But I must not forget that these records are meant to be about myself,
the author of poems and other effusions let loose when from time to time
he drew out the spigot. The author’s insurance policy is still under
discussion. His trial is still going on, as did that of Warren Hastings;
it has gone into a new generation, and some say that when, like the
traditional door-nail, he is dead, it will terminate in his acquittal,
it being found at last that he did not make himself, but was planned out
by Nature to serve her purpose; having fulfilled which, she withdrew the
chemical compound of which he consisted, and utilized his waste materials.
As said before, I had the “Piromides” printed and published; it was
by Saunders and Ottley, in 1839, while I resided in Gordon Square on
my return from Paris, where I had spent twelve months in making the
acquaintance of scientific physicians, naturalists, and others; going
round the wards of La Charité with Andral every morning at six o’clock;
attending the lectures on chemistry of Thénard at a later hour, and
revelling in the bones of Cuvier’s osteological museum. I was much with
Milne-Edwards; and with Dujardin, whose _éclairage_ for the microscope I
introduced into London, lending mine to Ross and to Powell as a pattern,
and these opticians and their successors have supplied the scientific
profession with it ever since. It consisted of an achromatic illuminator,
the invention of which Wollaston pronounced impossible, and which
Dujardin achieved.
In that year I made the discovery of an animalcule in the liver; it was a
time when such things were unknown, now fifty years ago. This discovery
has recently attracted the attention of the Pathological Society, who
have given an account of it in their “Transactions” for 1890, in a
eulogistic tone.
In that year, too, I published “Vates.”
From 1839 to 1853, living in East Anglia, I was engaged in an art-novel
or romance, called “Valdarno,” taking it up only from time to time,
as Goethe did his “Faust.” I began its foundations in Florence, and
published four numbers under the title of “Vates,” illustrated by Charles
Landseer, and I then dropped it, as in costing too much money it became
a gift to the world. Dante Rossetti, whose father was a professor at
King’s, like Pepoli at University College, used, as a student-boy at the
first-named, to purchase “Vates,” and devour it eagerly; so he told me
when many years later we met.
Leaving the arena of letters and art for country life, which is, however,
worth seeing once, I settled myself down in the monastic borough of Bury
St. Edmunds. Like all the old county towns, it was formerly the little
metropolis of a squirearchy, where the dowagers retired for life into the
family mansions. The place has great architectural features in the shape
of abbey ruins, still haunted by the ghost of Abbot Sampson; of noble
churches, such as are not built now; of Norman tower and Gothic gateway,
such as may never be built again.
There was no lord in the place to adorn it, but there was a great plenty
of the kind to bless it and conserve it within reach—the Duke of Norfolk,
the Marquis of Bristol, and baronets sufficient in number to engage
the fingers of one hand when counted up. But the town itself had its
magnates; there was an honourable Mr. Petre, brother of a lord of that
name, and an honourable Mr. Pellew, son of the naval hero, and my own
familiar friend, not to mention an admiral of the great name and family
of Wollaston, and a post-captain, with a C.B. that he never wore; and it
must not be forgotten that the august mother of the Bishop of London, Dr.
Bloomfield, also resided there, among others of great worth, including a
solitary baronet and his lady, Sir John Walsham.
There was a famous grammar school, too, with Dr. Donaldson of classic
fame as head master, which had supplied England with a president of
the Royal College of Physicians, Sir Thomas Watson; a lord chancellor,
Sir Robert Rolfe, Lord Cranworth; besides a bishop of London, whose
scholarship was on a par with that of the most learned of the day; and
all these alive at the same time.
The Marquis of Bristol was the younger son of the earl of that house,
who was also Bishop of Derry, and owing to his elder brother’s early
death, he became the owner of Ickworth, a park within a short drive of
Bury, which, including all the parish and part of the one adjoining, lies
within a circuit of eleven miles. It is said that the father disliked the
son, probably owing to some act of disobedience, and exercised his power
of depriving the inheritance of its charm. He destroyed all the fine old
timber in the park, but nearly a hundred years have sufficed to restore
it; and he left the plan of a colossal palace, of which he himself
erected the central shell, and laid the whole of the foundations. I was
credibly informed that ten thousand a year was to be spent for fifty
years, according to the bishop’s will, to complete the structure.
The building was completed on the original grand scale about fifty
years ago, and it took fifty years to finish. In the drawings of this
marvellous structure it is designated Ickworth Building, and it bears
that name, which, given it by Time, it will always retain, for people
call it by no other.
Ickworth Building was the design of a Mr. Sandys, I believe a clergyman,
not an architect by profession. He had been much in Rome, as had the
bishop, who loved Italy, and lived more in that country than elsewhere;
and, though an absentee bishop, the beneficence he exercised in his see
was so great that at his death the people of Derry subscribed to raise
a monument of their gratitude to him, which stands near the building in
Ickworth Park.
There must be descriptions of Ickworth Building in works on architecture,
and I think one will be found in Mr. Rookwood Gage’s fine “History of
Suffolk;” but I do not possess such, and what I say is from memory.
I have heard Lord Bristol say that often when he looked out of window
in the morning on the new building from the old, he wished the earth
would swallow it up. One knows the feeling of something always hanging
over one; it is like that of a man sitting underneath a gallows after an
execution.
