[Illustration: CAPTAIN COLES’S NEW IRON TURRET-SHIP-OF-WAR.]
KNOWLEDGE
FOR THE TIME:
A Manual
OF
READING, REFERENCE, AND CONVERSATION ON SUBJECTS OF LIVING
INTEREST, USEFUL CURIOSITY, AND AMUSING RESEARCH:
HISTORICO-POLITICAL INFORMATION.
PROGRESS OF CIVILIZATION.
DIGNITIES AND DISTINCTIONS.
CHANGES IN LAWS.
MEASURE AND VALUE.
PROGRESS OF SCIENCE.
LIFE AND HEALTH.
RELIGIOUS THOUGHT.
Illustrated from the best and latest Authorities.
BY JOHN TIMBS, F.S.A.
AUTHOR OF CURIOSITIES OF LONDON, THINGS NOT GENERALLY KNOWN,
ETC.
_LONDON_:
Lockwood and Co., 7 Stationers’-hall Court.
MDCCCLXIV.
TO THE READER.
The great value of contemporary History--that is, history written
by actual witnesses of the events which they narrate,--is now
beginning to be appreciated by general readers. The improved
character of the journalism of the present day is the best evidence
of this advancement, which has been a work of no ordinary labour.
Truth is not of such easy acquisition as is generally supposed;
and the chances of obtaining unprejudiced accounts of events are
rarely improved by distance from the time at which they happen.
In proportion as freedom of thought is enlarged, and liberty of
conscience, and liberty of will, are increased, will be the amount
of trustworthiness in the written records of contemporaries. It is
the rarity of these high privileges in chroniclers of past events
which has led to so many obscurities in the world’s history, and
warpings in the judgment of its writers; to trust some of whom has
been compared to reading with “coloured spectacles.” And, one of
the features of our times is to be ever taking stock of the amount
of truth in past history; to set readers on the tenters of doubt,
and to make them suspicious of perversions; and to encourage a
whitewashing of black reputations which sometimes strays into an
extreme equally as unserviceable to truth as that from which the
writer started.
It is, however, with the view of correcting the Past by _the light
of the Present_, and directing attention to many salient points
of Knowledge for the Time, that the present volume is offered to
the public. Its aim may be considered great in proportion to the
limited means employed; but, to extend what is, in homely phrase,
termed a right understanding, the contents of the volume are of a
mixed character, the Author having due respect for the emphatic
words of Dr. Arnold: “Preserve proportion in your reading, keep
your views of Men and Things extensive, and _depend upon it a mixed
knowledge is not a superficial one_: as far as it goes, the views
that it gives are true; but he who reads deeply in one class of
writers only, gets views which are almost sure to be perverted, and
which are not only narrow but false.”
Throughout the Work, the Author has endeavoured to avail himself of
the most reliable views of leading writers on Events of the Day;
and by seizing new points of Knowledge and sources of Information,
to present, in a classified form, such an assemblage of Facts and
Opinions as may be impressed with warmth and quickness upon the
memory, and assist in the formation of a good general judgment, or
direct still further a-field.
In this Manual of abstracts, abridgments, and
summaries--considerably over Three Hundred in number--illustrations
by way of Anecdote occur in every page. Wordiness has been avoided
as unfitted for a book which has for its object not the waste but
the economy of time and thought, and the diffusion of concise
notions upon subjects of living Interest, useful Curiosity, and
amusing Research.
The accompanying Table of Contents will, at a single glance, show
the variety as well as the practical character of the subjects
illustrated; the aim being to render the work alike serviceable
to the reader of a journal of the day, as well as to the student
who reads to “reject what is no longer essential.” The Author has
endeavoured to keep pace with the progress of Information; and in
the selection of new accessions, some have been inserted more to
stimulate curiosity and promote investigation than as things to
be taken for granted. The best and latest Authorities have been
consulted, and the improved journalism of our time has been made
available; for, “when a river of gold is running by your door, why
not put out your hat, and take a dip?”[1]
The Author has already published several volumes of “Things not
generally Known,” which he is anxious to _supplement_ with the
present Manual of Knowledge for the Time.
FOOTNOTE:
[1] Douglas Jerrold.
THE FRONTISPIECE.
CAPTAIN COLES’S IRON TURRET-SHIP-OF-WAR.
The precise and best mode of constructing Iron Ships-of-War, so
as to carry heavy guns, is an interesting problem, which Captain
Coles believes he has already satisfactorily solved in his Turret
ship, wherein he proposes to protect the guns by turrets. Captain
Coles offered to the Admiralty so long ago as 1855 to construct a
vessel on this principle, having a double bottom; light draught of
water, with the power of giving an increased immersion when under
fire; sharp at both ends; a formidable prow; her rudder and screw
protected by a projection of iron; the turret being hemispherical,
and not a turn-table, which was unnecessary, as this vessel was
designed for attacking stationary forts in the Black Sea.
Captain Coles contributed to the International Exhibition models of
his ship; admitting (he states) from 7 to 8 degrees depression. In
two this is obtained by the deck on each side of the turret sloping
at the necessary angle, to admit of the required depression; in
the other two it is obtained by the centre of the deck on which
the turret is surmounted being raised sufficiently to enable the
shot, when the gun is depressed, to pass clear of the outer edge
of the deck. A drawing published in 1860, of the midship section
from which these models were made, also gives a section of the
_Warrior_, by which it will be seen that supposing the guns of each
to be 10 feet out of water, and to have the usual depressions of
guns in the Navy (7 degrees), the _Warrior’s_ guns on the broadside
will throw the shot 19 feet further from the side than the shield
ship with her guns placed in the centre, that being the distance
of the latter from the edge of the ship: thus, with the same
depression, the shield ship will have a greater advantage, this
being an important merit of the invention, which Captain Coles
has already applied to the _Royal Sovereign_. The construction of
these turrets, the guns, and the turn-tables on which they are
placed, with the machinery to work them, is very interesting; but
its details would occupy more space than is at our command. (See
_Times_, Sept. 8, 1863.)
Captain Coles, in a communication to the _Times_, dated November
4, 1863, thus urges the application of the turret to sea-going
vessels, and quotes the opinion of the present Contractor of the
Navy on the advantages his (Captain Coles’) system must have over
the old one, in strength, height out of water, and stability, and
consequent adaptation for sea-going ships. The Captain states:
“I believe I have already shown that on my system of a revolving
turret, a heavier broadside can be thrown than from ships armed on
the broadside; but it possesses this further advantage, that my
turrets _can be adapted to the heaviest description of ordnance_;
indeed, no other plan has yet been put in practice, while it is
impossible to adapt the broadside ships to them, without the
enlargement of the ports, which would destructively weaken the
ships, and leave the guns’ crew exposed to rifles, grape-shot or
shells.” Captain Coles then quotes the armaments of the _Prince
Albert_ (now constructing at Millwall,) and the _Warrior_, and
shows that although the broadside of the _Prince Albert_ is
nominally reduced to 1120 lbs. (still in excess of the _Warrior’s_
if compared with tonnage); it still gives this great advantage,
that whereas late experiments have demonstrated that 4½-inch
plates can be made to resist 68-pounder and 110-pounder shot, they
have also shown that the 300-pounder smashes them when formed into
a “Warrior target” with the greatest ease. The _Prince Albert_,
therefore, can smash the _Warrior_, though the _Warrior_ carries
no gun that can injure her; nor can she, as a broadside ship, be
altered to carry heavier guns.
The Engraving represents Captain Coles’s Ship cleared for action,
and the bulwarks down.
CONTENTS.
I.--HISTORICO-POLITICAL INFORMATION, 1-56:
Politics not yet a Science,--The Philosopher and the Historian,
1.--Whig and Tory Ministries, 2.--Protectionists,--Rats, and
Ratting,--The Heir to the British Throne always in Opposition,
4.--Legitimacy and Government,--“The Fourth Estate,” 5.--Writing
for the Press,--Shorthand Writers, 7.--The Worth of Popular
Opinion, 8.--Machiavelism,--Free-speaking, 9.--Speakers of the
Houses of Parliament, 10.--The National Conscience, 11.--“The
Nation of Shopkeepers,” 12.--Results of Revolutions, 13.--Worth
of a Republic,--“Safe Men,” 14.--Church Preferment,--Peace
Statesmanship,--The Burial of Sir John Moore, 15.--The Ancestors
of Washington, 16.--The “Star-spangled Banner,”--Ancestry of
President Adams, 18.--The Irish Union, 19.--The House of Bonaparte,
20.--Invasion of England projected by Napoleon I., 21.--Fate of
the Duc d’Enghien, 24.--Last Moments of Mr. Pitt, 25.--What drove
George III. mad, 27.--Predictions of the Downfal of Napoleon
I., 29.--Wellington predicts the Peninsular Compaign, 30.--The
Battle of Waterloo, 31.--Wellington’s Defence of the Waterloo
Campaign, 32.--Lord Castlereagh at the Congress of Vienna,
33.--The Cato-street Conspiracy, 34.--Money Panic of 1832, 36.--A
great Sufferer by Revolutions,--Origin of the Anti-Corn-Law
League, 37.--Wellington’s Military Administration, 38.--Gustavus
III. of Sweden, 39.--Fall of Louis Philippe, 40.--The Chartists
in 1848, 41.--Revival of the French Emperorship, 43.--French
Coup d’Etat Predictions,--Statesmanship of Lord Melbourne,
44.--Ungraceful Observance, 45.--The Partition of Poland, 46.--The
Invasion of England, 47.--What a Militia can do, 48.--Whiteboys,
49.--Naval Heroes,--How Russia is bound to Germany, 50.--Count
Cavour’s Estimate of Napoleon III., 51.--The Mutiny at the Nore,
52.--Catholic Emancipation and Sir Robert Peel,--The House of
Coburg, 53.--A few Years of the World’s Changes, 55.--Noteworthy
Pensions, 56.
II.--PROGRESS OF CIVILIZATION, 57-84:
How the Earth was peopled, 57.--Revelations of Geology, 58.--The
Stone Age, 59.--What are Celtes? 60.--Roman Civilization of
Britain, 61.--Roman Roads and British Railways, 62.--Domestic
Life of the Saxons, 64.--Love of Freedom, 65.--The Despot
deceived,--True Source of Civilization, 66.--The Lowest
Civilization,--Why do we shake Hands? 67.--Various Modes of
Salutation, 68.--What is Comfort? 69.--What is Luxury?--What do
we know of Life? 70.--The truest Patriot the greatest Hero,--The
old Philosophers, 71.--Glory of the Past, 72.--Wild Oats,--How
Shyness spoils Enjoyment, 73.--“Custom, the Queen of the World,”
74.--Ancient Guilds and Modern Benefit Clubs,--The Oxford Man
and the Cambridge Man, 75.--“Great Events from Little Causes
spring,” 76.--Great Britain on the Map of the World, 80.--Ancient
and Modern London,--Potatoes the national food of the Irish,
81.--Irish-speaking Population,--Our Colonial Empire, 82.--The
English People, 84.
III.--DIGNITIES AND DISTINCTIONS, 85-102:
Worth of Heraldry, 85.--Heralds’ College, 86.--The Shamrock,--Irish
Titles of Honour, 87.--The Scotch Thistle, 88.--King and Queen,
89.--Title of Majesty, and the Royal “We,” 90.--“Dieu et Mon
Droit,”--Plume and Motto of the Prince of Wales, 91.--Victoria,
92.--English Crowns,--The Imperial State Crown, 93.--Queen’s
Messengers,--Presents and Letters to the Queen, 95.--The Prince
of Waterloo,--The See of London, 96.--Expense of Baronetcy
and Knighthood, 97.--The Aristocracy, 98.--Precedence in
Parliament,--Sale of Seats in Parliament,--Placemen in Parliament,
99.--New Peers,--The Russells,--Political Cunning, 100.--The
Union-Jack,--Field-Marshal, 101.--Change of Surname, 102.
IV.--CHANGES IN LAWS, 104-144:
The Statute Law and the Common Law, 104.--Curiosities of the
Statute Law, 105.--Secret of Success at the Bar,--Queen’s
Serjeants, Queen’s Counsel, and Serjeants-at-Law, 107.--Do not
make your Son an Attorney,--Appellate Jurisdiction of the House
of Lords, 108.--Payment of an advocate,--Utter-Barristers,
109.--What was Special Pleading?--What is Evidence? 110.--What is
Trial?--Trial by Jury, 111.--Attendance of Jurors,--The Law of
Libel, 113.--Induction of a Rector, 115.--Benefit of Clergy,--The
King’s Book, 116.--Compulsory Attendance at Church, 117.--The
Mark of the Cross,--Marriage-Law of England, 118.--Marriage
Fines, 119.--Irregular Marriages, 120.--Solemnization of
Marriage, 123.--The Law of Copyright, 124.--Holding over
after Lease,--Abolition of the Hop Duty, 125.--Customs of
Gavelkind,--Treasure Trove, 126.--Principal and Agent,--Legal
Hints, 129.--Vitiating a Sale, 130.--Law of Gardens,--Giving a
Servant a Character, 131.--Deodands, 132.--Arrest of the Body
after Death,--The Duty of making a Will, 133.--Don’t make your own
Will, 134.--Bridewell, 135.--Cockfighting, 136.--Ignorance and
Irresponsibility,--Ticket-of-Leave Men, 137.--Cupar and Jedburgh
Justice,--What is to be done with our Convicts, 138.--The Game
Laws,--The Pillory, 139.--Death-Warrants,--Pardons, 140.--Origin
of the Judge’s Black Cap,--The Last English Gibbet, 141.--Public
Executions, 142.
V.--MEASURE AND VALUE, 146-169:
Numbers descriptive of Distance,--Precocious Mental Calculation,
146.--The Roman Foot, 147.--The Peruvian Quipus, 148.--Distances
measured,--Uniformity of Weights and Measures, 149.--Trinity
High-water Mark,--Origin of Rent, 150.--Curiosities of the
Exchequer, 151.--What becomes of the Public Revenue, 153.--Queen
Anne’s Bounty, 154.--Ecclesiastical Fees,--Burying Gold and Silver,
155.--Results of Gold-seeking, 157.--What becomes of the Precious
Metals? 158.--Tribute-money, 159.--The First Lottery,--Coinage of a
Sovereign, 160.--Wear and Tear of the Coinage,--Counterfeit Coin,
161.--Standard Gold,--Interest of Money, 162.--Interest of Money in
India,--Origin of Insurance, 163.--Stockbrokers, 164.--Tampering
with Public Credit,--Over-speculation, 165.--Value of Horses,--Friendly
Societies, 166.--Wages heightened by Improvement in Machinery,
167.--Giving Employment,--Never sign an Accommodation Bill, 168.--A
Year’s Wills, 169.
VI.--PROGRESS OF SCIENCE, 171-232:
What human Science has accomplished,--Changes in Social
Science, 171.--Discoverers not Inventors, 172.--Science of
Roger Bacon, 173.--The One Science, 174.--Sun-force, 175.--“The
Seeds of Invention,” 176.--The Object of Patents,--Theory and
Practice,--Watt and Telford, 177.--Practical Science,--Mechanical
Arts, 178.--Force of Running Water,--Correlation of Physical
Forces,--Oil on Waves, 180.--Spontaneous Generation,--Guano,--What
is Perspective? 181.--The Stereoscope,--Burning Lenses, 182.--How
to wear Spectacles,--Vicissitudes of Mining, 183.--Uses of
Mineralogy, 185.--Our Coal Resources,--The Deepest Mine, 186.--Iron
as a Building Material, 189.--Concrete, not new,--Sheathing
Ships with Copper, 190.--Copper Smelting,--Antiquity of
Brass,--Brilliancy of the Diamond, 191.--Philosophy of
Gunpowder,--New Pear-flavouring, 192.--Methylated Spirit,
193.--What is Phosphate of Lime?--What is Wood?--How long will
Wood last? 194.--The Safety Match, 195.--Pottery,--Wedgwood,
196.--Imposing Mechanical Effects, 197--Horse-power,--The First
Practical Steam-boat, 198.--Effect of Heavy Seas upon Large
Vessels, 199.--The Railway,--Accidents on Railways, 200.--Railways
and Invasions, 202.--What the English owe to naturalized
Foreigners, 203.--Geological Growth, 204.--The Earth and Man
compared,--Why the Earth is presumed to be Solid,--“Implements in
the Drift,” 205.--The Centre of the Earth, 206.--The Cooling of the
Earth, 207.--Identity of Heat and Motion, 208--Universal Source of
Heat, 209.--Inequalities of the Earth’s Surface, 210.--Chemistry
of the Sea, 212.--The Sea: its Perils, 213.--Limitations of
Astronomy, 214.--Distance of the Earth from the Sun, 215.--Blue
Colour of the Sky, 216.--Beauty of the Sky, 217.--High Temperatures
in Balloon Ascents,--Value of Meteorological Observations,
Telegraph, and Forecasts, 218.--Weather Signs, 220.--Barometer
for Farmers, 222.--Icebergs and the Weather, 223.--St. Swithun:
his true History, 224.--Rainfall in London, 225.--The Force of
Lightning, 226.--Effect of Moonlight,--Contemporary Inventions and
Discoveries, 227.--The Bayonet, 228.--Loot,--Telegram,--Archæology
and Manufactures, 229.--Good Art should be Cheap, 230.--Imitative
Jewellery, 231.--French Enamel, 232.
VII.--LIFE AND HEALTH, 233-266:
Periods and Conditions of Life,--Age of the People, 233.--The
Human Heart,--The Sense of Hearing, 234.--Care of the Teeth,--On
Blindness, 235.--Sleeping and Dreaming, 236.--Position in
Sleeping,--Hair suddenly changing Colour, 237.--Consumption
not hopeless, 238.--Change of Climate,--Perfumes, 239.--Cure
for Yellow Fever,--Nature’s Ventilation, 240.--Artificial
Ventilation,--Worth of Fresh Air, 241.--Town and Country,
243.--Recreations of the People,--The Druids and their Healing Art,
244.--Remedies for Cancer, 245.--Improved Surgery,--Restoration
of a Fractured Leg, 246.--The Original “Dr. Sangrado,”--False
Arts advancing true, 247.--Brief History of Medicine, 248.--What
has Science done for Medicine? 249.--Element of Physic in Medical
Practice, 250.--Physicians’ Fees,--Prevention of Pitting in
Small-pox, 251.--Underneath the Skin, 252.--Relations of Mind
and Organization, 253.--Deville, the Phrenologist, 254.--“Seeing
is believing,” 255.--Causes of Insanity, 256.--Brain-Disease,
257.--The Half-mad, 258.--Motives for Suicide,--Remedy for
Poisoning, 259.--New Remedy for Wounds,--Compensation for
Wounds,--The Best Physician, 260.--The Uncertainty of Human Life,
262.
VIII.--RELIGIOUS THOUGHT, 266-286:
Moveable Feasts,--Christmas, 266.--Doubt about Religion, 267.--Our
Age of Doubt, 270.--A Hint to Sceptics,--What is Egyptology?
271.--Jerusalem and Nimroud, 272.--What is Rationalism? 273.--What
is Theology? 274.--Religious Forebodings, 275.--Folly of
Atheism,--The First Congregational Church in England, 276.--Innate
Ideas, and Pre-existence of Souls, 277.--Sabbath of Professional
Men, 278.--“In the Beginning,” 279.--The last Religious Martyrs in
England,--Liberty of Conscience, 281.--Awful Judgments,--Christian
Education,--The Book of Psalms, 283.--The Book of Job, 285.
APPENDIX.
Great Precedence Question 287
KNOWLEDGE FOR THE TIME.
Historico-Political Information.
_Politics not yet a Science._
Mr. Buckle, in his thoughtful _History of Civilization_, remarks:
“In the present state of knowledge, Politics, so far from being
a science, is one of the most backward of all the arts; and the
only safe course for the legislator is to look upon his craft as
consisting in the adaptation of temporary contrivances to temporary
emergencies. His business is to follow the age, and not at all to
attempt to lead it. He should be satisfied with studying what is
passing around him, and should modify his schemes, not according
to the notions he has inherited from his fathers, but according
to the actual exigencies of his own time. For he may rely upon it
that the movements of society have now become so rapid that the
wants of one generation are no measure of the wants of another;
and that men, urged by a sense of their own progress, are growing
weary of idle talk about the wisdom of their ancestors, and are
fast discarding those trite and sleepy maxims which have hitherto
imposed upon them, but by which they will not consent to be much
longer troubled.”
_The Philosopher and the Historian._
“I have read somewhere or other,” says Lord Bolingbroke, “in
Dionysius Halicarnassus, I think, that History is Philosophy
teaching by Example.”
Walter Savage Landor has thus distinguished the respective labours
of the Philosopher and the Historian. “There are,” Mr. Landor
writes, “quiet hours and places in which a taper may be carried
steadily, and show the way along the ground; but you must stand a
tip-toe and raise a blazing torch above your head, if you would
bring to our vision the obscure and time-worn figures depicted on
the lofty vaults of antiquity. The philosopher shows everything in
one clear light; the historian loves strong reflections and deep
shadows, but, above all, prominent and moving characters.”
In writing of the Past, it behoves us to bear in mind, that while
actions are always to be judged by the immutable standard of right
and wrong, the judgment which we pass upon men must be qualified
by considerations of age, country, situation, and other incidental
circumstances; and it will then be found, that he who is most
charitable in his judgment, is generally the least unjust.
It is curious to find one of the silken barons of civilization and
refinement, writing as follows. The polite Earl of Chesterfield
says: “I am provoked at the contempt which most historians show for
humanity in general: one would think by them that the whole human
species consisted but of about a hundred and fifty people, called
and dignified (commonly very undeservedly too) by the titles of
emperors, kings, popes, generals, and ministers.”
Sir Humphry Davy has written thus plainly in the same vein:
“In the common history of the world, as compiled by authors in
general, almost all the great changes of nations are confounded
with changes in their dynasties; and events are usually referred
either to sovereigns, chiefs, heroes, or their armies, which
do, in fact, originate entirely from different causes, either
of an intellectual or moral nature. Governments depend far more
than is generally supposed upon the opinion of the people and
the spirit of the age and nation. It sometimes happens that a
gigantic mind possesses supreme power, and rises superior to the
age in which he is born: such was Alfred in England, and Peter in
Russia. Such instances are, however, very rare; and in general it
is neither amongst sovereigns nor the higher classes of society
that the great improvers and benefactors of mankind are to be
found.”--_Consolations in Travel_, pp. 34, 35.
_Whig and Tory Ministries._
The domestic history of England during the reign of Anne, is that
of the great struggles between Whig and Tory; and Earl Stanhope,
in his _History of England_, thus points out a number of precisely
parallel lines of policy, and instances of unscrupulous resort to
the same censurable set of weapons of party warfare, in the Tories
of the reign of Queen Anne and the Whigs of the reign of William
IV.
“At that period the two great contending parties were
distinguished, as at present, by the nicknames of Whig and
Tory. But it is very remarkable that in Queen Anne’s reign the
relative meaning of these terms was not only different but
opposite to that which they bore at the accession of William
IV. In theory, indeed, the main principle of each continues
the same. The leading principle of the Tories is the dread of
popular licentiousness. The leading principle of the Whigs is the
dread of royal encroachment. It may thence, perhaps, be deduced
that good and wise men would attach themselves either to the
Whig or to the Tory party, according as there seemed to be the
greater danger at that particular period from despotism or from
democracy. The same person who would have been a Whig in 1712
would have been a Tory in 1830. For, on examination, it will be
found that, in nearly all particulars, a modern Tory resembles a
Whig of Queen Anne’s reign, and a Tory of Queen Anne’s reign a
modern Whig.
“First, as to the Tories. The Tories of Queen Anne’s reign
pursued a most unceasing opposition to a just and glorious war
against France. They treated the great General of the age as
their peculiar adversary. To our recent enemies, the French,
their policy was supple and crouching. They had an indifference,
or even an aversion, to our old allies the Dutch. They had a
political leaning towards the Roman Catholics at home. They were
supported by the Roman Catholics in their elections. They had a
love of triennial parliaments in preference to septennial. They
attempted to abolish the protecting duties and restrictions of
commerce. They wished to favour our trade with France at the
expense of our trade with Portugal. They were supported by a
faction whose war-cry was ‘Repeal of the Union,’ in a sister
kingdom. To serve a temporary purpose in the House of Lords, they
had recourse (for the first time in our annals) to a large and
overwhelming creation of peers. Like the Whigs in May, 1831, they
chose the moment of the highest popular passion and excitement to
dissolve the House of Commons, hoping to avail themselves of a
short-lived cry for the purpose of permanent delusion. The Whigs
of Queen Anne’s time, on the other hand, supported that splendid
war which led to such victories as Ramillies and Blenheim. They
had for a leader the great man who gained those victories.
They advocated the old principles of trade. They prolonged the
duration of parliaments. They took their stand on the principles
of the Revolution of 1688. They raised the cry of ‘No Popery.’
They loudly inveighed against the subserviency to France, the
desertion of our old allies, the outrage wrought upon the peers,
the deceptions practised upon the sovereign, and the other
measures of the Tory administration.
“Such were the Tories and such were the Whigs of Queen Anne.
Can it be doubted that, at the accession of William IV., Harley
and St. John would have been called Whigs; Somers and Stanhope,
Tories? Would not the October Club have loudly cheered the
measures of Lord Grey, and the Kit-Cat find itself renewed in the
Carlton?”
The defence of the Whigs against these imputations seems to
be founded upon the famous Jesuitical principle, that the end
justifies the means. They do not deny the facts, but they assert,
that while the Tories of 1713 resorted to such modes of furthering
the interests of arbitrary power, they have employed them in
advancing the progress and securing the ascendancy of the democracy.
_Protectionists._
This name was given to that section of the Conservative party
which opposed the repeal of the Corn-laws, and which separated
from Sir Robert Peel in 1846. A “Society for the _Protection_
of Agriculture,” and to counteract the efforts of the Anti-Corn
Law League, gave the name to the party. Lord George Bentinck was
their leader from 1846 till his death on September 21, 1848. The
administration under Lord Derby not proposing the restoration of
the corn-laws, this society was dissolved February 7, 1853.
_Rats, and Ratting._
James, in his _Military Dictionary_, 1816, states:--
“Rats are sometimes used in military operations, particularly for
setting fire to magazines of gunpowder. On these occasions, a
lighted match is tied to the tail of the animal. Marshal Vauban
recommends, therefore, that the walls of powder-magazines should
be made very thick, and the passages for light and wind so narrow
as not to admit them (the rats).”
The expression _to rat_ is a figurative term applied to those who
at the moment of a division desert or abandon any particular party
or side of a question. The term itself comes from the well-known
circumstance of rats running away from decayed or falling
buildings.--_Notes and Queries_, 2 S., No. 68.
_The Heir to the British Throne always in Opposition._
Horace Walpole somewhere remarks, as a peculiarity in the history
of the _Hanover family_, that the heir-apparent has always been
in opposition to the reigning monarch. The fact is true enough;
but it is not a peculiarity in the House of Hanover. It is an
infirmity of human nature, to be found, more or less, in every
analogous case of private life; but our political system developes
it with peculiar force and more remarkable effects in the Royal
Family. Those who cannot obtain the favours of the father will
endeavour to conciliate the good wishes of the son; and all arts
are employed, and few are necessary, to seduce the heir-apparent
into the exciting and amusing _game_ of political opposition. He
is naturally apt enough to dislike what he considers a present
thraldom, and to anticipate, by his influence over a faction, the
plenitude of his future power. This was the mainspring of the most
serious part of the political troubles of the last century: let
us, however, hope that it will never be revived; and this we are
encouraged to hope from our improved Constitution, as well as from
the improved education of our Royal Family.
_Legitimacy and Government._
It is an unguarded idea of some public writers that “the Sovereign
holds her crown not by hereditary descent but by the will of the
nation.” This doctrine is too frequently stated in and out of
Parliament; and without qualification or explanation it would be
apt to breed mischief in the minds of an ignorant and excited
multitude, if the instinctive feelings of common sense did not
invariably correct the popular errors of theorists.
“They who have studied the Constitution attentively hold that her
Majesty reigns by hereditary right, though her predecessor in
1688 received the Crown at the hands of a free nation. To refer
to the right of election, which can be exercised only during a
revolution, and to be silent on hereditary right, is to lower the
Regal dignity to the precarious office of the judges when they
held their patents _durante bene placito_. Suppose a nation so
divided that one casting vote would carry a plebiscite, changing
the form of government, or the dynasty, and there would be a
practical illustration of a principle--if principle at all--which,
when taken as a broad palpable fact, is undeniable in the founder
of a dynasty, but when erected into a legal theory it becomes
neither more nor less than a permanent code of revolution. Hence
the successor of that founder, if his power be not supported
by military despotism, is invariably a staunch advocate of his
indefeasible hereditary right, though originally derived from the
consent of the nation.”--_Saturday Review._
“_The Fourth Estate._”
The Press has been described as the Fourth Estate of the realm;
but it is not so. If we remember rightly, it was Lord Stanley
who characterized it as a second representation of the Third
Estate. This is nearer the mark, though it is not exactly true,
seeing that the press represents, or professes to represent, all
the three estates. Its influence on the State is a fact either
not acknowledged at all or acknowledged as an evil to be held in
check by stringent laws and safeguards. Its place of power is not
defined by any written Constitution, and its acts are in our day
controlled, for the most part, by no written statute, but only by
its own good sense. In its modes of expression, the newspaper press
of our country usually keeps far within the bounds which the law
prescribes; it voluntarily prescribes for itself a law which has no
authority save that of taste. There is not a greater power under
the Constitution than this press, which is indeed the source of
power to much besides itself. What would public meetings be without
the press? Within the present century the method of influencing
public opinion by means of great gatherings of the people under
the direction of leagues and associations has been perfected. It
is a method which derives its momentum from the multiplication of
reports. It is a matter of indifference to an orator what or where
is his audience, provided through the reporters he can address
all England. The Press has thus neutralized one of the evils of
democracy as it was known in the olden time. A democratic Assembly
meant a rabble, a packed multitude of noisy citizens into which
the more quiet and thoughtful class of people did not care to
venture. In the democratic Assemblies now every man in England
virtually sits. We have good seats, for we are at our own firesides
with the newspapers in our hands. In the quiet of our chosen
retreats we listen to the “cheers,” and the “hear, hear,” and the
laughter which the speech of the orator evokes, and we can calmly
measure the words of the demagogue. Upon the very manner of public
speaking, too, we imagine that the system of newspaper reporting
has had some effect. If we may judge by the very imperfect reports
which we have of speeches delivered in the last century, orators
were then more inflated and inflammatory in their style than they
are now, the momentary impression which they created was beyond
anything we can now conceive, and if eloquence is to be judged
from its immediate effect they were greater masters of the art
than any we can now boast of. If this appears a hard thing to say,
when we have such orators among us as Lord Derby, Mr. Gladstone,
Mr. Bright, and Mr. Disraeli, let us remember the other side of
the question--let us take into account that our contemporary
first-class orators speak with the full knowledge that in cool
blood their speeches will be read word for word on the morrow.
They know right well that much of the bombast which might safely be
addressed to an admiring and heated audience will expose them only
to ridicule when it is reduced to print. Insensibly a more sober
standard of oratory is thus established, to the great gain of our
deliberative assemblies, and acting as some check upon rhetorical
demagogues.--_Times._
_Writing for the Press._
The organization of a great Newspaper establishment is a remarkable
result of practical ability profiting by accumulated experience;
but an account of the progress and development of the system is
as tedious as a history of the iron manufacture or of the cotton
trade. A readable narrative must include matters of more human
interest than tables of figures which represent the successive
numbers of copies and of advertisements; and although newspapers,
like power-looms, may not have sprung into existence of themselves,
the names of their obscure founders and managers are deservedly
forgotten. Mr. Perry’s name is still known in consequence of his
connexion with the old Whig party; Mr. Stuart enjoys a parasitic
fame as the employer of Coleridge and of Mackintosh; and the
late Mr. Walter exhibited an effective sagacity in the conduct
of his business which places him on a level with the Arkwrights
and Boltons of manufacturing history. It would not be worth while
to extend the list of able editors and spirited proprietors.
Successful men of business must be contented to make their own
fortunes and to benefit the world at large, without desiring
the supererogatory reward of posthumous fame. When the gods, in
Schiller’s apologue, had given away the earth and the sea, they
reserved the barren sky for the portionless poet; and ever since,
the lightest touch of genius, the smallest act which indicated
inherent greatness, has been found to retain its place in the
memory of men long after capitalists and mechanical inventors
have joined the multitude of the dead; _abierunt ad plures_. The
clever lecturer who employs himself in diffusing information on the
mechanism of watches probably finds the attention of his audience
flag when he attempts to delineate the qualities and virtues of
deceased generations of watchmakers.--_Saturday Review._
_Shorthand Writers._
Stenography, or the art of short writing, is generally stated to
have been invented by Xenophon, the historian; first practised
by Pythagoras; and reduced to a system by the poet, Ennius. To
this art we owe full reports of the proceedings in Parliament. The
system of Gurney was employed for this purpose; shorthand notes
upon which were found among the Egerton MSS.
The shorthand-writer of the House of Commons states in his Evidence
before the Select Committee on Private Bill Legislation that he
receives two guineas a-day for attendance before committees to
take notes of the evidence, and 9_d._ per folio of 72 words for
making a copy from his notes. In 1862, he received for business
thus done for the committees on private Bills 6667_l._, consisting
of 1682_l._ for attendance fees and 4985_l._ for the transcripts;
this does not include the charges in respect of committees on
public matters. He is appointed for the House of Lords also. So
much of the business as he cannot execute by his own establishment
he transfers to other shorthand writers on rather lower terms, but
he himself keeps a staff of ten shorthand writers. Each of these
has at least one clerk who can read his shorthand; but the most
efficient course is found to be that he have two such clerks, each
of whom (and himself also), taking in hand a portion of the notes,
dictates to quick writers, so that the mode of transcribing is by
writing from dictation, and not by copying. There is a great strain
and pressure in order to get the transcript to the law-stationers
in time for the requisite number of copies to be ready when the
committee meet next morning. In the height of the session, the
witness mentions, he provides refreshments for about fifty persons
employed at his office during the evening, many of them until
midnight, and often later.
_The Worth of Popular Opinion._
Popular Opinion is generally founded on the most prominent and the
most striking, but for that reason, often the most superficial
feature in the interesting object of which a knowledge is
pretended. That Cromwell had a wart on his nose; that Byron had
a club-foot, which gave him more anxiety than the critiques on
his poems; that the head of Pericles was too long, for which
reason the sculptors always made his bust helmeted, while that of
Julius Cæsar was bald, which made it doubly grateful to that great
commander to have his brow encompassed with an oaken wreath, or the
coveted kingly diadem; such prominent and superficial accessories
of personal appearance, in the case of well-known characters,
will often be familiar to thousands who know nothing more of the
persons so curiously characterized. But these, so far as they
go, are true; they are accurate knowledge, not mere opinion. Even
vulgar opinion is not so often altogether false as it is partial
and inadequate, and therefore unjust. Of Mahomet, for instance,
everybody knows that he was the prophet of an intolerant religion,
which its most sincere professors have always most zealously
propagated with the sword. This is quite true; but it is far from
embracing the whole truth with regard to the religion of the Koran;
and he who with the inconsiderate haste of popular logic, uses this
accurate knowledge about a fraction of a thing, as if it were the
just appreciation of the whole, falls not the less certainly into
the region of mere delusion; for though the thing that he believes
is true, it is not true as he gives it currency. He is in fact
doing a thing in the region of ideas which is equivalent to passing
a farthing for a guinea; an act whereby he swindles the public
and himself very nearly as much as if he were to pass off a piece
of painted pasteboard for the same value.--_Professor Blackie_;
_Edinburgh Essays_, 1856.
_Machiavelism._
It has been well said of Machiavelli, that he has the credit
or discredit of having been the first to erect into a science,
and reduce it to theory, the art of obtaining absolute power by
deception and cruelty; and of maintaining it afterwards by the
simulation of leniency and virtue. In political history, he was
the first who gave at once a general and a luminous development of
great events in their causes and connexion.
Sir Walter Raleigh, in his _History of the World_, says:--“The
doctrine which Machiavel taught unto Cæsar Borgia, to employ men in
mischievous actions, and afterwards to destroy them when they have
performed the mischief, was not of his own invention. All ages have
given us examples of this goodly policy; the latter having been apt
scholars in this lesson to the more ancient, as the reign of Henry
VIII. here in England can bear witness; and therein especially the
Lord Cromwell, who perished by the same unjust law that himself had
devised for the taking away of another man’s life.”
_Free-speaking._
Archbishop Whately, in his very able Lecture on Egypt, referring
to the writers on Public Affairs at home, reprehends the practice
of exaggerating, with keen delight, every evil that they can
find, inventing such as do not exist, and keeping out of sight
what is good. An Eastern despot, reading the productions of one of
these writers, would say that, with all our precautions, we are
the worst governed people on earth; and that our law-courts and
public offices are merely a complicated machinery for oppressing
the mass of the people; that our Houses of Lords and Commons are
utterly mismanaged, our public men striving to repress merit, and
that our best plan would be to sweep away all those, as, with less
trouble, matters might go on better, and could not go on worse.
Charges of this nature cannot be brought publicly forward in the
Turkish Empire. In Cairo, a man was beheaded because he made too
free a use of his tongue. He was told not to be speaking of the
insurrection in Syria, and had dared to be chatting of the news;
and there are other countries, also, where because such charges are
true, it would not be safe to circulate them. But these writers do
not mean half what they set forth. They heighten their descriptions
to display their eloquence; but the tendency of such publications
is always towards revolution, and the practical effect on the
minds of the people is to render them incredulous. They understand
that these overwrought representations are for effect, and they go
about their business with an impression that the whole is unreal.
If one of these writers were visited himself with a horrible dream
that he was a peasant under an Oriental despot, that he was taxed
at the will of the Sovereign, and had to pay the assessment in
produce, valued at half the market-price, that he was compelled to
work and receive four-fifths of his low wages in food consisting
of hard, sour biscuit--let him then dream that he had spoken
against the Ministry, and that he finds himself bastinadoed till
he confesses that he brought false charges; that his grown-up son
had been dragged off for a soldier, and himself deprived of his
only support, and he would be inclined to doubt whether ours is the
worst system of Government.
_Speakers of the Houses of Parliament._
The late Sir George Cornewall Lewis, in a communication which
appeared in _Notes and Queries_, in the week of the author’s
lamented death, states the following:
“In modern legislative chambers it has been customary for the
Chamber to appoint one of its own members as president. In the
English House of Lords the Lord Chancellor is President by virtue
of his office. Although a member of the executive Government,
and holding his office at the pleasure of the Crown, he is
nevertheless a high judicial officer, and is deemed to carry his
judicial impartiality into the performance of his presidential
functions. In general, however, the president of a legislative
chamber is not, according to modern practice, a member of
the executive Government. He is an independent member of the
legislature, who is appointed by the chamber, and holds his
office at its pleasure, such as the Speaker of the English House
of Commons.
“The principal functions of the Speaker of the House of Commons
were not originally (as the title of his office indicates) what
they are at present. The House of Commons were at first a set of
delegates summoned by the Crown to negotiate with it concerning
the payment of taxes. They might take advantage of the position
of superiority which they temporarily occupied to remonstrate
with the Crown about certain grievances, upon which they were
generally agreed. In this state of things it was important that
they should have an organ and spokesman with sufficient ability
and knowledge to state their views, and with sufficient courage
to contend against the displeasure of the Crown. The helpless
condition of a large body which is called upon to conduct a
negotiation without any appointed organ is well described by
Livy. When the Roman plebeians seceded to the Mount Aventine,
after the Decemvirate, the Senate sent three ambassadors to
confer with them, and to propose three questions. ‘Non defuit,’
says Livy, ‘quid responderetur; deerat qui daret responsum,
nullodum certo duce, nec satis audentibus singulis invidiæ
se offerre’ (iii. 50). Since the Revolution of 1688, and the
increased power of the House of Commons, the functions of the
Speaker have undergone a change. His chief function has been no
longer to speak on behalf of the House; that which was previously
his accessary has become his principal duty. He has been simply
chairman of the House, with the function of regulating its
proceedings, of putting the question, and of maintaining order.
The Speaker of the House of Commons is now virtually disqualified
by his office from speaking; but as their debates have become
more important, his office of moderator of these debates has
acquired additional importance.
“The position of the Speaker of the Irish House of Commons was
similar to that of the Speaker of the English House (see Lord
Mountmorres’s _History of the Irish Parliament_, vol. i. p.
71-79); but in Scotland the three estates sat as one House;
there was no separate House of Commons, and the Lord Chancellor
presided over the entire assembly.” (See Robertson’s _History of
Scotland_, b. 1, vol. i. p. 276, ed. 1821.)
_The National Conscience._
When we come to the proofs from fact and historical experience, we
might appeal to a singular case in the records of our Exchequer,
viz., that for much more than a century back, our _Gazette_ and
other public advertisers have acknowledged a series of anonymous
remittances from those who, at some time or other, had appropriated
public money. We understand that no corresponding fact can be
cited from foreign records. Now, this is a direct instance of
that compunction which our travelled friend insisted on. But we
choose rather to throw ourselves upon the general history of Great
Britain: upon the spirit of her policy, domestic or foreign; and
upon the universal principles of her public morality. Take the case
of public debts, and the fulfilment of contracts to those who could
not have compelled the fulfilment; we first set this precedent. All
nations have now learned that honesty in such cases is eventually
the best policy; but this they learned from our experience, and
not till nearly all of them had tried the other policy. We it was
who, under the most trying circumstances of war, maintained the
sanctity from taxation of all foreign investments in our funds.
Our conduct with regard to slaves, whether in the case of slavery
or of the Slave Trade--how prudent it may always have been we need
not inquire--as to its moral principles they went so far ahead of
European standards that we were neither comprehended nor believed.
The perfection of romance was ascribed to us by all who did not
reproach us with the perfection of Jesuitical knavery; by many
our motto was supposed to be no longer the old one of _divide
et impera_, but _annihila et appropria_. Finally, looking back
to our dreadful conflicts with the three conquering despots of
modern history, Philip II. of Spain, Louis XIV., and Napoleon; we
may incontestably boast of having been single in maintaining the
general equities of Europe by war upon a colossal scale, and by our
counsels in the general congresses of Christendom.--_De Quincey._
“_The Nation of Shopkeepers._”
In the Præludia to the _Chronicon Albeldense_, attributed to
Bulcidius, Bishop of Salamanca, a Spanish writer at the end of
the ninth century, we find the following singular refutation
of an ungraceful compliment hitherto paid to us by our Gallic
neighbours. In a paragraph headed _De Proprietatibus Gentium_, we
see the tables turned in our favour:--“1. Sapientia Græcorum; 2.
Fortia Gothorum; 3. Consilia Chaldæorum; 4. Superbia Romanorum; 5.
Ferocitas Francorum; 6. Ira Britannorum; 7. Libido Scotorum; 8.
Duritia Saxonum; 9. Cupiditas Persarum; 10. Invidia Judæorum; 11.
Pax Æthiopum; 12. Commercia Gallorum!” This discovery seems to be
invested with an additional interest at a time when our Allies very
handsomely acknowledge that they have hitherto laboured under a
mistake in their estimate of our national peculiarities.
_Results of Revolutions._
Sir George Cornewall Lewis, in his last work, _On the Best Form
of Government_, has this summary: “There are some rare cases in
which a nation has profited by a revolution. Such was the English
Revolution of 1688, in which the form of the Government underwent
no alteration, and the person of the King was alone changed.
It was the very _minimum_ of a revolution; it was remarkable
for the absence of those accompaniments which make a revolution
perilous, and which subsequently draw upon it a vindictive
reactionary movement. The late Italian revolution has likewise
been successful; by it the Italian people have gained a better
government and have improved their political condition. It was
brought about by foreign intervention; but its success has been
mainly owing to the moderation of the leaders in whom the people
had the wisdom to confide, and who have steadily refrained from
all revolutionary excesses. The history of forcible attempts to
improve governments is not, however, cheering. Looking back upon
the course of revolutionary movements, and upon the character of
their consequences, the practical conclusion which I draw is that
it is the part of wisdom and prudence to acquiesce in any form
of government which is tolerably well administered, and affords
tolerable security to person and property. I would not, indeed,
yield to apathetic despair, or acquiesce in the persuasion that a
merely tolerable government is incapable of improvement. I would
form an individual model, suited to the character, disposition,
wants, and circumstances of the country, and I would make all
exertions, whether by action or by writing, within the limits of
the existing law, for ameliorating its existing condition and
bringing it nearer to the model selected for imitation; but I
should consider the problem of the best form of government as
purely ideal, and as unconnected with practice, and should abstain
from taking a ticket in the lottery of revolution, unless there was
a well-founded expectation that it would come out a prize.”
Sir William Hamilton has well observed that “No revolution in
public opinion is the work of an individual, of a single cause, or
of a day. When the crisis has arrived, the catastrophe must ensue;
but the agents through whom it is apparently accomplished, though
they may accelerate, cannot originate its occurrence. Who believes
that but for Luther or Zwingli the Reformation would not have
been? Their individual, their personal energy and zeal, perhaps,
hastened by a year or two the event but had the public mind not
been already ripe for their revolt, the fate of Luther and Zwingli,
in the sixteenth century, would have been that of Huss and Jerome
of Prague in the fifteenth. Woe to the revolutionist who is not
himself a creature of the revolution! If he anticipate, he is lost;
for it requires, what no individual can supply, a long and powerful
counter-sympathy in a nation to untwine the ties of custom which
bind a people to the established and the old.”
_Worth of a Republic._
Mr. Baron Alderson is described as having a temper too calm for the
stormy floor of the House of Commons; but he studied politics as a
science, from a safe distance; and his letters contain his opinions
on some points expressed with a very deliberate care. To Mrs. Opie,
who had been writing against Republics and Republican Government,
he says: “I entirely agree with your view of a Republic. As long as
men are so wicked, it is an impossibility for it to be a lasting
government, for it does not govern, but obey. America is no
exception to this rule. In the first place, at its commencement,
I believe it was a remarkably moral population; and so the evils
would not at first appear. And, since that time, the immensity of
its territory has enabled its most active and least self-restrained
population to expand itself with less inconvenience. But will
the thing last? When the wilderness is peopled, will not the
wickedness, which is now expended on the Indians and the weak
without observation, become intolerable, and a government strong
enough to protect, be the result? Such a one, I think, will hardly
be a republic, but, I fear, a despotism, for men always run into
extremes. Lynch law is, in fact, an ill-regulated despotism.”
“_Safe Men._”
Dean Hook, in his _Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury_, has
the following judicious observations upon appointments of this
practically useful class:
“Among the archbishops,” says the Dean, “there are a few eminent
rulers distinguished as much for their transcendent abilities
as for their exalted station in society; but as a general rule
they have not been men of the highest class of mind. In all ages
the tendency has very properly been, whether by election or
nomination, to appoint ‘safe men;’ and as genius is generally
innovating and often eccentric, the safe men are those who,
with certain high qualifications, do not rise much above the
intellectual average of their contemporaries. They are practical
men rather than philosophers and theorists, and their impulse
is not to perfection but _quieta non movere_. From this very
circumstance their history is the more instructive; and, if few
among the archbishops have left the impress of their mind upon
the age in which they lived, we may in their biography read
the character of the times which they fairly represent. In a
missionary age we find them zealous but not enthusiastic; on
the revival of learning, whether in Anglo-Saxon times or in the
fifteenth century, they were men of learning, although only a few
have been distinguished as authors. When the mind of the laity
was devoted to the camp or the chase, and prelates were called to
the administration of public affairs, they displayed the ordinary
tact and diplomatic skill of professional statesmen, and the
necessary acumen of judges; at the Reformation, instead of being
leaders, they were the cautious followers of bolder spirits;
at the epoch of the Revolution they were anti-Jacobites rather
than Whigs; in a latitudinarian age they have been, if feeble as
governors, bright examples of Christian moderation and charity.”
_Church Preferment._
Lord Chancellor Thurlow, on reading Horsley’s Letters to Dr.
Priestley, at once obtained for the author a Stall at Gloucester,
saying that “those who supported the Church should be supported by
it.”
_Peace Statesmanship._
There is nothing more wholesome for both the people and their
rulers, than to dwell upon the excellence of those statesmen whose
lives have been spent in the useful, the sacred, work of Peace.
The thoughtless vulgar are ever prone to magnify the brilliant
exploits of arms, which dazzle ordinary understandings, and prevent
any account being taken of the cost and the crime that are so
often hid in the guise of success. All merit of that shining kind
is sure of passing current for more than it is really worth; and
the eye is turned indifferently upon, or even scornfully from, the
unpretending virtue of the true friend to his species, the minister
who devotes all his cares to stay the worst of crimes that can be
committed, the last of calamities that can be endured by man.
_The Burial of Sir John Moore._
It had been generally supposed that the interment of General Sir
John Moore, who fell at the Battle of Corunna, in 1809, took
place _during the night_; a mistake which, doubtless, arose from
the justly-admired lines by Wolfe becoming more widely known and
remembered than the official account of this solemn event in the
Narrative of the Campaign, by the brother of Sir John Moore. In
Wolfe’s monody, the hero is represented to have been buried
By the struggling _moonbeam’s misty light_,
And the lanterns dimly burning,--
an error of description which has, doubtless, been extended by
many pictorial illustrations of the sad scene, “darkly at dead of
night.” The Rev. J. H. Symons, who was chaplain to the brigade
of Guards attached to the army under Moore’s command, and who
attended the hero in his last moments, relates that during the
battle Moore was conveyed from the field into the quarters on the
quay at Corunna, where he was laid on a mattress upon the floor,
and the chaplain remained with him till his death. During the
night, the body was removed to the quarters of Colonel Graham, in
the citadel, by the officers of his staff; whence it was borne by
them, assisted by Mr. Symons, the chaplain, to the grave which had
been prepared for it on one of the bastions of the citadel. It
being now daylight, the enemy had discovered that the troops had
been withdrawing and embarking during the night; a fire was soon
opened by them, upon the ships which were still in the harbour; the
funeral service was, therefore, performed without delay, under the
fire of the enemy’s guns; and, there being no means to provide a
coffin, the body of the general,
With his martial cloak around him,
was deposited in the earth, the Rev. Mr. Symons reading the funeral
service.
_The Ancestors of Washington._
While America feels a just pride in having given birth to George
Washington, it is something for England to know that his ancestors
lived for generations upon her soil. His great-grandfather
emigrated about 1657, having previously lived in Northamptonshire.
The Washingtons were a Northern family, who lived some time
in Durham, and also in Lancashire, whence they came to Northamptonshire.
The uncle of the first Lawrence Washington was Sir Thomas Kitson,
one of the great merchants, who, in the reigns of Henry VII. and
VIII., developed the wool-trade of the country, which depended
mainly on the growth of wool, and the creation of sheep-farms
in the midland counties. That he might superintend his uncle’s
transactions with the sheep proprietors, Lawrence Washington
settled in Northamptonshire, leaving his own profession of a
barrister. He soon became Mayor of Northampton, and at the
dissolution of the monasteries, being identified with the cause of
civil and religious liberty, he gained a grant of some monastic
land, including Sulgrave. In the parish of Brington is situated
Althorp, the seat of the Spencers: the Lady Spencer of that day was
herself a Kitson, daughter of Washington’s uncle, and the Spencers
were great promoters of the sheep-farming movement. Thus, then,
there was a very plain connexion between the Washingtons and the
Spencers.
For three generations the Washingtons remained at Sulgrave, taking
rank among the nobility and gentry of the county. Then their
fortunes failed: they were obliged to part with Sulgrave, and
retired to Brington, under, as it were, the wing of the Spencer
family. From this depression the Washingtons recovered by a
singular marriage. The eldest son of the family had married the
half-sister of George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham, which at this
time was not an alliance above the pretensions of the Washingtons:
they rose into great prosperity. The emigrant, above all others of
the family, continued to be on intimate terms with the Spencers,
down to the very eve of the Civil War; he was knighted by James
I. in 1623, and in the Civil War took the side of the king. The
emigrant who left England in 1657, we leave to be traced by
historians on the other side of the Atlantic.
“George Washington, without the genius of Julius Cæsar or Napoleon
Bonaparte, has a far purer fame, as his ambition was of a higher
and a holier nature. Instead of seeking to raise his own name, or
seize supreme power, he devoted his whole talents, military and
civil, to the establishment of the independence and the perpetuity
of the liberties of his own country. In modern history no man has
done such great things without the soil of selfishness or the stain
of a grovelling ambition. Cæsar, Cromwell, Napoleon, attained a
higher elevation, but the love of dominion was the spur that drove
them on. John Hampden, William Russell, Algernon Sidney, may have
had motives as pure, and an ambition as sustained, but they fell.
To George Washington alone, in modern times, has it been given to
accomplish a wonderful revolution, and yet to remain to all future
times the theme of a people’s gratitude, and an example of virtuous
and beneficent power.”--_Earl Russell’s Life and Times of Charles
James Fox._
_The “Star-spangled Banner” of the United States._
The people of the United States understand little of the proper
form, proportion of size, number of stripes even, of their own
national flag, the “Star-spangled Banner.”
The standard for the army is fixed at six feet and six inches, by
four feet and four inches; the number of stripes is thirteen--viz.,
seven red and six white. It will be perceived that the flag is
just one-half longer than it is broad, and that its proportions
are perfect when properly carried out. The first stripe at the top
is red, the next white, and so down alternately, which makes the
last stripe red. The blue field for the stars is the width and
square of the first seven stripes--viz., four red and three white.
These seven stripes extend from the _side_ of the field to the
extremity of the flag; the next stripe is _white_, extending the
entire length of it, and directly _under_ the field; then follow
the remaining stripes alternately. The number of stars on the field
is now thirty-one, and the Army and Navy add another star on the
admission of a new State into our glorious union. In some respects,
the “Banner” resembles the flag of the Sandwich Islands.--_American
journal._
_Ancestry of President Adams._
John Adams, second President of the United States of America, is
commonly but erroneously represented to have been the son of a
cobbler. Now, he was the son of a clergyman. His descent would
have graced any Court in Europe. He was descended from one of the
oldest families in Devonshire and Gloucestershire, one of whom sat
as an English Baron in the Parliaments of Edward the First. His
father, Adam Fitzherbert, was lineally descended from the ancient
Counts de Vermandois. Lord ap-Adam’s wife (the ancestress of this
second President of America) was the daughter and sole heiress
of John Lord de Gournay, of Beverston Castle, Gloucestershire,
the representative of the ancient House of Harpitré de Gournai,
a branch of the great house of “Yvery,” which was connected with
every Sovereign house in Europe. It would be difficult to find
a higher descent. The late Mr. Edward Adams, M.P., of Middleton
Hall, Carmarthenshire, was a descendant of the elder branch of this
family; and Mr. Anthony Davis, of Misbourne House, Chalfont Saint
Giles, Bucks, is its representative.
_The Irish Union._
It was after the exhaustion caused by the Rebellion in Ireland,
that Pitt brought forward his project of the Union, and Lord
Cornwallis successfully accomplished it. Mr. Massey describes at
great length the means by which, in Castlereagh’s phrase, “the fee
simple of Irish corruption was bought;” and the Irish Parliament,
like Tarpeia, perished beneath the weight of stipulated bribery.
No person acquainted in the least with history, or having any
regard for Ireland, will fail to rejoice at the success of a
measure which relieved her instantly from a worthless Legislature,
and by incorporating her with Great Britain assured her the
prospect of just government. But the delay in the grant of
Catholic Emancipation, which Pitt had intended to accompany the
Union, retarded for many years its benefits; and another part
of the Minister’s scheme, a State provision for the Catholic
priesthood, remains to this day unaccomplished. Pitt incurred a
heavy responsibility on this account. It appears certain from the
Castlereagh correspondence that the Irish Catholics supported
the Union on something like an implied pledge that they should
obtain their political rights; and on this ground, and on that,
besides, of the State necessity for emancipation, Pitt can hardly
escape the censure of history for not having insisted more
strongly in carrying out his policy as a whole, and especially for
having, in 1805, consented not to press the subject on the King
when he formed his second brief Administration. It is doubtful,
however, Mr. Massey observes, whether Pitt could at any period
have extorted compliance from George III., or, indeed, from the
people of England; and, though his conduct in this matter was not
chivalrous as an individual, he may have conceived, as a public
man, that he had satisfied honour by his resigning in 1801, and
that afterwards he would have not been justified in depriving the
country of his services for the sake of a policy impracticable at
the moment.--_Times review of Massey’s Hist. England._
The published Correspondence of Lord Cornwallis gives, with
painful minuteness, the details of management and bribery by
which the Union between Great Britain and Ireland was carried to
a conclusion; but most readers of the history of the period are
satisfied with knowing that the Union was a political necessity,
that the parties to be dealt with in effecting it--the Irish
Parliament and its patrons--were utterly corrupt, and that
_persuasion_ was the only method which it was possible to employ.
The result was inevitable. The Government bid high, and as it bid
the vendors raised their prices, and still the Government bid
higher. At last the owners of seats were gorged with the sum of
15,000_l._ for each disfranchised borough, and the whole amount
of compensation thus extorted reached the magnificent figure of
1,260,000_l._ We can hardly be thankful enough that Lord Grey’s
Government had the firmness to resist the application of so
inconvenient a precedent in the Reform Bill of 1832.
_The House of Bonaparte._
The _Moniteur_ in 1862 contained five columns on the pedigree of
Bonaparte, from Anno Domini 1170, when the first of that name
headed an Italian league at Treviso against the German invaders
under Frederic Barbarossa. John Bonaparte signs a treaty at
Constance on behalf of Italy, and writes himself _consul_, being in
fact _le premier consul_ of his race, in 1182. Two centuries after
the Bonaparte escutcheon on their house in St. Andrew’s-square,
at Treviso, is ordered to be broken by Venice; and 440 years
afterwards that republic is suppressed by a Bonaparte at the
treaty of Campo Formio. Details are given of the family’s removal
to Florence, San Miniato, and Corsica; of the sack of Rome, at
which Jacopo Bonaparte assisted in 1520, and of a comedy, _La
Vedova_, from the pen of another about the same period. Muratori’s
_Antiquitates Italicæ_, vols. 8, 9, and 12, folio, contain numerous
diplomatic documents signed by members of this stirring house, ever
active in all the revolutions of mediæval Italy. The _Moniteur_
becomes quite an enthusiast about the land that produced this
chosen race. The oddest revelation is the fact, that _Mala-parte_
was the original name before 1170, just as it was of the Bolognese
family _Malatesta_, the change having been voted by popular acclaim
in public assembly at Treviso. So far the _Moniteur_. But it might
be added that the Beauharnais family, through which the present
Emperor comes, had undergone a precisely similar change of name
at the request of Marie Antoinette. That house had been known for
ages in Poitou as Seigneurs de Bellescouilles, an appellation not
quite fitting the Court at Versailles, and altered accordingly.
It is rather remarkable that Napoleon I., in the _Moniteur_ of
22nd Messidor, an XIII., 1805, had scouted all idea of ancestry,
and ordered a formal declaration to be inserted that his house
dated from Marengo, quoting the lines of La Fontaine--“_Rien n’est
dangereux qu’un sot ami_,” meaning the person who had drawn out his
pedigree.
The Register of the Imperial family is a large folio volume,
bound in red velvet, and having at the corners ornaments of
silver-gilt, with the family cipher ‘N’ in the centre. It was
commenced in 1806, and the first entry made was the adoption
of Prince Eugène by the Emperor. The second, made the same
year, relates to the adoption of the Princess Stephanie de
Beauharnais, who died Grand Duchess of Baden, and who was cousin
of the Empress Joséphine. Next comes the marriage of the Emperor
Napoleon I.; then several certificates of the birth of Princes
of the family, and lastly of the King of Rome, which closes the
series of the certificates inscribed under the reign of the First
Emperor. This register was confided to the care of Count Regnault
de Saint-Jean-d’Angely, Minister and Councillor of State, and
Secretary of the Imperial family. It was to him, under the First
Empire, as it is now to the Minister of State under the Second,
that was reserved the duty of drawing up the _procès verbaux_ of
the great acts relative to Napoleon. At the fall of the First
Empire, Count Regnault de Saint-Jean-d’Angely carefully preserved
the book, which at his death passed into the hands of the
Countess, his widow. That lady handed it over to the President of
the Republic when Louis Napoleon was called by universal suffrage
to the Imperial throne.
A Correspondent of the _Literary Gazette_ writes: “I have been
afforded an opportunity of examining many of the letters of
Napoleon which figure in the Imperial collection; and I assure you
that the commission charged with the duty of saying what should and
what should not be published, had a most arduous task to perform.
For of all the ‘cramped pieces of penmanship’ that were ever seen
his are the most cramped and unintelligible. The manner in which
the letters are formed would frighten a writing-master into fits,
and the lines never run straight, whilst not unfrequently they come
into collision. And what is singular is that a great many of the
words are grossly misspelt, and that others are only half-written.
O vanity of human genius! O triumph for dull little schoolboys!
The man who conquered more kingdoms than Alexander knew not
orthography!”
_Invasion of England projected by Napoleon I._
The 9th volume of the _Correspondance de Napoléon I._, published at
Paris, in 1862, brings to light, for the first time, the whole of
his schemes for invading England, which he planned in 1803, when he
led a mighty host to Boulogne, in the hope of repeating the scene
of the Conquest. The following passage in this volume shows how
Napoleon struggled to remove his inferiority in fleets:
“Collect 3000 workmen at Antwerp. Wood, iron, and materials
can be brought there from the North. War is no impediment to
shipbuilding at Antwerp. If we are three years at war, we must
build there not less than 25 ships of the line. Anywhere else
this would be impossible. We must have a powerful fleet; and we
should not have less than 100 ships of the line. We must also
commence building frigates and smaller vessels. St. Domingo cost
us 2,000,000f. a month; the English having captured it, this sum
must be appropriated to the increase of our navy.”
Such were the conditions of this attack; and such the forces with
which Napoleon expected “to conquer the world in London;” and his
letters to Soult, to Bruix, to Déeres must convince the reader
that he was in earnest in his scheme of “planting the tricolour on
the Tower.” The problem for Napoleon to solve was how to transport
across the Channel an army of 150,000 men, with horses, cannon,
baggage, and equipments, in spite of the naval superiority of
England. In these first preparations we must allow he succeeded
beyond our worst expectations. Within fourteen months from the
commencement of the war he had gathered within ten leagues of
our coast, and had placed beyond the power of attack, a flotilla
mounting 2000 guns, and able to transport his superb army, which,
though numbering 150,000 men, could embark in less than a single
tide, and were fully trained for a naval encounter.
So far, at least, as regards the Government, it must be confessed
that our preparations to meet this attack were unequal to the
danger. In the Channel especially--the point menaced--the naval
arrangements made by the Admiralty were very faulty and even
ridiculous. Such a Power as England should never have allowed the
flotilla to assemble at Boulogne at all; and when it had assembled
it should have been assailed by a mass of gunboats and light
vessels, which we might have sent out in enormous numbers. Yet
the Admiralty persisted in encountering the flotilla with 18 and
12-pounder frigates, which drew too much water to close the shore,
and, at long range, were no match for their powerfully armed,
though small antagonists; the result was that on no occasion were
we able to damage the enemy seriously, and that on some we suffered
severely.
In England as well as in France it was thought that the flotilla
was to risk the passage unaided, its heavy armament suggesting
the notion that Napoleon believed it a match for our fleet in the
narrow strait between Dover and Calais. We now know, however, that
this was an error, and that Napoleon never intended to embark
unless supported by a covering squadron, which, having for a time
the command of the Channel, would completely protect the flotilla
and the army. In order to have the mastery of the Channel for the
forty-eight hours required for the transit, the problem was so to
manœuvre his fleets as to bring a superior force off Boulogne, in
spite of the numerous English squadrons which watched or blockaded
them in all their harbours. He devised a twofold scheme for this
end, adapted to the circumstances of the seaboard, and which
experience proved to be feasible.
This volume, however, proves sufficiently that, brilliant as were
Napoleon’s designs, he could not inspire Villeneuve and Ganteaume
with the daring energy of Nelson and Cochrane, or make British
seamen of his sailors. The want of discipline, the timidity, and
the inexperience, of which there are proofs, explain how Napoleon’s
deep-laid designs were brought to an end on the day of Trafalgar.
However, in 1805, Napoleon renewed his invasion scheme, the
details of which he thus narrates in the 11th volume of his
_Correspondance_, 1863:
“I wished to bring together forty or fifty sail of the line
by operating their junction from Toulon, Cadiz, Ferrol, and
Brest; to move them all together to Boulogne; to be there for a
fortnight master of the Channel; to have 150,000 men and 10,000
horses encamped on the coast, with a flotilla of nearly 4000
vessels, and then, upon the arrival of my fleet, to embark for
England and seize London.... To secure a prospect of success
it was necessary to collect 150,000 men at Boulogne, with the
flotilla, and an immense materiel, to embark the whole, yet
to conceal my plan. I accomplished this though it appeared
impossible, and I did so by reversing what seemed probable.”
Thus, in the spring of 1805 Napoleon collected within ten leagues
of our shores a flotilla of nearly 4000 vessels, which, moored
under the batteries of Boulogne, and armed with very heavy cannon,
had long repelled our attempts to destroy them. Encamped around lay
the veteran legions which had been selected for the descent, and
had been trained with such care to embark and expedite the passage,
that Napoleon writes, “150,000 men with a due proportion of guns
and horses could within four tides effect a landing.”
His plan was marked with much ingenuity. The aspect of an armed
flotilla induced our Admiralty to think that Napoleon relied on it
alone to cross; and they felt assured that when at sea, three or
four ships would suffice to destroy it. Accordingly, our Channel
fleet was reduced to a force of not more than six sail; and the
mass of the British Navy was employed either in blockading the
enemy’s squadrons or in distant expeditions on the ocean. Could,
therefore, one of the blockaded fleets effect its junction with
another, and penetrate into the unguarded Channel, a temporary
ascendancy at sea might be gained, under cover of which the
flotilla could cross and ferry over the French army.
