I am led to this train of reflections by the fact that an em

SEEING AND HEARING

SEEING

AND HEARING

BY

GEORGE W. E. RUSSELL

AUTHOR OF "COLLECTIONS AND RECOLLECTIONS," ETC.

LONDON

E. GRANT RICHARDS

1907

TO

WALTER SYDNEY SICHEL

1868-1907

"_Ay, there are some good things in life, that fall not away with

the rest,_

_And of all best things upon earth, I hold that a faithful friend is

the best._"

--OWEN MEREDITH.

CONTENTS

CHAP. PAGE

I. THE CORONATION 1

II. SECRET SOCIETIES 10

III. THE IRISH PEERAGE 17

IV. OMITTED SILHOUETTES 25

V. DOCTORS AND DOCTORING 31

VI. MOURNING 39

VII. WILLS 46

VIII. PENSIONS 54

IX. THE SEASON AS IT WAS 62

X. THE SEASON AS IT IS 69

XI. THE SINS OF SOCIETY 76

XII. OXFORD 83

XIII. SCHOOLS FOR SHEPHERDS 90

XIV. PILGRIMAGES 97

XV. THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS 105

XVI. SCHOOLS AND BOARDING-HOUSES 113

XVII. SQUARES 121

XVIII. SUNDAY IN LONDON 128

XIX. A SUBURBAN SUNDAY 135

XX. WINE AND WATER 143

XXI. DINNER 151

XXII. DINNERS 158

XXIII. LUNCHEON 166

XXIV. TEA 174

XXV. SUPPER 182

XXVI. INNS AND HOTELS 190

XXVII. TRAVEL 198

XXVIII. ACCOMPLISHMENTS 207

XXIX. CIDER 214

XXX. THE GARTER 221

XXXI. SHERIFFS 229

XXXII. PUBLISHERS 237

XXXIII. HANDWRITING 245

XXXIV. AUTOGRAPHS 252

XXXV. MORE AUTOGRAPHS 259

XXXVI. CHRISTMAS 266

XXXVII. NEW YEAR'S DAY 274

XXXVIII. PETS 283

XXXIX. PURPLE AND FINE LINEN 289

XL. PRELACY AND PALACES 297

XLI. HORRORS 304

XLII. SOCIAL CHANGES 312

XLIII. SOCIAL GRACES 319

XLIV. PUBLICITY _v._ RETICENCE 326

XLV. TOWN _v._ COUNTRY 333

XLVI. HOME 341

XLVII. HOSPITALITY 348

XLVIII. OSTENTATION 354

XLIX. PRINCIPLE AND PREJUDICE 360

L. CULTURE 367

LI. RELIGION 374

LII. SUPERSTITION 381

LIII. THE REMNANT 388

I

THE CORONATION

And so the great Act draws near--the "high midsummer pomp" of

Patriotism and Regality and Religion--the "one far-off divine event" to

which the whole social creation has moved since the day was appointed

and the preparations began. A thousand pens will picture the Coronation

as it actually occurs. Writing in advance, I can only contemplate it as

a magnificent ideal, and describe it as it strikes not the eye and ear

but the heart, the imagination, and the historic sense.

First and foremost and above all else, the Coronation is a religious

act. It is imbedded in the very heart of the great Christian service of

the Holy Eucharist. Litany and Introit and Gospel and Creed lead up to

it, and it in turn leads on to _Te Deum_ and Offertory and Consecration

and Communion. But though (or perhaps because) it is thus supremely

and conspicuously religious, the Coronation is national and secular

and historical as well. Other nations do not crown their Sovereigns.

Some have no crowns to give, and others are in doubt about the

rightful recipients; in some, revolutions have shattered the immemorial

landmarks, or the sharp sword of civil war has severed the sacred

thread of succession, or the State itself is a mushroom growth of

yesterday, with no roots and fibres striking deep down to the bedrock

of the national life.

But here in England we crown our kings as we have crowned them for

a thousand years, and our act of crowning is the august symbol of a

nation's story and a people's will. For before ever the ministers of

God approach the altar, before the sacred emblems of sovereignty are

hallowed, before the Christian's Mysteries begin, before the Eternal

Spirit is invoked and the consecrating unction bestowed, the English

people plays its part, and, through the mouth of its chief citizen

asserts its fundamental place in the system of the Kingly Commonwealth.

"Sirs, I here present unto you King Edward, the undoubted King of this

realm; wherefore all you who are come this day to do your homage, are

you willing to do the same?" And, as the King stands up and turns and

shows himself four times to the assembled freemen, they "signify their

willingness and joy by loud and repeated acclamations, all with one

voice crying out, 'God Save King Edward.'"

And here I borrow from one[1] who touches as no other living man can

touch these dramatic solemnities of our national life (for I know he

will consent to the borrowing), and I say that this is as noble as it

is intelligible. "It embodies the splendid liberty with which a free

people asserts its claim to have nothing imposed upon it in the dark,

no tyrannous rule set over it which it has not measured and considered

and acknowledged in the open light of Heaven." And then the whole great

company falls to prayer, and the Archbishop, who has hitherto played

his part as the first citizen of England and the greatest subject of

the Crown, takes up a still higher function, and goes up, vested to

the altar and begins the Service of the Eucharist, and, as a priest,

invokes the supreme sanction of the Eternal. And then the majestic

course of the rite is broken off in the very centre, and, with every

act and feature and ceremony which can most forcibly express the

solemnity of the transaction, the Archbishop demands of the King, in

the face of God and the Church and the people, whether he will promise

to rule England in due obedience to law and with sacred regard to

Justice, Mercy, and Religion. And the King gives his promise, and,

kneeling at the altar, confirms it with an oath upon the Holy Gospel.

