Lord Shaftesbury's devotion to the cause of Labour led him to make the

Factory Acts a touchstone of character. To the end of his days his view

of public men was largely governed by the part which they had played in

that great controversy. "Gladstone voted against me," was a stern

sentence not seldom on his lips. "Bright was the most malignant opponent

the Factory Bill ever had." "Cobden, though bitterly hostile, was better

than Bright." Even men whom on general grounds he disliked and

despised--such as Lord Beaconsfield and Bishop Wilberforce--found a

saving clause in his judgment if he could truthfully say, "He helped me

with the chimney-sweeps," or, "He felt for the wretched operatives."

But even apart from questions of humane sentiment and the supreme

interests of social legislation, I always felt in my intercourse with

Lord Shaftesbury that it would have been impossible for him to act for

long together in subordination to, or even in concert with, any

political leader. Resolute, self-reliant, inflexible; hating compromise;

never turning aside by a hair's-breadth from the path of duty; incapable

of flattering high or low; dreading leaps in the dark, but dreading more

than anything else the sacrifice of principle to party--he was

essentially the type of politician who is the despair of the official

wire-puller.

Oddly enough, Lord Palmerston was the statesman with whom, despite all

ethical dissimilarity, he had the most sympathy, and this arose partly

from their near relationship and partly from Lord Palmerston's

easy-going habit of placing his ecclesiastical patronage in Lord

Shaftesbury's hands. It was this unseen but not unfelt power as a

confidential yet irresponsible adviser that Lord Shaftesbury really

enjoyed and, indeed, his political opinions were too individual to have

allowed of binding association with either political party. He was, in

the truest and best sense of the word, a Conservative. To call him a

Tory would be quite misleading. He was not averse from Roman Catholic

emancipation. He took no prominent part against the first Reform Bill.

His resistance to the admission of the Jews to Parliament was directed

rather against the method than the principle. Though not friendly to

Women's Suffrage, he said: "I shall feel myself bound to conform to the

national will, but I am not prepared to stimulate it."

But while no blind and unreasoning opponent of all change, he had a deep

and lively veneration for the past. Institutions, doctrines, ceremonies,

dignities, even social customs, which had descended from old time, had

for him a fascination and an awe. In his high sense of the privileges

and the duties of kingship, of aristocracy, of territorial possession,

of established religions, he recalled the doctrine of Burke; and he

resembled that illustrious man in his passionate love of principle, in

his proud hatred of shifts and compromises, in his contempt for the

whole race of mechanical politicians and their ignoble strife for place

and power.

When Lord Derby formed his Government in 1866, on the defeat of Lord

Russell's second Reform Bill, he endeavoured to obtain the sanction of

Lord Shaftesbury's name and authority by offering him a seat in his

Cabinet. This offer was promptly declined; had it been accepted, it

might have had an important bearing on the following event, which was

narrated to me by Lord Shaftesbury in 1882. One winter evening in 1867

he was sitting in his library in Grosvenor Square, when the servant told

him that there was a poor man waiting to see him. The man was shown in,

and proved to be a labourer from Clerkenwell, and one of the innumerable

recipients of the old Earl's charity. He said, "My Lord, you have been

very good to me, and I have come to tell you what I have heard." It

appeared that at the public-house which he frequented he had overheard

some Irishmen of desperate character plotting to blow up Clerkenwell

prison. He gave Lord Shaftesbury the information to be used as he

thought best, but made it a condition that his name should not be

divulged. If it were, his life would not be worth an hour's purchase.

Lord Shaftesbury pledged himself to secrecy, ordered his carriage, and

drove instantly to Whitehall. The authorities there refused, on grounds

of official practice, to entertain the information without the name and

address of the informant. These, of course, could not be given. The

warning was rejected, and the jail blown up. Had Lord Shaftesbury been a

Cabinet Minister, this triumph of officialism would probably not have

occurred.

