act of interference being committed
at all. Is it not strange,
ludicrous, humiliating, to see our
Foreign Minister lecturing little
Denmark on her duties to her own
subjects, and submitting a constitution
cut-and-dry for her adoption,
even prescribing minute details
of taxation, &c.; and yet, at the
very same time, our Government
dare not say a word to the Cabinet
of Washington—nay, is full of ample
apologies for one of its own members
who happened to express an opinion
which is universal in this country—and
stands by in humble silence
and inaction while “the
North fights for conquest and the
South for independence”? The contrast
is striking and humiliating.
The attempt to coerce little Denmark
is ignoble—the proposals
which it is desired to enforce are
absurd in their form, and most impolitic
in their object. We wait to
hear what the British Parliament
will say to a policy in which folly
and meanness are combined in
equal proportions.
Strangely enough, the Continental
Power which is foremost in demanding
these “reforms” in the
internal Government of Denmark,
is itself exhibiting a melancholy
spectacle of a government at feud
with its own subjects. For three
years past the condition of Germany
has been growing more and
more distracted. In the search for
unity it is becoming divided; and
nowhere does dissension show itself
so much as in the very Power
which was looked to as the natural
head and rallying-point of the work
of union. We deeply lament the
troubles of Prussia, and not less
deeply do we lament the injurious
influence which they exercise upon
the general condition and prospects
of the Fatherland. There is no
State in Europe which more tries
the temper of the British public
than Prussia. As a people we desire
to think well of her; and yet
ever and anon she checks our sympathy
by some astounding exhibition
of the dullest wrongheadedness.
The Germans have little that
is bad in their nature, but they are
provokingly dull, and get into “insuperable
difficulties” which might
easily be evaded. The present conflict
in Prussia between the King
and the Chambers is a difficulty of
their own making. We have not
here the case of a despot wishing
to crush the liberties of the nation,
nor a revolutionary Chamber whose
main desire is to overturn the
Throne. After watching the progress
of the quarrel from the commencement,
and with the impartiality
which comes easily to an
observer at a distance, we are convinced
that the King and the
Chamber are alike sincere in their
desire to do right, and that their
lamentable strife has arisen from
what was at first but an accident of
the position.
The cause of the quarrel between
the Prussian Government and the
popular branch of the Legislature
dates from 1859. In that year two
distinct but correlative sentiments
became universal in Germany. One
of these was the insecurity of the
Fatherland from external attack,
owing to the defects of the military
organisation; the other was a revival
of the old desire for a closer
union among the States of the Confederation,
with a view to the ultimate
unification of Germany. These
sentiments were shared by both
the King and the Parliament of
Prussia; but the King was most
influenced by the first of these
sentiments, the lower Chamber by
the second. The Chamber desired
that the Government should immediately
commence measures for the
unification of Germany—measures
which could only be carried out by
“mediatising” or sweeping away
the lesser courts. The King, an
honourable and conscientious man,
declined to attack the rights of the
other Sovereign Princes of Germany,
but addressed himself with
zeal to the improvement of the military
resources of his own State.
The result of military investigation
proved that, under the existing system
of only three years’ service, the
average training of the soldiers was
too short to perfect them in the use
of the arms of precision, and the
new manœuvres thereby rendered
necessary, by which the fortunes of
every battle are now determined.
Hence the Government, acting upon
the report of a committee appointed
to investigate the matter, ordered
that the minimum period of military
service should be lengthened from
three years to five: a regulation
which, the conscription being kept
up at its previous amount, also augmented
the numerical strength of
the army. When the Chambers
met in 1860, the lower House made
great opposition to the part of the
budget which related to the additional
expenditure thus rendered
necessary; but they allowed it to
pass for that year only. At the
same time they carried a motion
against the Government, urging the
Government to adopt a “strong
policy,” with the view of promoting
the unification of the Fatherland
under the leadership of Prussia.
Averse as the King was to
adopt a course of action inimical
to the rights of the other German
Courts, the Government could not
fail to see that, if the Chamber
were thus resolved upon aggression,
it furnished an additional
reason why the Prussian army
should be kept in a state of efficiency.