[1] H. S. Holland, D.D.

"This free intercourse that passes between Ruler and Ruled is no

child's play, no mere pretty ceremonial; it is the act of men in solemn

earnest pledging their troth the one to the other. The act is broad

and deep and strong as the national life. It embodies the experience of

centuries. It has in it the stern breath of conflict and the anxious

determinations of secured peace. The Great Charter is behind it, and

the memories of Runnymede and Whitehall. It seals a concentrated

purpose. King and people look each other in the face, and speak their

minds out and give their word." And then, and not till then, the

Archbishop will go forward with his hallowing office and perform the

symbolic acts, and pronounce the benediction of the Highest upon the

covenant between King and Commonwealth. He anoints with the sacred

unction and girds with the kingly sword. He delivers the sceptre of

empire and the emblematic orb which, "set under the Cross," reminds the

King "that the whole world is subject to the power and empire of Christ

our Redeemer." And then the crown, of pure gold enriched with gems each

one of which is a history, is set upon the Sovereign's head, and the

Archbishop blesses and the onlookers acclaim.

"Blow, trumpets; all your exultations blow!"

as King Edward VII. takes his seat on the throne of the Confessor and

the Conqueror, of the Plantagenets and the Tudors, and receives by the

mouth of all that is greatest in Church and State the proud homage of a

self-governing people.

And then, once again, the splendid trappings of sovereignty are laid

aside, and the King, uncrowned, kneels down like the lowliest son of

Adam before the Mercy-seat of the Christian covenant, and the great

action of the Eucharist is resumed, and the memories of the Upper

Chamber at Jerusalem are renewed at the altar of Westminster. The Word

is spoken and the Deed is done. A great cloud of prayer and aspiration

and intercession floats up from the vast concourse of assembled

worshippers; and, in the midst of them, the crowned and anointed King,

kneeling by her who must aid him to bear his burden, seeks through the

Divinely-appointed Medium supernatural strength for a more than human

task. From a full heart and with the solemnest intent a united nation

says, "God save King Edward."

* * * * *

The scene is changed from Westminster Abbey to a dining-room in

Belgravia, and the date from Saturday, 9th August, to Sunday, 3rd.

Thirty guests, male and female, are gathered round a too-bountiful

board; and, amidst the rich fumes of mayonnaise and quails and

whitebait and champagne-cup, there rise the mingled voices of the great

"Coronation Chorus."

_Enthusiastic Young Lady._ "I can think of nothing but the Coronation.

Where are you going to see it from?"

_Facetious Young Man._ "Oh! from Hurlingham. That's quite near enough.

The whole thing is such a frightful bore. You know what they say London

is just now. All Board and no Lodging."

_New Peeress._ "I really envy the duchesses. They have such good places

in the front row. I shall be poked away under the gallery quite at the

back. I don't believe I shall see a thing. But, after all, one will be

able to say one has been there."

_Facetious Young Man._ "Oh! you could say that anyhow. It's not good

enough to get up at four in the morning for the sake of saying that.

Charley FitzBattleaxe thinks just the same as I do about it, but of

course, as he's a peer, he's bound to go. He's a bad hand at getting up

early, so he's going to sit up playing bridge all night, and then have

his bath and go straight to the show."

_Stout Peeress._ "Our creation is rather old, so I have got a very good

place, but the chairs are too dreadful. Such stiff backs, and only nine

inches to sit on, and horrid wicker seats which will make marks on our

velvet."

_Thrifty Peeress._ "Well, I really don't know where I shall have my

luncheon. It seems monstrous to have to pay two guineas at the House

of Lords for a sandwich and a glass of claret. The Watermans in Dean's

Yard have most kindly asked me to go to luncheon with them, and it

would be an immense saving. But they are strict teetotallers, and I

feel that, after all those hours in the Abbey, I shall want something

more supporting than lemonade. So I am rather divided. I dread the idea

of a teetotal luncheon, but two guineas for a glass of claret and a

sandwich is rather much."

_Nervous Peeress._ "I am so terrified of being faint in the Abbey. I

am going to take chocolate and meat lozenges in my coronet, and some

brandy and water in my smelling-bottle."

_Chorus_ (confusedly). "Oh no, port wine is the thing. No--rum and

milk. My doctor says whisky. Whisky? Oh no; sal volatile is much the

best, and Plasmon biscuits. Not sandwiches--I hate sandwiches. Cold

chicken. But can we eat in church? Isn't it rather odd? Oh, the Abbey

isn't exactly a church, you know. Isn't it? I should have thought it

was. Well--no--our Vicar tells me that it was never consecrated. How

very curious! At least it was only consecrated by the Angels, not by

the Bishop. Well, of course that makes a difference. Still, I don't

like the idea of eating and drinking in it. So I shall have some pâté

de foie gras and champagne in the carriage, and eat till the very

moment I get to the Abbey, and begin again the very moment I get out."

_Lively Young Lady._ "I'm not afraid of being faint--only of being

bored in that long wait. I shall take something to read while mamma is

stuffing herself with her sandwiches."

_Facetious Young Man._ "What a good idea! Shall you take _Modern

Society_ or the _Pink 'Un_?"