It is only in this volume that we see how nearly Napoleon’s design
succeeded so far as regards the descent, and also what were the
causes of its failure. Whatever we may think of his project as a
whole, it must be allowed that in August, 1805, when Villeneuve put
to sea from Ferrol, the Emperor had good reason to expect that his
Admirals would fulfil their mission:--
“The squadrons of Nelson and Calder have joined the fleet off
Brest, _and Cornwallis has been foolish enough to send twenty
sail to blockade the French fleet off Ferrol. On the 17th of
August--that is, three days after our squadron left Ferrol,
Calder left Brest for Ferrol with a northerly wind._ What a
chance was there for Villeneuve! _He could either, by keeping a
wide offing, avoid Calder, reach Brest, and fall upon Cornwallis,
or with his thirty sail-of-the-line beat Calder’s twenty, and
acquire a decided preponderance._ So much for the English, whose
combinations are so talked of.”
In England the Whigs laughed at the idea of the invasion as a
ministerial bugbear. “Can anything equal,” says Lord Grenville in
1804, “the ridicule of Pitt riding about from Downing-street to
Wimbledon, and from Wimbledon to Cox-heath, to inspect military
carriages, impregnable batteries, and Lord Chatham’s reviews?
Can he possibly be serious in expecting Bonaparte now?” So also
wrote Fox a year afterwards--“The alarm of invasion here was most
certainly a groundless one, and raised for some political purpose
by the Ministers.” Whatever the Whigs might then think, there is
no doubt now as to Bonaparte’s intentions. “Let us be masters of
the Channel for six hours, and we are masters of the world,” are
his famous words. His design to invade this country was never
relinquished, was cherished as the darling scheme of his life,
until within a month or two before Pitt’s death, when the battle
of Trafalgar destroyed his hopes for ever.--_Selected and abridged
from reviews in the Times._
_Fate of the Duc d’Enghien._
While the First Consul was meditating the descent upon England, in
1804, his life and government were imperilled by the conspiracy of
Georges, Moreau, and Pichegru. The Duc d’Enghien, as is well known,
was the innocent victim of this affair, having been arrested on
neutral territory, and shot in a ditch, without a trial, in order
to strike the Bourbons with terror. While the printed account shows
that the plot was a formidable one, that the death of Napoleon
and a counter-revolution were really not remote contingencies, and
that there were some slight grounds to suspect an intrigue between
Dumouriez and the Duke, it also impliedly acquits that Prince of
any share in the main conspiracy, and throws the guilt of his cruel
fate exclusively on the First Consul. From the list of charges
against the Duke, entirely in Napoleon’s writing, it is plain that
he did not possess any proofs, sufficient even for the tribunal of
Vincennes to convict the prisoner of a design against his life.
These monstrous charges speak for themselves, and accord well with
the midnight dungeon, the irresponsible conclave, the undefended
prisoner, and the grave dug before the trial for the victim!
Moreover, the volume of Napoleon’s _Correspondance_ in which these
details are given, has not a trace of the alleged over-rapidity of
Savary, of the suppression of the Prince’s letter by Talleyrand,
of the order said to have been given to Real to suspend the
execution after the sentence, and to await the result of a regular
examination--of the hundred and one excuses, in short, which have
been urged for Napoleon by his apologists. On the contrary, from
the following letter we infer that he wished to avoid discussion
about a purpose already determined, and that he feared lest public
opinion should condemn his design on the Duc d’Enghien. It is
addressed to the Commandant of Vincennes:--
“A person, whose name is to remain unknown, will be brought to
the fortress confided to your care; you are to put him in a
vacant cell, and to take every precaution for his safe keeping.
The intention of the Government is to _keep all proceedings
concerning him most secret_. No question is to be put to him as
to who he is, or why he is detained. Even you are not to know who
the prisoner is. No one is to communicate with him but yourself;
no one else is to see him until fresh orders. He will probably
arrive this night.”
Napoleon’s Government, though very despotic, was not, however,
usually cruel; and this great crime which, perhaps, was caused by
the haunting dread of an assassin’s arm, was an exception to its
general tenor.--_Times review._
_Last Moments of Mr. Pitt._
The news of Austerlitz was the last blow which killed Pitt. The
gout, which had hitherto confined its attacks to his extremities,
assailed some vital organ. He was not without hopes of getting
better. Lord Wellesley found him in high spirits, though before
the interview was over Pitt fainted in his presence. His last
moments are described by the Hon. James Stanhope, who was present
in the room when he died; so that at last we seem to have authentic
information of a scene which has hitherto been very imperfectly
described. “I remained the whole of Wednesday night with Mr. Pitt,”
says Mr. Stanhope in a paper drawn up by him, and of which Earl
Stanhope has availed himself in his _Life of Pitt_. “His mind
seemed fixed on the affairs of the country, and he expressed his
thoughts aloud, though sometimes incoherently. He spoke a good deal
concerning a private letter from Lord Harrowby, and frequently
inquired the direction of the wind; then said, answering himself,
‘East; ah! that will do; that will bring him quick.’ At other times
he seemed to be in conversation with a messenger, and sometimes
cried out ‘Hear, hear,’ as if in the House of Commons. During the
time he did not speak he moaned considerably, crying, ‘Oh, dear!
Oh, Lord!’ Towards twelve the rattles came in his throat, and
proclaimed approaching dissolution.... At about half-past two he
ceased moaning.... I feared he was dying; but shortly afterwards,
with a much clearer voice than he spoke in before, and in a tone
I never shall forget, ‘Oh, my country! how I leave my country!’
[referring, as it was natural for him to do, to the disastrous
state of the continental war produced by the battle of Austerlitz.]
From that time he never spoke or moved, and at half-past four
expired without a groan or struggle,” 23rd January, 1806. He
received the Sacrament from the Bishop of Lincoln. Mr. Pitt gave
his watch to his servant, who handed it over to Mr. Dundas, M.P.,
more than twenty years after Mr. Pitt’s death. That watch, a
mourning-ring, and box containing the hair, were bequeathed to the
Rt. Hon. R. N. Hamilton; and the watch is now preserved in the
Fitzwilliam Museum, at Cambridge.
“Pitt is the most forgiving and easy-tempered of men,” says Lord
Malmesbury. “He is the most upright political character I ever
knew or heard of,” says Wilberforce. “I never once saw him out of
temper,” says George Rose. One day, when the conversation turned
upon the quality most needed in a Prime Minister, and one said
“Eloquence,” another “Knowledge,” and a third “Toil,” Pitt said,
“No; Patience.” It was an answer worthy of the great statesman,
and recalls that of Newton, who said that he owed his splendid
discoveries to the power of fixed attention. Pitt was wonderfully
patient, and this which is commonly regarded as a slow virtue he
combined with uncommon readiness and rapidity of thought. “What
an extraordinary man Pitt is!” said Adam Smith; “he makes me
understand my own ideas better than before.” The Marquis Wellesley
has left this character of Pitt--a man of princely hospitality and
amiable nature:
“In all places, and at all times, his constant delight was
society. There he shone with a degree of calm and steady lustre
which often astonished me more than his most splendid efforts
in Parliament. His manners were perfectly plain, without any
affectation; not only was he without presumption or arrogance, or
any air of authority, but he seemed utterly unconscious of his
own superiority, and much more disposed to listen than to talk.
He never betrayed any symptom of anxiety to usurp the lead or to
display his own powers, but rather inclined to draw forth others,
and to take merely an equal share in the general conversation:
then he plunged heedlessly into the mirth of the hour, with no
other care than to promote the general good humour and happiness
of the company. His wit was quick and ready, but it was rather
lively than sharp, and never envenomed with the least taint of
malignity; so that, instead of exciting admiration or terror,
it was an additional ingredient in the common enjoyment. He was
endowed, beyond any man of his time whom I knew, with a gay and
social heart. With these qualities, he was the life and soul of
his own society; his appearance dispelled all care; his brow
was never clouded, even in the severest public trials; and joy,
and hope, and confidence, beamed from his countenance in every
crisis of difficulty and danger.”--_Communicated to the Quarterly
Review._
This was “the Heaven-born Minister.” This was “the pilot to weather
the storm.” This is he who stands forth as the greatest of our
statesmen, and the story of whose life, as fitly told by Lord
Stanhope, will have undying interest throughout the world.
Who would have supposed forty years ago that a day was coming when
a Frenchman would unhesitatingly write the apology--we had almost
said the panegyric--of William Pitt--_ce Pitt_, as the members of
the Jacobin Club used to call him? And yet such is the case. By way
of preface to a translation of Lord Stanhope’s last work, M. Guizot
has given a very good estimate both of the political relation
in which England stands to France, and also of the character of
the great British statesman. He conclusively shows that Pitt was
positively opposed to a war with France, and did all he could to
prevent the inevitable catastrophe.
_What drove George the Third mad._
How strange is it to find, upon a close examination of the
biography of Mr. Pitt, that early in the present century, the
_mention_ of the measure which twenty-eight years later became
the law of the land, had the effect of disturbing the reason of
the Sovereign: yet so it was. “Pitt had become in a manner pledged
on the union of the Irish with the British Legislature to provide
for what has since been called the Emancipation of the Catholics.
The probability is, that from the first he had underrated the
King’s repugnance to the measure; but it has been suggested that
had there been no treachery in the camp, and had he been the first
to broach the subject to George III., he might have had his own
way, and carried the acquiescence of the King. As it was, Lord
Loughborough had, contrary to all rule, made the King aware of
Pitt’s intentions, and had, for his own selfish purposes, sought
to strengthen His Majesty in a most absurd view of his duty. So it
happened that instead of Pitt breaking the subject to the King, the
King, in a fit of impatience, breaks out upon Dundas. Referring
to Lord Castlereagh, who had recently come from Dublin, he said,
“What is it that this young lord has brought over which they are
going to throw at my head?... The most Jacobinical thing I ever
heard of! I shall reckon any man my personal enemy who proposes
any such measure.” “Your Majesty,” replied Dundas, “will find
among those who are friendly to that measure some whom you never
supposed to be your enemies.” The time for action had evidently
come: it was necessary for Pitt to break the silence; he wrote
to the King explaining his views, and pointing out that if they
were not acceptable it would be necessary for him to resign. Pitt
did resign; his successor was appointed, but before the formal
transfer of office could take place, the King went mad, and it
was this Catholic question that drove him mad. He recovered in a
fortnight and told his physician to write to Pitt, “Tell him I am
now quite well--quite recovered from my illness; but what has _he_
not to answer for who is the cause of my having been ill at all?”
Pitt was deeply touched, and at once conveyed an assurance to the
King through the same physician that never again during the King’s
reign would he bring forward the Catholic question. Previous to
that illness, Pitt had two clear alternatives before him--“Either
I shall relieve the Catholics, or I shall resign,”--and he
resigned accordingly. But after the illness all was changed. Any
one attempting to relieve the Catholics would incur the risk of
the King’s derangement. There was but a choice of evils, and it
was natural that Pitt should regard it as the lesser evil to
postpone indefinitely the settlement of the Catholic claims, which,
nevertheless, he regarded as of the utmost importance.”--_Times
review._
The Rt. Hon. George Rose, when Secretary of the Treasury, had
frequent conversations with George III., whom he occasionally
received at his house at Cuffnells. Evidently the King took
the lion’s share in every dialogue. His remarks and his gossip
must have been often amusing, and not always uninstructive. He
invariably turned the conversation to personal subjects, and he
commented freely on the numerous politicians whom he had in his
time employed and baffled. He had a peculiar dislike to Lord
Melville, he resented Lord Grenville’s pride, and he accurately
described Lord Auckland as an inveterate intriguer. Of himself he
said that he seldom forgot and never forgave, but that he always
tried to believe the best of every man until he had proved his
demerit. Many, he added, improved when they found that they had
received more than justice; but it never occurred to him that his
own opinion might not form an accurate and sufficient standard of
merit.
During the latter part of the time, George III., notwithstanding
the continuance of some delusions, was perfectly competent to
understand the state of affairs, and there was every reason to
suppose that he would become convalescent before his son could take
his seat as Regent. For the remainder of his reign, his Ministers
and his subjects regarded his occasional insanity as one of the
ordinary contingencies of the Constitution. Mr. Pitt, during his
second Administration, sometimes obtained from the physicians a
written certificate of the King’s competence before he entered his
presence for the transaction of business.
_Predictions of the Downfal of Napoleon I._
Brialmont and Gleig, in their _Memoirs of Wellington_, relate--Mr.
Pitt received, during dinner, when Sir Arthur Wellesley and other
eminent persons were present, intelligence of the capitulation
of Mack, at Ulm, and the march of the Emperor upon Vienna. One
of the friends of the Prime Minister, on hearing of the reverse,
exclaimed, “All is lost! there are no other means of opposing
Napoleon.” “You are mistaken,” said Pitt, “there is yet hope, if I
can succeed in stirring up a national war in Europe--a war which
ought to begin in Spain. Yes, gentlemen, Spain will be the first
nation in which that war of patriotism shall be lighted up which
can alone deliver Europe.”
At a moment when the prestige of the Empire was accepted
everywhere, Wellington not only expressed doubts as to the
stability of that edifice, which seemed as if it must endure for
ages, but pointed out distinctly the causes which must operate to
throw it down, and the means by which its fall might be hastened.
From that hour, whilst prosecuting the war in Spain, he took care
as much as possible, to regulate his own proceedings according to
the general state of Europe. Something told him that the little
army on the Mondego had a mighty part to play in the sanguinary
drama which agitated the world; and that not the fate of the
Peninsula alone was at stake, nor yet the question of England’s
supremacy, but the independence and liberty of all nations, menaced
by the ambition of one man.
In December, 1811, Wellington wrote to Lord William Bentinck:
“I have long considered it probable that we shall see a general
resistance throughout Europe to the horrible and base tyranny of
Bonaparte, and that we shall be called upon to play a leading part
in the drama, as counsellors as well as actors.”
In a letter to Lord Liverpool, in 1811, Wellington wrote: “I am
convinced, that if we can only hold out a little longer, we shall
see the world emancipated.” And to Dumouriez, July, 1811: “It is
impossible that Europe can much longer submit to the debasing
tyranny which oppresses it.”
Brialmont and Gleig summarily observe: “It may truly be said that
the Duke foretold in succession, the final success of the war in
Spain--the influence which that war would exercise over public
opinion in other nations--_the general rising of Europe against
Bonaparte_--the fall of the Empire--the disastrous campaign in
Russia--and the awakening of the public spirit in Germany.”
When, in 1807, Haydon dined with Sir George and Lady Beaumont,
he met there Humphry Davy, who was very entertaining, and made
a remark which turned out a singularly successful prophecy; he
said, “Napoleon will certainly come in contact with Russia, by
pressing forward in Poland, and _there_, probably, will begin his
destruction.” This was said five years before it happened.
Lord Mulgrave, afterwards Marquis of Normanby, first raised
Haydon’s enthusiasm for Wellington by saying, one day, at table,
“If you live to see it, he will be a second Marlborough.”
_Wellington predicts the Peninsular Campaign._
The following is illustrative of the prophetic perception
of Wellington at the outset of the contest:--“He dined in
Harley-street one day in June, 1808, just before he set out in
command of the expedition which was assembling in Cork harbour. The
ladies had withdrawn, and he sat _tête-à-tête_ with his host, and
was silent. On being asked what he was thinking of, he replied, ’To
tell you the truth, I was thinking of the French whom I am going to
fight. I have never seen them since the campaign in Flanders, when
they were already capital soldiers; and a dozen years of successes
must have made them still better. _They have beaten all the world,
and are supposed to be invincible. They have besides, it seems, a
new system, which has out-manœuvred and overwhelmed all the armies
of Europe. But no matter, my die is cast. They may overwhelm, but
I do not think they will out-manœuvre me. In the first place, I am
not afraid of them, as everybody else seems to be; and secondly,
if what I hear of their system of manœuvres be true, I think it
a false one against troops steady enough--as I hope mine are--to
receive them with the bayonet._ I suspect that all the continental
armies were more than half beaten before the battle began. I, at
least, will not be frightened beforehand.’”
_The Battle of Waterloo._
M. Thiers, in the 20th volume of his _Histoire du Consulat et
de l’Empire_, presents to his reader a tissue of intellectual
illusions in his extraordinary account of the last struggle of
Napoleon in Belgium. Common sense and history agree that that
effort bears many traces of his hero’s genius, though marked by
one characteristic mistake, and that it was baffled by the ability
of his antagonists, who crushed him at last by superior numbers.
This volume, however, has been written to prove that in every move
in this famous contest Napoleon was an infallible commander; that
victory must have crowned his standards had his inspiration been
only understood; and that his final overthrow was due, not to
Wellington’s skill or Blucher’s daring--not to British heroism or
Prussian valour, but to the errors and fears of his subordinates.
Deserting the region of fact and circumstance, M. Thiers leads us
into a dream-land, where the Emperor, like a strategic Providence,
holds his puny foes in the hollow of his hand, and predestinates
his legions to conquest--where the French army performs prodigies
beyond the energies of mortal men--where but for Ney, D’Erlon, and
Grouchy, the downfal of its adversaries was certain--and where the
inability of these satellites to launch the bolts of military fate
was the only cause of the final issue. The above and the following
remarks are from _The Times_ review,--
Why the issue of this campaign was so different from that of many
of its splendid forerunners may be accounted for with perfect
certainty. The Duke and Blucher were different men, of greater
ability, and better united than the Generals of any previous
coalition, and the large majority of their troops were capable of
heroic exertions. The Duke was not the man to allow an accident
of time to ruin an ally, and at the crisis of the campaign, on
the 16th, he baffled the Emperor by his tactical skill and the
intrepidity of his British infantry. Of the subsequent moves by
which he won the greatest battle of modern times, it is enough to
say that they defy criticism, while the heroism of two-thirds of
his army has not been surpassed in military annals. As for the
Prussian troops, their stand at Ligny and their subsequent rally
and advance to Waterloo, are worthy of the highest commendation;
and Blucher’s celebrated march from Wavre is said to have wrung
from Napoleon himself the admission that “it was a flash of
genius.” It was this combination of talent and valour, unlike
anything he had encountered before, that brought the superior
numbers of the allies to bear upon Napoleon at last, and involved
him and his army in ruin.
As for the armies that met in this bloody strife, we Englishmen
think it enough to say that, except the Belgian and Nassau levies,
they all did their duty like soldiers. The weak falsetto of M.
Thiers detracts from the manhood of that dauntless cavalry “who
rode round our squares like their own,” and from the renown of that
veteran infantry “who bore nine rounds before they staggered.” Nor
will the heroism of Ligny be forgotten, nor the glory of England
at Waterloo fade, because an historian chooses to write that the
Prussian army “was well beaten,” and that the “English, excellent
in defence, are very mediocre on the offensive.” At this time,
surely, a French historian might describe the campaign of 1815
with a candid regard to truth alone, and without pandering to the
ignoble worship of military despotism.
_Wellington’s Defence of the Waterloo Campaign._
Wellington would never have fought at Waterloo unless certain
of the aid of Blucher; it is idle, therefore, to speculate on
the chance of what the event of the day might have been had this
support been unexpectedly wanting. French writers assert that he
must have been crushed; but the Duke held a different opinion. The
Rev. Mr. Gleig tells us that--
“After dinner the conversation turned on the Waterloo campaign,
when Croker alluded to the criticisms of the French military
writers, some of whom contended that the Duke had fought the battle
in a position full of difficulty, because he had no practicable
retreat. The Duke said: ‘At all events, they failed in putting it
to the test. The road to Brussels was practicable every yard for
such a purpose. I knew every foot of the ground beyond the forest
and through it. The forest on each side of the chaussée was open
enough for infantry, cavalry, and even for artillery, and very
defensible. Had I retreated through it, could they have followed
me? The Prussians were on their flank, and would have been on
their rear. _The co-operation of the Prussians in the operations
I undertook was part of my plan, and I was not deceived. But I
never contemplated a retreat on Brussels. Had I been forced from my
position, I should have retreated to my right, towards the coast,
the shipping, and my resources. I had placed Hill where he could
have lent me important assistance in many contingencies, and that
might have been one._ And, again, I ask, if I had retreated on
my right, would Napoleon have ventured to have followed me? The
Prussians, already on his flank, would have been on his rear. _But
my plan was to keep my ground till the Prussians appeared, and then
to attack the French position; and I executed my plan._’”
It matters little whether it be a pleasing tradition or an
historical fact, but it was commonly said that after the Peace,
which crowned the immortal services of the Duke of Wellington, that
great general, on seeing the playing-fields at Eton, said, there
had been won the crowning victory of Waterloo.
_Lord Castlereagh at the Congress of Vienna._
By the publication of the _Supplementary Despatches of the Duke
of Wellington_, vol. ix., the reputation of Lord Castlereagh will
profit by such of his letters as had not appeared before. A writer
in the _Saturday Review_ remarks:--
“Contemporaries saw that many small States were crushed by
the arrangements of Vienna, and that one or two of the larger
monarchies, especially that of Russia, were sensibly strengthened.
Therefore they concluded that the aim and end of the Congress of
Vienna was to aggrandise the greater monarchies, and that the
English Minister, biassed by political prejudices or dazzled
by royal condescension, had unworthily lent himself to the
accomplishment of that object. As the confidential correspondence
of that period makes its appearance bit by bit, we are learning
to form a juster estimate of what Lord Castlereagh effected at
the Congress. It is hard to set limits to the evils which would
have been the result of greater facility or less caution on the
part of the English plenipotentiary. That Alexander would, but
for Lord Castlereagh’s obstinate resistance, have absorbed the
whole of Poland into the Russian empire, and that Prussia would
have indemnified herself by the annexation of the whole of Saxony,
appears certain; and that France and Austria would have plunged
Europe back into war, in their efforts to resist, seems not
improbable. The greediness of the Powers who had met to divide the
spoil threatened incessantly to bring them into collision; and it
was on Lord Castlereagh that the ungracious task of moderating
their extravagant pretensions fell. If he had failed, and the
Congress had come to the abrupt and angry close which seemed more
than once inevitable, Napoleon’s return would have been safe and
easy. It was hard, but it was unavoidable, that those who only saw
the result in a considerable accession to Alexander’s frontier,
should have accused Lord Castlereagh of being his tool, when he had
been, in reality, resisting Alexander’s pretensions up to the very
brink of war.”
This late justice to the eminent diplomatic services of Lord
Castlereagh, reaches us some forty years after his death; thus
giving the lie to the coarse and unfeeling ribaldry of the
so-called “Liberal,” upon the awful termination of the statesman’s
life.
_The Cato-street Conspiracy._
Early in the year 1820--a period of popular discontent--a set of
desperate men banded themselves together with a view to effect a
revolution by sanguinary means, almost as complete in its plan of
extermination as the Gunpowder Plot. The leader was one Arthur
Thistlewood, who had been a soldier, had been involved in a
trial for sedition, but acquitted, and had afterwards suffered a
year’s imprisonment for sending a challenge to the minister, Lord
Sidmouth. Thistlewood was joined by several other Radicals, and
their meetings in Gray’s-Inn-lane were known to the spies Oliver
and Edwards, employed by the Government. Their first design was to
assassinate the Ministers, each in his own house; but their plot
was changed, and Thistlewood and his fellow conspirators arranged
to meet at Cato-street, Edgeware-road, and to proceed from thence
to butcher the Ministers assembled at a Cabinet dinner, on Feb.
23rd, at Lord Harrowby’s, 39, Grosvenor-square, where Thistlewood
proposed, as “a rare haul, to murder them all together.” Some of
the conspirators were to watch Lord Harrowby’s house; one was to
call and deliver a despatch-box at the door, the others were then
to rush in and murder the Ministers as they sat at dinner; and,
as special trophies, to bring away with them the heads of Lords
Sidmouth and Castlereagh, in two bags provided for the purpose!
They were then to fire the cavalry-barracks; and the Bank and Tower
were to be taken by the people, who, it was hoped, would rise upon
the spread of the news.
This plot was, however, revealed to the Ministers by Edwards,
who had joined the conspirators as a spy. Still no notice was
apparently taken. The preparations for dinner went on at Lord
Harrowby’s till eight o’clock in the evening, but the guests did
not arrive. The Archbishop of York, who lived next door, happened
to give a dinner-party at the same hour, and the arrival of the
carriages deceived those of the conspirators who were on the
watch in the street, till it was too late to give warning to
their comrades who had assembled at Cato-street, in a loft over
a stable, accessible only by a ladder. Here, while the traitors
were arming themselves by the light of one or two candles, a
party of Bow-street officers entered the stable, when Smithers,
the first of them who mounted the ladder, and attempted to seize
Thistlewood, was run by him through the body, and instantly fell;
whilst, the lights being extinguished, a few shots were exchanged
in the darkness and confusion, and Thistlewood and several of his
companions escaped through a window at the back of the premises;
nine were taken that evening with their arms and ammunition, and
the intelligence conveyed to the Ministers, who, having dined at
home, met at Lord Liverpool’s to await the result of what the
Bow-street officers had done. A reward of 1000_l._ was immediately
offered for the apprehension of Thistlewood, and he was captured
before eight o’clock next morning while in bed at a friend’s
house, No. 8, White-street, Little Moorfields. The conspirators
were sent to the Tower, and were the last persons imprisoned
in that fortress. On April 20th, Thistlewood was condemned to
death after three days’ trial; and on May 1st, he and his four
principal accomplices, Ings, Brunt, Tidd, and Davidson, who had
been severally tried and convicted, were hanged at the Old Bailey,
and their heads cut off. The remaining six pleaded guilty; one was
pardoned, and five were transported for life.
Southey relates this touching anecdote of Thistlewood’s last
hours:--
“When the desperate and atrocious traitor Thistlewood was on the
scaffold, his demeanour was that of a man who was resolved boldly
to meet the fate he had deserved; in the few words which were
exchanged between him and his fellow-criminals, he observed, that
the grand question whether or not the soul was immortal would
soon be solved for them. No expression of hope escaped him; no
breathing of repentance, no spark of grace, appeared. Yet (it is
a fact which, whether it be more consolatory or awful, ought to
be known), on the night after the sentence, and preceding his
execution, while he supposed that the person who was appointed
to watch him in his cell was asleep, this miserable man was seen
by that person repeatedly to rise upon his knees, and heard
repeatedly calling upon Christ his Saviour to have mercy upon
him, and to forgive him his sins.”--_The Doctor_, chap. lxxi.
The selection of _Cato_-street for the conspirators’ meeting was
accidental; and the street itself is associated but indirectly in
name with the Roman patriot and philosopher. To efface recollection
of the conspiracy of the low and desperate politicians of 1820,
Cato-street has been changed to Homer-street.
_Money Panic of 1832._
When, in May, 1832, the Duke of Wellington was very unpopular as a
minister, and _it was believed_ that he had formed a Cabinet which,
_it was thought_, would add to his unpopularity, a few agitators
got up “a _run_ upon the Bank of England,” by means of placarding
the streets of London with the emphatic words:--
TO STOP
THE DUKE,
GO FOR GOLD.
advice which was followed to a prodigious extent. On Monday,
May 14, (the bills having been profusely posted on Sunday!)
the run upon the Bank for coin was so incessant, that in a few
hours upwards of half a million was carried off: we remember a
tradesman in the Strand bringing home, in a hackney-coach, 2000
sovereigns. Mr. Doubleday, in his _Life of Sir Robert Peel_, states
the placards to have been “the device of four gentlemen, two of
whom were elected members of the Reformed Parliament. Each put
down 20_l._; and the sum was expended in printing thousands of
these terrible missives, which were eagerly circulated, and were
speedily seen upon every wall in London. The effect is hardly to be
described. It was electric.” The agent was a tradesman of kindred
politics, in business towards the east end of Oxford-street; and it
must be admitted that he executed the order completely.
_A Great Sufferer by Revolutions._
King Louis of Bavaria, who abdicated after an insurrection in
1848, has seen his family extensively affected by the dynastic
changes which have taken place since 1859. His second son is
Otho, the ex-King of Greece, born on the 1st of June, 1815; his
third, Luitpold, is married to the daughter of the Grand Duke of
Tuscany; one of his daughters to the Duke of Modena; and one of
his grandsons, or his youngest son Adalbert, was to have succeeded
Otho on the throne of Greece. Lastly, the Queen of Naples and
her sister, the Countess de Trani, belong to a collateral branch
of the Royal family, that of Maximilian, Duke of Bavaria. The
House of Wittelsbach has therefore suffered most materially from
the revolutions of Germany, Italy, and Greece, and its members
might give a second representation of the famous dinner at Venice
mentioned in Voltaire’s _Candide_.--_Le Temps._
_Origin of the Anti-Corn-Law League._
The first hint of this great political Association is to be found
in the writings of the very individual whose labours tended
so much to crown its efforts with success. In the well-known
pamphlet, entitled _England, Ireland, and America, by a Manchester
Manufacturer_, Mr. Cobden says:
“Whilst agriculture can boast almost as many associations as there
are British counties, whilst every city in the kingdom contains its
botanical, phrenological, or mechanical institutions, and these
again possess their periodical journals (and not merely these, for
even _war_ sends forth its _United Service Magazine_)--we possess
no association of traders, united together, for the common object
of enlightening the world upon a question so little understood, and
so loaded with obloquy, as free-trade.
“We have our Banksian, our Linnæan, our Hunterian Societies, and
why should not at least our greatest commercial and manufacturing
towns possess their Smithian Societies, devoted to the purpose of
promulgating the beneficent truths of the ‘Wealth of Nations’? Such
institutions, by promoting a correspondence with similar societies
that would probably be organized abroad (for it is our example
in questions affecting commerce that strangers follow), might
contribute to the spread of liberal and just views of political
science, and thus tend to ameliorate the restrictive policy of
foreign governments through the legitimate influence of the
opinions of its people.
“Nor would such societies be fruitless at home. _Prizes might be
offered for the best essay on the corn question, or lecturers might
be sent to enlighten the agriculturists, and to invite discussion
upon a subject so difficult and of such paramount interest to all._”
The pamphlet from which the preceding extract is taken, was
published in the early part of the year 1835, about four years
before the formation of the Anti-Corn-Law League, and at a time
when, owing to the very low price of grain, and the prosperity of
the manufacturing districts, the question of the Corn-laws scarcely
attracted the slightest attention, either in Manchester or in any
other part of the country.
_Wellington’s Military Administration._
Much misconception exists with respect to the military
administration of the Duke of Wellington, who was, at the close
of his life, commander-in-chief of the army. He is said to have
been wedded to “Brown Bess,” but he is known to have encouraged
the introduction of the Minié; and several of the reforms executed
by Lord Herbert had been discussed by the Duke with approval. The
celebrated letter of 1847 shows what were the thoughts of this
great man in reference to our national defences, and they are not
perhaps the least valuable legacy which Wellington has bequeathed
to England. The following scheme of defence by the Duke, which
Mr. Gleig for the first time published, is not perhaps the less
interesting because it has been in part accomplished:--
“He considered the Channel Islands--Jersey, Guernsey, and
Alderney--to be the key of our outer line of defence. In each of
these he required that a harbour of refuge should be constructed
of sufficient capacity and depth of water to receive a stout
squadron; and then, with Portsmouth well guarded on one flank and
Plymouth on the other, he held that England would be perfectly
safe from invasion on a large scale.... If Government gave
him the _Channel Islands, Seaford, Portsmouth, and Plymouth,
all completely fortified, and ready to receive respectively
their squadrons_, then he was satisfied that, though it might
be impossible to prevent marauding parties from landing here
or there, England would be placed beyond the risk of invasion
on such a scale as to endanger her existence, or even to put
the capital in jeopardy.... Establishing then an outer line of
defence, he asked for men and material wherewith to meet an
enemy if he succeeded in breaking through that line. He would be
satisfied with an addition of 20,000 men to the regular army,
_provided such a force of Militia were raised as would enable
him to dispose of 70,000 men among the principal fortresses and
arsenals of the kingdom_; keeping at the same time two corps of
50,000 men in hand, one in the neighbourhood of London, the other
near Dublin. He should thus have open to him all the great lines
of railway, which would enable him to meet with rapidity any
danger, from whatever side of the capital it might threaten.”
If we read Volunteers for Militia, we shall see that Wellington’s
plan of defence is nearly that contemplated in 1863.
_Gustavus III. of Sweden._
In a paper contributed to the Royal Society of Literature, Dr.
Hermann has traced the eventful history of the Swedish monarch
with great skill, from the period when he ascended the throne, in
1771, to his assassination by Ankerström at the masked ball in
1792. Dr. Hermann shows that Gustavus united in his own person and
character most of those qualities, intellectual and moral, which
distinguished the latter half of the eighteenth century. Thus, like
Catherine of Russia and Frederick the Great, though not to the same
extent, he was a believer in those doctrines whose chief expositors
were Voltaire and the Encyclopædists; while, in the government
of his country, he was ever striving after a system of optimism,
which, however beautiful in theory, is wholly impracticable. The
reign of Gustavus is chiefly remarkable for the spirit with which
he broke down a tyranny of certain noble families, which had long
usurped nearly the whole of the royal prerogative, and had thrown
the monarch into the background; for the zeal with which he carried
out many reforms of the greatest benefit to the more indigent
classes of his people; for the remarkable rashness with which,
unsupported by a single other European power, he rushed madly into
a war with the Russian Empress; and for the extraordinary victory
in which, at the close of his second campaign, in July, 1791, he
destroyed the entire Russian fleet, in the Bay of Swöborg, and
captured no less than 1412 Russian cannon.
The assassin, Ankerström, was discovered and executed: in his
character and in his last moments, a striking similarity may be
traced to Bellingham, who assassinated Mr. Perceval in 1812: both
expressed the same fanatical satisfaction at the perpetration of
the crime, and the same presumptuous confidence of pardon from the
Almighty.
Gustavus, in his parting moments, strictly forbad, for _fifty
years_, the opening of the chests at Upsal, in which his papers
were deposited; and the injunction was strictly obeyed. On
March 30, 1842, the chests were opened, in the presence of many
spectators; but in neither was found, as was expected, any clue to
the conspiracy of which Ankerström was the agent; but the king’s
autograph instructions do not refer to any papers later than 1788,
when the bequest was made. The Swedish instructions, in Gustavus’s
handwriting, prove that the king enjoyed the reputation of being a
great author without even knowing how to spell.--See _Curiosities
of History_, p. 107.
_Fall of Louis-Philippe._
Sir John Herschel, in a paper on Humboldt’s _Kosmos_, in the
_Edinburgh Review_, January, 1848, has the following sentence,
which reads strangely now, for it was given to the public
just before the catastrophe which overthrew the throne of
Louis-Philippe, and led in a few months to the Italian and
Hungarian wars. Herschel’s words are: “A great and wondrous attempt
is making in civilized Europe at the present time--neither more nor
less than to stave off, _ad infinitum_, the tremendous visitation
of war.” The retrospect has been thus sketched:
Seventeen years Louis-Philippe sat on his elective throne: great
increase of wealth and physical progress were the results of his
reign at home, peace preserved abroad, and foreign policy alike
successful; yet _the King was not popular at home_. He was hated
alike by the Legitimist party, in whose eyes he was but a usurper,
and by the revolutionists, who sighed for entire emancipation from
kingly rule. Besides, there are deep and dark stains upon the reign
of the “Napoleon of Peace,” as Louis-Philippe liked to be called.
His reign was a period of corruption in high places, of jealousy
and illiberal restriction towards his own subjects, of a fraudulent
and heartless policy towards the allies of his country, whose good
will he more especially forfeited by his over-reaching conduct
in regard to the marriage of the Duc de Montpensier to a Spanish
princess. His downfal was long predicted by the leading journalists
of England, where public opinion is unfettered by arbitrary laws.
In France, too, it was understood that Louis-Philippe was, in great
measure, restrained in his views by his sister, Madame Adelaide,
who died Dec. 30, 1847. “Then it came to pass that the heart of
the nation became alienated from their king; and when a trifling
disturbance in February, 1848, was aggravated into a popular riot
through the audacity of a few ultra-republicans, Louis-Philippe
felt that he stood alone and unsupported as a constitutional king,
both at home and abroad, and that the soldiery were his only means
of defence. He shrank from employing their bayonets against his
people: he fell in consequence, and his house fell with him. The
King fled in disguise from Paris to the coast of Normandy, and
taking ship again found a safe refuge on the shores of England,
to which his family had already made their escape. He landed at
Newhaven, March 3rd, 1848. The Queen of England--who, in 1843, had
enjoyed the hospitality of Louis-Philippe at the Château d’Eu, his
royal residence near Dieppe, and who had entertained him in the
following year at Windsor, and conferred on him the order of the
Garter--immediately assigned Claremont, near Esher, as a residence
for himself and his exiled family. From the time of his arrival in
England, his health began visibly to decline: he died on the 26th
of August, 1850, in the presence of Queen Amelie and his family,
having dictated to them the conclusion of his memoirs, and having
received the last rites and sacraments of the church at the hands
of his chaplain. He was buried on the following 2nd of September at
the Roman Catholic chapel at Weybridge, Surrey, and an inscription
was placed upon his coffin, stating that his ashes remain there,
Donec Deo adjuvante in patriam avitos inter cineres transferantur”
(_Saturday Review_). They have not been removed!
_The Chartists in 1848._
The Tenth of April, 1848, is a noted day in our political calendar,
from its presenting a remarkable instance of nipping in the bud
apparent danger to the peace of the country by means at once
constitutional and reassuring public safety. It was on this day
that the Chartists, as they were called, from developing their
proposed alterations in the representative system, through “the
People’s Charter,” made in the metropolis a great demonstration
of their numbers: thus hinting at the physical force which they
possessed, but probably without any serious design against the
public peace. On this day the Chartists met, about 25,000 in
number, on Kennington Common, whence it had been intended to march
in procession to the House of Commons with the Charter petition;
but the authorities having intimated that the procession would be
prevented by force if attempted, it was abandoned. Nevertheless,
the assembling of the _quasi_ politicians from the north, by
marching through the streets to the place of meeting, had an
imposing effect. Great preparations were made to guard against
any mischief; the shops were shut in the principal thoroughfares;
bodies of horse and foot police, assisted by masses of special
constables, were posted at the approaches to the Thames bridges;
a large force of the regular troops was stationed out of sight in
convenient spots; two regiments of the line were kept ready at
Millbank Penitentiary; 1200 infantry at Deptford, and 30 pieces of
heavy field ordnance were ready at the Tower, to be transported by
hired steamers to any required point. The Meeting was held, but was
brought to “a ridiculous issue, by the unity and resolution of the
Metropolis, backed by the judicious measures of the Government, and
the masterly military precautions of the Duke of Wellington.”
“On our famous 10th of April, his peculiar genius was exerted
to the unspeakable advantage of peace and order. So effective
were his preparations that the most serious insurrection could
have been successfully encountered, and yet every source of
provocation and alarm was removed by the dispositions adopted.
No military display was anywhere to be seen. The troops and the
cannon were all at their posts, but neither shako nor bayonet
was visible; and for all that met the eye, it might have been
concluded that the peace of the metropolis was still entrusted to
the keeping of its own citizens. As an instance, however, of his
forecast against the worst, on this memorable occasion, it may be
observed that orders were given to the commissioned officers of
artillery to take the discharge of their pieces on themselves.
The Duke knew that a cannon-shot too much or too little might
change the aspect of the day; and he provided by these remarkable
instructions, both for imperturbable forbearance as long as
forbearance was best, and for unshrinking action when the moment
for action came.”--_Memoir_; _Times_, Sept. 15-16, 1852.
The Chartists’ Petition was presented to the Commons, on the above
day, signed, it was stated, by 5,706,000 persons. The principal
points of the Charter were universal suffrage, vote by ballot,
annual parliaments, the division of the country into equal
electoral districts, the abolition of property qualification in
members, and paying them for their services. Chartism and the
People’s Charter grew out of the shortcomings of the Reform Act.
The Chartists then divided into the Physical Force and the Moral
Force Chartists; and then arose the Complete Suffragists; the
latter principally from the Middle Classes, the former from the
working-classes; though their objects were very similar.
_Revival of the French Emperorship._
Soon after the breaking-out of the French Revolution, in 1848, the
Count d’Orsay called at the office of the _Lady’s Newspaper_, in
the Strand, and besought the proprietor, Mr. Landells, to engrave
in that journal a portrait which he (the Count) had sketched of
Louis Napoleon. The proprietor hesitated, when the Count told him
it was the Prince’s intention to go over to France; and he added,
emphatically, “the English people do not understand him; but, take
my word for it, if he once goes over to France, _the French people
will never get rid of him_.” This prediction has been strictly
verified: the assertion was equally correct, that the English
people did not understand the Emperor.
Mr. B. Ferrey, in a communication to _Notes and Queries_, 3rd
S., remarks:--“For a considerable time, Napoleon was held up to
ridicule by the Press of England; yet there were some who then
foretold his coming greatness, while the multitude charged him with
folly and rashness. Mr. William Brockedon, author of _Passes of
the Alps_, who was well acquainted with the Prince’s habits, used
to say, at the period when the Prince, amidst much derision, was
aspiring to become the President of the French Republic,--‘Mark my
words, that man is not the fool people take him for: he only waits
an opportunity to show himself one of the most able men in Europe;’
justifying this prediction by relating a discussion he had heard
at a public meeting, between the Prince and some civil engineers,
respecting a projected railway across the Isthmus of Panama, in
which the former displayed great ability, showing an amount of
scientific knowledge which amazed everybody present; not only
stating his case with clearness, but combating all objections in a
most masterly way.”
The newspapers of London, with one “base exception,” condemned the
French choice; and after Louis Napoleon had taken the first step
towards the establishment of his rule, the journalists foretold his
speedy failure: the “base exception,” the _Morning Post_, predicted
the reverse, and maintained Louis Napoleon to be the only man
capable of rescuing France from the throes of revolution. We happen
to know that for another journal of very extensive circulation,
chiefly among the influential classes, a leading article of similar
tone and confidence to that of the _Morning Post_, was written by
the Editor, but omitted by desire of the Proprietor, and an article
of opposite tone substituted: the advocacy would have been too bold
a step for the time.
The career of Louis Napoleon has been well described as a _great
revival_ in the fortunes of France, the accomplishment of which has
been the result of a far-seeing estimate of the French character;
thus sketched by a master hand:
“Louis Bonaparte seems to have had the key of the mystery. It
may be that, as in the human subject, one part of the system
acts upon another, so that a disorder of the brain may affect
other seemingly unconnected organs, so political discontent,
even though without any just cause, may deaden the enterprise
of a people. How else could it be that France, with a citizen
King, a philosophical Minister, and the alliance of a nation of
shopkeepers, could not be made to feel that her greatness must
henceforth be dependent on her mercantile enterprise? While she
saw not only England and America, but the German States, making
long strides to the attainment of wealth, she lagged behind, and
encouraged among the rising generation the delusion that business
was unworthy of a warlike and gifted people. That this generation
has thoroughly unlearnt the doctrines which were fashionable in
its youth, is certainly among the achievements of Napoleon III.
If we look back to the days of Louis Philippe, when, though even
Germany had its railways and its electric telegraph, we jolted
out of Paris in the diligence and saw the old semaphores at work,
we shall be able to appreciate the change which ten years of
Imperialism have made.”--_Times_, Jan. 29, 1862.
_French Coup d’Etat Predictions._
The late Baron Alderson, in a letter to Mrs. Opie, written just
after the intelligence of the _Coup d’Etat_ had arrived, hazards
rather a curious speculation with regard to the probable issue of
this unexpected crisis. He was just on the point of starting for
Paris when the news reached him, and put an end to the expedition:
“I was going there [he writes to Mrs. Opie], but of course do not
dream of it now. They seem in a bad way. A nation so unfit for
freedom--if that be freedom which requires those who love it to be
_first_ wise and good--does not exist. The Celts seem to me to be
‘a bad lot.’ I suppose it will end in Louis Napoleon’s becoming
dictator, and then (not unlikely), being shot by an assassin,
and the game will begin over again then. The fear is, that the
Prætorian guards will make him go to war for their own profit. It
is a fearful crisis, I think: and the best that can happen will be
for him to be made King or Emperor, and hold his ground in spite of
conscience, oaths, and faith which he pledged to the Republic.”
_Statesmanship of Lord Melbourne._
Sir Bulwer Lytton, in an eloquent lecture upon the historical and
intellectual associations of Hertfordshire, pays this willing
tribute to the character of Viscount Melbourne; referring to “the
fair park of Brocket, which our posterity will find historical
as the favourite residence of one who, if not among the greatest
Ministers who have swayed this country, was one of the most
accomplished and honourable men who ever attained to the summit
of constitutional ambition. And it is a striking anecdote of Lord
Melbourne, that he once said in my own hearing--‘He rejoiced to
have been Prime Minister, for he had thus learnt that men were
much better, much more swayed by conscience and honour, than he
had before supposed;’ a saying honourable to the Minister, and
honourable still more to the public virtue of Englishmen.”
Lord Melbourne was proverbially a good-natured man; but in his
preferences he acted with a sense of duty more stringent than might
have been expected. It appears that Lord John Russell had applied
to Lord Melbourne for some provision for one of the sons of the
poet Moore; and here is the Premier’s very judicious reply:--
“MY DEAR JOHN;--I return you Moore’s letter. I shall be ready
to do what you like about it when we have the means. I think
whatever is done should be done for Moore himself. This is more
distinct, direct, and intelligible. Making a small provision for
young men is hardly justifiable; and it is of all things the most
prejudicial to themselves. They think what they have much larger
than it really is; and they make no exertion. The young should
never hear any language but this: ‘You have your own way to make,
and it depends upon your own exertions whether you starve or
not.’--Believe me, &c.
“MELBOURNE.”
_Ungraceful Observance._
Mr. Torrens M‘Cullagh, in his _Life of Sir James Graham_, relates
the following instance of want of graciousness in this unpopular
statesman. In 1837, on the death of King William, Lord John Russell
came to the bar of the House of Commons charged with a Message from
the Queen. Hats were immediately ordered off, and even the Speaker
announced from the chair that members must be uncovered. Every one
present complied with the injunction except Sir James Graham, who
continued to wear his hat until the first words of the Message were
pronounced. His doing so was the subject of some unpleasant remarks
in the newspapers; and at the meeting of the House next day he rose
to explain that in not taking off his hat until the word _Regina_
was uttered he but followed the old and established custom--a
custom which he deemed better than that observed by everybody else
in the House. The Speaker then said that Sir James Graham was quite
right, that he was strictly within rule in not uncovering until the
initiatory word of the Message was delivered. If Sir James Graham
had the letter of the law on his side, still there was a stiffness
in his conduct which, considering that the message came from a
young Queen, and was her first message to her faithful Commons, was
not over attractive.
_The Partition of Poland._
Some twenty years before the dismemberment of Poland, this
disgraceful act was foretold by Lord Chesterfield, in Letter
CCCIV., dated Dec. 25, 1753, commencing with “The first squabble
in Europe that I foresee, will be about the crown of Poland.”
The leading data of the fall of Poland will show how far this
prediction was realized. Poland was dismembered by the Emperor of
Germany, the Empress of Russia, and the King of Prussia, who seized
the most valuable territories in 1772.
At the bottom of the Convention signed on the 17th Feb., 1772,
we read this declaration of the Empress Queen Maria-Theresa of
Austria, dated the 4th March, 1772: “Placet, since so many learned
personages will that it should be so; but long after my death it
will be seen what will be the result of having thus trampled under
foot all that has been hitherto held to be just and sacred.”
The royal and imperial spoliators, on various pretexts, poured
their armies into the country in 1792. The brave Poles, under
Poniatowski and Kosciusko, several times contended against superior
armies, but in the end were defeated. Then followed the battle of
Warsaw, Oct. 13, 1794; and Suwarrow’s butchery of 30,000 Poles, of
all ages and conditions, in cold blood. We can scarcely believe
such wholesale atrocities to have been perpetrated upon European
soil within seventy years of the time we are writing. Poland
was finally partitioned and its political existence annihilated
in 1795. The transaction, in its earlier stage, is detailed
in the _Annual Register_ for 1771, 1772, and 1773, supposed
to have been written by Edmund Burke. Professor Smythe says,
diffidently:--“After all, the situation of Poland was such as
almost to afford an exception (perhaps a single exception) in the
history of mankind to those general rules of justice that are so
essential to the great community of nations. I speak with great
hesitation, and you must consider the point yourselves; I do not
profess to have thoroughly considered it myself.”--(_Lectures
on Modern History._) Sir James Mackintosh contributed to the
_Edinburgh Review_ a valuable paper on Poland.
_The Invasion of England._[2]
In contemplating the possibility of an Invasion, we have some right
to count upon the changes which modern civilization has introduced
into the methods of warfare. It is not improbable that, if it
entered into the French Emperor’s plans to invade England, he
would make the attempt upon several points at once. The campaign
which he sketched out for the use of the allied generals in the
Crimea, and which they rejected as impracticable, was based upon
this principle. His forces were to be distributed at various
points on the circumference of a circle, of which the enemy was
to occupy the centre. The enemy was to have all the advantage of
concentration; he and his allies were to have all the weakness of
division. It is a mode of fighting which is rather at variance with
the old Napoleonic ideas, and which would require an overwhelming
force to give it effect. As in military numeration the rule of
addition is somewhat at fault,--two and two do not always make
four, and 200,000 men cannot be computed as ten times stronger
than 20,000--we may rest assured that for the successful invasion
of England, whether the attack be made by a single armament or by
several, a tremendous force must be necessary; and preparations,
which will prevent us from being taken altogether by surprise, must
be some time in progress.
We shall have a little time to prepare. There is no necessity
for our arming to the teeth, and standing to our guns, as if
the Philistines were upon us; for there is no need to play the
fire-engines before the fire breaks out; but, on the other hand,
if we delay our defences on the plea of saving our money till the
danger actually comes, when we shall be able to spend it without
stint, “it is as if, for a security against fire, you laid by your
money at interest, to be expended in making engines and organizing
a proper fire brigade as soon as the conflagration commences.” Sir
John Burgoyne adds, by way of practical illustration, that 10,000
additional British infantry would have taken Sebastopol before the
month of December, 1854, and saved all the sufferings of the winter
campaign; “but not all the boasted wealth of England could supply
the British infantry required.”--(_Military Opinions._)
Suppose the descent to have taken place where it was least
expected. Sir John Burgoyne attributes to the invading force the
power of landing with marvellous rapidity. People imagine that
because, after long training on a particular beach, Napoleon could
embark 100,000 soldiers in a space of time measured by minutes, the
process of debarkation on an unknown shore must be proportionately
rapid. Perhaps no nation can do these things more quickly than
our French friends, but they sometimes exaggerate. On landing in
the Crimea, where there was no resistance, they indeed succeeded
in throwing 6000 men on shore in about twenty-two minutes; and at
the end of nearly seven hours (namely a little before two o’clock)
Marshal St. Arnaud sent word to Lord Raglan that the disembarkation
was complete. But observe that here were seven hours required to
land 23,600 men without opposition, and the fact was that the whole
of these French troops had really not landed in the time specified.
The Special Correspondent of the _Times_ stated that the French
were not more advanced than ourselves in the disembarkation, which
was carried on long after sunset. More than this, Sir John Burgoyne
asks us to consider what would have been the effect of following
St. Arnaud’s proposal to land at the mouth of the Katcha. He raises
before us a vision of boats closely packed, and rowing on shore in
the proper order at the rate of about two miles an hour. From the
first they are exposed to the fire of artillery, and for the last
600 yards to a fire of musketry which they are unable to return.
Even a small force could, in such circumstances, have punished the
allies severely, although ultimately they might have been unable to
prevent a landing. If so, it really seems to us that the invasion
of our island, though perfectly possible, is not likely to be the
simple stepping on shore which some of our military men seem to
regard as within the bounds of possibility.--_Times review of Sir
John Burgoyne’s “Military Opinions.”_
_What a Militia can do._
Lord Macaulay, in his epitome of the arguments that were used
in the year 1697, against the maintenance of a standing army in
England, says, illustratively:--
“Some people, indeed, talked as if a militia could achieve nothing
great. But that base doctrine was refuted by all ancient and modern
history. What was the Lacedæmonian phalanx in the best days of
Lacedæmon? What was the Roman Legion in the best days of Rome?
What were the armies that conquered at Cressy, at Poictiers, at
Agincourt, at Halidon, or at Flodden? What was that mighty array
which Elizabeth reviewed at Tilbury?[3] In the 14th, 15th, and 16th
centuries Englishmen who did not live by the trade of war had made
war with success and glory. Were the English of the 17th century so
degenerate that they could not be trusted to play the men for their
own homesteads and parish churches?”
Gibbon, the historian, who at one part of his life was a captain in
the Hampshire regiment of militia, remained ever after sensible of
a benefit from it, which he testifies as follows:
“It made me an Englishman, and a soldier. In this powerful
service I imbibed the rudiments of the language and science of
tactics, which opened a new field of study and observation.
The discipline and evolutions of a modern battalion gave me a
clearer notion of the phalanx and the legion; and the captain of
the Hampshire grenadiers, (the reader may smile,) has not been
useless to the historian of the Roman Empire.”--_Miscellaneous
Works_, vol. i. p. 136.
_White-Boys._
These ferocious rioters in the south of Ireland, early in the
reign of George III., were known by the above name, because, as
a mark among themselves in their attacks, they frequently wore a
shirt over their clothes. Lord Chesterfield writes in 1765, to the
Bishop of Waterford:--“I see that you are in fear again from your
White-Boys, and have destroyed a good many of them; but I believe
that if the military force had killed half as many landlords it
would have contributed more effectually to restore quiet. The poor
people in Ireland are used worse than negroes by their lords and
masters, and their deputies of deputies of deputies.”
_Naval Heroes._
The register of the church of Burnham Thorpe contains the entry
of Lord Nelson’s birth; with a note by his father recording
the investiture of Nelson with the order of the Bath, his
rear-admiralship, and creation as Lord Nelson of the Nile, and
of Burnham Thorpe. It is somewhat remarkable that three great
contemporaneous admirals were all born in one small village of
Norfolk--the village of Cockthorpe, which hardly contains more
than six houses. The admirals are Sir Cloudesley Shovel, Sir
Christopher Minors, and Sir James Narborough; it is also remarkable
that this small village and the village of Burnham Thorpe should
have produced four such great men.--_Proc. Norfolk and Norwich
Archæological Society._
_How Russia is bound to Germany._
In his last Will, Peter the Great said that Russia must endeavour
to increase her influence in Germany “by means of marriages,
dowries, and annuities;” and that the value of the advice has been
properly appreciated by his successors, the _Morgen Post_, in 1863,
thus shows:--
“Prussia was bound to Russia by means of the marriage of
Nicholas I. with Alexandra, the daughter of Frederic William
III., and it may with truth be said that for a quarter of a
century the King of Prussia obeyed the behests of his imperious
son-in-law. Würtemberg is bound to Russia by three ties. The
first wife of William I. was Catherine of Russia; the Crown
Princess of Würtemberg is Olga Nicolajevna; and one of the King’s
nieces is the Grand Duchess Helen, widow of the Grand Duke
Michael. The Grand Duke of Oldenburg is a member of the Russian
dynasty. The Grand Duchess Helen Paulovna (one of the sisters of
the Emperor Nicholas) was married to the hereditary Grand Duke
of Mecklenburg-Schwerin. Prince George of Mecklenburg-Strelitz
married the Grand Duchess Catherine Michaelovna in 1851. The
mother of the present Grand Duke of Saxe-Weimar was Maria
Paulovna, another sister of the Emperor Nicholas. The Grand Duke
Constantine, at present Stattholder in Poland, is married to a
Princess of the House of Saxe-Altenburg. The late Grand Duke
Constantine, the uncle of the last-mentioned Prince, was married
to Anna Theodorovna, a Princess of Saxe-Coburg. The wife of the
Emperor Alexander II. is a scion of the Grand Ducal House of
Hesse-Darmstadt. Prince Frederick, the heir-presumptive to the
throne of Hesse-Cassel, was married to Alexandra, the daughter of
the late Emperor Nicholas. The wife of the Grand Duke Michael,
who is now Stattholder in the Caucasus, is Olga Theodorovna of
Baden-Baden. The first wife of Duke Adolphus of Nassau was the
Grand Duchess Elizabeth Michaelovna. The Dowager-Queen of the
Netherlands, the mother of King William III., is a Princess
of the House of Russia. The Russian dynasty is connected with
Bavaria by means of the Leuchtenbergs, and with Hanover by
means of Queen Maria Alexandrine, who is the sister of the
above-mentioned Grand Duchess Constantine.”
_Count Cavour’s Estimate of Napoleon III._
Of the character and policy of Louis Napoleon, Cavour was
accustomed to speak with much freedom. No one had better
opportunities than Cavour of sounding their depths. He was the
only living man who had ventured to grapple with him face to face,
and who had used him for his purpose. The estimate he had formed
of his capacity was not a high one; but he fully admitted his
fertility of resource, his physical and moral courage, and his
knowledge of the people he governs. “He has no definite policy,” he
remarked to an English friend. “He has a number of political ideas
floating in his mind, none of them matured. They would seem to be
convictions founded upon instinct. He will not steadily pursue any
single idea if a serious object presents itself, but will give way
and take up another. This is the _mot d’énigme_ to his policy.
It is by steadily keeping this in view that I have succeeded in
thwarting his designs, or in inducing him to adopt a measure. The
only principle--if principle it can be called--which connects
together these various ideas is the establishment of his dynasty,
and the conviction that the best way to secure it is by feeding the
national vanity of the French people. He found France, after the
fall of the Orleanist and Republican Governments, holding but a
second place among the great Powers; he has raised her to the very
first. Look at his wars, look at his foreign policy; he has never
gone one step beyond what was absolutely necessary to obtain this
one object. The principle ostentatiously put forward in the first
instance has been forgotten or discarded as soon as his immediate
end has been accomplished. It was so in the war with Russia; it has
been so in the war with Austria. In the Crimea he was satisfied
with the success of his army in the capture of Sebastopol, which
took from the English troops the glory they had earned by their
devotion and courage, and to which they would have added had the
war continued. In the struggle with Austria, he was astounded
by the greatness of the victories of Magenta and Solferino. The
military glory of France had been satiated, and he thought no more
of the liberty of Italy, of that free and united nation which he
was to have called into existence from the Alps to the Adriatic.
“It is this uncertain policy guided by dynastic and selfish
considerations, which makes him so dangerous to you, and which
renders it necessary that you should ever be on your guard. Not
that he is hostile to England, or that he has any definite design
against her. On the contrary, he has much affection for your
country. He is a man of generous impulses, and has strong feelings
of gratitude towards those who have served and befriended him.
At the bottom of his heart he is greatly attached to Italy. His
earliest recollections are bound up with her. He is to this day
a _carbonaro_ in his desire for Italian freedom and hatred of
Austria. He has not forgotten the kindness and hospitality shown to
him when an exile in England. He admires your institutions and the
character of the English people. But all this is as nothing when
compared with the maintenance of his dynasty, the establishment of
which he looks upon almost in the light of a religious obligation.
If the moment came when he thought a sacrifice necessary to sustain
it, however great that sacrifice might be, however painful or
repugnant to his feelings, he would make it. No one has had better
opportunities of knowing him than I have. He has talked to me with
the greatest openness of his future plans. But he has invariably
assured me at the same time that his first object was to maintain
peace and good understanding with England. I believe,” he solemnly
added, “that, from policy, as well as from affection, such are his
views; and that only in a moment of the utmost emergency, when he
was convinced that his influence in France depended upon it, would
he depart from them. But that moment may come, and you would be
madmen if you were not prepared for it.”--_Quarterly Review_, No.
222.
_The Mutiny at the Nore._
In 1797, when Capt. William Linder had the _Thetis_, and was
returning to England, having on board the “Prussian subsidy,”
amounting to nearly half a million sterling, he was taken prisoner
by the mutineer William Parker, and detained, with his vessel
and valuable cargo, for a week at the Nore. The rebel, little
suspecting the prize he had within his grasp, credited the
assertion of Capt. Linder that the aid would shortly arrive, and
that he was to be the medium of its transmission to this country.
By this _ruse_, and a promise of assistance by which Parker decided
that he would take the grand fleet into Brest, he obtained a pass
(it is believed the only one given) from William Parker, and
arrived safely with his immense treasure at the Tower, where he
immediately landed his golden cargo, and forthwith proceeded to the
Admiralty,--also giving information to the minister, Mr. Pitt, of
his fortunate escape, which, had it been otherwise, would certainly
have turned the tide of success of Old England at that time. Mr.
Pitt generously offered him a commission; but Capt. Linder having a
fine vessel of his own, and a noble and independent spirit, which
he retained to the last, respectfully declined; nor could he be
induced in after years to solicit for any recompense or popularity.
He died in 1862, May 21, at the age of eighty-seven.--_Athenæum._
_Catholic Emancipation and Sir Robert Peel._
It having been stated, in a leading article of a journal,
April 14, 1862, that the Liberal party forced upon the Duke of
Wellington and Sir Robert Peel that concession to the cause of
Catholic emancipation “which Sir Robert Peel declares he entirely
disapproved to the latest day of his life,” drew from the present
Sir Robert Peel the following corrective reply:
“I do not know upon what authority that statement is made, but, so
far from disapproving the measure, Sir Robert Peel has distinctly
stated that in passing Catholic Emancipation he acted on a deep
conviction that the measure was not only conducive to the general
welfare, but imperatively necessary to avert from the Church, and
from the interest of institutions connected with the Church, an
imminent and increasing danger.”
_The House of Coburg._
Some fifty years ago, a young prince of a then obscure German House
was serving under the Emperor Alexander in the great war against
Napoleon. He was brave, handsome, clever, and, as events have
proved, possessed of prudence beyond the ordinary lot of princes
or private men. In 1814 he accompanied the Allied Sovereigns to
England, and there his accomplishments attracted the attention
and engaged the affection of the heiress to the English throne,
the Princess Charlotte of Wales. They were married, and though an
untimely death was destined soon to sever the union, yet from that
time the star of the successful young officer and of the House
of Coburg has been in the ascendant. From the vantage-ground of a
near connexion with the British Royal Family they have been able to
advance to a position in Europe almost beyond the dreams of German
ambition. The Coburgs have spread far and wide, and filled the
lands with their race.
They have created a new Royal House in England. The Queen is a
daughter of Leopold’s sister; her children are the children of
Leopold’s nephew. The Coburgs reign in Portugal; they are connected
with the royal though fallen House of Orleans, and more or less
closely related to the principal families of their own country.
Prince Leopold himself has for thirty years governed one of the
most important of the minor States of Europe, and his eldest son is
wedded to an Archduchess of the Imperial House of Austria. Jealousy
and detraction have followed these remarkable successes, but the
Coburgs can afford to smile when their rivals sneer, for they have
the solid rewards of skill, prudence, and that adaptability to
all countries and positions which has distinguished the more able
members of their family. It may be added, as the last memorable
events in their annals, that two of them have successively had the
refusal of the Crown of Greece.
The talents of the Coburgs have been conspicuous. King Leopold, the
late Prince Consort, and the present Duke of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha,
have been men much above the ordinary standard. They have had great
opportunities, and they have known how to use them. Neither the
Prince Consort nor the King of Portugal could, without offence,
have taken a share in the politics of England and Portugal unless
they had been gifted with much prudence and circumspection. No one
who studies their history will believe that they and their kinsmen
have merely had greatness thrust upon them. But, on the other hand,
it cannot be doubted that they owe all to the excellent start which
Prince Leopold’s good fortune gave their House. Had it not been
for the elevation of the young soldier to the highest station in
England, the Coburgs, instead of planting dynasties everywhere,
might have been no more than any other of the five-and-thirty
German reigning families, or the multitude of Princely and Serene,
but mediatized personages who are scattered through the land. But
when Leopold became an English prince, and his sister was the
mother of the heiress presumptive to the British throne, the path
to greatness was open to the enterprise of the family. How much
one success leads to another in princely life has been shown in
their history, and we have adverted to it because, if report speak
true, another family, which, a few years since, was of hardly
more account in Europe, is at this moment entering on a similar
career.--_Times._
_A Few Years of the World’s Changes._
Little more than a dozen years have elapsed since there were
witnessed in Europe events so stirring that they constitute one
of the most remarkable epochs in the history of the world. Since
then France has undergone three revolutions--the fall of the
constitutional monarchy, the stormy interlude of a democratic
republic, and the restoration of a military empire. The old
rulers of Lombardy, of Tuscany, and of Naples have disappeared,
and the map of the world has been altered in order to admit of
the introduction of the kingdom of Italy. Austria, long the
haughtiest representative of the principle of absolute monarchy,
has commenced the experiment of constitutional government, and
Russia has laid the foundation of a new political and social
existence in recognising the value of free labour, and abolishing
the institution of serfdom. China has opened her ports to our
merchants and her capital to our ambassadors. We ourselves have
twice gone through the calamities of war in the siege of Sebastopol
and the suppression of the Indian revolt, and we have been twice
reminded this evening that the great republic which boasted a
superb exemption from the perils and the evils which beset ancient
states and monarchical forms of government, has been violently rent
in twain, and whatever may be the issue of that struggle in which
we see at present only a lavish expenditure of blood and treasure,
still there is no dispassionate bystander who can believe that the
union can ever be restored, and no far-sighted politician who can
suppose that the curse of slavery can long survive that separation
of which it is the most ostensible, though not the only, nor
perhaps the most powerful cause. Such important events, all leading
to effects so vast and so permanent in their relation to the
advancement of the human race, have probably never before occurred
within so short a space of time.--_Speech of Sir E. Bulwer Lytton._
We may supplement the above by the following strange passage in the
career of Louis Napoleon, three-and-twenty years since:
A correspondent of _The Reader_ writes:--“It was at Vimereux,
the site of the old camp of Boulogne, that Charles Louis
Bonaparte, now Emperor of the French, landed on his famous
adventure of the 5th of August, 1840. I was in Boulogne when
he reached that town, at about 5.30 a.m., with about sixty
followers. In proceeding to the beach to bathe, I was startled
by the appearance of a rabble, some of whom were clothed as
English footmen and grooms, and some as French soldiers. In
the midst of this somewhat boozy battalion the then pretender,
now the Emperor of the French, marched, closely encircled by
adherents. I followed him and them to the barracks; and never
did I see a more careworn or crestfallen set of conspirators.
