call, was at a dinner at Lord ——’s. —— house is in the skirts of
London, and was constructed as a country residence, though the growth
of this mammoth town is gradually bringing it within the smoke and
din of the capital. The lamps extend miles beyond it. Taking a
hackney coach I drove to the gate, the lawn being separated from the
high-way, or rather street, by a high blind wall. Here I alighted
and walked to the house. The building is of bricks, and I should
think of the time of Elizabeth, though less quaint than most of the
architecture of that period. At any rate Lady —— told me that in the
room in which we dined, Sully had been entertained, and his embassy
occurred in 1603. This building was once in a family different from
the present, and is also celebrated as having been the abode of
Addison, after his marriage with Lady Warwick. There were formerly
Earls of —— too, of another race. But I cannot tell you any thing of
their history. The present possessors of —— house are of a family too
well known to need any explanation. Lord —— being the grandson of the
man who so long battled it with the first ——, as his son did with the
second.
The proximity of London and the value of land forbids the idea of
a park, but the lawn was ample, and prettily enough arranged. It
is scarcely necessary to say that it was neat, in a country where
order and system and the fitness of things, seem to form a part of
its morals, if not indeed of its religious faith. The lawn is about
the size of your own at Rye, and I should think the house might
contain twice as much room as that of the Patroon. The rooms were
old-fashioned, and, in some respects quaint, and, to me, they all
seemed out of proportion narrow for their length. That in which
we dined had a ceiling in the style of Elizabeth’s reign, being
much carved and gilded. It was not as large as the hall of the
manor-house, at Albany, nor in any other respect, much more peculiar,
although the ceiling was essentially higher.
—— house as a country residence, in England, is but of a secondary
class, though, for a town abode, it would rank among the first.
Whoever may own it, fifty years hence, will probably enjoy a
preferment so easily and quietly obtained, for the new improvements
at Pimlico bid fair to push fashion into this quarter. We should
pull the building down, however, if we had it in New York; firstly,
because it does not stand on a thoroughfare, where one can swallow
dust free of cost; secondly, because it wants the two rooms and
folding doors, and thirdly, because it has no iron _chevaux de frise_
in front.
The invitations to dinner, here, vary from seven to half-past seven.
It is not common to receive one for an earlier hour, nor do regular
people often dine at a later. As this was semi-rural, I had been
asked to come early, and Sir James M‘Intosh, had been kind enough
to leave word with the porter, that he was to be sent for when I
arrived. Accordingly, I had the pleasure of passing half an hour with
him, before the rest of the party assembled. He took me into the
grounds in the rear of the house, which are still quite extensive
for the situation, though I presume Kensington, which is beginning
to enclose the spot on that side, has already curtailed them in a
degree. I was told that a proposition had lately been made to the
proprietor, to dispose of a part on lease, but that he preferred air
and room to an addition of some thousands a year to his rental. There
is an historical avenue of trees, behind the house, and a garden near
by; but the latter struck me as insignificant.
We went into the library, which is a fine room, on the second floor,
including the whole depth of the house. There were recesses for
reading, and writing, and also for lumber, on one of its sides. My
companion showed me tables at different ends of the room, and stated
there was a tradition that Addison, when composing, was in the habit
of walking between the two, and of aiding his inspirations, by using
the bottles placed on them for that purpose. I beg you will not
mention this, however, lest it excite a sensation among the “ripe
scholars” of New York.
Our party at dinner was not large. There were present, besides the
family, and a lady or two, Mr. Rogers, Sir James M‘Intosh, Mr.
Tierney, and an old nobleman, a Lord B—— and his son. The table was
square, and we sat round it without any attention to precedency, the
master of the house occupying a corner, while the mistress had a seat
in the centre. As this was done quietly, and without the parade of an
_impromptu fait à loisir_, the effect was particularly good. So was
the dinner. I do not think the tables of London, however, of a very
high order. The viands are generally better than those of Paris, but
the cookery is far less knowing, and the arrangement, while it is
more pretending, is, I think, generally less elegant and graceful.