What I have said of this favourite hero of mine in his public aspects

will have prepared the sympathetic reader for the presentment of the man

as he appeared in private life. For what he was abroad that he was at

home. He was not a man who showed two natures or lived two lives. He was

profoundly religious, eagerly benevolent, utterly impatient of whatever

stood between him and the laudable object of the moment, warmly attached

to those who shared his sympathies and helped his enterprises--_Fort

comme le diamant; plus tendre qu'une mère_. The imperiousness which I

described at the outset remained a leading characteristic to the last.

His opinions were strong, his judgment was emphatic, his language

unmeasured. He had been, all through his public life, surrounded by a

cohort of admiring and obedient coadjutors, and he was unused to, and

intolerant of, disagreement or opposition. It was a disconcerting

experience to speak on a platform where he was chairman, and, just as

one was warming to an impressive passage, to feel a vigorous pull at

one's coat-tail, and to hear a quick, imperative voice say, in no

muffled tone, "My dear fellow, are you never going to stop? We shall be

here all night."

But when due allowance was made for this natural habit of command, Lord

Shaftesbury was delightful company. Given to hospitality, he did the

honours with stately grace; and, on the rare occasions when he could be

induced to dine out, his presence was sure to make the party a success.

In early life he had been pestered by a delicate digestion, and had

accustomed himself to a regimen of rigid simplicity; but, though the

most abstemious of men, he knew and liked a good glass of wine, and in a

small party would bring out of the treasures of his memory things new

and old with a copiousness and a vivacity which fairly fascinated his

hearers. His conversation had a certain flavour of literature. His

classical scholarship was easy and graceful. He had the Latin poets at

his fingers' ends, spoke French fluently, knew Milton by heart, and was

a great admirer of Crabbe. His own style, both in speech and writing,

was copious, vigorous, and often really eloquent. It had the same

ornamental precision as his exquisite handwriting. When he was among

friends whom he thoroughly enjoyed, the sombre dignity of his

conversation was constantly enlivened by flashes of a genuine humour,

which relieved, by the force of vivid contrast, the habitual austerity

of his demeanour.

A kind of proud humility was constantly present in his speech and

bearing. Ostentation, display, lavish expenditure would have been

abhorrent alike to his taste and his principles. The stately figure

which bore itself so majestically in Courts and Parliaments naturally

unbent among the costermongers of Whitechapel and the labourers of

Dorsetshire. His personal appointments were simple to a degree; his own

expenditure was restricted within the narrowest limits. But he loved,

and was honestly proud of, his beautiful home--St. Giles's House, near

Cranbourne; and when he received his guests, gentle or simple, at "The

Saint," as he affectionately called it, the mixture of stateliness and

geniality in his bearing and address was an object-lesson in high

breeding. Once Lord Beaconsfield, who was staying with Lord Alington at

Crichel, was driven over to call on Lord Shaftesbury at St. Giles's.

When he rose to take his leave, he said, with characteristic

magniloquence, but not without an element of truth, "Good-bye, my dear

Lord. You have given me the privilege of seeing one of the most

impressive of all spectacles--a great English nobleman living in

patriarchal state in his own hereditary halls."

IV.

CARDINAL MANNING.

I have described a great philanthropist and a great statesman. My

present subject is a man who combined in singular harmony the qualities

of philanthropy and of statesmanship--Henry Edward, Cardinal Manning,

and titular Archbishop of Westminster.

My acquaintance with Cardinal Manning began in 1833. Early in the

Parliamentary session of that year he intimated, through a common

friend, a desire to make my acquaintance. He wished to get an

independent Member of Parliament, and especially, if possible, a Liberal

and a Churchman, to take up in the House of Commons the cause of

Denominational Education. His scheme was much the same as that now[3]

adopted by the Government--the concurrent endowment of all

denominational schools; which, as he remarked, would practically come to

mean those of the Anglicans, the Romans, and the Wesleyans. In

compliance with his request, I presented myself at that barrack-like

building off the Vauxhall Bridge Road, which was formerly the Guards'

Institute, and is now the Archbishop's House. Of course, I had long been

familiar with the Cardinal's shrunken form and finely-cut features, and

that extraordinary dignity of bearing which gave him, though in reality

below the middle height, the air and aspect of a tall man. But I only

knew him as a conspicuous and impressive figure in society, on public

platforms, and (where he specially loved to be) in the precincts of the

House of Commons. I had never exchanged a word with him, and it was with

a feeling of very special interest that I entered his presence.