_Grave Young Lady_ (intervening). "Neither, I hope. People seem to

forget that after all it is a religious service. If one must read,

I think 'John Inglesant' or one of Miss Yonge's books would be more

suitable than a newspaper."

_Lively Young Lady._ "Well, really, it is so difficult to think of it

as a religious service. It seems to me more like a play. I saw one

of the rehearsals, and certainly it was as funny as a pantomime. But

still, of course, one wouldn't wish to do anything that was unsuitable;

so I think I shall take a 'Guide-book to the Abbey' and learn all the

history while we are waiting. One hears so much about it just now, and

it seems stupid not to know. I never can remember whether St. Edward

was Edward the Confessor or Edward the Sixth. Do you know?"

_Facetious Young Man._ "Oh, ask me an easier one. Those old jossers

were all pretty much of a muchness. I tell you I'm not taking any. The

whole thing is utterly out of date. Why couldn't he write his name in a

book, or send a crier round with a bell to say he's come to the throne?"

_The Host._ "My dear Freddy Du Cane, I don't agree with you the least.

I am bound to say quite honestly that all my life I have hoped that

I might live to see a Coronation, and I am honestly thankful that I

have got a place. It is all the things that interest me most rolled

into one--Pageant and History and Patriotism and a great Religious

Ceremony. I am a Liberal; therefore I like the Recognition and the

Oath. I am a Ritualist; therefore I like the vestments and the Unction

and the oblation of the Golden Pall. Above all I am an Englishman,

and I like to see my Sovereign take up the duties of sovereignty at

the altar of 'that Royal and National sanctuary which has for so many

centuries enshrined the varied memories of his august ancestors and the

manifold glories of his free and famous kingdom.' Those words are Dean

Stanley's. Do you know his account of the Coronation in his 'Memorials

of Westminster Abbey'? If you will let me, I will show it to you after

luncheon. People ought at least to know what the service is before they

presume to make stupid jokes about it."

CURTAIN.

II

SECRET SOCIETIES

When Lord Scamperdale was angry with Mr. Sponge for riding over his

hounds he called him "a perpendicular Puseyite pig-jobber"; and the

alliteration was felt to emphasize the rebuke. If any Home Ruler is

irritated by Sir Robert Anderson he may relieve his feelings by calling

him a "preaching political policeman," and each word in the title

will be true to life. Sir Robert combines in his single person the

characters of barrister, detective, and theologian. He began life at

the Irish Bar, was for many years head of the Criminal Investigation

Department in London, then became Assistant Commissioner of Police, and

all the while gave what leisure he could spare from tracking dynamiters

and intercepting burglars to the composition of such works as "The

Gospel and its Ministry," "A Handbook of Evangelical Truth," and

"Daniel in the Critic's Den."

A career so diversified was sure to produce some interesting

reminiscences, and the book[2] which Sir Robert has just published

is as full of mystery and adventure, violence and strategy, plot and

counterplot, as the romances which thrilled our youth. In those days

some boys thought soldiering the one life worth living; some, in fancy,

ran away to sea. Some loved tales of Piracy, and were peculiarly at

home in a Smugglers' Cave. Others snatched a fearful joy from ghosts

and bogies. Others enjoyed Brazilian forests and African jungles,

hand-to-hand encounters with gorillas and hair-breadth 'scapes from

watchful tigers. The present writer thought nothing so delightful

as Secret Societies, and would have given his little all to know a

password, a sign, or a secret code. Perhaps this idiosyncrasy was

due to the fact that in the mid 'sixties every paper teemed with

allusions to Fenianism, just then a very active force in the political

world; and to Smith Minus, in the Fourth Form at Harrow, there was

something unspeakably attractive in the thought of being a "Head

Centre," a "Director," or an "Executive Officer of the Irish Republican

Brotherhood," or even in the paler glory of writing the mystic letters

"F.B." or "C.O." after his undistinguished name. It is in his account

of the earlier days of Fenianism that Sir Robert Anderson is so

intensely interesting. He traces it, from its origin in the abortive

rebellion of 1848 and that "Battle of Limerick" which Thackeray sang,

to its formal inauguration in 1860, and its subsequent activities at

home and abroad; and the narrative begins, quite thrillingly, with the

biography of the famous spy Henri le Caron, who played so striking a

part before the Commission on Parnellism and Crime. Those who wish to

learn these incidents in our recent history, or as much of them as at

present can properly be disclosed, must read Sir Robert's book for

themselves. I will not attempt even to epitomize it; and, indeed, I

only mention it because of the "sidelights" which it throws, not on

Home Rule, but on the part which Secret Societies have played in the

fortunes of Modern Europe.

[2] "Sidelights on the Home Rule Movement." By Sir Robert Anderson,

K.C.B., LL.D.

As far as I know, the only Englishman--if Englishman he could properly

be called--who regarded the Secret Societies as formidable realities

was Lord Beaconsfield. As long ago as 1844--long before he had official

experience to guide him--he wrote, with regard to his favourite Sidonia

(in drawing whom he drew himself):--

"The catalogue of his acquaintance in the shape of Greeks, Armenians,

Moors, Secret Jews, Tartars, Gipsies, wandering Poles, and Carbonari

would throw a curious light on those subterranean agencies of which

the world in general knows so little, but which exercise so great an

influence on public events."