It appears to be as much a matter of etiquette for a peer to dine
off of silver here, as it is to keep a carriage. Wealthy commoners
sometimes use plate also, but opinion has so much influence over
things of this nature, in England, that it is not always sufficient
to be able to buy a luxury, to be permitted to enjoy it in peace.
In England certain indulgences are accorded to station, and it is
deemed _contra bonos mores_, to assume them without the necessary
qualifications. Something of this feeling must exist every where when
there are distinctions in rank, but, in this country, rank being so
positive, while the competition is open to all, that the outs watch
their fellows closely, as stealing a privilege is thought to be
stealing from them. “Do you see that silly fellow,” asked ——, as we
were walking together, and pointing to a man who had just passed—“his
father was in trade and left him a large fortune, and, now he is
dashing upon the town, like a nabob. He actually had the impudence
lately to give his footmen cockades.” There was a fellow!
Nothing is in worse taste than to talk much of dishes and wines at
table, I allow, but one may show his gratitude for good things of
this sort, afterwards, I hope, without offending the _bien-séances_.
I believe the table of —— house is a little peculiar in London; at
least, such is its character according to my limited experience.
As to the mere eating and drinking, New York is a better town than
London. We set handsomer tables too, on the whole, with the exception
of the size (our own being invariably too narrow), the plate, and
the attendants. In porcelain, glass, cutlery, table linen, and the
dishes, I am clearly of opinion, that the average of the respectable
New York dinners, is above the average of those of London. There may
be, now and then, a man of high rank here, who, on great occasions,
throws us far into the shade, but these cases are exceptions, and I
am now speaking of the rule. On the point of plate, I believe there
is more of it, in the way of ounces, in the single city of London,
than in the whole twenty-four states of the American Union, put
together.
During dinner, as the stranger, I had the honour of a seat next to
Lady ——. She offered me a plate of herrings, between the courses.
Being in conversation at the moment, I declined it, as I should
not have done, according to strict etiquette, especially as it was
offered by the mistress of the house. But my rule is the modern one
of pleasing one’s self on such occasions; besides I never suspected
the magnitude of the interest involved in the affair. “You do not
know what you say,” she good humouredly added—“They are _Dutch_.”
I believe I stared at this, coming as it did from the mistress
of a table so simply elegant and so _recherchée_. “_Dutch!_” I
involuntarily repeated, though I believe I looked at the same time,
as if it was a herring after all. “Certainly; we can only get them
_through an ambassador_.” What a luxury would a potato become, if we
could contrive to make it contraband! I shall hold a Dutch herring in
greater respect, as long as I live.
Unluckily there is nothing prohibited in America, and it is a capital
oversight in graduating our comforts, it is such a pleasure to sin!
I believe I got out of the difficulty by saying there were too many
good things of native production, to require a voyage to Holland, on
my account. Still I frankly avow I ought to have eaten one, even to
the fins and tail. From some such feeling as this, has probably come
the old saying of “fish, flesh, and red herring.”
There are a thousand things in life, which will not stand the test
of philosophical inquiry, but on which no small part of our daily
enjoyments depend. I have mentioned this little anecdote, not because
it is particularly pertinent to the house in which I was dining,
which would be particularly impertinent in me, but, because I think
it illustrative of a principle that pervades the whole structure
of English society. Things appear to me, to be more than usually
estimated here, by the difficulty there may be in attaining them, and
less than usual by their intrinsic value. In citing such examples one
is always obliged to keep a salvo for poor human nature (and why Esop
made the animal in the manger a _dog_ I never could discover) but,
apart from this, England is singularly a begrudging country. Every
thing is appreciated by its price. They have an expression always in
their mouths that is pregnant of meaning, and which I fancy was never
heard any where else. They say a thing is “_ridiculously cheap_.”
Now when one becomes ridiculous from buying a thing at a low price,
common sense is in a bad way. This is one of the weaknesses of man
from which we are more than usually exempt, and I believe that with
us, free trade may boast of having done more on this point than on
any other.