We had little in common. I was still a young man, and the Cardinal was

already old. I was a staunch Anglican; he, the most devoted of

Papalists. I was strongly opposed both to his Ultramontane policy and to

those dexterous methods by which he was commonly supposed to promote it;

and, as far as the circumstances of my life had given me any insight

into the interior of Romanism, I sympathized with the great Oratorian of

Birmingham rather than with his brother-cardinal of Westminster. But

though I hope that my principles stood firm, all my prejudices melted

away in that fascinating presence. Though there was something like half

a century's difference in our ages, I felt at once and completely at

home with him.

What made our perfect ease of intercourse more remarkable was that, as

far as the Cardinal's immediate object was concerned, my visit was a

total failure. I had no sympathy with his scheme for the endowment of

denominational teaching, and, with all the will in the world to please

him, I could not even meet him half way. But this untoward circumstance

did not import the least difficulty or restraint into our conversation.

He gently glided from business into general topics; knew all about my

career, congratulated me on some recent success, remembered some of my

belongings, inquired about my school and college, was interested to find

that, like himself, I had been at Harrow and Oxford, and, after an

hour's pleasant chat, said, "Now you must stay and have some luncheon."

From that day to the end of his life I was a frequent visitor at his

house, and every year that I knew him I learned to regard and respect

him increasingly.

Looking back over these fourteen years, and reviewing my impressions of

his personality, I must put first the physical aspect of the man. He

seemed older than he was, and even more ascetic, for he looked as if,

like the cardinal in _Lothair_, he lived on biscuits and soda-water;

whereas he had a hearty appetite for his midday meal, and, in his own

words, "enjoyed his tea." Still, he carried the irreducible minimum of

flesh on his bones, and his hollow cheeks and shrunken jaws threw his

massive forehead into striking prominence. His line of features was

absolutely faultless in its statuesque regularity, but his face was

saved from the insipidity of too great perfection by the

imperious--rather ruthless--lines of his mouth and the penetrating

lustre of his deep-set eyes. His dress--a black cassock edged and

buttoned with crimson, with a crimson skullcap and biretta, and a

pectoral cross of gold--enhanced the picturesqueness of his aspect, and

as he entered the anteroom where one awaited his approach, the most

Protestant knee instinctively bent.

His dignity was astonishing. The position of a cardinal with a princely

rank recognized abroad but officially ignored in England was difficult

to carry off, but his exquisite tact enabled him to sustain it to

perfection. He never put himself forward; never asserted his rank; never

exposed himself to rebuffs; still, he always contrived to be the most

conspicuous figure in any company which he entered; and whether one

greeted him with the homage due to a prince of the Church or merely with

the respect which no one refuses to a courtly old gentleman, his manner

was equally easy, natural, and unembarrassed. The fact that the

Cardinal's name, after due consideration, was inserted in the Royal

Commission on the Housing of the Poor immediately after that of the

Prince of Wales and before Lord Salisbury's was the formal recognition

of a social precedence which adroitness and judgment had already made

his own.

To imagine that Cardinal Manning regarded station, or dignity, or even

power, as treasures to be valued in themselves would be ridiculously to

misconceive the man. He had two supreme and absorbing objects in

life--if, indeed, they may not be more properly spoken of as one--the

glory of God and the salvation of men. These were, in his intellect and

conscience, identified with the victory of the Roman Church. To these

all else was subordinated; by its relation to these all else was weighed

and calculated. His ecclesiastical dignity, and the secular recognition

of it, were valuable as means to high ends. They attracted public notice

to his person and mission; they secured him a wider hearing; they gave

him access to circles which, perhaps, would otherwise have been closed.

Hence, and for no other reason, they were valuable.

