On the following Sunday I went to Westminster Abbey to hear a sermon

from Canon Harford on A Cheerful Life. A lively, wholesome, and

encouraging discourse, such as it would do many a forlorn New England

congregation good to hear. In the afternoon we both went together to the

Abbey. Met our Beverly neighbor, Mrs. Vaughan, and adopted her as one of

our party. The seats we were to have were full, and we had to be stowed

where there was any place that would hold us. I was smuggled into a

stall, going through long and narrow passages, between crowded rows of

people, and found myself at last with a big book before me and a set of

official personages around me, whose duties I did not clearly

understand. I thought they might be mutes, or something of that sort,

salaried to look grave and keep quiet. After service we took tea with

Dean Bradley, and after tea we visited the Jerusalem Chamber. I had been

twice invited to weddings in that famous room: once to the marriage of

my friend Motley's daughter, then to that of Mr. Frederick Locker's

daughter to Lionel Tennyson, whose recent death has been so deeply

mourned. I never expected to see that Jerusalem in which Harry the

Fourth died, but there I found myself in the large panelled chamber,

with all its associations. The older memories came up but vaguely; an

American finds it as hard to call back anything over two or three

centuries old as a sucking-pump to draw up water from a depth of over

thirty-three feet and a fraction. After this A---- went to a musical

party, dined with the Vaughans, and had a good time among American

friends.

The next evening we went to the Lyceum Theatre to see Mr. Irving. He had

placed the Royal box at our disposal, so we invited our friends the

Priestleys to go with us, and we all enjoyed the evening mightily.

Between the scenes we went behind the curtain, and saw the very curious

and admirable machinery of the dramatic spectacle. We made the

acquaintance of several imps and demons, who were got up wonderfully

well. Ellen Terry was as fascinating as ever. I remembered that once

before I had met her and Mr. Irving behind the scenes. It was at the

Boston Theatre, and while I was talking with them a very heavy piece of

scenery came crashing down, and filled the whole place with dust. It was

but a short distance from where we were standing, and I could not help

thinking how near our several life-dramas came to a simultaneous

_exeunt omnes_.

A long visit from a polite interviewer, shopping, driving, calling,

arranging about the people to be invited to our reception, and an

agreeable dinner at Chelsea with my American friend, Mrs. Merritt,

filled up this day full enough, and left us in good condition for the

next, which was to be a very busy one.

In the Introduction to these papers, I mentioned the fact that more than

half a century ago I went to the famous Derby race at Epsom. I

determined, if possible, to see the Derby of 1886, as I had seen that of

1834. I must have spoken of this intention to some interviewer, for I

find the following paragraph in an English sporting newspaper, "The

Field," for May 29th, 1886:--

"The Derby has always been the one event in the racing year which

statesmen, philosophers, poets, essayists, and _littérateurs_

desire to see once in their lives. A few years since Mr. Gladstone was

induced by Lord Granville and Lord Wolverton to run down to Epsom on the

Derby day. The impression produced upon the Prime Minister's sensitive

and emotional mind was that the mirth and hilarity displayed by his

compatriots upon Epsom race-course was Italian rather than English in

its character. On the other hand, Gustave Doré, who also saw the Derby

for the first and only time in his life, exclaimed, as he gazed with

horror upon the faces below him, _Quelle scène brutale!_ We wonder

to which of these two impressions Dr. Oliver Wendell Holmes inclined, if

he went last Wednesday to Epsom! Probably the well-known, etc., etc.--Of

one thing Dr. Holmes may rest finally satisfied: the Derby of 1886 may

possibly have seemed to him far less exciting than that of 1834; but

neither in 1834 nor in any other year was the great race ever won by a

better sportsman or more honorable man than the Duke of Westminster."

My desire to see the Derby of this year was of the same origin and

character as that which led me to revisit many scenes which I

remembered. I cared quite as much about renewing old impressions as

about getting new ones. I enjoyed everything which I had once seen all

the more from the blending of my recollections with the present as it

was before me.