In all fifty-six persons, eight horses, and two carriages had
embarked at Margate aboard the steamer, which was now cruising
in the offing of Boulogne after landing its human freight. When
the enterprise at the barracks failed, the present Emperor of the
French, with eleven of his adherents, got into a boat with a view
to escape; but they allowed the oars to be taken from them by
one Guillaume Tutelet, a bather. The boat subsequently capsized,
and the present Emperor of the French swam for the steamer, the
City of Edinburgh, which was at some distance. In this attempt he
failed, and was forced to cling to a buoy till he was picked up
and placed in safety by the English captain. But he did not long
remain thus, for the Lieutenant du Port collected his force, and
boarded the steamer, bringing her, with his prisoner, close to
the Quai la Douane.”
_Noteworthy Pensions._
The finance accounts for 1862 give, as usual, a rather serious list
of Pensions charged upon the Consolidated Fund, and therefore not
otherwise stated than in these accounts.
“Among the larger entries are five ex-Chancellors of England
receiving 5000_l._ a year each, two ex-Chancellors of Ireland
with 3692_l._, four retired English judges with 3500_l._, two
Irish with 2400_l._, and five County Court judges dividing
4600_l._ between them. But these are pensions earned by personal
service; perhaps not so much can be said of some others. The
Earl of Ellenborough has a compensation annuity of 7700_l._ as
chief clerk of the Court of Queen’s Bench; the Rev. T. Thurlow,
4028_l._ as clerk of the hanaper, in addition to 7352_l._ as
patentee of bankrupts. Viscount Avonmore receives 4199_l._ as
late registrar of the Irish Court of Chancery; the Earl of Roden
2698_l._ as late auditor-general of the Irish Exchequer. But
these pensions will come to an end; even that cannot be said of
some others. There is above 23,000_l._ a year paid in perpetual
pensions, payable as long at least as there shall be an Earl
Amherst or Nelson, a Lord Rodney, a Viscount Exmouth, an heir
of William Penn, or of the Duke of Schomberg, and so forth. Of
the limited number of first-class pensions of 2000_l._ a year
to statesmen who have been in high office, and who claim the
pensions, only two are now payable--viz., to Lord Glenelg and Mr.
Disraeli; Sir G. Grey’s is suspended, he being again in office.
Several pensions ceased in the course of the year; among them
that to the family of George Canning, and that to the door-keeper
of the Irish House of Lords; but the housekeeper still lives to
receive her annual compensation for loss of emoluments by the
Union.”
FOOTNOTES:
[2] This paper relates to the Invasion Tactics, as illustrated by
Sir John Burgoyne: the Paper at page 21-24 refers to the project of
Napoleon I.
[3] We have now learned from Mr. Motley’s researches to estimate
more correctly the worth of the army at Tilbury. “There were,”
he says (_History of the United Netherlands_, vol. ii. p. 515 et
seq.), “patriotism, loyalty, courage, and enthusiasm in abundance;”
but “there were no fortresses, no regular army, no population
trained to any weapon.” “On the 5th of August no army had been
assembled--not even the bodyguard of the Queen--and Leicester, with
4000 men, unprovided with a barrel of beer or a loaf of bread, was
about commencing his entrenched camp at Tilbury. On the 6th of
August the Armada was in Calais Roads, expecting Alexander Farnese
to lead his troops upon London.” Good fortune and gallant sailors
saved us from this calamity; but the undisciplined mob which was
assembled under an incompetent commander on shore would have done
little to avert it; and we have in this case a sufficient proof of
the difficulty of improvising an army in an interval of “diplomatic
correspondence.”--_Quarterly Review_, No. 223.
Progress of Civilization.
_How the Earth was peopled._
The record of the actual _origines_ of the human race, as
communicated by God Himself, tells us that one spot was selected,
for the purpose in question, by Creative Power; and that to
one aboriginal pair was consigned the office and destiny of
replenishing the earth. The same record, moreover, informs us,
that, when the _earth was corrupt before God_, through the
wickedness of their posterity, the whole race was destroyed, save
the family of one man; and that, of the three sons of that one man
_was the whole earth overspread_. And, lastly, we have this account
confirmed to us by the testimony of an inspired servant of God, who
has declared, that _He hath made, of one blood, all nations of men,
for to dwell on the face of the earth_.
Now, according to this account, Noah may be considered, for the
purposes of ethnological inquiry, as the sole forefather of the
existing race of man. Of antediluvian men, all, except Noah, are
entirely out of the question. Of the remarkable physical varieties
of complexion, stature, or temperament, among the races before the
Flood (if any such varieties existed), we are profoundly ignorant.
We do read, it is true, that there were _giants_ in those days;
but the meaning of this term seems very doubtful. It is most
generally understood to indicate a gigantic scale of iniquity,
licentiousness, and violence, rather than of corporeal bulk and
might. At all events, Noah himself, and his three sons, were the
only males spared from the general destruction: and the mother of
these three sons, together with their three respective wives, the
only females; eight persons in all. And, so far as race or family
are concerned, the sons are clearly identified with their father.
It is, indeed, just possible that all these four females may have
been of so many different tribes or races. But this surmise is
wholly gratuitous, and very far from probable. And, even were it
admitted, it could not affect any argument respecting the origin
of the present inhabitants of the earth, without assuming the
falsehood of that part of the sacred narrative which traces them
all, Noah and his _whole_ family included, to one and the same
common parentage.
Since the days of the patriarch upwards of 4000 years have elapsed,
and we now find the earth inhabited by at least eight hundred
millions of souls. And, so it is, that these vast multitudes
exhibit, _within certain limits_, almost every imaginable variety
of form, of constitution, and of stature.--_English Review_, No. 2.
Nevertheless, the Unity of the Human Race is a much-vexed question
among ethnologists. Mr. Dunn is convinced of the original unity
of the human species, and, after adducing the best ethnological
evidence attainable, he earnestly appeals to the philologists to
help him. Admiral Fitzroy reduces mankind to one, or, at least, to
three types; and these three varieties he reverently ascribes to
the three sons of Noah, with the help of the hypothesis that they
may have been the sons of different mothers. On the other hand,
Mr. Craufurd, President of the Ethnological Society, admits of
no compromise with orthodoxy, maintaining that the hypothesis of
the unity of our race is without foundation. There are, he says,
some forty races of men, which to pack into the five pigeon-holes
of Cuvier and Blumenbach, or the seven of Prichard, would produce
confusion instead of order. The supposition of a single race
peopling all countries by migration he holds to be “monstrous,”
and contradictory to the fact that some of them to this day do not
know how to use or construct a canoe. Migration, he contends, is
the achievement of races possessed of resources in food and means
of transport. It is to little purpose that Admiral Fitzroy dwells
on the capacities of rafts, double canoes, and ocean currents. Mr.
Craufurd is incredulous as ever, and fights for his forty Adams
with unchecked vivacity, kicking a tremendous hole in the “frail
canoe,” and leaving the ocean currents to deal with it _more
oceanico_.
_Revelations of Geology._
Geology attests that man was the last of created beings in this
planet. If her _data_ be consistent and true, and worthy of
scientific consideration, she affords conclusive evidence that, as
we are told in Scripture, he cannot have occupied the earth longer
than 6000 years. (_Hitchcock_, _Religion of Geology_.)
Sir Isaac Newton’s sagacious intellect had arrived at a similar
conclusion from different premisses, and long before the geologist
had made his researches and discoveries. “He appeared,” said
one who conversed with him, not long before his death, and has
carefully recorded what he justly styles “a remarkable and
curious conversation,” “to be very clearly of opinion, that the
inhabitants of this world were of short date; and alleged as
one reason for that opinion, that all arts--as letters, ships,
printing, the needle, &c.--were discovered within the memory of
history, which could not have happened if the world had been
eternal; and that there were visible marks of ruin upon it, which
could not have been effected by a flood only.”--_Brewster’s Life of
Newton._
_The Stone Age._
Admiral Fitzroy adduces the following striking facts strongly
bearing on the great geological inquiry of “Flint Tools,” and
“Implements in the Drift.”
Tierra del Fuego, with its innumerable islands and rocky islets,
like mountain ranges half sunk in ocean, combines every variety of
aspect--storm-beaten rocky summits, several thousand feet above
the sea--glaciers so extensive that the eye cannot trace their
limits--densely wooded hillsides--grand cascades and sheltered
sandy coves,--altogether such a combination of Swiss, Norwegian,
and Greenland scenery as can hardly be realized or believed to
exist near Cape Horn. Yet, even there--by lake-like waters, though
so near the wildest of oceans--thousands of savages exist, and
migrate in bark canoes!
In 1830 four of those aborigines were brought to England. In 1833
three of them were restored to their native places (one having
died). They had then acquired enough of our language to talk
about common things. From their information and our own sight are
the following facts:--The natives of Tierra del Fuego use stone
tools, flint knives, arrow and spear heads of flint or volcanic
glass, for cutting bark for canoes, flesh, blubber, sinews, and
spears, knocking shell-fish off rocks, breaking large shells,
killing guanacoes (in time of deep snow), and for weapons. In every
sheltered cove where wigwams are placed, heaps of refuse--shells
and stones, offal and bones--are invariably found. Often they
appear very old, being covered deeply with wind-driven sand, or
water-washed soil, on which there is a growth of vegetation. These
are like the “kitchen middens” of the so-called “stone age” in
Scandinavia.
No human bones would be found in them (unless dogs had dragged some
there), because the dead bodies are sunk in deep water with large
stones, or burnt. These heaps are from six to ten feet high, and
from ten or twenty to more than fifty yards in length. All savages
in the present day use stone tools, not only in Tierra del Fuego,
but in Australia, Polynesia, Northernmost America, and Arctic
Asia. In any former ages of the world, wherever savages spread, as
radiating from some centre, similar habits and means of existence
must have been prevalent; therefore casual discovery of such traces
of human migration, buried in or under masses of water-moved
detritus, may seem scarcely sufficient to define a so-called “stone
age.”
_What are Celtes?_
Celtes are certain ancient instruments, of a wedge-like form, of
which several have been discovered in different parts of Great
Britain. Antiquaries have generally attributed them to the Celtæ,
but, not agreeing as to their use, distinguish them by the above
unmeaning appellation. Mr. Whitaker, however, is of opinion that
they were British battle-axes, and in this he has been generally
followed. Such is the statement in the eighth or last edition of
the _Encyclopædia Britannica_.
The Welsh etymologists, Owen and Spurrell, furnish an ancient
Cambro-British word _celt_, a flint-stone. M. Worsae (_Primeval
Antiq._, p. 26) confines the term to those instruments of bronze
which have a hollow socket to receive a wooden handle; the other
forms being called paalstabs on the Continent. In the “Latin
Vulgate,” our translators have rendered “an iron pen” in the book
of Job, chap. xix. v. 24, there translated _celte_.
But the origin and application are variously explained among
antiquarian writers. The Abbé Cochet states, in a letter to the
French journals, 1863, that hatchets are found almost all over
Europe. They are common in France, and are generally found in
groups. Some of them have been analysed, and found to be composed
of fourteen parts of tin and eighty-six of copper. The bronze
is the same as that of an antique poniard brought from Egypt
and analysed by Vauquelin, from which it would appear that the
composition of ancient Gallic bronze came from Egypt. Archæologists
generally attribute hatchets of this kind to the Celts and Gauls,
and give them the general name of Celtic.
In opposition to this statement, it is, however, maintained that
“the word is not derived from its use by the Celts or Kelts, but
from the Latin word ‘celtis,’ which means chisel, or hatchet.” Dr.
Smith (_Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities_) obtains the
term from “celtes, an old Latin word for a chisel, probably derived
from cælo, to engrave.” Mr. Wright (in _The Celt, Roman, and
Saxon_) says that Hearne first applied the word to such implements
in _bronze_, believing them to be “Roman _celtes_, or chisels;”
and that “subsequent writers, ascribing these instruments to the
Britons, have retained the name, forgetting its origin, and have
applied it indiscriminately not only to other implements of bronze
but even to the analogous instruments of stone.” Mr. Wright objects
to the term, “as too generally implying that things to which it is
applied are Celtic;” and it is now generally allowed that there
is no connexion between this word and the name of the nation
(Celtæ).--(Abridged from _Notes and Queries_, No. 203). Fosbroke
(_Encyclopædia of Antiquities_, p. 286) has an excellent column
of authorities upon the subject, which is still hotly contested.
An admirable paper was read to the Archæological Institute,
in 1849, by Mr. James Yates, illustrating “The Use of Bronze
Celts in Military Operations,” with several woodcuts.--See the
_Archæological Journal_, December, 1849, Pages 363-392. See also
“Notes on Bronze Weapons,” by A. W. Franks, F.S.A., _Archæologia_,
vol. xxxvi., pp. 326-331: and Papers by Mr. John Evans, F.S.A.;
_Archæologia_, vol. xxxviii. p. 280; also, vol. xxxix. p. 57. The
subject is of immediate interest in illustration of “The Antiquity
of Man.”
_Roman Civilization of Britain._
If the commencement of the Roman rule in England was, say, fifty
years before the birth of Christ (or 1910 years ago) and each
generation lasted on the average thirty years--rather a high
rate of vitality probably in the Early and Middle Ages--we find
that about sixty-four generations have gone to dust since then.
The archæological information obtained of late years shows that
at the time of the Roman invasion there was a larger amount of
civilization in Ancient Britain than has been generally supposed:
that in addition to the knowledge of the old inhabitants in
agriculture, in the training and rearing of horses, cows, and other
domestic animals, they were able to work in mines, had skill in
the construction of war-chariots and other carriages, and in the
manufacture of metals; and there is evidence that cheese and other
British manufactures and materials were exported to certain parts
of the Continent, probably in British vessels. The ancient coinage
of this period is well worthy of attention. To what country may the
style of art be traced? To what people do we owe the mysterious
circle of Stonehenge? Mr. Fergusson and others say to the Buddhists
rather than to the Druids.
In connexion with the Ancient British period, it would seem that
probably 2000 years before the Roman times there had been in Great
Britain a certain degree of civilization, which from various causes
declined in extent. If Stonehenge may be considered as of the same
antiquity as similar remains in various parts of the East--which
are reckoned by good authorities to be 4000 years old--we had
in this country a degree of civilization which was contemporary
with the prosperous period of the Egyptian empire; and, in times
more immediately preceding the Roman occupation, we know that
Britain was the grand source of Druidical illumination (whatever
relation that may have had to a true civilization) to the whole of
Continental Europe.
That the Ancient Britons, even after they were conquered by the
Romans, had still a strength considered dangerous, is shown by the
fact that upwards of forty barbarian legions which had followed the
Roman standards were settled chiefly upon the northern and eastern
coasts; and it is supposed that a force of about 19,200 Roman foot
and 1700 horse was required to secure peace, and the carrying out
of certain laws in the island. It is calculated by some writers
that a revenue of not less than 2,000,000_l._ a year was raised
by the conquerors of Britain from the land-tax, pasture-tax, and
customs, besides legacy duties, and those levied on the sale of
slaves, auctions of goods, &c.; and it may be remarked that these
customs were levied by the Roman governors in lieu of direct
tribute, to which, it seems, the spirit of the Britons would not
submit.--_The Builder_, 1860.
_Roman Roads and British Railways._
We have no means of estimating the cost of a mile of Roman
road by any audited account of expenses, and it is not easy to
make a comparison of labour. Its cost is vaguely calculated as
insignificant by the side of that of our leviathan railways. The
following is stated to be the average cost of a mile of railway:
Land 6000_l._
Earthwork 5000_l._
Tunnelling 3000_l._
Masonry 3000_l._
Viaduct and large Bridges 3000_l._
Permanent Iron Road 5000_l._
Stations 4000_l._
Law expenses, Engineering, Surveying, &c. 3000_l._
----------
32,000_l._
If this be multiplied by 5000, which was the aggregate length of
British railways in 1851 (now it is nearly 12,000), and we have
the almost fabulous amount of 160 millions, a sum fully equal to
ten times the revenue of all the Roman provinces in the time of
Augustus.
In estimating the value of a Roman road, we have to deduct 7800_l._
a mile for land and law: every mile of railway cost 6000_l._
for land, whereas the Roman road-makers cut through the country
without asking the price, and dispensed with all juries for
assessing damages. Next, we must deduct 4000_l._ for stations;
the Roman _mutationes_ were but hovels where horses were changed;
and lastly, is to be deducted 5000_l._ for iron, before we come
to the materials the Romans were enabled to use; in other words,
the materials of the Roman road and labour would not be more than
half the cost of our railways, from the mere fact of certain
expenses being absent, which they could not understand; but,
although inferior to the Britons of the nineteenth century in
the art of spending money, if judged by the present state of the
science, they could not be despicable engineers--their levels were
chosen on different principles, but their lines of roads passed
through the same countries, and generally in the same direction,
as our railways. A diagram taken from an article of the _Quarterly
Review_, exhibiting a general view of the direction of the
principal Roman roads in England, shows that on comparing one or
two of our principal lines, we shall find that the Great Western,
_e.g._, supplies the place, with a little deviation near Reading,
of the Roman iter from London to Bath and Bristol; the Liverpool
and Manchester, and on to Leeds and York, replace the northern
Watling-street; the Eastern Counties follows a Roman way, and so of
the rest.
In boasting of the gigantic steps which the art of road-making
has taken in our time, we cannot afford to depreciate either the
genius or the magnificence of the ancient Romans in this matter.
If we have our railway under the cliffs of Dover, Trajan had his
road under 2000 feet of perpendicular cliff along the Ister; if we
have our 12,000 miles of rails, the Romans had their 4000 miles
of chosen road, reaching from one extremity of the empire to the
other; if we have our leviathan bridges and viaducts, the Romans
had theirs over greater rivers and wider vales than we have to deal
with; and, finally, if we had our glass bazaar, one-third of a mile
long, in Hyde Park, they had a golden palace, which reached a whole
mile on the Esquiline Hill. If we rise superior and look down upon
the works of the Romans, it is not so much that we have gained in
unskilful labour, as in science. Without the iron and the science,
their works would be as great as ours; it is in mental rather than
in any physical energies, that we have the pre-eminence.
We may acquire some idea of this branch of Roman economy from the
following details:--From the wall of Antonius to Rome, and from
thence to Jerusalem, that is, from the north-west to the south-east
point of the empire, was measured a distance of 3740 English miles;
of this distance 85 miles only were sea-passages, the rest was
the _road of polished silex_. Posts were established along these
lines of High road, so that a hundred miles a day might be with
ease accomplished. A fact related by Pliny affords an example of
the quickest travelling in a carriage in ancient times. Tiberius
Nero, with three carriages, accomplished a journey of 200 miles in
twenty-four hours, when he went to see his brother Drusus, who was
sick in Germany.--_Rev. R. Burgess, B.D._
_Domestic Life of the Saxons._
Were it possible for an archæologist to report the gossip of the
Saxon hinds over their ale or mead, we should have learnt more of
their daily life from such a specimen of their conversation than
from all the cautious inferences from manuscripts and records. Let
us conceive the presence of a modern reporter in the mead-hall of
Hrothgar, and we may be certain that his literal transcript of a
single hour’s talk there would be worth all that we can now learn
from the Romance of Beowulf. “Then,” says the poem, “there was for
the sons of the Geats (Beowulf and his followers altogether), a
bench cleared in the beer-hall; there the bold spirit, free from
quarrel, went to sit; the thane observed his office, he that in his
hand bare the twisted ale-cup; he poured the bright sweet liquor;
meanwhile the poet sang serene in Heorot (the name of Hrothgar’s
palace); there was joy of heroes.” Although our conceptions of the
scene are faint and vague, the antiquary is enabled to represent
certain items as “the twisted ale-cup,” a favourite fashion of
our forefathers, many of whose ale-cups, as discovered in their
barrows or graves, are incapable of standing upright, implying that
their proprietors were thirsty souls, and that it was not, as we
supposed, the Prince Regent who first invented _tumblers_. From
the mead-hall and the other Saxon houses of the period, we also
get the type of the modern English mansion, with its _enceinte_
and its lodge-gate, as distinguished from its hall-door. The early
Saxon house was the whole enclosure, at the gate of which--the
_ostium domus_--beggars assembled for alms, and the porter received
the arms of strangers. The whole mass enclosed within this wall
constituted the burgh, or tun, and the hall, with its duru, or door
_par excellence_, was the chief of its edifices. Around it were
grouped the sleeping chambers, or _bowers_, as they were designated
till a late age, with the subordinate offices. Mr. Wright (in his
able work on the _Domestic Life of the Middle Ages_) draws many of
his inferences from the description of the mead-hall of Hrothgar,
and adds that he believes Bulwer’s description of the Saxonized
Roman house inhabited by Hilda is substantially correct. Still,
though we can identify to this day the Saxon derivatives of many
of our houses and much of our crockery-ware, this helps us little
as regards the sentiments of the originators of these familiar
types. They have left us some memorials of their manners; but,
substantially speaking, their sentiments on a great variety of
subjects are lost to us, and there is little trace of them, even in
their barrows and sepulchral surroundings.--_Times review._
_Love of Freedom._
There is something absolutely touching in the simplicity of the
following incident, derived from Aelfric’s _Colloquium_, composed
in the eleventh century. A teacher examines a ploughman on the
subject of his occupation. “What sayest thou, ploughman; how
dost thou perform thy work?” “O, my lord,” he answers, “I labour
excessively: I go out at dawn of day, driving my oxen to the field,
and yoke them to the plough: there is no weather so severe that
I dare rest at home, for fear of my lord; but having yoked my
oxen, and fastened the share and coulter to the plough, every day
I must plough a whole field (acre?) or more.” The teacher again
asks, “Hast thou any companion?” “I have a boy who urges the oxen
with a goad, and who is now hoarse with cold and shouting.” “What
more doest thou in the day?” “Truly, I do more yet. I must fill
the oxen’s mangers with hay, and water them, and carry away their
dung.” “O, it is a sore vexation!” “Yea, it is great vexation;
because _I am not free_.”
The Anglo-Saxon clergy went so far as to make the giving of
Freedom an Atonement for all Sins, by encouraging the manumission
of theows gratuitously, as an action of merit in the eyes of the
church. Among the early benefactors of the abbey of Ramsey, it
is recorded that Athelstan Mannesone manumitted thirteen men in
every thirty, “for the salvation of his soul,” taking them as the
lot fell upon them, and “placing them in the open road, so that
they were at liberty to go where they would.” Many, indeed, were
freed, from feelings of piety. Thus it appears from the celebrated
“Exeter book” in the cathedral, that, at Exeter, on the day when
they removed the bodies of bishops Osbern and Leofric from the old
minster to the new one, William, bishop of Exeter, “proclaimed
Wulfree Pig free and sackless of the land at Teigtune,” and “freed
him for the love of God and of St. Marie, and of all Christ’s
saints, and for the redemption of the bishops’ souls and his own.”
Sometimes a man who had no theow of his own, bought one of another
person, in order to emancipate him, “for the love of God and the
redemption of his soul.” Such were the fruits that ripened from
Roman teaching in the olden time!--_Archæologia_, vol. xxx.
_The Despot deceived._
Nothing can be more erroneous than the notion that the despot,
though he may himself oppress his people, can prevent others from
doing the same. He is cheated by his subordinates, and they cheat
the people.--_Archbishop Whately._
_True Source of Civilization._
The killing of animals for food is, after all, merely the resource
of the savage, and domesticated animals and cultivated plants are
indispensable to the earliest advances of civilization. It may be
safely averred, says Mr. Craufurd, that no people ever attained
any great civilization without, for example, the possession of
some cereal, and without having domesticated the horse, or the
ox, or the buffalo. No evidence exists of a people emerging from
barbarism whose food consisted of the cocoa-nut, the banana, the
date, the bread-fruit, sago, the potato, the yam, or the batata.
Such articles are too easily produced, require too little skill
and ingenuity to raise; and when they fail, there is nothing to
fall back upon--nothing between the people cultivating them and
starvation. The higher, too, the cereal the better, wheat standing
at the top of the list in temperate regions, and rice in warm
ones. Thus, the cereals of Egypt, nurtured by the mud of the Nile,
created a respectable civilization among a very inferior race. It
was because the Egyptians, says Mr. Craufurd, besides the date,
possessed wheat, barley, pulse, and the ox, and that nature dressed
and irrigated their country, that the Egyptians became numerous and
civilized.
_The Lowest Civilization._
The South Sea Islanders who scalded their fingers in Captain Cook’s
tea-kettle, and to whom pottery and warm water were luxuries also,
were certainly low in the scale of civilization, but they were not
nearly so low as the Terra del Fuegans at this moment. Mr. Darwin
describes the state of these wretched creatures as the extreme
of misery, and as affording him the most curious and interesting
spectacle he had ever beheld. “I could not have believed,” says
he, “how wide was the difference between savage and civilized
men.” Their land, we should remember, is a land of rain, sleet,
snow, and storms, unsheltered from the cold of the South Pole, and
one thick murky mass of forest. The “climate (where gale succeeds
gale, with rain, hail, and sleet) seems blacker than anywhere
else. In the Straits of Magellan, looking due south from Port
Famine, the distant channels between the mountains appear, from
their gloominess, to lead beyond the confines of the world.” In
this terrestrial limbo live human beings who are clad, for this
inclement temperature, in a single otter-skin, which they lace
across their breast by strings, and, according as the wind blows,
shift from side to side. He pictures the state of these poor
creatures at night, some half-a-dozen of them sleeping together
naked on the wet ground coiled up like animals. “Whenever it is
low water they must rise to pick shellfish from the rocks; and
the women, winter and summer, either dive to collect sea-eggs, or
sit patiently in their canoes, and with a baited hair-line jerk
out small fish. If a seal is killed, or the floating carcass of a
putrid whale is discovered, they are feasts. Such miserable food
is assisted by a few tasteless berries and fungi.” Mr. Snow, who
brings us our latest reports from the Fuegans, visited them in
1855. At present, however, their condition in the scale of humanity
is almost as low as it can be; for though they possess the capacity
of kindling a fire by the friction of two sticks (an accomplishment
of which, by the way, all savages that we know of are capable), and
though they can form canoes by hollowing out logs of wood, they
cultivate no plant and domesticate no animal, and have, as we see,
no other art of civilized life.--_Times journal._
_Why do we shake Hands?_
“It is,” replies Dr. Humphry, in his clever volume, _The Human
Foot and the Human Hand_, “a very old-fashioned way of indicating
friendship. Jehu said to Jehonadab, ‘Is thine heart right as my
heart is with thine heart? If it be, give me thine hand.’ It is
not merely an old-fashioned custom; it is a strictly _natural_
one, and, as usual in such cases, we may find a physiological
reason, if we will only take the pains to search for it. The
animals cultivate friendship by the sense of touch, as well as by
the senses of smell, hearing, and sight; and for this purpose they
employ the most sensitive parts of their bodies. They rub their
noses together, or they lick one another with their tongues. Now,
the hand is a part of the human body in which the sense of touch
is highly developed; and, after the manner of the animals, we not
only like to see and hear our friend (we do not usually smell him,
though Isaac, when his eyes were dim, resorted to this sense as a
means of recognition), we also touch him, and promote the kindly
feelings by the contact and reciprocal pressure of the sensitive
hands. Observe, too, how this principle is illustrated by another
of our modes of greeting. When we wish to determine whether a
substance be perfectly smooth, and are not quite satisfied with the
information conveyed by the fingers, we apply it to the lips and
rub it gently upon them. We do so, because we know by experience
that the sense of touch is more acutely developed in the lips than
in the hands. Accordingly, when we wish to reciprocate the warmer
feelings, we are not content with the contact of the hands, and
we bring the lips into the service. A shake of hands suffices for
friendship, in undemonstrative England at least; but a kiss is the
token of a more tender affection.”
Dr. Humphry is no friend to Palmistry; for, he observes: “You will
estimate the value of the science of Cheiromancy when you hear
that equal furrows upon the lower joint of the thumb argue riches
and possessions; but a line surrounding the middle joint portends
hanging. The nails, also, come in for their share of attention:
and we are informed that, when short, they imply goodness; when
long and narrow, steadiness but dulness; when curved, rapacity.
Black spots upon them are unlucky; white are fortunate. Even at the
present day Gipsies practise the art when they can find sufficient
credulity to encourage them.”
_Various Modes of Salutation._
Of all the different modes of salutation in various countries,
there is none so graceful as that which prevails in Syria. At New
Guinea the fashion is certainly picturesque; for they place upon
their hands the leaves of trees as symbols of peace and friendship.
An Ethiopian takes the robe of another and ties it about his own
waist, leaving his friend partially naked. In a cold climate this
would not be very agreeable. Sometimes it is usual for persons to
place themselves naked before those whom they salute as a sign
of humility. This custom was put in practice before Sir Joseph
Banks when he received the visit of two Otaheitan females. The
inhabitants of the Philippine Islands take the hand or foot of him
they salute, and gently rub their face with it, which is at all
events more agreeable than the salute of the Laplanders, who have
a habit of rubbing noses, applying their own proboscis with some
degree of force to that of the person they desire to salute. The
salute with which you are greeted in Syria is at once most graceful
and flattering; the hand is raised with a quick but gentle motion,
to the heart, to the lips, and to the head, to intimate that the
person saluting is willing to serve you, to think for you, to speak
for you, and to act for you.--_Farley’s Syria._
_What is Comfort?_
Could any one really be satisfied with the attainment and diffusion
of any conceivable amount of Comfort? Or do the whole series of
influences which the popular sentiment almost deifies really affect
very deeply the standing calamities and the standing complaints of
life? It is not difficult to bring the question to a fair test.
If all the causes which we see at work around us were to continue
to operate for an indefinite length of time in the utmost vigour,
they would probably not raise the average standard of comfort for
the whole population above the point at which the average of the
better-paid professional classes stands at present. The wildest
dreams of the most sanguine believer in progress on Christian
principles would be more than realized if he ever saw ordinary
day-labourers as well off and as intelligent as ordinary lawyers,
doctors, and merchants are at present. Take, then, one reasonably
prosperous person of this kind, and see whether he is in such an
entirely satisfactory condition. It is clear that he is not. He
neither knows whence he comes nor whither he is going, nor for what
purpose he lives; or at least his knowledge upon these subjects
is so indefinite, so much involved in metaphors and mysteries,
that it is little more than enough to make visible the darkness in
which he stands. He passes through life in a round of occupations
which often fatigue and hardly ever satisfy large portions of his
mind; and the very comforts which have been provided for him by so
infinite a multiplicity of social devices, as often as not operate
to choke and strangle his energies. We need not detail the features
of a familiar picture. Every one knows the gloomy side of life, and
though it is not the whole truth, it is right that its existence
should be recognised. It is an insulting affectation to keep it
out of sight, and to persist in crying up progress and improvement
as if there was no undying worm and unquenchable fire.--_Saturday
Review._
_What is Luxury?_
Luxury is the indefinite and comprehensive term of reproach with
which the vulgar, in all ages, brand whatever is beyond their own
tastes and habits. What is luxury to one is but refinement and
civilization to others. The higher orders mingle up with their
disgust at the boorish and noisy pastimes of the lower, a kind of
latent feeling of their immorality: the lower revenge themselves
by considering as things absolutely sinful the more splendid
entertainments and elegant festivities of their superiors in wealth
and refinement.--_Quarterly Review._
_What do we know of Life?_
The condition of our life is that we stand on a narrow strip of
the shore, waiting till the tide, which has washed away hundreds
of millions of our fellows, shall wash away us also into a country
of which there are no charts, and from which there is no return.
What little we know about that unseen world comes to this--that it
contains extremes of good and evil, awful and mysterious beyond
all human expression or conception, and that those tremendous
possibilities are connected with our conduct here. It is surely
wiser and more manly to walk silently by the shore of that silent
sea, than to boast with puerile exultation over the little
sand-castles which we have employed our short leisure in building
up. Life can never be matter of exultation, nor can the progress
of arts and sciences ever really fill the heart of a man who has
a heart to be filled. In its relation to what is to be hereafter,
there is, no doubt, no human occupation which is not awful and
sacred, for such occupations are the work which is here given us
to do--our portion in the days of our vanity. But their intrinsic
value is like that of schoolboys’ lessons. They are worth just
nothing at all, except as a discipline and a task. It is right that
man should rejoice in his own works, but it is very wrong to allow
them for one instant to obscure that eternity from which alone
they derive their importance. Steam-engines and cotton-mills have
their greatness, but life and death are greater and older. Men
lived, and died, and sorrowed, and rejoiced before these things
were known, and they could do so again. Why mankind was created
at all, why we still continue to exist, what has become of that
vast multitude which has passed, with more or less sin and misery,
through this mysterious earth, and what will become of those vaster
multitudes which are treading and will tread the same wonderful
path?--these are the great insoluble problems which ought to be
seldom mentioned, but never for an instant forgotten. Strange as
it may appear to popular lecturers, they really do make it seem
rather unimportant whether, on an average, there is or is not a
little more or less good nature, a little more or less comfort,
and a little more or less knowledge in the world. Men live and die
in India, and China, and Africa, as well as in England and France;
and where there is life and death there are the great essentials of
existence, and the eternal problems which they involve. This page
of beautiful philosophy is from the _Saturday Review_.
_The truest Patriot the greatest Hero._
Is he not in reality the truest _patriot_ who fills up his station
in private life well; he who loves and promotes peace both public
and private, who knowing that his country’s prosperity depends much
more on its virtues than its arms, resolves that his individual
endeavours shall not be wanting to promote this desirable end?
And is he not the greatest _hero_ who is able to despise public
honour for the sake of private usefulness, he who has learnt to
subdue his own inclinations, to deny himself those gratifications
which are inconsistent with virtue and piety, who has conquered his
passions and brought them low even as a child that is weaned: is
not such a man greater than he that taketh a city, sheddeth blood
as it were water, or calls for the thundering applause of assembled
multitudes? But if persons in general held these sentiments, if
utility were substituted for show, and religious usefulness for
worldly activity, how very little our public men would have to do!
Truly they would be driven to turn their swords into ploughshares,
and study the Gospel instead of the statutes.
_The old Philosophers._
Horace Walpole, who possessed great knowledge of life, though
himself disfigured by arrogant conceits, has left this satirical
view of the wisdom of the ancient philosophers:
“I thought that philosophers were virtuous, upright men, who
loved wisdom, and were above the little passions and foibles
of humanity. I thought they assumed that proud title as an
earnest to the world, that they intended to be something more
than mortal; that they engaged themselves to be patterns of
excellence, and would utter no opinion, would pronounce no
decision, but what they believed the quintessence of truth; that
they always acted without prejudice and respect of persons.
Indeed, we know that the ancient philosophers were a ridiculous
composition of arrogance, disputation, and contradictions! that
some of them acted against all ideas of decency; that others
affected to doubt of their own senses; that some, for venting
unintelligible nonsense, pretended to think themselves superior
to kings; that they gave themselves airs of accounting for all
that we do and do not see--and yet, that no two of them agreed
in a single hypothesis; that one thought fire, another water,
the origin of all things; and that some were even so absurd and
impious as to displace God, and enthrone matter in his place. I
do not mean to disparage such wise men, for we are really obliged
to them: they anticipated and helped us off with an exceeding
deal of nonsense, through which we might possibly have passed if
they had not prevented us.”
_Glory of the Past._
To be honoured and even privileged by the laws, opinions, and
inveterate usages of our country, growing out of the prejudice
of ages, has nothing to provoke horror and indignation in
any man. Even to be too tenacious of those privileges is not
absolutely a crime. The strong struggle in every individual to
preserve possession of what he has found to belong to him, and to
distinguish him, is one of the securities against injustice and
despotism implanted in our nature. It operates as an instinct to
secure property, and to preserve communities in a settled state.
What is there to shock in this? Nobility is a graceful ornament to
the civil order. It is the Corinthian capital of polished society.
_Omnes boni nobilitati semper favemus_ was the saying of a wise and
good man. It is, indeed, one side of a liberal and benevolent mind
to incline to it with some sort of partial propensity. He feels
no ennobling principle in his own heart who wishes to level all
the artificial institutions which have been adopted for giving a
body to opinion and permanence to fugitive esteem. _It is a sour,
malignant, and envious disposition, without taste for the reality,
or for any image or representation of virtue, that sees with joy
the unmerited fall of what had long flourished in splendour and in
honour._ I do not like to see anything destroyed, any void produced
in society, any ruin on the face of the land.--_Burke._
_Wild Oats._
We are more familiar with Wild Oats in a moral than in a botanical
sense; yet in the latter it is an article of no small curiosity.
For one thing, it has a semi-inherent power of moving from one
place to another. Let a _head_ of it be laid down in a moistened
state upon a table, and left there for the night, and next morning
it will be found to have walked off. The locomotive power resides
in the peculiar hard _awn_, or spike, which sets the grain
a-tumbling over and over sideways. A very large and coarse kind of
wild oats, brought many years ago from Otaheite, was found to have
the ambulatory character in uncommon perfection. When ordinary oats
is allowed by neglect to degenerate, it acquires this among other
characteristics of wild oats.--_R. Chambers._
_How Shyness spoils Enjoyment._
Mr. Arthur Helps writes upon this everyday hindrance to happiness:
“I believe if most young persons were to tell us what they had
suffered from shyness upon their entrance into society, it would
well deserve to be placed next to want of truth as a hindrance to
the enjoyment of society. Now, admitting that there is a certain
degree of graceful modesty mixed up with this shyness, very
becoming in the young, there is at the same time a great deal of
needless care about what others think and say. In fact, it proceeds
from a painful egotism, sharpened by needless self-examinations and
foolish imaginations, in which the shy youth or maiden is tormented
by his or her personality, and is haunted by imagining that he or
she is the centre of the circle--the observed of all observers.
The great cause of this shyness is not sufficiently accustoming
children to society, or making them suppose that their conduct in
it is a matter of extreme importance, and especially in urging them
from their earliest youth by this most injurious of all sayings,
‘If you do this or that, what will be said, what will be thought of
you?’ Thus referring the child not to religion, not to wisdom, not
to virtue, not even to the opinion of those whose opinion ought to
have weight, but to the opinion of whatever society he may chance
to come into. I often think the parent, guardian, or teacher, who
has happily omitted to instil this vile prudential consideration,
or enabled the child to resist it, even if he, the teacher, has
omitted much good advice and guidance, has still done better than
that teacher or parent who has filled the child to the brim with
good moral considerations, and yet has allowed this one piece of
arrant worldliness to creep in.”
“_Custom, the Queen of the World._”
Sir William Hamilton, in his _Metaphysical Essays_, has the
following passage characterizing this universal rule:--
“Man is by nature a social animal. ‘He is more political,’
says Aristotle, ‘than any bee or ant.’ But the existence of
society, from a family to a state, supposes a certain harmony of
sentiment among its members; and nature has, accordingly, wisely
implanted in us a tendency to assimilate in opinions and habits
of thought to those with whom we live and act. There is thus, in
every society great or small, a certain gravitation of opinions
towards a common centre. As in our natural body, every part has
a necessary sympathy with every other, and all together form,
by their harmonious conspiration, a healthy whole; so, in the
social body, there is always a strong predisposition, in each
of its members, to act and think in unison with the rest. This
universal sympathy, or fellow-feeling, of our social nature, is
the principle of the different spirit dominant in different ages,
countries, ranks, sexes, and periods of life. It is the cause
why fashions, why political and religious enthusiasm, why moral
example, either for good or evil, spread so rapidly and exert
so powerful an influence. As men are naturally prone to imitate
others, they consequently regard, as important or insignificant,
as honourable or disgraceful, as true or false, as good or bad,
what those around them consider in the same light. They love and
hate what they see others desire and eschew. This is not to be
regretted; it is natural, and consequently it is right. Indeed,
were it otherwise, society could not subsist, for nothing can be
more apparent than that mankind in general, destined as they are
to occupations incompatible with intellectual cultivation, are
wholly incapable of forming opinions for themselves on many of
the most important objects of human consideration.
“If such, however, be the intentions of nature with respect
to the unenlightened classes, it is manifest that a heavier
obligation is thereby laid on those who enjoy the advantages
of intellectual cultivation, to examine with diligence and
impartiality the foundations of those opinions which have any
connexion with the welfare of mankind. If the multitude must
be led, it is of consequence that it be led by enlightened
conductors. That the great multitude of mankind are by natural
disposition only what others are, is a fact at all times so
obtrusive that it could not escape observation from the moment a
reflective eye was first turned upon man. ‘The whole conduct of
Cambyses,’ says Herodotus, the father of history, ‘towards the
Egyptian gods, sanctuaries, and priests, convinces me that this
king was in the highest degree insane, for otherwise he would
not have insulted the worship and holy things of the Egyptians.
If any one should accord to all men the permission to make free
choice of the best among all customs, undoubtedly each would
choose his own. That this would certainly happen can be shown
by many examples, and among others by the following. The King
Darius once asked the Greeks who were resident in his court, at
what price they could be induced to devour their dead parents.
The Greeks answered, that to this no price could bribe them.
Thereupon the king asked some Indians who were in the habit of
eating their dead parents, what they would take not to eat but to
burn them; and the Indians answered even as the Greeks had done.’
Herodotus concludes this narrative with the observation, that
‘Pindar had justly entitled Custom--the Queen of the World.’”
_Ancient Guilds and Modern Benefit Clubs._
The guilds in our mediæval towns, in the opinion of Mr. T. Wright,
F.S.A., were derived from the municipal system of the Romans. We
know that such guilds existed in the Roman towns, and with much
the same objects. All people have, at all times, placed great
importance in the ceremonies attending the interment of the dead;
and the process of burial among the Romans was one of great
expense, which could be met by families which were wealthy, but it
must have been very onerous, falling all at once, on men of very
limited means; to avoid the inconvenience of which they _clubbed
together_, in a spirit which exists to the same degree in modern
times; so that the expense on each occasion, instead of falling
upon one, was distributed among the members of the club. This was
the great object of the Roman guilds, and the second seems to have
been drinking and sociality. People clubbed together to be merry
while alive, and to be buried when dead. While they still remained
attached to their old customs in burial, they were now taught the
duty of investing money in the foundation of obits, or perpetual
prayers for the dead; but this being looked upon as a superstitious
usage, was the cause of their dissolution after the Reformation.
In the successive changes of society, they embraced from time to
time other objects; but the two grand objects of the Roman, Saxon,
or Mediæval guilds, seemed to have been alike the respectable
burial of their deceased members, and the promoting of convivial
intercourse--the leading features of a modern Benefit Society.
_The Oxford Man and the Cambridge Man._
If stated very briefly, the chief difference may be said to be that
the Cambridge man is more practical. Whether there is something in
the method of training pursued, or whether the different degrees
of importance assigned to the various branches of education may be
the cause, or whether the pitting of man against man in examination
may operate still more powerfully, the fact soon forces itself
on the attention of all close observers. If two school-friends
part, and meet again after spending a year at the respective
universities, they are soon conscious that they no longer work
exactly in the same way. The Cambridge student has learned to
regard everything as a task which he must honestly and steadily get
through. To do it, and not to think about it, is his aim. Still
less does he occupy himself with thinking about doing it. He is
too busy and methodical for the agreeable but delusive pleasure of
secondary reflection. He has to master a subject, and all he cares
is to master it, and to go through it, so that he may satisfy the
practical test of being examined in it and answering creditably.
When he leaves college and commences a profession, he works in the
same way. A law student from Cambridge, for instance, has generally
no very romantic views either of his profession or of himself.
Here is a very complex, confused, various piece of learning which
he has undertaken to acquire. To do the thing well, he must work
hard, and must utterly disbelieve that any knowledge will come
unless it is painfully obtained. He must cultivate a legal memory,
note carefully up all that he thinks he ought to know, and prepare
himself to be able to pass an imaginary examination at the shortest
possible notice. The Oxford student, on the other hand, is more
inclined to speculate about law, to dally with its details, and to
despise its confusion. Cambridge men, so to speak, approach law
in a humble attitude, and are consequently, perhaps, as a rule,
better lawyers after the received English fashion. A boating man
who has shaved through a pass at Cambridge, will probably read law
precisely in the same way as a boating man who has shaved through
a pass at Oxford. But if we compare the general body of men who
have taken fair degrees or been accustomed to read, we shall find
that there is a difference in the manner in which the one and the
other set approach a subject like law, and that difference may
fairly be described by saying that the Cambridge manner is the more
practical.--_Saturday Review._
“_Great Events from Little Causes spring._”
Exemplifications of this poetic saw are very numerous in the
highways and byeways of History, ancient and modern; all tending
to show the springs which have set the world in motion, and how
the most trivial circumstances have occasioned the subversion of
empires, and erected new ones in their stead. Infinite are the
consequences which follow from a single, and often apparently a
very insignificant, circumstance. Paley himself narrowly escaped
being a baker; here was a decision upon which hung in one scale,
perhaps, the immortal interests of thousands, and in the other, the
gratification of the taste of the good people of Giggleswick for
hot rolls. Cromwell was near being strangled in his cradle by a
monkey; here was this wretched ape wielding in his paws the destiny
of nations. Then, again, how different in their kind, as well as in
their magnitude, are these consequences from anything that might
have been, _à priori_, expected. Henry VIII. is smitten with the
beauty of a girl of eighteen, and ere long--
“The Reformation beams from Bullen’s eyes.”
_The Mission of St. Augustine_ is one of the most striking
instances in all history of the vast results which may flow
from a very small beginning,--of the immense effects produced
by a single thought in the heart of a single man, carried out
conscientiously, deliberately, and fearlessly. Nothing in itself
could seem more trivial than the meeting of Gregory with the
three Yorkshire boys in the market-place at Rome; yet this roused
a feeling in his mind which he never lost; and through all the
obstacles which were thrown first in his own way, and then in
that of Augustine, his highest desire concerning it was more than
realised. From Canterbury, the first English Christian city--from
Kent, the first English Christian kingdom--has by degrees arisen
the whole constitution of Church and State in England, which now
binds together the whole British empire. And from the Christianity
here established has flowed, by direct consequences, first, the
Christianity of Germany--then, after a long interval, of North
America--and, lastly, we may trust, in time, of all India and all
Australasia.--_Stanley’s Historical Memoirs of Canterbury._
_Wars have frequently been brought about by trivial causes._ In the
cathedral of Modena, in the marble tower called “La Ghirlandina,”
is kept the old worm-eaten wooden bucket which was the cause of the
civil war, or rather affray, between the Modenese and Bolognese,
in the time of Frederic II., Nov. 15, 1325. It was long suspended
by the chain which fastened the gate of Bologna, through which the
Modenese forced their passage, and seized the prize, which was
deposited in the cathedral by the victors, the Geminiani, as a
trophy of the defeat of the Petronii, with wonderful triumph. The
event is the subject of Tassoni’s Secchia Rapita, or Rape of the
Bucket, the first modern mock-heroic poem.
When the palace of the Trianon was building for Louis XIV., at the
end of the park of Versailles, the monarch went to inspect the
work, accompanied by Louvois, secretary-at-war, and superintendent
of the building: Louis remarked that one of the windows was out of
shape, and smaller than the rest, which Louvois denied. The king
had the window measured, and finding that he had judged rightly,
treated Louvois with contumely before the whole court. This
treatment so incensed the minister, that when he returned home,
he was heard to say, that he would find better employment for a
monarch than that of insulting his favourites. Louvois was as good
as his word, for by his insolence and haughtiness he insulted the
other powers, and occasioned the bloody war of 1688.
An instance pregnant with mightier results could not, perhaps, be
quoted than the following:--When many Puritans emigrated, or were
about to emigrate, to America, in 1637, Cromwell, either despairing
of his fortunes at home, or indignant at the rule of government
which prevailed, resolved to quit his native country, in search
of those civil and religious privileges of which he could freely
partake in the New World. Eight ships were lying in the Thames,
ready to sail: in one of them, says Hume, (quoting Mather and other
authorities,) were embarked Hazelrig, Hampden, Pym, and Cromwell.
A proclamation was issued, and the vessels were detained by Order
in Council. The King had, indeed, cause to rue the exercise of his
authority. In the same year, Hampden’s memorable trial--the great
cause of Ship-money--occurred. What events rapidly followed!
At the beginning of the reign of Elizabeth, when the Protestant
religion was restored, the question whether there should be Saints’
Days in the Calendar was considered by the Convocation, and
sharply and fully debated. The Saints’ Days were carried only by
a single vote: 59 members voted for Saints’ Days, 58 for omitting
them.--_Literary Remains of H. Fynes Clinton._
Bishop Burnet relates that the Habeas Corpus Act passed by a
mere mistake; that one peer was counted for ten, and that made a
majority for the measure.--_Earl Stanhope’s Speech_, 1856.
_The House of Brunswick and the Casting Vote._--Sir Arthur Owen,
bart., of Orielton, in the county of Pembroke, is the individual
who is asserted to have given the casting vote which placed the
Brunswick dynasty on the throne of England. A lady, in 1856,
residing at Haverfordwest, remembered her grandmother, who was
staying at Orielton, at the time when Sir Arthur Owen rode to
London on _horseback_, for the purpose of recording his vote:
he arrived at the precise juncture when his single vote caused
the scale to preponderate in favour of the descendants of the
Electress Sophia. (_I. Pavin Phillips_, _Haverfordwest_.--_Notes
and Queries_, 2nd S. No. 31.) Another account, which Mr. Phillips
thinks the correct one, states that Sir Arthur Owen made the number
even; and that it was Mr. Griffith Rice, M.P. for Carmarthenshire,
who gave the _casting vote_. (See Debrett’s _Baronetage_, 1824.)
_The Discovery of America_ is referred to by Humboldt as a
“wonderful concatenation of trivial circumstances which undeniably
exercised an influence on the course of the world’s destiny:”
Washington Irving has justly observed that if Columbus had
resisted the counsel of Martin Alonzo Pinzon, and continued to
steer westward, he would have entered the Gulf Stream and been
borne to Florida, and from thence, probably, to Cape Hatteras
and Virginia,--a circumstance of incalculable importance, since
it might have been the means of giving to the United States of
North America a Catholic Spanish population, in the place of the
Protestant English one by which those regions were subsequently
colonised. “It seems to me like an inspiration,” said Pinzon
to the Admiral, “that my heart dictates to me that we ought
to steer in a different direction.” It was on the strength of
this circumstance that in the celebrated lawsuit which Pinzon
carried on against the heirs of Columbus, between 1513 and
1515, he maintained that the discovery of America was alone
due to him. This inspiration Pinzon owed, as related by an old
sailor of Moguez, at the same trial, to _the flight of a flock
of parrots_ which he had observed in the evening flying towards
the south-west, in order, as he might well have conjectured, to
roost on trees on the land. _Never has a flight of birds been
attended by more important results._ It may even be said that it
has decided the first colonization in the New Continent, and the
original of the Roman and Germanic races of men.
The Act to recharter the first Bank of the United States
was defeated by the casting vote of Vice-president Clinton
(_ex-officio_ President of the Senate), and the Tariff Act of 1846
was ordered to be engrossed by the casting vote of Vice-president
Dallas.
That _the Past is the Guide for the Present_ is thus argued:--Every
political treatise referring to events which have engrossed the
attention of the day, either as modifications or as changes of
our social system, must be valuable in later years. It must
necessarily recommend or condemn measures on account of their
probable operation in the time to come; it must in some degree be
a prophecy, or else it is practically worthless. The politician
studies the past merely as his guide for the future. If he is
learned, wise, and at all an adept in the science which he
professes--than which no other is of so momentous an import--he
will consider past history as the barometer which must guide
him in predicating the approach either of a tempest or a calm.
Temporary clamour or occasional obstruction will not lead him
to forsake clear principles of action, or to recommend a grand
constitutional remedy in the case of a trifling local disease. He
must look forward beyond the sphere of immediate action--resolute
in this belief, that one false step, however small, may upset the
equilibrium of the State.--_Blackwood’s Magazine_, 1850.
_Great Britain on the Map of the World._
We see two little spots huddled up in a corner, awkwardly shot
off to a side, as it were, yet facing the great sea, on the very
verge of the great waste of waters, with nothing to protect them:
not like Greece, or Italy, or Egypt, in a Mediterranean bounded
by a surrounding shore, to be coasted by timid mariners, but on
the very edge and verge of the great ocean, looking out westward
to the expanse. If she launch at all, she must launch with the
fearless heart that is ready to brave old ocean,--to take him with
his gigantic western waves--to face his winds and hurricanes--his
summer heats of the dead-still tropics--his winter blasts--his
fairy icebergs--his fogs like palpable darkness--his hail-blasts
and his snow. Britain has done so. From her island-home, she has
sailed east and west, north and south. She has gone outwardly, and
planted empires. The States themselves, now her compeer, were an
offshoot from her island territory. Her destiny is to plant out
nations, and the spirit of colonization is the genius that presides
over her career. She plants out Canada, Australia, New Zealand,
and the Cape. Ceylon and the Mauritius she occupies for trade.
India she covers with a network of law, framed and woven in her
Anglo-Saxon loom. She clutches China, and begins at last to break
up the celestial solecism. She lays hold of Borneo, and straightway
piratical prahus are seen wrecked and stranded on the shore, or
blown to fragments in the air. She raises an impregnable fortress
at the entrance of the Mediterranean, and another in its centre, as
security to her sea-borne trade. She does the same in embryo at the
entrance to the Red Sea. Westward from Newfoundland, she traverses
a continent, and there, in the Pacific, Vancouver’s Island,
which may one day become the New Great Britain of new Anglo-Saxon
enterprise, destined to carry civilization to the innumerable
islands of the great sea--bears the union-jack for its island
banner, and acknowledges the sovereignty of the British Crown.
At Singapore, she has provisionally made herself mistress of the
Straits of Malacca; and thousands of miles away on the other hand,
at the Falkland Islands, near to the Land of Fire, the British
mariner may hear the voice of praise issuing in the Anglo-Saxon
tongue. In addition to this, she has representatives at every
court, and consuls at every sea-port. Her cruisers bear her flag
on every navigable sea. Europeans, Asiatics, Africans, Americans,
and Australians, are found wearing her uniform, eating her bread,
bearing her arms, and contributing to extend her dominion.--_North
British Review._
_Ancient and Modern London._
It is interesting, beyond a merely antiquarian point of view, to
trace the progress of London from a walled town, covering about 700
acres, with a population half mercantile, half military, living in
a labyrinth of courts and alleys, the majority being, as appears
from an old proclamation, “_heaped up together, and in a sort,
half smothered_.” Let us compare this with the majestic city of
our day, spreading over more than 120 square miles, and containing
2600 miles of streets, flanked by 360,000 inhabited houses, with a
population of 3,000,000, and an assessed rental of 13,000,000_l._
Modern London embraces important portions of the four adjacent
counties, and has swallowed up not only the old district, which
is still designated “the City,” and its ancient suburbs, but
numberless places formerly existing as distinct towns, villages,
and hamlets, which in days gone by had their separate systems
of local government. Under the present regulations, the Central
Criminal Court district extends over an area of more than 700
square miles, including all Middlesex, and parts of Surrey, Kent,
Essex, and Hertfordshire; which is also about the area of the
Metropolitan Police District.--_Alexander Pulling_; _Law Magazine_,
N.S., No. xxviii.
_Potatoes the national food of the Irish._
There is one instance, and only one, of a great European people
possessing a very cheap national food. In Ireland the labouring
classes have for more than two hundred years been principally fed
by potatoes, which were introduced into their country late in the
sixteenth or early in the seventeenth century. Now, the peculiarity
of the potato is, that until the appearance of the late disease,
it was, and perhaps still is, cheaper than any other food equally
wholesome. If we compare its reproductive power with the amount
of nutriment contained in it, we find that one acre of average
land sown with potatoes will support twice as many persons as the
same quantity of land sown with wheat. The consequence is, that
in a country where men live on potatoes, the population will,
if other things are tolerably equal, increase twice as fast as
in a country where they live on wheat. And so it has actually
occurred: until a few years ago, the population in Ireland, in
round numbers, increased annually three per cent.; the population
of England during the same period increasing one and a half per
cent.--_Buckle’s History of Civilization._
_Irish-speaking Population._
There were in Ireland at the time of the Census of 1861, 1,105,536
persons who spoke Irish. 163,275 of them spoke Irish only; the
other 942,261 spoke both Irish and English. Of those who spoke
Irish only, 3,075 were in the civic districts and 160,200 in the
rural districts. That the number is declining is obvious from the
circumstance that the proportion under 20 years of age was less
than a third. 77,818 were in Connaught (in a population of less
than a million), 62,039 in Munster, 23,180 in Ulster, only 238 in
all Leinster.
_Our Colonial Empire._
The Colonies of Great Britain comprise altogether 3,350,000
square miles, and cost us for management 3,350,000_l._ per annum,
or just about a pound a mile. They have an aggregate revenue
of 11,000,000_l._, and owe among them 27,000,000_l._, or just
two years and a half’s income. They import goods to the amount
of 60,000,000_l._ yearly--half from ourselves, and half from
all the rest of the world. They export produce to the value of
50,000,000_l._, of which three-fifths come to this kingdom; and
all this is done by a population which is under 10,000,000 in the
aggregate, and of which only 5,000,000 are whites. Add to these
figures, says the _Spectator_, 900,000 square miles for India, and
200,000,000 of people with a trade of 71,000,000_l._, and we have
a result that _the Queen reigns ever nearly one-third of the land
of the earth, and nearly a fourth of its population_. If a British
vizier under the Emperor should, as it seems probable, rule China,
Englishmen will directly control _more than half the human race_!
Our Colonies may be grouped or classed as North American,
Australian, Mediterranean, Atlantic, West Indian, Eastern, and
African. In extent of territory no Colonies approach those of
Australia. The palm of debt belongs to Canada, that of cost to
the Mediterranean settlements, that of commerce to the Australian
Colonies again. This great show of trade is owing to the precious
character of their produce. Of the gross exports of 50,000,000_l._
they claim 22,000,000_l._, and cost little or nothing for garrisons
all the while. In 1860, 250,000_l._ paid the entire military
expenditure on this group of our dependencies; but New Zealand,
which only stood at 100,000_l._ then, is probably not managed for
that figure now. We can see but little trace of its gold-fields
in the return before us, which throws all the weight upon New
South Wales and Victoria. The former of these settlements exported
in 1860 produce to the value of 5,000,000_l._; the latter (and
here come the gold-ships) no less than 13,000,000_l._ worth of
goods. Three-fourths of this, too, came to England, whereas in
the export-trade of New South Wales three-fourths went to foreign
countries. Victoria also imported very largely from us, as did the
other Colonies of the group, standing, in the whole, for more than
half the sum total of this column.
Taking population and area into consideration, the trade done
by the West Indies is not a bad one. There are but 54,000 white
people in all these islands, yet they export goods to the value of
6,000,000_l._, and import about the same. Most of the settlements
are somewhat in debt--Jamaica above the others; but even Jamaica
does not owe three years’ income, whereas Canada owes eight. The
total revenue of the West Indian Colonies in 1860 was not quite a
million; the total debt was not quite a million and a half. But the
most curious specimen in the return is Heligoland. The area of this
British Colony is one-third of a square mile. On that territory a
population of 2,172 souls maintains itself, and buys 13,000_l._
worth of foreign produce every year. Heligoland has also a revenue;
but Heligoland has a public debt likewise, and is behind the world
to the extent of nearly 5,000_l._
The contrast of the statistics of India with these Colonial totals
will develope some remarkable facts. The mere area of India, large
as it is, scarcely exceeds one-fourth of the gross area of the
Colonies, but it is infinitely more populous and wealthy. Its
900,000 square miles contain fifteen times as many inhabitants
as all the rest of the Colonies together; its annual revenue is
four times as great; its public debt four times as heavy. But
its commerce is wonderful. The exports of all the Colonies, even
including the produce of the gold-fields, amount to 50,000,000_l._
only, and to no more than 27,000,000_l._ apart from the exports
of Australia. India, however, exported in 1860 goods to the
value of 34,000,000_l._, of which 15,000,000_l._ worth came to
us; and purchased in return 22,000,000_l._ worth from us, and
12,000,000_l._ worth from other countries. Add to this, that its
cost is nothing. Under every item of charge, military as well as
civil, the return in the case of India is _nil_. Where the rest
of the Colonies figure for upwards of 3,000,000_l._ in the way
of cost, India makes no demand whatever. That great Empire could
supply us with almost everything we want. It could send us tea and
silk when China fails; and if there can be any adequate substitute
for the American cotton-fields, it is in India that we must seek
it. It supplies us, too, with the invaluable advantage of a sphere
of action and an honourable career for our adventurous youth, and
all this it does without costing us a farthing, and without costing
its own people more than they receive in value.--_Parliamentary
Return_, 1863.
_The English People._
Mr. Craufurd, the ethnologist, has, in these few sentences,
described the people of England: “They are,” he tells us, “among
the most mixed people in the world: but the admixtures always
having been of high order, no deterioration has resulted. Teutonic
invasions appear to have been early made on the coasts of Britain,
and the people who offered so brave a resistance to Cæsar were
probably German settlers. The Romans, for four centuries, occupied
all the best parts of the land, leaving the remains of the
primitive peoples in the sterile and mountainous districts, which
it would have been difficult to subdue, and unprofitable to keep
in subjugation. The Romans, accompanied by few women, necessarily
intermarried with the British. After them came the Teutonic Jutes,
Saxons, Angles, Frisians, Danes, and Norwegians--the latter came
over by mere boatloads; but in the course of several generations
they attained, by their superior valour--for in number they never
approached that of the original inhabitants--to the position of
invaders, and spread their own language and institutions over the
land. The Normans came next, but they were too few in number to
overthrow the Saxon element; and all they have accomplished has
been to add considerably to the Saxon vocabulary. We are not then,
as a race, exclusively Britons, or exclusively Saxon, but a great
deal more of the former than the latter.”
Dignities and Distinctions.
_Worth of Heraldry._
The only individuals who affect to sneer at heraldic pursuits and
studies are those of apocryphal gentility, or whose ancestral
reminiscences are associated with the rope sinister, or some
such distinctive badge. Heraldry is, however, a branch of the
hieroglyphical language, and the only branch which has been handed
down to us with a recognised key. It in many cases represents
the very names of persons, their birth, family, and alliances;
in others it illustrates their ranks and titles; and in all
_is_, or rather _was_, a faithful record of their illustrious
deeds, represented by signs imitative and conventional. Taking
this view of the question, it is evident that it is capable of
vast improvements: in fact, a well-emblazoned shield might be
made practically to represent, at a single glance, a synopsis
of biography, chronology, and history. Insignia of individuals
and races, which are of a kindred character with heraldry, at
least in its original form and design, may be recognised among
the nations of antiquity, and may perhaps be carried back to the
primeval ages of Egyptian history. The Israelites, from their long
captivity familiarized with such objects, naturally adopted them
as distinguishing characteristics; and Sir W. Drummond believed
that the twelve tribes adopted the signs of the zodiac as their
respective ensigns; “nor,” as has been observed, “does the supposed
allusion to those signs by Jacob imply anything impious, magical,
or offensive to the Deity.”
The heraldry (?) of the heroic ages may be traced in the pages
of Homer and Æschylus; and in the succeeding generations we have
testimony of the adoption of a sort of armorial bearings by
the princes of Greece. Omitting Nicias, Lamachus, Alcibiades,
and others on record, we will merely observe that the arms of
Niochorus, who slew Lysander, were a dragon, thus realizing the
prediction of the oracle,
Fly from Oplites’ watery strand;
The earth-born serpent too beware.
Nor were mottos by any means unfrequent. The shield which
Demosthenes so pusillanimously threw away was inscribed “To good
Fortune.”
The animals which are frequently represented within shields on
the Roman vases sufficiently establish the fact, that this usage
was common amongst that great people; and the striking example of
a goat, on a specimen in the British Museum, might, by analogy,
without any great stretch of imagination, be ascribed to the family
of _Caprus_!
Students of heraldry are commonly great enthusiasts; so that, in
its pursuit, they are apt to depreciate more important subjects.
We remember to have heard an amateur herald, who had filled all
his windows with arms of his own painting, condemn Mr. Salt’s
collection of Egyptian Antiquities in terms of unmistakeable
contempt!
_Heralds’ College._
The corporation of the College of Arms consists of 13
officers--namely, three Kings of Arms (Garter, Clarenceux, and
Norroy), and, we believe, six heralds and four pursuivants.
According to a Parliamentary Return, the most onerous of their
duties is the preservation and safe custody of the vast mass of
records and evidences which relate to the genealogical history,
pedigrees, and arms of the nobility and gentry of England, from
the earliest period to the present time. These officers have
no Government grant, but they are household servants of the
Crown, under the Earl Marshal; and their duty as such consists
in the ordering and conducting all public funerals, such State
ceremonials as coronations, and other ceremonials where the
person of the Sovereign is more immediately concerned. For these
services they receive salaries, the aggregate amount of which to
the 13 officers is 252_l._ 18_s._ per annum. In their capacity of
household servants they also receive certain fees on the creation
of dignities and upon the installation of Knights of the Garter,
paid by the persons on whom such honours are conferred. A herald
and a pursuivant answer all public inquiries, make such searches
as may be required, and give official extracts from records; the
fees received for such searches and extracts amounted to 94_l._
in 1861. From all these sources, therefore, they received 600_l._
in that year. The officers of arms are the agents through whom
applications are made to the Earl Marshal (acting in this behalf on
the part of the Crown) for the registration of armorial bearings,
or the solicitation of the Royal licence for a change of name,
or change of name and arms. For the one case it becomes the duty
of the officers of arms to see that no memorial be presented to
the Earl Marshal by any individual not occupying a fit station
in life for such distinction; and in the other that no petition
be, through them, presented to the Crown, the allegations of
which have not been, before such presentation, fully established,
inasmuch as the Crown accepts and endorses such allegations, and
directs the Earl Marshal to make them matter of record. The number
of these patents and grants of arms or change of name or arms has
been 869 in the period from 1850 to 1862 inclusive. The fees taken
upon them are:--For grants on voluntary applications, 66_l._ 10_s._
and 10_l._ stamp duty; under Royal licences, 66_l._ 10_s._ and
48_l._ 17_s._ 6d. for exemplifications, 3_l._ 10s. of which goes
to the Home-office; for grants of supporters, 55_l._; for grants
to wives or spinsters, 53_l._ and 10_l._ stamp duty; for grants
of quarterings, 42_l._ 10_s._ and 10_l._ stamp duty; for grants
of crests, 42_l._ 10_s._ and 10_l._ stamp duty; and for change
of name, 44_l._ 13_s._, whereof 10_l._ 2_s._ 6_d._ goes to the
Home-office.
