1867-1869.
Visit of Queen Victoria to Abbotsford in 1867--Mr. Hope-Scott's
Improvements at Abbotsford--Mr. Hope-Scott's Politics--Toryism in Early
Life--Constitutional Conservatism--Mr. Hope-Scott as an Irish and a
Highland Proprietor--Correspondence on Politics with Mr. Gladstone, and
with Lord Henry Kerr in 1868--Speech at Arundel in 1869.
Towards the end of August 1867, her Majesty Queen Victoria, visiting the
Duke and Duchess of Roxburghe, at Floors Castle, was received with great
rejoicings at the various Scottish border towns on the Waverley route from
Carlisle to Kelso. On this occasion her Majesty honoured Mr. and Lady
Victoria Hope-Scott by calling at Abbotsford. The newspapers of the day
contain copious narratives of the tour, otherwise unimportant for our
present purpose. The following account is taken from the 'Daily Telegraph'
of August 24, with a few additional particulars introduced from the 'Border
Advertiser' of August 23, 1867, the former journal supplying details of
much interest relating to Mr. Hope-Scott's improvements at Abbotsford. I
have shortened the original, and made some slight alterations in it:--
Her Majesty visited Melrose and Abbotsford on Thursday, August 22, with
Princess Louise, Prince and Princess Christian, the Duke and Duchess of
Roxburghe, and the Duke of Buccleuch. The Queen having viewed Melrose
Abbey, Mr. Hope-Scott and his family were honoured, later in the day, by
her Majesty's presence at Abbotsford, which was reached shortly after six
o'clock. In the fields in front of the lodge, and for a great distance
along the road, was a great concourse of people, many of whom had waited
for hours, and vehement cheering rang through the Abbotsford woods.
Many alterations and additions had been made to the Abbotsford of Sir
Walter during Mr. Hope-Scott's nineteen years' possession of the place. In
the lifetime of the Great Magician, the ground on which he fixed his abode
was nearly on a level with the highway running along the south front; and
wayfarers could survey the whole domain by looking over the hedge. Mr.
Hope-Scott, twelve years ago or more (1855), threw up a high embankment on
the road front of Abbotsford, and it is from this steep grassy mound that
one of the best views may be had. The long, regular slope, steep near the
level top where laurels are planted, is a beautiful bank from end to end,
being well timbered with a rich variety of trees, among others the silver
birch, the oak, the elm, the beech, the plane, and the good old Scotch fir;
and being, moreover, naturally favourable to the wild flora of the
district, especially to the bluebell and forget-me-not. The wild strawberry
also is in great abundance, with its sweet, round little beads of fruit
dotting the green. The square courtyard of the house is planned as a
garden, with clipped yews at the corners of the ornamental plots of grass,
and with beds all ablaze with summer flowers, a brilliant pink annual
making a peculiarly fine appearance by well-arranged contrast with the
sober greys of an edging of foliage plants. On one side of the courtyard is
a postern, which was thrown open when the royal cavalcade had entered the
grounds by the lodge gate. The opposite flank of the quadrangle is a kind
of ornamental palisade, or open screen of Gothic stonework, the spaces of
which are filled up by iron railings. This palisade divides the courtyard
from the pleasure-gardens, which are well laid out, and bordered with
greenhouses. The porch was beautifully decorated with rows of ferns along
the margin of the passage, and behind the ferns were magnificent fuchsias
rising to the roof, and mingled with other choice and rare flowers. The
floors of the porch and other rooms were covered with crimson cloth, but
beyond that, and the addition of vases of flowers, 'Sir Walter's Rooms'
were in the same condition in which they have been witnessed by the many
thousands drawn thither from every civilised country in the world.
Her Majesty was received by Mr. Hope-Scott, Lady Victoria Hope-Scott, and
Miss Hope-Scott, Lord and Lady Henry Kerr, Miss Kerr, and Miss Mackenzie.