It has always to be borne in mind that Manning was essentially a man of

the world, though he was much more than that. Be it far from me to

disparage the ordinary type of Roman ecclesiastic, who is bred in a

seminary, and perhaps spends his lifetime in a religious community. That

peculiar training produces, often enough, a character of saintliness and

unworldly grace on which one can only "look," to use a phrase of Mr.

Gladstone's, "as men look up at the stars." But it was a very different

process that had made Cardinal Manning what he was. He had touched life

at many points. A wealthy home, four years at Harrow, Balliol in its

palmiest days, a good degree, a College Fellowship, political and

secular ambitions of no common kind, apprenticeship to the practical

work of a Government office, a marriage brightly but all too briefly

happy, the charge of a country parish, and an early initiation into the

duties of ecclesiastical rulership--all these experiences had made

Henry Manning, by the time of his momentous change, an accomplished man

of the world.

His subsequent career, though, of course, it superadded certain

characteristics of its own, never obliterated or even concealed the

marks left by those earlier phases, and the octogenarian Cardinal was a

beautifully-mannered, well-informed, sagacious old gentleman who, but

for his dress, might have passed for a Cabinet Minister, an eminent

judge, or a great county magnate.

His mental alertness was remarkable. He seemed to read everything that

came out, and to know all that was going on. He probed character with a

glance, and was particularly sharp on pretentiousness and

self-importance. A well-known publicist, who perhaps thinks of himself

rather more highly than he ought to think, once ventured to tell the

Cardinal that he knew nothing about the subject of a painful agitation

which pervaded London in the summer of 1885. "I have been hearing

confessions in London for thirty years, and I fancy more people have

confided their secrets to me than to you, Mr. ----," was the Cardinal's

reply.

Once, when his burning sympathy with suffering and his profound contempt

for Political Economy had led him, in his own words, to "poke fun at the

Dismal Science," the _Times_ lectured him in its most superior manner,

and said that the venerable prelate seemed to mistake cause and effect.

"That," said the Cardinal to me, "is the sort of criticism that an

undergraduate makes, and thinks himself very clever. But I am told that

in the present day the _Times_ is chiefly written by undergraduates."

I once asked him what he thought of a high dignitary of the English

Church, who had gone a certain way in a public movement, and then had

been frightened back by clamour. His reply was the single word

"_infirmus_," accompanied by that peculiar sniff which every one who

ever conversed with him must remember as adding so much to the piquancy

of his terse judgments. When he was asked his opinion of a famous

biography in which a son had disclosed, with too absolute frankness, his

father's innermost thoughts and feelings, the Cardinal replied, "I think

that ---- has committed the sin of Ham."

His sense of humour was peculiarly keen, and though it was habitually

kept under control, it was sometimes used to point a moral with

admirable effect.

"What are you going to do in life?" he asked a rather flippant

undergraduate at Oxford.

"Oh, I'm going to take Holy Orders," was the airy reply.

"Take care you get them, my son."

Though he was intolerant of bumptiousness, the Cardinal liked young men.

He often had some about him, and in speaking to them the friendliness of

his manner was touched with fatherliness in a truly attractive fashion.

And as with young men, so with children. Surely nothing could be

prettier than this answer to a little girl in New York who had addressed

some of her domestic experiences to "Cardinal Manning, England."

"My Dear Child,--You ask me whether I am glad to receive letters from

little children. I am always glad, for they write kindly and give me no

trouble. I wish all my letters were like theirs. Give my blessing to

your father, and tell him that our good Master will reward him a

hundredfold for all he has lost for the sake of his faith. Tell him that

when he comes over to England he must come to see me. And mind you bring

your violin, for I love music, but seldom have any time to hear it. The

next three or four years of your life are very precious. They are like

the ploughing-time and the sowing-time in the year. You are learning to

know God, the Holy Trinity, the Incarnation, the presence and voice of

the Holy Ghost in the Church of Jesus Christ. Learn all these things

solidly, and you will love the Blessed Sacrament and our Blessed Mother

with all your heart. And now you will pray for me that I may make a good

end of a long life, which cannot be far off. And may God guide you and

guard you in innocence and in fidelity through this evil, evil world!