The marquis might doubtless have eluded the burden imposed on him
by his father’s will, but _je noublieray jamais_ was the motto he
inherited, and he lived to finish his task and to enjoy the magnificent
dwelling-place as a home. The building itself, wholly unique in grace
and beauty, consists of a central structure, almost circular, surmounted
by a dome, intended to represent the Coliseum; its summit is belted by
sculptures of the Homeric legends, the work of Flaxman. There are two
square wings at a proportionate distance from the body of the building,
connected with it by corridors, each being the segment of a circle,
with its concavity to the front. The left wing was designed for a
picture-gallery, the right one for a gallery of sculpture, intended by
the bishop to receive his collections of art.
The building is of white material externally; its area is planted with
cedars alone. Of all the palaces and mansions I have ever beheld, it is
the most surprising; perhaps equalled only, though not in grace, by the
temples of India, with the designs of which one is familiar.
The Pavilion at Brighton should not be forgotten in such a comparison,
but that is semi-barbarous, while Ickworth is classic, of the Ionic and
Corinthian orders.
Approached by a serpentine road, its perspective conveys the impression
of a moving object; it seems to swing round, as on a pivot, at every
turn one takes in driving towards the portico, now slowly, now rapidly
revolving, on its aërial axis, now remaining still.
I am not aware of it, if what follows has ever been put on record
authentically, though it may have been so in part. The earl-bishop
lived much at Rome and spent his large income in making a collection of
pictures and sculptures to fill the galleries at Ickworth. It was at the
time when we were at war with France on account of Napoleon Bonaparte’s
usurpations.
The bishop having completed his collections of sculptures made his
arrangements for transmitting them to England, when they were seized
on their way by Bonaparte as belonging to a British subject. This act
aroused a strong feeling of indignation in the minds of the Italian
artists, who had met with so generous a patron in the bishop, and, that
he might not be a sufferer, they subscribed a large sum of money and
offered it to Bonaparte as a ransom for the treasures he had put under
confiscation. Bonaparte took the money and set the collection free,
restoring it to their owner, when it was no sooner despatched a second
time than he seized it again.
No more fortunate fate awaited the pictures. The bishop succeeded in
having them safely conveyed to Dover, but while in the custom house
the building was burnt down, and the fine collection of paintings was
destroyed in the flames.
I was told by one of the family a singular anecdote of the bishop. When
at Rome he was invited to a banquet by the cardinals, and, while the
company gathered, he learnt accidentally that the dining-hall was over
the debtor’s prison. His anger at once burst forth and knew no bounds.
He, a prelate of the Church of England, was insulted; he had been asked
to dine over the heads of those wretched prisoners who, during the feast,
would be pining in their narrow cells. His hosts naturally explained that
such an affront was unintended by them; but he was not to be pacified. At
length his course was determined on: he would remain where he was until a
full list of all the prisoners’ debts was brought him. For this he waited
sulkily, and when it arrived he wrote a cheque for the entire amount.
The prison doors were opened, and he sat down.
The private history of a country has not the same interest as the public,
which is enduring; but it has a charm and is instructive. Biology profits
by observing the influence of a higher life on the temperaments of men,
on their principles, their manners, and their views. How different all
these become to what we meet with in the common working men, from whom
the best of us are descended!
The bishop was for some time confined by the republicans in the castle
of Milan, and afterwards still remained in Italy, where he died in 1803.
Except the central shell and the foundations, Ickworth was left for the
next successor to erect: a gigantic undertaking.
The Herveys were always distinguished by their manners; Lord Hervey, in
Pope’s time, was so conspicuous on this ground as to be called “Fanny
Hervey.” It was with him, probably, the saying arose that the human race
was divided into men, women, and Herveys.
The present Lord Arthur, now bishop of Bath and Wells, has a manner
which, once seen, could never be forgotten. The same might be said of
Lord Charles Hervey, who, however, had taken a different polish from
having been a member of the Spanish embassy.
Lord Bristol was at Ickworth chiefly at Christmas, when he packed his
house with all his descendants, having a separate table for those who
were yet children.
Unfortunately, the offices being in the basement, half a mile distant, as
people said, the dinner had plenty of time to cool before it reached the
table.
Lord Bristol was always very pleasant with his guests: after dinner he
would sit with his legs crossed and enter into familiar chat on political
matters. He had veered a good deal towards the Liberal side. I remember
his saying to me, “It is incumbent on us to move with the times; it was
very easy to govern when there was only a population of eleven millions,
but it is a different matter now.”
Earl Jermyn was very unlike his younger brothers and his father. He had
a manner peculiarly his own, a politeness so mingled with shyness that
one could not distinguish the one from the other, but withal a commanding
air. His countess, Lady Catherine Jermyn, sister of the present Duke of
Rutland, had a most imposing figure, and was both beautiful and full
of charm. She died in London in her prime, so absolutely the prey of
small-pox that no feature was longer recognizable.
Lord Alfred was member for Bury at one time, with Earl Jermyn, but he
made no place for himself in political life.
I was informed that the earl-bishop had built himself a residence in
Ireland, similar to the Ickworth Building, but on a greatly reduced
scale. When I read Lever’s novel of “The Bishop’s Folly,” I wondered
whether its plot was laid in the place in question. I quite read the work
with the impression that it was so.