Mr. Hope-Scott bowed to the Queen, and led the way to the drawing-room,
where a few minutes were passed. Her Majesty then in succession passed
through Sir Walter's library, study, hall, and armoury, and viewed with
great interest all these memorials. The royal party then proceeded to the
dining-room, where fruits, ices, and other refreshments had been prepared,
but her Majesty partook only of a cup of tea and 'Selkirk bannock.' When
the Queen was passing through 'Sir Walter's library,' some photographic
views of Abbotsford, which had been taken recently by Mr. Horsburgh of
Edinburgh, attracted her attention, and she graciously acceded to the
request of Mr. Hope-Scott that her Majesty might be pleased to accept of a
set of the photographs. Her Majesty expressed to Mr. Hope-Scott the great
pleasure she had experienced in visiting what had been the residence of Sir
Walter Scott. The Queen and suite then entered their carriages, and left
Abbotsford about seven o'clock. The day was not so bright as the preceding
one; but the little rain which fell, just as her Majesty had got under the
shelter of the historical roof, did not spoil the holiday which some
thousands of people from Galashiels, Hawick, Kelso, Berwick, and Edinburgh
had been bent on making.
Mr. Hope-Scott, in a letter to Mr. Badeley of August 23, 1867, gives a
brief description of the Queen's visit, concluding as follows:--
'Throughout her visit, her Majesty was most gracious and kind, and her
conduct to Mamo was quite touching.
She showed a great deal of interest in the place and the principal
curiosities, looked remarkably well and active, and, I am told, is much
pleased with the reception she has met with on the Border.'
The political aspects of Mr. Hope-Scott's character, on which it is now
time that we should enter, do not require any very extended discussion. His
opinions and feelings were Conservative in the constitutional sense, and in
his early years seem to have gone a good deal further. It is perhaps
scarcely fair to bring evidence from the correspondence of youths of
nineteen, but Mr. Leader tells him (November 3, 1831): 'The latter part of
your letter is an admirable specimen of Tory liberality and Tory
argument.... What! are all Radicals fools or knaves, and all Conservatives
honest or intelligent?... _Absint hæ ineptiæ pæne aniles_.' A few
years later the Thun correspondence, though only affording incidental
references to Mr. Hope's own letters, shows clearly that, like 'young
Oxford' of that date and long afterwards, he adopted Tory views as
deductions from Scripture, and as the political side of religion. Thus
Count Leo Thun writing to Mr. Hope on December 14, 1834, says: 'We both
agree in the first principles; I copy your own words: "Everything we do is
to be done in the name of the Lord: admitting this, it is evident that the
_principle_ on which we are to act with regard to politics is to be
derived from the Scriptures."' The future Austrian statesman, however,
declares that he cannot find in the Scriptures 'that blind and passive
obedience' which his friend requires, and enters at considerable length
into the question, controverting the application which the latter had made
of certain passages. Again pass on a few years, and we find Mr. Hope
writing to Mr. Badeley (it is the first letter in that collection), January
12, 1838: 'I have managed to read Pusey's sermon, in which there is nothing
that I am disposed to quarrel with. The origin of civil government used
long ago to be a favourite subject of inquiry with me; and I had long been
convinced of the absurdity of any but the patriarchal scheme. Aristotle,
the most sensible man, perhaps, who ever lived, came to the same conclusion
without the aid of revelation.'
These views sustained practically some modification as time went on.
Toryism, in its _historical_ sense, could never be the political creed
of a mind on which the Church of England had lost its hold. This begins to
appear in a speech made by him at an early date, without preparation
indeed, but not carelessly spoken. On the occasion of the ceremony for
turning the first sod for the Sheffield and Huddersfield Railway (August
29, 1845), Mr. Hope said:--
If you lived under a despotic government, you would have lines made without
reference to your local wants, and perhaps from visionary views of public
advantage, but without reference to your private interests. It would be the
same if a democratic body were to govern. In the one case you would be
subject to the dictates of the imperial office; in the other, to the votes
of a turbulent assemblage; but in neither case would there be that mixed
regard to public justice and private interests which are combined in an
efficient system. I dare say we [railway lawyers] are troublesome, but we
belong to a system which has in it great elements of constitutional
principle, which combines a regard for the public interest, and for private
rights, with that free spirit which enterprises of this nature require in a
great commercial country. [Footnote: _Sheffield and Rotherham
Independent_, August 30, 1845.]