And may His blessing be on your home and all belonging to you! Believe

me always a true friend, Henry Edward, Card. Abp. of Westminster."

The Cardinal had, I should say, rather a contempt for women. He

exercised a great influence over them, but I question if he rated their

intellectual and moral qualities as highly as he ought, and their

"rights" he held in utter detestation. General society, though in his

later days he saw little of it except at the Athenaeum, he thoroughly

enjoyed. Like most old people, he was fond of talking about old days,

and as he had known hosts of important and interesting men, had a

tenacious memory, and spoke the most finished English, it was a pleasure

to listen to his reminiscences. He wrote as well as he talked. His

pointed and lucid style gave to his printed performances a semblance of

cogency which they did not really possess; and his letters--even his

shortest notes--were as exquisite in wording as in penmanship. As he

grew older, he became increasingly sensible of the charms of "Auld Lang

Syne," and he delighted to renew his acquaintance with the scenes and

associations of his youth.

On July 15, 1888, being the first day of the Eton and Harrow Match at

Lord's, a few old Harrovians of different generations met at a Harrow

dinner. The Cardinal, who had just turned eighty, was invited. He

declined to dine, on the ground that he never dined out, but he would on

no account forego the opportunity of meeting the members of his old

school, and he recalled with pride that he had played for two years in

the Harrow Eleven. He appeared as soon as dinner was over, gallantly

faced the cloud of cigar-smoke, was in his very best vein of anecdote

and reminiscence, and stayed till the party broke up.

The Cardinal's friendships were not, I believe, numerous, but his

affection for Mr. Gladstone is well known. It dated from Oxford. Through

Manning and Hope-Scott the influence of the Catholic revival reached the

young member for Newark, and they were the godfathers of his eldest son.

After their secession to Rome in 1851 this profound friendship fell into

abeyance. As far as Manning was concerned, it was renewed when, in 1868,

Mr. Gladstone took in hand to disestablish the Irish Church. It was

broken again by the controversy about _Vaticanism_, in 1875, and some

fifteen years later was happily revived by the good offices of a common

friend. "Gladstone is a very fine fellow," said the Cardinal to me in

1890. "He is not vindictive. You may fight him as hard as you like, and

when the fight is over you will find that it has left no rancour behind

it."

This affection for Mr. Gladstone was a personal matter, quite

independent of politics; but in political matters also they had much in

common. "You know," wrote the Cardinal to Mrs. Gladstone on her Golden

Wedding, "how nearly I have agreed in William's political career,

especially in his Irish policy of the last twenty years." He accepted

the principle of Home Rule, though he thought badly of the Bill of 1886,

and predicted its failure from the day when it was brought in. The

exclusion of the Irish members was in his eyes a fatal blot, as tending

rather to separation than to that Imperial federation which was his

political ideal. But the Cardinal always held his politics in

subordination to his religion, and at the General Election of 1885 his

vigorous intervention on behalf of denominational education which he

considered to be imperilled by the Radical policy, considerably

embarrassed the Liberal cause in those districts of London where there

is a Roman Catholic vote.

It is necessary to say a word about Cardinal Manning's method of

religious propagandism. He excelled in the art of driving a nail where

it would go. He never worried his acquaintance with controversy, never

introduced religious topics unseasonably, never cast his pearls before

unappreciative animals. But when he saw a chance, an opening, a

sympathetic tendency, or a weak spot, he fastened on it with unerring

instinct. His line was rather admonitory than persuasive. When he

thought that the person whom he was addressing had an inkling of the

truth, but was held back from avowing it by cowardice or indecision, he

would utter the most startling warnings about the danger of dallying

with grace.

"I promise you to become a Catholic when I am twenty-one," said a young

lady whom he was trying to convert.

"But can you promise to live so long?" was the searching rejoinder.

Collections and Recollections · 第 2 / 27 段