_The Shamrock._
Mrs. Lankester describes the Wood-sorrel (_Oxalis acetosella_)
as easily recognised by its three delicately-green leaflets with
longish stalks, marked with a darkish crescent in the centre,
veined, and its lovely white flowers which at first sight resemble
the wood-anemone. There are few walks or shady woods where, in the
early spring, the bright half-folded green leaves of this pretty
little plant may not be found. The tiny white flowers with their
delicate purple veins are called, by the Welsh, “fairy bells,”
and are believed to ring the merry peals which call the elves
to “moonlight dancing and revelry.” Among the Druids its triple
leaflets were regarded as a mysterious symbol of a Trinity, the
full meaning of which was involved in darkness. So, too, St.
Patrick chose this leaf as his symbol to illustrate the doctrine
he sought to teach, and converted many by the apt use of an
illustration derived from a plant already sacred in the eyes of his
hearers. The original shamrock was undoubtedly the Oxalis, though
the name became applied to all sorts of trefoiled plants.
It is, however, suspected that any three-leaved plant may be
called the shamrock, the wood-sorrel no more undoubtedly than the
Dutch clover, all leaves of this kind having been beheld with
superstitious veneration, as possessing--
The holy trefoil’s charm.
_Irish Titles of Honour._
Titles of honour are still borne by the representatives of some of
the old Milesian families in Ireland. Some of these titles have
become extinct in course of time, such as the M‘Carty More, the
White Knight, the O’Sullivan Bear, the O’Moore, &c., and some have
been merged in peerages. The O’Bryens in the titles of Thomond (now
extinct) and Inchiquin, the O’Neills in an Earldom (extinct), the
O’Callaghan in Lord Lismore, and the descendant and representative
of the O’Byrnes in Lord de Tabley. But the following titles are
still preserved and generally acknowledged:--
These are the O’Donoghue of the Glens, the O’Conor Don,
the Knight of Kerry, the Knight of Glen, the O’Grady, the
M‘Gillicuddy of the Reeks; and the M‘Dermot, Prince of Coolvain.
The two first of these represent Irish constituencies, and it is
believed are the only Irish chieftains who have adhered to the
national religion; all the others are Protestants. Indeed, it
is a curious circumstance that while we see the O’Neills, the
O’Briens, the O’Callaghans, the O’Byrnes, indeed almost all the
lineal descendants of the old Irish families, staunch Protestants
(some of them even Orangemen; the late Lord O’Neill was Grand
Master of the Orangemen); we find, on the other hand, that the
leading Roman Catholic nobility and gentry in Ireland are mostly
of English and Protestant extraction. Thus the Brownes, Earls of
Kenmare, came over originally in the reign of Queen Elizabeth;
and being Protestants obtained large grants of the O’Donoghue
property in Kerry, forfeited by Roderick O’Donoghue, in the reign
of Elizabeth, and by Geoffrey O’Donoghue, “dead in rebellion,”
in the reign of her successor. The Earls of Kenmare are now, as
is well known, at the head of the Irish Roman Catholic peerage,
and so of the Dillons, Plunkets, Burkes, Nugents, Prestons, and
other Irish Roman Catholic families of importance; they are all,
with few exceptions, of English and Protestant descent, while we
have seen that the descendants of the native Irish are almost all
Protestants.
_The Scotch Thistle._
Many different species have been dignified with the name of Scotch
Thistle. It is probable, say some authorities, that a common
species, such as _Carduus lanceolatus_, is most deserving the
name. Some have fixed on doubtful native species, such as _Silybum
Marianum_ and _Onopordum Acanthium_. Neither of these is, however,
reconcilable with history. _S. Marianum_ is appropriated by the
Roman Catholic Church, who say the white marking on the foliage is
commemorative of the milk of the Virgin Mary. _O. Acanthium_ is
not only, like the last, a doubtful original species to Scotland,
but, like _C. lanceolatus_, of much too great a height; for one
historian says that, after the landing of Queen Scota, she reviewed
her troops; and, being fatigued, retired; and, on sitting down,
was pricked by a thistle; from which circumstance she adopted it
as the arms of her new country, with the motto, _Nemo me impune
laccssit_. Another says, on the eve of an attack by the Danes, one
of the enemy having trod on a thistle, cried out with pain, which
gave intimation to the Scots of their near presence; and hence
the thistle became dignified as the arms of the country. With
these two exceptions, we meet with no other reference to a matter
of equal importance, in an historical point of view, with that
of the legends in connexion with the Coronation Stone, which all
historians have treated on with great minuteness.
However, if any reliance may be placed on the authorities above
given, it is quite clear that it must have been a low-growing
species like _Cnivus acaule_; for, whether we take into
consideration the accident to the Queen or the bare-footed Dane,
or the configuration of the flower-head itself, it more closely
resembles the representations we find on many of the sculptured
stones than either of the others. Some have supposed it to be
_Carduus acanthoides_; but this, as well as all the rest, is less
formidably furnished with those strong spiny scales with which
the receptacle of _Silybum Marianum_ is so amply provided. This
circumstance agrees with the sculptured representations found on
the oldest parts of Stirling Castle, Linlithgow Palace, or Holyrood
House, especially with one on the top of a garden doorway opposite
the new fountain, in front of the entrance to the latter, which
is more like the head of _Cynara Scolymus_, the globe artichoke,
a native of the South of Europe, than any thistle in the world.
Uncertain as the Scotch are regarding the species of their national
emblem, or even of its being a native, they are no more so than the
English are regarding the species of rose they have adopted. No
double rose existed in Britain at the period it was introduced into
the national escutcheon; therefore, it must have been borrowed from
the French; who even, in their turn, cannot now tell what species
of iris their _fleur-de-lis_ is meant to represent. Nor are the
Irish agreed as to whether their shamrock is derived from a series
of Trifolium, or from _Oxalis acetosella_. The ancient Britons, as
the Welsh call themselves, have adopted the leek, _Allium porum_, a
native of Switzerland.--_Scottish Farmer._
_King and Queen._
It is curious to find Lord Buckhurst and Recorder Fleetwood engaged
in a conversation on the excellency of the regal dignity of a King,
as they rode from London to Windsor in the reign of Elizabeth,
(1575,) in the company of the Earl of Leicester, who travelled
according to his own pompous notions, with divers knights and
noble gentlemen, and a princely cavalcade of attendants. Mr.
Recorder, riding between my Lord of Leicester and Lord Buckhurst,
as they passed “alonge by Saint James’s walles,” began the debate;
when the great lawyer laid down:[4]
“I doe read that this worde Kinge is a Saxon terme, and doe
originallye comme and growe out of this ould Saxon word cyninȝ,
which doth signefie a cuninge, a wyse, a virtuous, a polleticque,
and a prudent person, fitt to governe as well in peace as in
warres; and this word Queene, in the same tongue, is in effect
of the same force, referringe the same to the female sex, and
therefore it is to be noted that the crowne of England is not
alwayes bound especiallye to be governed by the male; but yf
there wante heyres males, then ought it to descend to the heyres
females, as it appeareth by the judgmente given touchinge the
dawghters of Zelophehad (xxvi. 33 Numbers), and as it did in the
tyme of the Bryttons descend upon Queen Cordeila, who was queene
of this realme before the Incarnation of Christ 805 years, even
at that tyme that the good King Ozias did repayer the cittye
of Jerusalem, which was in the yeare of the worlde 3358. This
Cordeila was dawghter of Kinge Leire, who buylded the auntient
cittye of Leicester; yea, and is it a most true and playne
matter, that the crowne of England maye descend and come to the
female dawghter, where there lacketh heyre male, as it did unto
Mawde the Empresse, who was dawghter to Kinge Henrye the First,
and by the meane that William, Mary, and Richard, the children
of the same King Henry the First, were drowned in the seas by
shipwracke, it soe fell out the said Mawde the Empresse became
sole heyre, and notwithstandinge an ynterruption made by Kinge
Stephen the intruder (for that is his proper addition in the
antient chronicles), yett the judgmente fell out for her parte,
and she and her posteritye, even to this daye, have justlye and
most rightfullye enjoyed the crowne without any enterclayme of
anye person that ever hath bine heard of.” To this Leicester
replies: “I see that this is a greate and good proofe that the
female hath had and enjoyed the crowne of England by just and
lawfull tytle,” &c.--_Archæologia_, xxxvii.
_Title of Majesty, and the Royal “We.”_
It is a common error to suppose Charles V. to have been the
originator of this sovereign title. Its earliest use is to denote
the dignity of the Roman people. Thence the Emperors borrowed
it as the representatives of the people, in accordance with the
Lex Regia. They were called “Majestas Augusta,” and even “Regia
Majestas.” In later times this title was applied to the Emperor
Louis the Pious; and Charles the Bald assumes it in one of his
charters. It is also found attributed to some of the Popes. Charles
V. at most gave it fixity and continuance, instead of its being
adopted and discontinued by turns. Francis I. of France, at the
interview with Henry VIII. of England, on the Field of the Cloth
of Gold, addressed the latter as “Your Majesty,” 1520. James I.
coupled with this title the term, “Sacred,” and “Most Excellent
Majesty.”
The royal “We” represents, or was supposed originally to represent,
the source of the national power, glory, and intellect, in the
august power of the Sovereign. “Le Roi le veut”--the King will have
it so--sounded as arrogantly as it was meant to sound in the royal
Norman mouth. It is a mere form, now that royalty in England has
been relieved of responsibility. In haughtiness of expression it
was matched by the old French formula at the end of a decree: “For
such is our good pleasure.” The royal subscription in Spain is “Yo,
el Re,” _I, the King_. The first “King’s speech” ever delivered
was by Henry I., in 1107. Exactly a century later, King John first
assumed the royal “We:” it had never before been employed in
England. The same monarch was the first English King who claimed
for England the sovereignty of the seas. “Grace,” and “my Liege”
were the ordinary titles by which our Henry VI. was addressed.
“Excellent Grace” was given to Henry VI., who was not the one, nor
yet had the other. Edward IV. was “Most High and Mighty Prince.”
Henry VII. was the first English Highness.
“_Dieu et Mon Droit._”
The earliest notice that has been found of the Sovereign’s present
motto, “Dieu et mon Droit,” is in the 13th Henry VI., 1435, when a
gown, embroidered with silver crowns, and with the motto “Dieu et
mon Droit,” is mentioned in a roll at Carlton-ride.--_Sir Harris
Nicolas_; _Archæologia_ vol. xxxi.
_Plume and Motto of the Prince of Wales._
Dr. Doran, F.S.A., has thus briefly told their history, profiting
in his inquiry by the researches of Sir Harris Nicolas:--“Old
Randall Holmes solved the difficulty in his summary way, by
asserting that the ostrich feathers were the blazon on the
war-banner of the ancient Britons. The only thing that in any way
resembles the triple feathers in ancient British heraldry is to be
found on the azure shield of arms of King Roderick Mawr, on which
the tails of that monarch’s three lions are seen coming between
their legs, and turning over their backs, with the gentle fall of
the tips, like the graceful bend of the feathers in the Prince’s
badge. The feathers themselves, however, do not appear in connexion
with our Princes of Wales until after the battle in which the blind
King of Bohemia lost his life. The crest of the Bohemian monarch
was an eagle’s wing; as for the motto of _Ich dien_, it was assumed
by the Prince to characterize his humility, in accordance with a
fashion followed to a late period even by princesses--Elizabeth of
York, for instance, took that of “Humble and Reverent.” Edward of
Woodstock, therefore, did not adopt either the badge or the legend
of the dead King of Bohemia; such is the conclusion at which nearly
all persons who have examined into this difficult question have
arrived. Nevertheless, John, Count of Luxemburg, was the original
style and title of him who was elected King of Bohemia, and fell
so bravely and unnecessarily at Cressy. Now, the ostrich feather
_was_ a distinction of Luxemburg; and it is from such origin that
the Princes of Wales derive the graceful plumes, which are their
distinguishing badge, but not their crest. This much is stated
by Sir H. Nicolas, in the _Archæologia_ (xxxi. 252); and Mr.
D’Eyncourt (_Gent. Mag._ xxxvi. 621) suggests that the King of
Bohemia’s crest looks more like ostrich feathers than a vulture’s
wing. The question may be considered as having been set at rest by
John de Ardern. He was a physician, contemporary with the Black
Prince; and in a manuscript of his in the Sloane Collection (76 fo.
61), Ardern distinctly states that the Prince derived the feathers
from the blind King. In the directions given in this will for the
funeral procession, banners bearing the arms of France and England
quarterly, and others with the ostrich-plume, are respectively
described as those of war and peace. The ostrich symbolised
Justice, its feathers being nearly all of equal length.”
_Victoria._
The first time this name occurs in English history is as belonging
to a “Mastres (Mistress) Victoria,” who was one of the attendants,
“Gentylwomen,” upon Queen Katherine, when she accompanied her
husband, Henry VIII., to the gorgeous meeting of the Field of the
Cloth of Gold (June, 1520). Each gentylwoman was allowed “a woman,
ij men servantes, and ijj horses.” And the Queen had 265 of all
ranks, and they in turn had 999, making the total number 1260
persons. The King’s retinue amounted to 4544; Wolsey had above 400.
_English Crowns._
The crowns worn in former times by the kings of England have varied
much in form and material. The Saxon kings had a crown consisting
of a simple fillet of gold. Egbert improved its appearance by
placing on the fillet a row of points or rays; and after him,
Edmond _Ironside_ tipped these points with pearl; William the
Conqueror had on his coronet points and leaves placed alternately,
each point being tipped with three pearls, while the whole crown
was surmounted with a cross. William Rufus discontinued the
leaves. Henry I. had a row of _fleur-de-lis_; from this time to
Edward III. the crown was variously ornamented with points and
fleur-de-lis, placed alternately; but this monarch enriched his
crown with fleur-de-lis and crosses alternately, as at present.
Edward IV. was the first who wore a close crown, with two arches
of gold, embellished with pearls; and the same form, with trifling
variations, has been continued to the present day. The English
crown, called the “St. Edward’s crown,” was made in imitation
of the ancient crown said to be worn by that monarch, kept in
Westminster Abbey till the beginning of the Civil Wars in England,
when, with the rest of the regalia, it was seized and sold in 1642.
A new crown was prepared for the coronation of Charles II.: it is
set with pearls and precious stones, as diamonds, rubies, emeralds,
sapphires; it has a mound of gold on the top, enriched with a
fillet of the same metal, covered also with precious stones; the
cap is of purple velvet, lined with white silk, and turned up with
ermine.
_The Imperial State Crown._
Professor Tennant, the well-known mineralogist, thus minutely
describes the Imperial State Crown of Her Majesty Queen Victoria,
which was made by Messrs. Rundell and Bridge in the year 1838, with
jewels taken from old Crowns, and others furnished by command of
her Majesty:
The Crown consists of diamonds, pearls, rubies, sapphires, and
emeralds, set in silver and gold; it has a crimson velvet cap
with ermine border, and is lined with white silk. Its gross
weight is 39 oz. 5 dwts. troy. The lower part of the band,
above the ermine border, consists of a row of one hundred and
twenty-nine pearls, and the upper part of the band a row of one
hundred and twelve pearls, between which, in front of the Crown,
is a large sapphire (partly drilled), purchased for the Crown by
His Majesty King George the Fourth. At the back is a sapphire
of smaller size, and six other sapphires (three on each side),
between which are eight emeralds.
Above and below the seven sapphires are fourteen diamonds, and
around the eight emeralds one hundred and twenty-eight diamonds.
Between the emeralds and sapphires are sixteen trefoil ornaments,
containing one hundred and sixty diamonds. Above the band are
eight sapphires surmounted by eight diamonds, between which are
eight festoons consisting of one hundred and forty-eight diamonds.
In front of the Crown, and in the centre of a diamond Maltese
cross, is the famous ruby said to have been given to Edward
Prince of Wales, son of Edward the Third, called the Black
Prince, by Don Pedro, King of Castile, after the battle of
Najera, near Vittoria, A.D. 1367. This ruby was worn in the
helmet of Henry the Fifth at the battle of Agincourt, A.D. 1415.
It is pierced quite through after the Eastern custom, the upper
part of the piercing being filled up by a small ruby. Around this
ruby, to form the cross, are seventy-five brilliant diamonds.
Three other Maltese crosses, forming the two sides and back of
the Crown, have emerald centres, and contain respectively one
hundred and thirty-two, one hundred and twenty-four, and one
hundred and thirty brilliant diamonds.
Between the four Maltese crosses are four ornaments in the form
of the French fleur-de-lis, with four rubies in the centres, and
surrounded by rose diamonds, containing respectively eighty-five,
eighty-six, and eighty-seven rose diamonds.
From the Maltese crosses issue four imperial arches composed of
oak-leaves and acorns; the leaves containing seven hundred and
twenty-eight rose, table, and brilliant diamonds; thirty-two
pearls forming the acorns, set in cups containing fifty-four rose
diamonds and one table diamond. The total number of diamonds in
the arches and acorns is one hundred and eight brilliants, one
hundred and sixteen table, and five hundred and fifty-nine rose
diamonds.
From the upper part of the arches are suspended four large
pendent pear-shaped pearls, with rose diamond caps, containing
twelve rose diamonds, and stems containing twenty-four very small
rose diamonds. Above the arch stands the mound, containing in the
lower hemisphere three hundred and four brilliants, and in the
upper two hundred and forty-four brilliants; the zone and arc
being composed of thirty-three rose diamonds. The cross on the
summit has a rose-cut sapphire in the centre, surrounded by four
large brilliants, and one hundred and eight smaller brilliants.
The following is the summary of jewels comprised in the Crown:--
1 Large ruby, irregularly polished.
1 Large broad-spread sapphire.
16 Sapphires.
11 Emeralds.
4 Rubies.
1363 Brilliant diamonds.
1273 Rose diamonds.
147 Table diamonds.
4 Drop-shaped pearls.
273 Pearls.
It is difficult to declare what is the precise value of the jewels
in the Queen’s crown; but it is confidently affirmed that, unlike
most other princely crowns in Europe, whether of kings, emperors,
or grand dukes, all the jewels in the British crown are really
precious stones; whereas in other state crowns valuable stones have
been replaced by coloured glass, and the consequence is that their
estimated value is far beyond what such crown jewels are really
worth.
_Queen’s Messengers._
The Queen’s foreign-service Messengers are fifteen in number. The
first three for service are obliged to be in attendance at the
Foreign-office. Formerly there was no distinction between them
and the home-service messengers; they were all under the Lord
Chamberlain, and their connexion with his office is said to be the
origin of the silver greyhound pendent from their badge. At a later
period they were transferred to the Secretaries of State, and took
journeys abroad indifferently in their turn, but in 1824 there
was a separation into home and foreign service. Lord Malmesbury
reduced the number of foreign-service messengers from eighteen to
fifteen; and these are found quite sufficient, owing to the greater
speed with which journeys are now performed, and the introduction
of the electric telegraph rendering many journeys unnecessary. The
Queen’s messengers formerly had very small salaries, only 60_l._
a year, but made large profits by mileage and other allowances
when employed. The situation was worth 800_l._ or 900_l._ a year;
it has been altered to a salary of 525_l._ and the travelling
expenses. This was considered by the messengers too great a
reduction of their income. Earl Russell has introduced a new plan,
giving them salaries of 400_l._ a year and 1_l._ a day for their
personal expenses while employed abroad, besides their travelling
expenses. Queen’s messengers are treated with great kindness and
consideration abroad; they are usually invited to the Minister’s
table. They are examined on appointment by the Civil Service
Commissioners: the qualifications required are an age between
twenty-five and thirty-five, some knowledge of French, German,
or Italian, and ability to ride on horseback. The home-service
messengers occupy a very inferior position.
_Presents and Letters to the Queen._
The resolution of the Royal Family to decline all presents was
conveyed, in 1847, to a gentleman at Sheffield, in the following
official letter from Sir Denis Le Marchant:--“Whitehall, Oct.
5, 1847: In the absence of Secretary Sir George Grey, I have to
acknowledge the receipt of a small box, containing a gold bijou,
sent by you to the Queen, as a present for his Royal Highness the
Prince of Wales; but, in consequence of the very great number of
presents of this nature which have been offered to her Majesty, it
has been found absolutely necessary, to avoid the possibility of
giving individual offence, that her Majesty should decline presents
generally, and the box is therefore declined.” [This rule is not,
however, invariably observed.]
Again, it is contrary to established rule for the Lord Chamberlain
to receive any letter addressed to Her Majesty, _if the same be
sealed_.
Sir C. B. Phipps explains in a letter the absence of her Majesty’s
name from the subscription-list for the widow of the late Captain
Harrison, of the _Great Eastern_. He states: “It is contrary to
established rule for her Majesty the Queen, or the Prince Consort,
to join a subscription for a private individual.”
_The Prince of Waterloo._
It will be recollected that, in 1815, the Duke of Wellington
received the grant of Prince of Waterloo, which was understood
to have been given to his Grace and to his direct descendants.
After the death of the Duke in 1852, the question of succession to
the title was discussed in the Belgian House of Representatives,
when, in reply to a request for information upon the subject,
M. Frère-Oban stated that, upon inquiry, he had learned that
the direct line of the Duke of Wellington was not extinct; for
although the rights claimed by his son were contested, because at
the time of his birth the system of registration was imperfect or
irregular, yet it had subsequently been proved by other means, and
particularly by an inscription in a family Bible, that the present
Duke was the legitimate offspring of the first Prince of Waterloo,
and as such was entitled to be recognised as one of the direct
lineal descendants who were included in the original grant.
_The See of London._
It may not be generally known that the See of London was
archiepiscopal in the time of the ancient Britons, before the
mission of Augustine. In the thousand years which intervened
between his era and that of the Reformation, the See of London
numbered no less than eighty prelates, the most distinguished
of whom were St. Dunstan, Warham, Courtenay, and Bonner, the
last of whom was deprived by King Edward VI., and again, after
his temporary restoration under Queen Mary, by Elizabeth. The
reformed list commences with Bishop Ridley, who was burnt at
Oxford under Queen Mary; and from whom the present occupant of
the See, Dr. Tait, is twenty-eighth in descent. Among those
prelates occur the names of Grindal, Bancroft, Abbott, Laud,
Juxon, and Sheldon, all of whom were eventually promoted to
archbishoprics--Grindal to York, and the rest to Canterbury.
One prelate before the Reformation, Bishop Tonstal, and one
since that time, Bishop Montaigne, were translated from London
to the wealthier See of Durham; but from Dr. Sheldon, who held
the See after the Restoration, down to Dr. Howley, the immediate
predecessor of Bishop Blomfield, not a single instance occurs
either of a translation from the See of London, or of a direct
appointment to the bishopric, except by translation from another
see. The Diocese of London, until the last few years, comprised the
counties of Essex and Middlesex. By a recent enactment, however,
the former county has been transferred to the diocese of Rochester,
in exchange for the parishes of Charlton, Woolwich, Deptford,
Greenwich, and other suburban districts in the county of Kent. To
these at the next avoidance of the See of Winchester will be added
the whole of Southwark, Lambeth, Clapham, Wandsworth, Tooting, and
Battersea, together with one or two adjoining districts in the
county of Surrey.
_Expense of Baronetcy and Knighthood._
The fees chargeable on a Baronetcy in the Heralds’-office are
reported by Sir C. G. Young, Garter King-at-Arms, to amount to
21_l._ 2s. 3d. (payable to the Heralds’ College), besides which
there is a sum of 15_l._ 2s. 4d., “incidental to the creation of a
baronet,” and payable for the necessary certificate of his arms and
pedigree registered in the college, so that the sum total payable
to the Heralds’-office is 36_l._ 4s. 7d. The newly-created baronet,
it would appear, is further mulcted by the Crown-office in the sum
total of 257_l._ 9s. 1d., of which 120_l._ is for stamps, nearly
58_l._ for the royal household, and 21_l._ for the heralds.
The Knight Bachelor is required to pay a fee of 9_l._ 8s. 3d. if
the dignity is conferred by the Sovereign; 9_l._ 13s. 6d. if it is
conferred by patent; and 18_l._ 15s. 2d. when the knighthood is
conferred prior to the admission into the Order of the Bath as a
G.C.B. This is in the Heralds’-office. In the Crown-office a sum
of 155_l._ 12s. 10d. is exacted, of which 30_l._ is for stamps and
69_l._ 19s. 4d. for the royal household. As regards the Order of
the Bath, there are no fees chargeable by the Heralds’ College,
except on the preliminary grade of common Knighthood already
described.
The robes, collars, and badges for the Knights of the several
Orders are also very costly. The sum of 4625_l._ 10s. 7d. was
charged for items, including four silver boxes for the great
seal of the Order of the Garter for the Sultan and the King
of Sardinia, repairs of collars, ribands, stationery, &c. The
complete robes, of the Order of the Garter for the King of Sardinia
cost 346_l._, and the same for the Sultan (excepting the silver
under-dress), 279_l._ Two mantles of the Garter and one of the
Thistle cost 190_l._ The banner of the King of Sardinia in St.
George’s Chapel is charged by the herald painter at 27_l._ 17s. 6d.
The goldsmith charges 2378_l._ for 140 new military companions’
badges, at 16_l._ 9s. 9d. each; 195_l._ for fifteen new civil
commanders’ badges, at 13_l._ each; 302_l._ for 130 new civil
companions’ badges at 10_l._ 1s. 9½d. each; 157_l._ for nine new
silver enamelled stars (G.C.B.), at 17_l._ 10s. each; 261_l._ for
eighteen new military K.C.B. stars, at 14_l._ 10s.; and 295_l._ for
re-enamelling and “making as new” twelve collars and eighty-eight
badges, besides other items. These honours have, on some occasions,
been made as profitable to the Sovereign as to his officers of
State. James I. became the subject of much ridicule, not quite
unmerited, for putting honours to sale. He created the order of
baronet, which he disposed of for a sum of money; and it seems
that he sold common knighthood as low as _thirty pounds_, at least
it was so reported. In the old play of _Eastward Hoe_, one of the
characters says: “I know the man well: he is one of my thirty-pound
knights.”
_The Aristocracy._
Mr. Lothair Bucher, in the _Transactions of the Philological
Society_, Berlin, 1858, writes:
“One may safely affirm beforehand that the word ARISTOCRACY has
been part and parcel of the English language from a very early
period. But the Attorney-General in Horne Tooke’s trial (1795)
in enumerating the new opinions propagated by the friends of the
accused, and the new terms in which they conveyed those opinions,
says--‘To the rich was given the name _Aristocracy_;’ and in
considering this application of the term as a new one, he is
evidently quite correct.”
“Now,” writes a critic in the _Saturday Review_, “Aristocracy
is the name of a particular form of Government; it is an abuse
of language to apply it to a class of people. Yet, when one
says--‘the Government of Berne was an aristocracy,’ it is a very
slight change to speak of ‘the aristocracy of Berne,’ meaning the
patrician order, or its members. The word was doubtless brought
into use in England because the class which it was intended to
stigmatize as an ‘aristocracy’ was a class more extensive than
the ‘nobility,’ in the English use of that word. Now the name has
ceased to be a stigma. The words ‘aristocrat,’ ‘aristocratic,’
‘aristocracy,’ are often used in a complimentary way. But, to our
taste at least, there is always a smack of vulgarity about them.”
_Precedence in Parliament._
To the readers of the reports of parliamentary debates, in the
newspapers, it may be useful to state, upon the authority of Mr.
May, that “in the Commons no places are particularly allotted to
members; but it is the custom for the front bench on the right hand
of the (Speaker’s) chair to be appropriated for the members of the
Administration, which is called the Treasury or Privy Councillors’
Bench. The front bench on the opposite side is usually reserved
for the leading members of the Opposition who have served in
high offices of State; but other members occasionally sit there,
especially when they have any motion to offer to the House. And
on the opening of a new Parliament, the members for the city of
London claim the privilege of sitting on the Treasury or Privy
Councillors’ Bench.”--May, on the _Practice and Law of Parliament_.
_Sale of Seats in Parliament._
The smaller boroughs having been from the earliest period under the
command of neighbouring peers and gentlemen, or sometimes of the
Crown, were first observed to be attempted by rich capitalists in
the general elections of 1747 and 1755: though the prevalence of
bribery in a less degree is attested by the statute-book, and the
journals of Parliament from the Revolution, it seemed not to have
broken the flood-gates till the end of the reign of George II., or
rather perhaps the first part of the next. The sale at least of
seats in Parliament, like any other transferable property, is never
mentioned in any book that the writer remembers to have seen of an
earlier date than 1760. The country gentlemen had long endeavoured
to protect their ascendancy by excluding the rest of the community
from Parliament. This was the principle of the Bill, which, after
being repeatedly attempted, passed into a law during the long
administration of Anne, requiring every member of the Commons,
except those for the Universities, to possess, as a qualification
for his seat, a landed estate, above all incumbrance, of 300_l._
a-year. The law was, however, notoriously evaded; and was abolished
in 1858, by the Act 21 Vict. cap. 26.
_Placemen in Parliament._
In 1694 a bill passed both Houses “touching free and impartial
proceedings in Parliament,” against the eligibility of Placemen. On
its discussion Mr. Harley, afterwards Earl of Oxford, remarked,
that “in the 1st of James I., the Chancellor, studious of the good
of the kingdom, sent down to the House of Commons a list of the
members in office, and they were turned out of the House, and new
members chosen.” King William, however, refused his sanction to
this Act. “A Dutchman (says Mr. Burgh) comes over to Britain on
pretence of delivering us from slavery, and makes it one of his
first works to plunge us into the very vice which has enslaved all
the nations of the world that have ever lost their liberties. When
the Parliament passed a bill for incapacitating certain persons
who might be supposed obvious to Court influence, our _glorious
Deliverer_ refused the royal assent.”
_New Peers._
Nothing is more plausible than to talk of strengthening an order by
making it more popular in its constitution, &c.; but _practically_,
we know that in early days in England nothing was so _un_popular as
a batch of bran-new potentates. The proofs are abundant. When James
I. began scattering coronets (“_crownets_,” they called them in old
times), a wag issued a pamphlet which professed to teach people
“How to remember the names of the Nobility.”--_Hannay._
_The Russells._
Hereditary likeness is one of the commonest phenomena in the world,
and is an index of the moral resemblance which makes character of
a particular class run through a line, and thus, in free countries
like ours, produces hereditary politics and affects the fortunes of
the State, as was the case at Rome. “A Russell,” says Niebuhr, very
justly, “could not be an absolutist; the thing would be monstrous.”
This conviction is, no doubt, one excellent reason why Liberals
glorify the race with such constancy.--_Hannay._ [Is not this the
reason why Lord John Russell, when raised to the Peerage in 1861,
preferred to the Earl of Ludlow the title of Earl _Russell_? He
would not part with the glory.]
_Political Cunning._
The obtaining of the same ends by opposite means is exemplified as
follows:--Jack Cade, when he wanted to be _popular_, called himself
a Mortimer, and said his wife was a Lacy! The great Napoleon, to
win the Continent, on the contrary, professed that he belonged
to the _canaille_, though he knew, and his brother Joseph, and
all of them well knew, that the Buonapartes were good Italian
nobility.--_Hannay._
_The Union-Jack._
The term “Union-jack” is one which is partly of obvious
signification, and in part somewhat perplexing. The “Union” between
England and Scotland, to which the flag owed its origin, evidently
supplied the first half of the compound title borne by the flag
itself. But the expression “jack” involves some difficulty. Several
solutions of this difficulty have been submitted, but, with a
single exception only, they are by far too subtle to be considered
satisfactory. A learned and judicious antiquary has recorded it
as his opinion, that the flag of the Union received the title of
“Union-jack” from the circumstance of the union between England
and Scotland having taken place in the reign of King James, by
whose command the new flag was introduced. The name of the king
in French, “_Jaques_,” would have been certainly used in heraldic
documents: the union flag of king “Jaques” would very naturally
be called after the name of its royal author, _Jaques’ union_,
or _u_nion _Jaques_, and so by a simple process we arrive at
_u_nion-jack. This suggestion of the late Sir Harris Nicolas may
be accepted without any hesitation; and the term “jack” having
once been recognised as the title of _a_ flag, it is easy enough
to trace its application to _several_ flags. Thus the old white
flag with the red cross is now called the “St. George’s jack;” and
English seamen are in the habit of designating the national ensigns
of other countries as the “jacks” of France, Russia, &c.
We quote this sensible view from the _Art Journal_. The paper by
Sir Harris Nicolas above referred to will be found in the _Naval
and Military Magazine_ for 1827; and with engravings, in Brayley’s
_Historic and Graphic Illustrator_.
_Field-Marshal._
The title of Field-Marshal is one of comparatively modern date,
having been first created only so far back as the reign of George
I. In the _London Gazette_ for the month of January, 1736, we
find it announced that “His Majesty has been pleased to erect a
new post of honour, under the title of Marshal of the Armies of
Great Britain, and to confer the same on the Duke of Argyll and
the Earl of Orkney, as the two eldest generals in the service.”
The corresponding title up to that time would seem to have been
that of “captain-general,” which was subsequently revived, as a
distinction, in the person of William Duke of Cumberland, just
previous to the Rebellion of ’45, and again in that of the late
Duke of York in 1799. The title of field-marshal has been but
sparingly conferred--only about thirty individuals, exclusive of
royalty, having been gazetted as field-marshals during upwards of
120 years.
_Change of Surname._
The _usage_ at the Home Office in dealing with applications for
Change of Name has been thus stated by the Secretary, Sir George
Grey, there being no written law on the subject:
“About two hundred years ago, the practice of applying for
permission to change names arose; and in 1783, in consequence
of the frequency of the request, it was deemed necessary to put
some check on it. A regulation was, therefore, made that all
cases should be referred to the College of Arms. That reference
is not, however, necessarily decisive, as it is intended only
for the information of the department. That usage has been
universally adopted, subject to the modification introduced by
Sir Robert Peel, that where there are no plausible grounds for
an application, and it is obviously the mere result of whim or
caprice, it should be at once declined, without any reference to
the College of Arms, leaving it to the applicant to change his
name on his own responsibility.”
Now, Sir Robert Peel died in 1850, in which year a gentleman
named Laurie obtained two royal licences to change his name;
first to Northdale, and then to Nuthall, “in compliance with the
will of the late Catherine Jack, spinster, of Sloane-street.” In
1851 a lady named Braham was permitted by royal licence to assume
the name of Medows, on the plea that she was “the co-heiress
expectant” of her aged grandmother, who was so called. In 1852
a gentleman named Rust was granted a royal licence to assume
his wife’s maiden name, D’Eye, “out of respect to her memory.”
In 1853 a Mr. Penny was allowed to assume the name of Harwood,
“by wish of his mother, out of respect to his grandmother.” In
1854 Thomas Clugas, of Guernsey, was permitted by royal licence
“to use his paternal name of Clucas.” In 1855 a Miss Galston was
allowed to assume the name of Stepney, “out of respect to her
maternal ancestors in general.” It is difficult to conceive more
trifling grounds than these on which royal licences have been
granted in the above-quoted instances.
The authorities are, however, divided in their opinions. The Lord
Chancellor (in 1863) refused to recognise officially a change of
name, because the applicant had not obtained the royal licence to
bear that name, and the arms connected with it; while, on the other
hand, the Secretary of State for the Home Department has declared
that such a licence is unnecessary, and that a name can be legally
assumed without it. But the claim to the new name assumed can only
be established “by usage of such a length of time as to give the
change a permanent character,” a reservation which has clogged the
undoubted right of every Englishman to assume any name he pleases,
provided the assumption be made _bonâ fide_, and with reasonable
publicity, while it has the effect of placing everybody at the
mercy of any ill-conditioned official who may take pleasure in
obstructing him and opposing him.
Reference to the _London Gazette_ proves that Royal licences have
hitherto been constantly issued from capricious motives, and on
no fixed principle whatever. Doubtless, in many cases, they have
been granted in furtherance of testamentary conditions connected
with property; but they have been quite as often granted merely to
enable applicants to avoid names which were distasteful to them,
and to assume others which were more agreeable to them.
As the qualification which Sir George Grey and the Lord Chancellor
appear desirous of affixing to the right to change name, without
the assistance of a Royal licence, virtually cancels that right
altogether in a vast number of cases, it becomes, in consequence,
highly important that the rules by which those indulgences are
obtainable, and the amount of the fees which must be paid for them,
should be exactly made known.
A Parliamentary Return states that since 1850 415 applications
have been made for royal licence for a change of name, and 398
licences have been granted. There is a stamp duty of 50_l._ on
every such licence if the change of name is made in compliance
with the injunction of any will or settlement, and of 10_l._ if
the application is voluntary. The fees payable are stated to be
10_l._ 2s. 6d. on a change of name only; 13_l._ 12s. 6d. on a
change of name and arms; and 1_l._ 7s. 6d. for every additional
name inserted in a licence; which fees are paid into the
Exchequer. But the return is described as being made only “so far
as relates to the Home Secretary’s office,” and therefore does
not appear to include fees at the Heralds’ College.
To conclude--it does not appear that the Queen either claims or
exercises any special prerogative whatever connected with the
subject of change of surname; or that a Royal licence is anything
more than the recognition in the highest quarter of a voluntary act
already accomplished. Its recipient is not even compelled to bear
for a day the surname which it authorizes him to assume; nor are
other people enjoined by it to recognise him by that name, if they
are not inclined to do so. The case of the Right Hon. R. C. Dundas,
who in 1836 obtained a Royal licence, in compliance with the
conditions of a Will by which he inherited a considerable estate,
to bear the name of Christopher _only_, and who, in spite of that
licence and without either procuring its revocat on or obtaining
the grant of a fresh one, has since sat in Parliament under the
surname of Nisbet, and who now bears the surname of Hamilton,
assumed _proprio motu_, completely establishes this point.
FOOTNOTE:
[4] In the _Itinerarium ad Windsor_.
Changes in Laws.
_The Statute Law and the Common Law._
Lord Chancellor Westbury, in the House of Peers, in the Session of
1863, made the following statement with reference to the revision
and expurgation of the Statute Law, from the earliest commencement
of our legislation down to the beginning of the 17th century--the
legislation, in fact, of about 500 years.
The Laws are divided into Written and Unwritten law. The written
is the statute law, and the decision of the judges constitutes the
unwritten law of the land. The Statute Law[5] is in a great measure
supplemental to the Common Law, and a knowledge of the common is
necessary in order to enable a man to read and understand the
statute law. The Common Law is only traditionary--it is supposed
to reside in the breasts of the judges; accordingly, when it is
necessary to ascertain it in the House of Lords, their lordships
require the attendance of the judges, who are called upon to
declare what that law is. In like manner, in the great court of
equity to which belongs that large portion of natural justice
which is repudiated by the common law, the judges have the power
of determining what constitutes the rudiments of that law. This
is, undoubtedly, a dangerous and a difficult trust. It is little
less than legislative power, because the sources of common law
are of the most varied character. It is probably derived in a
great measure from customs and usages, recorded only in the memory
of man; it is partly derived, no doubt, from old rules embodied
in acts of which no record now exists. It is partly made up of
relics of the old Roman jurisprudence which remained so long
throughout the land; and it is partly the result of customs and
maxims, handed down from one generation to another. The sources
were so varied in ancient times that the custom of declaring the
law also varied. In the old time it was impossible to know what
the law was. The judges were not only legislators, but the worst
of legislators--legislators _ex post facto_. Accordingly, at an
early period, it became necessary for the protection of liberty,
in order to get some kind of approach to uniformity, constancy,
and regularity in the law, that the grounds and reasons of the
judges’ decisions should be given. At first an attempt was made to
do so by entering the reasons for the judgments in the rolls of the
court; and our court rolls, preserved from the time of Richard I.,
contain repeatedly the reasons for the decisions and sentences. At
the latter end of the reign of Edward II., or in the beginning of
the reign of Edward III., the practice of reporting the decisions
of the judges began, and from that period down we have a series of
judicial reports of those decisions. That was a great security for
the people, because it was an approach to certainty in the law.
The origin and reason of it was a distinctive peculiarity in the
English mind--namely, the love of precedent, a love of appealing
to precedent rather than indulging in abstract reasoning. This was
the only mode in which the law was recorded, and the only mode in
which it became known. These reports were kept for a considerable
period of time under the superintendence of the judges themselves,
and great care was taken in sifting and ascertaining the grounds of
the decision. The evil was, therefore, comparatively little; but
in course of time, as the reports multiplied and as the personal
superintendence and care of the judges were withdrawn, great
complaints began to arise; and so much inconvenience was felt
that, as early as the time of Lord Bacon, it became a subject of
general dissatisfaction which attracted his attention, and led to
his compiling and publishing his celebrated book for the amendment
of the law of England. The Lord Chancellor, in his revision and
expurgation, proposed to do little, if anything at all, more than
revive the proposal of Bacon. “The wisdom and excellence of that
proposal has been admitted from age to age; and the fact that
nothing has been done to give effect to it we must attribute to the
singular _inertia_ that characterized the English Legislature.”
_Curiosities of the Statute Law._[6]
Most people have a confused idea that as new laws are made old
ones are repealed; and that the Statute-Book, bulky as it is,
contains nothing but what every Englishman is bound to know and
observe. Such, however, is not the case: for the old laws, instead
of being cleared away to admit the new ones, have been allowed to
remain, so that nine-tenths of this Statute-Law is really not law
at all; and if the Statute-Book were freed from the enactments
which have become obsolete, or ceased to be in force without being
specifically repealed, it would be reduced from forty to four or
five volumes. Enough of confusion, prolixity, and repetition would
still remain within this compass to exercise the wits and fill
the pockets of the lawyers; but the perusal of it would no longer
occupy a lifetime, and this excuse for our ignorance of it would be
very much weakened.
To show the necessity of the revision of our Statute-Book, we
shall quote from the schedule of the Bill presented by the Lord
Chancellor to the House of Lords in the Session of 1863, a few
samples of useless or inoperative enactments, to show how curiously
the history of a bygone age is reflected in its legislation.
Here in the midst of provisions confirming or modifying feudal
privileges and liabilities is, “The Sentence of Curse given by
the Bishops against the Breakers of the Charters.” No less out
of place in the Statute-book, according to modern notions, is
“The Award made between the King and his Commons at Kenilworth.”
Next, we light upon enactments prescribing “The Remedy if a
Distress be impounded in a Castle or Fortress,” and prohibiting
the custom of distraining upon one foreigner for the debt of
another. By the famous Statute _Circumspectè Agatis_ laymen are
restrained from laying violent hands on a clerk, while other
Acts warn “men of religion” against aggression on their lay
neighbours. Then we come to a whole series of sumptuary laws, and
laws for the encouragement or discipline of particular trades.
Bread and ale are placed under special protection; butchers and
cooks are forbidden to buy flesh of Jews, and sell the same to
Christians; exporters of wool are to give surety to import silver
in return; iron is not to be exported at all; “no shoemaker
shall be a tanner, nor any tanner a shoemaker;” yet (by a later
Statute) “shoemakers may tan leather till the next Parliament;”
all merchandises of a certain kind are to be carried to Calais;
gowns and mantles are to be worn of a specified length; salmon,
herring, and eels are to be packed in a specified manner;
long-bows are not to cost more than a specified sum; calves are
not to be killed at the will of their owners; the “breade of
horsys” is subjected to State control; and “the stuffynge of
feather-bedds” does not escape the vigilance of Parliament. Most
of these Acts, and a very large per-centage of all those which
are proposed for repeal, have reference to a state of society
which has little in common with our own. Instead of enacting that
“every one may put his child to school,” we debate now-a-days
as to whether he should not be compelled to do so; and, instead
of fixing the rate of workmen’s wages by Act of Parliament, we
tolerate a liberty of combination which sometimes enables them to
exact more than the market value of their labour. If the habit of
“telling slanderous Lyes of the Great Men of the Realm” is not
quite extinct, it is no longer checked by penalties, and we are
content to leave “fonde and fantasticale Prophesies” to refute
themselves.
The expurgation by which it was proposed to rid the Statute-book
of this lumber was originated some 250 years ago, by Bacon, as
stated in pp. 104-105; but the statutes which he marked, before
the Restoration or the Revolution, before the Union of Scotland or
Ireland, before the abolition of the feudal tenures, before the
passing of the Habeas Corpus Act, still encumber the Statute-book;
and the plain, sensible, and unanswerable suggestions which he
threw out for the heroic work of consolidating the statutes have
remained without effect. Each succeeding generation has employed
itself in adding something more to that mass of evil which the
great philosopher felt and denounced. If the mind of Bacon was
shocked at the tangled labyrinth of our Statute Law in the reign
of James I., if Sir Matthew Hale occupied his mind with the same
subject in the reign of Charles II., what would they have said
could they have foreseen the 10,000 statutes passed in the reign of
George III., and the Ossa which the industry of the last forty-five
years has piled upon the shoulders of that mighty Pelion?
_Secret of Success at the Bar._
Sir Thomas Buxton relates that he once asked Sir James Scarlett
what was the secret of his pre-eminent success as an advocate. He
replied that he took care to press home the one principal point of
the case, without paying much attention to the others. He also said
that he knew the secret of being short. “I find,” said he, “that
when I exceed half an hour I am always doing mischief to my client;
if I drive into the heads of the jury important matter, I drive out
matter more important that I had previously lodged there.”
_Queen’s Serjeants, Queen’s Counsel, and Serjeants-at-Law._
To remove certain doubts of very recent growth (cast upon a matter
previously deemed plain enough), the following statement is the
result of a very careful inquiry:--Queen’s serjeants are sworn
to “serve and counsel the Queen and duly to minister the Queen’s
affairs, and sue the Queen’s process after the course of the law
and after their cunning, and they are to take no fee of any one
against the Queen.” Queen’s counsel, as distinguished from Queen’s
Serjeants, are appointed by Letters Patent under the Great Seal,
giving them precedence “in our courts as elsewhere.” The oath
administered to Queen’s counsel is precisely the same as the oath
administered to Queen’s serjeants. Next after Queen’s counsel come
serjeants-at-law, who, on taking their degree, swear that they
shall “serve the Queen’s people and truly counsel them that retain
them, after their cunning.” Sometimes a serjeant-at-law applies
for a “Patent of Precedence,” which gives him precedence next after
the last of the Queen’s counsel previously appointed. No oath is
administered on the grant of a patent of precedence, as it implies
no special service or duty to the Crown.
_Do not make your Son an Attorney._
Apart from the heavy expenses which must, even under the most
favourable circumstances, attend the introduction of a youth into
the legal profession, the fact must never be lost sight of that
the examination which articled clerks are now called upon to pass
before they can be admitted is of such a rigorous nature that
perhaps not one in ten of the established practising attorneys
could undergo the ordeal. Then, if we consider that the legal
profession is at the present moment vastly overstocked, and reflect
upon the fact of numbers of clever young men, who finding it
impossible to beat out a connexion for themselves, either make for
one of the colonies, or settle down at home in managing clerkships,
at salaries scarcely equal to the remuneration paid to skilled
mechanics, there is quite enough to make us hesitate before placing
our sons in law offices. Nor must the fact be overlooked, that the
tendency of our legislation has been, and will continue to be, to
simplify legal procedure as much as possible; to lower the scale of
fees payable to attorneys and solicitors, and even to dispense in
many instances, with the necessity for employing professional men
at all.--_S. Warren, Q.C._
_Appellate Jurisdiction of the House of Lords._
The proper constitution of the Supreme Court of Appeal justifies
the utmost solicitude of the legislature and the country. The
difficulties surrounding its reconstruction were found too great
to admit of solution during the session of 1856, unexpectedly
complicated as they were by the creation of that very distinguished
judge, Baron Parke, a peer for life only, as Lord Wensleydale.
The greatest constitutional lawyers in the House of Lords,
supported by a considerable majority of peers, declared that the
Crown had no power to create a peer for life only, with a right
to sit and vote in that house; that such an act was illegal, and
that the very essence of the British peerage consisted in its
hereditary character. Issuing out of these discussions a Bill
for reconstructing the appellate jurisdiction was sent down from
the Lords to the Commons, but so late in the session that they
declined then to entertain it. Whatever may be the ultimate fate
of this measure, it is still practicable, even without adopting
its special machinery, to preserve the appellate jurisdiction of
the House of Lords--itself an object of the highest importance--by
providing for more assistance from the legal and equitable judicial
force of the country. In the meantime a well-earned hereditary
peerage was conferred on Lord Wensleydale, under which he took
his seat before the session closed.--_Blackstone’s Commentaries_,
edited by Warren.
_Payment of an Advocate._
In 1863, Chief Justice Erle gave judgment in the case of Kennedy
_v._ Broun, which involved the right of the plaintiff, a barrister,
to recover the sum of 20,000_l._, alleged to have been promised by
Mrs. Broun, then Mrs. Swinfen, for professional services rendered
in the matter of the Swinfen estates; the trial at Warwick having
been compromised by Lord Chelmsford, then Sir Frederick Thesiger.
An action was brought by Mr. Kennedy to recover the 20,000_l._
in question, and a verdict was given in his favour. A rule was
obtained to set aside that verdict and enter it for the defendant.
The Chief Justice, in a most elaborate judgment, said that the
relation of the parties, as advocate and client, incapacitated
the latter from making any promise of remuneration which could be
recovered as a debt. The payment to an advocate was as _honorarium_
not _merces_--and the opinion of all the judges, from the days of
Justinian to the present time, supported that view. The rule for
a new trial to enter the verdict for the defendants was therefore
absolute. This of course quashed Mr. Kennedy’s claim.
_Utter-Barristers._
“The term ‘Utter-Barrister’ occurs for the first time in the reign
of Henry VIII. It is mentioned in the ‘Orders and Customs’ of the
Middle Temple, where it is applied to one who, having continued in
the house for five or six years, and profited in the study of the
law, has been called by the benchers ‘to plead, argue, and dispute
some doubtful matter before certain of the benchers,’ which ’manner
of argument or disputations is called _motyng_; and this making of
Utter-Barristers is as a preferment or degree given him for his
learning.’”
Fifty years ago no junior barrister presumed to carry a bag in the
Court of Chancery, unless one had been presented to him by the
King’s counsel, who, when a junior was advancing in practice, took
an opportunity of complimenting him on his increase of business,
and giving him his own bag to carry home his papers. It was then a
distinction to carry a bag, and a proof that a junior was rising in
his own profession.
_What was Special Pleading?_
From a period of very remote antiquity down to the passing of the
Common Law Procedure Act, 1852, the pleadings in our Law Courts
were of a highly artificial character, and had been elaborated,
by the care of judges and practitioners during many successive
centuries, into a regular system or science, called _pleading_, or
more properly, _special pleading_, which constituted a distinct
branch of the Law, with treatises and professors of its own. It
was a system highly rated by our ancient lawyers, and had at least
the merit of developing the point in controversy with the severest
precision. But its strictness and subtlety were a frequent subject
of complaint; and one object of the Common Law Procedure Act, 1852,
was to relax and simplify its rules. Whether the effect of this
will be to impair its value or not in other respects, experience
alone can decide.--_Stephen’s Commentaries_, note.
Lord Campbell studied, at Lincoln’s Inn, the mysteries of special
pleading, under the guidance of Mr. Tidd, through whom he traced
his legal pedigree up to the celebrated Tom Warren, father
of this wondrous art. Tom Warren begat Serjeant Runnington,
Serjeant Runnington begat Tidd, Tidd begat Campbell, and Campbell
begat Dundas and Vaughan Williams. “Tidd,” writes his grateful
pupil, “lived to see four sons sitting together in the House of
Lords--Lord Lyndhurst, Lord Denman, Lord Cottenham, and Lord
Campbell. To the unspeakable advantage of having been three years
his pupil, I chiefly ascribe my success at the bar.”
_What is Evidence?_
Mr. Stephen, in his able Treatise on the Criminal Law of England,
gives the follow definitions of Evidence:
All the facts with which we are acquainted, visible or invisible,
internal or external, are connected together in a vast series of
sequences which we call cause and effect; and the constitution
of things is such, that men are able to infer from one fact the
existence, either past or future, of other facts. For instance,
we infer from a footmark on soft ground that a foot has been
impressed upon it. From the fact that a man is planting his
foot on soft ground, we infer that if he completes that motion
a footmark will appear. Any specific fact, or set of facts,
employed for the purpose of inferring therefrom the existence of
any other fact, is said to be evidence of the fact. Suppose the
question is whether John Smith is living or dead: A says, “I knew
John Smith, and I saw him die.” B says, “I knew John Smith. I
saw him in bed; he looked very ill. I shortly afterwards heard
he was dead, and saw a funeral procession, which I attended, and
which every one said was his funeral, leave his house and go to
the churchyard, where I saw a coffin buried with his name on
it.” C says, “Z told me that he heard from X that John Smith was
dead.” D says, “I had a dream that John Smith was dead.” Each of
these facts, if used for the purpose of supporting the inference
that John Smith was really dead, would be evidence of his death.
The assertions of A and B would, under ordinary circumstances,
be convincing; that of C far from satisfactory, and that of D
altogether idle, except to a very superstitious person. This
would be usually expressed by saying that the assertions of A and
B would be good evidence, that of C weak evidence, and that of
D no evidence at all of the fact of the death. But this is not
quite a correct way of speaking; whether one fact is evidence
of another, depends on the way in which it is used. If people
usually believed in dreams, the assertion that a man had dreamt
of John Smith’s death would be evidence of his death. Whether or
not it would be wise to allow it to be evidence of his death,
would depend on the further question, whether in point of fact
the practice of inferring the truth of the dream from the fact of
its occurrence, usually produced true belief.
It would, unquestionably, aid the ends of justice if the real
nature of evidence were better understood; which can only be
assisted by the right use of reason.
_What is Trial?_
The decision of fact, which constitutes in every civilized country
the chief business of courts of justice; for experience will
abundantly show that above a hundred of our lawsuits arise from
disputed facts, for one where the law is doubted.
About twenty days in the year, says Blackstone, are sufficient in
Westminster Hall to settle, upon solemn argument, every demurrer or
point of law that arises throughout the nation; but two months are
annually spent in deciding the truth of facts before six distinct
tribunals, exclusive of Middlesex and London, which afford a supply
of causes much more than equivalent to any two of the largest
circuits. (3 Bl. Com. 320.) The state of things in our own days is
substantially the same.--_Stephen’s Commentaries._
_Trial by Jury._
In England, when the aspect of the French Revolution divided our
public men into factions--in the evil time, when statesmen had
talked complacently “of a vigour beyond the law,” when judges
had tortured free speech into sedition, and when open violence
and secret art were sapping the liberties we prize most dearly,
English juries, with the approbation of the country, interposed
frequently against political wrong, and vindicated the good cause
that elsewhere had been abandoned. As for the loyalty and good
sense of the nation as a whole, the mode in which it obeyed the
Government attests this in a remarkable way; and though, of course,
the Revolution in France stirred up some elements of disorder here,
they were as nothing among the great mass of Englishmen. This truth
is urged by Mr. Massey with more force than by any other historian,
and it deserves to be put prominently forward, as several writers
have asserted the contrary. In his very instructive summary of the
state of English opinion at this period, he says:
“Because freedom had been abused at Paris, the liberties of
Englishmen were assailed. The press was put under restraint;
legions of spies were let loose upon the country, and no man could
speak his mind in safety, or even do the most harmless act without
fear of question. It is no wonder that the old English feeling was
aroused, and that the State trials of 1794 were regarded with an
intensity of interest which had not been equalled since that of the
Seven Bishops. The public safety at that time depended on the trial
by jury, and men were satisfied that their liberties were safe when
it appeared that the great institution which had so often sustained
them was still sound and unshaken.... Happily the prosecutions
failed, and from their failure was derived that security which but
for these trials would not have been ascertained.”--_Times review
of Massey’s History of England._
That sound and experienced judge, Sir John Coleridge, in a lecture
delivered by him at the Athenæum, Exeter, stated that
He had been a judge for an unusually long period, and he should
ever regard with admiration the manner in which juries discharged
their duties. Again and again he had reason to marvel at their
patience, and again and again he had observed questions put by
a jury which had been omitted by counsel and judge, the answer
to which had thrown a light that had guided them to the truth of
the whole matter. He had often thought if he had the appointment
of the magistrates in the country, that he would appoint those
gentlemen who had served on petty juries on the Crown side for
two assizes at least; for he was sure that a more practical
knowledge of criminal law was learnt in that way than could be
acquired by several months of careful reading. One thing should
always be remembered, that stupid verdicts were no arguments
against the institution, for no human institution, however
wise in itself, could be expected to work perfectly. Let them
improve their jurymen by raising the character of their national
education; let them introduce into their panels all classes
who by law were liable to serve; and when they had done that,
and not till then, if they found it to fail, let them condemn
the institution. They lived under a law which, though far from
perfect, was framed in a wise and just spirit. They could not
possibly overrate the blessing which they possessed, yet it was
so much a matter of course that they were apt to think as little
of it as they did of the sun that shone upon them from Heaven.
_Attendance of Jurors._
The law on this subject has been thus concisely explained by Mr.
Under-Sheriff Burchell. At the present period, persons who claim to
be excused from attending as jurors should get their names removed
from the jury-list. In July, within the first week, the Clerk of
the Peace is to issue his warrant to the high constable for the
overseers to prepare and make out a list of persons qualified as
jurors. For three weeks in September the list is to be exhibited
on the doors of churches and chapels, with a notification where
objections are to be heard. Within the last seven days of September
the justices are to hold a petty sessions to hear objections. If
persons having exemptions do not attend to the subject, they may
be returned and be liable to serve until the list is corrected in
the September following. Some complaints are made of persons being
returned by parish officers who had either removed or been dead
for years. The law as stated prevails throughout the counties of
England.
_The Law of Libel._
It would be useless to attempt to define, within our limit, the
principles of the Law of Libel--it would be attended with fruitless
results; but we may be permitted to give such an outline of the
subject as may be useful for reflection and research, if not for
immediate practice. Now that the old saying, “The greater truth the
greater libel,” is no longer applicable even to indictments for
defamation, the popular idea of what is and what is not actionable
is correct, so far as it goes. It is now generally understood that
a false and malicious attack upon another man’s character is in
all cases illegal; that a somewhat less offensive imputation than
would support an action for mere words will render its author
liable in damages if it be conveyed in writing, but that the law
deems all statements of this kind to be justifiable which can be
shown to be true. For the ordinary intercourse of life these rules
and cautions are sufficient. No one can speak ill of his neighbour
with impunity, unless he is prepared to make good his words to
the letter; or, at least, to prove that they were spoken without
malice or on a lawful occasion. With regard to the Press, it has
been proclaimed again and again from the judicial Bench, that “fair
comments” in a journal or periodical are not within the Law of
Libel; but, then, what is to be the test of “fairness”? It is quite
possible that a journalist’s comments may be made _bonâ fide_ and
out of a regard for the public welfare, and yet may be incapable
in their very nature of legal proof. In the case of Campbell v.
Spottiswoode, the former obtained a verdict against the printer of
the _Saturday Review_ for an alleged calumny against himself as
editor and part-proprietor of the _British Standard and Ensign_.
The defendant’s counsel relied at the trial, and in his argument
before the Court of Queen’s Bench, on the “general privilege” of
all who discuss public questions without actual malice. The Lord
Chief Justice and the Court decided against him, on the ground
that there is no such general privilege; and that the imputation
of base motives throws upon a public critic, as it would upon a
private detractor, the necessity of bringing them home to the party
maligned. According to this doctrine, the jury is not to be allowed
to compare the comments with the evidence before the writer, and to
say whether they were “fair” and justified by appearances. Nothing
short of their being strictly true in fact, and proved to be so in
open court, will relieve the latter of his liability.
Nevertheless, we have the authority of the Lord Chief Justice
(Erle) of the Common Pleas (Turnbull v. Bird, 1861), for the
principle that very strong and injurious language, if provoked and
employed “for the purpose of maintaining the truth,” “without any
corrupt motive,” may be innocent in the view of the law. We have
the sanction of the same eminent Judge that “a man may publish
defamatory matter in defence either of his private or his public
rights. Every subject of this realm has a right to comment upon
the acts of public men, for they concern him as such subject;
but he must not make his commentary a cloak for malice. Such a
commentary, however libellous, is justifiable if the defendant
honestly believes that he is writing what is fair and just; but if
he makes wilful misrepresentation, or misstatement that might have
been avoided by ordinary care, his protection ceases.” We find it
assumed by Chief Justice Erle, and stated in plain terms by Mr.
Justice Willes, that there is such a thing as a “_privilege_ of
fair discussion on a matter of public interest,” though two of the
learned Judges of the Queen’s Bench were at much pains to show that
a right belonging to all her Majesty’s subjects cannot properly
be called a “privilege.” Moreover, we have the general but most
emphatic testimony of Lord Ellenborough, that where the “object”
is “to correct misrepresentations of fact, to refute sophistical
reasoning, to expose a vicious taste in literature, or to censure
what is hostile to morality,” there can be no libel.
In a case against the _Lincolnshire Chronicle_, the Judge, Mr.
Justice Coleridge, laid down the law as follows:
“In discussing the public conduct of a public man, a journalist
might certainly use the most unceremonious freedom, and juries
should not be nice in criticising the language in which the
censure might be conveyed, if they could see that the motive and
spirit of the whole were public and honest. On the other hand, no
newspaper was justified in commenting upon the private life even
of a public man; but the present appeared to be an intermediate
case. The plaintiff filled a public situation, but it could
hardly be said that the paragraph was merely a comment upon his
conduct as alderman, neither did it relate to a strictly private
matter. The most objectionable paragraph appeared to him to be
that which imputed to the plaintiff ‘confused notions on the
important matters of _meum_ and _tuum_,’ but the jury must look
at the whole, and say whether in their opinion it exceeded the
bounds of fair comment upon the conduct of a person filling the
position which the plaintiff filled. The jury found a verdict for
the defendant.”
But, by the judicial _dicta_ in Campbell v. Spottiswoode, no
greater latitude is allowed in comments on public topics than in
remarks on private affairs. Any theoretical indulgence to the
former, whether it be called privilege or not, is a worthless boon
if truth, or rather legal demonstration, is to be the only test
of “libel or no libel” for literary critiques. As Mr. Bovill well
pointed out, no privilege is wanted where truth can be successfully
pleaded. On the other hand, no privilege is demanded where malice
can be established against the writer, or inferred by the jury
from the tone and spirit of the composition. It is where a public
critic, with the best and purest intentions, has injured the good
name of a public man that the question arises. The great difficulty
is to render the Press harmless to individuals, and yet to leave it
powerful for good.--_Abridged from the Times._
With regard to the propagation of Libel, “it may be some doubt
in the eye of morality, whether the purchaser of a satirical
libel does not share in the guilt of the author; and whether the
pleasure in reading it is not of a criminal sort, and a proof
of the malignity of human nature. There would be no thieves nor
stolen goods, experience tells us, if there were no receivers; and
no scurrilous writings nor libellous prints would be published,
to corrupt the ear or gratify the impudence of the eye, if there
were no purchasers.” These sentiments are from Bayle’s _Essay on
Defamatory Libels_; and we remember Lord Brougham to have once
expressed himself in almost the identical words of Bayle, in a
speech on the Newspaper Stamp Duty.
_Induction of a Rector._
The ceremony of inducting a clergyman to his benefice is briefly
as follows: the instance being the induction of the Rev. Pascoe
Grenfell Hill, Feb. 9, 1863, to the benefice of the united parishes
of St. Edmund the King and St. Nicholas, Lombard-street. The
Rev. Mr. Hill brought with him the Rev. J. Lupton, who performed
the office of induction. The reverend Chaplain, therefore,
accompanied by the Rev. Mr. Hill, proceeded to the church-door
in Lombard-street, and the Clerk having put the key into the
lock of the door, the Chaplain took Mr. Hill’s right hand, and
placing it on the key thus inserted in the lock, said, holding the
archdeacon’s mandate in his hand, “By virtue of this instrument, I,
James Lupton, Rector of St. Michael’s, Queenhithe, induct you into
the real, actual, and corporal possession of the United Rectory
of St. Edmund the King and Martyr with St. Nicholas Acons, with
all its fruits, members, and appurtenances.” The new Rector then
opened the church door, and having entered the church, shut himself
in, and then pulled one of the bells, so as to assure the public
that he was in the church and had taken possession of it. He then
returned to the church-door, opened it, and let his friends and the
officials in.
_Benefit of Clergy._
The privilege of Benefit of Clergy,--_Privilegium Clericale_--arose
in the pious regard paid by Christian princes to the Church
in its infant state, and consisted of--1st, an exemption of
places consecrated to religious duties from criminal arrests,
which was the foundation of sanctuaries; 2nd, exemption of the
persons of clergymen from criminal process before the secular
judge, in particular cases, which was the original meaning of
the _privilegium clericale_. In the course of time, however, the
_benefit of clergy_ extended to every one who could read, for such
was the ignorance of those periods, that _this_ was thought a great
proof of learning; and it was enacted, that from the scarcity of
clergy in the realm of England, there should be a prerogative
allowed to the clergy, that if any man who could read were to be
condemned to death, the bishop of the diocese might, if he would,
claim him as a clerk, and dispose of him in some places of the
clergy as he might deem meet; but if the bishop would not demand
him, or if the prisoner could not read, then he was to be put to
death. 3 Edward I., 1274.--Benefit of Clergy was abolished by
statute 7th and 8th George IV., c. 28.
_The King’s Book._
“The King’s Book,” so frequently mentioned in connexion with the
value of church livings, is the Return of the Commissioners
appointed under 26 Henry VIII., c. 3, to value the first-fruits and
tenths bestowed by that Act upon the King. The valuation then made
is still in force, and the record containing it is that commonly
known as the Kings’ Book (the _Valor Ecclesiasticus_, &c.) which
has been printed by the Record Commission.