In the letter to Mr. Gladstone, of December 9, 1847 (quoted p. 78), we
perceive an uncertain, sea-sick tone, the sadness natural to a mind not yet
sure of its course. Very different is the buoyancy that breathes in Mr.
Hope-Scott's remarks, ten years later, on the rivalry between Manchester
and Liverpool, in his speech on the Mersey Conservancy and Docks Bill
(quoted p. 115), though that, perhaps, is too rhetorical for us to found an
argument upon. It will be more to the purpose here if I give an extract
from a letter which he had written that same year, as an Irish proprietor,
on the eve of a contested election, to the agent for his estates in co.
Mayo, Joseph J. Blake, Esq., at Castlebar. It will show the wise and kindly
spirit in which he dealt with his people, as well as the reference to the
interests of Catholicity which now governed his politics:--
As to the election for the county of Mayo, I am in considerable ignorance
about the state of parties in that particular part of Ireland. I may state,
however, that I should myself prefer the candidate who is the most sincere
friend of the Catholic Church, and most disposed to take a calm and careful
view of the questions which most affect the interests of the Irish people--
say Tenant Right, for instance, in which I think something should be done,
but perhaps not so much as the more noisy promoters of it insist on. I do
not, however, wish to influence my tenants more decidedly than by letting
them know my general feelings on these subjects. (March 25, 1857.)
The question here involved, which has very recently ripened into
difficulties so formidable as far as regards Ireland, also affected at the
time, as it still affects, the state of property in the Western Highlands,
where it seems to have interfered a good deal with Mr. Hope-Scott's efforts
to raise the condition of his tenantry. He urged on them the necessity of
cultivating more of the waste land which stretched for miles before their
doors, but they never took kindly to this task. No rent was to be demanded
for the reclaimed lands, and they were promised compensation if called upon
to give them up at any future year. They were perfectly convinced of Mr.
Hope-Scott's sincerity, but were unwilling to enter into these schemes of
amelioration without the security of possession guaranteed by leases.
[Footnote: Further details of Mr. Hope-Scott's relations with his Highland
tenants will he found in chap. xxvi. See also chap. xxiv. pp. 171, 172 in
this vol. as affording some indirect illustration.] My office not being
that of the political economist, it is unnecessary to enlarge on the
subject, especially as the following important letter of Mr. Hope-Scott
himself will enable the reader to judge of the reasons upon which he
acted:--
_J. R. Hope-Scott, Esq., Q.C. to the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, M.P._
(_Private_.) Abbotsford: Oct. 28, 1868.
Dear Gladstone,--As you are kind enough to care for my political ideas, I
will try to describe them.
Born and bred a Tory and a Protestant, I have discarded both the creeds of
my youth. But with this difference in the result: in religion I have found
sure anchorage; in politics I am still adrift.
Had the followers of Sir Robert Peel been able to found a permanent party,
my case would probably have been different. But death took many of them,
and the rest are scattered.
Of the two great parties now forming on the ruins of the old ones, that
which you lead has a claim upon me for the work of justice
[disestablishment of the Irish Church] which it has undertaken, and which
the other seeks to frustrate. But, nevertheless, this work is to me no test
of the abiding principles of the party. In you I acknowledge the promotion
of it to be a sign of honesty and courage which few can better appreciate
than myself; and I know that you mean it as a pledge of steady advancement
in the same path. But amongst those who act with you there are many minds
of a very different stamp.
A few words will bring out my views.