The Derby day of 1834 was exceedingly windy and dusty. Our party, riding

on the outside of the coach, was half smothered with the dust, and

arrived in a very deteriorated condition, but recompensed for it by the

extraordinary sights we had witnessed. There was no train in those days,

and the whole road between London and Epsom was choked with vehicles of

all kinds, from four-in-hands to donkey-carts and wheelbarrows. My

friends and I mingled freely in the crowds, and saw all the "humours" of

the occasion. The thimble-riggers were out in great force, with their

light, movable tables, the cups or thimbles, and the "little jokers,"

and the coachman, the sham gentleman, the country greenhorn, all

properly got up and gathered about the table. I think we had "Aunt

Sally," too,--the figure with a pipe in her mouth, which one might shy a

stick at for a penny or two and win something, I forget what. The

clearing the course of stragglers, and the chasing about of the

frightened little dog who had got in between the thick ranks of

spectators, reminded me of what I used to see on old "artillery

election" days.

It was no common race that I went to see in 1834. "It is asserted in the

columns of a contemporary that Plenipotentiary was absolutely the best

horse of the century." This was the winner of the race I saw so long

ago. Herring's colored portrait, which I have always kept, shows him as

a great, powerful chestnut horse, well deserving the name of "bullock,"

which one of the jockeys applied to him. "Rumor credits Dr. Holmes," so

"The Field" says, "with desiring mentally to compare his two Derbies

with each other." I was most fortunate in my objects of comparison. The

horse I was about to see win was not unworthy of being named with the

renowned champion of my earlier day. I quote from a writer in the

"London Morning Post," whose words, it will be seen, carry authority

with them:--

"Deep as has hitherto been my reverence for Plenipotentiary, Bay

Middleton, and Queen of Trumps from hearsay, and for Don John, Crucifix,

etc., etc., from my own personal knowledge, I am inclined to award the

palm to Ormonde as the best three-year-old I have ever seen during close

upon half a century's connection with the turf."

Ormonde, the Duke of Westminster's horse, was the son of that other

winner of the Derby, Bend Or, whom I saw at Eaton Hall.

Perhaps some coeval of mine may think it was a rather youthful idea to

go to the race. I cannot help that. I was off on my first long vacation

for half a century, and had a right to my whims and fancies. But it was

one thing to go in with a vast crowd at five and twenty, and another

thing to run the risks of the excursion at more than thrice that age. I

looked about me for means of going safely, and could think of nothing

better than to ask one of the pleasantest and kindest of gentlemen, to

whom I had a letter from Mr. Winthrop, at whose house I had had the

pleasure of making his acquaintance. Lord Rosebery suggested that the

best way would be for me to go in the special train which was to carry

the Prince of Wales. First, then, I was to be introduced to his Royal

Highness, which office was kindly undertaken by our very obliging and

courteous Minister, Mr. Phelps. After this all was easily arranged, and

I was cared for as well as if I had been Mr. Phelps himself. On the

grand stand I found myself in the midst of the great people, who were

all very natural, and as much at their ease as the rest of the world.

The Prince is of a lively temperament and a very cheerful aspect,--a

young girl would call him "jolly" as well as "nice." I recall the story

of "Mr. Pope" and his Prince of Wales, as told by Horace Walpole. "Mr.

Pope, you don't love princes." "Sir, I beg your pardon." "Well, you

don't love kings, then." "Sir, I own I love the lion best before his

claws are grown." Certainly, nothing in Prince Albert Edward suggests

any aggressive weapons or tendencies. The lovely, youthful-looking,

gracious Alexandra, the always affable and amiable Princess Louise, the

tall youth who sees the crown and sceptre afar off in his dreams, the

slips of girls so like many school misses we left behind us,--all these

grand personages, not being on exhibition, but off enjoying themselves,

just as I was and as other people were, seemed very much like their

fellow-mortals. It is really easier to feel at home with the highest

people in the land than with the awkward commoner who was knighted

yesterday. When "My Lord and Sir Paul" came into the Club which

Goldsmith tells us of, the hilarity of the evening was instantly

checked. The entrance of a dignitary like the present Prince of Wales

would not have spoiled the fun of the evening. If there is any one

accomplishment specially belonging to princes, it is that of making the

persons they meet feel at ease.

The grand stand to which I was admitted was a little privileged

republic. I remember Thackeray's story of his asking some simple

question of a royal or semi-royal personage whom he met in the courtyard

of an hotel, which question his Highness did not answer, but called a

subordinate to answer for him. I had been talking some time with a tall,

good-looking gentleman, whom I took for a nobleman to whom I had been

introduced. Something led me to think I was mistaken in the identity of

this gentleman. I asked him, at last, if he were not So and So. "No," he

said, "I am Prince Christian." You are a Christian prince, anyhow, I

said to myself, if I may judge by your manners.