_Compulsory Attendance at Church._
We do not find any very early regulations made to enforce the
observation of festivals among Christians. The Middle Ages are
somewhat more prolific. Attendance at church on the principal
festivals was made a subject of inquiry, about A.D. 900, in Abbot
Regino’s articles; and by that of Clovishoff, in 905, the clergy
are enjoined to be more diligent in teaching, and the people to be
more regular in their attendance. This observance is also enjoined
by the laws of Canute, about 1032, which decree “all divine
rites and offices, let every one studiously keep and observe;
the feast-days and the fasts, let him celebrate with the utmost
ceremony.” After the Conquest, the synod of Exeter, 1287, includes
the “festival days,” with the Lord’s days, among those when the
people ought specially to attend the churches. And Ascension Day,
the feast of Corpus Christi, the high feast of the Assumption of
our blessed Lady, and All Saints’ Day, are included with the Lord’s
days, in the 27th Henry VI. (1450) in the list of days whereon the
holding of fairs is prohibited.
The Acts by which at the Reformation it was attempted to secure the
due attendance of the people upon the remodelled services include
“the other days ordained and used to be kept as holidays.” But
the application of their provisions to the attendance upon other
holidays than Sundays, seems to have been pretty soon dropped. The
statute of James the First, re-enacting the penalty of 1s. for
default in attendance at church, is limited to Sundays; and the
latter day alone is mentioned in the Acts of William and Mary,
and George III.; by which exceptions in favour of dissenters from
the Church of England were introduced. Mr. Neale, however, cites
several cases which appear to settle that the ecclesiastical courts
have not the power to compel any person to attend his parish
church, because they have no right to decide the bounds of parishes.
The repeal of the Act enjoining attendance at church on the 5th
of November, so far as Roman Catholics are concerned, by the 7
and 8 Victoria, c. 102, removing the penalties to which they
stood exposed up to the year 1844, must be looked upon more as
a piece of consistency in legislation than as the removal of a
possible grievance. And a somewhat similar remark may be made
in respect to members of the Church of England, upon the total
repeal of the 1st of Elizabeth, so far as concerns the penalty
of 1s., for non-attendance at church on holidays. As the statute
of James applies solely to Sundays, there is now no civil
punishment left for this neglect: though it would appear to remain
punishable, under the 5th and 6th of Edward VI., by ecclesiastical
censures.--_Neale’s Feasts and Fasts_, p. 307.
Among the recent cases of prosecution, in a Treatise on Sir Matthew
Hale’s _History of the Pleas of the Crown_, by Professor Amos, the
following passage occurs under “Repealed Statutes:”
“In the year 1817, at the Spring Assizes for Bedford, Sir Montague
Burgoyne was prosecuted for having been absent from his parish
church for several months: the action was defeated by proof of
the defendant having been indisposed. In the _Report_ of Prison
Inspectors to the House of Lords, in 1841, it appeared that in
1830, ten persons were in prison for recusancy in not attending
their parish churches. A mother was prosecuted by her own son.”
_The Mark of the Cross._
The old Danish laws made it obligatory upon those who could not
write to affix their _bomærke_ (house-mark); and the Russians
required a mark, or a cross. The probable reason why the cross was
always used in the Middle Ages in the testing of ecclesiastical
charters was not only that it was a sacred symbol, but that
Justinian had decreed it should have the strength of an oath.--_B.
Williams, F.S.A._; _Archæologia_, xxxvii. p. 384.
Sir Henry Spelman tells us that “The Saxons in their deeds
observed no set forme, but used honest and perspicuous words to
express the thing intended with all brevity, yet not wanting the
essential parts of a deed: as the names of the donor and donee, the
consideration, the certainty of the thing given, the limitation
of the estate, the reservation if any were, and the names of the
witnesses, which always were many, some for the one part, and some
for the other. As for dating, it was not usual amongst them. Seals
they used not at all, other than (the common seal of Christianity)
the sign of the Cross, which they, and all nations following the
Greek and Roman Church, accompted the most solemn and inviolable
manner of confirming.”
_Marriage-Law of England._
On the 17th of March, 1835, Dr. Lushington, in the House of
Commons, stated the history and principle of the Marriage Law of
England thus--“By the ancient law of this country as to marriages,
a marriage was good if celebrated in the presence of two witnesses,
though without the intervention of a priest. But then came the
decision of the Council of Trent rendering the solemnization
by a priest necessary. At the Reformation we refused to accept
the provision of the Council of Trent; and in consequence, the
question was reduced to this state--that a marriage by civil
contract was valid. But there was this extraordinary anomaly in
the law, that the practice of some of our civil courts required,
in certain instances and for some purposes, that the marriage
should be celebrated in a particular form. It turned out that a
marriage by civil contract was valid for some purposes, while for
others--such as the descent of the real property to the heirs of
the marriage--it was invalid. Thus, a man in the presence of a
witness, accepting a woman for his wife, _per verba de præsenti_,
the marriage was valid, as I have said, for some purposes, but
for others to make it valid it was necessary that it should be
celebrated _in facie ecclesiæ_. This was the state of the law till
the passing of the Marriage Act in 1754.”
“Marriage, in its origin, (says Lord Stowell,) is a contract of
natural law: it may exist between two individuals of different
sexes although no third person existed in the world, as happened
in the case of the common ancestors of mankind. In civil society
it becomes a civil contract, regulated and prescribed by law, and
endowed with civil consequences. In most civilized countries,
acting under a sense of the force of sacred obligations, it has had
the sanction of religion superadded. It then becomes a religious
as well as a natural and civil contract; for it is a great mistake
to suppose that, because it is the one, it may not likewise be the
other.”--(2 _Hagg. Cons. Rep._ 63.)
_Marriage Fines._
In the feudal times, the lord might object to the marriage of a
bondman’s daughter with a stranger, even of her own condition; and
by marriage with a freeman she became free during coverture, if not
free for ever; this and the lord’s approval of her marriage being
purchasable by fine. At Swincombe, in Oxfordshire, the bondman
could not get a husband for his daughter, and could not take to
himself a wife, without the lord’s permission.
Although a fine used to be paid by a freeman in the occupation
of bond-land, on the marriage of his daughter, there was no more
degradation in such a fine than there now is in the Archbishop
of Canterbury’s charge for a marriage-licence. At Southfleet,
Friendsbury, Wouldham, and other places in their neighbourhood, a
tenant who wished to give his daughter in marriage had to announce
the marriage to the warden or bailiff of the village, and to invite
him to the wedding; the girl could not be married to any one out
of the manor without the lord’s good-will; an heiress could not be
married even to a neighbour without the lord’s consent. A tenant
at Headington, Oxon, paid no fine on the marriage of his daughter
within the manor--he paid two shillings for leave to give her in
marriage to a stranger; but we are told that payment was on account
of the chattels which might be removed out of the manor with her.
When we consider the lord of a manor to be the patron and protector
of all within it, there seems to be nothing very offensive in this
arrogation of assent to the marriage of his tenant’s daughter.
_Irregular Marriages._
Little more than a century ago, a common notion prevailed that
the performance of the marriage ceremony by a person in holy
orders rendered it sacred and indissoluble, without regard to any
other condition. Hence arose the scandals and indecencies of the
Fleet Marriages, _i.e._, marriages performed in the Fleet prison,
and its neighbourhood, by a set of drunken, swearing parsons,
and their myrmidons, who wore black coats, and pretended to be
clerks and registrars to the Fleet. Those malpractices were put
an end to by the Marriage Act of 1754: the register-books were
purchased by Government in 1821, and deposited in the Bishop of
London’s Registry. A similar abuse flourished at May Fair, until
it was abolished by the Act of 1754, when the register-books were
deposited in St. George’s church, Hanover-square.
The “Border Marriages” were also of this class of abuses, and
arose from nothing formerly having been necessary in Scotland to
constitute a man and woman husband and wife save a declaration
of consent by the parties before witnesses, or even such a
declaration in writing without any witnesses: a marriage which was
considered binding in all respects. Still, a marriage in Scotland,
not celebrated by a clergyman, except these “Border Marriages,”
was rarely or never heard of. They were performed at Lamberton
toll-bar, about three miles north of Berwick-upon-Tweed; and at
Gretna Green, the nearest locality accessible to strangers actually
within the territory of Scotland.[7] The preliminaries of such a
marriage used to be a long purse in hand or in prospect, for the
purpose of meeting heavy posting expenses, and bribes to secure
speed. In the course of time, facility of travelling by railway,
and of obtaining licensed carriages from the stands in towns,
increased; and the farm-servants and the servants generally in
the Border counties began to avail themselves of what was deemed
a lawful practice by their superiors from other places. During
the holidays for farm-servants, at Whitsuntide and Martinmas, the
times of the statute-hirings, parties generally under the influence
of drink, and too often tipsy, would hire carriages in Carlisle,
and drive, by the two or three couples in a carriage, over the
Border to get married in Scotland; they would live together for
two or three days, then go to their services, and perhaps never
again think of their having been married at all; or not till
circumstances might arise making it worth the while of one of the
parties to claim conjugal rights, with a view to participation
in an inheritance of property--a not uncommon accident among the
natives of the Border Counties.
Under this state of affairs, at the Spring Assizes at Carlisle,
in 1856, there were three trials for bigamy; upon the increase of
which crime the Judge made some serious remarks to the Grand Jury,
in his charge. A magistrate of Cumberland, having leisure time, and
a sufficient acquaintance with the Marriage Laws of England and
Scotland, to avoid falling into any gross error, set to work to
frame Petitions to Parliament and the Home Secretary, reciting that
such petitions were from the Magistrates of Cumberland, charged
with the suppression of vice and immorality in their county; that
a state of irregularity which had formerly been permitted in
the Law of Marriage had grown into an abuse, under a change of
circumstances; that the Petitioners thought that the young people
of their county acted more out of levity and under excitement, than
from any real want of good principle; and that they submitted the
exigencies of the case might be met by requiring all parties, _not
being natives of Scotland_, and wishing to be married in Scotland,
to acquire _domicile_ in Scotland, by a residence of a fixed number
of days, prior to being considered entitled to the privilege of
the laws relating to marriage in Scotland; and prayed that the
parties petitioned would authorize such measures, &c. The Bench of
Magistrates mostly approved of the petitions, one alone declining
to sign. The clerical magistrates generally abstained from signing,
urging that if they did sign, it might be objected that they
had been instigated through interested motives. The petitions
were signed by all the lay magistrates attending the Session at
Whitehaven, and were forwarded to London for presentation; the Hon.
Charles Howard taking charge of the petition to the Commons, but
with misgivings as to its success; his only hope being that the
substance of it might be passed in a clause of the Dissenters’
Marriage Bill, then before the House. Nor was the Home Secretary,
Sir George Grey, more sanguine: he promised to look over the
petition, adding the state of the feeling of the House was such
that it could not be made a Government measure.
The petition to the Lords was taken charge of by Lord Brougham,
who was selected because, at the commencement of the Session
squibbing speeches had passed between him, with Lord Campbell on
his side, and Lord Aberdeen joined by Lord Minto, relative to the
laws of Scottish marriages. Such had also been the case in several
sessions prior to the one of 1856: bills had been threatened to
be introduced for _altering_ the laws of marriage _in Scotland_
entirely; but always, after Easter, the matter had been dropped.
At the above interview, Lord Brougham entered upon the state of
the case with the Cumberland magistrate, who knew beforehand that
a civil marriage between English in Scotland was not deemed valid
for the inheritance of the offspring of real estate in England.[8]
Lord Brougham confirmed this knowledge by citing instances in which
real estates in England had not passed to the issue by marriages in
Scotland; and he also mentioned that children born before marriage
could be legitimized to the inheritance of estate and title in
Scotland, by the subsequent marriage of the mother to the father;
and Lord Brougham named, in the House of Lords, an instance of the
fact. His Lordship added that the Law of _Scotland_ ought to be
changed, and must be changed, when it was replied that his Lordship
would find that the object of the magistrates of Cumberland was not
to change the Laws of Scotland, but to oblige natives of England to
obey the Laws of England. We mention this to show how widely the
ideas were astray from the real object in view.
A Bill founded on the principle of the petitions was introduced
by Lord Brougham: it was quickly supported by petitions signed at
large meetings convened in the Border Counties; at one of which,
in Carlisle, a solicitor mentioned an instance wherein clients of
his own had not only been married, but, in the woman’s opinion (she
having succeeded to some property), _had been divorced_ in the
course of two or three days, by one of the officiating _marriers_
of Gretna. One of these _marriers_, Murray, of Gretna, admitted
that he had married between 700 and 800 couple in a recent year;
and as there were two or three other _marriers_ in good practice,
the number of couples married at Sark toll-bar, and at Gretna, may
safely be estimated at upwards of 1000 in the year.[9]
When the Bill came to its critical point in the House of Commons,
the Lord Advocate for Scotland stated that “seeing that it did
not interfere with the Law of Scotland, he should not object to
its progress.” Thus, the Bill went through its third reading, and
passed, within three months from its introduction; and thus was a
stop put to a state of affairs threatening the rapid demoralization
of the lower classes in the Border Counties and North-Western parts
of England.[10]
_Solemnization of Marriage._
The great facilities for Marriage afforded by the present state of
the law will be apparent from the following recapitulation of the
various forms and authorities, from the 20th Annual Report of the
Registrar-General:
“Marriages may be solemnized-- Authority.
{1. Special licence from the
{ Archbishop of Canterbury.
{
{2. Licence from a Surrogate,
{ &c.
1. According to the rites of the {
Established Church. {3. Publication of banns.
{
{4. Certificate from the
{ Superintendent Registrar.
{1. Licence from the
{ Superintendent Registrar.
2. In registered places of worship {
not of the Established Church. {2. Certificate from the
{ Superintendent Registrar.
{1. Licence from the
{ Superintendent Registrar.
3. In the District Register Office. {
{2. Certificate from the
{ Superintendent Registrar.
{1. Licence from the
{ Superintendent Registrar.
4. Between Quakers and between {
Jews. {2. Certificate from the
{ Superintendent Registrar.
“By the English law as it stood before the passing of the
Act of 6 and 7 Will. IV., c. 85, no marriage could be lawfully
solemnized (except where both the parties were Quakers or Jews
respectively) in any other place than a church or public chapel
wherein banns might be published, unless by special licence from
the Archbishop of Canterbury. This law was enforced by severe
penalties; and if any persons intermarried without licence from
a competent authority, or without the previous publication
of banns, the marriage was null and void to all intents and
purposes. Thus all persons (with the exception of Jews and
Quakers), whether conforming to the Church of England or not,
were compelled to resort to the Established Church in order to
have their marriages lawfully solemnized. The boon conferred upon
Roman Catholics and Dissenters generally by the amended law of
1836, which enables them to marry in their own places of worship
and according to their own forms, may well be appreciated. The
Act of 1856, besides abolishing the objectionable practice of
reading notices of marriage before boards of guardians, has
sanctioned marriage out of the district in the ‘usual place of
worship’ of one of the parties, and reduced the interval between
the giving of notice of marriage by licence and the grant of the
licence from seven days to one clear day.”
_The Law of Copyright._
The _Publishers’ Circular_ gives the following summary of facts
respecting the Copyright Laws:--In our own country, the copyright
lasts 42 years absolutely for the author’s life, and seven years
after his death. In Greece and in Sardinia it lasts only 15 years
from the date of publication. In the Roman States it extends to 12
years after the author’s death. In Russia it lasts for 25 years
after the author’s death, and for ten years more if a new edition
has been published in the last five years of the first term. In
Belgium and Sweden it lasts 20 years after the author’s death,
with a provision in Sweden, that, should the representative of the
author neglect to continue the publication, the copyright falls
to the State. In France it lasts for the benefit of children or
widow (that is, to the widow if she be what is called in France
_en communauté de biens_, a peculiar arrangement in French
marriage settlements, which establishes between husband and wife
a perfect community in each other’s property) 30 years after the
author’s death, but to other representatives only 10 years. In
Spain it lasts 50 years, reckoning from the author’s death. In
Austria, Bavaria, Portugal, Prussia, Saxony, the Kingdom of the Two
Sicilies, Wurtemberg, and the States of the Germanic Confederation,
it lasts 30 years from the author’s death, to all his heirs and
assigns without distinction; and in Denmark, so recently as 1858,
it lasted an indefinite period, provided the work was kept in
print; now, however, it is restricted to a period of 30 years after
the author’s death, with a provision that republication by others
is permitted when five years have elapsed in which a work has been
out of print. In the United States, copyright lasts for 28 years,
and an extension of 14 years granted to the author if he lives, or
to his widow, children, and grandchildren. With regard to lectures,
sermons, &c., the law of France appears to be that professors and
preachers have the sole right of reproducing their lectures and
sermons in print; but that advocates and political speakers, while
they alone have the right to publish their speeches in a collective
or separate form, cannot prevent their being published in the
journals of the time as news.
_Holding over after Lease._
The doctrine is well established--viz., that where a tenant by
lease holds over after the determination of the term, and pays
rent, he becomes a tenant from year to year, _under all the
conditions of the expired lease consistent with such a tenancy_.
Baron Watson remarks--“It is important that no doubt should be
thrown upon a question of such very general importance, as a
great many of the houses in London and throughout the country are
occupied by tenants holding over.”
_Abolition of the Hop Duty._
The 15th September, 1862, dates the freedom of English Hops from
Excise impost, and the abolition of Customs duties upon foreign
Hops. Time alone can show the effect so serious a change will
have on the average prices of a produce of increasing importance
throughout the world. The general opinion is that under perfect
freedom of trade hops will vary in price in each district of
production only in proportion to their quality and the cost of
transport; and that consumers will find prices more uniformly even
than has hitherto been known, since the simultaneous failure in the
crop at home and abroad is beyond probability.
This tax was first imposed by Mr. Harley in the year 1711; and
its removal will make the hopgrower in future free from those
heavy losses which the Duty inflicted on him in years of large
crops and small prices. Hopgrowing has now become a simple farming
operation, left to natural causes. It might be that, owing to the
costly nature of the production and the precarious nature of the
crop, it would always remain a somewhat more speculative branch of
business than any other branch of farming. It is, however, thought
that the supply of hops will be more abundant, and, above all, more
steady and uniform from year to year. The consequence will be that
the beer we drink will be more wholesome. Burton, in his _Anatomy
of Melancholy_, says: “Beer made without hops is productive of
heaviness and melancholy; but that well hopped is an antidote to
it.”
_Customs of Gavelkind._
The well-known treatise, entitled “The Common Law of Kent;
or the Customs of Gavelkind, with the Decisions concerning
Borough-English,” by Thomas Robinson, with additions by J. D.
Norwood, comprehends everything relating to the subject, embracing
all that is useful in Somner, Tayler, and Lambarde, as well as
a full account of both tenure and custumal. The work contains
chapters on the etymology and significations of the word Gavelkind;
on the antiquity and universality of partible descents in England;
on the places out of Kent where the custom of gavelkind may be
alleged and maintained; on the manner of pleading the custom, and
the difference between that and other counties, and between the
general and special customs; on what lands and tenements in Kent
are of the nature of gavelkind; of the effect of the alteration
of the tenure and of the disgavelling statutes; on the nature of
gavelkind in reference to descent and partition, and the remedy
for and against parceners by the custom; on the special customs
incident to gavelkind lands in Kent, tenancy by the courtesy; of
dower, of customary wardship, and of alienation by any infant
tenant in gavelkind; the father to the bough and the son to the
plough, and the custumal of Kent with precedents. The principal
peculiarities which distinguish socage lands subject to the custom
of gavelkind from free or common socage are--1. That the lands
descend to all males in equal degree, in equal shares. 2. That the
husband is tenant by the courtesy of his deceased wife’s lands,
whether there were issue born alive or not. 3. That the widow is
dowable of one-half instead of the third. 4. That an infant may
alien by feoffment at the age of fifteen. 5. That upon a conviction
of felony, there is no escheat by reason of corruption of blood;
corruption of blood only occurs now in cases of treason, petit
treason, and murder--see 54 G. 3, c. 145. These peculiarities do
not recommend themselves as possessing so great advantages as to
induce us to continue a system of law in Kent different from the
rest of England. One of its great disadvantages is the difficulty
of deducing the title, on account of the complicated subdivisions
of the estate.
_Treasure Trove._
Treasure Trove (from the French _trouver_, to find, _trouvé_,
found) is the law by which money, or other treasure, found hidden,
is adjudicated to the legal claimant.
In 1863, Mr. F. Peel, (one of the Secretaries to the Treasury,)
stated in Parliament:
It was by no means an unreasonable or absurd law that when an
article of gold or silver, belonging to an unknown owner, was
found, it should be held to be the property of the Crown. The
rights of the Crown in that respect were not, however, rigidly
enforced. The articles found were usually returned to the person
who was declared to have the best claim to them; or, if they
were of historical interest, they were deposited in the British
Museum or some local collection, and their intrinsic value was
paid to the finder. What the Treasury desired was to obtain
speedy information of the discovery of any treasure trove. The
Circular which was issued some time ago was intended to instruct
the finders of any treasures how to communicate with the Crown on
the subject.[11] That Circular was subsequently withdrawn because
it laid claim to antiquities which were not exactly treasures and
did not belong to the Crown, and because it directed a reference
to the wrong tribunal in cases of dispute. The draught of another
circular was prepared; but so many difficulties beset the subject
that it was not deemed advisable to issue it. If occasion should
arise for a new order it would of course be made, but there
appeared to be no necessity for one at present.
Sometimes, the right to the property is confirmed by the special
conditions of the holding of the property whereon it is found.
Thus, at the above date, Lord Palmerston related in Parliament
that about two years ago some workmen, when digging a drain on one
of his farms, found a gold torque, which his Lordship purchased
of the man who discovered it, the value being about 30_l._ Lord
Palmerston, however, had an investigation made of the original
grant of the farm several centuries ago, and ascertained that it
conferred on the grantee all the treasure-trove on the property;
wherefore his Lordship felt entitled to keep the relic in question.
In January, 1863, eleven pounds’ weight of ancient gold ornaments
were ploughed up in the neighbourhood of Hastings, and were sold
as old brass, to a man who had been a Californian gold-digger, and
recognised the metal as solid gold. He was taken into custody,
but discharged, the magistrates having no jurisdiction in the
matter, the power of making such an investigation being vested,
according to an old statute, (4th Edward I.) in the coroner; the
jury returning a verdict that the gold, (value about 530_l._) the
owner or owners not being known, was the property of the Queen,
and that the persons accused had concealed the finding from the
Queen and the coroner. This discovery of gold ornaments, and
their almost total destruction, render it desirable that the law
of Treasure-trove should be made clear to popular comprehension:
that if it is not just, as seems to be the common impression, it
should be amended, and the practice of the Crown, in exercising
its conventional rights, defined. At any rate, so long as finders
do not know that they will receive full value for discoveries,
and have not confidence in their appraisement, it is in vain to
expect country-folk will yield Treasure-trove to an authority they
contemn. In some parts a belief is held that such discoveries
entail condign punishment upon the finders: it was formerly a
capital offence; it is now a misdemeanour, punishable by fine and
imprisonment.
It is difficult to make the peasantry comprehend manorial rights.
A man who finds a treasure in his own ground, and that treasure
one which can have no living owner, naturally looks on himself
as its rightful possessor. He has probably never heard of King
Edward’s law of Treasure-trove, and a natural sense of justice
does not guide him rightly in the matter. If a liberal reward were
given--nearly the _metal_ value of the _trouvaille_--it is quite
possible that we might have become possessed of many precious
relics which now are broken up and consigned to the melting-pot.
In France, the right is more practically understood. Thus, in July,
1863, a pot of louis-d’ors was found in the Rue Lafayette, in
Paris, when the following adjustment was made.
One of the labourers while at work, struck his pick on to an
earthen jar, which broke, and out of which rolled several pieces
of gold. The other workmen hearing the sound, rushed round the
spot, probably to obtain a share of the treasure, when the latter
cried out “Stop! Form a ring around me, and then let no one
move.” The others obeyed. He then quietly picked up the pieces
of gold, which he placed in his hat, and, taking up the broken
jar which contained the remainder, he stood in the midst of the
circle, and said, “Now call a sergent-de-ville to accompany me
to the nearest police-office, where I will deposit the money.”
This was done, and the prize was found to consist of 978 gold
louis-d’or of twenty-four livres each, bearing the effigies of
Louis XV. and XVI., the whole amounting to more than 23,000f. The
whole was forwarded to the Prefecture of Police, where it was to
remain during the inquiry to discover the legitimate owners of
the property. It is only after that has been done that the share,
attributed by law to the finder of a treasure, will be paid to
the lucky workman.
_Principal and Agent._
There is a well-known case involving this point, in which the late
Lord Abinger differed from the rest of the Court of Exchequer:
a plaintiff had employed an agent to let a house for him, and
the defendant asked the agent “if there was any objection to the
house;” to which the agent in perfect good faith answered, there
was not. It turned out, however, that the adjoining premises were
of a disreputable character, of which the plaintiff was aware,
although his agent was not. The defendant, on the discovery of
the objection, refused to fulfil his written contract to take the
house; and the question was, whether he was liable for a breach of
the agreement. Lord Abinger thought he was not, but the rest of the
Court thought he was, and so judgment was given for the plaintiff.
Upon merely technical grounds, perhaps, the majority of the learned
Barons were right; but no one can read the masterly opinion of Lord
Abinger without feeling that the law _ought to be_ as he laid it
down, and on the broad and simple ground that in such a case the
knowledge of the principal should be held to be the knowledge of
the agent.
_Legal Hints._
Although no book ever was or ever can be written to enable a man to
dispense with the assistance of a lawyer in cases where a knowledge
of the law is practically required, attention to certain hints
may save him from many a scrape. Of this kind are the following
from Lord St. Leonards’s _Handy-Book_: You should be cautious
whom you employ as an auctioneer, for any loss by his insolvency
would fall upon you; he is your agent. We may add, however, that
he is the agent of both parties, buyer and seller; and for that
reason his signature satisfies the Statute of Frauds, and binds
both. Again, you may employ _one_ person to bid for you at an
auction when you sell property, to prevent its going beneath its
value; but you must not employ _more than one_, for that would be
considered unfair puffing. Never bid for a leasehold estate clogged
with the condition that the production of a receipt for the last
half-year’s rent shall be accepted as proof that all the lessee’s
covenants were performed up to that period; for there may have been
a prior breach of covenant, and the landlord may not have waived
his right of entry for the forfeiture. Do not take possession of
an estate until objections to the title are removed, for such a
step would in some cases be held to be an acceptance of the title.
Before you enter an auction-room make up your mind as to price,
and do not be led away by the persuasions of the auctioneer, who
is the agent of the seller, or the biddings of others. Do not sign
a contract tendered to you by the auctioneer, unless a reciprocal
contract is signed and delivered to you at the same time by him. In
writing about the sale or purchase of an estate, you should always
cautiously declare your offer not to be final, lest the other party
should, by accepting the terms you mention in your letter, not
intending them to be final, entrap you into a binding contract.
Mind your fire insurances. Very few policies against fire, says
Lord St. Leonards, are so framed as to render the company legally
liable. If you have added an Arnot’s stove, or made any other
important change in your mode of heating your house since your
policy, you should call upon the Company to admit the validity of
your policy by an endorsement on it.
_Vitiating a Sale._
It is rather startling to hear an ex-Lord Chancellor saying,
“Thus I have told you what truths you must disclose. I shall
now tell you what falsehoods you _may_ utter in regard to your
estate.” Of course it is not meant that morally any falsehood may
be told, but only that there are some which do not, at Law or in
Equity, vitiate the contract of sale. And it is curious to see
the distinctions taken in these falsehoods. They remind us of the
difference in Roman Catholic theology between venial and mortal
sins. Thus, you may falsely praise, that is, _puff_, your property.
You may describe it as uncommonly rich water-meadow, although it
is imperfectly watered. In selling an advowson you may falsely
state that an avoidance of the living is likely to occur soon. You
may say, as a mere puff, that your house is fit for a respectable
family; but you may not say, in answer to inquiries, contrary to
the fact, that the house is not damp. And you must disclose a
right of sporting or of common over your estate, or a right to dig
mines under it. The reason of such distinctions as given by the
law--_valeat quantum_--is, that some statements are cautions to
purchasers to make inquiries for themselves, and that concealments,
to be material, must be of something that the party concealing is
bound to state. Although Lord St. Leonards (in his _Handy-Book
of Property Law_) does not allude to the point, we might, had we
space, while upon this subject, enlighten our readers by a set
of cases in which the law relating to bugs is elaborately laid
down, and explain to them in what instances the presence of these
domestic nuisances in inconvenient numbers does or does not affect
a contract for taking a house. But we must be content to refer them
to the leading authorities in the pleasant volumes of Meeson and
Welsby, where they will find the law fully expounded.--_Saturday
Review._
_Law of Gardens._
Some persons, when leaving a place, finding they could not remove
the trees and shrubs, have them cut down; but they were actionable,
for the law prohibits waste with malevolent intentions. The
decision given in the case of Buckland _v._ Butterfield establishes
this point; for “a tenant is liable to pay for the waste, if he
cuts down or destroys,” &c. And it has also been decided by Lord
Denman, Mr. Justice Littledale, and Mr. Justice Parke, that a
tenant could not remove a border of box, planted in the garden
by himself; but that it belonged to the landlord, in the absence
of any agreement to the contrary. In the course of the argument
the counsel for the tenant asked, “Could not the tenant remove
flowers which he had planted in the ground?” Mr. Justice Littledale
instantly said, “No.”
_Giving a Servant a Character._
The giving a Character to a Servant is one of the most ordinary
communications which a member of society is called on to make; and,
as the learned Mr. Starkie observes, is a duty of great importance
to the interests of the public; and in respect of that duty a
person offends grievously against the interests of the community
in giving a good character where it is not deserved, or against
justice and humanity in either injuriously refusing to give a
character, or in designedly misrepresenting “one to the detriment
of the individual.”
The following Rules are suggested for the consideration of masters
and mistresses not acquainted with the law in such cases:
Rule 1. No magistrate has any jurisdiction touching the character
of a domestic servant; and the common threat of a master or
mistress being summoned for not giving a character is absurd.
Rule 2. It has been clearly decided that a character honestly
and _bonâ fide_ given by a master or mistress to any person
making the usual inquiry, is a privileged communication; and
unless inconsistent with truth, or actual malice can be proved by
evidence, no damages can be sustained. But it must be carefully
borne in mind that, however truly or honestly the character may
be given, an action at law can be brought against the master or
mistress, and the ladies of the family put to the anxiety of
appearing in court, as well as the lady to whom the character was
given. And, although the servant may be immediately defeated,
and the case stopped by the judge, you will find yourself some
fifty or sixty pounds out of pocket by your victory.
Rule 3. The only safe course, when a master or mistress cannot in
sincerity and truth recommend a servant, is to decline answering
any questions on the subject, and the following form of written
answer may prove useful: “Mrs. A. presents her compliments to
Mrs. B., and in reply to her note requesting the character of Ann
C----, trusts she will kindly excuse Mrs. A. declining to answer
any questions on the subject.” Address and date. A copy should be
kept.
In the case of Carrol _v._ Bird, the courts of law have decided
that neither master nor mistress is bound to give a character, and
that no action will lie against them for refusing. The cases also
of Taylor _v._ Hawkins are well worthy of notice. It must, however,
be repeated, that both justice and humanity claim from a master and
mistress their kindest care and consideration for the character
of their servants, more particularly female servants; but it is
confidently believed that if the above rules were better known and
more generally acted on, all good and honest servants would be
gainers.--_Times_, April 19, 1860.
It may be useful to mention here that in the Court of Exchequer, a
cook, formerly in the service of Col. Sibthorp, M.P., brought an
action against him for an alleged libel in a letter to a lady who
had applied to him for the character of the cook, but which was not
satisfactory to the lady. It was submitted the Colonel’s letter
being proved a privileged communication, the action could not be
maintained without proof of express malice on the part of the
defendant, of which there was not the slightest evidence; the judge
concurred in this view, and the plaintiff was accordingly nonsuited.
_Deodands._
Within memory, when an accident occurred, it was customary to
inflict a kind of fine or penalty thus: supposing a boy was run
over by a vehicle, the verdict was recorded “Accidental death, with
a deodand of one shilling upon the cart.” In the _Liber Albus_ (27
Henry III.), we read that a man fell from a boat into the Thames,
and was drowned; no one was held in suspicion as to the same; the
judgment was “Misadventure,” and the value of the boat, 4s. 7d.,
was exacted as a deodand, payable to the king. [See _Things not
generally known_, First Series, p. 173.] The _deodandum_ (Deo
dandum, given to God) of our jurisprudence may be reckoned among
the mysterious things of history. The deodand is philanthropic,
it is religious, and it is so far clerical, that its value, when
levied, was handed over to the clergy. Fleta, a commentator on
English law, _temp._ Edward I., says that the deodand is to be
sold, and the price distributed to the poor, for the soul of the
king, his ancestors, and all faithful people departed this life.
Yet it was not _ecclesiastical_: it cannot be recovered by suit
in the courts of canon law, but only in the courts of the king’s
coroner, either for counties, or for all England. This ancient
custom was abolished by act 9th and 10th Vict., cap. 62, which
enacts that subsequent to September 1st, 1846, there shall be no
forfeiture of chattels in respect of homicide.
_Arrest of the Body after Death._
It was long erroneously believed that the body of a debtor might be
taken in execution, in this country, after his or her death. Such,
however, was the practice in Prussia, till its abolition by the
Code Frédérique.
The above idle notion we remember to have been repeated in
connexion with the pecuniary embarrassments of Sheridan, at the
time of his death, in 1816. It may have been fostered through
the mis-reading of an account of a sheriff’s officer arresting
the dying man in his bed; “he would have carried him off in his
blankets, had not Dr. Bain assured him it was too probable his
prisoner would expire on the way to the lock-up house!” After
Sheridan’s death, the removal of his remains from Savile-row to Mr.
Peter Moore’s house, in George-street, Westminster, to be near the
Abbey for interment, more probably led to the story that the body
was removed to escape arrest.
_The Duty of making a Will._
When in 1859, Lord Northwick’s collection of pictures was about
to be disposed of by auction, at Thirlestane-house, Cheltenham,
we paid a visit to the gallery, and great was our regret at the
thought of the dispersion of so extensive a collection, which had
long been the pride of Cheltenham, and had been to that thriving
town what the National Gallery is to the metropolis. Lord Northwick
had collected these pictures during a life extending for nearly
a quarter of a century beyond the average term allotted to man.
Until within a year or two of Lord Northwick’s death, in 1859,
he spent much of his time every day among his pictures, and took
great delight in pointing out their beauties to any intelligent
visitor. The collection, and another at Campden, were swept away
by sale, which realized nearly 100,000_l._ Upon our visit to the
Thirlestane Gallery, much as we were gratified with the pictures,
we became impressed with the futility of devoting a long life to
their collection, without providing against their dispersion; and
subsequently to the sale, there appeared in the _Morning Post_ the
following remarks, which more fully bespeak our own feelings upon
the subject:
We contemplate the dispersion of these pictures with two painful
reflections, which, by way of caution or suggestion to other
collectors, we wish to impress upon the public. The first is
the comparative uselessness of collecting works of art without
some provision for their preservation. The purpose of a life is
dissipated, and a new illustration is given to the preacher’s
moral, “_Vanitas vanitatis est omnia vanitas_.” Undoubtedly, he
who collects treasures of art in the way Lord Northwick did,
and gives the public the benefit of them during his life, does
a great service in his day and generation; but it is impossible
not to remember how much greater a service he renders who not
only forms a collection but provides for its perpetuity. In the
next place, see the duty of making a Will. These collections are
dispersed because they form a portion of the personalty of the
deceased, and there being no instructions as to their disposal,
there is no choice but to sell them, and appropriate their
proceeds among the heirs-at-law. Next to the mischief of making
an unfair Will is that of making none at all. Had Lord Northwick
ordered by Will the sale of his pictures, however disappointed
the world might have been, it would have been felt that he had a
right to do as he liked. But dying intestate, the sale follows
as a matter of course, and the results of a long life and large
fortune devoted to works of art are just nowhere. A gallery of
pictures left to a family or to the public is an offering at
the shrine of art; but, sold by auction, and dispersed among
innumerable private purchasers, is sheer vanity and labour lost.
_Don’t make your own Will:_
Lord St. Leonards, in his _Handy-Book of Property Law_, says: “I
am somewhat unwilling to give you any instructions for making your
Will, without the assistance of your professional adviser; and
I would particularly warn you against the use of printed forms,
which have misled many men. They are as dangerous as the country
schoolmaster or the vestry-clerk. It is quite shocking to reflect
upon the litigation which has been occasioned by men making their
own Wills or employing incompetent persons to do so. To save a few
guineas in their lifetime, men leave behind them a Will which it
may cost hundreds of pounds to have expounded by the courts before
the various claimants will desist from litigation. Looking at this
as a simple money transaction, lawyers might well be in despair
if every man’s Will were prepared by a competent person. To put
off making your Will until the hand of death is upon you, evinces
either cowardice or a shameful neglect of your temporal concerns.
Lest, however, such a moment should arrive, I must arm you in some
measure against it.
“If you wish to tie up your property in your family you really
must not make your own will. It were better to die without a will,
than to make one which will waste your estate in litigation to
discover its meaning. The words “children,” “issue,” “heirs of the
body,” or “heirs,” sometimes operate to give the parent the entire
disposition of the estate, although the testator did not mean any
such thing. They are seldom used by a man who makes his own will
without leading to a lawsuit. And now an operation has been given
to like words by the new statute, which I could not explain to you
without you possessed more knowledge of law than I give you credit
for. It were useless for me to show how to make a strict settlement
of your property, and therefore I will not try. I could, without
difficulty, run over the names of many judges and lawyers of note,
whose wills made by themselves have been set aside, or construed so
as to defeat every intention which they ever had. It is not even a
profound knowledge of law which will capacitate a man to make his
own will, unless he has been in the habit of making the wills of
others. Besides, notwithstanding that fees are purely honorary,
yet it is almost proverbial that a lawyer never does anything well
for which he is not fee’d. Lord Mansfield told a story of himself,
that feeling this influence, he once, when about to attend on some
professional business of his own, took several guineas out of his
purse and put them into his waistcoat pocket, as a fee for his
labour.”
_Bridewell._
This name, from a well dedicated to St. Bridget, or St. Bride,
between Fleet-street and the Thames, was given to a palace built
there, and which, soon after, became a House of Correction, in
the reign of Queen Mary. Hence, places of confinement in other
parts, in which employment and penitentiary amendment were leading
objects, were called _Bridewells_.
The greater part of the City of London Bridewell was taken down
in 1863; committals are now made to the City prison at Holloway,
but refractory City apprentices are still committed to Bridewell
by the Chamberlain, this jurisdiction being preserved by the
Court of Chancery. The number of committals rarely exceeds 25
annually, nevertheless the power of committal which the present
Chamberlain has most praiseworthily asserted and successfully
maintains, acts as a terror to evil-doers, and keeps in restraint
3000 of these lads of the City.
By a document lately discovered in the State-Paper Office, it
appears that in the Bridewell of London were imprisoned the
members of the Congregational Church first formed after the
accession of Elizabeth; they were committed to the custody of the
gaoler, May 20, 1567.
_Cockfighting._
British cocks are mentioned by Cæsar; but the first notice of
English cockfighting is by Fitzstephen, in the reign of Henry II.;
and it was a fashionable sport from _temp._ Edward III. almost to
our time. Henry VIII. added a cockpit to Whitehall Palace, where
James I. went to see the sport twice a week. There were also
cockpits in Drury-lane, Shoe-lane, Jewin-street, Cripplegate, and
“behind Gray’s Inn;” and several lanes, courts, and alleys are
named from having been the sites of cockpits. The original name
of the _pit_ in our theatres was the _cock-pit_, which seems to
imply that cockfighting had been their original destination. One
of our oldest London theatres was called the _Cockpit_; this was
the Phœnix in Drury-lane, the site of which was Cockpit-alley,
now corruptly written Pitt-place. Southwark has several cockpit
sites. The cockpit in St. James’s-park, leading from Birdcage-walk
into Dartmouth-street, was only taken down in 1816, but had been
deserted long before. Howell, in 1657, described “cockfighting, a
sport peculiar to the English, and so is bear and bull baitings,
there being not such dangerous dogs and cocks anywhere.” Hogarth’s
print best illustrates the brutal refinement of the cockfighting
of the last century; and Cowper’s “Cockfighter’s Garland,” greatly
tended to keep down this modern barbarism, which is punishable by
statute. It was, not many years since, greatly indulged in through
Staffordshire; and “Wednesbury (Wedgbury) cockings” and their
ribald songs were a disgrace to our times.
Cockfighting was, in fact, the great national amusement,
particularly in the north of England, and Berwick-upon-Tweed was
among the places most celebrated for it. Some ninety years ago, in
the north of England, when a cockfighting was about to take place,
the parties were in want of an adept in putting on the spurs: a
person present was recognised by an acquaintance, who exclaimed,
“Here comes a Berwick man; he knows how to do it.” Cockfighting
is now legally a misdemeanor; and on the 15th of April, 1857,
at the Liverpool Police Court, James Clark, a publican, in
Houghton-street, was fined 5_l._ and costs for permitting
cockfighting in his house.
In the autumn of 1862, several persons were convicted by the
magistrates at Barnsley, for cockfighting, under the Act, which
inflicts a fine on any one assisting at a cockfight, _in a place
used for the purpose_. This is an absurd condition, and is a
blunder of the Act-framer. Now, the _place_ used for the purpose
of _this fight_ was an old quarry; but the magistrates held that
any place where a cockfight took place was a place used for the
purpose, the fact of the fight being the evidence of the use. The
case came by appeal before the Court of Queen’s Bench, when the
Judges decided, in accordance with a ruled case, there must be
some evidence of general use, if on a piece of waste ground, and
that one act would only prove the use when it was a place over
which a man had some control. The judgment was therefore reversed.
At Bradford, within a few days of this decision, William Speight
and J. Holroyd were fined 3_l._ each for cruelty in having set
gamecocks to fight; twelve other persons, resident in various parts
of the Riding, were fined 10s. each.
On June 24th, 1863, before a bench of magistrates at Loughborough,
the Marquis of Hastings, and three of his gamekeepers, were
charged, on behalf of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to
Animals, with causing a cock to be cruelly tortured. It was proved
in evidence that three weeks before, the Marquis of Hastings had
“some good cockfighting” at Donington Hall, _on a Sunday_! They
fought six pairs of cocks, six cocks were killed, all had steel
spurs on, and the Marquis was one of the persons who put the cocks
together to fight; the other persons accused being spectators. Lord
Hastings admitted that the fight had taken place, but denied that
there had been any cruelty used in the sense of the words of the
information. His Lordship was, however, convicted in the penalty of
5_l._, and his three keepers in 2_l._ each.
_Ignorance and Irresponsibility._
Sir John Bowring states that he remembers a murder occurring in
Ceylon, and on the murderer being brought to trial, it was found
utterly impossible to make him comprehend that he had committed any
sin whatever in revenging himself upon one by whom he thought he
had been injured. The consequence was that the Judge came to the
conclusion that the murderer could not be held responsible for his
crime. So ignorant was this man that he could not count up to the
number of five, losing himself always at three.
_Ticket-of-Leave Men._
Archbishop Whately, who always handles a practical subject in a
masculine way, annihilates the English Ticket-of-leave system with
a single sentence:--“What should we think of a right, encouraged by
a Secretary of State, to go every day to a menagerie and let out by
mere rotation one animal from a cage without inquiring whether he
released a monkey or a tiger?” The Archbishop proposes that all
sentences beyond fifteen years should be irreversible, except by
an Act of Parliament, specifying the names, offences, and previous
committals of the prisoners pardoned.
_Cupar and Jedburgh Justice._
It is an odd circumstance that Lord Campbell, to whom both as judge
and legislator the law of England owes so much, was born at a place
which gives its name, “Cupar justice,” to the peculiar system of
law which hangs a man first and tries him afterwards; and that he
had his country residence (Hartrigge-house, Roxburghshire) in the
neighbourhood of another town which gave the name of “Jedburgh
justice” to an equally summary code, the great principle of which
is, “Hang all or save all.”
_What is to be done with our Convicts._
Transportation having had a fair and patient trial, and having
altogether failed as a punishment, and having no colony fitted and
willing to receive the sweepings of our gaols, the alternative to
which we are compelled is to keep our convicts at home, and to
make the best of them, by making them self-supporting. Or, in the
forcible words of the late Mr. Charles Pearson, City Solicitor:
If the honest millions, as they pass through life, can, and do,
during what is recognised as the producing age, not only provide
for their own wants, but create a large surplus, by which the
non-producing classes are supported and the institutions of
society are maintained, it surely ought not to be endured that
any portion of the same race and of the producing age ... should
be permitted to renounce their allegiance to the fundamental law
of their existence, and declare in practice, that by the sweat of
the face of other men, they will eat of earth’s choicest fruits.
The only rational, merciful, and effectual corrective of such
offenders against all laws, human and divine, is to classify and
place them in secure prisons, surrounded by lofty and substantial
walls; to subject them, week by week, to seventy, or at least
sixty, hours of useful and profitable work; to allow them sixty,
or at most seventy, hours for food, rest, cleanliness, and their
other bodily requirements; to give them twenty-eight hours with
means and opportunities for mental and spiritual instruction, and
for the public and private worship of God.... If any Government,
having thus placed at its disposal annually the hundred millions
of hours of confiscated labour, which 30,000 criminals would
yield, cannot make the class not only self-supporting, but
productive of a surplus for the future benefit of those who
produce it, such a Government would be pronounced by men of
business unfit to be at the head of a great manufacturing and
commercial people.
_The Game Laws._
In 1834, Mr. Henry Warburton, in Parliament, denounced the Game
Laws as they then existed, in this remarkable illustration:--“I
have read in Mariner’s account of the Tonga islands, that there the
rats were preserved as game; and, though everybody might eat rats,
nobody was allowed to kill them but somebody descended from their
gods or their kings. This is the only country and the only case I
know of which furnishes anything like a parallel to our game laws.”
_The Pillory._
The Pillory (Fr. _pilori_, probably from Lat. _pila_, a pillar) was
a mode of punishment by a public exposure of the offender long used
in most countries of Europe. No punishment has been inflicted in so
many different ways as that of the pillory. Sometimes the machine
was constructed so that several criminals might be pilloried at
the same time; but it was commonly capable of holding but one at
once. Francis Douce, in his _Illustrations of Shakespeare_, vol.
i., p. 146, gives six representations of distinct varieties of
this instrument. These varieties are all reducible, however, to
the simplest form of the pillory. It consisted of a wooden frame
or screen raised on a pillar or post several feet from the ground,
and behind which the culprit stood supported on a platform, his
head and hands being thrust through holes in the screen, so as to
be exposed in front. This screen, in the more complicated forms of
the instrument, consisted of a perforated iron circle or _carcan_
(hence the name given to the pillory in French), which secured the
hands and heads of several persons at the same time.
The Pillory seems to have existed in England before the Conquest,
in the shape of the stretchneck, in which the head only of the
criminal was confined; but it was usually constructed for the head
and hands. It was used for punishing all sorts of cheats; as,
bakers for making bread of light weight; fraudulent com, coal, and
cattle dealers; cutters of purses; sellers of sham gold rings;
forgers of letters, bonds, and deeds; users of unstamped measures,
&c. It was also a Star Chamber punishment; and from the time of
Titus Oates to its abolition, the pillory was a common punishment
for perjury. The usual places where the pillory was pitched were
the Royal Exchange, the Old Bailey, Temple Bar, Lincoln’s-Inn
Fields, Charing Cross, New Palace Yard, and Tyburn. About the year
1812, the writer remembers to have seen four men in the pillory,
at the north end of Fleet-market (Holborn-bridge). The last
person who stood in the pillory in London, was Peter James Bossy,
for perjury, in the Old Bailey, June 23, 1830. A pillory is still
standing at Coleshill, in Warwickshire; and in an unused chancel of
Rye church, Sussex, is a pillory, last used in 1813. The pillory
was abolished in Great Britain in 1837, by stat. 1 Vict., c. 23;
and in France in 1832.
_Death-Warrants.--Pardons._
Although we occasionally read in the public journals of the issue
of the usual Death-warrant for the execution of a criminal, there
is (except in the case of a peer of the realm) no such thing as a
death-warrant ever signed by the Crown or by any one or more of
the officers of the Crown; the only authority for the execution of
a criminal convicted of a capital crime being the verbal sentence
pronounced upon him in open court, which sentence the Sheriff
is bound to take cognizance of and execute without any further
authority. It is true that a written calendar of the offences and
punishments of the prisoners is made out and signed by the Judge,
of which a copy is delivered to the Sheriff; but this is only a
memorandum and not an official document, and it is optional with
the Judge to sign it or not.
The false notion of there being such a document as a Death-warrant
for the execution of a criminal has been fostered to our own time
by the frequent reference of writers of note to its existence. Sir
Nathaniel Wraxall says of Dr. Dodd’s case in 1777--
“_I have heard_ Lord Sackville recount the circumstances that
took place in the council held on the occasion, at which the
King assisted. To the firmness of the Lord Chief-Justice, Dodd’s
execution was due: for, no sooner had he pronounced his decided
opinion that no mercy ought to be extended, than the King, taking
up the pen, signed the death-warrant.”
This is flatly contradicted in the _Quarterly Review_, No. 57,
as follows:--Lord Sackville never could have told him any such
thing--the King _never_ signs any death-warrant--his pleasure on
the Recorder’s report is in ordinary cases _verbally_, and in fatal
cases _silently_, signified--and it is _always_ guided by the
opinion of the legal members of the Privy Council.
This popular error of the Death-warrant is fully explained, from
an accredited legal source, in _Things not generally known_, First
Series, p. 172.
It is erroneously supposed that the Sovereign can save a life
that has been declared forfeit by the law; but the Sovereign’s
sign-manual to a pardon is of no effect unless it be countersigned
(that is, sanctioned) by a responsible minister.--_J. Doran,
F.S.A._; _Last Journals of Horace Walpole_, vol. i.
_Origin of the Judge’s Black Cap._
The practice of our Judges in putting on a Black Cap when they
condemn a criminal to death will be found, on consideration, to
have a deep and sad significance. Covering the head was in ancient
days a sign of mourning. “Haman hastened to his house, mourning
and having his head covered.” (Esther vi. 12). In like manner
Demosthenes, when insulted by the populace, went home with his
head covered. “And David ... wept as he went up, and had his head
covered; ... and all the people that was with him covered every man
his head, and they went up, weeping as they went up.” (2 Samuel
xv. 20.) Darius, too, covered his head on learning the death of
his Queen. But among ourselves we find traces of a similar mode
of expressing grief at funerals. The mourners had the hood “drawn
forward over the head.” (Fosbroke, _Encyc. of Antiq._, p. 951).
Indeed, the hood drawn forward thus over the head is still part of
the mourning habiliment of women when they follow the corpse. And
with this it should be borne in mind that, as far back as the time
of Chaucer, the most usual colour of mourning was black. Atropos
also, who held the fatal scissors which cut short the life of man,
was clothed in black. When, therefore, the Judge puts on the black
cap, it is a very significant as well as solemn procedure. He puts
on mourning, for he is about to pronounce the forfeit of a life.
And, accordingly, the act itself, the putting on of the black cap,
is generally understood to be significant. It intimates that the
Judge is about to pronounce no merely registered or suppositious
sentence; in the very formula of condemnation he has put himself in
mourning for the convicted culprit, as for a dead man. The criminal
is then left for execution, and, unless mercy exerts its sovereign
prerogative, suffers the sentence of the law. The mourning cap
expressly indicates his doom.--_Notes and Queries._
_The last English Gibbet._
In March, 1856, the last Gibbet erected in England was demolished
by the workmen employed by the contractors making docks for the
North-Eastern Railway Company upon the Tyne. The person who was
gibbeted at that place was a pitman, convicted at the Durham
Midsummer Assizes of 1832. So great was the horror and disgust of
all parties with the sight of the body of the poor wretch dangling
in chains by the side of a public road, that great gratitude was
expressed when the pitmen took it down one dark night. It is a
gratifying fact, showing the progress of civilization among the
mining population, that, though there have been several strikes
among them since 1832, none of those strikes have been marked by a
repetition of the fearful acts of violence of that year. At one of
the great meetings of pitmen held in the spring of 1832 the Marquis
of Londonderry attended on horseback to remonstrate with them. But
he had a company of soldiers with him, which were hiding in the
valley. This was known to the pitmen, and the pitman that held his
horse’s head as he spoke had a loaded pistol up his sleeve, in
case the Marquis should wave the soldiers to come up, to blow the
Marquis’s brains out. Fortunately, the good feeling and kind heart
of the nobleman prevailed, and that emergency did not arise.
_Public Executions._
It is the grossest and most illogical of assumptions to conclude,
without a particle of attempted proof, that Public Executions
produce only brutalizing effects upon the spectators. It is just
as fair to assume that their results even on the spectators are
edifying. But these results are only remote and indirect, and
comparatively unimportant. Public executions are to be justified on
other grounds than their effects on bystanders. They are designed
not only to prevent possible murder but to avenge actual murder.
They are great retributive acts; they represent and embody the last
and most solemn and weightiest impersonation of Eternal Justice. An
execution is retaliatory, and is to be defended as such. As we no
longer hang men for other crimes than that of murder, life for life
becomes a social necessity. Any other punishment than that of death
is incommensurate with the crime; and we cannot afford to place the
sanctity of human life and the safety of our spoons under the same
sanctions.--_Saturday Review._
On the other hand, it is maintained that executions ought never
to be made a spectacle for the multitude, who, if they can bear
the sight, always regard it as a pastime; nor for the curiosity of
those who shudder while they gratify it.
In neither of these views is the effect of a public execution upon
the criminal taken into account. This effect, as instanced at the
execution of the Mannings for murder, in 1849, was thus forcibly
urged by Sir Francis Head:
The merciful object of every punishment which the law inflicts,
is not so much to revenge the past crime as to prevent its
recurrence. Now, Mrs. Manning’s last moments clearly explain, or
rather indisputably prove, the benefit which society practically
derives from a public execution. She had courage enough--as she
sat smiling by his side--to plan the murder of “her best friend;”
to dig his grave; to prepare vitriol and lime to burn his body;
to blow his brains out; to bury him in her own kitchen. She
had resolution enough--almost before he was cold--to go to his
lodgings to obtain his property. Her self-possession before the
police authorities at Edinburgh was unexampled; her hardness of
heart on her trial, as well as in prison, most extraordinary. And
yet this bold, courageous woman, who after the murder, and with
her hands stained with blood, had said to her husband, “I think
no more of what I have done than if I had shot the cat that is
on the wall!” afterwards triumphantly adding, “I have the nerve
of a horse!” did not dare to face the indescribable terrors of
a public execution! She did not fear death in private; on the
contrary, she almost succeeded in gradually, with her own hands,
strangling herself; but her obdurate heart quailed at the idea
of beholding in fearful array before her, the uplifted horrid
faces of the London mob; and accordingly, as her last act, “she
drew from her pocket a black silk handkerchief, requested that
she might be blindfolded with it; and, having a black silk veil
fastened over her head, so as completely to conceal her features
from public gaze, she was conducted in slow and solemn procession
towards the drop;” and as for a few fleeting moments she stood
with bandaged eyes beneath the gibbet, how unanswerably did the
picture mutely expound the terror which the wicked very naturally
have of being publicly hanged before the scum and refuse of
society! “The whistlings--the imitations of Punch--the brutal
jokes and indecent delight of the thieves, low prostitutes,
ruffians, and vagabonds,” so graphically described by Mr. Charles
Dickens, were--by her own showing--not only the most fearful
portion of her sentence, but, under Providence, these coarse
ingredients may possibly have effected that momentary repentance
which the mild but fervent exhortations of the chaplain had
failed to produce.
Many men, neither sentimental nor enthusiastic, nor even
philanthropists, however, conclude that though public executions
under the present system are deterring, to a certain extent, yet
they are exceedingly brutalizing and calculated to harden and
deprave the spectators. Sir George Bowyer, M.P., has said:
The problem remains unsolved how the terror of capital
punishments is to be purified from the abominable accessories
and consequences which Dickens and Thackeray have so vividly and
usefully described. I am not one of those who think that capital
punishments are either unlawful or inexpedient. The passage in
Holy Writ which says that the civil ruler bears the sword to be a
terror to evil-doers, points out with infallible authority both
the lawfulness and the use of the extreme penalty. But still I
must admit that this dreadful prerogative of Sovereignty--the
power of life and death--may be, and is in this country,
exercised in such a way, that one might almost doubt whether the
moral pestilence which it spreads did not counterbalance the
security that it affords to society.
The Committee of the House of Lords on Capital Punishment were
so convinced of the evil effects of the present mode of carrying
into effect capital punishments, that they recommended that
executions should in future take place within the prison, and in
the presence only of official and selected witnesses. But this
opinion does not solve the difficulty. Mr. George Augustus Sala
truly says that private executions would not be tolerated in the
present state of society. Besides, certainly the terror produced
by the sight of death cannot be equalled by the sound of a bell
or the hoisting of a black flag, which the Lords’ Committee
propose; and these forms would soon lose any impressiveness. The
sight of death is, indeed, most awful to human nature:
“---- O sight
Of terror, foul and ugly to behold,
Horrid to think--how horrible to feel!”
The knowledge that a criminal had been put to death would no
doubt be less terrible to the criminal and dangerous population
if they were prevented from seeing the execution. If the plan
of private executions be rejected, what can be done to give a
character to public executions more wholesome than that justly
condemned by the committee?
The cold, business-like formality of a public execution is then
referred to: beyond a glimpse of the chaplain’s surplice there
is nothing to remind the spectators of the awful and sacred
character with which the Christian religion invests death. The
people see a man strangled, and that is all.
Archdeacon Bickersteth evidently felt this when he said before
the Lords’ Committee, “I would suggest that the churches might
be opened.... There might be a service at the time, and perhaps
a prayer for the criminal.” This is a very pregnant hint. At
the execution of three men at Dundalk a few years ago, when the
criminals came on the scaffold, all the people knelt and prayed
for them at the request of the priest. Those who were there
describe the scene as most solemn and honourable to the Irish
character. The prisoners confessed their guilt and declared their
penitence. An account describing a late execution for murder at
Ancona, says that the prisoner knelt on the scaffold and repeated
the Litany, the crowd making the responses. A friend of mine
who was at an execution for murder in Rome, told me that the
thousands of spectators round the scaffold recited the _Miserere_
and _De Profundis_ in a loud voice. How different this is from
“levity, jeering, laughing, hooting, whistling, low jesting, and
indecent ribaldry” described before the Committee! This contrast
surely suggests that the people in England should be better
taught than they are, and that it is by religious influences that
executions can be purified from their abominable and loathsome
effects. The people should be made to feel that they are, so to
speak, attending a death-bed scene of the most frightful and
appalling kind, and not the mere slaughter of a biped without
feathers.
Sir George Bowyer then relates how the problem is solved in Italy,
where, in every city is a religious society of laymen, called “the
Confraternity of Death,” or of Mercy, whose duty it is to attend
criminals before and at their execution:
The exposition of the blessed sacrament for the forty hours’
prayer commences in the churches, and the people attend in
great numbers during the whole day, and even sometimes during
the night. The prisoner is taken to the place of execution
(usually outside the town) in the following manner:--First the
great black cross and banner of the Confraternity is seen slowly
advancing, followed by the members walking two and two in their
black cassocks and their hoods over their faces, with apertures
for their eyes. As they proceed along the streets they recite the
Penitential Psalms aloud. They are followed by the litter for the
dead body, carried by four of their number; and then comes the
convict, assisted by the clergy and brethren. At the scaffold
the Confraternity stand round and continue their devotions until
the prisoner is dead, and then they remove the body in the same
funeral procession.
These facts, it must be admitted, are very suggestive; but, how far
such ceremonies are adapted for a Protestant country is extremely
questionable.
That experienced judge, Baron Alderson, in his answers given to a
Committee of the House of Commons, looked on the deterring effect
of punishment, such as it was, as more indispensable than the
reforming:--
“It is desirable--I do not know whether it is the duty of the
State--to make all criminals better if possible; but I think this
object is to be held subservient to that of preventing crime by
the example of punishment; and on no other principle that I can
perceive is it possible to defend capital punishments, which
can hardly be said to have any tendency to make the individual
criminals better, though I think they have a strong effect in
repressing crime.”
The latest evidence upon the subject is--that in September, 1863,
the Association for the Promotion of Social Science, holding its
second session at Ghent, discussed at great length the subject of
punishment of death. The abolition was finally voted by a great
majority. In the course of the debate a member read a list of
167 convicts sentenced to death, of whom 161 had been present at
capital executions; and he concluded from this fact, that the
witnessing capital punishment is not efficacious in the suppression
of crime.
FOOTNOTES:
[5] The Statutes were inscribed in Latin to the time of Edward I.
(1272); in Norman-French to about the time of Richard III. (1483);
and subsequently in the English language.
[6] Selected and condensed from the _Times_, June 13, 1863.
[7] See _Things not generally Known_, First Series, pp. 120-121.
_Popular Errors Explained_, p. 207.
[8] In some cases where parties had been married at Gretna, the
marriage used to be repeated, as soon as they returned to England,
_in a church_.
[9] In 1815 the number of marriages celebrated at Gretna was stated
in Brewster’s _Edinburgh Encyclopædia_, at 65, which produced about
1000_l._ at the rate of fifteen guineas each: Murray, however,
charged as low a fee as sixpence each.
[10] For the details of these successful steps for the abolition of
the Gretna Green marriages, the writer is indebted to the obliging
courtesy of a Correspondent who took an active part in the measure.
[11] This Treasury Minute of July 16, 1861, directs that the
superintendents and inspectors of police shall be authorized to
receive treasure-trove from the finders, and shall transmit it to
the Solicitor of the Treasury, who will ascertain at the Mint the
real intrinsic or metallic value of the treasure, and the amount
will then be remitted to the finder. Cases will no doubt occur
in which rare and valuable coins will be disposed of at a higher
price than their bullion value, but they will then find their way
into some collection, either public or private, and will not be
melted down. It should be generally known that treasure-trove is
not claimed peremptorily by the Crown, nor is there any occasion
for the finder to sell it to the nearest silversmith under the
apprehension that it would have to be given up without compensation.
Measure and Value.
_Numbers descriptive of Distance._
Before the introduction of railways we scarcely possessed any
standard by which an idea could be formed of the distances and
movements of the planets by comparison with those which exist on
the terrestrial globe. Thus, the mean distance of the moon from
the earth is about 237,000 miles. A steam-carriage on a railway,
proceeding uninterruptedly, at the rate of 25 miles an hour, would
run 237,000 miles in 1 year, 4 weeks, and 2 days. This falls within
the limits of our conception. We may imagine something analogous to
this, supposing a carriage, or rather a succession of carriages,
to be kept constantly at work for rather more than two years, and
working 12 hours per day. But our powers of imagination fail us
in estimating a distance equal to that of the earth from the sun,
namely, _ninety-five millions of miles_.[12] Our steam-carriage
illustration is here no longer available, since it falls far beyond
the boundaries of probability. Proceeding uninterruptedly at
twenty-five miles an hour, it would require 433 years to move over
a space equal to ninety-five millions of miles.--_Dr. Lardner._
_Precocious Mental Calculation._
A rare exceptional instance of this faculty being cultivated and
matured for a highly-useful purpose, is presented in the case of
Mr. Bidder, the eminent civil engineer, known in his childhood as
“the Calculating Boy.” (See a portrait in the _Boy’s Own Book_.)
George Parkes Bidder, when six years old, used to amuse himself by
counting up to 100, then to 1000, then to 1,000,000: by degrees, he
accustomed himself to contemplate the relations of high numbers,
and used to build up peas, marbles, and shot, into squares, cubes,
and other regular figures. He invented processes of his own,
distinct from those given in books of arithmetic, and could solve
all the usual questions mentally more rapidly than other boys
with the aid of pen and paper. When he became eminent as a civil
engineer, he was wont to embarrass and baffle the parliamentary
counsel on contested railway bills, by confuting their statements
of figures almost before the words were out of their mouths. In
1856, he gave to the Institution of Civil Engineers an interesting
account of this singular arithmetical faculty--so far, at least,
as to show that _memory_ has less to do with it than is generally
supposed: the processes are actually worked out _seriatim_, but
with a rapidity almost inconceivable. They are accomplished
mentally by occupying the mind simultaneously with the double
task of _computing_ and _registering_. The first--computing--is
executive, or reasoning, and is that portion of the process, which,
whilst it is the most active, is not that which causes the greatest
strain upon the mind. The result is recorded by the second faculty,
registering, which is the real strain upon the mind, and that by
which alone the power of Mental Calculation is limited.
Experience has shown that, up to a certain point, the power of
registering is as rapid as thought; but the difficulty increases,
in a very high ratio, in reference to the number and extent of
impressions to be registered, until a point is reached, the
registering of which, in the mind and by writing, are exactly
balanced. Below that point, mental registration is preferable;
above it, that by writing will be as quick, and more certain.
All the rules employed by Mr. Bidder were invented by him, and
are only methods of so arranging calculation as to facilitate
the power of registration: in fact, he thus arrives at a sort of
natural algebra, using actual numbers in the place of symbols. When
he first began to deal with numbers (in his 6th year), he had not
learned to read, and certainly long after that time he was taught
the symbolical numbers from the face of a watch.
A brief outline of Mr. Bidder’s method is given in the _Year-Book
of Facts_, 1857, pp. 149-152. The paper, _in extenso_, has been
edited and published by Mr. Charles Manby, F.R.S., Honorary
Secretary to the Institution of Civil Engineers.