As the Prime Minister observed,
it is ridiculous for a State
to adopt a “strong policy” without
having a strong army to back it.
Accordingly in the following year
the obnoxious item again made its
appearance in the Budget. The
opposition of the Lower Chamber
became more vehement than ever:
but again the military estimates were
allowed to pass provisionally, and
with a distinct intimation to the
Government that nothing would
induce the Chamber to sanction
the vote in the following year.
Thus, last year, the affair came
to a crisis. The Lower Chamber
or House of Commons struck out
of the Budget the sum required for
the increase of the army made in
1859 by the prolongation of the
term of service. The Upper Chamber
replaced it. But on the Budget
thus amended, or rather thus restored
to its original form, being
returned to the Lower Chamber
for its approval, the Chamber refused
to pass it. Thus the country
was left without any Budget at
all. In this dilemma the Government
decreed, that as no Budget
had been passed, their only
course was to fall back upon the
Budget voted by the Chambers in
the previous year (which contained
the allowance for the increase of the
army), and the taxes have been
levied accordingly.
It is curious to observe that both
the Government and the Lower
Chamber appeal to the Constitution
in support of their totally
opposite views. One article of the
Prussian Constitution, as revised
ten years ago, decrees that the
Upper Chamber shall have no
power to alter, but simply to reject,
the Budget. Another article
decrees that the Budget shall be
treated as an ordinary legislative
enactment: and for all such enactments
it is decreed that they cannot
become valid without the united
consent of the two Chambers and of
the Crown. It is also decreed by
the Constitution, that in the event
of no Budget being passed, the
Budget of the previous year shall
continue in force. In regard to
what actually took place, the Lower
Chamber can maintain that the
Constitution was violated by the
Upper Chamber altering (it is allowed
they had the power to reject)
the Budget. But that is a question
between the two Houses with which
the Government has nothing to do.
The only fact which the Government
had to deal with was, that
no Budget was passed. (And obviously
the result would have been
the same if the Upper Chamber,
instead of altering the Budget, had
simply rejected it.) Accordingly,
no Budget having been passed, the
Budget of the previous year continued
in force in virtue of the
Constitution itself. It is a mistake,
therefore, to suppose that any
Bill of Indemnity is required by
the Government. The levying of
taxes during the past year, to the
amount of the previous Budget,
was no special act of theirs, but
was enjoined by the Constitution.
We extremely regret, therefore, to
see that the Prussian Deputies appear
resolved to act as if the Government
had committed an actual
violation of the constitution,—which
most certainly it has not
done.
While the King and Parliament
of Prussia are thus demonstrating
how much mischief may be occasioned
even by good intentions—by
a simple-hearted but dull-witted
desire on either side to do what is
right—and thereby destroying the
high prestige which once made the
hegemony of Germany appear to
be the natural reversion of Prussia,
the other great leading Power in
Germany is displaying a broad
freedom, frank constitutionalism,
and statesmanlike ability, which are
winning for her universal admiration
and respect. Despotism has
been but a recent and transitory
phenomenon in the history of Austria.
It ought to be remembered
that members of the House of
Hapsburg were the first royal champions
of political reform in Europe.
Not to go back to the fourteenth
and fifteenth centuries, when the
Estates of Austria enjoyed an amount
of influence second only to that
possessed by the Parliament of
England; the Grand-Duke Leopold
immortalised himself by his bold
and thoughtful reforms in Tuscany,
which, though established nearly a
century ago, were cherished by his
subjects as in unison with the times
even down to the present day.
The Emperor Joseph II. played
a similar part in the history of
Austria, exhibiting a liberality of
opinion so ardent, and in those
days so singular, that he was regarded
in most quarters as an eminently
rash, though amiable and
philanthropic theorist. He commenced
the work of reform without
any pressure from below, and he
trusted to regulate and complete
the work happily by placing himself
at its head. The wild outburst
of the French Revolution of 1789,
which startled and checked Pitt in
his projects of Parliamentary Reform,
produced a similar effect in
other countries; and with reluctance
and regret the Austrian Emperor
paused in his work of liberalising
the administration, and the long
war with France diverted the
thoughts of his successor into another
channel. Francis-Joseph has
resumed the work which fell incomplete
from the hands of Joseph II.