I once made a similar mistake in addressing a young fellow-citizen of

some social pretensions. I apologized for my error.

"No offence," he answered.

_Offence_ indeed! I should hope not. But he had not the "_manière

de prince_", or he would never have used that word.

I must say something about the race I had taken so much pains to see.

There was a preliminary race, which excited comparatively little

interest. After this the horses were shown in the paddock, and many of

our privileged party went down from the stand to look at them. Then they

were brought out, smooth, shining, fine-drawn, frisky, spirit-stirring

to look upon,--most beautiful of all the bay horse Ormonde, who could

hardly be restrained, such was his eagerness for action. The horses

disappear in the distance.--They are off,--not yet distinguishable, at

least to me. A little waiting time, and they swim into our ken, but in

what order of precedence it is as yet not easy to say. Here they come!

Two horses have emerged from the ruck, and are sweeping, rushing,

storming, towards us, almost side by side. One slides by the other, half

a length, a length, a length and a half. Those are Archer's colors, and

the beautiful bay Ormonde flashes by the line, winner of the Derby of

1886. "The Bard" has made a good fight for the first place, and comes in

second. Poor Archer, the king of the jockeys! He will bestride no more

Derby winners. A few weeks later he died by his own hand.

While the race was going on, the yells of the betting crowd beneath us

were incessant. It must have been the frantic cries and movements of

these people that caused Gustave Doré to characterize it as a brutal

scene. The vast mob which thronged the wide space beyond the shouting

circle just round us was much like that of any other fair, so far as I

could see from my royal perch. The most conspicuous object was a man on

an immensely tall pair of stilts, stalking about among the crowd. I

think it probable that I had as much enjoyment in forming one of the

great mob in 1834 as I had among the grandeurs in 1886, but the last is

pleasanter to remember and especially to tell of.

After the race we had a luncheon served us, a comfortable and

substantial one, which was very far from unwelcome. I did not go to the

Derby to bet on the winner. But as I went in to luncheon, I passed a

gentleman standing in custody of a plate half covered with sovereigns.

He politely asked me if I would take a little paper from a heap there

was lying by the plate, and add a sovereign to the collection already

there. I did so, and, unfolding my paper, found it was a blank, and

passed on. The pool, as I afterwards learned, fell to the lot of the

Turkish Ambassador. I found it very windy and uncomfortable on the more

exposed parts of the grand stand, and was glad that I had taken a shawl

with me, in which I wrapped myself as if I had been on shipboard. This,

I told my English friends, was the more civilized form of the Indian's

blanket. My report of the weather does not say much for the English May,

but it is generally agreed upon that this is a backward and unpleasant

spring.

After my return from the race we went to a large dinner at Mr. Phelps's

house, where we met Mr. Browning again, and the Lord Chancellor

Herschell, among others. Then to Mrs. Cyril Flower's, one of the most

sumptuous houses in London; and after that to Lady Rothschild's, another

of the private palaces, with ceilings lofty as firmaments, and walls

that might have been copied from the New Jerusalem. There was still

another great and splendid reception at Lady Dalhousie's, and a party at

Mrs. Smith's, but we were both tired enough to be willing to go home

after what may be called a pretty good day's work at enjoying ourselves.

We had been a fortnight in London, and were now inextricably entangled

in the meshes of the golden web of London social life.

II.

The reader who glances over these papers, and, finding them too full of

small details and the lesser personal matters which belong naturally to

private correspondences, turns impatiently from them, has my entire

sympathy and good-will. He is not one of those for whom these pages are

meant. Having no particular interest in the writer or his affairs, he

does not care for the history of "the migrations from the blue bed to

the brown" and the many Mistress Quicklyisms of circumstantial

narrative. Yet all this may be pleasant reading to relatives and

friends.