_The Roman Foot._
The late celebrated architect and antiquary, Luigi Canina, made a
great number of inquiries as to the length of the ancient Roman
foot. He measured very carefully the Antonine and Trajan columns,
and found them (exclusive of their pedestals and some pieces let in
to repair them) exactly alike. This height, which was known to have
been 100 Roman feet, was measured with extreme care by means of
rods of wood carefully dried, and found to be exactly 29·635 French
mètres. Measuring chains were then constructed of this length,
and the Roman miles (_mille passuum_) carefully measured down the
Appian Way as far as the twelfth mile, and were found to correspond
with the traditional sites of the milestones. The great length of
these measurements being such an extensive check, their accuracy
was at once accepted by the Roman archæologists as the best
authority known. This would make the ancient Roman foot 11·66753
English inches; and the mile 4861·41 English feet; being about
one-eleventh less than our English mile of 5280 feet. For rough
reckoning the antiquary may deduct one-eleventh from Roman miles to
bring them into English; or may add one-tenth to English miles to
bring them into Roman; the ratio being 10:11, but inversely. There
is a common error in supposing the Roman mile, or _mille passuum_,
was 1000 paces, or single steps. This is not the case: the military
_passus_ consisted of _two_ steps (_gressus_), or about 5 feet
Roman.--_Notes and Queries._
_The Peruvian Quipus._
The well-known contrivance of the Quipus, or method of counting and
even recording events by means of cords, was equally ingenious and
original. The quipus of the Peruvians were of twisted wool, and
consisted of a thick cord, with threads more or less fine, attached
to the main part. The smaller lines were covered with knots, either
single or double. The size of the quipus varies much, sometimes the
main cord being five or six yards long, and at others not more than
a foot; the branches rarely exceeding a yard in length, and being
sometimes shorter. In the neighbourhood of Lurin, on the coast of
Peru, a quipu was found which weighed twelve pounds. The different
colours of the threads had different meanings: thus, the red
signified a soldier, or war; the yellow gold; the white, silver, or
peace, &c. In the system of arithmetic, a single knot signified 10,
two single knots 20, a double knot 100, a triple knot 1000, and so
on to higher numbers. But not only the colour and mode of combining
the knots, but also the laying-up of the strands of the cord,
and the distances of the threads apart, were of great importance
in reading the quipus. It is probable that in the earliest times
this ingenious contrivance was merely used for enumeration, as the
shepherd notches the number of his sheep on a stick; but in the
course of time the science was so much improved that the initiated
were able to knot historical records, laws, and decrees, so that
the great events of the empire were transmitted to posterity;
and, to some extent, the quipus supplied the place of chronicles
and national archives. The registry of tributes, the census of
populations, the lists of arms, of soldiers, and of stores, the
supplies of maize, clothes, shoes, &c., in the storehouses, were
all specified with admirable exactness by the quipus; and in every
town of any importance, there was an officer, called the quipu
camayoc, to knot and decipher these documents.--_Markham’s Visit to
Peru._
_Distances measured._
Many people hear of distances in thousands of yards--a usual
measure of artillery distances--and have very little power of
reducing them at once to miles. Now, four miles are ten yards for
each mile above 7000 yards, whence the following rule: the number
of thousands multiplied by 4 and divided by 7 give miles and
sevenths for quotient and remainder, with only at the rate of ten
yards to a mile in excess. Thus 12,000 yards is 48 7ths of a mile,
or 6 miles and 6 7ths of a mile: not 70 yards too great. Again,
people measure speed by miles per hour, the mile and the hour
being too long for the judgment of distance and time. Take half
as much again as the number of miles per hour, and you have the
number of feet per second, too great by one in 30. Thus 16 miles an
hour is 16 + 8, or 24 feet per second, too much by 24-30ths of a
foot.--_Athenæum_, No. 1854.
_Uniformity of Weights and Measures._
A collection of the Weights and Measures of the various countries
of the world, made, under the auspices of the International
Association, for obtaining a uniform Decimal System of Measures,
Weights, and Coins, was among the curiosities of the International
Exhibition of 1862. Few persons are perhaps aware of the
extraordinary diversities in weights and measures, and in their
use, which exist in our own country. The price of com, for
instance, will be quoted in at least fifteen different ways in as
many different localities; at so much per _cwt._, per _barrel_,
per _quarter_, per _bushel_, per _load_, per _bag_, per _weight_,
per _boll_, per _coomb_, per _hobbet_, per _winch_, per _windle_,
per _strike_, per _measure_, per _stone_. The word _bushel_ is in
some places used for a measure, in others for a weight, and this
weight is by no means the same in all places. In different English
towns the bushel means--168 lbs., 73½ lbs., 62 lbs., 80 lbs.,
75 lbs., 72 lbs., 70 lbs., 65 lbs., 64 lbs., 63 lbs., 5 quarters,
144 quarts, 488 lbs., and in Manchester, while a bushel of English
wheat is 60 lbs., a bushel of American wheat is 70 lbs. The meaning
of a _stone_ is almost equally various. An acre of land expresses
seven different quantities. These variations in measurement must
be highly inconvenient, and prejudicial to trade; and the labours
of the above-named Association are directed to bringing about a
uniformity, which seems greatly called for. The metrical system
employed in France is that which is advocated. This has been
already established in Belgium, Holland, Sardinia, Lombardy,
Greece, Spain, Portugal, and many other parts of the world. Great
Britain and the American States still adhere to their old systems.
_Trinity High-water Mark._
Trinity High-water Mark is placed in various parts of London, as
described in the _Register of Tides in the River Thames_, printed
by order of the Honourable Court of Commissioners, of the 26th of
October, 1849; and every bench-mark in London is shown in feet and
decimals of feet above an oblate spheroidal datum plane, decreasing
in radii towards the north pole from the centre of gravity between
the parallels of latitude at London and Liverpool, about 2·02 feet,
or 24¼ inches, which is evidently worthy of consideration, at a
rate of 2 feet to the mile in 40 miles of sewer. The difference at
Liverpool is also given in the aforesaid Report; and this may prove
of public utility if reported on by the engineer employed in the
levelling of the main drainage of London. The Ravensbourne drainage
is a specimen of such levelling. The approximate mean water at
Liverpool is 12½ feet below the level of Trinity High-Water at
London, as described identical with the level of the datum plane of
the Ordnance survey of London, which is also 12½ feet below the
level of Trinity High-Water mark.
_Origin of Rent._
The want of intelligent workmen, without the concurrence of other
causes, might have destroyed the old English predial polity,
if that system had not failed through its own nature; having
been essentially rude and awkward and uncommercial. Under the
Plantagenets, service could in general be reduced to money at the
discretion of the lord or the option of the tenant. The service
often cost the tenant more than it was worth--he found it cheaper
to pay than to work: on the other hand, money must have been at
all times welcome to the lord, and he did not at all times require
labour. In the course of time agricultural service went out of use
altogether, and money was regularly tendered and accepted instead
of it: so that the improved rent, as it has been called, now paid
by a farmer, appears to be a compound--historically considered--of
the ancient mail or gable, and of a great variety of petty charges,
which were originally compensations for tributes of corn, malt,
poultry, bacon, and eggs--or fines for the non-performance of acts
of tillage, carriage, porterage, and the like. The elements of rent
were recognised in Scotland longer than in England, because petty
charges subsisted in Scotland for some time after they had been
abandoned in England. At the beginning of the eighteenth century,
David Deans--the tough true-blue Presbyterian farmer--still
paid “mail duties, kain, arriage, carriage, dry multure, lock,
gowpen, and knaveship, and all the various exactions now commuted
for money, and summed up in the emphatic word RENT.”--_Heart of
Mid-Lothian_, chap. viii.; _Law Magazine_, N. S., No. 27.
_Curiosities of the Exchequer._
Mr. Foss, in his _Lives of the Judges_, tells us that the Court
of Exchequer was anciently sometimes called _Curia Regis ad
Scaccarium_; and its name was derived from the table at which it
sat, which was “a four-cornered board, about ten feet long and five
feet broad, fitted in manner of a table to sit about, on every
side whereof is a standing ledge or border, four fingers broad.
Upon this board is laid a cloth bought in Easter Term, which is of
black colour, rowed with strokes, distant about a foot or span,
like a chess-board. On the spaces of this Scaccarium, or chequered
cloth, counters were ranged, with denoting marks, for checking the
computations.”
In the old Court of Exchequer, at Westminster, before the
coronation of King George IV., might be seen the chequered cloth
which covered the table of that Court. This table, at which sat the
officers of the Court, and the king’s counsel, was ten or twelve
feet square, and was covered with a woollen cloth, the groundwork
of which was white, with a very dark blue chequered pattern over
it; the dark stripes being about three inches wide, leaving between
them white squares of about four inches across.
Again, the cover on the table of the Exchequer Court in Dublin is
composed of a thick woollen substance made in squares of black and
white, resembling a chess-board.
The origin of the word _Scaccarium_ (whence Exchequer) is not
certain. Madox, the historical authority upon the subject,
considers the most likely derivation to be from _Scaccus_, or
_Scaccum_, a chess-board, or the _ludus Scaccarium_, the game
of chess. He then refers to the chequered cloth mentioned by
Foss; adding, “from the Latin _Scaccarium_ cometh the _French
Eschequier_, or _Exchequier_, (_Exchiquer_,) and the English name
from the French.”
Mr. G. A. Sala, in a communication to _Notes and Queries_, 3rd S.
No. 81, however, traces exchequer to the Italian _Zecca_, treasury
or mint; whence, also, he derives the word cheque; remembering that
in old time our goldsmiths were Lombards and Venetians.
However this may be, the forms by which accounts were kept in
the Exchequer, and receipts given for moneys paid by “the King’s
debtors” in those days, when few persons knew how to write and
cipher, and “double entry” was unknown, were strictly observed down
to a period scarcely thirty years ago. The rude wooden “tallies”
that were prepared as quittances for payment, and stowed away in
the Exchequer as entries of receipt, were still maintained in their
sham employment until finally abolished by an Act passed in 1834.
The officials who superintended, or were supposed to superintend,
the operation of cutting, delivering, and keeping the tallies were
paid by fees on all receipts; and as the national revenue augmented
their incomes became enormous. A “Tallier,” or, as the name became
latterly, “Teller,” of the Exchequer enjoyed at last an income from
his sinecure office of more than 30,000_l._ per annum.
The Tally was a slip of willow-wood, cut to a length proportioned
to the magnitude of the pecuniary transaction it was intended to
record. Its indications were rendered by notches, which signified
various sums, according to their size and shape.[13]
When fabricated the instrument indicated this meaning. A large
notch of an inch and a half in width signified 1000_l._; a
smaller notch, one inch in width, signified 100_l._; one of
half-an-inch signified 20_l._; a notch in the wood slanting to
the right signified 10_l._ (in combination this notch was placed
before the 20_l._ notch); small notches signified 1_l._ each; a
cut sloping to the right signified 10s. (in combination placed
before the 1_l._ marks); slight indentations, or jags, in the
wood signified shillings; strokes with ink on tally signified
pence; a round hole, or dot, signified a halfpenny; a farthing
was written in figures.
When split in two lengthwise across the notches, each section of
the tally, of course, corresponded exactly. One half was then
delivered to the party paying money, as a receipt, and the other
kept by the officers of the department, as a check or record of
the transaction. On neither side was the slightest value attached
to the tally; but down to 1834 no payment could be made into
the Exchequer without summoning the officers of the Tally, who
gravely notched and split the willow wand, and handed over the
Exchequer half to be placed in careful custody. The absurdity
came to an end in that year; but by way of farewell ceremony,
is reported to have burnt down the Parliament Houses; certain
furnace flues having become overheated by burning a lumbering
mass of Exchequer tallies. Nor was the tally the only idle
formality observed when payments were made into the Exchequer.
Centuries ago the Royal moneys were actually received and kept
in that department; but for a long while past the actual cash
has been lodged in the Bank of England, where it is more safely
guarded, and more conveniently administered. Nevertheless, every
sum received on Exchequer account was still nominally brought to
the Exchequer Office; and for that purpose a Bank clerk regularly
attended every day with a bundle of cancelled notes, which were
solemnly counted over and checked, and deposited as a precious
trust in a massive iron chest secured with three keys, each in
the custody of different officers.
The tally in course of time failed to satisfy the payers of money
to Exchequer account, and a written quittance became necessary.
This also in its turn grew obsolete in form and language, but was
in like manner preserved in all its antique unintelligibility
until the Act of 1834.
Such was the “tally” system of olden time, and, undoubtedly, it in
some way is involved in the origination of what is known as the
“tally shop” system of to-day.
Formerly, in the Exchequer business, the collectors and receivers
charged with the receipt of public moneys from the taxpayers were
required to find sureties for their honesty. These security bonds
were valid only for a year, and, therefore, annually renewed,
to the great profit of the law and other officers of the Crown.
When each collector had duly settled his account, and paid-in all
the proper moneys into the Exchequer, for any year, he received
back his bond, signifying a discharge from all further liability,
and this was called getting his _quietus_. The practice and the
term are now disused, but they evidently constituted the point of
_Hamlet’s_ allusion:--
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin.
_What becomes of the Public Revenue._
Of the seventy millions of the Revenue more than one-third is
disposed of by the interest of the National Debt, a charge not
liable to any important variation. It was less by 89,412_l._ in
1862 than in the year before. But the difference is very slight
on such a sum as 26,142,606_l._ The armed force of the country is
the next great channel of expenditure. The Army in 1862 absorbed
15,570,869_l._, an increase of 399,000_l._ over its cost in the
previous year. The Navy required 12,598,042_l._ in the same period,
or 733,626_l._ less than in 1861. Together they account for more
than 28,000,000_l._ of the public expenditure. The naval and
military operations in China figure in both years of this return.
In 1861 they drew from the Exchequer 3,043,896_l._; and in 1862 a
further sum of 1,230,000_l._ The votes or money for fortifications
rose suddenly from 50,000_l._ in 1861 to 970,000_l._ in 1862. There
are small variations, both of reduction and increase, dispersed
through an immense number of items, but when the gross sum they
absorb is reckoned up, the difference between one year and another
is scarcely worth noting.
_Queen Anne’s Bounty._
The origin of this revenue, which is considered to effect little
compared with what might be accomplished under improved management,
is as follows. We know that in olden times the Romish Pontiff had
the “tenths” of the net annual income of good livings, as well
as first-fruits. When the Pope and Henry VIII. quarrelled, and
the Papal supremacy was subverted, not only was the supremacy
in ecclesiastical affairs transferred from the Pope of Rome to
England’s supreme ruler, but also the tenths and first-fruits
likewise. At length Queen Anne came to the throne, when (with the
consent of her Parliament) she nobly refused to receive what the
Church should enjoy, and placed the income under the direction of a
Board called “the Governors of Queen Anne’s Bounty.” Their revenue
for the improvement of poor livings is considerable, but it might
be largely increased. The Pope would have had the real present
value, and not that of centuries since; yet, strange to say, while
some old benefices have been freed from payment no new rich livings
have since been included, and all the old ones are rated according
to the absurd scale of assessment made in the time of Henry VIII.
To illustrate this the writer compiled the following, some time
since:--
+-----------------------+------------+-----------+-------------+
| | | Value in | Value in |
| Benefice. | Diocese. | King’s | Clergy |
| | | Books. | List. |
+-----------------------+------------+-----------+-------------+
| 1. Stanhope | Durham | £67 6 8 | £4848 0 0 |
| 2. Whitchurch | Lichfield | 8 17 0 | 1458 0 0 |
| 3. Halsall | Chester | 24 11 5 | 3500 0 0 |
| 4. Croston | Manchester | 31 11 0 | 1050 0 0 |
| 5. Edgmond | Lichfield | 46 8 0 | 2600 0 0 |
| 6. Houghton-le-Spring | Durham | 124 0 0 | 1600 0 0 |
| 7. Bingham | Lincoln | 44 7 0 | 1503 0 0 |
| | +-----------+-------------+
| | | £347 1 1 | £16,559 0 0 |
+-----------------------+------------+-----------+-------------+
Thus, seven benefices which now pay only 34_l._ as tenths to the
fund, would, if rated according to the present net value, furnish
1600_l._ annually. If this were altered, and a graduated scale of
taxation upon all valuable livings adopted, we should soon see a
more equitable and less objectionable management of ecclesiastical
affairs. If all the rich clergy regularly assisted the poor
benefices, would not the rich laity do the same?
We quote the above from a communication to the _Times_, 1862. It
has been significantly remarked that a Report of the Receipts and
Expenditure of the Bounty is desirable.
_Ecclesiastical Fees._
A Return issued in 1863, gives a curious list of Fees payable by
members of the sacred profession. The Bishop of Lichfield had to
pay 624_l._ on his appointment to that see; the Bishop of Bath
and Wells 450_l._ on his translation from Sodor and Man. To this
prelate the Attorney-General, or “his office,” presented a demand
for nearly 30_l._; the Secretary of State (including stamp),
23_l._; a mysterious impersonality, “the Petty Bag-office,”
absorbed 167_l._ When the Bishop had his audience of Her Majesty
the homage fees were 94_l._, and the _Court Circular_ charged
a guinea for its line and a half of history. The bill winds up
with an item of 21_l._ for “passing documents through the various
offices.” Bishop Baring’s “homage” on translation from Gloucester
to Durham cost him only 21_l._ 6s. 8d. The Bishops of Chester and
Lichfield add an item of 11_l._ 2s. and 12_l._ for gloves. The fees
on the consecration of a church or churchyard are heavy, but it is
noticeable as a rule that the bishops waive the customary payment
to themselves.
_Burying Gold and Silver._
The practice of burying treasure in the earth has uniformly
prevailed in all countries harassed by intestine commotions,
or exposed to foreign invasions. Of sums so deposited a very
considerable proportion has been altogether lost; and this has,
no doubt, been one of the principal means by which the stock of
the precious metals has been kept down to its present level. Every
one is aware that, during the Middle Ages, _treasure-trove_, or
money dug from the ground, formed no inconsiderable part of the
revenues of this and other countries. And though the burying of
money has long ceased in Great Britain, such has not been the case
with our neighbours. Wakefield tells us that, down to 1812, the
practice was common in Ireland; and though much fallen off, it
still continues to this day to be occasionally resorted to in that
part of the kingdom. It has always prevailed, more or less, in
almost every part of the Continent. The anarchy and brigandage that
accompanied the Revolution of 1789 made the practice be carried
to an extraordinary extent in France; and there, owing to various
causes, it still maintains a broad and firm footing. Dupuynode, in
1853, estimated the sum at 40 millions thus rendered sterile. Yet,
we doubt whether the burying of treasure be at present as prevalent
in France as in many parts of Germany, and in Hungary, Russia,
Italy, Spain, and European Turkey. The feeling of insecurity that
has prevailed in all these countries, especially since 1848, has
given a stimulus to this practice. Of the many millions that were
distributed among the countries round the Black Sea, during the
late campaigns in that quarter, the greater portion is believed to
be as much withdrawn from circulation as if it had never been dug
from the mine.
It is impossible, of course, to form any estimate of the sums that
are thus annually, as it were, placed in mortmain. They are always
greater when wars or revolutionary disturbances are in progress;
when their occurrence is anticipated, or but little confidence is
placed in the permanence of existing institutions. There can, at
all events, be no question that the sums which have been disposed
of in the way now stated in the different Continental countries
of late years have been enormous--greater, perhaps, than those
absorbed by any of the usual channels of expenditure. But the
practice has been carried to a greater extent in India, Persia,
Turkey in Asia, and other eastern countries, than anywhere in
the western world. Despotism and a want of security have always
prevailed in these countries. The inhabitants have been, in
consequence, accustomed to regard the money they have committed to
the earth as their only real wealth, and have availed themselves of
every opportunity to place portions of their means beyond the grasp
of their avaricious and tyrannical masters. And as many of the
hoards so deposited will never be brought to light, the practice
has, undoubtedly, been a principal cause of the constant flow of
bullion to the East.
Bernier, “that most curious traveller,” as he is called by Gibbon,
has some remarks on this subject, in which he calls the empire of
the Mogul an abyss of gold and silver, which the people buried to
escape the injustice and exactions to which they were exposed.
At a later date, Mr. Luke Scrafton refers to the same practice.
“In India,” he says, “the Hindoos bury their dead under-ground,
often with such secresy as not to trust their own children with
the knowledge of it; and it is amazing what they will suffer
rather than betray it. When their tyrants have tried all manner
of corporal punishments upon them, and that fails, resentment
prevailing over the love of life, they frequently rip up their
bowels, or poison themselves, and carry the secret to their graves.
And the sums lost in this manner in some measure account why the
silver of India does not appear to increase, though there are such
quantities continually coming into it, and none going out.”
The comparative security that was lately enjoyed by the natives in
most parts of India may have done something to lessen this habit,
in the countries directly under the Company’s government; but there
was in Oude, and many other parts of India, previous to the late
insurrection, a good deal of disorder, oppression, and robbery.
And since that unfortunate outbreak, insecurity and disorders of
all sorts have immeasurably increased, and have proportionally
stimulated the practice of hoarding. The rebellion in China led
to similar effects; and we have been assured by those who, from
experience and observation are well qualified to form an opinion on
such a subject, that it may be moderately estimated that in India
and China, during the half-dozen years ending with 1857, a sum of
not less than 100,000,000_l._ sterling has been consigned to the
earth.--_J. R. Macculloch_; _Ency. Brit._, 1859.
Thirty years ago, _hoarding_ coin went on in England to a
considerable extent, and greatly augmented the scarcity, and
consequently the value, of the precious metals. Even the old
practice of _making a stocking_ was by no means given up in rural
districts. A writer in the _Quarterly Review_, 1832, states,
“We ourselves, but a few days back, personally witnessed an old
crone, the wife of a small and apparently poor farmer, in a wild
pastoral district, bring no less than three hundred sovereigns
in a bag to a neighbouring attorney, to be placed by him in
security; her treasure having accumulated till she was afraid to
keep it longer at home. Such examples are by no means so rare as
may be imagined. The failures of so many country banks in 1825
destroyed the confidence of country-people in the bank-notes of
the present banks, and causes their preference for gold. The
failure of many attorneys, as well as of country banks, which
received and gave interest on deposits, and, (with the exception
of the savings’-banks, which are very limited in the amount of the
deposits they allow,) the total absence, in the rural districts of
England, of any safe and accessible depositaries for the savings of
the economical, such as the invaluable Scotch banks, have tended
most injuriously to discourage economy; and where that principle
was strongly ingrafted, have converted it into a practice of
hoarding--have caused it to stagnate in unprofitable masses, which,
spread through proper channels, would have stimulated new industry
and new accumulations, and added both to the wealth of the owner,
and to the general stock.”
_Results of Gold-seeking._
The question as to the probable continuation, increase, or
diminution of the Supply of Gold is of the greatest interest;
though nothing but the vaguest conjectures can be offered
respecting it. Though gold be very generally distributed, it
is extremely doubtful whether there be many places in which
the deposits are so rich and so extensive as in California and
Australia; and even in these the produce is either stationary,
or has begun to decline. The myriads of adventurers that are
attracted to prolific diggings can hardly fail, in no very
lengthened period, to rifle the richest beds. And when this is
done--when the excitement caused by the original discovery is worn
off, and the great prizes in the gigantic lottery recur only at
distant intervals,--then, unless some new and equally promising
discoveries should be made, a serious check will be given to the
gold-seeking mania. The process of quartz-crushing is believed to
produce only moderate profits, and is not of a kind to collect
crowds of competitors. The few fortunes that have been realized in
California and Australia have not been made by the diggers, but by
the merchants and others who have supplied their real or imaginary
wants, or bought their gold-dust and nuggets on advantageous
terms. Of those engaged on their own account in the search of
gold, very few have retired from the pursuit with anything like a
real competence. The great majority have hardly realized the wages
current in the districts before the deposits were discovered; and
the conviction seems to be everywhere gaining ground, that more is
to be made by cultivating the surface of the earth than by digging
in its bowels, or crushing its rocks.--_J. R. Macculloch_; _Ency.
Brit._, 1859.
_What becomes of the Precious Metals?_
The indestructibility of Gold is one of its many characteristics,
and some very curious questions arise from the fact. We know that
at a very early period of the history of the human race, gold was
discovered in very large quantities, and was used for a variety
of ornamental and useful purposes. Among the latter may be named
its employment as a medium of exchange, not exactly in the form
of money, but nearly approaching to it. Pieces of the precious
metal were cut into certain lengths and were stamped with figures
denoting their weight, and these circulated freely among the buyers
and sellers of those remote and primitive times. What was known as
a talent of gold weighed, it is supposed, 125 lbs., and Dr. Adam
Clarke estimates that the revenue of King Solomon in gold, was
equal in value to about 4,683,375_l._ sterling. To some extent this
estimate is confirmed by the Bible; for it is stated in the book of
Kings that “the weight of gold that came to Solomon in one year,
was six hundred and three score and six talents of gold,” without
reference to silver, which the same authority states, “was nothing
accounted of in the days of Solomon.” According to Calmet, the
precious metals expended by the same monarch in building Jerusalem
and the Temple, amounted in value to eight hundred millions of
pounds sterling, and the questions naturally suggest themselves as
to where this enormous amount of material came from, and what has
become of it also.
It is sufficient for our purpose to know that the precious metals
did actually exist in very large quantities; and there is little
doubt that they had been accumulating almost from the period of
the creation of man. The early history of the Jews abounds with
statements as to the uses to which gold was put. The subsequent
conquests of Rome doubtlessly led to its absorption at one time of
a very large proportion of the accumulated mineral wealth of the
world.
It is also plain that the Romans could not employ the precious
metals for domestic purposes, or at least not to any considerable
extent. Watches, spoons, and plate were the inventions of much
later times. Since it is clear that many hundreds of tons of gold
found their way to Rome during its prosperous time, and equally
clear that gold is indestructible, we may well inquire, “What has
become of the vast treasures?” Was it, after the decline and fall
of Rome, distributed among other nations? Were large quantities of
the precious metals buried in the earth, which still holds them in
its keeping?
Amidst a multitude of suggestive replies there remains the
undoubted fact that gold is indestructible. Who shall say, in
short, in the presence of the certain knowledge we have, that war,
conquest, and spoliation have been the rule among nations for
centuries past, that some of the “talents” of King Solomon, are not
existing at this moment in the shape of sovereigns, in the pockets
of the subjects of Queen Victoria? Or, who will have the hardihood
to assert that the very watch-guard, or trinket he or she may wear,
is not a _bonâ fide_ part of the treasure forwarded by the Queen of
Sheba to Solomon the wise?
The fact seems to be clearly demonstrable that much of the gold and
silver spoken of in Scripture and in ancient profane history is
in active circulation at this hour amongst the inhabitants of the
globe.--_Mechanics’ Magazine._
_Tribute-money._
The coins of the British Prince Cunobelin were not only stamped
with the figures of animals, but with the word TASCIO, which
signified TASK, TAX, and TRIBUTE. The payment of them into the
Exchequer acquitted the subject of duties on merchandise, and was
also a commutation of personal services. “I have thought,” says
the learned Camden, “that in old time there was a certain sort
of money coined on purpose for this use, seeing, in Scripture, it
is called _tribute-money_; and I am the more confirmed in this
opinion, because, in some of the British pieces, there is the
Mint-master stamping the money with TASCIO, which among the Britons
meant the tribute-money.”
_The First Lottery._
The first Lottery in England of which we have any account, took
place in 1569, the proposals for which were published in 1567 and
1568. It consisted of 10,000 lots of ten shillings each: there
were no blanks, and the prizes consisted chiefly of plate. There
were then only three lottery-offices in London. The lottery was
drawn at the west door of St. Paul’s Cathedral; and the profits
were intended for the repair of the havens of the kingdom, and
other public works. M. Greillier considers this number of lots much
underrated, and raises them to 400,000; and he arrives at that
conclusion because the drawing was continued uninterruptedly _both
day and night_, between the 11th of January and the 6th of May. The
first Lottery for sums of money took place in 1630.
_Coinage of a Sovereign._
The number of operations necessary for the conversion of an ingot
of Gold into Sovereigns is greater than most persons are aware of.
In the first instance it is melted; in the second it is cast into
bars; in the third the bars are rolled; in the fourth they are cut
into short lengths; in the fifth they are annealed in copper pans;
in the sixth they are flattened into fillets; in the seventh the
fillets are adjusted; in the eighth they are punched, and blanks
produced; in the ninth the blanks are weighed singly by automaton
balances; in the tenth the blanks are marked, or have their edges
raised; in the eleventh they are annealed in cast-iron pans; in the
twelfth they are blanched in an acid bath; in the thirteenth they
are washed in cold water; in the fourteenth they are dried in hot
beech-wood saw-dust; in the fifteenth they are muffled; and in the
sixteenth stamped on both sides, milled on their edges, and made
perfect for circulation! Thus sixteen operations, separate and
distinct from each other, have to be performed in the production
of sovereigns from an ingot. But the ingot will be after all only
partly converted; the perforated “fillets,” amounting in weight
to nearly half that of the original ingot, must be returned to
the crucible, recast into bars, and these bars passed through the
routine processes above enumerated. The fillets resulting from
this second crop of sovereigns will again have to be melted, and
yet again and again, if the ingot is to be made to yield all its
value in coin; and thus the sixteen operations will be multiplied
before the last sovereign is obtained from the precious wedge of
gold.--_Mechanics’ Magazine._
_Wear and Tear of the Coinage._
It has been discovered by the Mint authorities that the intelligent
or intelligible life of coins is much shorter than it was prior to
the introduction of the railway system and cheap travelling. People
move about now more frequently than they used, and so does money.
Whether the former wear out sooner from their greater activity
is a problem for social economists, but that the latter does is
certain. Towards the close of the last century careful experiments
deduced the fact that deterioration among ten-year-old silver coins
of the various denominations was as follows:--Crowns, 3½ per
cent.; half-crowns, 10 per cent.; shillings, 24½ per cent.; and
sixpences, 38 2-10ths per cent. Now, the loss is nearly as follows
on coins of the same age:--Crowns, 5 per cent.; half-crowns, 12
per cent.; shillings, 30 per cent.; sixpences, 45 per cent.; and
threepences, over fifty per cent. This increase is evidently due
to “fast living,” so to speak, and the weakest individuals; or,
at any rate, the smallest, suffer most from its consequences. The
gold coinage does not deteriorate in anything like the same ratio,
and this from obvious causes. It is not subjected to anything
like the same course of treatment. It moves in higher and more
circumscribed circles, is only a legal tender when of legal weight,
and is therefore nursed with more care under the porte-monnaie
system. Of copper and bronze moneys, pence and halfpence suffer the
most rapid deterioration, farthings being the longest lived of the
three denominations. They are all tokens of value merely, and their
shortcomings are less noticed, and, indeed, of far less consequence
to the public.--_Mechanics’ Magazine._
_Counterfeit Coin._
There is little doubt that the method first employed in the
manufacture of money was that of pouring fluid bullion into earthen
moulds previously impressed by some rude artist with the device
intended to be represented on the coin; and that (as now in some
remote localities of Central India) a small cylindrical vessel,
forming a smelting-furnace, a pair of tongs, a cutting-tool or
file, and a pair of scales, constituted the entire apparatus for
a mint. It is not a little singular that the casting process is
that resorted to by counterfeiters up to this day. The customary
mode adopted for the production of spurious money at present is
precisely identical, indeed, with that employed in the manufacture
of genuine coin by the monarchs and the _moneyers_--as the
fabricators of money were then termed--of the Heptarchy, only that
the coiners of to-day use appliances superior to those of the
tenth century. A private coiner of the nineteenth century, whether
in Birmingham or London, expends very little in the purchase of
his plant of machinery. He provides himself with a pennyworth of
plaster of Paris, which he converts into a mould; making a genuine
coin serve as the medium for impressing the material when in a soft
state with the devices--the obverse and reverse. If he cannot steal
pint measures from a publican, he will have to invest a portion of
his capital in Britannia-metal spoons at a shilling a dozen, and
these he will break up and melt in an earthen pipkin, purchasable
for another penny. With a tobacco-pipe for a ladle he will take up
sufficient of the fused metal to create a florin, say, and this he
will pour into the moulds. As soon as these are filled, and the
base compound has become solidified, the moulds are separated,
and any defects observable in the graining or milling of the edge
are made good with a file or some other implement adapted to the
nefarious purpose. If, after this, a clever confederate can finish
the work by depositing a coat of silver (by galvanic agency), so
much the better for the manufacturer, his chance of uttering being
thus much enhanced.--_Mechanics’ Magazine._
_Standard Gold._
In 1855, an alteration was made in the quality of gold marked
in Goldsmiths’ Hall, it being represented to the President of
the Board of Trade that it would be advantageous alike to the
manufacturer and the public: instead of there being only two
different standards, there are now five--viz., 22, 18, 15, 12, and
9 carats. If, on the purchase of a watch, the cases, instead of
having the mark of “18 carat,” the gold of which would be worth
67s. per oz., should be marked only “12 carat,” the gold is worth
only 45s. per oz., and the purchaser has been legally robbed of the
difference in value, which, supposing the cases to weigh 1 oz. 10
dwts., would be 33s.
When purchasing a gold watch, therefore, see that the cases are
marked “18 carat;” if they are not so marked, do not make the
purchase.
_Interest of Money._
Among the curiosities of the Exchequer, it may be mentioned that
about the year 1857, there were paid into its account the proceeds
of a lottery prize, drawn in the reign of George II., but which
had remained unclaimed for 102 years. The original amount of the
prize was 490_l._, to which in the course of a century there had
been added 1499_l._ 8s. for interest. The sum of 1989_l._ 8s.
was therefore handed over for the public service; but even now we
have no doubt that if the purchaser of the ticket, warned by this
announcement of the fact, can come forward and prove his claim, the
money will be honourably refunded to him from the Exchequer.
_Interest of Money in India._
In the _Institutes of Menu_, which were drawn up about B.C. 900,
the lowest legal interest for money is fixed at 15 per cent., the
highest at 60 per cent. Nor is this to be considered a mere ancient
law now fallen into disuse. So far from that, the _Institutes of
Menu_ are still the basis of Indian jurisprudence; and we know, on
very good authority, that in 1810, the interest paid for the use
of money varied from 36 to 60 per cent.; Ward places it at 75 per
cent., and this without the lender incurring any extraordinary risk.
_Origin of Insurance._
Mr. G. F. Smith, in a paper read to the Institute of Actuaries, is
of opinion that the earliest direct mention of Marine Insurance
is in an ordinance of the City of Barcelona, of the year 1433,
in which it is ordered that no vessel should be insured for more
than three-quarters of its value; that no merchandise belonging
to foreigners should be insured at Barcelona, unless freighted on
board a ship belonging to the King of Arragon; and that merchandise
belonging to Arragonese subjects on board vessels belonging to
other countries should only be insured for half its value. It
appears most probable that the inventors of Marine Insurance were
the Italians, who, as is well known, were the leading commercial
nation in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. It was in Venice
that the first Bank was established, and that a funded debt,
transferable from hand to hand, was first introduced. Bills of
exchange, if not invented in Italy, were used extensively by the
Lombard merchants and money-dealers; and book-keeping by double
entry is of Italian origin; as is also the phrase, “Policy of
Assurance.”
After the Great Fire, Assurance Offices were set up. One of these
is described, in Phillips’s _World of Words_, under the heading
“Phœnix Insurance Office, the first office that was set up in
London for the insuring of houses from accidents by fire, so called
from its emblem or device: the rate for ensuring 100 pounds on a
brick house, is 6 shillings for 1 year, 12 shillings for 2 years,
15 shillings for 3 years, 19 shillings and sixpence for four years,
1 pound 10 shillings for seven years, and 2 pounds 1 shilling for
eleven years: the number of houses so insured since Anno Dom. 1681
is ten thousand.” A second is mentioned as the “Friendly Society,
one of the offices settled in London for the insuring of houses
from casualties by fire: the reward or consideration-money paid for
insuring to the value of 100 pounds in this office, is 1 shilling
4 pence per annum for seven years. The device of it is a sheaf of
arrows, and the number of houses insured since A.D. 1684 is 12,500.”
_Stockbrokers._
Stock-jobbing or broking was contemporaneous with the creation of
our National Debt, in the reign of William III., 1695, and gave
rise to that class of money-dealers who have the exclusive _entrée_
to the Royal Exchange. “William,” says Mr. Francis, in his work on
the Stock Exchange, “had already tried his power in the creation of
a national debt: jobbing in the English funds and East India stock
succeeded; and the Royal Exchange became what the Stock Exchange
has been since 1700--the rendezvous of those who, having money,
hoped to increase it, and of that yet more numerous and pretending
class, who, having none themselves, try to gain it from those who
have.”
In the course of the Session of 1771, a Bill was brought into the
House of Commons, “for the more effectually preventing the infamous
practice of Stock-jobbing.” It passed the committee, but was not
further proceeded in.
Lord Chatham, in the previous year, 1770, had, in Parliament,
denounced “the Monied Interest as a set of men in the City of
London, who are known to live in riot and luxury upon the plunder
of the ignorant, the innocent, the helpless. Whether they be the
miserable jobbers of ’Change-alley, or the lofty Asiatic plunderers
of Leadenhall-street, they are equally detestable.... By the
monied interest I mean that blood-sucker, that muck-worm, which
calls itself the friend of Government--that pretends to serve this
or that administration, and may be purchased on the same terms
by any administration--that advances money to Government, and
takes special care of its own emoluments. Under this description
I include the whole race of commissaries, jobbers, contractors,
clothiers, and remitters.”
In the South Sea year, patriots were made or marred by jobbing:
“from the Alley to the House,” said Walpole, “is like a path of
ants.”
Yet, it is an established fact, that, abroad and at home, all
parties having large financial operations, approach the London
Stock Exchange with more confidence than any other money-market in
the world.
_Tampering with Public Credit._
Thirty years ago, it was wisely said by a writer in the _Quarterly
Review_: “It is physically impossible to carry on the commerce of
the civilized world by the aid of a _purely_ metallic currency--no,
not though our gold and silver coins were every tenth year debased
to a tenth! Why, in London alone, five millions of money are
daily exchanged at the clearing-house, in the course of a few
hours. We should like to see the attempt to bring this infinity
of transactions to a settlement in coined money. Credit money, in
some shape or other, always has, and must have, performed the part
of a circulating medium to a very considerable extent. And (by
one of those wonderful compensatory processes which so frequently
claim the admiration of every investigator of civil as well as of
physical economy,) there is in the nature of credit an elasticity
which causes it, _when left unshackled by law_, to adapt itself
to the necessities of commerce, and the legitimate demands of
the market. Well may the productive classes exclaim to those who
persist in legislating on the subject, and are not content with
determining who may and who may not give credit to another, what
kind of monied obligations shall, or shall not, be allowed to
circulate--that is, to be taken in exchange for goods at the option
of the parties,--well might they exclaim, as the merchants of Paris
did to the minister of Louis, when he asked what his master could
do for them--“Laissez-nous faire,”--“Leave us alone, to surround
ourselves with those precautions which experience will suggest, and
the instinct of self-preservation put in execution.”
_Over-speculation._
During the prevalence of a speculative mania there is not one
person in ten among the English public that can be induced to weigh
any arguments or facts that run counter to their fancies; but by
the small proportion capable of giving heed, the following _résumé_
of British banking experience during the twelve years from 1846 to
1857 will be considered valuable.
In 1858 an interesting paper was published by Messrs. Waterlow
and Sons, under the ominous title of _British Losses by Bank
Failures_, and extending from 1820 to 1857. In the great mania
for the establishment of new banks, it may not be out of place
to call attention to the general facts proved in this document.
Omitting, then, the years previous to 1846, which may perhaps be
considered to be out of date, and taking the twelve years from 1846
to 1857 inclusive, it appears that the liabilities of the private
banks which suspended payment amounted to 6,700,000_l._, and
those of the joint-stock banks to 40,800,000_l._, making a grand
total of 47,500,000_l._ To this, moreover, must be added another
1,500,000_l._ for some banks, the liabilities of which are not
mentioned.
_Value of Horses._
As an example of the large sums produced by the sale of first-rate
Horses, we may quote the following prices from the sale of the stud
of the late Earl of Pembroke, at Paris, in 1862. The condition of
the horses was so good that, in spite of their being aged, some of
them sold for more money than Lord Pembroke paid for them years
previously. Thus, a pair of bay carriage-horses, aged respectively
13 and 14, bought at Anderson’s seven years ago for 400_l._,
fetched 600_l._; and another pair, which had been bought at the
same place for 600_l._, fetched 1088_l._! Never was the policy
of buying a good thing, and taking care of it, more practically
proved than at this sale. Elis, a brown carriage-horse, more
than 16 years old, sold for 100_l._; Pilot, a bay, upwards of
15 years old, fetched 220_l._; Papillon, 14 years old, 384_l._;
Abeille, 13 years old, 200_l._; Grasshopper, a chestnut cob, 13
years old, 128_l._; Zouave, a grey carriage-horse, 12 years old,
304_l._; Calthorpe, a bay carriage-horse, 12 years old, 280_l._;
Sebastopol, a grey carriage-horse, 11 years old, 240_l._; Pigeon,
a brown phaeton-horse, 9 years old, 140_l._; Solferino, a bay
carriage-horse, 16 hands high, and 7 years old, 640_l._; and
Glaucus, a bay carriage-horse, 6 years old, 448_l._
_Friendly Societies._
The repeated failures of Friendly Societies to effect the object
for which they were projected, prove how the best intentions may
be defeated through want of proper foresight and calculation of
probabilities, which so often reduce to certainty results which, to
unthinking minds, appear mere chances.
In 1863, Mr. Tidd Pratt, the Registrar, reported: Sixty-five
societies have been dissolved in the course of the year. The causes
of such societies not being able to meet the claims of the members
are to be found in incorrect tables for the contributions, small
number of members, insecure investment of funds, and unnecessary
expenses of management, which actually, in some instances, take
10s. out of every 1_l._ subscribed. Most of these societies still
hold their meetings at public-houses, with the landlords for
treasurers; and the members are required by the rules of most of
the old societies to spend a monthly sum in beer “for the good
of the house,” which amount is generally taken from the box,
whether the members have or have not paid their contributions;
and in many instances the money is not repaid to the society. In
the correspondence of the year it is stated, in a letter to the
Registrar respecting the affairs of a society, that it has spent
nearly 1300_l._ of the funds “for the good of the house.” There is
generally a strong party in favour of it. One letter states that a
female friendly society will be obliged to break up unless they are
allowed to have an annual feast and music; and an objector who is
contending with the managers against any such application of the
trust-funds writes:--“I can do nothing with them unless you assist
me by sending a very saucy letter to the stewards.” Sometimes the
law is evaded by paying an extravagant rent for the room, the
excess being really allowed in beer.
The Registrar considers it to be proved by thirty-five years’
experience that some further provisions are necessary to secure to
working men that they shall not be required to subscribe to these
societies more than is necessary, and that they shall be certain of
obtaining the benefits paid for. Returns which have been obtained
from only 128 unions show about 1150 inmates in their workhouses
who have been members of friendly societies which have been broken
up or dissolved.
_Wages heightened by Improvement in Machinery._
It is stated, in a Report of the Commissioners appointed in 1832
to inquire concerning the employment of women and children in
factories, that “in the cotton-mill of Messrs. Houldsworth, in
Glasgow, a spinner employed on a mule of 336 spindles, and spinning
cotton 120 hanks to the pound, produced in 1823, working 74½
hours a week, 46 pounds of yarn, his net weekly wages for which
amounted to 27s. 7d. Ten years later, the rate of wages having in
the meantime been reduced 13 per cent., and the time of working
having been lessened to 69 hours, the spinner was enabled by
the greater perfection of the machinery to produce on a mule of
the same number of spindles, 53½ pounds of yarn of the same
fineness, and his net weekly earnings were advanced from 27s. 7d.
to 29s. 10d.” Similar results from similar circumstances were
experienced in the Manchester factories. The cheapening of the
article produced by help of machinery increases the demand for
the article; and there being consequently a need for an increased
number of workmen, the elevation of wages follows as a matter of
course. Nor is this the only benefit which the working-man derives
in the case, for he shares with the community in acquiring a
greater command over the necessities which machinery is concerned
in producing.--_G. R. Porter._
_Giving Employment.--Indirect Taxation._
Mr. Babbage relates the following illustrative anecdote: An Irish
proprietor, whose country residence was much frequented by beggars,
resolved to establish a test for discriminating between the idle
and the industrious, and also to obtain some small return for the
alms he was in the habit of bestowing. He accordingly added to the
pump, by which the upper part of his house was supplied with water,
a piece of mechanism so contrived, that at the end of a certain
number of strokes of the pump-handle, a penny fell out from an
aperture to repay the labourer for his work. This was so arranged,
that labourers who continued at the work obtained very nearly the
usual daily wages of labour in that part of the country. The idlest
of the vagabonds of course refused this new labour-test; but the
greater part of the beggars, whose constant tale was that “_they
could not earn a fair day’s wages for a fair day’s work_,” after
earning a few pence, usually went away cursing the hardness of
their taskmaster.
_Never sign an Accommodation Bill._
Nothing is more deceptive than imaginary wealth. “We are apt,”
says Sir E. B. Lytton, “to rely upon future prospects, and become
really expensive while we are only rich in possibility. We live
up to our expectations, not to our possessions, and make a figure
proportionable to what we may be, not what we are. We outrun our
present income, as not doubting to disburse ourselves out of the
profits of some future place, project, or reversion we have in
view.”
By no means is this artificial state of living more nourished than
what are familiarly called “bill transactions.” This has been
illustrated in novels and tales, but never more to the purpose
than in the following passage in _Pisistratus Caxton_. “To sign
an Accommodation Bill, and still more, to renew one when due, is
opening an account with ruin. One always begins by being security
for a friend. The discredit of the thing is familiarized to one’s
mind by the false show of generous confidence in another. Then,
what you have done for a friend, _a friend_ should do for you--a
hundred or two would be useful now--you are sure to repay it
in three months. To youth the future seems safe as the Bank of
England, and distant as the peaks of Himalaya. You pledge your
honour that in three months you will release your friend. The
three months expire. To release one friend, you catch hold of
another--the bill is renewed, premium and interest thrown into the
next pay-day--soon the amount multiplies, and with it the honour
dwindles--your _name_ circulates from hand to hand on the back
of doubtful paper,--your name, which, in all money transactions,
should grow higher and higher each year you live, falling down
every month like the shares in a swindling speculation. You
begin by what you call trusting a friend, that is, aiding him to
self-destruction--buying him arsenic to clear his complexion,--you
end by dragging all near you into your own abyss, as a drowning man
would catch at his own brother.”
_A Year’s Wills._
The Registrar-General has drawn from a calendar of the Wills
and Administrations of the year 1858, the following interesting
calculations. 210,972 adults died in the twelvemonth, and 30,823
persons left personal property behind them; 21,653 had made their
Wills; the other 9170 had made none, and letters of administration
had to be taken out. 89 persons with more than 10,000_l._ (one
worth 100,000_l._) died without making a Will. The aggregate
amount of property left by all these persons is estimated at
71,860,792_l._, averaging 2331_l._ each. Distinguishing between
the men and the women, we find that 102,049 adult men died in
the year, and 21,454 left personal property--for one who left
any, four leaving none; 108,923 adult women died, and 9369 left
personal property. The average amount left by the men was 2751_l._;
by the women, 1371_l._ Omitting now any estimate for the first
ten days of the year, and dealing only with the actual Wills and
administrations of the rest of the twelvemonth, the personal
property of those who died leaving any, 29,979 in number, amounted
to 69,893,380_l._, of which 57,396,350_l._ was left by the men, and
12,497,030_l._ by women. The stream of wealth flowed thus:--
Persons. Dying worth Left
22,513 Less than 1000_l._ 5,762,880_l._
6277 1000_l._ but less than 10,000_l._ 20,010,500_l._
1020 10,000_l._ but less than 50,000_l._ 21,960,000_l._
102 50,000_l._ but less than 100,000_l._ 7,100,000_l._
67 Above 100,000_l._ 15,060,000_l._
------ --------------
29,979 69,893,380_l._
Only one property was sworn as high as 900,000_l._ and under
1,000,000; 1935 were under 20_l._ The property divides nearly
equally at 20,000_l._ About 35,000,000_l._ belonged to 29,392
persons, none having more than 20,000_l._, and the other
35,000,000_l._ belonged to 587 persons, fifty times fewer than
the former company. Of those who left above 100,000_l._, 37 were
described as esquires, a term which would include men who had made
their fortunes by trade or commerce; ten were titled personages,
five were bankers, four merchants, three clergymen, one cotton
manufacturer, one corn merchant, one hotel-keeper; one was in the
navy, one in the Indian army, one in the Indian Civil Service,
one was a spinster. Three medical men left more than 50,000_l._
A person described when he made his will as a commercial clerk
left above 30,000_l._; 17 “labourers and mechanics” above 1000_l._
Of 75 lawyers, 15 died without making their Wills. The foregoing
statements, which must be taken as approximations rather than an
absolute accuracy, relate to England alone. In the year ending
March 31, 1859, legacy-duty was paid in the United Kingdom on
62,441,611_l._, but that does not include property passing from
husband to wife or the converse, no legacy-duty being then payable;
succession-duty on real property was paid upon 29,242,630_l._,
and, estimating that to be taxed to the next successor at half
its saleable value, it will amount to 58,485,260_l._ On this
assumption 123,926,871_l._ passed by death to another generation
of successors. It is certainly a remarkable fact, that (upon an
average) on every death, including alike men, women, and children,
more than 100_l._ of property paying legacy-duty, and perhaps
187_l._ of property of every kind, is left for the benefit of
successors in the United Kingdom.--_Times._
The extraordinary circumstances under which Wills are sometimes
made have given rise to the following suggestive remarks by an able
writer in the _Saturday Review_:--
“If the matter is considered in reference to general principles,
there is no more curious power in the world than the right which
people exercise by Will of legislating after they are dead and
gone, without restraint and without appeal; and it is perhaps
even more singular that they exercise this power without being
subject to any formalities whatever except the presence of two
witnesses. To sell a house or a field is a matter which requires
care and inquiry, and the circumstances ensure a certain degree
of notoriety. But property of any amount may be disposed of in
any way that caprice may dictate by an instrument which may be
executed under any circumstances, and kept in any custody. No
one but the testator need know its contents, and he may, and
often does, prepare it with the most wanton caprice, and leave
it in the most absurd depository to take its chance of loss
or discovery as it may happen. It is well worth consideration
whether the unlimited power which the law of England confers
of making whatever Wills a testator chooses ought not to be
qualified by some special provisions as to the manner in which
such wills should be made.”
FOOTNOTES:
[12] It is now shown to be 91,328,600 miles.
[13] Abridged (with interpolations) from a communication to the
_Illustrated London News_, 1857.
Progress of Science.
_What human Science has accomplished._
If we reflect on the extreme feebleness of the natural means by
the help of which so many great problems have been attacked and
solved; if we consider that to obtain and measure the greater
part of the quantities now forming the basis of astronomical
computation, man has had greatly to improve the most delicate of
his organs, to add immensely to the power of his eye; if we remark
that it was not less requisite for him to discover methods adapted
to measuring very long intervals of time, up to the precision of
tenths of seconds; to combat against the most microscopic effects
that constant variations of temperature produce in metals, and
therefore in all instruments; to guard against the innumerable
illusions that a cold or hot atmosphere, dry or humid, tranquil or
agitated, impresses on the medium through which the observations
have inevitably to be made; the feeble being resumes all his
advantage: by the side of such wonderful labours of the mind, what
signifies the weakness, the fragility of our body; what signify the
dimensions of the planet, our residence, the grain of sand on which
it has happened to us to appear for a few moments!--_Arago._
_Changes in Social Science._
The conquests of science over the realms of matter in our day
would scarcely have affected Bacon with greater surprise than the
change in what we may call the social position of science. There
was a time, not so very far removed from his own, when scientific
truth was worshipped, if at all, with closed doors and in muffled
accents. Science, like religion, had her age of persecution and her
“church in the catacombs;” she, too, had heroes, and martyrs, and
confessors of her own, and won her way to popularity through an
ordeal of shame and suffering, the history of which remains to be
written. The philosopher of the Middle Ages shunned the haunts of
men; his crucible was heated in some secret or underground chamber;
his knowledge was a forbidden lore, and if it showed itself in the
command of new powers, was ascribed, not to inspiration from on
high, but to dealings with an agent which even modern credulity so
often proclaims as the source of intellectual mastery. From these
fiery trials science has emerged without even a scar upon her.
Militant she still is, but she is also triumphant, and vies with
the learning of “letters,” which was never branded with the like
infamy, in the number and dignity of her votaries. The change which
has come over her social status has reacted on her doctrines. There
are no longer any “mysteries” of science; “problems,” and even
“apparent contradictions,” remain, but mysteries, with everything
else that savours of the occult and esoteric, are exploded, and not
many difficulties are admitted.--_Times._
_Discoverers not Inventors._
Although Galileo only discovered the moons of Jupiter, we often and
unconsciously think of him as if he had been their creator, and had
first set them to play their untiring game of hide-and-seek round
the stately planet; and so also in no irreverent spirit we call
the laws which Kepler divined to regulate certain movements of the
heavenly bodies, “Kepler’s Laws,” although he disclaimed the title,
grandly affirming that God, whose laws they were, had waited some
thousand years before one man, even Kepler, had discerned them. And
so again, notwithstanding our conviction that the star Neptune has
been shining in the sky since what we shall be content to call “the
beginning,” and that all the tiny planets which have so rapidly
been added to our astronomical catalogues are probably as old as
the sun, we cannot help feeling as if Adams, Leverrier, Hind, and
their brethren, had just planted those lights in the sky, and that
midnight should be sensibly less dark because of their addition to
the heavens.
When we work as transformationalists we are like sculptors,
not evolving a pre-existent statue from a concealing mass, but
bestowing a statue on a block of marble. The hollow screw is
Archimedes’ screw; the condensing steam-engine, Watt’s engine;
the railway locomotive, Stephenson’s locomotive; the electric
telegraph, Oersted’s telegraph; the Crystal Palace, Fox and
Paxton’s palace. Yet as implied in what has been already said, we
treat discoverers as if they were inventors, and to make amends we
call inventors discoverers. And although, in strictness of speech,
it is inadmissible to speak of Watt, as accomplished men are
frequently found doing, as the _discoverer_ of the steam-engine,
and only Sancho Panza thought of invoking blessings on the man who
first _invented_ sleep, still the popular confusion between the
discoverer and the inventor shows how difficult it is to assign the
one higher praise than the other.--_Prof. George Wilson._
_Science of Roger Bacon._
Roger Bacon, writing about the year 1260, that is, six hundred
years ago, says:--“I call that Experimental Science which neglects
argumentation; for the strongest arguments prove nothing as long
as the conclusions are not verified by experience. Experimental
science does not receive truth at the hands of superior sciences.
It is itself mistress, and other sciences are its servants. It
has, in truth, the right to command all sciences, since it alone
certifies and sanctions their results. Experimental science is,
therefore, the queen of sciences and the limit of all speculation.”
The features in Bacon’s writings that have caused his name to be
handed down as a founder of physical science are very obvious. He
doubts wisely and has a profound reverence for facts. The theory
of a vacuum has come to him on the highest authority, but its
difficulties distress him. He speaks of experimental philosophy
as more perfect than all the natural sciences; “for it teaches
us to test by trial the noble conclusions of all the sciences,
which, in the others, are either proved by logical arguments or are
examined into on the imperfect evidence of nature; and this is its
prerogative.”
“As a workman in the laboratory, and with lenses, he himself
discovers the existence of explosive compounds, confirms the
tradition of history as to the effect of burning glasses, and
understands the principle of the camera. He points out the
faultiness of Cæsar’s calendar. His views of the limits of
medicine are excellent. ‘For, whereas a healthy rule of life
depends upon what is eaten and drank, on the hours of sleep and
waking, of exercise and rest, on climate and the temper of the
mind, and that all these should be observed from childhood in the
constitution they fit, scarcely any man cares to take thought of
these things, nay, not even physicians, such at least as we have
met with.’ Contrast this and his critical approval of the use of
charms to delude credulous patients into health with the science
ridiculed in the _Malade Imaginaire_, and the advantage will
not be found on the side of the seventeenth century. But, even
in physical science, Bacon’s splendid powers of generalization
prevail over the habit of analysis, and he is rather a prophet
than a teacher. He believes that the period of human life may
be prolonged many years by a sound system of dietetics; and the
averages of life in our own century confirm him. He believes that
‘engines of navigation may be made without oarsmen, so that the
greatest river and sea-ships with only one man to steer them, may
sail swifter than if they were fully manned. Moreover, chariots,’
he thinks, ‘may be made so as to be moved with incalculable
force without any beast drawing them.’ ‘And such things might be
made to infinity, as, for instance, bridges to traverse rivers
without pillars or any buttress.’ He even knows a wise man who
has determined to construct a flying machine; but Bacon’s tone
on this subject is a little less confident. That he himself
hoped for much that has since been proved impossible--for the
art of increasing gold, and for the discovery of an elixir of
life--cannot of course be questioned. Bacon summed up the science
of his times, and the analogies which guided him in his estimate
of the laws of motion could not teach him to anticipate by five
hundred years the individuality of the elements, or to understand
the texture of the human body. His error, after all, was chiefly
that he believed in Thought as a conqueror, and expected to
establish her kingdom on the ruins of the thrones of the visible
world.”--_Saturday Review._
_The One Science._
In an able summary in the Times of the contents of Sir Henry
Holland’s _Essays on Scientific and other Subjects_, we find the
following suggestive passages:--“The sciences are so interlacing
and coalescing that it would seem as if in a year or two we should
only have one huge science embracing all; or, at least, what are
now regarded as separate sciences should be considerably reduced
in number. This is more or less implied in the controversy on
the “Correlation of Forces.” The question is,--Are there really
“Forces” in nature? Or should we not rather say that there is but
one force appearing under different forms? Among these forces may
be mentioned light. The undulatory theory of the transmission of
light is as old as Huyghens, but its universal acceptance is an
incident of our own day; and it is in our own day that radiant
heat has been discovered to be subject to those great physical
laws which are the basis of the undulatory theory. Here, then,
we find in our time, within the last few years, that the three
great sciences of optics, of acoustics, and of heat, reduce their
principal facts to the same formula. Or again, take this science
of optics in another relation. It has within the last few years
proved itself to be the most delicate instrument of chemistry. By
the aid of a little starch the chemist can detect the millionth
part of iodine in solution. Mr. Faraday has found that a strong
ruby tint is given to a fluid by a proportion of gold not exceeding
the half-millionth part in weight. These are wonderful results
of ordinary chemical analysis; but what are they in comparison
with the results obtained through the analysis of the spectrum?
By means of it chymists have been able to detect in a compound
1-70,000,000th part of a grain of lithium, and the 1-180,000,000th
part of a grain of sodium, the metal of common salt. The method of
the analysis is very simple. If a little sodium, for instance, be
burnt in a flame, and during the process of this burning the rays
be made to pass through a prism, then in a certain defined portion
of the spectrum beyond there will appear a thin yellow line, so
vivid that it will show even when the sodium has been reduced to
the 1-180,000,000th part of a grain. By help of the same analysis
we pass on to astronomy, and discover the chemistry of the sun, the
moon, and the stars. In the photosphere, or luminous atmosphere
surrounding the body of the sun, there has in this way been
discovered no less than six known metals.
“In these few examples we indicate roughly but sufficiently the
intimate connexion of the physical sciences, and the necessity
which is imposed on the student in the present day to know all if
he would understand one. It has been said that he who has seen but
one work of ancient art has seen none, while he who has seen all
has seen but one. We may say the same of science. To know one is to
know none, and to know all is to know but one.”
_Sun-force._
Daily the conviction deepens among those who have studied the
matter, that with a few exceptions all the physical powers which
man wields as movers or transformers of matter are modifications
of Sun-force. It was bestowed upon antediluvian plants, and they
locked it up for a season in the woody tissue which it enabled
them to weave, and afterwards time changed that into coal; and the
steam-engine which we complacently call ours, and claim patents
for, burns that coal into lever-force and steam-hammer power, and
is in truth a sun-engine. And the plants of our own day receive as
liberally from the sun, and condense his force into the charcoal
which we extract from them, and expend in smelting metallic ores.
With the smelted metals we make voltaic batteries, and magnets, and
telegraph wires; and call the modified, sun-force electricity and
magnetism, and say it is ours, and ask if we may not do what we
like with our own.
And again, the plants we cultivate concentrate Sun-force in grass,
hay, oats, wheat, and other fibres and grains, which seem only
suitable to feed cattle and beasts of burden with. But by and by a
Spanish bull-fighter is transfixed by this force, through the horns
of a bull, and dies unaware of his classical fate, pierced to the
heart by an arrow from Apollo the Sun-god’s bow. On English commons
prizes are run for, by steeds which are truly coursers of the sun,
for his force is swelling in their muscles and throbbing in their
veins, and horse-power is but another name for sun-power. Nor is it
otherwise with their riders; for they too have been fed upon light,
and made strong with fruits and flesh which have been nourished
by the sun. His heat warms their blood, his light shines in their
eyes; they cannot deal a blow which is not a _coup-de-soleil_, a
veritable sun-stroke; nor express a thought without help from him.
In grave earnestness, let me remind you, that as force cannot be
annihilated any more than matter, but can only be changed in its
mode of manifestation, so it appears beyond doubt that the force
generated by the sun, and conveyed by his rays in the guise of
heat, light, and chemical power, to the earth, is not extinguished
there, but only changes its form. It apparently disappears when it
falls upon plants, which never grow without it; but we cannot doubt
that it is working in a new shape in their organs and tissues, and
reappears in the heat and light which they give out when they are
burned. This heat, which is sun-heat _at second hand_, we again
seem to lose when we use plants as fuel in our boiler-furnaces;
but it has only disguised itself, without loss of power, in the
elasticity of the steam, and will again seem lost, when it is
translated into the momentum of the heavy piston, and the whirling
power of a million of wheels.
The second-hand heat of the sun appears equally lost when vegetable
fuel is expended in reducing metals; but oxidize these metals
in a galvanic battery, and it will reappear as chemical force,
as electricity, as magnetism, as heat the most intense; and, in
the electro-carbon light, will return almost to the condition of
sunshine again.--_Prof. George Wilson._
“_The Seeds of Invention._”
Sir William Armstrong maintains, as a half-truth, that Invention is
the fruit of the circumstances that call for it almost more than
of the mind from which it springs. In a sense it is true, as Sir
William Armstrong says, that “the seeds of invention exist, as it
were, in the air, ready to germinate whenever suitable conditions
arise;” but it depends not the less on the genius of individual
inventors to determine whether the germination shall happen in one
century or the next. The history of the locomotive is itself the
strongest argument against relying too much on these floating seeds
of invention and favouring circumstances, and taking too little
account of inventors. If the Killingworth brakesman had died in his
youth, it is scarcely too much to say that we should probably not
yet be travelling by steam. We owe it to George Stephenson’s keen
insight and resolute temper that the locomotive was forced upon an
unbelieving world, no one can say how long before circumstances
would otherwise have called it into existence. The seed had been
floating, it is true, and had been in a manner detected centuries
before; but it remained without life, not because the occasion had
not called it forth, but because the right man had not arisen.
_The Object of Patents._
The recklessness with which Patents are issued, and the dishonesty
on the part of the State in selling the same article to two or
more persons, and then coolly leaving them to litigation for the
possession of it, cannot be too strongly reprehended. The common
sense of the question is summed up by Dr. Percy, in these words: “I
cordially subscribe,” says the Doctor, “to the opinions expressed
by Mr. Grove, Q.C.--namely, that the real object of Patent Law was
‘to reward not trivial inventions, which stop the way to greater
improvements, but substantial boons to the public; not changes
such as any experimentalist makes a score a day in his laboratory,
but substantial practical discoveries, developed into an available
form.’”
The law with respect to Patents has been greatly simplified and
improved by the statute 15 and 16 Vict. c. 83: the fees payable
for a Patent have been reduced, and the payment of spread over
several years. One Patent now suffices for the United Kingdom,
and is no longer void, as formerly, for trifling inaccuracies in
the Specification, as these may be now disclaimed.
Before quitting the subject of Patents it may, perhaps, be
serviceable to call attention to the admirable Abridgments of
Specifications now publishing by the Patent Commissioners. In a few
minutes one can get exact information there which cannot otherwise
be obtained in as many hours. These Abridgments are in the form of
small 8vo volumes.
Hereafter we hope to see provided out of the revenues of the
Patent-office, a public library and museum, to constitute a
historical and educational institution for the benefit and
instruction of the skilled workman of the kingdom. Exact models
of machinery are to be exhibited in the subjects, showing the
progressive steps of improvement.
_Theory and Practice.--Watt and Telford._
James Watt was a highly accomplished theorist, on every point on
which he worked; yet his name has been frequently cited, as a
proof that theory could be dispensed with. And his career, when
compared with that of Telford, will illustrate _theory applied to
practice_, as distinguished from practice alone, however acute.
It is impossible to contemplate the career of Telford without
a feeling of high interest, created by the comparison of his
apparently inadequate education with his startling successes.
Looking at the individual himself, there is everything for his
age to admire; and as long as his structures last, each of them
is the _monumentum_, but not _ære perennius_. The time will come
when his name shall be like that of the builder of the old London
bridge, who was, no doubt, the Telford of the day,--a stimulus to
his contemporaries, useful and honoured, but not the remembered of
succeeding ages. On the other hand, the discoveries of Watt, though
equally startling in what is called the practical point of view,
have the mind of the discoverer impressed upon them, and have been,
and must be, the guide of his successors, not merely to repetitions
of what he did himself, but to the enlargement of ideas, and the
conversion of principles into forms useful in art. Take away
the honourable qualities which enabled the two men to outstrip
their contemporaries, each in his line; qualities which are the
properties of the individual minds, and consider what is left,
namely their modes of proceeding: consider the effect of these two
modes on men in general, and there is nothing in that of Telford
which would raise a workman above a workman; while in that of Watt
there is the vital principle to which we owe all the mechanical
triumphs of civilization, and all the theoretical successes of
philosophy.--_Penny Cyclopædia._
_Practical Science.--Mechanical Arts._
It seems impossible to exclude from a review, however slight, of
contemporary progress in the exact Sciences, the advantages which
have accrued to them, both directly, and as it were reflexively,
by the astonishing progress of the Mechanical Arts. The causes,
indeed, which called them forth are somewhat different from those
which are active in more abstract, though scarcely more difficult,
studies. Increasing national wealth, numbers, and enterprise,
are stimulants unlike the laurels, or even the gold medals, of
academies, and the quiet applause of a few studious men. But the
result is not less real, and the advance of knowledge scarcely more
indirect. The masterpieces of civil engineering--the steam-engine,
the locomotive-engine, and the tubular bridge--are only experiments
on the powers of nature on a gigantic scale, and are not to be
compassed without inductive skill, as remarkable and as truly
philosophic as any effort which the man of science exerts, save
only the origination of great theories, of which one or two in a
hundred years may be considered as a liberal allowance. Whilst,
then, we claim for Watt a place amongst the eminent contributors to
the progress of science in the eighteenth century, we must reserve
a similar claim for the Stephensons and the Brunels of the present;
and whilst we are proud of the changes wrought by the increase of
knowledge during the last twenty-five years on the face of society,
we must recollect that these very changes, and the inventions which
have occasioned them, have stamped perhaps the most characteristic
feature--its intense practicalness--on the science itself of the
same period.