Those were the days when Disraeli, a genius whom no one treated

seriously, was uttering his inmost thoughts through the medium of

romances to which fancy contributed at least as much as fact. Then

came twenty years of constant activity in politics--that pursuit which,

as Bacon says, is of all pursuits "the most immersed in matter,"--and,

when next he took up the novelist's pen, he was a much older and more

experienced, though he would scarcely be a wiser, man. In 1870 he

startled the world with "Lothair"; and those who had the hardihood

to fight their way through all the fashionable flummery with which

the book begins found in the second and third volumes a profoundly

interesting contribution to the history of Europe between 1848 and

1868. One of the characters says that "the only strong things in Europe

are the Church and the Secret Societies"; and the book is a vivid

narrative of the struggle for life and death between the Temporal Power

of the Papacy and the insurrectionary movements inspired by Garibaldi.

Every chapter of the book contains a portrait, and every incident is

drawn from something which had come under the author's notice between

1866 and 1869, when he was the leading personage in the Tory Government

and the Fenians were making open and secret war on English rule. He

was describing the men whom he knew and the things which he had seen,

and this fact makes the book so extraordinarily vivid, and won for

it Froude's enthusiastic praise. Every one could recognize Capel and

Manning and Antonelli and Lord Bute, and all their diplomatic and

fashionable allies; it required some knowledge of the insurrectionary

movements to see in "Captain Bruges" a portrait of General Cluseret,

commander-in-chief of every insurgent army in Europe or America, or in

Theodora the noble character of Jessie White-Mario, whose career of

romantic devotion to the cause of Freedom closed only in this year.[3]

[3] 1906.

"Madre Natura" in Italy, Fenianism in America and England, the "Mary

Anne" Societies of France, and the mysterious alliance between all

these subterranean forces, are the themes of "Lothair," and the

State trials of the time throw a good deal of light upon them all.

Even more mysterious, much harder to trace, and infinitely more

enduring were the operations of the Carbonari--- beginning with a

handful of charcoal-burners in the forests of Northern Italy, and

spreading thence, always by woodland ways, to the centre and north of

Europe. They promoted the French revolutions of 1830 and 1848. Even

Louis Napoleon allied himself with them in his earlier machinations

against Louis Philippe and the Republic; and in the Franco-German

War of 1870 they rendered incalculable service to the German troops

by guiding them through the fastnesses of the Ardennes. It is one

of the characteristics of the Secret Societies that they attack the

established order, without, apparently, caring much what that order

represents. Their generals fought against England in Canada and in

Ireland; against the Northern States in America; against Russia in the

Danubian Principalities. It is not to be supposed that in 1870 the

Carbonari had much sympathy with the military absolutism of Prussia;

but Prussia was attacking the French Empire, and that was enough for

the Carbonari.

Of course, as a general rule, the Secret Societies of the Continent

were anti-monarchical and anti-Christian; but he who loves these

mysterious combinations can find plenty to interest him in the history

of organizations which were neither Republican nor Atheistic. Nothing

could be more devotedly monarchical and orthodox than the "Cycle

of the White Rose." This Society, profoundly "secret," was founded

about the year 1727. It had for its object to unite all the Cavalier

and Nonjuring families of North Wales and Cheshire, with a view to

concerted action when next the exiled Stuarts should claim their own.

The headquarters were always at Wynnstay, and the Lady of Wynnstay was

always Patroness. The badge was a White Rose in enamel, and the list

of members was printed in a circle, so that if it should fall into

the hands of Government no one should appear as ringleader or chief.

The Cycle was for some fifty years a real and definite organization

for political ends; but, as years went on and the hopes of the

Jacobites perished, the Cycle degenerated into a mere dining-club,

and it expired in 1850. Its last member was, I believe, the Rev. Sir

Theophilus Puleston, who lived to see the second Jubilee of Queen

Victoria; and the last Lady Patroness died in 1905.

Another Secret Society which once meant practical mischief of no

common kind was that of the Orangemen. Though Orangemen are nowadays

vociferously loyal, their forerunners are grossly misrepresented if it

is not true that, under the Grand-mastership of the Duke of Cumberland,

afterwards King Ernest of Hanover, they organized a treasonable

conspiracy to prevent Queen Victoria from succeeding to the Throne of

her ancestors and to put her uncle in her place. For sidelights on this

rather dark passage of modern history the curious reader is referred to

"Tales of my Father," by "A. M. F.," and to a sensational rendering of

the same story, called "God Save the Queen."

My space is failing, and I must forbear to enlarge on the most familiar

and least terrifying of all "Secret Societies." I hold no brief for the

"Grand Orient of France," even though Pius IX. may once have belonged

to this or a similar organization; but I must profess that English

Freemasons are the most respectable, most jovial, and most benevolent

of mankind; and I trust that they will accept in its true intention

Cardinal Manning's ambiguously worded defence of their craft, "English

Freemasonry is a Goose Club."