He has also undone at a stroke the
project of autocratic centralisation,
which was in part a mistake, and
in part a lamentable but necessary
consequence of the revolutionary
contests of 1848–49—which, it ought
to be remembered, proved fatal to
the liberties of the people in France
not less than in Austria. It is only
within the last fifteen years that
the internal government of Austria
assumed that despotic form which
has been so injurious to the character
of the House of Hapsburg in
free countries like ours. While
France still groaned under the old
regime which was overthrown in
1789—while she bled under the
atrocious despots of the Republic,
or was held in chains under the
brilliant tyranny of Napoleon I.—the
subjects of the Austrian crown
enjoyed personal rights and local
institutions which, in comparison,
were perfect freedom. No State,
during the long war with France,
received so many deadly blows as
Austria; yet all those blows were
firmly sustained, and those reverses
nobly retrieved, by the steady and
gallant loyalty of its subjects. It
was the practical freedom and good
government enjoyed by the Austria
peoples which prevented the
sundering of an empire above all
others most liable to be split up
under the effects of great reverses,
and which rallied the noble races
of the Tyrol and Hungary around
the throne of their sovereign in the
gloomiest hours of the empire. The
Emperor Francis-Joseph is now doing
his best—wisely and bravely—to
retrieve the mistakes, and obliterate
from memory the stern necessities
of the recent past. And
he is already reaping his reward in
a revival on the part of his people
of the old loyalty which formerly
so brightly illustrated the annals of
Austria.
These happy changes in Austria
have produced a corresponding
change of public feeling towards
her in this country. Four years
ago, the epithet “Austrian” was
devised by the Liberals as the most
telling which could be employed
against the Conservative Government.
It was purely an “invention
of the enemy;” for the Conservative
Government showed no
special favour to Austria, but only
found in her a Power desirous of
peace, and willing to make concessions;
whereas they rightly discerned
in the French Government
a fixed resolve to force on a war, and
to evade all attempts at a compromise.
But who would use the same
epithet as opprobrious now? Lord
Palmerston himself, who more than
any British statesman has acted an
unfriendly part towards Austria,
now goes out of his way to attend a
dinner to Baron Thierry at Southampton,
and to express himself in
the most friendly terms towards
that Government. Austria, in truth,
during the last three years, has been
doing more for the spread of constitutional
government than all the
other Governments of the Continent
put together. The French Government
has felt itself compelled to
follow in her wake—first, by allowing
freedom of debate to the Chamber
of Deputies; and, secondly, by
abandoning the right to open “extraordinary
credits” on the mere
will of the Sovereign; the example
in both cases having first been
practically given in the new Austrian
Constitution. Unhappily the
press of France has still to envy the
freedom so fully enjoyed by the
journals of Austria.
If such has been the influence produced
on other countries by the enlightened
principles of government
now in operation at Vienna, they
have not failed to produce an equally
powerful effect upon public feeling
in Germany. Prussia, once so popular,
is falling behind, grumbling;
while Austria, without showing
any unfriendly rivalry with Prussia,
is completely outstripping her in
wisdom and liberality of policy. For
some years past the Prussian Government
has been talking of the necessity
of reforming the Germanic
Diet, yet without proposing any definite
remedy for its defects: last year
Austria, without any palaver, quietly
tabled a proposal which would
most effectually liberalise the Diet,
and in the best of all ways. At
present the Diet consists entirely
of delegates from the respective
Governments of the Confederated
States,—in fact, it simply represents
the Courts; but alongside
of the present Diet Austria proposes
that another “House” be
constituted, the members of which
shall be chosen by the Parliaments
of the different States; so
that, while the existing Diet represents
the Courts, the new body
would represent the people of Germany.
This proposal was adopted
by a majority of the Committee of
the Diet; but Prussia, instead of
being foremost in welcoming such
a project, as from her professions
might have been expected, sulked—and
not only sulked, but raged
against the proposal, and hinted
that she would even employ force
to resist its adoption. As the Diet,
however, has declined to accept
the resolution of their Committee,
the Austrian plan of reform is at
present in abeyance; and Prussia,
desirous to regain the initiative,
now talks of outbidding Austria
in the liberality of her proposals.