It has long been the fashion of one party to lament “the Decline of
Science” in England; whilst another section has gravely declared
that Science in this country is but the growth of yesterday, having
been imported from Germany, and tenderly nurtured by the magnates
of the realm. In the House of Commons, in the Session of 1863,
a member stood up, and, with exultation, announced that Science
had at length found its way into that democratic assembly through
the individual exertions and influence of one now no more. From
the language which this scion of a great house employed it might
be inferred that Science had been previously almost unknown in
England. The member, no doubt, spoke according to his knowledge;
but it possibly escaped his memory that a man named Isaac Newton
once existed. Without justly exposing ourselves to the charge
of presumption, we might also boast of a few other names of
distinction among the dead as well as the living.
There is another point upon which the public appear to be much
misinformed--namely, that Science is in the receipt of large sums
from the State. The annual amount voted out of the taxes for
Science and Art is unquestionably large; but it should be borne in
mind that, comparatively, only a small portion is really devoted
to Science, while Art takes the lion’s share. Let it be so by all
means. True Science to be worth anything must never become the
creature of State bounty. We want no Institute with its salaried
members and its eternal jobbing. We need no patronizing Mecænas,
whether from the high-born or the self-exalted. What Science
earnestly desires is to be let alone, that she may follow her
destined course quietly, modestly, and without molestation. She
especially loathes the Pythonic embrace of meddlesome persons
who, knowing nothing of her, yet profess an intimate acquaintance
with her and a tender regard for her welfare, solely with the
object of puffing themselves into notoriety. She disdains them
utterly.--_Times journal._
We hear much, too, of “Science and Art” now-a-days coupled
together, as if the strongest affinity existed between them;
although no two things can be more unlike each other. The Arctic
Circle and the Torrid Zone cannot be wider apart or in stronger
contrast; for Science is frigidly logical, and Art hotly emotional.
_Force of Running Water._
It has been proved by experiment, that the rapidity at the bottom
of a stream is everywhere less than in any part above it, and is
greatest at the surface. Also, that in the middle of the stream the
particles at the top move swifter than those at the sides. This
slowness of the lowest and side currents is produced by friction,
and when the rapidity is sufficiently great, the soil composing
the sides and bottom gives way. If the water flows at the rate of
three inches per second, it will tear up fine clay; six inches per
second, fine sand; twelve inches per second, fine gravel; and three
feet per second, stones of the size of an egg.--_Lyell’s Geology._
_Correlation of Physical Forces._
Of late years experimental philosophers have been occupied with
the investigation of a profound problem. Formerly, the most
brilliant phenomena of nature were attributed to the existence
of imponderable fluids. But the Correlation of heat, light,
electricity, magnetism, and chemical affinity, as varying
manifestations of force, attributable to modifications of motion
in matter, now employs our subtlest thinkers--Faraday and Grove,
Wheatstone and De la Rive. These researches extend even to
the confines of the moral phenomena. The chemistry of nature
differs from that of the laboratory, and the difference has
been attributed, not simply to organization, but to the vital
force--a power found only in living organisms. Yet, at length, the
laboratory of Hoffman imitates the processes of nature, especially
in plants, and produces some of the most delicate of the perfumes
of flowers and fruits, and even seems on the very verge of the
manufacture of some of its greatest treasures--such as quinine.
Some are staggered by the steady march of scientific research into
the most sacred sanctuaries of life, and recoil from investigations
which trace the growth of the cell in the ovary into the perfect
man; as though mystery were essential to faith; or, if it were so,
as though there is the slightest risk that in ages to come man will
have so stolen the sacred fruit that no mystery will remain to be
solved.--_Sir James Kay Shuttleworth on Public Education._
_The Effect of Oil in stilling Waves._
It was thought that this old idea had been completely disproved
by experiment; but, according to the _Saturday Review_, the very
contrary has been the result of recent experiments, in course
of which, at all events, waves on a pond, generated by the wind,
were completely stilled to a “glassy smoothness” by means of a
film of oil scarcely more than the 7,000,000th part of an inch in
thickness, and exhibiting the most brilliant zones of iridescent
colours from its extreme thinness. The _modus operandi_ is believed
to consist simply in the wind ceasing to have a hold upon the water
by the intervention of the oil, which slips along the surface
_with_ the wind, so that the oil must be applied to windward, and
it moves to leeward, smoothing the surface as it goes!
_Spontaneous Generation._
Of all errors upon the formation of beings, the most absurd is
Spontaneous Generation. Yet it is one of the most popular. If this
theory is admissible for inferior beings, such as intestinal worms,
infusoria, or polypi, why not for superior beings? The difficulty
becomes an impossibility in both cases. Can it be imagined that an
_organized_ body, of which all the parts are intimately connected,
with an admirably contrived correlation, so full of profound
wisdom, is produced by a blind assemblage of physical elements?
The organized body must have derived its existence from elements
of which it was destitute! Then motion might proceed from inertia,
sensibility from insensibility, life from death!
_Guano._
In Mr. Ross’ translation of Dr. Tschudi’s _Travels in Peru_, 1847,
we are informed that the correct orthography is _Huanu_, and not
Guano. He states that it is a term in the _Quichua_ dialect,
meaning “animal dung.” As the word is now generally used it is an
abbreviation of _Pishu Huanu_, bird dung. “The Spaniards,” he says,
“have converted the final syllable _nu_ into _no_ The European
orthography _Guano_, followed also in Spanish America, is quite
erroneous, for the Quichua language is deficient in the letter
G, as it is in several other consonants. The H, in the common
formation of the word, is strongly aspirated, whence the error of
the orthography of the Spaniards, who have sadly corrupted the
language of the Autochthones of Peru.”
_What is Perspective?_
Perspective is the science which furnishes us with the laws by
which we can give the apparent, as geometry those by which we can
give the real, forms of objects. These laws are obvious without
rules to thoughtful, artistic common-sense--but, to many, books
on the subject will always be useful, if not indispensable.
The science was called perspective, or _seeing through_, from
an impression that the correct foreshortening of objects could
be gained by viewing and tracing them through a pane of glass.
This plan only ensures correctness when the plane of the eye is
parallel to that of the medium upon which the drawing is made. A
picture in perspective is simply a plane parallel to the plane of
the eye intersecting the rays that come from the surface of the
objects represented. The points of these rays at the places of
their several intersections combine to form the true perspective
representation. This was the art that Mantegna made so much
of at Padua; and that with which Bellini, the painter of the
National Gallery “Doge,” delighted the Venetians. Without much
semi-scientific pedantry, the whole science may be understood
by balancing a half-crown on the top of the forefinger of your
right hand. Hold it up so that its broad plane is parallel to the
eye’s plane; put it nearer or further, and it seems to increase
or diminish in size. Turn it obliquely, and it appears an oval;
put the edge on a line with the eye, and it appears a mere thin
straight line. A sphere is the only geometric form that undergoes
no perspective changes. The eye is able to take in any given
space set at an angle of under sixty degrees. When both eyes view
a scene, instead of the circle one eye sees, we have an ellipse
formed by the continuation of the two circles of vision,--the
point of sight being opposite the centre of the space between the
two eyes. Perspective is of great use in Art; but the books upon
it are too abstruse, and imply a knowledge of mathematics. [This
common-sense explanation is from the pen of Professor Wallace,
M.A., in the first number of a journal edited by him and entitled
_The Public Instructor_.]
_The Stereoscope._
Till the discovery of the Stereoscope, naturalists were puzzled to
account for _a single image resulting from double vision_; and Gall
and Spurzheim endeavoured to explain it by the supposition that
one eye only was active at a time, the other only admitting light,
and that Nature had given us two merely to provide against the
accidental loss of one.--_Leslie’s Handbook._
_Burning Lenses._
The danger from Lenses, when the heat of the sun is powerful,
is well known. As an illustration, we may relate an instance
which occurred on the premises of Messrs. Negretti and Zambra,
philosophical instrument makers, in Hatton Garden. There was a
smell of fire, but it could nowhere be detected, until a person
entered the shop from the street with the startling information
that the window was on fire, and such was really the fact: a large
reading-lens hanging in the window exposed to the sun, its focus
happening to be just within range of the woodwork of the window
fittings, set fire to them, and no doubt in a very few seconds some
serious damage would have been caused. Is it not possible that in
tropical climates, when vessels are becalmed, they may be set on
fire by the eye-deck lights everywhere observable on ships’ decks;
or, nearer home, in warehouses, &c., where such means of lighting
is resorted to? The matter merits serious consideration and should
serve as a caution.
_How to wear Spectacles._
In the proper use of Spectacles there is no circumstance of more
importance than their position on the head. They should be worn
so that the glasses may come as close to the eye as possible
without touching the eyelashes; they must also be placed so that
the glasses may be parallel to the paper when held in an easy
position. To accomplish this, let the sides of the spectacles bear
upon the swell of the head, about midway between the top of it and
the ear; the eyes will then look _directly_ through the glasses
to the paper, and make the most advantageous use of them, instead
of looking _obliquely_ through them to the paper, as in numerous
cases, where persons place the sides of their spectacles in contact
with, or very near, their ears--in which position they produce a
distorted image on the retina. The sides of the spectacles should
also be placed at an equal height upon the head; and the hands
being applied to the _points_ of the sides, will generally direct
their equal height, as well as allow of their opening to the full
extent without injury.--_Adams on the Human Eye._
_Vicissitudes of Mining._
Although the thoughts of men have been turned to the mineral
conditions of these islands for more than two thousand years;
and in that period the _art_ of Mining has improved; and the
engineering appliances which have been brought to bear upon the
ventilation and the draining of mines, are fine examples of
mechanical ingenuity,--the _science_ of Mining, however, can
scarcely be said to have, as yet, any existence. In 1856, Mr. John
Taylor, who must be regarded as a good authority, stated before a
Committee of the House of Commons, “That there were no greater
facilities for ascertaining the productive character of a mine now
than formerly. The difference was simply in improved machinery. Our
knowledge was not greater than that of our forefathers.” Whatever
was said in 1856, is true at the present moment.
The psychological influences of subterranean toil form a strange
but interesting subject of study. These and the effects of that
continued uncertainty as to the reward which labours of the
severest kind are to receive, are distinguishingly marked on every
miner. In occult powers they are believers; and when, about a
century since, the “Divining Rod” was introduced into Cornwall as
a means for finding mineral lodes, it was eagerly seized upon;
and, to the present day, several families are supposed to possess
remarkable powers as diviners, or, as they are commonly called,
“dowsers.”
Mr. Rawlinson observes that the existence of “diviners,” or
“dowsers,” for finding out the mineral lodes was a serious
reflection upon the present age; yet it was a curious fact, that
a French adventurer, who was supposed to have been successful in
finding water-beds in Africa, was introduced to the Government
during the Crimean war, and was sent out to trace, by the
divining-rod, water in that locality.
The most elementary laws of science are still a book sealed to
the large majority of miners, and while they are, of all men,
themselves the most theoretical, they always meet any attempt to
explain phenomena upon the evidences of inductive research, by
pronouncing the explanation to be a “theory,” which is of no value
to a “practical.”
Mr. Wallace, himself a miner, says: “The impossibility of arriving
at any knowledge of practical value respecting ore deposits in
veins, is avowed by those who, with singular inconsistency, attach
the greatest importance to individual experience. Even some
occupying high distinction as directors or proprietors of mines,
affirm, without qualification, that it is impossible to see through
solid rocks.”
It must be admitted that amongst the miners there is an entire
absence of any method by which a knowledge may be obtained of the
causes leading to the production of mineral deposits; while the
speculations of those philosophers who will not endure the toil
of subterranean investigations are wild, and are consequently
valueless.
The natural consequence of this imperfect knowledge is, that all
mining speculations are necessarily attended with much uncertainty.
From time to time a most productive mine is discovered. The
Devon Great Consols, first known as Huel Maria, has paid 826_l._
dividends upon every share, one pound only being paid for shares
now worth 490_l._ each. Upon the shares of South Caradoc, near
Liskeard, the trifling sum of 25_s._ only was ever paid; the price
of these shares, in 1862, was 390_l._; and 391_l._ profit had been
paid on every share.
There are other examples of great success in mining. Such results
as these are laid hold of by designing men, and used to bait the
hooks by which those who are in a hurry to be rich are caught.
Permission to search for minerals is obtained from the possessor of
the land near to some productive mine. A few trials are probably
made, and then comes the formation of a company to work “Huel
Chance” (or some more attractive name is adopted), through which
the lodes from the fortunate neighbour are shown, by the aid of a
parallel ruler, to run.
Mr. Rawlinson states, with regard to the pecuniary losses incurred
in mining speculations, that some years ago, whilst holding an
official inquiry in Cornwall, he was brought into connexion with
several of the large mining adventurers of that district; and
they stated it as their opinion that, if the value of all the ore
mines in Cornwall, and the cost of working them were compared,
the statement would stand as something like 25_s._ paid for every
pound’s worth of ore obtained.
Statistics show that about 350,000 persons are employed in the
production of minerals, to the value of nearly 35 millions per
annum, which gives, as the production of each miner, not more than
2_l._ per week, an amount so small that we can hardly conceive
it possible that it would remunerate the large capital which is
invested in these mines.--See Mr. Robert Hunt’s valuable _Report_,
1862.
_Uses of Mineralogy._
Professor Tennant states there have been already described 500
minerals, more than half which number are found in the British
Isles; whilst more than 450 are found in our colonies. In the
International Exhibition of 1862, our vast colonial mineral wealth
was shown in remarkable specimens of gold, silver, copper, precious
stones, &c., many of which had been found by working miners who
had been sent out from this country. Yet, miners are generally
ignorant of the value of minerals, which they reject as not worth
collection: now, the gold they collect is worth 4_l._ per ounce;
but rough stones are often rejected, which are worth 50_l._ per
ounce, and some 500_l._ per ounce--they are diamonds. Mr. Tennant
believes that, in many of our colonies, these minerals are thrown
away, whereas a little knowledge of the use of the blowpipe would
enable miners to distinguish one substance from another.
_Our Coal Resources.--The Deepest Mine._
Professor Morris describes the carboniferous series of rocks
in England which contain Coal as deposited above the old red
sandstone, or what have been called the Devonian rocks, and several
thousand feet in thickness, though the coal measures are of much
more limited depth, and the mines of coal vary from thirty feet to
only two inches thick. The distribution of Coal in England is much
greater than in any country in Europe; though in the United States
of America, near Pittsburg, the beds of coal extend over a vast
area, and one is of great thickness. The quantity of coal that is
raised from the pits in this country, however, exceeds that from
all the other coal-fields in the world.[14] The probable duration
of coal in England has formed an interesting subject of speculation
with some geologists, who have estimated the period variously at
from 300 to 1000 years. Sir William Armstrong, at the Meeting of
the British Association, in 1863, estimated the minimum period of
the northern coal-field at 200 years; but Mr. N. Wood, the great
coal-viewer of the North, is of opinion that of the northern
coal-field no conjecture, of practical utility, can yet be formed,
as more than one half of the basin, lying under the sea, has not
yet been explored.
Sir William Armstrong’s remark, however, was misunderstood,
and thought to refer to the coal supply of the whole kingdom,
whereas he limited the remark to the coal-field of Durham and
Northumberland. This misapprehension re-opened the question of the
exhaustion of our coal resources, and led to the communication
of some valuable evidence to the _Times_ journal. Thus, Mr. E.
Hull, of the Geological Survey, states as the result of a series
of investigations of the British coal-fields, that adopting the
limit of depth at 4000 feet, he found there to be enough workable
coal, at the rate of consumption for that year, (about 71,000,000
tons,) for nearly 1000 years; and even if the consumption should
ultimately reach 100,000,000 of tons, that supply could be
maintained for 700 or 800 years.
With respect to the assumed depth, 4000 feet, Mr. Hull adds:
“Already a depth of nearly 1000 yards has been reached in a
Belgian colliery, and coal is now being extracted from depths of
700 and 800 yards in Lancashire. Even with the vertical limit of
4000 feet, I have since found reason to believe that the estimate
I arrived at in the case of the South Wales coal-field was rather
under than over the truth. In that coal-basin alone, with an area
of 906 square miles, I calculated that the rate of consumption
for 1859, of 9½ millions of tons, could be maintained for 1600
years; but it is only right to state, that Mr. H. Vivian, M.P.,
in a pamphlet published by him in 1861, controverts this view,
and arrives at the conclusion that ‘South Wales could supply all
England with coal for 500 years, and her own consumption for
5000.’
“As regards the absolute quantity of mineral fuel in this island,
it may be considered as practically inexhaustible. The seams of
coal outcrop in our coal-fields, and descend under the Permian
and Triassic formations to depths exceeding 10,000 feet. The
question of the available supply is therefore one depending on
the rapidity of production and the limit of depth.”
Dr. Buckland, in 1841, dwelt upon the wanton waste of coal at the
pits, which, in 1836, he had maintained would finally “exhaust the
Newcastle coal-field at a period earlier by at least one-third than
that to which it would last if wisely economized.” The waste has,
however, been much abated.
Mr. Robert Hunt, however, maintains the _consumption_ to be greatly
understated. He says:
“All calculations on the probable duration of our coal-fields
have been founded on the very erroneous data which supposes
that not more than 36,000,000 of coals are raised annually.
We know that more than _sixty-six_ millions of coals are now
annually produced, and the demands upon our resources are rapidly
increasing.”
Sir William Amstrong himself quotes Mr. Hunt as showing “that at
the end of 1861 the quantity of coal raised in the United Kingdom
had reached the enormous total of _eighty-six_ millions of tons,
and that the average annual increase of the eight preceding years
amounted to 2¾ millions of tons.”
If, therefore, Dr. Buckland’s remarks were important in 1836 (when
his _Bridgewater Treatise_ was first published), and of “greater
force” in 1858, how much more must they be worthy of most serious
consideration in 1863.--_Communication to the Times by Mr. Frank
Buckland_. Another Correspondent, however, adds this consolation:
“There may yet remain plenty of coal in the world. Three-fourths
of the globe are covered with water, and what geologist shall
presume to declare that there are no vast deposits of coal deep
below the ocean bed? We have been up and down below the waters
several times, and we shall probably sink again; but then the
bed of the Atlantic may become dry land and peopled with our
successors. Change is the law of the universe. The moon is stated
to be approximating to the earth at the rate of a fraction of an
inch in a century or so, and may one day come tumbling upon us.
The whole of the solar system seems to be travelling--some report
at the slow rate of 47,000 miles an hour--towards an unknown
region of infinite space. Great Britain, therefore, has no reason
to complain if she shares the common fate of all things, whether
in the heavens above or on the earth beneath.”
Monkwearmouth, Sunderland, is the deepest coal-mine in all England;
the coal being won at nearly two miles’ distance from the shaft,
and upwards of 1900 feet, or more than five times the height of St.
Paul’s, below the surface of the green fields and trees above. The
pit employs nearly 300 hands, and yields between 500 and 600 tons
of domestic coal per day; every few seconds, the tall cage shoots
up out of the gloom of the shaft, and the tubs, like miniature
railway-waggons, holding nearly half a ton each, are brought to the
bank, and wheeled away in different directions. Not for a single
instant does the work stop: it is coal--coal everywhere beneath and
around; the very atmosphere is made gloomy with its fine particles;
and all this, seen amid clanking of chains, roaring of steam, and
the rapid activity and whirl of hurried business, make it one of
the most curious and interesting scenes imaginable.
The dangers of the working are thus detailed. The boys in charge
of the trams carry the “Davy,” the wire-gauze of which is far
less liable to injury than the glass shade of the “Geordie,” or
Stephenson lamp; and with these the lads may safely pass the
“goafs” or worked-out seams, in which, though built up as far as
possible, gas always lurks, though the invisible enemy around them
is so thick that the gas will light inside their lamps and burn
with a ghastly blue flame. Beyond this steep incline or bank there
is still nearly a mile to be traversed to the “in-bye”--the face
of the working, the spot from which the coals are actually won:
where, too, the gas has its head-quarters, and has to be watched
and guarded against every hour and minute of the day and night, for
the work of a mine never stops, and day and night are meaningless
terms in such eternal gloom and silence. The heat at the bottom of
the bank, indeed in all parts of the mine, is very great in the
extreme depths of Monkwearmouth. It is seldom less than 84 or 85
deg., and at the workings often over 90 deg. So great is the heat,
in fact, that the men nearly always work almost naked, and in some
cases absolutely so. The heat certainly does not arise from want of
proper ventilation, which seems ample. Not much bratticing is used
to convey the air through the workings, and it is almost entirely
confined to the places where the coal is won. In fact, as far as
human ingenuity, skill, or experience can go, the pit is made safe
from gas at least. Its only risk seems to be from shaft accidents
or inundation, to both of which more or less all colleries in this
district and near to the sea are, to say the least, equally exposed
and equally protected against, as far as it is possible to do it.
_Iron as a Building Material._
The late Professor Cockerell, in a lecture on Architecture, at the
Royal Academy, observed upon the early employment of this material
in building:
The progress of architecture depends as much on discovery of new
materials and new methods of building as on taste. Iron was used
by Tubal Cain as a subsidiary material. It has been employed in
building ever since; but never in solid and in the gross as a
constituent part of the substance of building before Mr. Rennie
employed it as voussoirs in the Southwark Bridge. Sir Robert Smirke
has nobly followed in applying iron in trabeation, and so has
Mr. S. Smirke in the new reading-room of the British Museum, and
others; but the engineers have kept ahead of the architects, from
Mr. Rennie to Messrs. Stephenson, in displaying the powers of iron.
Iron has been cited in Deuteronomy as the essential and last fruit
of the promised land. Our interiors, as halls and churches, will
assume new development and grandeur by iron, since we have seen 200
feet span at Birmingham without abutment, and 150 feet at Paris in
still more enduring structure. The Pantheon of Rome, Sta. Sophia,
St. Peter’s, the Baths, and the great Riding-house at Moscow,
will hide their glories; and iron will henceforward dispense with
pillars and clerestory, flying buttresses and abutments, and roof
our churches in bold and single spans. With all due reverence
for antiquity and precedent, we ought to open our eyes to the
reconciliation of this new material and its peculiar faculties with
the laws of proportion and taste; and this is a problem worthy of
the best spirits, both as to the form of roofs or ceilings, and the
form of supports, which, in iron, with 1-40th part of substance of
stone, will give equal strength of support.
Iron may be termed the osteology of building. Hitherto the
architectural system has proceeded on statics and equipoise of
molecules, as if the human frame were built without bones. Now our
buildings will have bones, giving unity and strength which never
before existed. The nervures of the Gothic will now be in uniform
and single arcs, erected at once: the library at St. Généviève, by
Mons. Arbruste, exhibits an experiment in this way.
_Concrete, not new._
Professor Cockerell observes:--Concrete is a novelty characteristic
of the nineteenth century, or rather a resuscitation of ancient
practice, as shown by quoting Philibert de l’Orme; but in the
bridge of Alma, at Paris, concrete has taken a new and admirable
development, where three arches of about 140 feet span are cast on
the centreing, forming one vast stone from pier to pier. The only
voussoirs used are in the face of the arches. A peculiar cement and
hard fragmented stone has effected this with vast economy of cost
and time, and promises well. The so-called Temple of Peace at Rome
is ceiled and vaulted with a similar concrete. The coffering was
previously moulded in all its detail upon the centreing, and then
covered with grosser concrete, so that on removal of centreing all
was finished. A vast fragment now lies in the middle of the Temple,
and at Tivoli we find that Adrian employed the same simple process.
_Sheathing Ships with Copper._
From an old pamphlet we learn that:--“Mr. Pepys, a scientific man,
in the reign of Charles the Second, suggested the great importance
of Sheathing Ships with Copper, and urged the advantages with sound
and persuasive arguments; and says, in some despair, ‘I wish it
were tried on one ship.’ But this experiment was delayed for nearly
a century; and when it was tried, although it answered beyond
expectation, yet the prejudice against innovation was so strong,
that in Admiral Keppel’s fleet, 1778, there was only one coppered
ship.”
_Copper-smelting._
A prodigious quantity of copper is obtained from Lake Superior.
Mr. Petherick, the well-known mining engineer, informed Dr. Percy
that at Minnesota, in 1854, not fewer than forty men were engaged
during twelve months in cutting up a single mass of native copper,
weighing about 500 tons! The native copper at Lake Superior in
some places occurs curiously intermingled, but generally not
alloyed, with native silver. The following anecdote is recounted
of the value of the gold in the residue from some South American
copper-ores, and which was communicated to Dr. Percy by Dr. Lyon
Playfair. At certain large chemical works where sulphate of copper
was prepared by dissolving copper in sulphuric acid, an insoluble
residue was produced in the process, which had been put aside from
time to time, and had fortunately not been thrown away. A small
sum was offered by certain persons for this residue, which had not
previously been regarded as of much value. Suspicion was excited,
especially by the quarter from which the offer proceeded, and it
was declined; whereupon the residue was examined, and was found to
contain 700_l._-worth of gold!
_Antiquity of Brass._
Dr. Percy, the able metallurgist, extracts from history the
remarkable inference that the _orichalcum_ of Cicero, and which
closely resembled gold, was really Brass; this alloy of copper and
zinc being the only metallic substance which it is possible to
conceive the ancients could have so mistaken. The modification of
brass which is termed “Muntz’s metal,” has been the subject of one
of the most lucrative patents known: when its well-known proprietor
died, his property was sworn under 600,000_l._
_Brilliancy of the Diamond._
The cause of the wonderful _Brilliancy_ of the Diamond is not
popularly known. It has no inherent luminous power; it is simply
transparent, like common glass, and yet, if the latter were
cut into the form of a brilliant, it could no more be mistaken
for a real one than for a sapphire or an emerald. The secret,
therefore, of the brilliancy of the diamond must lie in something
other than its clearness or its transparency. It is owing to its
great _refractive_ power. When rays of white light pass through
transparent substances they are refracted, or bent out of their
former course, and under certain circumstances are separated
into their constituent elements, and dispersed in the form of the
well-known prismatic colours. The cut drops of glass chandeliers
show a familiar example of these properties. Now, the degree in
which this effect is produced by any substance depends on the
refractive power it possesses, and it so happens that the diamond
has this power in an extraordinarily high degree, its index of
refraction being 2·47, while that of glass, or rock crystal,
is only about 1·6, and of water 1·3. The effect of this great
refractive capability, particularly when aided by judicious
cutting, is, instead of allowing the light to pass _through_, to
throw it about, backwards and forwards in the body of the stone,
and ultimately to dart it out again in all sorts of directions, and
in the most brilliant array of mingled colours; and this is the
marvellous effect that meets the eye. Sir David Brewster has shown
that the play of colours is enhanced by the small _dispersive_
power of the diamond, in comparison with its refractive properties.
The general value of diamonds has been rising of late years; for,
though the production is not scanty, the demand, owing to general
prosperity, and the extension of ornament to wider classes in
society, is largely on the increase.--_Mr. Pole_; _Macmillan’s
Magazine_.
_Philosophy of Gunpowder._
It may be well to have one word, as _transmutation_, to indicate
chemical molecular change, and another, as _transformation_, to
indicate mechanical molecular change; but, as industrialists,
we must hesitate to marvel more at the one than the other.
How cheerfully they labour to a common end, like twin brother
and sister; the one strong by measurable strength, the other
by immeasurable fascinating power, we see in the case of that
great world-changer, that emblem of war, and minister of peace,
Gunpowder. It needs the strong brother to fell the oaks, and with a
hint from his twin to burn them into charcoal. It needs his stout
arms to quarry the sulphur, and bring the saltpetre from India;
to crush them into grains, and grind them together. But it also
needs his weird sister, in whose palm he lays the innocent dust, to
breathe upon it before the Alps are tunnelled, or Sebastopol lies
in ruins.--_Prof. George Wilson._
_New Pear-flavouring._
The new _Pear_-flavouring is derived from an alcoholic solution
of pure acetate of amyloxide, considerable quantities of which
are manufactured by some distillers, and sold to confectioners,
who employ it chiefly in making _Pear-drops_, which are merely
barley-sugar, flavoured with this oil. There is, also, an
Apple-oil, which, according to analysis, is nothing but valerianate
of amyloxide.
_Methylated Spirit._
_Methylene_ is a highly volatile and inflammable liquid produced
from the destructive distillation of wood; whence _Methylated_
Spirit, or wood spirit. It is permitted to be used, duty free, in
arts and manufactures. Hitherto, no effort to obtain a potable
spirit from methylated alcohol has succeeded. A patent has been
granted for a process which professes not only to accomplish this
object, but to render wood spirit itself potable, and that, too,
at a cost almost nominal; and it has afforded matter for earnest
discussion among some of our leading pharmacologists, who, anxious
to preserve the integrity of medicinal preparations, have not
unreasonably been alarmed by the assertion that wood spirit can
be so far defecated as to render it almost indistinguishable from
vinous alcohol, and by the exhibition of specimens of such spirit
which might be used, instead of spirits of wine, for pharmaceutical
purposes. But after a series of experiments, Mr. Phillips, of the
Revenue Laboratory, has not been able by the process indicated to
render either methylated or wood spirit potable, although it was
submitted to numerous successive distillations, which from their
costliness could not be applied profitably on a commercial scale.
One of the latest Acts passed, Session 1863, was to reduce the duty
on rum. It recites that by the Act 18th and 19th Victoria, cap. 38,
spirit of wine was allowed to be methylated duty free; and that it
is expedient to allow foreign and colonial rum to be methylated,
on payment of reduced duty. Rum may now be “methylated” in the
Customs’ warehouse; but the wood naphtha, or methylic alcohol, or
other article to be mixed with the rum, is to be provided by the
Inland Revenue Commissioners; and the mixture is to be denominated
“methylated spirits,” and such spirits may be exported.
Meanwhile, the Inland Revenue returns in 1863 showed a decreased
consumption of spirit, from the fact of methylated spirit taking
the place of duty-paid or pure spirit. Of the one article of
spirit of nitre, very little is sold which is not distilled from
“methylated finish.” This increased quantity of sweet spirit of
nitre sold is not taken medicinally, but is extensively used in the
adulteration of potable spirits.
_What is Phosphate of Lime?_
Phosphate of Lime, a minute constituent of all fertile soils
and of most waters, is of great value to the ivory-turner, the
manure-maker, the potter, the silver-assayer, the drug-manufacturer,
the dyer, and the lucifer-match maker. It reaches all of them in
the shape of the bones of dead animals; dead cattle from our farms,
dead horses from the Pampas of South America, dead walrusses from
the Arctic icebergs, dead whales from the Pacific Ocean, dead men
even from fields of battle. Land and sea-plants have, as it were,
milked this essential constituent of their frames, drop by drop,
from the breast of nature. Animals of all classes, from the lowest
to the highest, have robbed plants of their hard-gotten gains,
and made their bones strong with the precious substance. Finally,
the chartered robber man has robbed them all, claiming even the
relics of his brethren, and obtaining in a handful of bone dust the
phosphate of tons of rock and water.--_Prof. G. Wilson._
_What is Wood?_
Its chief ingredients, charcoal and water, are uncostly and
abundant; but in themselves they are useless to the carpenter,
and he cannot change them into timber. So he calls to remembrance
that his great grandfather planted an acorn, which has turned
its first small capital to so excellent account that now it is
a timber-merchant on a large scale, and will contract with you
to build a ship of war out of oak of its own making. It is with
other trees as with this ancestral oak. Each, with its republic
of industrious roots and leaves, is a joint-stock company with
limited liability, engaging to furnish you with pine-stems for
masts, fir-wood for planking, logwood for dyeing, cork-bark for
bottling, oak-bark for tanning, walnut for tables, rosewood for
picture-frames, satinwood for looking-glasses, willow for cradles,
mahogany for wardrobes, ebony for will-chests, elm-tree for
coffins.--Those trees form the Worshipful Company of Woodmakers, an
ancient guild.--_Ibid._
_How long will Wood last?_
Cedar-wood will last 1000 years. The oil of cedar-wood, mixed
with oil of creosote and forced into timber by means of a pump,
will be found highly preservative of all timber for shipbuilding
and breakwaters. In very old buildings, the timbers where they
have been whitewashed, are often found in the highest state of
preservation. In _olden_ days they cut the timber in the winter
season, when the sap was most out of it; but now, for the use of
tanners, it is felled in summer; the result of which is, that it
shrinks, chaps, and decays, sooner than it otherwise would. The
wood of the walnut-tree is very durable, and so is that of the
horse-chesnut-tree. Many very ancient barns about Gravesend are
built entirely of the last. In preparing wood for shipbuilding,
&c., it is best to lay it in a “running stream” for a few days
only, to extract the sap that remains in it, and then dry it in the
sun or air, by which it neither chaps, casts, nor cleaves. The use
of linseed-oil, tar, or such oleaginous matter, tends much to the
preservation of wood. Hesiod prescribes “smoking” timber in order
to preserve it:--
“Temonem in fumo poneres.”
Virgil advised the same method:--
“Et suspensa focis exploret Robora fumus.”
Others have advised the oil of smoke! [pyroligneous acid?] The
solid stems of trees most subject to decay, are commonly found in
the Irish “peat-bogs,” in such excellent preservation, that they
are esteemed equal to any timber for substantial buildings; the
peat being highly antiseptic and preservative. Larix (which can be
procured in blocks of any size from Dantzig) is the best kind of
wood for breakwaters, harbours, &c. It is capable of resisting the
weather for a length of time in those situations.--_Correspondent
of the Builder._
_The Safety Match._
The statistics of London Fires in one year (1858) show that, out
of the 1114 fires forming the total of serious conflagrations, the
following proportion was occasioned by the usual contrivances for
procuring flame, viz.:
Children playing with lucifers 12
Lucifer matches accidentally ignited 7
” ” making 3
” ” careless use of 17
--
39
In the first of these instances the sacrifice of life and wholesale
destruction of property were traced principally to the fact of
children inserting lucifer matches into various nooks and crevices,
where an accidental concussion had produced their ignition. The
next in the series of casualties are accidents resulting from
the sudden ignition of boxes or bundles of phosphorized matches.
The necessity as well as the possibility of removing the fatal
cause of these accidents has long been felt; and by the following
contrivance such occurrences, which hitherto have led to so many
terrible disasters, may be completely obviated. This invention,
which has reached us from France, consists of a match which cannot
ignite by friction with ordinary substances, but which bursts into
flame when struck upon a chemically-prepared substance, owing to
the peculiar action occurring between the two bodies which are thus
brought into contact. Without the prepared strip, the matches may
be struck or trodden upon without the possibility of ignition. The
advantage of having these articles tipped with a material which
is not inflammable _per se_ is sufficiently obvious, not only to
careful housewives, but to the owners of large establishments where
the ordinary “lucifers” are now used, and, we are afraid, often
left carelessly about.
The reputed inventor of the Lucifer Match died in 1859, in
Stockton, aged seventy-eight. The _Gateshead Observer_ adds to this
announcement:--“In the year 1852 (August), correcting the history
of ‘matches’ in the ‘Jurors’ Reports’ (Great Exhibition), we
stated, says our authority, that ‘A quarter of a century ago, Mr.
John Walker, of Stockton-upon-Tees, then (as now) carrying on the
business of chemist and druggist in that town, was preparing some
lighting mixture for his own use. By the accidental friction on
the hearth of a match dipped in the mixture, a light was obtained.
The hint was not thrown away. Mr. Walker commenced the sale of
friction-matches: this was in April, 1827.’ Dr. Faraday, it is
said, first brought the discovery into general notice.”
_Pottery.--Wedgwood._
There are three conditions locally necessary to the manufacture of
Earthenware: the first is the presence of coals, the second is the
existence of beds of clay and the accessibility of other materials
of minor importance, and the third is the requisite labour. The
great Wedgwood found these conditions to be mainly fulfilled in the
part of North Staffordshire now called Stoke-upon-Trent, and with
an enterprise, an industry, and a perseverance which is appreciated
there, set on foot a manufacture which has now become a staple,
and employs, directly or indirectly, upwards of 100,000 of the
population of this country, and which is at this time one of the
most important articles of our commercial interchange.
Where there is coal there is generally iron, and iron works and
earthenware manufactories naturally and unavoidably engender smoke;
but although the inhabitants of the Potteries have refused to
accept any compulsory measure, which, if recklessly carried out,
might completely annihilate their trade and deprive of employment
the vast number of the inhabitants of the district, yet there is no
place where greater efforts have been made by private individuals
voluntarily to adopt measures for the suppression of what they
admit to be an evil, not in any degree to the extent set forth.
The first use of flint in pottery has been thus explained. A potter
named Astbury, travelling to London, perceived something amiss
with one of his horse’s eyes, when an ostler at Dunstable said he
could cure him, and for that purpose put a common black flint into
the fire. The potter observing it when taken out to be of a fine
white, immediately conceived the idea of improving his ware by the
addition of this material to the clay.
_Imposing Mechanical Effects._
Mechanical force, when exerted even as a motive-power, can be
employed by man on many a grand scale. The movements of massive
pieces of machinery, even though moving aimlessly, still more
when working for a purpose, always awaken in us the idea of
power; and often also create emotions of awe and sublimity akin
to those which are begotten by the spectacle of great natural
phenomena. The sweep of a railway train across the country, and
the dash of a war-steamer against the waves with which it measures
its strength, never become paltry pageants, even though we are
ignorant of the errands on which these swift coursers are bound.
Still more striking are those actions of machinery which involve
not only swift irresistible motion, but also transformation of the
materials on which the moving force is exerted. Take, for example,
a cotton-mill, which some never tire of representing as dreary and
prosaic. In the basement story revolves an immense steam-engine,
unresting and unhasting as a star, in its stately, orderly
movements. It stretches its strong iron arms in every direction
throughout the building; and into whatever chamber you enter, as
you climb stair after stair, you find its million hands in motion,
and its fingers, which are as skilful as they are nimble, busy at
work. They pick cotton and cleanse it, card it, rove it, twist
it, spin it, dye it, and weave it. They will work any pattern you
select, and in as many colours as you choose; and do all with such
celerity, dexterity, unexhausted energy, and skill, that you begin
to see what was prefigured in the legend of Michael Scott, and his
“sabbathless” demons (as Charles Lamb would have called them),
to whom the most hateful of all things was rest, and ropemaking,
though it were of sand, more welcome than idleness. For our own
part, we gaze with untiring wonder and admiration on the steam
Agathodæmons of a cotton-mill, the embodiments, all of them, of a
few very simple statical and dynamical laws; and yet able, with the
speed of race-horses, to transform a raw material, originally as
cheap as thistle-down, into endless useful and beautiful fabrics.
Michael Scott, had he lived to see them, would have dismissed his
demons and broken his wand.--_Prof. George Wilson._[15]
_Horse-power._
In speaking of the power, or force which an engine exerts, it is
necessary to have some measure of force, or standard of inference.
That used in this country is _a Horse-power_, a force equal to
that which the average strength of a horse was believed capable
of exerting. This has been estimated at 33,000 lb. avoirdupois
weight, raised one foot high in a minute. There have been different
estimates as to the real power of horses; and it is now considered
that taking the most advantageous rate, for using horse-power,
the medium power of that animal is equal to 22,000 lb. raised one
foot high per minute. However, the other 33,000 lb. is taken as
the standard, and is what is meant when a horse-power is spoken
of. In comparing the power of a steam-engine with that of horses
applied to do the same work, it must be remembered that the
engine horse-power is 33,000 lb. raised one foot per minute; the
real horse-power only 22,000 lb.; and that the engine will work
unceasingly for twenty-four hours, while the horse works at that
rate only eight hours. The engine works three times as long as the
horse; hence, to do the same work in a day as the engine of one
horse-power, 4·5 horses would be required (33,000 × 3 = 99,000;
99,000 ÷ 22,000 = 4·5). The power of a man may be estimated at
one-fifth of the real power of a horse, or 44,000 lb. raised one
foot per minute.--_Hugo Reid on the Steam-Engine._
_The First Practical Steam-boat._
Mr. Macquorn Rankine, in supporting the opinion of Mr. Benet
Woodcroft, that the title of the “first practical steamboat” is due
to that vessel in which the double-acting cranked steam-engine--in
short, Watt’s rotative engine--was first applied to drive the
propeller,--proceeds on the principle, that to constitute a
“practical” machine, that machine must be capable, not merely of
working well during a series of experiments, but of continuing
to work well for years, with ordinary care in its management and
repairs. Such certainly never was, and never could have been the
case, with any steam-boat in which the wheels were made to turn
by means of chains and rachet-work--a sort of mechanism which may
answer its purpose during an experiment, but which must rapidly
wear itself out by shocks and rattling. Such an engine is not
a “practical steam-engine;” and a vessel driven by it is not a
“practical steam-boat.” Hence the importance which Mr. Rankine
is disposed to ascribe to the first actual use of a permanently
efficient rotative steam-engine to drive a vessel.
It may be true that as an original inventor, Symington ought to be
ranked below his predecessors; because his steam-boat of 1801 was
only a new combination of parts which had previously been invented
separately by others--the paddle-wheel, by some unknown mechanic
of remote antiquity; the application of steam to drive vessels,
by a series of inventors, comprising Papin, Hulls, D. Bernouilli,
Jouffroy, Miller, and Taylor; and the rotative steam-engine
by Watt: still, the merit of having first used a “practical
steam-engine” to drive a vessel is due to Symington.--_Communicated
to the Literary and Philosophical Society of Manchester, 1863._
_Effect of Heavy Seas upon Large Vessels._
Professor Tennant, in considering the effect of heavy seas upon
vessels of 400 to 600 feet long, remarks that the waves of the
Atlantic are stated, by some captains of American “liners,” to
attain an elevation of 20 feet, with a length of 160 feet, and a
velocity of 25 to 30 miles per hour. Dr. Scoresby, in his paper on
Atlantic waves, gives about the same mean elevation for the waves
in rather a hard gale a-head; on one occasion, with a hard gale
and heavy squalls, some few waves attained a height of 43 feet,
with a length of nearly 600 feet, and a velocity exceeding 30 miles
an hour. Other authorities assume even more than those heights
and distances. The amount of strength, to resist the impact of
such waves, must vary with the length and size of a ship, and the
materials of which it was constructed; and as the experience of the
Britannia Bridge shows, that a weight of 460 tons, at a velocity of
30 miles per hour, could be borne by a cellular tube of 460 feet
span, it was demonstrated, that by the use of iron, almost any
amount of strength could be given to a vessel; and as stability
could be imparted by proper proportions, efficient vessels could
be built of any dimensions, as has been exemplified by the _Great
Britain_, which after remaining ashore on rocks for several months,
had been got off without serious injury.
_The Railway._
“Depend upon it, whenever this new mode of travelling comes into
operation, we shall become altogether a _faster_ people,” was the
vaticination of a common-sense observer some thirty years since;
and experience has proved the soundness of the opinion. Increased
facility of moving from place to place must, more or less, affect
every one except the recluse shut up in his chamber from choice, or
the less fortunate one prostrated on the bed of suffering, or age--
“Lies he not bedrid? And again does nothing
But what he did, being childish.”--_Shakspeare._
This quickening of locomotion has multiplied our desires by adding
to the means of gratifying them; a greater number of incidents and
opportunities of observation is thus gained; but, being crowded
into the same length of existence, the wear and tear becomes
greater; the knife wears out the sheath; and men grow old before
they reach mid-age; or rather, the finer portions of existence are
lost, and the residue approaches a _caput mortuum_.
Meanwhile, the Railway is yet an incomplete invention; and it is
contended that our passenger-trains are deficient in the requisite
accommodation for the comfort and even health of the passengers,
who are still exposed to an unnecessary vibration which, in the
course of continual travelling, produces nervous diseases. Mr.
Bridges Adams, the engineer, and therefore a practical authority
upon the subject, maintains that the railway companies are so
fettered in their operations as to be unable to make feasible
improvements: were these restrictions removed, Mr. Adams contends
the public would receive the advantage in many forms, in easier and
cheaper transit, and in reciprocal relations of town and country,
such as involve a revolution in our national economies. The same
acute writer anticipates the time when our towns shall have their
railway-streets, which may become a fact at no very distant future.
London has already its subterranean railway; above, the air is
grilled with the electric-wire railway; and the street-system is
being commenced upon the banks of the Thames, and the stream is
already bridged with viaducts.
_Accidents on Railways._
The question of Railway Accidents involves the whole question of
railway management in detail. Accidents may be called the weak
points of the system, where imperfection is manifested, where
failure crops out, and where the line of demarcation may be drawn
between the practicable and the impracticable. “If the road is
perfect,” says Captain Huish, “if the engine is perfect, if the
carriages are perfect, and I will go on to say, if the signalman
is perfect, and if everything about the railway is perfect, almost
any amount of speed that can be got out of an engine may be done
with safety. But we deal not with theoretical excellence, but with
practical facts, and none of these things are perfect; and in a
large machine like a railway they cannot always be kept perfect.”
Safety to life and limb is of course the most important
consideration in the working of railway traffic. Yet the problem
is substantially this:--There are upwards of one hundred and
forty millions of passengers and seventy million tons of goods
per annum conveyed over our railways; assumed that all these must
be transported by railway, what is the best way to do it? It must
at the best be by a species of compromise; there must be a limit
to tentative measures, there must be a risk. “If you do not go at
all,” says Mr. Seymour Clarke, “there is no risk of an accident; if
you go one mile an hour it is more risky than if you stand still;
it is a natural attendant upon all travelling, that there is a
liability to accident of some sort.” And, again, Mr. Locke thinks
“that where you have the certainty of inflicting an inconvenience
on the public by a prospective advantage in the saving of an
accident, you should be very careful how you entail perpetually
recurring inconvenience for the sake of preventing an accident
which may never arise.”
The Evidence adduced before the Select Committee of the House of
Commons on railway accidents in 1858, from which the foregoing
extracts have been made, has led the committee to the conclusion,
that accidents on railways arise from three causes--inattention of
servants; defective material, either in the works or the rolling
stock; and excessive speed.
Of the accidents reported to the Board of Trade that happened
in 1857, there appears to have been twice as many by collision
between trains as by running off the rails; and of the accidents
by collision, five-sixths took place between passenger-trains and
goods trains; and only about one-sixth between passenger-trains
one against another. It further appears that a very small
proportion, not above one in twenty, of the accidents reported,
have directly arisen from excessive speed, but in every case
in conjunction with imperfections in the permanent way. It may
be observed that the greater proportion, if not all of these
accidents, may be traced primarily to the crowding of trains,
timed for unequal speeds, and the want of punctuality, which
involve the risk of every kind of accident as a consequence:--by
a want of perfect manifestation or apprehension of signals, or
by excessive speeds. As tentative measures, the free use of the
electric telegraph for giving intelligence of the exact relative
positions and circumstances of trains on the line, and the use
of the most powerful brakes for bringing up the trains in the
shortest practicable distance, are probably of the most urgent
necessity. Perfect brakes are also indisputably promotive of
safety in working traffic and in compensating for unavoidable
irregularities. With the usual amount of braking power, a train
at 50 miles per hour may not be stopped within 900 or 1200 yards.
An instantaneous brake is not of course what is wanted; on the
contrary, a length of 200 yards appears to be the shortest
desirable space within which a train at 50 or 60 miles per hour
should be stopped, so that the process of retardation should
not be accompanied by risk of carriages riding over each other,
or of violence to the passengers. This appears to have been
accomplished by powerful systems of train-brakes. Steam-brakes
applied to the locomotives and extended to the tenders, and even
to the brake-vans, have been found beneficial and capable of
stopping a train within half the usual distance.--_Encyclopædia
Britannica_, 8th edit.
_Railways and Invasions._
The Volunteer Review at Brighton, in 1862, afforded a good
practical demonstration of the facility with which troops might be
moved towards a threatened point on the particular railway which
would be most likely to be required for such a duty in an actual
case of emergency. On the morning of the review, 6922 Volunteers
were despatched from London-bridge in 2 hours and 41 minutes, and
5170 from the Victoria Station in 2 hours and 20 minutes, without
difficulty. They were conveyed in 16 trains, each composed of an
engine and tender and 22 vehicles, and each carrying on an average
20 officers and 735 men; and they reached Brighton in an average
of 2 hours and 28 minutes from the time of starting. The Company
had also to provide for the Easter Monday traffic, and to convey
upwards of 2000 Volunteers along the south coast from the several
stations on their own line. Indeed, the total number of passengers
who travelled upon the London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway
on that day was 132,202, including Volunteers and the holders of
season and return tickets.
The vast power which the railways of this country place at the
disposal of the Government for the transport of troops is little
known. It is in practice limited only by the number of troops that
are forthcoming; and railway organization is highly favourable for
the concentration of all its energies upon this object whenever it
is worth while to interfere with the ordinary traffic.
Connected with the Brighton Railway system alone there are 145
locomotive engines, 1858 carriages or passenger vehicles, and
2588 waggons and trucks or merchandise vehicles, for working 240
miles: on the South-Eastern there are 179 engines, 972 carriages,
and 2535 waggons, for 286 miles; and on the South-Western, 177
engines, 850 carriages, and 3488 trucks, for 444 miles. These
numbers might be increased to any amount, if increase were
required, at a day’s notice, by aid from the gigantic resources of
the more extensive systems north of London. Excursion traffic is
more difficult to manage in many respects than military traffic.
A word from the commanding-officer procures an amount of order
in the one case which barriers and policemen fail to do in the
other. A hundred thousand men may at any time be conveyed without
fatigue from London to Brighton in a single day, and they may
further be transported along the coast from point to point, to
Portsmouth and Weymouth on the west, and to Dover on the east,
without break of gauge. They may also be brought from the north
through London, and from the north, _via_ Reading, without coming
to London at all; and, indeed, the means of communication thus
afforded are of so much importance to successful defence, that the
railway system determines to a great extent in this country, as
it has notably done in America, the strategic lines along which
offensive operations must be carried on, and defensive movements
effected.--_Quarterly Review_, No. 223.
_What the English owe to naturalized Foreigners._
The industry of England owes much to the foreigners who have from
time to time become settled and naturalized amongst us. Dr. Percy
has stated, in his _Metallurgy_, that we are indebted to German
miners, introduced into England by the wisdom of Elizabeth, for the
early development of our mineral resources. It also appears that
the Dutch were our principal instructors in civil and mechanical
engineering; draining extensive marsh and fen lands along the east
coast in the reign of James I., and erecting for us pumping-engines
and mill-machinery of various kinds. Many of the Flemings, driven
from their own country by the Duke of Alva, sought and found an
asylum in England, bringing with them their skill in dyeing,
cloth-working, and horticulture; while the thousands who flocked
into the kingdom on the revocation of the Edict of Nantes by Louis
XIV., introduced the arts of manufacturing in glass, silk, velvet,
lace, and cambric, which have since become established branches
of industry. The religious persecutions in Belgium and France not
only banished from those countries free Protestant thought, but
at the same time expelled the best industrial skill, and England
eventually obtained the benefit of both.
Our mechanical proficiency, however, has been a comparatively
recent growth. Like many others of our national qualities, it has
come out suddenly and unexpectedly. But, though late learners, we
have been so apt that we have already outstripped our teachers;
and there is scarcely a branch of manufacture in which we have not
come up to, if indeed we have not surpassed, the most advanced
continental nations.
The invention of the steam-engine, towards the end of last century,
had the effect of giving an extraordinary impetus to improvement,
particularly in various branches of iron manufacture; and we began
to export machines, engines, and ironwork to France, Germany, and
the Low Countries, whence we had before imported them. Although
this great invention was perfected by Watt, much of the preliminary
investigation in connexion with the subject had been conducted
by eminent French refugees: as by Desaugliers, the author of the
well-known _Course of Experimental Philosophy_, and by Denis
Papin, for some time Curator of the Royal Society, whose many
ingenious applications of steam-power prove him to have been a
person of great and original ability. But the most remarkable of
these early inventors was unquestionably Thomas Savery--also said
to have been a French refugee, though very little is known of him
personally--who is entitled to the distinguished merit of having
invented and constructed the first working steam-engine. All these
men paved the way for Watt, who placed the copestone on the work of
which the distinguished Frenchmen had in a great measure laid the
foundations.
Many other men of eminence, descendants of the refugees, might be
named, who have from time to time added greatly to our scientific
and productive resources. Amongst names which incidentally occur
to us are those of Dollond the optician; and Fourdrinier, the
inventor of the paper-making machine. Passing over these, many
were the emigrés who flocked over to England at the outbreak
of the great French Revolution of 1789, and who maintained
themselves by teaching the practice of art, and by other industrial
pursuits. Of these, perhaps, the most distinguished was Marc
Isambard Brunel, who for the greater part of his life followed
the profession of an engineer, leaving behind him a son as
illustrious as himself,--Isambard Kingdom Brunel, the engineer of
the Great Western and other railways, the designer of the Great
Eastern steam-ship, and the architect of many important public
works.--Abridged from the _Quarterly Review_, No. 223.
_Geological Growth._
Geologists who are familiar with the idea of Geological phenomena
worked out through periods of inconceivable duration will,
perhaps, be able to appreciate Mr. E. B. Hunt’s argument on the
growth and chronology of the great Florida reef. After stating the
dimensions of the reef, Mr. Hunt proceeds: “Taking the rate at
twenty-four years to the foot, we shall have for the total time 24
× 250 × 900, on the data, as stated; or we find the total period of
5,400,000 years as that required for the growth of the entire coral
limestone formation of Florida.”
“_Implements in the Drift._”
We have already, at page 59, referred to these important evidences,
in connexion with the mode of life of the present inhabitants of
Tierra del Fuego. The geological inference must, however, be drawn
with extreme caution, which induces us to return to the subject.
The period of time long before history was, for convenience we
designate the “Stone Age.” We gather from manifold evidence that
during this period metals were unknown. Wherever their use was
introduced, there the “Stone Age” virtually ended. The recent
discovery of the flint instruments of the drift seems to carry
the “Stone Age” back to a period of which, till very lately, we
had no idea. The interval between the time when men fashioned
these thousands of implements already found in the drift, and the
earliest examples of the second “Stone Age” so to speak, as the
Danish “kjökkenmödding,” or the oldest Swiss “pfahlbau,” must be
long indeed.
It by no means follows that all the men who have used stone weapons
must necessarily have been savages. At least, a consideration of
the every-day life of the Swiss “pfahlbauten” would refute such a
proposition. There was progress even in the “Stone Age,” and the
iron swords of the Gauls of Brennus probably differed less from
the finest-tempered Damascus blade than do the flint implements
of the drift from those of Denmark; or, to come nearer home, from
the stone relics of our Channel Islands. There may have been an
all-pervading “Stone Age,” but universality is not implied in the
term. The people of the lands now Hungary and Transylvania seem to
have used copper implements, preceding those of bronze, when the
men of the West were fashioning their flints.
The present state of the tribes of Tierra del Fuego is their “Stone
Age,” and, if ever they become a nation hereafter, they will
probably collect in their museums the humble implements of their
earliest culture.
The above observations were communicated to the _Times_, April 30,
1863: it is but a glimpse of a great subject, but is so suggestive
as to be entitled to attention.
_The Earth and Man compared._
If it were possible for man to construct a globe 800 feet, or twice
the height of St. Paul’s Cathedral, in diameter, and to place
upon any one point of its surface an atom 1/4380th of an inch in
diameter, and 1/720th part of an inch in height, it would correctly
denote the proportion man bears to the earth upon which he stands.
_Why the Earth is presumed to be solid._
Besides the confirmation of some of the most material points
of the theory of gravitation which results from the experiment
of “Weighing the Earth,”[16] it furnishes a presumption of the
strongest kind that the _earth is solid to the centre_, and not,
as many have supposed in every age, a hollow shell. The mean
density, 5⅔, is very much greater than that of the substances
which abound at the surface. All common rocks are under 3, and
nothing under the ores of the heaviest metals comes up to 5⅔.
The earth is as massive as if it were all composed of silver ore,
from the centre to the circumference, so that there must be an
increase of density towards the centre. If those who think the
earth to be a shell were to presume that its solidity ceased at 500
miles below the surface, they would then be compelled to give to
the terrestrial matter, one part with another, a density greater
than that of mercury, in order that the whole shell, the hollow
part included, might have the mean density which is found by this
experiment.--_Penny Cyclopædia._
_The Centre of the Earth._
Lt.-Col. Sir Henry James writes to the _Athenæum_ as follows:--In
verifying on a globe the interesting fact stated by Sir John
Herschel, in his _Outlines of Astronomy_, and by Sir Charles Lyell,
in his _Principles of Geology_, that the central point of the
hemisphere which contains the maximum of land, falls very nearly
upon London, or more exactly upon Falmouth, our most western port
of departure for all parts of the habitable globe, it occurred
to me to inquire what would be the central point of that portion
of the globe which should include the whole of Europe, Asia,
Africa, and America; and I found that the point lies in lat. 23°
3´ on northern tropical line, and in 15° E. long., near a place
called Ghad in Africa, about 700 miles south of Tripoli. But the
portion of the globe which, from this point as a centre, includes
the so-called four quarters of the world is as near as possible
two-thirds of the surface of the sphere; and I found that by
projecting this portion of the sphere upon a plane drawn parallel
to the great circle of which the above defined centre was in the
pole and at 20° from it, and from a point in the prolongation of
the axis of this great circle distant one-half of the radius from
the surface of the sphere, that the whole of the four quarters
of the globe could be represented on one strictly geometrical
projection. I have had this projection made by Mr. J. O’Farrell,
one of the highly intelligent assistants of the Ordnance Survey. I
believe this is the first time that two-thirds of a sphere has been
presented to the eye at one view.
_The Cooling of the Earth._
It is a generally received belief among geologists, that the centre
of the earth is occupied by incandescent fluid matter, which is
gradually but constantly losing its heat. Adopting this theory,
which rests on mere conjecture, Professor William Thomson, in
a paper published in the Transactions of the Royal Society of
Edinburgh, endeavours to fix the date of the first consolidation
of the globe, supposed to have been once in a state of perfect
liquefaction. It is estimated that the temperature increases as
we descend towards the centre of the earth, at the average rate
of one degree of Fahrenheit per 50 British feet, or 105 degrees
per mile. Our author admits the temperature of melting rock to be
7000 degrees; supposing, therefore, the surface of the earth to
have been in a fluid state, its consolidation, he thinks, cannot
have taken place less than 20,000,000 years ago, since we should
otherwise have more underground heat than we actually have; nor
more than 400,000,000 years ago, because in that case we should
have much less. This, it must be allowed, is rather a wide range,
and is a curious instance of the strange results which calculation
affords when applied to a gratuitous hypothesis. Compared with the
earth’s radius, which is 3958 miles, the depths to which we have
been able to penetrate are utterly insignificant, and can afford
no reliable data whatever; the more so, as by Professor Thomson’s
own admission, the rate of increase of temperature decreases
progressively.
Our author, moreover, in the course of his arguments, meets with
difficulties, the importance of which does not seem to have
escaped him, since he endeavours to remove them by some rather
doubtful assertions. To those, for instance, who would object to
the supposition that any natural action could possibly produce at
one instant, and maintain for ever after, a 7000 degrees’ lowering
of the surface temperature of the earth, he replies:--“I answer
by saying, what I think cannot be denied, that a large mass of
rock exposed freely to our air and sky will, after it once becomes
crusted over, present in a few hours, or a few days, or at the most
a few weeks, a surface so cool that it can be walked over with
impunity.” Now we do confess ourselves very much inclined to deny
such a proposition. What kind of mass does our author mean? Is it
a small mass? then he need but visit a gun foundry, where he will
find pieces of ordnance still hot though cast several days before.
Or is it a large mass, like a mountain? The nearest approach to
it would be lava, which remains hot for weeks after the eruption,
and for any larger mass there is no evidence either in existence
or possible. But the immense difficulty of the subject may be
inferred from the fact, that Professor Thomson himself further
down makes an admission which is fatal to his own view, viz., that
“if at any time the earth were in the condition of a thin solid
shell of, suppose, 50 or 100 feet thick of granite, enclosing a
continuous melted mass of 20 per cent. less specific gravity in its
upper parts, where the pressure is small, this condition cannot
have lasted many minutes, since the rigidity of a solid shell of
superficial extent so vast in comparison with its thickness must
be as nothing, and the slightest disturbance would cause some
part to bend down, crack, and allow the liquid to run out over
the solid.” What then, we may ask, becomes of the liquid theory
altogether?--_Galignani’s Messenger._
_Identity of Heat and Motion._
George Stephenson’s remark, that the sun is the agent that drives
our locomotives, has attained a wider and more definite meaning
from modern investigations. It is now known, not only that heat and
motion are mysteriously related, but that they are the same thing.
From the researches of Mayer and Joule, Thomson and Rankine, it is
ascertained that so much heat can be converted into so much motion,
and the motion reconverted into the original quantity of heat. Sir
William Armstrong says that a degree of Fahrenheit in a pound of
water is the same thing as the force required to lift 772 pounds a
foot high, thus testifying to the final and exact establishment of
the largest generalization which modern science has made; and among
the many fruits which cannot but flow from the discovery, one of
the earliest is its application, by Sir William Armstrong himself,
to test the waste of power in artillery practice, by observing the
heat called forth in the shot. Every degree of temperature added
to the projectile is part of the force intended to destroy the
target; and if it is asked what material makes the most effective
cannon-ball, it is only necessary to ascertain what substance will
keep coolest when it strikes the mark. It is observable that the
convertibility of heat and motion opens up a new light into the
ultimate constitution of matter. The marvellous experiments of
Professor Tyndall on the power of the minutest films of gas and
vapour to absorb heat, as a dark glass stops light, are equally
interesting as valuable contributions to meteorology, and as a new
mode of probing the molecular condition of the gases themselves.
The laws of the variation of atmospheric temperature were
unfathomable until it was discovered that the habitable quality
of the earth depends on the floating vapour which clothes it, and
which keeps it warm in exactly the same way as the coverings by
which we protect our bodies from the inclemency of the weather; but
the significance of these experiments goes far beyond the limits of
a single branch of science, and again we seem to be hovering on the
verge of large revelations as to the ultimate arrangement of the
particles of matter.
It is in the development of new powers of testing the
infinitesimal, and carrying research immeasurably beyond the
coarse limits of microscopic vision, that the strength of recent
effort has been displayed. The most startling result of this form
of investigation is the insight which has been gained into the
materials and the condition of the luminous atmosphere of the
sun. It could scarcely have been anticipated that the nature of
a body separated from us by millions of miles should have been
discovered by experiments which deal with qualities hidden in
the inconceivably minute dimensions which express the form and
distances of what, for want of better knowledge, may still be
termed the ultimate atoms of material substances; and yet it was
by testing the light-stopping power of thin films of different
vapours, that philosophers have felt themselves entitled to say
that some of the same substances which we are familiar with on
earth have contributed to the atmosphere of the sun.--_Saturday
Review._
_Universal Source of Heat._
Dr. Percy, in his very able Treatise on Metallurgy, gives an
explanation of the principle that the sun is really the source
of the heat-producing power of all fuel; and we are inevitably
reminded of the question with which George Stephenson puzzled
Buckland. “Now, Buckland,” said Stephenson, as they were looking
at a train in motion, “can you tell me what is the power that
is driving that train?” “Well,” said the other, “I suppose it
is one of your big engines.” “But what drives the engine?” “Oh!
very likely a canny Newcastle driver.” “What do you say to the
light of the sun?” “How can that be?” asked the Doctor. “It is
nothing else,” said the engineer: “it is light bottled up in the
earth for tens of thousands of years; light, absorbed by plants
and vegetables, being necessary for the condensation of carbon
during the process of their growth, if it be not carbon in another
form,--and now, after being buried in the earth for long ages
in fields of coal, that latent light is again brought forth and
liberated, made to work, as in that locomotive, for great human
purposes.” Dr. Percy explains the process by which this light or
heat is stored, and discusses the question of fuel in all its
forms and branches. We find under this head, _inter multa alia_,
an account of the manufacture of the peat-bricks in South Bavaria,
which have for some years past been used for the boilers of
locomotives; again, an explanation of the failure of Mr. Vignoles’s
process of manufacturing iron in Ireland by means of peat charcoal,
in consequence of the value of the raw material so much exceeding
his estimate; besides an elaborate discussion on that litigated
question so differently judged by different tribunals, and still
undecided--“What is or is not coal?”
_Inequalities of the Earth’s Surface._
The earth is a spherical body, or, more correctly, an elliptic
spheroid. Its surface, therefore, may be considered equidistant
from its centre point within, and of uniform curvature. This is so
as regards the ocean, which is
“Unchangeable save to _its_ wild waves’ play;”
but the surface of the land is very diversified. In parts it is
spread out into plains; in others, into easy undulations. Here
and there it rises into hills, with valleys and extensive basins
between them; while at places chains of mountains appear at varying
altitudes, some of which penetrate the clouds.
Although the irregularities of the small portion of land which we
can see at one view seem very considerable, and more especially the
largest mountains, yet these protuberances are insignificant when
compared to the magnitude of the earth itself.
Mount Everest, in Nepaul, is the loftiest point of the Himalaya
chain, and the highest mountain in the world. It rises 29,002
feet--equal to 5·49 miles,--above the level of the sea. This
height is only (7912·40/5·49) 1/1441 part of the earth’s diameter;
or equal to 1 inch placed on a globe (1441/12 =) 120 feet in
diameter. It therefore bears the same proportion to the diameter of
the earth that a grain of sand, the ninetieth part of an inch in
diameter, does to a globe (1441/90 =) 16 inches in diameter.