I was asked by the mistress of this house where I had learned to
speak so good English? This surprising me quite as much as the
herring!
The old nobleman I have mentioned, had the civility to offer to take
me to town in his chariot; and I was safely deposited in St. James’s
Place, about ten.
As Lord —— is a man of mark, it may be well if I add that he had
an air of great benevolence, and that there were much nature and
_bonhomie_ in his manner. I thought his feeling towards America
kind, and his disposition to speak of it stronger than usual. His
wife is possessed of some property in New York, and he complained a
little of the squatters; the land, he told me, lying on the Genessee,
in Connecticut. You may judge from this single circumstance how
much attention we attract, when a man made this mistake about his
own property. The day may not be distant, when lands in either
Connecticut, or New York, will more avail his heir than the lawn
before —— house. Reform must move fast in England, or it will be
overtaken by revolution.[4] Sir James M‘Intosh pithily observed, that
he supposed “there was about the same danger of finding a squatter
in Connecticut, as there would be of finding one in the county of
Kent.” He is the only man I have yet met in England who appears to
have any clear and defined notions of us. They will not acquire this
knowledge, simply because they do not wish to acquire it, until we
bear hard on some of their interests, political or pecuniary, and
then light will pour in upon them in a flood, as the sun succeeds the
dawn. That day is not distant.
After the herring, and before the dessert, a page, attired in a
very suspicious manner, entered with a regular censer, such as is
used before the altar, smoking with frankincense, and, swinging it
about, he perfumed the room. I thought this savoured a little of
“_protestant emancipation_.”
One of my next dinners was at —— house. This is a residence in the
heart of London, and the invitation ran for a quarter past seven,
_very precisely_. The English have a reputation, in America, for
coming late, and I can understand it, as one accustomed to their
hours must feel a reluctance to dine as early as five or six; but
here, the sittings of parliament excepted, I think it rare to be
behind the time.
I breakfasted a few mornings since with Mr. Rogers, who had invited
five or six others. I was the first there, and I was punctual
to the hour. Not another soul had come. On my laughing at their
laziness, “you shall have the laugh all of your own side,” said the
poet, who forthwith ordered breakfast. We sat down alone. Presently
Stewart Newton showed himself; then Kenney, the dramatist; then Mr.
Luttrell, and the remainder in succession. We, who were first on the
ground, treated the matter coolly, and the others were left to enjoy
it as they might. A man who wilfully misses any portion of these
delightful breakfasts, is quite beneath sympathy.
I sent my man to set my watch by the palace clock, and as the
distance was short, a few minutes before the hour named, for the
dinner just mentioned, I drew on my gloves and walked leisurely to
the door, which was but a step from my own lodgings. It was exactly
a quarter past seven when I knocked. On entering the drawing-room,
I found it full of people. “Very precisely” means, then, a little
before the hour. Among the guests were Sir —— ——, one of the most
fashionable physicians of London, and Dr. ——, lately consecrated
Bishop of ——. The latter was the first dignified clergyman I had met,
and, irreverent though it seem, his appearance diverted me out of
measure. He wore a wig, in the first place, that set at naught both
nature and art, and not satisfied with this, he had on a little silk
petticoat, that I believe is called a stole. One may get accustomed
to this clerical masquerade, as well as to any thing else, and there
is little argument for or against it, in abstract philosophy; but I
shall contend that neither the little wig, nor the _jupon_, is any
more of a natural taste than olives, though I dare say one who has
been envying others their possession half his life, may think them
very becoming.
Both the bishop and the physician had a precise and potent manner
with them, that showed how broad is the separation between _castes_
and the professions, in this country.
“Mon tailleur m ’a dit que les gens de qualité etoient comme cela
le matin.”
We were about to take our seats, when the bishop, who was on my left
hand, bent over the table and uttered a sound that was singularly
like that made by a hound gaping. He then commenced an apology to
Lady ——, who, in her turn, apologized to him, saying, “you were quite
right, my lord.” To my surprise, I learned the divine had been saying
grace!