Nevertheless, Prussia has appeared
to great disadvantage in this act of
rivalry. In truth, it is impossible
not to recognise the superiority in
statesmanship and breadth of views
in the Austrian Government and
legislators compared with those of
Prussia. And the Prussians must
be blind indeed if they do not see
that the mingled folly and dogmatism
which, scorning compromise,
has now brought constitutional
government to a dead-lock at
Berlin, as well as the opposition
which, from motives of jealousy,
the Prussian Government is offering
to the reform of the Diet, is
rapidly destroying their prestige in
Germany, and is making many an
eye now turn to Vienna, which
formerly looked for a leader of the
united Fatherland in the House of
Hohenzollern.
The great embarrassment which
still hangs round the Austrian Government
is the refusal of the Hungarians
to join with the other sections
of the empire in sending
representatives to the Reichsrath,
or Imperial Parliament. The prospect
of the Hungarians foregoing
their demand for a wholly separate
administration is better than it
was, yet still is not so great as the
friends alike of Austria and of
Hungary could desire. A separate
administration for Hungary, while
all the other parts of the empire
are represented in the Reichsrath,
would never work. The Hungarians
must either desire it as a step
towards entire separation from
Austria, or else they are making a
mistake. And if they desire to
separate from the German, Polish,
Sclavonian, and other nationalities
which constitute the Austrian empire,
the best or only issue to which
they can look forward is union with
a similar medley of certainly not
superior races, in a Confederation
of the Danube. We do not see
what the Hungarians would gain
even if the issue were accomplished
in a manner the most favourable
for them; but if we take into account
the many formidable opposing
obstacles, and the probability
that the expectations of the Hungarians
would be considerably disappointed,
the only judgment at
which we can arrive is, that the
Hungarians are much better as
they are, and would act wisely in
frankly accepting for themselves
the liberal constitution which is
already in operation in the other
parts of the empire. The Magyars
are men of high spirit, great ability,
and perhaps the most eloquent
speakers in Europe. Moreover, they
will count fully fourscore votes in the
Reichsrath: surely, then, they need
have no fear of not having their
fair proportion of influence in the
assembly,—the greater likelihood
is that they would have too much.
The Hungarian question is a
misfortune for all Europe. For,
until it is settled, there can be no
pacific solution of the Venetian
question. As long as Hungary remains
in a state of sullen rebellion,
the cession of Venetia to Italy
would only bring an enemy close
to the heart of Austria, and permit
a direct co-operation between
the Hungarians and their “sympathisers”
in Italy. But if Hungary
were reconciled, and were again
playing her part loyally as an integral
portion of the Austrian empire,
we believe that the Austrian
Government would no longer hesitate
to rid themselves of the Venetian
difficulty, even though the
Quadrilateral is invaluable to them
as the most impregnable frontier
and position in Europe.
There is still one year more in
which a happy solution of both of
these serious questions may be attained.
Austria has still a year for
negotiating with the Hungarians,
without the interference of hostile
Powers. Italy is in no position to
provoke a conflict with Austria for
the possession of Venetia. Her old
“ally” France has now turned
against her, so unceremoniously
that even the Italian Government,
so ready to hope all things, can no
longer mistake the Imperial intentions.
The fall of Garibaldi has
removed the only fear which Napoleon
had before his eyes. Garibaldi
was a name of power not only in
Italy, but in Europe; and it was
at any time within the range of
possibility that a great movement
would arise under his leadership,
which would either compel the
French to evacuate Italy, or produce
a conflict which would endanger
Napoleon’s position in France,
and rupture the sagacious policy by
which he vibrates to and fro between
despotism and revolution, without
wholly breaking with either. There
is no man in Italy—we might say
in Europe—who can do that now.
Napoleon is at ease, and snubs the
Italian Government with little ceremony.
For not only has Garibaldi
been removed from the scene, but
the prestige of Victor Emmanuel
has at the same time received a
serious blow. Aspromonte will
never be forgotten—in many quarters
never forgiven. Rattazzi has,
in consequence, been ignominiously
overthrown; and in Southern Italy
the shooting of the great national
hero has given increased force to the
discontent with the King’s Government.