But I must not forget that a new generation of readers has come into

being since I have been writing for the public, and that a new

generation of aspiring and brilliant authors has grown into general

recognition. The dome of Boston State House, which is the centre of my

little universe, was glittering in its fresh golden pellicle before I

had reached the scriptural boundary of life. It has lost its lustre now,

and the years which have dulled its surface have whitened the dome of

that fragile structure in which my consciousness holds the session of

its faculties. Time is not to be cheated. It is easy to talk of

perennial youth, and to toy with the flattering fictions which every

ancient personage accepts as true so far as he himself is concerned, and

laughs at as foolish talk when he hears them applied to others. When, in

my exulting immaturity, I wrote the lines not unknown to the reading

public under the name of "The Last Leaf", I spoke of the possibility

that I myself might linger on the old bough until the buds and blossoms

of a new spring were opening and spreading all around me. I am not as

yet the solitary survivor of my literary contemporaries, and,

remembering who my few coevals are, it may well be hoped that I shall

not be. But I feel lonely, very lonely, in the pages through which I

wander. These are new names in the midst of which I find my own. In

another sense I am very far from alone. I have daily assurances that I

have a constituency of known and unknown personal friends, whose

indulgence I have no need of asking. I know there are readers enough who

will be pleased to follow me in my brief excursion, _because I am

myself_, and will demand no better reason. If I choose to write for

them, I do no injury to those for whom my personality is an object of

indifference. They will find on every shelf some publications which are

not intended for them, and which they prefer to let alone. No person is

expected to help himself to everything set before him at a public table.

I will not, therefore, hesitate to go on with the simple story of our

Old World experiences.

Thanks to my Indian blanket,--my shawl, I mean,--I found myself nothing

the worse for my manifold adventures of the 27th of May. The cold wind

sweeping over Epsom downs reminded me of our own chilling easterly

breezes; especially the northeasterly ones, which are to me less

disagreeable than the southeasterly. But the poetical illusion about an

English May,--

"Zephyr with Aurora playing,

As he met her once a-Maying,"--

and all that, received a shrewd thrust. Zephyr ought to have come in an

ulster, and offered Aurora a warm petticoat. However, in spite of all

difficulties, I brought off my recollections of the Derby of 1886 in

triumph, and am now waiting for the colored portrait of Ormonde with

Archer on his back,--Archer, the winner of five Derby races, one of

which was won by the American horse Iroquois. When that picture, which I

am daily expecting, arrives, I shall have it framed and hung by the side

of Herring's picture of Plenipotentiary, the horse I saw win the Derby

in 1834. These two, with an old portrait of the great Eclipse, who, as

my engraving of 1780 (Stubbs's) says, "was never beat, or ever had

occation for Whip or Spur," will constitute my entire sporting gallery.

I have not that vicious and demoralizing love of horse-flesh which makes

it next to impossible to find a perfectly honest hippophile. But a racer

is the realization of an ideal quadruped,--

"A pard-like spirit, beautiful and swift;"

so ethereal, so bird-like, that it is no wonder that the horse about

whom those old story-tellers lied so stoutly,--telling of his running a

mile in a minute,--was called Flying Childers.

The roses in Mrs. Pfeiffer's garden were hardly out of flower when I

lunched with her at her pretty villa at Putney. There I met Mr.

Browning, Mr. Holman Hunt, Mrs. Ritchie, Miss Anna Swanwick, the

translator of Æschylus, and other good company, besides that of my

entertainer.

One of my very agreeable experiences was a call from a gentleman with

whom I had corresponded, but whom I had never met. This was Mr. John

Bellows, of Gloucester, publisher, printer, man of letters, or rather of

words; for he is the author of that truly remarkable little manual, "The

Bona Fide Pocket Dictionary of the French and English Languages." To the

review of this little book, which is dedicated to Prince Lucien

Bonaparte, the "London Times" devoted a full column. I never heard any

one who had used it speak of it except with admiration. The modest

Friend may be surprised to find himself at full length in my pages, but

those who know the little miracle of typography, its conciseness,

completeness, arrangement, will not wonder that I was gratified to see

the author, who sent it to me, and who has written me most interesting

letters on the local antiquities of Gloucester and its neighborhood.

We lunched that day at Lady Camperdown's, where we were happy to meet

Miss Frances Power Cobbe. In the afternoon we went by invitation to a

"tea and talk" at the Reverend Mr. Haweis's, at Chelsea. We found the

house close packed, but managed to get through the rooms, shaking

innumerable hands of the reverend gentleman's parishioners and other

visitors. It was very well arranged, so as not to be too fatiguing, and

we left the cordial gathering in good condition. We drove home with

Bishop and Mrs. Ellicott.