Speaking logically, justice to the Catholic people of Ireland means, if it
means anything, the undoing of the Reformation, the replacing of the Church
of the great majority in the position from which it has been unjustly
removed.
But had you proposed this, or anything savouring of this, you know that
your followers would have been few indeed; and that you have been able
wholly to avoid such a danger for yourself, and even to turn it against
your political opponents, has arisen chiefly from the moderation and wisdom
of the Catholic clergy.
By their acquiescence in a mere disestablishment you got so far rid of the
fear of Popery as to give scope to the voluntary principles of ultra-
Protestantism, and, as a consequence, many now support you upon grounds so
wholly different from your own, that, when the assault is over, and the
stronghold taken, half your forces may disappear from the field, or remain
only to rebel against your next movement.
This, then, is the reason why, seeking for a party, I cannot accept the
present action against the Irish establishment as materially affecting my
choice; but I must add that the Church question does not, in point of
statesmanship, appear to me to be either the most important or the most
difficult of the Irish questions.
That of Land Tenure exercises a wider influence among the people, and calls
for a higher science of government.
Now, upon this most difficult and most delicate subject, there are
prominent men among your supporters who have put forth views which I am
forced to call in the highest degree crude, if not extravagant.
The law of demand and supply renders one class dependent upon another to an
extent little short of slavery, not only in contracts for land in Ireland,
but in all questions which, in free countries, turn upon the possession by
one man of what another cannot or will not do without. The scale of wages
of the agricultural labourers in some counties in England, and the rates
paid for the worst lodgings by the poorest classes in our large towns, are
full of the same meaning as the difficulties of the Irish tenant farmer.
But, more than this, the Irish land question itself is not exclusively
Irish. It is to be found also, smaller of course in extent, but identical
in its main features and in some of its worst consequences, in the West
Highlands of Scotland; and I, who am a proprietor in both countries, can
hardly be expected to put much trust in the political physicians who, to
cure a disease in Mayo or Galway, propound remedies the first principles of
which they would deem inapplicable to the same disorder in Argyle or
Inverness.
That I am hopeless of any reasonable mode of relief being found, I will not
say; but, if it is to be safe, it certainly cannot be speedy; and if it is
to be permanent, it must depend upon a change in the habits of a race
rather than upon a new distribution of landed property by Parliament.
And now, turning from Irish to general policy, I profess that I accept your
principles of finance and commerce with entire satisfaction, and with a
confidence in your power of applying them which I give to no other man.
I enter heartily also into your schemes for the material improvement of the
labouring classes, and admire the wisdom as well as the kindness of what
you have done.
With regard to the Franchise, I have no fear of Household Suffrage, and I
prefer it to the more limited measure which you formerly advocated, because
it brings into play a greater variety of interests; and, if it is liable to
the objection that it gives votes to the ignorant and the profligate, I
answer that your bill would have bestowed still greater, because more
exclusive and more concentrated power, upon a class which comprises not
only the Lancashire operative, but the Sheffield rattener.
Moreover, I believe that all which is worth defending in our social and
political state in England and Scotland, has better guarantees in the
spirit of the people than in any provision of the law. When Talleyrand said
that England was the most aristocratic country in the world, because there
was scarcely any one in it who did not look down on somebody else, he
touched the keystone of our society. I have already met with amusing
instances of the effect on Scotch middle-class Liberals of the recent
enfranchisement of those below them; and my conviction is, that the more
you widen the base, the more closely will you bind the superstructure
together.
What I fear more than democracy is the strife between capital and skilled
labour. This appears to me to be among the most pressing questions of the
day, and I shall think well of the statesman, whoever he may be, who, with
a just but firm hand, shall regulate the relations of these forces.
On Education I hope we are agreed; at any rate, I feel sure that you will
not intentionally divorce it from religion; but I have yet to learn what
measure your party would support.