France now kneels securely
on the breast of Italy, and Napoleon
does not abandon his hope of being
able to break up the new kingdom,
and throw Italy back into a state of
disunion. There is nothing now for
Italy but to improve and consolidate
her internal condition, and await
the course of events; which, if she
play her part wisely, will force the
French Emperor to come to her
terms, in order that he may profit
by her help. One advantage the
Italians have certainly derived from
recent events: they now know that
they must rely only on themselves,
and that they have no concessions to
expect from the French Emperor
but such as they can make it for his
interest to yield. The Government,
although receding somewhat from
the bold and manly position taken
up by the late Foreign Minister,
General Durando,[10] has at least desisted
from those vain repetitions
by which it formerly hoped to soften
the heart of the Emperor. They are
now resolved to take the matter
into their own hands, and to make
themselves strong enough to enforce
their rightful claims. In his address
to the King on New Year’s
Day, the President of the Deputies
said that the Chamber was deeply
impressed with the necessity of reorganising
and arming the country,
and did not hesitate to add—“When
we have an army of 400,000 men,
and a chief like you, Sire! we shall
see if any Power will dare to gainsay
our claims to have our own.”
The Italians are in the right track
now; but they will find that before
they are ready to enforce the evacuation
of Rome, Napoleon will anticipate
a hostile collision by timeously
bargaining to cede to them
their capital in return for renewed
co-operation between the two Governments.
In the neighbouring peninsula a
revolution has taken place which
startled Europe by its unexpectedness,
and which may by-and-by
give rise to important consequences.
For the present, however, no such
consequences attend the movement.
The Greeks have been orderly,
peaceable, and discreet; and although
we entertain no doubt that
this movement will ere long extend
itself at the expense of Turkey, and
will hasten the final disruption of
the Ottoman Empire, we trust that
the Greeks will continue to act with
prudence, and not compromise their
fortunes by hasty efforts to revive a
Panhellenic kingdom. Their choice
of Prince Alfred to be their new
King—the founder of a dynasty
whose territories would soon comprise
all Greece, and the isles alike
of the Adriatic and the Ægean—was
a great compliment to England,
and a proof that the quick sagacity
of their race has survived amidst the
decay of many nobler powers. It
was an instinct, a universal emotion,
which declared that they would
have no King but Alfred of England;
and that instinct was as correct
as if the question had been debated
in popular assembly for a
twelvemonth before. Prince Alfred
comes of a good stock, and has had
an excellent training; and England
is the Power who could, if she
would, either assist or oppose the
Greek revolution more effectually
than any other. England is the
stanchest ally of the Porte; but
the Greeks knew that they could
reckon also upon our still greater
attachment to freedom; and, moreover,
that if they did secure our
alliance, they should not have to
pay for it, as their neighbours in
Italy had to pay France. Still
more, England is commercial, full
of capital and enterprise, and the
Greeks might reasonably conclude
that if our Prince became their
King, the bleak hills and deserted
harbours of the Morea would soon
bloom with verdure, or teem with
new life. What they will do now
that they are disappointed in their
hopes and unanimous desire, we do
not know. It is certainly a hard
thing for a people that they should
be checked in the choice of a King
on account of a treaty which they
had no hand in making. Were
Prince Alfred to become their King,
his kingdom probably would ere
long rise into an influential place in
Europe; but certainly the vacant
throne possesses no such attractions
as would lead us to desire the annulment
of the treaty which forbids
it to be filled by an English Prince.
The choice of Prince Alfred by the
Greeks, however, has had the good
effect of checking any dreams of
ambition which may have been entertained
by Russia, by inducing
her to adhere to the treaty, instead
of putting forward Prince Leuchtenberg
as a candidate for the throne.