This dinner offered nothing worth repeating, except a short
conversation I had with my neighbour, the bishop. He asked me if I
knew Dr. _Hubbart_, I was obliged to answer, “No.” “From what part
of America do you come?” “From New York.” “I thought Dr. _Hubbart_
well known in that state. Is he not its bishop?” “You must mean Dr.
_Hobart_, who was lately in England, I think.” “Hubbart, or Hobart;
we have a noble family in this country of the name of Hobart, which
we pronounce _Hubbart_, and we called your bishop, _Hubbart_ too,
thinking it might flatter him.” Here was a finesse, for a successor
of St. Peter and St. Paul!
The bishop then began to speak of the well known sermon preached by
Dr. Hobart, after his return from Europe, a sermon which was not
very favourable to an established church, you will remember. I said
a little in his defence, observing that he had probably written
from his convictions, and that, however erroneous, a conscientious
discharge of duty was not to be condemned. To this my neighbour
had no objection; but he complained that Dr. Hobart held language
so different when abroad, that he had disappointed and grieved
his friends in England. This, you will perceive, was little short
of accusing our good bishop of a vice as mean as a toad-eating
hypocrisy. Something like this he is charged with in some of the
church publications, here.
All who knew Dr. Hobart will exonerate him from the imputation of
calculating disingenuousness. His fault, if fault it be, lay just
the other way. Still I think a desire to avoid unpleasant topics,
as well as the wish to say pleasant things, may have induced him
to be silent, on some occasions, when it might have been better to
speak, and not always to have measured the extent of his concessions.
It moreover requires some time, and not a little practice, for an
Englishman and an American fully to understand each other, though
speaking the same language. I had a proof of this fact this very
evening, and I will relate the circumstance, by way of illustrating
my meaning.
The night previously I was in company with Lord N—— and Mr. B——, both
of whom are members of the House of Commons, and whigs. The former
was very particular in inquiring how we prevented frauds under the
vote by ballot. I explained to these two gentlemen the process,
which, as you have never attended an election, it may be well to
explain to you. It is simply this. The ballot is put in the hands of
a public officer, who is himself chosen by the people, and who is
obliged to hold it in such a way that every one can see it is not
changed. In this manner it is put into the box. Thus the elector is
prevented from slipping in two tickets along side of each other; the
officer cannot change the ticket; and when they come to count the
votes, if two are rolled together, both are rejected.
To me this explanation seemed perfectly clear; but I saw, at the
time, my auditors did not appear to be of the same way of thinking.
After dinner, at —— house, when we had returned to the drawing-room,
Lord A——, the son of the master of the house, and Lord John Russell,
both prominent men in the opposition, came to me, and the former,
who has stronger notions in favour of the ballot than is usual
in England, observed that he had heard me quoted at Brookes’s as
giving an opinion against the vote by ballot. I answered that my
opinion was strongly in favour of the ballot, and that I did not
remember even to have spoken at all on the subject, except on the
previous night to Lord N—— and Mr. B——, when the question was not
of the _utility_ of the ballot, but of the _manner in which we
prevented frauds under the system_. I was desired to repeat our mode
of proceeding, but neither of these gentlemen appeared to me to be
perfectly satisfied. Of course, this ill-luck in explaining set me
to reflecting, and by dint of thought, observation, and inquiries,
I believe I have arrived at the truth. By _frauds_ these gentlemen
meant to ask me, “In what manner do you prevent the elector who has
pledged himself to vote for you, from voting for another man at the
polls?” As these pledges, in England, are four times in five given by
the dependant to his patron, the tradesman to the employer, and the
tenant to the landlord. The inquiry was to know, if we had discovered
any means by which the very object for which the vote by ballot had
been instituted, might be defeated under the ballot! It strikes me
this is a peculiarly English mode of doing things.