After this Sir James Paget called, and took me to a small and early

dinner-party; and A---- went with my secretary, the young lady of whom I

have spoken, to see "Human Nature," at Drury Lane Theatre.

On the following day, after dining with Lady Holland (wife of Sir Henry,

niece of Macaulay), we went across the street to our neighbor's, Lady

Stanley's. There was to be a great meeting of schoolmistresses, in whose

work her son, the Honorable Lyulph Stanley, is deeply interested. Alas!

The schoolma'ams were just leaving as we entered the door, and all we

saw of them was the trail of their descending robes. I was very sorry

for this, for I have a good many friends among our own

schoolmistresses,--friends whom I never saw, but know through the kind

words they have addressed to me.

No place in London looks more reserved and exclusive than Devonshire

House, standing back behind its high wall, extending along Piccadilly.

There is certainly nothing in its exterior which invites intrusion. We

had the pleasure of taking tea in the great house, accompanying our

American friend, Lady Harcourt, and were graciously received and

entertained by Lady Edward Cavendish. Like the other great houses, it is

a museum of paintings, statues, objects of interest of all sorts. It

must be confessed that it is pleasanter to go through the rooms with one

of the ladies of the household than under the lead of a liveried

servant. Lord Hartington came in while we were there. All the men who

are distinguished in political life become so familiar to the readers of

"Punch" in their caricatures, that we know them at sight. Even those who

can claim no such public distinction are occasionally the subjects of

the caricaturist, as some of us have found out for ourselves. A good

caricature, which seizes the prominent features and gives them the

character Nature hinted, but did not fully carry out, is a work of

genius. Nature herself is a remorseless caricaturist, as our daily

intercourse with our fellow men and women makes evident to us, and as is

curiously illustrated in the figures of Charles Lebrun, showing the

relations between certain human faces and those of various animals.

Hardly an English statesman in bodily presence could be mistaken by any

of "Punch's" readers.

On the same day that we made this quiet visit we attended a great and

ceremonious assembly. There were two parts in the programme, in the

first of which I was on the stage _solus_,--that is, without my

companion; in the second we were together. This day, Saturday, the 29th

of May, was observed as the Queen's birthday, although she was born on

the 24th. Sir William Harcourt gave a great dinner to the officials of

his department, and later in the evening Lady Rosebery held a reception

at the Foreign Office. On both these occasions everybody is expected to

be in court dress, but my host told me I might present myself in

ordinary evening dress. I thought that I might feel awkwardly among so

many guests, all in the wedding garments, knee-breeches and the rest,

without which I ventured among them. I never passed an easier evening in

any company than among these official personages. Sir William took me

under the shield of his ample presence, and answered all my questions

about the various notable personages at his table in a way to have made

my fortune if I had been a reporter. From the dinner I went to Mrs.

Gladstone's, at 10 Downing Street, where A---- called for me. She had

found a very small and distinguished company there, Prince Albert Victor

among the rest. At half past eleven we walked over to the Foreign Office

to Lady Rosebery's reception.

Here Mr. Gladstone was of course the centre of a group, to which I was

glad to add myself. His features are almost as familiar to me as my own,

for a photograph of him in his library has long stood on my revolving

bookcase, with a large lens before it. He is one of a small circle of

individuals in whom I have had and still have a special personal

interest. The year 1809, which introduced me to atmospheric existence,

was the birth-year of Gladstone, Tennyson, Lord Houghton, and Darwin. It

seems like an honor to have come into the world in such company, but it

is more likely to promote humility than vanity in a common mortal to

find himself coeval with such illustrious personages. Men born in the

same year watch each other, especially as the sands of life begin to run

low, as we can imagine so many damaged hour-glasses to keep an eye on

each other. Women, of course, never know who are their contemporaries.

Familiar to me as were the features of Mr. Gladstone, I looked upon him

with astonishment. For he stood before me with epaulets on his shoulders

and a rapier at his side, as military in his aspect as if he had been

Lord Wolseley, to whom I was introduced a short time afterwards. I was

fortunate enough to see and hear Mr. Gladstone on a still more memorable

occasion, and can afford to leave saying what were my impressions of the

very eminent statesman until I speak of that occasion.

Our Hundred Days in Europe · 第 2 / 14 段