There remains one subject of home policy which with me is paramount. At the
time when I became a Catholic the so-called Papal Aggression was the great
topic of the day; and while the ignorance and violence of the majority,
both in and out of Parliament, greatly assisted my conversion, the steady
reason and justice of Lord Aberdeen, and of those who, like yourself, acted
with him, drew from me a greater feeling of respect than I have ever been
sensible of on any other political occasion, or towards any other political
men. I felt that they were determined honestly to carry out the principles
of Catholic emancipation, amidst great popular excitement, and without
reference even to their personal prejudices, far less to their political
interests, and I honoured them with no stinted honour.
In the same direction much still remains to be done, and I wonder to myself
whether you will ever head a party which will venture its political power
in a contest with county magistrates and parish vestries on behalf of the
Catholic poor.
I wonder too sometimes, but with less of hope, whether yours will be a
party which will be content to forego that political propagandism which
seems chiefly favoured in England when applied to the weaker countries
which profess the Catholic faith, and which, in those countries, seems to
impair religion much more than it increases temporal prosperity; and,
lastly, whether it will have enough moderation to admit that the protection
of the public law of Europe ought not to be denied to the States of the
Church, merely because a neighbouring power demands them in the name of
Italian unity.
Such, my dear Gladstone, are the thoughts of a somewhat indolent, but not
indifferent observer of what is going on around him. They are put before
you neither to elicit opinions nor to provoke controversy, but to explain
how it is that an old friend, who loves and admires you, should withhold
his support, insignificant as it is, at the very moment when, as the leader
of a party, you might be thought to have justly earned it.
Yours aff'ly,
JAMES R. HOPE-SCOTT.
The Right Hon'ble W. E. Gladstone, &c. &c. &c.
_The Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, M.P. to J. R. Hope-Scott, Esq., Q.C._
Hawarden, N.W.: Nov. 1, '68
My dear Hope-Scott,--Everything in your handwriting is pleasant to read,
and I thank you sincerely for your letter.
* * * * *
When I come to the _gros_ of your letter touching politics, I own it
appears to me that we have a moral title to your serious and even strenuous
aid.
I hope you will not think my writing to say so a bad compliment, for, as
far as the value of the aid is concerned, even such as yours, I assure you
I cannot afford to buy it at the present moment by personal appeals in
writing.
But you praise _justly_ the 'moderation and wisdom' of the R. C.
clergy on the question of the hour--why do you not imitate them?
Simply because you cannot trust those who are acting with me in the
_paulo post futurum_. Is that a sound rule of political action? You
think much, as I do, of the importance of the Land Question. You see a
great evil--you do not see any other man with a remedy--you hold off from
us who made a very moderate proposal in 1866, because eminent men among our
supporters have made proposals which you think extravagant or crude, and to
which we have never given any countenance.
Now I will not indulge myself here by going over the many and weighty
matters in which we are wholly at one; all that you say on them gives me
lively satisfaction.
I will only, therefore, touch the one subject on which you anticipate
difficulty as possible--that of political propagandism, meaning the
temporal power of the Pope: for I do not suppose you mean to censure
English pleas for civil rights of the United Greeks in Poland against the
Emperor of Russia, though touching their religion.
I have at all times contended that the Pope as prince ought to have the
full benefit of the public law of Europe, and have often denied the right
of the Italian Government to absorb him. But you must know that
extraordinary doctrines, wholly unknown to public law, have been held and
acted on for the purpose of maintaining the temporal power. If you keep to
public law, we _can_ have no differences. If you do not, we may: with
Abp. Manning I have little doubt we should. But that question is and has
been for years out of view, and is very unlikely to come into it within any
short period. Rational cooperation in politics would be at an end if no two
men might act together until they had satisfied themselves that in no
possible circumstances could they be divided. Q.E.D.
There in brief is my case, based on yours, and I would submit it to any
committee you ever spoke before, provided you were not there to bewilder
them with music of the Sirens.