III

THE IRISH PEERAGE

Dryasdust is proverbially a bore, and his forms are Protean. Thus there

are the Jacobite Dryasdusts, who affirm that Queen Victoria had no

higher dignity than that of Dowager Princess Albert of Saxe-Coburg,

and deny that any act of sovereignty transacted in this country

has been valid since that dark morning when James II., making the

best of his way to the Old Kent Road, dropped the Great Seal into

the Thames. Then there are the Constitutional Dryasdusts, who deny

the existence of a Cabinet or a Prime Minister, and insist that the

Privy Council is the only Ministerial body known to the law; and the

Ecclesiastical Dryasdusts, who affirm that the Church of England is

really free because the bishops are freely elected by the Chapters of

their respective Cathedrals, acting under licence from a Sovereign

who, having been anointed, is a _Persona Mixta_--part layman, part

ecclesiastic. At the height of the South African War I chanced to meet

an Heraldic Dryasdust, who moaned like a mandrake over the announcement

that the Duke of Norfolk had just set out, with his Yeomanry, for

the scene of action. "You mean," I said, "that a valuable life is

needlessly imperilled?" "Not at all," replied Dryasdust, with a face

as long as a fiddle-case. "A far more important consideration than the

Duke's life is involved. As Earl-Marshal he is supreme commander of

the forces of the Crown when engaged in actual warfare, and the moment

he sets his foot on African soil Lord Roberts becomes subject to his

command. There is no way out of that constitutional necessity, and I

regard the outlook as very serious." And so indeed it would have been,

had Dryasdust been right.

I am led to this train of reflections by the fact that an eminent

genealogist has lately tried to frighten the readers of a Sunday

paper by broaching the theory that all the Acts of Parliament passed

within the last twenty years may have been invalid. He does not commit

himself to the statement that they are invalid, but he insists that

they may be, and he grounds his contention on a clause of the Act of

Union. Concerning this clause he says, following Sir William Anson,

that it requires that "the number of Irish peers, not entitled by

the possession of other peerages to an hereditary seat in the House

of Lords of the United Kingdom, shall never fall below one hundred."

Now it seems that during the last twenty years the number has fallen

below a hundred; therefore the House of Lords has not been properly

constituted, and therefore its part in legislation has been null and

void. It is a startling theory, and like most startling theories, will

probably turn out to be nonsense; but the history of the Irish Peerage,

apart from any consequences which may be deduced from it, is full of

interest, and not wholly free from scandal. The Irish peerage, as it

stands to-day, comprises 175 members; of these, 28 sit in the House of

Lords as Representative Peers, elected for life by their brethren; 82

sit there because they hold English as well as Irish peerages; and the

remainder, being merely Irish peers and not Representatives, do not

sit in the House of Lords, but are eligible for the House of Commons.

In this respect their state is more gracious than that of the Scotch

peers, who cannot be elected to the House of Commons, and therefore,

unless they can get themselves chosen to be Representative Peers of

Scotland, are excluded from Parliament for ever. Still, though a seat

in the House of Lords is a desirable possession, a mere title has its

charms.

It used to be said that when Mr. Smith the banker, who lived in

Whitehall, asked George III. for the _entrée_ of the Horse Guards, the

King replied, "I can't do that; but I wish to make you an Irish Peer."

However, the true version of the story seems to be that which is given

in the "Life of the Marquis of Granby."

"In 1787 the owner of Rutland House desired to increase the private

_entrée_ into Hyde Park to the dimensions of a carriage entrance,

and asked Charles, fourth Duke of Rutland, to support the necessary

application to the King. The Duke, who was then Viceroy of Ireland,

replied, 'You will let me know whether ye application is to be made to

Lord Orford, who is ye Ranger of ye Park, or to ye King himself: in ye

latter case I would write to Lord Sydney att ye same time; if it be

to the King a greater object might be easier accomplished than this

trifle, as I know he is very particular about his Parks; at least he is

so about St. James Park, for he made a man an Irish Peer to keep him

in Good Humour for having refused him permission to drive his carriage

through ye Horse Guards.'"

Lord Palmerston, himself an Irish peer, used to say that an Irish

peerage was the most convenient of all dignities, as it secured

its owner social precedence while it left him free to pursue a

Parliamentary career. At the same time, greatly as he enjoyed his

position, Palmerston never would take the oaths or comply with

the legal formalities necessary to entitle him to vote for the

Irish Representative Peers; and the reason for this refusal was

characteristic alike of an adroit politician and of the unscrupulous

age in which he lived. An Irish peer who has proved his right to

vote for the Representative Peers, is eligible for election as a

Representative, and Palmerston feared that his political opponents,

wishing to get him out of the House of Commons into the comparative

obscurity and impotence of the House of Lords, would elect him a

Representative Peer in spite of himself, and so effectually terminate

his political activities. In the days immediately succeeding Palmerston

a conspicuous ornament of the Irish Peerage was the second Marquis

of Abercorn. He had no need to trouble himself about Representative

arrangements, for he sat in the House of Lords as a peer of Great

Britain, but his hereditary connexion with the North of Ireland,

his great estates there, and the political influence which they

gave him, made him, in a very real sense, an Irish peer. He was

Lord-Lieutenant from 1866 to 1868, and during his viceroyalty Disraeli

(who subsequently drew his portrait in "Lothair") conferred upon him

the rare honour of an Irish dukedom. It was rumoured that he wished, in

consideration of his 80,000 acres in Tyrone and Donegal, to become the

Duke of Ulster, but was reminded that Ulster was a Royal title, borne

already by the Duke of Edinburgh. Be that as it may, he stuck to his

Scotch title, and became Duke of Abercorn. Down to that time the Duke

of Leinster had been the sole Irish duke, and went by the nickname of

"Ireland's Only." To him, as an old friend, the newly created Duke of

Abercorn wrote a mock apology for having invaded his monopoly; but the

Duke of Leinster was equal to the occasion, and wrote back that he was

quite content to be henceforward the Premier Duke of Ireland. When,

six months later, Disraeli was driven out of office, he conferred an

Irish barony on a faithful supporter, Colonel M'Clintock, who was made

Lord Rathdonnell; and it was generally understood that, by arrangement

between the leaders on both sides, no more Irish peerages were to

be created. This understanding held good till Mr. George Curzon,

proceeding to India as Viceroy and contemplating a possible return to

Parliament when his term of office expired, persuaded Lord Salisbury to

make him Lord Curzon of Kedleston in the Peerage of Ireland.