Important as may be the issues
likely to flow from this outburst of
new life on the part of Greece, the
only matter of any consequence to
us at present is the proposed cession
to it of the Ionian Islands by Her
Majesty’s Government. The cession
is to be made only upon certain
conditions, and therefore may never
take place at all. If the Greeks
do not care to comply with these
conditions, or if the Ionian people
prefer to remain under our rule,
that is their concern: and our
Government will at least have
given proof that its retention of
the Ionian Islands does not proceed
from a grasping selfishness, but
simply (in fulfilment of the trust reposed
in us by the other Powers in
1815) to prevent those islands falling
into bad hands. In a few years
hence, at most, there can hardly
fail to be hostilities on the Adriatic,
whether between Austria and
Italy, or between the Porte and
some of its provinces, not unassisted
by other Powers; and in
such a case our possession of the
Ionian Islands would be very embarrassing
to us, unless it were
known and felt by every one that
we remained there only in discharge
of a duty to Europe which profited
us nothing. Times are greatly altered
since 1815: neither France
nor Russia has the least chance of
ever again being left in possession
of Corfu and its sister islands.
With a united Italy on one side of
the Adriatic, and the growing maritime
power of Greece on the other—States
which can hardly be enemies,
but ought to be firm allies—there
is small chance of an extraneous
Power being allowed to establish
itself in the basin of the Adriatic.
Nor, in these times when
the principle of nationality is the
foremost regulating force in politics,
is it likely that Europe would remain
indifferent to so flagrant a
violation of that principle, as well
as of common justice.
As France has her hands full in
Mexico, and is waiting till the pear
is ripe in Germany, we may count
upon another year of peace in
Europe. We regard with no jealousy
the intervention of France in
Mexico. It cannot possibly do us
harm; and if the result of the intervention
be to raise Mexico to
new life and productiveness, the
world may congratulate itself on
the happy change. Meanwhile, it
acts as a diversion, and turns the
military ambition of France away
from Europe; so that for another
year we may take our ease or follow
our industry, without fearing to be
disturbed by any serious hostilities.
Still there is no assured tranquillity;
we shall have no Long Peace
such as the last generation enjoyed;
and for many years to come the
country is likely to feel the advantage
of keeping its naval and military
resources in a state of thorough
efficiency.
In a few days Parliament will
meet, and already the usual rumours
and speculations are current
as to the programme of the
Ministry. It is very safe to say
that there will be nothing in the
Speech from the Throne to provoke
a conflict. The most prominent
feature of the Speech will doubtless
be the paragraphs which relate to
the great distress in the manufacturing
districts, and the admirable
spirit with which it is borne by the
sufferers and alleviated by the wise
munificence of the other classes of
the community. There will be an
expression of regret for the continuance
of the lamentable contest in
America, and a hope that it will
soon terminate. The country will
be congratulated on the extraordinary
vitality of its trade and commerce,
indicated by the Board of
Trade returns, despite the unparalleled
disaster which has befallen
our greatest branch of industry;
and the commercial treaty with
France will come in for another
laudation. Nothing will be said of
the new and indefensible policy
of the Government on the Danish
question; but the affairs of Greece
will be alluded to in a friendly
spirit. And finally, Parliament will
be congratulated on our friendly relations
with all foreign Powers, and
the happy prospect of a year of
tranquillity. It is rumoured that
Mr Gladstone, with his characteristic
restlessness, means to propose
important changes in regard to the
position of the Bank of England;
and we have no confidence that the
changes proposed by a statesman so
crotchetty will be for the better.
Although the subject is not likely
to be alluded to in the Royal Speech,
it appears certain that very considerable
reductions are to be proposed
in all branches of the national defences.
If the work of retrenchment
is to be accomplished in a
right way, by studying economy
without destroying efficiency, the
country will be grateful. But if
the reduction in the naval and
military estimates is to be made, not
by improving the organisation and
administration of these departments,
but by summarily cutting them
down—by stopping the work in our
dockyards, and dismissing trained
soldiers and sailors whose places
will by-and-by have to be refilled
by raw recruits—it will be a recurrence
to the old penny-wise pound-foolish
economy which produced
the breakdown and disasters of the
Crimean war. Time will show.