Now pray think about it. I shall bother you no more. I wish I had time to
write about the Life of Scott. I may be wrong, but I am vaguely under the
impression that it has never had a really wide circulation. If so, it is
the saddest pity; and I should greatly like (without any censure on its
present length) to see published an abbreviation of it.
With my wife's kindest regards,
Always aff'tely yours,
W. E. GLADSTONE.
J. R. Hope-Scott, Esq., Q.C.
Mr. Hope-Scott, in replying to the above letter of Mr. Gladstone's (under
date 'Abbotsford, November 4, 1868'), says:--
I fully acknowledge the compliment which you have paid me in writing at
such length at such a time, and there are some things in your letter which
I am glad to have had from yourself. But your main argument for action
fails to convince me. I cannot put 'paulo post futurum' into my pocket, and
march to the poll. For the present, then, I cannot enlist with you in
politics, but I can do so heartily in any attempt to extend a knowledge of
Walter Scott.
The following letters, of the same year, will further illustrate Mr. Hope-
Scott's view of the Irish disestablishment question, and the independent
line of politics which he adopted in his closing years:--
_J. R. Hope-Scott, Esq., Q.C. to the Lord Henry Kerr._
Norfolk House, St. James's Square:
March 22, '68.
Dear Henry,--[The Archbishop] thinks that if Gladstone is serious (which he
and I both believe him to be) about the Irish establishment, he will carry
his motion, although it seems probable that Disraeli will make it a
rallying-point, and may even dissolve Parliament if beat. How he is to
manage the latter operation in the present condition of the Reform Question
I hardly see....
It is astonishing to find on all sides such proof of the progress of
opinion in Irish, and I think generally, in Catholic matters. The Fenian
blister has certainly worked well; but besides that, Ireland and the
Catholic religion offer the best field for the Liberals, as a party, to
recover the ground which Disraeli last year ousted them from. Hence it is
that my two months' absence from England seems to count as years on this
point. Indeed, Gladstone's great declaration on Monday last is supposed to
be due to the rapid progress of a few weeks, or even days....
Yours affectionately,
JAMES E. HOPE-SCOTT.
_The Same to the Same._
Dorlin, Strontian: Sept. 16, '68.
Dear Henry,--... In politics I have taken my line, and have told Curie and
Erskine that, as at present advised, I do not intend to meddle with either
Roxburgh or any other election. I trust neither party enough to identify
myself with either; and while I do not think that the demolition of the
Irish establishment is enough of a religious question to make me support
the Liberals, I think it sufficiently so to prevent me siding with the
Conservatives. On the other matters which you mention, members of both
political parties seem to be at present free to follow their own
consciences or interests, but their leaders may at any moment require
obedience, and in that case I would rather trust the necessary tendency of
the Liberals than that of the Conservatives on all home questions; and
foreign policy seems, by accord of all parties, to have now settled into
non-interference....
Yrs affly,
James R. Hope-Scott.
The Lord Henry Kerr.
In a speech at Arundel, January 5, 1869, perhaps the last Mr. Hope-Scott
made on a public occasion, he remarked that he did not think the wisest
thing had been done in remodelling the constituency by simply numbering
heads. By depriving Arundel of its member, a large interest had been left
unrepresented--that is, the Catholic interest. An intimate friend of his,
possessing excellent means of information and judgment, said to me: 'Hope-
Scott, in his latter years, was not political--not a party man in any
sense. Indeed, he got into a scrape with the Whigs when the Duke of Norfolk
voted with the Tories. This much mortified the Whigs, and they complained
to Hope-Scott of the Duke's line: he said he wished him to be of no party.
This was his line as a Catholic. Every lawyer, in fact, is Conservative.
Revolution is against all their theories of government.' This, however, so
far as it relates to the personal influence exercised by Mr. Hope-Scott,
must be balanced by the evidence of another friend, also very intimate with
him, to whom the _late_ Duke of Norfolk, while still traditionally a
Liberal, had remarked that he thought Conservatives would do more for
Catholics, and that nothing was to be expected from the Liberals.