But, after all, the Irish Peerage of to-day is to a great extent the

product of the Irish Union. "There is no crime recorded in history--I

do not except the Massacre of St. Bartholomew--which will compare for a

moment with the means by which the Union was carried." The student of

men and moods, having no clue to guide him, would probably attribute

this outburst to Mr. Gladstone at some period between his first and

second Home Rule Bills; and he would be right. For my own part, I can

scarcely follow the allusion to St. Bartholomew, but beyond doubt the

measures employed by the English Government in order to secure the

Union were both cruel and base. It is the baseness with which we are

just now concerned. In order to carry the Union it was necessary to

persuade the Irish Houses of Lords and Commons, and to capture the

whole machinery of bribery and terrorism which directed the Irish

Parliament. As that blameless publicist Sir T. Erskine May tranquilly

observes, "corrupt interests could only be overcome by corruption." The

policy of out-corrupting the corruptest was pursued with energy and

resolution. Each patron of Irish boroughs who was ready to part with

them received £7500 for each seat. Lord Downshire got £52,000 for seven

seats; Lord Ely £45,000 for six. The total amount paid in compensation

for the surrender of electoral powers was £1,260,000. In addition to

these pecuniary inducements, honours were lavishly distributed as

bribes. Five Irish peers were called to the House of Lords, twenty were

advanced a step in the peerage, and twenty-two new peers were created.

It would be invidious, and perhaps actionable, to attach proper names

to the amazing histories of Corruption by Title which are narrated in

the Private Correspondence of the Viceroy, Lord Cornwallis, and the

published Memoirs of Sir Jonah Barrington. Even that sound loyalist

Mr. Lecky was constrained to admit that "the majority of Irish titles

are historically connected with memories not of honour but of shame."

On the 22nd January 1799 one member of the Irish House of Commons took

his bribe in the brief interval between his speech for, and his vote

against a resolution affirming the right of the Irish nation to an

independent Legislature. Another aspirant to the peerage "made and sang

songs against the Union in 1799, and made and sang songs for it in

1800." He got his deserts. A third secured £30,000 for his surrendered

boroughs, a peerage for himself, and for his brother in Holy Orders an

archbishopric so wealthy that its fortunate owner became a peer, and

subsequently an earl, on his own account. The scandalous tale might

be indefinitely prolonged; but enough has been said to show why it is

difficult to shed tears when these strangely-engendered peerages sink

below the prescribed number of a hundred.

IV

OMITTED SILHOUETTES

Last year[4] I ventured to submit for public inspection a small

collection of Social Silhouettes. From time to time during the last few

months I have received several kind enquiries about Omitted Portraits.

For instance, there is the Undertaker. Perhaps a friend will write:

"Dickens made capital fun out of Mr. Mould and the 'Hollow _Elm_ Tree.'

Couldn't you try your hand at something of the same kind?" Another

writes, perhaps a little bluntly: "Why don't you give us the Barrister?

He must be an awfully easy type to do." A third says, with subtler

tact: "I feel that, since Thackeray left us, yours is the only pen

which can properly handle the Actor"--or the Painter, or the Singer,

or the Bellringer, or the Beadle, as the case may be. Now, to these

enquiries, conceived, as I know them all to be, in the friendliest

spirit, my answer varies a little, according to the type suggested.

With regard to the Barrister, I stated quite early in my series that I

did not propose to deal with him, because he had been drawn repeatedly

by the master-hands of fiction, and because the lapse of years had

wrought so little change in the type that Serjeant Snubbin, and

Fitz-Roy Timmins, and Sir Thomas Underwood, and Mr. Furnival, and Mr.

Chaffanbrass were portraits which needed no retouching. I must, indeed,

admit that the growth of hair upon the chin and upper lip is a marked

departure from type, and that a moustached K.C. is as abnormal a being

as a bearded woman or a three-headed nightingale; but the variation is

purely external, and the true inwardness of the Barrister remains what

it was when Dickens and Thackeray and Trollope drew him. So, again,

with regard to the Family Solicitor; as long as men can study the

methods of Mr. Tulkinghorn (of Lincoln's Inn Fields) and Mr. Putney

Giles (of the same learned quarter) they may leave Mr. Jerome K. Jerome

in undisturbed possession of his stage-lawyer, who "dresses in the

costume of the last generation but seven, never has any office of his

own, and (with the aid of a crimson bag) transacts all his business at

his clients' houses."

[4] 1906.

When I am asked why I do not describe the Painter, my reply is partly

the same. We have got Gaston Phoebus, and Clive Newcome, and Claude

Mellot, and the goodly company of Trilby, and we shall not easily

improve upon those portraits, whether highly finished or merely

sketched. But in this case I have another reason for reticence. I

know a good many painters, who about this time of year bid me to their

studios. I have experienced before now the delicate irritability of the

artistic genius, and I know that a reverential reticence is my safest

course. Conversely, my reason for not describing the Actor is that I

really do not know him well enough. An actor off the stage is about as

exhilarating an object as a theatre by daylight. The brilliancy and the

glamour have departed; the savour of sawdust and orange-peel remains.