Here, then, you see how easy it is for us to misunderstand each
other; for Lord A—— admitted that it was Lord N—— who quoted me in
the manner he had mentioned; and how much care and experience are
necessary for an Englishman to give a correct account of even the
declared opinions of an American, and, of course, _vice versa_.
As respects Dr. Hobart, it is understood, that, like almost every
clergyman of our church, who goes to England to pass any time, he saw
reason to alter many of his previously cherished opinions. In the
sermon to which there has been allusion, he said that, of the two,
he should prefer for his church, the persecution of the state to a
legal establishment, and this, an opinion that would be very likely
to rankle in the breast of a new-made bishop, is also an opinion that
he himself, probably, did not entertain, or at least in so strong a
light, when he sailed from home. Now, some time and observation are
necessary to produce these changes, and Dr. Hobart, or any other
man, may very conscientiously think, and thinking, express himself
differently, on quitting a country, from what he had done on entering
it.
But I would strenuously urge on every American who really loves the
institutions of his country, never to make any concessions to mere
politeness, on these topics, when actually required to say any thing
in England. Indeed, politeness has few claims when principles are
concerned, and it is rare to meet an Englishman, in America or any
where else, who thinks himself bound to sacrifice even a prejudice to
such a claim.
There is another point of view in which this charge against Dr.
Hobart ought to be considered. There is, quite evidently, here, a
secret distrust of the justice of the present system, both political
and religious, and a latent apprehension of its not enduring forever.
Every thing wears out, even to the rock, and time is the parent of
changes. Even they who maintain that our system is but a single step
removed from despotism, know that our system must, in principle at
least, be the next great change of England, and they search eagerly
for testimony against its merits, from those who, having lived under
it, are supposed to be acquainted with its action. Thus an American,
who betrays the smallest leaning to their side of the argument, is
eagerly quoted, and used as authority in their favour. Such may have
been the case with Dr. Hobart, who, in the warmth of his feeling
towards a church from which his own is derived, and which its worst
enemies must admit has so much that is excellent, has probably
uttered expressions to which too much meaning has been attached, or
which, indeed, he may have seen good reason himself to change on a
closer examination, after admitting the more comprehensive views that
are always opened by travelling.
From —— house Mr. —— and myself proceeded to Berkeley Square, to
make a call. As we were in the hall, Lord ——, one of the guests,
understanding our intention, offered to take us in his chariot.
As I had no acquaintance with this gentleman, I put myself at the
disposition of my companion, who decided to accept the offer. Another
carriage was standing before the door, and casting my eye at it,
I was half inclined to think that the bishop, by some droll freak,
had got up on its box. The coachman was in deep black, wore a cocked
hat, and a wig so very like that I had been admiring in the house,
that, to my uninstructed eye, they appeared to be one and the same.
Some such conceit must have passed through the mind of Lord ——, for
we were no sooner seated, than he began to discuss the subject of
coachmen’s wigs. It would seem that a fashion of decorating the heads
of the Jehus of the “nobility and gentry” with this ornament, has
lately come in, and most of the conceits of this nature being already
monopolized by the bench, the bar, or parliament, they who invented
the mode have been compelled to trespass a little on the sacred
rights of the church. After some cogitation, pro and con, Lord ——
decided against the wigs.
On reaching the house to which we were going, we alighted, in the
order in which we sat, which brought Lord —— in advance. In this
manner, as a matter of course, we ascended the stairs. When about
half way up, my companion stopped, and appeared to be examining a
vase filled with rose leaves, one of the customs that the extreme
luxury of the age has introduced in London. It was some little time,
however, before I discovered the real cause of the delay, which was
merely to allow Lord ——, who was a fat old man, and walked slow, to
get up stairs before us. This he did, was announced, and entered
the drawing-room first, we following and entering as if we had not
come in his party! It was very good natured in this gentleman to
offer a stranger the use of his carriage, but now I understand the
conditions, I shall not accept it the next time, even though he
should change his mind and give his coachman a wig.