Meanwhile we rejoice to know that
the Conservative party, augmented
alike in numbers and in prestige,
is now so powerful that it ought to
be able to resist successfully any
measures of wrong policy or mistaken
legislation on the part of the
Government. The gains and losses
at the elections since the last
change of Ministry show a net balance
of ten seats in favour of the
Conservative party—two of which
are the new seats, Lancashire and
Birkenhead; so that the Conservative
Ministry, which was defeated
in June 1859 by thirteen votes,
would now, in similar circumstances,
have a majority of five.
But, in truth, the circumstances
are not similar. Reform since then
has been seen through and discarded;
and the feeling of the
country is now so universally Conservative,
that, if in office, the Conservative
party would command a
great majority. As it is, they are
already so strong, that, when united,
they can determine the judgment
of the House. Happily the constitution
of the State is no longer
in danger. Lord Russell’s Reform
Bills have had their day, and have
been consigned to the limbo of
vanities. The constitution of the
Church, however, is still an object
of virulent and persevering attack;
and we trust that the Conservative
party will not relax its vigilance
and energy from an over-confidence
in its successes of last session. Let
them remember East Kent, where
they threw away an important seat
by sheer remissness and mismanagement,
and not allow reverses to befall
them in Parliament from a
like cause. Church questions are
now the great battle-field between
Conservative and Liberal. Let the
Opposition strain every nerve to
convert the drawn battle in Church-rates
last year into a crowning and
decisive victory; so that the work
of Radical innovation be finally
brought to an end, and that the
Conservative party may find its last
difficulties vanquished even before
it quits its present position on the
Opposition benches, and enters upon
the pleasurable responsibilities
of office, which so soon await it, and
of which it promises to have a long
term.
Printed by William Blackwood & Sons, Edinburgh.
1. ‘Five Months on the Yang-tsze.’ By Thomas Blakiston, Captain, R.A.
2. Vide the confession of one of the Taeping leaders, named Tien-teh, published
in the ‘Pekin Gazette’ of May 1852.
3. ‘Le Pere Lacordaire,’ par le Comte de Montalembert. Paris, 1862.
4. ‘Lady Morgan’s Memoirs: Autobiography, Diaries, and Correspondence.’ London:
W. H. Allen & Co.
5. The accession to the Swedish throne is restricted by law to the male line,
and a recent proposal to abrogate this law in favour of the King’s only child, a
daughter, has not met with success. Nevertheless, her husband, especially if King
of Denmark, would almost to a certainty be made King also of Norway and Sweden.
6. ‘Speculations on the Future,’ June 1856, pp. 736–7.
7. See M. Hall’s reply to the Prussian Government, dated Nov. 6, 1862.
8. The Danish Minister of Foreign Affairs rightly calls this “an important sacrifice
extorted by the force of circumstances.” For it is to be remembered that the
Diet of Frankfort has no right to interfere with the sovereign powers of any member
of the Confederation. The final Act of Vienna describes the Confederation as
composed of “sovereign and independent” States, the union of which had precisely
for object “to guarantee the sovereign rights of each.” Accordingly, M. Hall is
right when he says (in his despatch of January 5): “The King of Denmark is bound
to fulfil faithfully his federal obligations; but he has not surrendered to any one
his right to regulate the internal affairs of Holstein, as little as the other members
of the Confederation have done so for their States.”
9. In February 1861 Earl Russell wrote as follows to Lord Cowley:—“Another
plan, which was put forward in Holstein, would give the Diets of Holstein, Schleswig,
and Lauenburg equal power with Denmark to sanction or refuse the taxes and
estimates for the year. But this plan is so cumbrous and uncertain that, if ever
put into operation, it would only serve to paralyse the Danish monarchy. The
Duchy of Schleswig is a Danish duchy, and although both the honour and interest
of Denmark require that Schleswig should be equitably treated, the King of Denmark
could not without danger treat with Germany respecting the terms to be given
to that duchy.”
10. In his circular to foreign courts on the affair of Aspromonte, General Durando
said—“The present position is no longer tenable. The whole nation claims the capital.
If Garibaldi has been resisted, it is solely because the Government is convinced that
it will attain its end, and that France will recognise the danger of maintaining the
antagonism between the Papacy and Italy.”
TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES
Typos fixed; non-standard spelling and dialect retained.
Used numbers for footnotes, placing them all at the end of the last chapter.