Let us render all honour to the histrion when his foot is on his native

boards; but if we are wise we shall eschew in private life the society

of Mr. and Mrs. Vincent Crummles, nor open our door too widely to the

tribe of Costigan and Fotheringay.

The mention of that great actress's name (for did not Emily Costigan,

afterwards Lady Mirabel, figure as "Miss Fotheringay" on the provincial

stage?) reminds me that, according to some of my critics, women

played too rare and too secluded a part in my series of "Typical

Developments." It is only too true, and no one knows as well as the

author the amount of brilliancy and interest which has been forfeited

thereby. But really it is a sacred awe that has made me mute. Even

to-day, as I write, I am smarting under a rebuke recently administered

to me, at a public gathering, by an outraged matron. This lady belongs

to the political section of her tribe; holds man, poor man! in proper

contempt; and clamours on Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman's doorstep for

that suffrage which is to make her truly free. At present she esteems

herself little better than a Squaw, and has been heard to declare, in

moments of expansive eloquence, that she was not created to be the Toy

of Man--a declaration in which her hearers most heartily concurred.

Well, this stern guardian of her sex's rights recently took me to

task in a public place for the levity with which I had criticized a

gathering of political ladies, and my nerve has scarcely rallied from

the sudden onslaught. Had I been more myself I might even yet have

tried my unskilled hand at female portraiture. Perhaps, in the spirit

of that Cambridge professor who calls William II. "quite the nicest

Emperor I know," I might have begun in the most illustrious circles,

and have sketched the stone-laying and bazaar-opening activities of

Royal Princesses. Or, yielding precedence to the Church, I might

have discoursed of Episcopal ladies and have traced the influence

of a tradition received from the beatified Mrs. Proudie. "_We_ had

a very nice Ordination this Trinity," says one lady of this class.

"The Bishop and I were much disappointed by the poor response of the

laity to our appeal," wrote another. When in May 1899 the Archbishops

were playing at a Court for the trial of Ritualism, Episcopal ladies

sat knitting by the judgment-seat, and stared at the incriminated

clergymen, as the _tricoteuses_ of the French Revolution may have

stared at the victims of the guillotine, or as Miss Squeers peered

through the keyhole at the flagellation of Smike. Or again, on a

lowlier rung of the Ecclesiastical ladder, I might have drawn the

Parochial Worker--the woman of waterproof and gingham, the distributor

of tracts, the disciplinarian of the Sunday School, the presiding

spirit of Mothers' Meetings. At a General Election this type of lady

varies her activities--canvasses for the Conservative candidate, and

tells the gaping washerwomen that Mr. Lloyd-George wishes to convert

the Welsh cathedrals into music-halls for the Eisteddfod. Of all

Parochial Workers the highest type is the Deaconess; and not long ago,

in a parish with which I am conversant, the Deaconess and the Curate

used to do their parochial rounds on a double bicycle, to the infinite

amusement of the gutter-children and the serious perturbation of the

severely orthodox. There was a picture worthy of the pen and pencil of

Thackeray, but it faded all too soon into the blurred commonplace of

matrimony.

The Deaconess may be called the Marine of the Church's army, with one

foot on sea and one on shore--only half a Worldling, yet not quite

a Nun. With ladies of the last-named type, my acquaintance has been

prolonged and intimate. Of their excellence and devotion it would be

impertinent to speak; but I may say without offence that some of the

ablest, most agreeable, and most amusing women I have known I have

encountered in the Cloister. But, alas! even into the Cloister the

serpent of political guile will wend his sinuous way; nor could I,

though her friend, commend the action of Sister G---- M---- when, in

order to prevent a patient in a Convalescent Home from voting for a

Radical candidate, she kept his trousers under lock and key till the

poll was over.

"Old age," it has been bitterly said, "when it can no longer set a bad

example, gives good advice;" and when, as sometimes happens, I am asked

to hortate my younger fellow-citizens, one of my most emphatic lessons

is a Reverence for Womanhood, even in its least ideal aspects. This, I

declare to be an essential attribute of the ideal character--of that

manhood, at once beautiful and good, to which the philosophers have

taught us to aspire; and, lest I should seem to be violating my own

oft-repeated precept, I tear myself from a fascinating theme.

V

DOCTORS AND DOCTORING

Sydney Smith, who was fond of quacking his parishioners, and had a poor

opinion of "professional and graduated homicides," observes that "the

Sixth Commandment is suspended by one medical diploma from the North of

England to the South." Personally, I have experienced the attentions

of the Faculty north, south, east, and west, and I began in London.

In my first appearance on this planet I was personally conducted by

a smart gentleman, who came straight from a dinner-party, in a large

white cravat and turquoise studs. Those studs still exist, and have

descended, with the practice, to his grandson. May they beam on births

more propitious than my own.

My knowledge of the first act of life's drama is necessarily

traditional. But, as I approach the second, memory begins to operate. I

seem to remember a black silhouette of a gentleman in an elbow-chair,

with a pigtail and knee-breeches; and this icon was revered as

the likeness of "old Doctor P----." This "old Dr. P.'s" son, "Tom

P----," was a sturdy stripling of seventy odd, who had never used

a stethoscope, and dismissed a rival practitioner who talked about

heart-sounds as "an alarmist." To these succeeded a third generation

of the same drug-stained dynasty, represented to me by a gentleman

in shiny black, who produced a large gold watch when he felt one's

pulse, and said "Hah!" when he looked at one's tongue. These three

generations, for something more than a century, monopolized all the

best practice of Loamshire, were immensely respected, and accumulated a

great deal of money. Echoes of the dialogue between doctor and patient

still haunt the ear of memory:--

_Nervous and Dyspeptic Lady._ "Do you know, Dr. P., I felt so very

uncomfortable after luncheon--quite a sensation of sinking through the

floor. Of course I had some brandy and water--about half and half--at

once, but I feel that I ought to have a little champagne at dinner.

Nothing helps me so much."

DR. P. "Your ladyship is no inconsiderable physician. I was about to

make the same suggestion. But pray be careful that it is a dry wine."

All this was very comfortable and friendly, and tended to promote the

best relations between doctor and patient. I do not recollect that the

doctor was supposed to effect cures; but his presence at a deathbed

created the pleasant sense that all had been done which could be done,

and that the patient was dying with the dignity proper to his station.

It may be remarked, in passing, that the two elder generations did all

their rounds, early and late, summer and winter, on horseback; while

the third subsided into a brougham drawn by a pair of horses afflicted

with stringhalt, and presumably bought cheap on account of that

infirmity.

So much for the men. What was their method? To my infant palate the

oils of castor and cod were as familiar as mother's milk. I dwelt

in a land flowing with rhubarb and magnesia. The lively leech was a

household pet. "Two nocturnes in blue and an arrangement in black," as

the Æsthete said, were of frequent occurrence. But other parts of the

system were more palatable. I seem to have drunk beer from my earliest

infancy. A glass of port wine at eleven, with a teaspoonful of bark in

it, was the recognized tonic, and brandy (which the doctor, who loved

periphrasis, always called "the domestic stimulant") was administered

whenever one looked squeamish, while mulled claret was "exhibited" as a

soporific. The notion of pouring all this stuff down a child's throat

sounds odd to a generation reared on Apollinaris and barley-water, but

it had this one advantage--that when one grew up it was impossible to

make one drunk.

From childhood we pass on to schooldays. Wild horses should not drag

from me the name of the seminary where I was educated, for its medical

arrangements left a good deal to be desired. There were three doctors

in this place, and they shared the care of some six hundred boys. Dr.

A. was certainly very old, and was reputed to be very good, insomuch

that his admirers said that, if they were dying, they should wish

to have Dr. A. with them, as he was better than any clergyman. If,

however, they were so carnally-minded as to wish to recover, they sent

for Dr. B., a bluff gentleman, who told his patients that they were

not half as ill as they thought, and must pull themselves together--a

prescription which, if there was nothing the matter, answered

admirably. The third was a grievous gentleman, who took a dark view of

life, and, sitting by my sick-bed, would inform me of the precarious

condition of a schoolfellow, who, to use his own phrase, was "slipping

through his fingers," and "had no more constitution than a fly."

Regarding this triumvirate in the light of my subsequent experience, I

cannot affect surprise that there were fifteen deaths among the boys

during the five years that I was in the school.

From the anonymous school I proceeded to an anonymous university, where

the medical world was dominated by the bland majesty of Sir Omicron Pie

(the name is Trollope's, but it will serve). Who that ever saw them can

forget that stately bearing, that Jove-like brow, that sublime air of

omniscience and omnipotence? Who that ever heard it, that even flow of

mellifluous eloquence and copious narrative? Who that ever experienced

it, the underlying kindness of heart?

A nervous undergraduate is ushered into the consulting-room, and the

great man advances with a paternal smile.

"Mr. Bumpstead? Ah! I think I was at school with your good father. No?

Then it must have been your uncle. You are very like him. We ran a

neck-and-neck race at the University. I won the Gold Medal, and he was

_proximè_. In those days I little thought of settling down in Oxbridge.

I had destined myself for a London practice; but Sir Thomas Watson--you

have heard of 'Watson's style'? He was the Cicero of Medicine--well,

Watson said, 'No, my dear Pie, it won't do. In ten years you will be at

the head of the profession, and will have made £100,000. But, mark my

words, _the blade will wear out the scabbard_. You are not justified in

risking your life.' I was disappointed, of course. All young men like

the idea of fame. But I saw that Watson was right, and I came here, and

found my life's work. The Medical School was then in a very decayed

condition, and I have made it what it is. Why am I telling you all

this----?"

(_Enter the butler._) "Please, Sir Omicron, you've an appointment at

Battle-axe Castle at four o'clock, and the carriage is at the door."

_Sir O. P._ "Ah! well. I must tell you the rest another day. Let me

see, what was the matter? Palpitation? Let me listen for a moment. It

is as I thought--only a little functional irritability. Lead a sensible

life; avoid excess; cultivate the philosophic temper. Take this

prescription, and come again next week. Thank you, thank you."

Fortified by four years of Sir Omicron's care, I came up to London

somewhere between 1870 and 1880. The practice of the West End was then

divided between three men--Sir A. B., Sir C. D., and Sir E. F.

Sir A. B. was bluff and brutal, fashioned himself on the traditions of

Abernethy, and ruled his patients by sheer terrorism. He had an immense

influence over hysterical women and weak-minded men, and people who

might otherwise have resented his ursine manner were reconciled to it

by the knowledge that he officially inspected the most illustrious

Tongue in the kingdom.

His principal rival was Sir C. D., who ruled by love. "Well, my dear

sir, there is not much the matter. A day or two's hunting will set you

right. You don't ride? Ah! well, it doesn't much matter. A fortnight at

Monte Carlo will do just as well. All you want is change of scene and

plenty of amusement."

Seeing and Hearing · 第 1 / 20 段