“If we would construct a correct model of our earth, with its seas,
continents, and mountains, on a globe 16 inches in diameter, the
whole of the land, with the exception of a few prominent points
and ridges, must be comprised on it within the thickness of thin
writing paper; and the highest hills would be represented by the
smallest visible grains of sand.”[17]
Astronomers have measured the distances and weighed the masses of
the planets, yet the height of the atmosphere and the depths of the
ocean are unsolved problems. The bottom of “blue water” is almost
as unknown to us as the interior of the earth. It is a common
opinion that the greatest depths of the sea are about equal to the
greatest heights of the mountains. Attempts have been repeatedly
made to sound out its depths, but no reliance can be placed on
any reports of soundings beyond 8000 or 10,000 feet. One ran out
his sounding-line 34,000 feet, and did not touch bottom; another
39,000 feet with the same result; one reported bottom at 49,000
feet, another at 50,000 feet. But there are no such depths. There
are currents and counter-currents in the ocean, as in the air,
which operate upon the bight of the sounding-line, and cause it to
run out after the weight has reached the bottom, so that the shock
cannot be felt.
The oceanic circulation is as complete as that of the atmosphere,
and is possibly subject to, or governed by, the same laws; and
there appears to be a law of descent through “blue water,” the same
as there is a law of ascent through “blue air.” The one increases
in density downwards as the other decreases in density upwards; and
the development of this law proves that the sea is not so deep as
reports made it.
There is a set of currents in the sea by which its waters are
conveyed from place to place through regular and certain channels,
traversing from one ocean to the other with the regularity of the
machinery of a watch. The chief motive power of marine currents is
caused by heat. But an active agency in the system of circulation
is derived from the salts of the sea-water, by winds, marine
plants, and animals. These give the ocean great dynamical force.
The only reliable deep-sea soundings are those obtained by Brooke’s
plummet; and the greatest depths at which the bottom of the sea has
been reached with this plummet are in the North Atlantic Ocean, and
do not show it to be deeper than 25,000 feet, the deepest place
being immediately to the south of the Grand Banks of Newfoundland.
Thus, from the top of Mount Everest to the deepest reliable sea
bottom reached by sounding, we have a vertical height of nearly
10¼ miles, equal to (7912·40/10·23) 1/773rd part of the earth’s
diameter.--_The Builder._
_Chemistry of the Sea._
The specific gravity of Sea-water varies of course with the
proportion of salts and the degree of heat it receives from the
sun, or by the intermixture of currents of various temperatures;
but in our own latitudes it is about 1·028--that is, a given volume
of pure distilled water weighing 1000 grains, the same volume of
sea-water weighs 1028 grains. Many useful substances are daily
extracted from the sea for the use of man, among which we may
mention pure water for the use of ships, salt, iodine, bromine,
&c. Many attempts have been made to purity sea-water in order to
render it potable, not only for supplying ships, but for the use of
maritime towns and villages, where pump-water is often brackish,
and where the inhabitants are frequently obliged to have recourse
to rain-water. Now, when sea-water is submitted to congelation, it
abandons its salt almost completely--a fact which appears to have
been discovered many years ago by Chevalier Lorgna, who found that
a mixture of three parts of pounded ice and two parts of common
salt produced a cold of about 4° below the zero of a Fahrenheit
thermometer, and that such a mixture caused sea-water to freeze
rapidly. A mixture of various chemical salts in proper proportions
produces a similar degree of cold. Lately, the cold produced by
the evaporation of ether has been proposed for the same purpose.
The purification is complete if the ice thus formed be melted and
frozen again. In the Polar regions the ice formed from salt-water
is more or less opaque, except it be in very small pieces, when it
transmits light of a bluish green shade. When melted, it produces
sometimes perfectly fresh water, and at other times water slightly
brackish. The fresh-water ice resulting from rain or melted snow,
as seen floating in the Arctic seas, is distinguished from the
salt-water ice by its black appearance, especially when in small
pieces, and by its transparency when removed from the water into
the air. Its transparency is so great, when compared with sea-ice,
that Dr. Scoresby used to amuse his sailors by cutting large lenses
out of this fresh-water ice, and using them as burning-glasses
to light the men’s pipes. Their astonishment was increased by
observing that the ice did not melt, while the solar rays emerging
from it were so hot that the hand could not be kept more than a
second or two at the focus.--_Macmillan’s Magazine._
_The Sea: its Perils._
On the surface of the globe there is nowhere to be found so
inhospitable a desert as the “wide blue sea.” At any distance from
land there is nothing in it for man to eat, nothing in it that he
can drink. His tiny foot no sooner rests upon it, than he sinks
into his grave: it grows neither flowers nor fruits; it offers
monotony to the mind, restless motion to the body; and when,
besides all this, one reflects that it is to the most fickle of the
elements, the wind, that vessels of all sizes are to supplicate
for assistance in sailing in every direction to their various
destinations, it would almost seem that the ocean was divested of
its charms, and armed with storms, to prevent our being persuaded
to enter its dominions.
But though the situation of a vessel in a heavy gale of wind
appears indescribably terrific, yet, practically speaking, its
security is so great, that it is truly said that ships seldom or
never founder in deep water, except from accident or inattention.
How ships manage to get across that still region, that ideal line,
which separates the opposite trade-winds from each hemisphere; how
a small box of men manages, unlabelled, to be buffeted for months
up one side of a wave and down another; how they ever get out of
the abysses into which they sink; and how, after such pitching and
tossing, they reach in safety the very harbour in their native
country from which they originally departed--can and ought only to
be accounted for, by acknowledging how truly it has been written,
that “the Spirit of God moves upon the face of the waters.”
It is not, therefore, from the ocean itself that man has so much
to fear: the earth and the water each afford to man a life of
considerable security, yet there exists between these two elements
an everlasting war, into which no passing vessel can enter with
impunity; for of all the terrors of this world, there is surely
no one greater than that of being on a lee-shore in a gale of
wind, and in shallow water. On this account it is natural enough
that the fear of land is as strong in the sailor’s heart as is
his attachment to it; and when, homeward bound, he day after day
approaches his own latitude, his love and his fears of his native
shores increase as the distance between them diminishes. Two
fates, the most opposite in their extremes, are shortly to await
him. The sailor-boy fancifully pictures to himself that in a few
short hours he will be once again nestling in his mother’s arms.
The able seaman better knows that it may be decreed for him, as it
has been for thousands, that in gaining his point he shall lose
its object--that England, with all its virtue, may fade before his
eyes, and,
“While he sinks without an arm to save,
His country blooms, a garden and a grave.”
Nor can it be regarded as improbable that in the beds of the
present seas the edifices and works of nations, whose history
is altogether unknown to existing generations, are embedded and
preserved:
“What wealth untold,
Far down and shining through their stillness lies;
They have the starry gems, the burning gold,
Won from a thousand royal argosies.
Yet more--the depths have more--their waves have roll’d
Above the cities of a world gone by;
Sand hath fill’d up the palaces of old,
Sea-weed o’ergrown the halls of revelry.”
_Limitations of Astronomy._
These limitations are great. Ages before the existence of
scientific astronomy, the question was put to the patriarch Job,
“Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the
bands of Orion; canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season?
or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?” And when Job in his
heart, if not with his lips, answered the Almighty, No, he answered
for all his successors as well as for himself. Astronomical
problems accumulate unsolved on our hands, because we cannot, as
mechanicians, chemists, or physiologists, experiment upon the
stars. Are they built of the same materials as our planet? Are they
inhabited? Are Saturn’s rings solid or liquid? Has the moon an
atmosphere? Are the atmospheres of the planets like ours? Are the
light and heat of the sun begotten of combustion? and what is the
fuel which feeds his unquenchable fires? These are but a few of the
questions which we ask, and variously answer, but leave in reality
unanswered, after all. A war of words regarding the revolution
of the moon round her axis may go on to the end of time, because
we cannot throw our satellite out of gearing, or bring her to a
momentary stand-still; and the problem of the habitability of the
stars awaits in vain an _experimentum crucis_.
The astronomer, accordingly, must be content to be the chronicler
of a spectacle, in which, except as an on-looker, he takes no part.
Like the sailor at the mast-head in his solitary night-watch, he
must see, as he sails through space in his small earthly bark, that
nothing escapes his view within the vast visible firmament. But he
stands, as it were, with folded arms, occupied solely in wistfully
gazing over the illimitable ocean, where the nearest vessel, like
his own, is far beyond summons or signal, and the greatest appears
but as a speck on the distant horizon. His course lies out of the
track of every other vessel; and year after year he repeats the
same voyage, without ever practically altering his relation to the
innumerable fleets which navigate those seas.--_Professor George
Wilson, on the Physical Sciences, &c._
_Distance of the Earth from the Sun._
Mr. Hind, the astronomer, in a communication to the _Times_,
September 17, 1863, observes: “It may occasion surprise to many who
are accustomed to read of the precision now attained in the science
and practice of Astronomy, when it is stated that there are strong
grounds for supposing the generally received value of that great
unit of celestial measures--the mean Distance of the Earth from the
Sun--to be materially in error; and that, in fact, we are nearer to
the central luminary by some 4,000,000 miles than for many years
past has been commonly believed. The results of various researches
during the last ten years appear, however, to point to the same
conclusion.”
Mr. Hind then proceeds to describe the actual state of our
knowledge respecting it, extending through two entire columns of
the above Journal. We have only space for the results:
“To recapitulate briefly: a diminution in the measure of the sun’s
distance now adopted is implied by--1st, the theory of the moon, as
regards the parallactic equation, agreeably to the researches of
Professor Hansen and the Astronomer Royal; 2nd, the lunar equation
in the theory of the earth, newly investigated by M. Le Verrier;
3rd, the excess in the motion of the node of the orbit of Venus
beyond what can be due to the received values of the planetary
masses; 4th, the similar excess in the motion of the perihelion
of Mars, also detected within the past few years by the same
mathematician; 5th, the experiments of M. Foucault on the velocity
of light; and 6th, the results of observations of Mars when near
the earth about the opposition of 1862.
“Subjoined are a few of the numerical changes which will follow
upon the substitution of M. Le Verrier’s solar parallax (8´´·95)
for that of Professor Encke, on which reliance has so long been
placed. The earth’s mean distance from the sun becomes 91,328,600
miles, being a reduction of 4,036,000. The circumference of her
orbit, 599,194,000 miles, being a diminution of 25,360,000. Her
mean hourly velocity, 65,460 miles. The diameter of the sun
850,100 miles, which is smaller by nearly 38,000. The distances,
velocities, and dimensions of all the members of the planetary
system of course require similar corrections if we wish to
express them in miles; in the case of Neptune, the mean distance
is diminished by 30 times the amount of correction to that of
the earth, or about 122,000,000 miles. The velocity of light is
decreased by nearly 8000 miles per second, and becomes 183,470 if
based upon astronomical data alone. These numbers will illustrate
the great importance that attaches to a precise knowledge of the
sun’s parallax, in our appreciation of the various distances and
dimensions in the solar system.
“The evidence which has been adduced since the publication of M.
Le Verrier’s investigations, would rather induce us to adopt a
diminished measure of the earth’s distance from the sun, as the
most probable solution of the difficulty.
“M. Léon Foucault, of Paris, has succeeded in measuring
the absolute velocity of light by means of the ‘turning
mirror’--an experimental determination of no little interest
and significance. He concludes that it cannot differ much from
298,000,000 of French metres per second, or 185,170 English
miles, which is a notable diminution upon the velocity previously
derived from astronomical data alone. The time which light
requires to travel from the sun to the earth is known with great
precision; at the mean distance of the latter it is rather less
than 8´ 18´´, and if this number be combined with M. Foucault’s
measure of the velocity, it will be evident that the received
distance is too great by about one-thirtieth part--that light,
in fact, has not so far to travel before it reaches the earth as
generally supposed. The corresponding solar parallax is 8´ 86´´,
which approaches much nearer to M. Le Verrier’s theoretical value
than to the one depending on the transits of 1761 and 1769. So
curious a corroboration of the former deserves especial remark.”
_Blue Colour of the Sky._
Mr. Glaisher, in his Report of Scientific Balloon ascents made by
him and Mr. Coxwell, in 1863, remarks that the Colour of the Sky in
1862 was of a deeper blue generally than in 1863. On the 31st of
March the sky was of a deep Prussian blue, and on the 18th of April
it was of a faint blue only, exhibiting another great contrast
to the appearance of last year. Sir Isaac Newton considers this
colour as a “blue of the first order, though very faint and little,
for all vapours, when they begin to condense and coalesce into
small parcels, become first of that bigness, whereby such an azure
must be reflected.” Professor Clausius considers the vapours to be
vesicles or bladders, and ascribes the blue colour of the first
order to reflection from the thin pellicle of water. In reference
to these opinions the following facts are important:--1. The azure
colour of the sky, though resembling the blue of the first order
when the sky is viewed from the earth’s surface, becomes, as
observed by Mr. Glaisher in his balloon ascents, an exceedingly
deep Prussian blue, as we ascend to the height of five or six
miles, which is a deep blue of the second or third order. 2. The
_maximum_ polarizing angle of the atmosphere being 45 deg. is that
of air, and not that of water, which is 55 deg. 3. At the greatest
height to which Mr. Glaisher ascended--namely, at the height of
five, six, and seven miles, where the blue is the brightest--“the
air is almost deprived of moisture.”
Hence it follows that the exceedingly deep Prussian blue cannot be
produced by vesicles of water, but must be caused by reflection
from the molecules of air, whose polarizing angle is 45 deg.
The faint blue which the sky exhibits at the earth’s surface is
therefore not the blue of the first order, and is merely the blue
of the second or third order, rendered paler by the light reflected
from the aqueous vapour in the lower regions of the atmosphere.
Mr. Glaisher speaks of the curious changes in colour that he and
Mr. Coxwell experienced in ascending, and remarked that they could
now easily go a mile higher without turning quite so blue as
before. In one descent they very nearly got into the sea, and only
escaped that fate by coming down at the rate of four miles in two
minutes.
_Beauty of the Sky._
It is a strange thing how little in general people know about the
Sky. It is the part of creation in which Nature has done more for
the sake of pleasing man, more for the sole and evident purpose of
talking to him and teaching him, than in any other of her works,
and it is just the part in which we least attend to her. There
are not many of her other works in which some more material or
essential purpose than the mere pleasing of man is not answered by
every part of their organization; but every essential purpose of
the sky might, as far as we know, be answered, if once in three
days, or thereabouts, a great black ugly rain-cloud were broken up
over the blue, and everything well watered, and so all left blue
again till next time, with perhaps a film of morning and evening
mist for dew. But, instead of this, there is not a moment of any
day of our lives when Nature is not producing scene after scene,
picture after picture, glory after glory, and working still upon
such exquisite and constant principles of the most perfect beauty,
that it is quite certain it is all done for us, and intended for
our perpetual pleasure.--_John Ruskin._
_Influence of High Temperatures in Balloon Ascents._
Professor Owen has remarked the importance of the influences of
very high distances on the human frame, which is adapted of course
to a very different medium. The fact which Mr. Glaisher mentions as
to his feeling a greater power of resisting the influence of very
high temperatures is interesting in physiology, and in relation
to the series of facts with which we are acquainted. We know that
our lungs adapt themselves to atmospheres of different degrees
of gravity, so that there are people who live habitually on high
mountains, and feel no such difficulty in breathing as is felt at
once when the inhabitant of a plain or low country comes up to
these elevations. Now that depends upon the greater proportion
of the minute cells of the lungs which are open and receive an
attenuated atmosphere, in proportion to the minute cells that are
occupied by a quantity of mucus. Those on the plain do not make
so large a use of their breathing apparatus as those who live at
great altitudes. Hence more cells, occupied by mucus, will be taken
up, and opened to free course and play; and Professor Owen has no
doubt that is the solution of the interesting fact mentioned by
Mr. Glaisher. Physiologists are all agreed that one condition of
longevity is the capacity of the chest; and therefore it is hoped
the increased breathing capacity acquired by Mr. Glaisher and Mr.
Coxwell will tend to the prolongation of their lives.
_Value of Meteorological Observations, Telegraphy, and Forecasts._
The establishment of a Meteorological Department by the Board
of Trade is understood to have originated with the late Prince
Consort, who suggested that the more methodical observation of
the phenomena of the Weather might be rendered conducive to the
saving of many valuable lives. The plan had worked to February,
1861, when the Secretary of the Board of Trade wrote to the Royal
Society concerning the new features which the operations of the
Meteorological Department had assumed; and expressing an anxiety to
know whether the science of meteorology was now in such a state
as to admit of a permanent reliable system of storm-signals and
daily weather forecasts; also, whether the progress and useful
application of meteorological science would be more efficiently
promoted by devoting the money voted by Parliament to the original
objects contemplated--viz., the collection, tabulation, and
discussion of meteorological phenomena, or by devoting it to
the system of telegraphy and weather forecasts. The Secretary
of the Royal Society, after the lapse of a month, replied, on
behalf of the President and Council, to the effect that they were
assured by Admiral Fitzroy that the original objects for which
the Meteorological Department was formed were still kept in view.
“In the forewarnings of storms,” adds Dr. Sharpey, “much must as
yet undoubtedly be viewed as in a great measure tentative; but
there is one class of cases on which such premonitory information
is entitled to be regarded as resting on more assured scientific
relations. Admiral Fitzroy considers that he has satisfactorily
established the occasional occurrence of storms of a cyclonic
character, of very limited diameter, not much exceeding perhaps
that of the British islands themselves, and originating in their
vicinity. The practice of forewarning is specially suited to such
storms. They are characterized by great violence, and by frequent
and rapid changes in the direction of the wind. The key to their
comprehension is supplied by the telegraphic reports, which convey
to the central office a knowledge of the various simultaneous
directions of the wind in different localities; and, when once
comprehended, they are particularly suited for forewarning,
inasmuch as, in its general course, the advance of the cyclone is
steady in direction and moderate in rate.
“In connexion with this subject the President and Council revert
with satisfaction to a reply by Sir John Herschel to the Royal
Commission on Lights, Buoys, and Beacons, that ‘the most important
meteorological information which could be telegraphed would be
information first received by telegraph of a cyclone actually
in progress at a great distance, and working its way towards
the locality. There is no doubt that the progress of a cyclone
may be telegraphed, and might secure many a ship from danger by
forewarning.’ It is obvious that this remark, which refers to the
approach of a distant cyclone, is equally applicable to cyclones
originating in or near our islands, the existence of which has been
made known by the system of telegraphy which Admiral Fitzroy has
established.
“With respect to the ‘forecasts of the state of the weather,’
which are published in the newspapers, the President and Council
learn from Admiral Fitzroy that they really occasion no cost to
Government, and scarcely fall, therefore, within the questions
submitted for reply; moreover, the President and Council have
no data whereon to rest a conclusion in regard to the degree of
reliance to which these last-named forecasts may be entitled.”
_Weather Signs._
A few of the more marked Signs of Weather--useful alike to seaman,
farmer, and gardener, are the following:
Whether clear or cloudy--a rosy sky at sunset presages fine
weather:--a red sky in the morning bad weather, or much wind
(perhaps rain):--a grey sky in the morning, fine weather:--a high
dawn, wind:--a low dawn, fair weather.
Soft-looking or delicate clouds foretell fine weather,
with moderate or light breezes:--hard edged, oily-looking
clouds,--wind. A dark, gloomy, blue sky is windy;--but a light
bright blue sky indicates fine weather. Generally, the _softer_
clouds look, the less wind (but perhaps more rain) may be
expected;--and the harder, more “greasy,” rolled, tufted, or
ragged,--the stronger the coming wind will prove. Also--a bright
yellow sky at sunset presages wind; a pale yellow, wet:--and
thus by the prevalence of red, yellow, or grey tints, the coming
weather may be foretold very nearly:--indeed, if aided by
instruments, almost exactly.
Small inky-looking clouds foretell rain:--light scud clouds
driving across heavy masses show wind and rain, but if alone, may
indicate wind only.
High upper clouds crossing the sun, moon, or stars, in a
direction different from that of the lower clouds, or the wind
then felt below, foretell a change of wind.
After fine clear weather, the first signs in the sky of a coming
change are usually light streaks, curls, wisps, or mottled
patches of white distant clouds, which increase and are followed
by an overcasting of murky vapour that grows into cloudiness.
This appearance, more or less oily or watery, as wind or rain
will prevail, is an infallible sign.
Usually the higher and more distant such clouds seem to be, the
more gradual but general the coming change of weather will prove.
Light, delicate, quiet tints or colours, with soft, undefined
forms of clouds, indicate and accompany fine weather; but gaudy,
or unusual hues, with hard, definitely outlined clouds, foretell
rain and probably strong wind. Misty clouds forming, or hanging
on heights, show wind and rain coming--if they remain, increase,
or descend. If they rise or disperse, the weather will improve or
become fine.
When sea birds fly out early and far to seaward, moderate wind
and fair weather may be expected.
When they hang about the land, or over it, sometimes flying
inland, expect a strong wind with stormy weather. As many
creatures besides birds are affected by the approach of rain or
wind, such indications should not be slighted by an observer
who wishes to foresee weather or compare its variations. There
are other signs of a coming change in the weather known less
generally than may be desirable, and therefore worth notice;
such as, when birds of long flight, rooks, swallows, or others,
hang about home and fly up and down or low, rain or wind may be
expected. Also when animals seek sheltered places, instead of
spreading over their usual range; when pigs carry straw to their
sties; when smoke from chimneys does not ascend readily (or
straight upwards during calm), an unfavourable change is probable.
Dew is an indication of fine weather, so is fog. Neither of these
two formations occur under an overcast sky, or when there is much
wind. One sees fog occasionally rolled away as it were by wind,
but seldom or never _formed_ while it is blowing.
Remarkable clearness of atmosphere near the horizon: distant
objects, such as hills unusually visible, or raised (by
refraction), and what is called “a good _hearing_ day,” may be
mentioned among signs of wet, if not wind, to be expected.
More than usual twinkling of the stars; indistinctness or
apparent multiplication of the moon’s horns; halos; “winddogs,”
and the rainbow; are more or less significant of increasing wind,
if not approaching rain, with or without wind.
Mr. Glaisher remarks, in the account of one of his recent balloon
ascents:--“It would also seem that, when the sky is overcast and
no rain falling, the Sun is shining on its upper surface, and both
these conclusions agree with all my own experiences. That double
strata or layers of clouds are indications of rain is shown by my
recent observations; but it is one of those facts which have so
far attracted the attention of some observers of nature as even to
have passed into proverbs. My friend, Mr. Sopwith, tells me that in
the mining districts, where he has resided so much, it is a common
saying that ‘it will be rain to-day; the clouds is twee ply thick;’
by which, in their homely phrase, they clearly express that their
expectations of rain are based on the observance of one range of
clouds flying in the air at a higher elevation than another.”
It has been well observed that the old lunar theory, still
implicitly received by country-folks, and held by many ladies as a
fact of direct experience--the theory that weather is apt to change
at the moon’s quarters, clearly applies rather to the earth than to
any particular spot on it. And all the various complicated forms
of that theory, invented to supply its apparent failures--such as
that a change from fine to wet may be expected if the new quarter
is entered on after midnight, and _vice versâ_ for a post-meridian
change,--are liable to the same objection.
The late Marshal Bugeaud, says the _Emancipation_, when only a
captain, during the Spanish campaign under Napoleon I., once
read in a manuscript which by chance fell into his hands, that
from observations made in England and Florence during a period
of fifty years, the following law respecting the Weather had
been proved true:--‘Eleven times out of twelve the weather
remains the same during the whole moon as it is on the fifth
day, if it continues unchanged over the sixth day; and nine
times out of twelve like the fourth day, if the sixth resembles
the fourth.’ From 1815 to 1830 M. Bugeaud devoted his attention
to agriculture; and guided by the law just mentioned, avoided
the losses in hay time and vintage which many of his neighbours
experienced. When Governor of Algiers, he never entered on a
campaign till after the sixth day of the moon. His neighbours at
Excideuil and his lieutenants in Algeria would often exclaim,
‘How lucky he is in the weather.’ What they regarded as mere
chance was the result of observation. In counting the fourth and
sixth days, he was particular in beginning from the exact time of
new moon, and added three-quarters of an hour for each day for
the greater length of the lunar as compared with the solar day.
Mr. Shepherd, C.E., appears to prefer the planet Jupiter to the
moon, and has discovered an elaborate law for the variations of
our English weather, except so far as the principle is affected by
comets.
Mr. Shepherd is not quite without even higher authority. Sir
John Herschel has publicly intimated his suspicion that the
periodic expansion in the Sun’s spots had some close connexion
with the extraordinarily wet summer of 1860, and in his article
on Meteorology in the _Encyclopædia Britannica_, the same eminent
authority has connected this periodic change in the Sun’s spots,
which takes place in about twelve years, with the periodic time of
Jupiter’s revolution round the sun (which is nearly the same in
length), so that here we have an eminent astronomer half conceding
the same very dubious principle--that causes which affect equally,
if not the whole earth, at least all places which, in the diurnal
rotation, are brought into the same relative position towards the
sun or the planet, are the principal influences which determine our
local weather.
Yet, if this be so, how does it happen that the year 1860, which
was abnormally wet in Europe, was abnormally dry in many other
parts of the world? If Mr. Shepherd be right in connecting this
fact with the orbital position of Jupiter, or Sir John Herschel in
connecting it with the large spots on the Sun, it would scarcely
have merely affected the local distribution of heat; or, if it
could, the means by which these causes rob England to burn India
remain as dark as before.--_Paper in the Spectator newspaper_.
_Barometer for Farmers._
In one of his letters, Humboldt says that a Barometer should
be considered as necessary on a farm as a plough: but farmers
generally prefer to trust in the moon and other exploded nonsense
to purchasing a reliable instrument that would repay them tenfold.
A substitute, called Leoni’s Prognosticator, consists of a vial
full of a clear liquid, in which swims a snowy substance. In fine
weather that substance lies on the bottom, but before a storm it
rises to the surface, with a tendency to the side opposite the
quarter from which the storm is coming. The substances used are
kept secret. An ordinary barometer indicates the density of the
atmosphere. Leoni’s instrument evidently indicates its electric
state, and for that reason we are of opinion that it is a better
instrument to prognosticate the weather. The following is a
substitute that will not cost more than 1s., and for aught we know
it may be the identical thing itself. Dissolve some camphor in
alcohol and throw into the solution some soda; the camphor will be
precipitated in snowy flakes; collect these by passing the mixture
through a filter and put them in a vial with clear alcohol, in
which as much camphor as it would take has been dissolved. Cork
it, place it where it will not be disturbed, and examine it every
morning and night. This is termed a _Storm-glass_.
_Icebergs and the Weather._
The intimate relation existing between the Climates of particular
seasons, and the discharge of Icebergs from the great Arctic
glaciers has long been perfectly understood and described by
both British and American naval officers. But the quantity of
ice annually released in the shape of bergs is so insignificant,
majestic as those frozen masses are, in proportion to the quantity
remaining behind, and to that annually engendered over the vast
area of the Arctic continental icefields, that any difference in
the amount of “average” annual discharge cannot materially disturb
the balance. Nor is the disengagement of the bergs, when viewed
on a large scale, a process depending on variable conditions. The
slow downward descent of glaciers towards the ocean (which is now
fully recognised as the result of a well-known law) is dependent
on forces of such vast magnitude and in such constant operation as
to admit of no perceptible modification owing to local atmospheric
influences.
What does materially affect climate, however, is the variation in
the annual range, Equator-wards, of the great Arctic currents,
which convey on their surface not only the bergs, but the
vast compact fields of pack-ice, extending over areas of many
thousands of square miles, and thus bringing about a reduction of
temperature, infinitely in excess of that produced by the bergs.
The exceptionally boisterous and rainy summer of 1860 was due to
the much increased southward range, along the eastern and southern
shores of Greenland, of the Spitzbergen drift, and was alluded to
by Dr. Wallich, in some observations published by him at the close
of that year.
_St. Swithun: his true History._
So little is really known of this good Saint, that it is tedious to
wade through a mass of more or less probable conjecture.
The facts of St. Swithun’s life seem to be that he was born
near Winchester about the year 800--that he became a monk,
and afterwards prior of the old abbey of that city, and was
chosen by King Ecgberht the Bretwalda to be tutor of his son
Æthelwulf, heir to the throne of Wessex. From 852 to 863, when
he died, Swithun was Bishop of Winchester. He distinguished
himself as an architect by building a bridge of stone and a
tower to his cathedral, and as a Minister of State both to
Æthelwulf and his successor, Æthelbald. In 971, more than a
century after his death, he was exhumed, and “translated” and
beatified by his successor, the famous Bishop Æthelwold, in the
time of Archbishop St. Dunstan. Ridiculing, with Godwin _De
Præsulibus_, the idea taken up by Lord Campbell, that Swithun was
Æthelwulf’s “Chancellor,” in the modern sense of the word, Mr.
Earle (formerly Professor of Anglo-Saxon at Oxford) claims for
him the credit of having had a great share in the administration
of that King’s policy, and especially in the education of his
youngest son, the Great Alfred. Indeed, he surmises that Swithun
was Alfred’s companion in his journey to Rome in 853, though
the _Saxon Chronicle_ says nothing about it. And he also argues
that Æthelwulf’s much-debated dedication of the tenth of his
land as tithes to religious purposes, in the year 855 (when
the Northmen first wintered in England), was due to Swithun’s
advice. “This was,” he says, “the culminating point of Swithun’s
policy.” Equally baseless is the hypothesis that Swithun was the
“intermediary,” the “prudent counsellor and successful diplomat”
who averted civil war when Æthelwulf returned from his pilgrimage
to Rome, bringing with him as wife the Frankish Princess Judith.
It is more certain, we think, that Swithun’s name continued to
be held in affectionate reverence among the people; and this
probably led to his beatification by popular consent. The formal
process of canonization had not yet been introduced.--_Saturday
Review._
Mr. Earle discusses the legend which connects St. Swithun with
_forty days of rain_, and decides that it is wholly without
foundation. Mr. Howard, the meteorologist, many years since, by
his observations, gave a sort of currency to this notion; but it
has since received its quietus in the following facts, from the
Greenwich observations for 20 years:--It appears that St. Swithun’s
day was wet in 1841, and there were 23 rainy days up to the 24th of
August; 1845, 26 rainy days; 1851, 13 rainy days; 1853, 18 rainy
days; 1854, 16 rainy days; and in 1856, 14 rainy days. In 1842 and
following years St. Swithun’s day was dry, and the result was, in
1842, 12 rainy days; in 1843, 22 rainy days; 1844, 20 rainy days;
1846, 21 rainy days; 1847, 17 rainy days; 1848, 31 rainy days;
1849, 20 rainy days; 1850, 17 rainy days; 1852, 19 rainy days;
1855, 18 rainy days; 1857, 14 rainy days; 1858, 14 rainy days;
1859, 13 rainy days; and in 1860, 29 rainy days. These figures show
the superstition to be founded on a fallacy, as the average of 20
years proves rain to have fallen upon the largest number of days
when St. Swithun’s day was dry.
No event, or natural phenomenon which could be construed into such,
is alluded to by any of the various authors who wrote histories
of St. Swithun. On the contrary, the weather seems to have been
most propitious during his translation. How then did the popular
notion about St. Swithun’s Day arise? Most probably, as Mr. Earle
remarks, it was derived from primeval pagan belief regarding the
meteorologically prophetic character of some day about the same
period of the year as St. Swithun’s. Such adaptations, it is well
known, were frequent on the supplanting throughout Europe of
heathenism by Christianity. In confirmation of this view it is to
be observed, that in various countries of the European continent,
the same belief prevails, though differences exist as to the period
of the particular day in question. Thus, in France, St. Médard’s
Day, (June 8,) and the Day of St. Gervais and Protais, (June 19,)
have a similar character ascribed to them. In Belgium they have a
rainy saint, named St. Godeliève; whilst in Germany, among others,
a character of this description is ascribed to the day of the Seven
Sleepers.
_Rainfall in London._
Mr. G. V. Vernon has communicated to the Literary and Philosophical
Society of Manchester a Paper on the number of Days on which
Rain falls annually in London, from observations made during the
fifty-six years, 1807-1862. Howard’s _Climate of London_ has been
used for the years 1807 to 1831; the _Philosophical Transactions_
for the years 1832 to 1840; and the _Greenwich Observations_ for
the years 1841 to 1862. During the entire period of fifty-six
years, no month occurred in which rain did not fall.
The minimum number of days occurred in 1832, the cholera year, and
1834; the number of days being 86, 82 respectively. The maximum
number occurred in 1848, the number being 223 days.
Taking the quarterly values, we find that rain falls on the
greatest number of days in autumn, and the least in spring.
Taking the means of five yearly periods, there appears to be a kind
of periodicity in the number of days on which rain falls; having a
maximum in 1815 to 1817, and a minimum in 1845 to 1847.
_The Force of Lightning._
A person may be killed by Lightning, although the explosion takes
place at the distance of twenty miles, by what is called the
back-stroke. Suppose that the two extremities of a cloud, highly
charged with electricity, hang down towards the earth, they will
repel the electricity from the earth’s surface, if it be of the
same kind with their own, and will attract the other kind; and if a
discharge should suddenly take place at one end of the cloud, the
equilibrium will instantly be restored by a flash at that point
of the earth which is under the other. Though the back-stroke
is often sufficiently powerful to destroy life, it is never so
terrible in its effects as the direct shot, which is frequently of
inconceivable intensity. Instances have occurred in which large
masses of iron and stone, and even many feet of a stone wall, have
been conveyed to a considerable distance by a stroke of lightning.
Rocks and the tops of mountains often bear the marks of fusion from
its action, and occasionally vitreous tubes, descending many feet
into banks of sand, mark the path of the electric fluid. Some years
ago, Dr. Fielder exhibited several of these fulgorites in London,
of considerable length, which had been dug out of the sandy plains
of Silesia and Eastern Prussia. One found at Paderborn was forty
feet long. Their ramifications generally terminate in pools or
springs of water below the sand, which are supposed to determine
the course of the electric fluid. No doubt the soil and substrata
must influence its direction, since it is found by experience
that places which have been struck by lightning are often struck
again. A school-house in Lammer-Muir, in East Lothian, has been
struck three different times.--Mrs. Somerville’s _Connexion of the
Sciences_.
The inquiries into the chances of refuge from lightning have been
attended with saving results. Here is an instance:
A few years since an awful thunderstorm occurred in the
neighbourhood of Inkpen, Berkshire. Three men, named Martin,
Buxey, and Palmer, were employed in mowing grass, when a storm
of thunder and lightning broke over the field, and one of them
suggested that they should run beneath a tree; Martin knowing
that trees generally attract lightning, immediately remarked,
“We had better go anywhere than under a tree.” Buxey and Palmer,
however, as the storm was severe, and the hail was falling
heavily at the time, ran and seated themselves beneath a large
lime-tree, but Martin walked off to a cottage, and was safely
sheltered. In about half-an-hour after the storm had abated, both
Buxey and Palmer were found lying on the grass beneath the tree,
quite dead from the lightning. The clothes of Buxey were found
to be on fire, and the hair of Palmer was much scorched.
_Effect of Moonlight on Vegetation._
It has been demonstrated that Moonlight has the power, _per
se_, of awakening the Sensitive Plant, and consequently that it
possesses an influence of some kind on Vegetation. It is true that
the influence is very feeble, compared with that of the sun; but
the action is established, and the question remains, what is the
practical value of the fact? “It will immediately,” says Professor
Lindley, “occur to the reader that possibly the screens which are
drawn down over hothouses at night, to prevent loss of heat by
radiation, may produce some unappreciated injury by cutting off the
rays of the moon, which Nature intended to fall upon plants as much
as the rays of the sun.”
Even artificial light is not wholly powerless. Decandolle succeeded
in making crocuses expand by lamplight; and Dr. Winn, of Truro,
has suggested that the oxyhydrogen lamp may be made subservient to
horticulture in the dark days of winter.
An extraordinary effect of Moonlight upon the human subject occured
in 1863. A boy, thirteen years of age, residing near Peckham Rye,
was expelled his home by his mother for disobedience. He ran away
to a corn-field close by, and on lying down in the open air, fell
asleep. He slept throughout the night, which was a moonlight one.
Some labourers on their way to work, next morning, seeing the
boy apparently asleep, aroused him; the lad opened his eyes, but
declared he could not see. He was conveyed home, and medical advice
was obtained: the surgeon affirmed that the total loss of sight
resulted from sleeping in the moonlight.
_Contemporary Inventions and Discoveries._
Mr. Piesse, the well-known operative chemist, has thus popularly
grouped some of the leading novelties of our age:
The inventions and discoveries of my time may truly be included
among some of the greatest and most wonderful which the world
has seen. I have not yet passed forty summers, but perfectly
recollect being one of the gaping crowd that first witnessed
lighting the streets with gas. Near to the Marble Arch, at the
top of Oxford-street, London, stands an iron post, on which is
inscribed “Here stood Tyburn Gate, 1829.” Now I well remember
this Oxford-street turnpike, and the oil-lamps ‘dimly burning,’
which enabled the University coach and the eight-horse waggons to
nearside the off-side gatepost; at that time all Oxford-street
and the shops therein protested against ‘the light of other
days,’ and became illumined with Murdoch’s gas: thus the
oil-lamps passed away for ever. Tunneling Primrose Hill for the
first railway into London was a fund of enjoyment to me; there I
learned my first practical lesson in mineralogy--to distinguish
iron pyrites from real gold nuggets, which it at times resembles.
One morning the newspapers teemed with an account of the late
Duke of Wellington witnessing the first electric telegram from
Drayton, twelve miles from London. People flocked to Paddington,
and paid a shilling to do the same; of course I was among them!
It appears to me but the other day when every housewife kept her
linen rags to make tinder. The bunch of matches, like a large
fan, the flint and steel were in every house. What a change
has the lucifer produced? After hearing Professor Brande one
night deliver a popular lecture at the Royal Institution, the
Secretary read a letter received that day from Paris, announcing
the discoveries of Daguerre. The assertion that the picture of
a camera could be fixed by the mere agency of light startled
belief, yet from that hour photography took its rise. Strange
discoveries now crowd upon the memory. The oxyhydrogen flame
that burns the diamond and volatilizes platinum; then came the
Drummond lime-light that is visible as a star sixty miles away;
now followed Dobereiner’s lamp that ignites itself when you lift
a latch. Electroplating becomes one of the arts of the country.
A new force of nature, actinism, was recognised. Wonderfully
active principles of plants--quinine, morphia, and strychnine,
are discovered. The food of plants and the balance of organic
nature are developed at Giessen. New metals are discovered and
are practically eliminated for the use of manufacturers; and so
we thus come to the present, when I now write with an aluminium
pen made from tiles laid in a wall when Constantine was crowned
at York.[18]
_The Bayonet._
Mr. Akermann, in an elaborate series of “Notes on the Origin and
History of the Bayonet,” has been unable to verify the statement
that this weapon derives its name from Bayonne, the reputed place
of its invention. Voltaire alludes to it in the eighth book of
the _Henriade_. The results of the inquiry may be thus briefly
recited:--That “bayonette” was the name of a knife, which may
probably have been so designated either from its having been the
peculiar weapon of a crossbow-man, or from the individual who
first adopted it; that its first recorded use as a weapon of war
occurs in the Memoirs of Puysegur, and may be referred to the year
1647; that it is first mentioned in England by Sir J. Turner,
1670-71; that it was introduced into the English army in the first
half of the year 1672; that before the peace of Nimwegen Puysegur
had seen troops on the Continent armed with bayonets, furnished
with rings, which would go over the muzzles of the muskets; that in
1686 the device of the socket-bayonet was tested before the French
king, and failed; that in 1689 Mackay, by the adoption of the
ringed bayonet, successfully opposed the Highlanders at the battle
of Killicrankie; lastly, that the bayonet with the socket was in
general use in the year 1703.
William Cobbett, who had been a soldier, and carried the bayonet,
used to call it “King George’s Toasting-fork.”
_Derivation of the word Loot._
This word, which so often occurs in the account of the late Indian
war, is simply the Hindustani for plunder. Noun, “loot,” plunder;
verb, “lootna,” to plunder. This is one of the many examples of
Hindustani words generally used in English conversation in India,
which gradually came into use at home, amongst the oldest and most
familiar of which is, perhaps, the slang term “that’s the cheez,”
for “that’s the thing,” “cheez” Hindustani for “thing.”
_Telegram._
When this Indian term was first applied to our telegraphic
messages, a considerable amount of learned disquisition was wasted
in seeking its origin. Any one who has been in India must remember
the curious pronunciation by natives of many English proper names,
as well as of other words, for which they have no translation in
Hindustani; generally abbreviating a long difficult expression,
and sometimes even changing altogether the pronunciation. On
the introduction of the telegraph into India, there being no
Hindustani word, the natives were obliged to attempt English, and
the easiest way they could manage to pronounce telegraphic message
was “telegram.” This being an easy abbreviation was at once picked
up and adopted by the English in India, and then came home in
the same way that we got “loot” from India, and now again from
China.--_Correspondent of the “Daily News.”_
_Archæology and Manufactures._
Archæology, far from being a mere unprofitable dilettantism, has
a positive money-value, one appreciable not only by the literary
or scientific mind, but even by those who look exclusively to
material interests--that commerce, in fine, no less than history
or art, is under obligations to archæology. In the case of our
pottery and earthenware manufacture,--now an important branch of
our national trade--at the time when Wedgwood first began his
operations, England was an importing country with regard to this
article of trade, drawing her supplies from Holland, France, and
Germany. About the year 1760, Wedgwood established himself in
Staffordshire. The models which he selected for imitation were
taken from the antique:--from the Portland Vase, Greek vases,
cameos, and old coins,--but, above all, from the magnificent
collection of Etruscan vases and earthenware, which was purchased
about that time from Sir William Hamilton, for the British
Museum. Such was the immediate improvement in classical elegance
and purity of design, which the manufactures derived from these
sources, that within very few years England became an exporting
country in this article; and the trade was steadily developed,
until, in the year 1857, the declared value of her exports nearly
reached a million and a half of money. Wedgwood’s own sense of his
obligation to ancient models was marked by the name he gave to the
new village formed around his works in Staffordshire, which he
called Etruria, in honour of them. More recently the collection
of Etruscan antiquities made by the Prince of Canino, and brought
to England by Signor Campanari, has marked another stage of
progress in this branch of industry; and, at this moment, the best
silversmiths and jewellers in London resort to the British Museum,
to study these models, and copy them for reproduction. Much of the
well-known Minton-ware is either copied from, or due to the study
and imitation of, the Majolica ware of Mediæval Italy; whilst
the smaller objects of Assyrian art, brought from Nineveh by Mr.
Layard, are extensively copied by artists, and reductions of them
made in Parian, in marble, or in bronze.--_Address to the Cambrian
Archæological Association, by Mr. C. G. Wynne, M.P._
_Good Art should be cheap._
There is no hope of the diffusion of a better taste till all
classes of society are familiarized with the best works of the best
artists; and English manufactures will never be generally improved
in design till the purchasers as well as the producers know how to
appreciate what is beautiful, and till a better intuitive taste
prevails in the cottage as well as in the mansion. So long as it is
_cheaper_ to reproduce familiar shapes and ornaments, so long will
it be vain to expect sufficient encouragement for improvements in
design. Theorists may preach for ever as to abstract beauty, but
_the public will buy the old-fashioned, tasteless goods, if they
cost less_.
We do not believe that a beautiful thing need be more expensive
than an ugly thing. At any rate, this is the lesson to impress
upon such of our manufacturers as may be disposed to join the
art-movement of the day. It is not enough to design a novelty in
really good taste--it must be at least as cheap as the monstrosity
which it is meant to supersede, and, if possible, cheaper. Is it
not worth while to inquire whether there may not be some deeper
reason than a supposed depraved taste for the hideous colouring,
so dubious and sombre, of our Manchester goods, for example? To
take an instance: we believe that Hoyle’s Prints, famous throughout
the world for their slates and lilacs, are dyed of those most
unpicturesque hues for no other reason than that they are the most
“fast” colours that can be produced. If our chemists could discover
the secret of making the primitive colours equally “fast,” and
if the needful pigments were no dearer, we believe that cotton
printing would be revolutionized. But, meanwhile, customers in
every market of the world will ask for Hoyle’s Fast Prints, in
preference to the brightest and most beautiful colours, which,
however charming to the eye when bran-new, would disappear in the
first wash.--_Saturday Review._
_Imitative Jewellery._
From the profuse display of what are designated “gold chains” in
the windows of jewellers’ shops, there is evidently a large demand
for these articles, although the purchasers are little aware of the
value of the articles. The gold coin of the realm is, in technical
language, 22 carats fine--that is, it consists of 22 parts by
weight of fine, or pure gold, and 2 parts by weight of copper; and
gold plate, &c., is 18 carats fine--that is, it contains 18 parts
by weight of gold and 6 of copper in the 24. The alloy of which a
large proportion of gold chains is made contains only 8 or 10 parts
by weight of fine gold in the 24 parts, the remaining 16 or 14
parts being common brass. The application of brass for this purpose
is of comparatively recent date, and enables the manufacturer to
adulterate gold to a much greater extent than is practicable with
copper alone. This depends upon the fact that brass resembles gold
in colour, and copper does not. The brassy gold chains in question
are far inferior in colour to chains made of gold of 18 or 22
carats fine, and they would hardly be tolerated by many persons
when seen side by side with those of the latter description. They
are now manufactured on a very large scale by the aid of machinery,
and so great has been the decrease in their cost of production,
that the value of the labour upon certain kinds of chains has been
reduced from 30s. to 3s. 6d., or even less. It is usual to deposit
upon the finished chain an exceedingly thin coating of pure gold by
the electrotype process. This, of course, is speedily worn off by
friction, and consequently the original fine colour of the chain at
the time of purchase disappears. The propriety of this practice is
questionable. If the public like cheap brassy gold chains, and are
satisfied with their appearance, it is their own affair, and no one
has a right to say a word; but, in buying such articles, beware of
the small value of the materials in comparison with gold.[19]
_French Enamel._
Among the artistic triumphs in the International Exhibition of 1862
was the magnificent work in gold and enamel, by M. Payen, which
is stated to have cost him several years’ labour, or the sum of
6000_l._ In this work the late Prince Consort evinced considerable
interest when he was in Paris; and it was mainly to the Prince’s
kind interference on behalf of M. Payen, that the Great Seal of
England was sent to Paris, in order that it might be copied as one
of the great seals of the different nations, which form the border
of the work. The subject of the allegory is the Reward of Genius
and Industry: this is shown on a large centre-piece on a ground
of blue enamel; and the border, in which the seals of different
countries are emblazoned, is formed of filigree work in gold. There
was besides in the Exhibition an immense variety of works by M.
Payen, including gold rings from three francs to three thousand
francs each.
FOOTNOTES:
[14] There are two distinct theories respecting the formation of
coal, though all agree that it is of vegetable origin. This is
proved by the trees and plants found in the substance of coal, by
the vegetable remains imbedded in the accompanying strata, and by
microscopical examination. The plants most abundant are ferns, some
of which were of gigantic size. These are supposed to have composed
two-thirds of the mass of most coal. Large trees are sometimes
discovered growing upright in the shale that lies beneath and above
a seam of coal. The vegetation from which coal has been formed,
according to the views of some geologists, grew on the places where
it is found, and they consider it to have been composed of decayed
beds of peat which grew in succession one over the other, and
that by the compression of the whole, when submerged, and by the
accompanying action of heat, these vegetable beds were converted
into coal. Other geologists imagine that it was produced by the
accumulation of drift wood brought down by great rivers, similar
to the present accumulation of drift wood on the coast of Mexico
brought down by the great American rivers. There are geological
facts adduced in support of both theories. Ireland presents the
remarkable geological feature of an immense area of carboniferous
rocks without coal, that valuable portion of the deposit having, it
is supposed, been swept away by some of the denudations to which
the surface of the globe has been exposed in the early periods of
its history.--_Prof. Morris._
[15] This and the other abstracts in the present section by Prof.
George Wilson, are from a valuable paper by that able writer, on
the Physical Sciences which form the Basis of Technology.
[16] Described and illustrated in _Things not generally Known_.
First Series.
[17] Herschel’s _Outlines of Astronomy_.
[18] What would the old Scotchman of the following anecdote say
to such an age?--Sir Alexander Ramsay had been constructing upon
his estate in Scotland, a piece of machinery, which was driven
by a stream of water running through the home farm-yard. There
were a thrashing machine, a winnowing machine, a circular saw for
splitting trees, and other contrivances. Observing an old man, who
had long been about the place, looking very attentively at all that
was going on, Sir Alexander said, “Wonderful things people can do
now, Robby?” “Ay,” said Robby, “indud, Sir Alexander; I’m thinking
if Solomon was alive now, he’d be thought naething o’!”--_Dean
Ramsay._
[19] In a book published in 1679, we find these cautions on Gold
and Silver Wares:--“Can you imagine that although the buyer
perceive not the deceit at first, when the work is newly sold and
cunningly set off with all your skill, that he will not perceive
it in the wearing like brass or copper, and when sold again be
allowed but 3s. or 3s. 6d. the ounce for the silver, and but 2_l._
10s. or 3_l._ the ounce for the gold, when he paid 5s. the ounce
for the silver, and 4_l._ the ounce for the gold, besides the
fashion? You may be sure he will not only repent the dealing with
you, but publicly say you are a very cheating knave; and say also,
‘Who would buy such sort of works, wherein is so much deceit, but
rather use any other thing instead thereof?’ And thus the people
are discouraged to buy your works, and your trade decays, while you
vainly think to treble your profit, but instead thereof lose your
trade. When otherwise, if your gold and silver works be of standard
goodness, your customers will say, ’Tis as good as money in their
pockets, weight for weight; and that they know what they paid for
the fashion, which is all the loss they shall be at, and the work
wears creditable; and they will not repent of their bargain, but
publicly commend it, whereby others will be encouraged to buy such
works, and so your trade increases.”
Life and Health.
_Periods and Conditions of Life._
Physiologists divide Human Life into four periods, the embryonic,
immature, reproductive, and sterile ages: the first terminating at
birth; the second at puberty, which is achieved at 15; the third at
45, after which few mothers have children; and the last at 100 and
upwards.
Individual life exists on such conditions that it may at any moment
cease; and the vital tenure varies not only with every change
of external circumstances, but by natural laws at every year of
age. It is most insecure in infancy and old age. At the age of
puberty--before the period when the growth of the body is most
rapid--before the age of its greatest strength--before the age of
greatest intellectual power--it is less assailable by death. The
chance of living through a given year increases from birth to the
age of 14 or 15; it decreases to the age of 55-8 at a slightly
accelerating rate; after which the vitality declines at a much more
rapid rate.
_Age of the People._
It is worthy of remark that the very aged have not in the ten
years [1851-1861] increased in near the same proportion as the
general population. In 1851 there were in England 107,041 persons
who had passed the limit of “14 years;” in 1861 the number had
only increased to 113,250. In 1851 215 persons were returned as
being above 100 years old, but only 201 persons in 1861--one in
every 100,000. Of this last number 146 were women, and but 55
men--nearly three women to one man. Only 26 had never been married.
About a third were found living in large towns--21 in London,
11 in Liverpool, five in Manchester, one in Birmingham, four in
Bristol, one in Leeds. As in 1851, so in 1861, these very aged
persons were not found so often in the midland districts of the
kingdom as in the north and the east, and most of all in the west.
At the last Census, Norfolk had among its 435,000 people 11 above
100 years old; Gloucestershire, with 485,000 people, had eight
centenarians; and Somerset, with its 445,000, had nine. Wales, with
its 1,112,000, had no less than 24, the same number as Lancashire
with its 2,400,000 people, and more than London with its 2,800,000
inhabitants. So far as the occupations of these long-lived persons
are given, the returns show a majority engaged in pursuits that
caused them to be much in the open air. Three had been farmers,
13 out-door farm servants, five labourers, three hawkers, three
seamen, three soldiers; there was a fisherman, a quarrier, a
waterworks man, a miller. But there was also a scrivener, four
shoemakers, a baker, a grocer, a carpenter, a marine-store dealer,
three persons occupied in cotton manufacture, two in woollen, one
in silk, one in lace. Of the women the returns commonly state
only whether the person is wife or widow, but we are told that
there were six who had been domestic servants, two nurses, three
charwomen, two washerwomen, and a gipsy. One centenarian was a
member of the Household. Fourteen are described as land or house
proprietors, or independent; 19 were passing their last years in
the workhouse. Six were blind.--_From the Census Report._
_The Human Heart._
If we regard the construction of the blood-vessels, and other
parts of the circulating system, we find that they are constructed
entirely on physical laws. The Heart is the mover which propels
the blood, and, after having given the stroke, its fibres become
relaxed, to receive a fresh supply. In this case it is important
that the fluid should not again regurgitate into its cavities; and
to prevent that, a system of valves, not thicker than paper, has
been contrived. Here we see a design identical with that pursued
by man in the construction of his pump, or even, in some cases, of
his floodgates. The only difference between the work of man and
the work of Nature is, that the latter is executed in a manner so
superior, that man feels that he sinks into insignificance beside
the Creator.
That wonderful machine, the Heart, goes night and day, for
eighty years together, at the rate of 100,000 strokes for every
twenty-four hours, having at every stroke a great resistance to
overcome. Now, each ventricle will contain at least one ounce of
blood; the heart contracts 4000 times in an hour, from which it
follows that there pass through the heart every hour 4000 ounces,
or 350 pounds of blood. The whole mass of blood is said to be about
twenty-five pounds; so that a quantity equal to the whole mass of
blood passes through the heart fourteen times in one hour, which is
about once in every four minutes.
_The Sense of Hearing._
Mr. John Marshall, in a Lecture on the special organs of the
Sense of Hearing, describes the wonderful arrangements for the
protection of these organs and their adaptation to their office;
the examination of their relative duties, in distinguishing the
kinds and intensities of the sounds of such exceeding variety,
produced by inanimate nature, by animals, and by art (music). For
the appreciation of the pitch and quality of sounds Mr. Marshall
considers that we are indebted to the delicate fibrous structure
of the cochlea; for the knowledge of the intensity of sound to
the tympanum or drum, which, possessing the power of tension and
relaxation, thus acts a protective part; while in our knowledge of
the distance and direction of sound we are guided by the external
parts of the ear and by our experience.
_Care of the Teeth._
Dr. J. H. Bowditch, of the United States, having examined with a
microscope the matter deposited on the teeth and gums of more than
40 individuals, selected from all classes of society, and in nearly
every variety of bodily condition, has discovered, in nearly every
case, animal and vegetable parasites in great numbers; in fact, the
only persons whose mouths were found to be entirely free from these
parasites cleaned their teeth four times daily, using soap once.
Among the agents applied, it was found that tobacco-juice and smoke
did not impair the vitality of the parasites; nor did the chlorine
tooth-wash, pulverized bark, soda, ammonia, &c. Soap, however--pure
white soap--destroyed the parasites instantly, and is, therefore,
the best specific for cleaning the teeth.
It having been asked, “Did the Greek surgeons extract teeth?”
Mr. George Hayes, the well-known dentist, replied, that on one
of the ornaments found in an ancient building in the Crimea,
is represented a surgeon drawing a tooth from the mouth of one
of the barbarian royalties. “This,” says Mr. Hayes, “I think,
establishes the fact that there were then peripatetics, either
Egyptian or Greek dentists, who resorted to those distant
countries for the purpose of practising their art. I believe this
is the only representation of a surgical operation to be met with
on ancient sculpture.”
Sugar has been proved injurious to the teeth, from its tendency to
combine with their calcareous basis.
_On Blindness._
Many have been the appeals to our sympathy with the affliction of
the loss of sight, but neither has, perhaps, exceeded in pathos the
following from an address delivered by Sir John Coleridge, at the
West of England Institution for the Blind:
“Conceive to yourselves, for a moment, what is the ordinary
entertainment and conversation that passes around any one of your
family tables; how many things we talk of as matters of course, as
to the understanding and as to the bare conception of which sight
is absolutely necessary. Consider again, what an affliction the
loss of sight must be, and that when we talk of the golden sun,
the bright stars, the beautiful flowers, the blush of spring, the
glow of summer, and the ripening fruit of autumn, we are talking
of things of which we do not convey to the minds of these poor
creatures who are born blind anything like an adequate conception.
There was once a great man, as we all know, in this country, a
poet--and nearly the greatest poet that England has ever had to
boast of--who was blind; and there is a passage in his works which
is so true and touching that it exactly describes that which I have
endeavoured, in feeble language, to paint. Milton says:
“‘Thus with the year
Seasons return; but not to me returns
Day, or the sweet approach of ev’n, or morn,
Or sight of vernal bloom, or summer’s rose,
Or flocks, or herds, or human face divine;
But cloud instead, and ever during dark
Surrounds me, from the cheerful ways of men
Cut off, and for the book of knowledge fair
Presented with a universal blank
Of Nature’s works, to me expunged and rased,
And wisdom at one entrance quite shut out.
So much the rather then, celestial light,
Shine inward, and the mind through all her powers
Irradiate; there plant eyes; all mist from thence
Purge and disperse; that I may see and tell
Of things invisible to mortal sight.’
“The great poet when intent upon his work sought for celestial
light to accomplish it. And this brings me to that part of the
labours of our institution upon which I dwell the most, and which,
after all, is the greatest compensation we can afford to the
inmates for the affliction they suffer; and that is, the means we
provide for them to read the blessed Word of God, which they can
read by day as well as by night, for light in their case is not an
essential.”
_Sleeping and Dreaming._
Mr. A. E. Durham, in a discourse at the Royal Institution, on
these questions, commenced by some remarks on Sleep considered as
pleasant, irresistible, and necessary. A Chinese murderer, whose
punishment was total privation of sleep, died on the ninth day.
The amount of needful sleep varies in different persons, eight
hours being the average. John Hunter took four hours’ sleep and an
hour’s nap after dinner. General Elliot (of Gibraltar) required
only four hours. The conditions favouring sleep were referred
to--_e.g._, silence, warmth, sufficient food, and, especially, a
quiet conscience and a mind at ease; and various exceptions were
noticed. Considered psychologically, sleep was defined as suspended
consciousness, and dreaming as a partial revival of consciousness.
Torpor through cold, and coma through disease, are not sleep.
After describing the structure of the brain, Mr. Durham stated
that he regarded the action of sleep as analogous to a chemical
process, during which the brain tissue regains from the blood
what it had lost through the activity of the mind. To enable him
to ascertain the condition of the brain during sleep, &c., he
administered chloroform to a dog, and, while it was insensible,
removed a portion of the skull, substituting for it a piece of
glass. He found thus that, when the dog slept, the blood-vessels
were comparatively empty, the arteries lost their bright red colour
and assumed the blue colour of the veins, and the brain tissue
collapsed, leaving a space within the skull which was filled with
cerebral fluid. When the dog was awakened the blood-vessels resumed
their functions, and the brain once more filled the cavity.
_Position in Sleeping._
It is better to go to sleep on the right side. If one goes to sleep
on the left side the operation of emptying the stomach of its
contents is like drawing water from a well. After going to sleep
let the body take its own position. If you sleep on your back,
especially soon after a hearty meal, the weight of the digestive
organs and that of the food, resting upon the great vein of the
body, near the backbone, compresses it, and arrests the flow of
the blood more or less. If the arrest is partial, the sleep is
disturbed, and there are unpleasant dreams. For persons who eat
three times a day it is amply sufficient to make the last meal of
bread-and-butter, and a cup of some warm drink. No one can starve
on it; while a perseverance in the habit soon begets a vigorous
appetite for breakfast, so promising of a day of comfort.--_Hall’s
Journal of Health._
_The Hair suddenly changing Colour._
Dr. Davy has read to the British Association an interesting paper
“On the Question, whether the Hair is or is not subject to Sudden
Changes of Colour.” This he decides in the negative, explaining
away the evidence on which the contrary belief has become popular;
and also maintaining with regard to seemingly analogous phenomena,
such as the becoming white of the ptarmigan, and many animals and
birds in winter, that it is through moult and not change of colour
in feather or hair.
Nevertheless, in the biography of Montaigne, the celebrated
French essayist, we read:--“Among others whose acquaintance
Montaigne made in the bath-room, was Seigneur d’Andelot, formerly
in the service of Charles V. and governor for him of St. Quentin.
One side of his beard and one eyebrow were white; and he related
that this change came to him in an instant. One day as he was
sitting at home, with his head leaning on his hand, in profound
grief at the loss of a brother, executed by the Duke of Alva as
accomplice of Counts Egmont and Horne, when he looked up and
uncovered the part which he had clutched in his agony, the people
present thought that flour had been sprinkled over him.”
Mr. D. P. Parry, Staff-surgeon, at Aldershott, writes the
following very remarkable account of a case of which he says he
made memoranda shortly after the occurrence:--“On February 19,
1858, the column under General Franks, in the south of Oude, was
engaged with a rebel force at the village of Chanda, and several
prisoners were taken; one of them, a Sepoy of the Bengal army,
was brought before the authorities for examination, and I being
present had an opportunity of watching from the commencement
the fact I am about to record. Divested of his uniform and
stripped naked, he was surrounded by the soldiers, and then
first apparently became alive to the dangers of his position; he
trembled violently, intense horror and despair were depicted in
his countenance, and although he answered the questions addressed
to him, he seemed almost stupified with fear; while actually
under observation, within the space of half-an-hour, his hair
became grey on every portion of his head, it having been when
first seen by us the glossy jet black of the Bengalee, aged
about 24. The attention of the bystanders was first attracted by
the sergeant, whose prisoner he was, exclaiming, ‘He is turning
grey,’ and I with several other persons watched its progress.
Gradually but decidedly the change went on, and a uniform greyish
colour was completed within the period above named.”
_Consumption not hopeless._
Sir Edward Wilmot, the physician, was, when a youth, so far gone
in Consumption, that Dr. Radcliffe, whom he consulted, gave his
friends no hope of his recovery, yet he lived to the age of
ninety-three; upon which Dr. Heberden notes: “This has been the
case with some others, who had many symptoms of Consumption in
youth.”
The life of Sir Hans Sloane was protracted by extraordinary means:
when a youth, Sloane was attacked with spitting of blood, which
interrupted his education for three years; but by abstinence from
wine and other stimulants, and continuing, in some measure, this
regimen ever afterwards, he was enabled to prolong his life to the
age of ninety-three years; exemplifying the truth of his favourite
maxim--that sobriety, temperance, and moderation, are the best
preservatives that nature has granted to mankind.
_Change of Climate._
The difference in disease produced by change to warmer or colder
climate has been thus ably illustrated by Dr. Graves:
We observe that the English in India suffer greatly from
liver disease; whilst, on the other hand, negroes and natives
frequently die of phthisis (consumption) in England. Monkeys die
of consumption, so do lions and tigers. This is a very important
fact in the pathology of phthisis, as tending to prove that
although phthisis is in many instances distinctly hereditary,
nevertheless it may be, and is, frequently acquired. Nothing can
furnish a stronger proof that phthisis may be acquired than the
instances I have adduced, for I need not tell you that no lion
or tiger is ever born in warm climates of a consumptive sire, or
ever dies there of tubercular disease. An additional illustration
of the influence heat exercises on the size of the liver is
afforded by the celebrated Strasburg geese. By feeding these
birds in a particular way, and keeping them in artificial heat,
the liver becomes diseased, grows to an enormous size, and in
this state furnishes the materials of the famous pâté. How many
instances occur where our citizens, exposing themselves to the
long continued operation of the very same causes, confinement,
overfeeding, heat, and want of exercise, are affected by them
in exactly the same way! How slight the difference between the
morbid phenomena displayed in the post-mortem of a city feaster
and the autopsy of an over-fed goose.
_Perfumes._
A knowledge of the nature and operations of Perfumes is a very
proper thing to propagate. Ignorance respecting them often leads
to mischief. Dr. Capellini relates the story of a lady who fancied
that she could not bear the smell of a rose, and who accordingly
fainted at the sight of one, which turned out to be artificial!
This is rather an extreme case; but minor mistakes, adverse to the
use of perfumes, are very common. Many persons suppose that they
are injurious, because flowers left in a bedroom by night, will
sometimes cause headache and sickness. But this is attributable,
not to the escaping aroma, but to the carbonic acid which the air
imbibes from the flowers. On the other hand Mr. Rimmel contends
that perfumes are beneficial and prophylactic in the highest
degree. He reminds us that after the Dutch had destroyed, by
speculation, the clove-trees in the Island of Ternate, that colony
was visited by a series of epidemics, which had been kept off until
then by the fragrant smell of the cloves; and in more modern times,
when London and Paris were ravaged by cholera, there was not a
single victim among the numerous persons employed in the perfumery
factories of either city.
_Cure for Yellow Fever._
A private letter from Her Majesty’s Vice-consul at Cape Bolivar to
Her Majesty’s Acting Consul-General at Caracas states:--“An old
woman, named Mariquita Orfila, has discovered a perfect remedy for
the black vomit and yellow fever, by means of which several persons
have been completely cured after a consultation of doctors had
declared that the cases were quite hopeless, and that the patients
must die in a few hours. The remedy is the juice of the pounded
leaves of the verbena, given in small doses three times a day,
and injections of the same every two hours, until the bowels are
emptied. The verbena is a wild shrub, to be found growing almost
everywhere, and particularly in low, moist ground. All our doctors
have adopted its use, and now few or none die of those late fearful
diseases. There are two kinds of it, male and female; the latter is
most used.”
_Nature’s Ventilation._
Upon the proper adjustments of the dynamical forces which keep up
the ceaseless movements of the atmosphere, the life of organic
nature depends. If the air that is breathed were not taken away
and renewed, warm-blooded life would cease: if carbon, and oxygen,
and hydrogen, and water were not in due quantities dispensed by
the restless air to the flora of the earth, all vegetation would
perish for lack of food. That our planet may be liable to no
such calamity, power has been given to the wayward wind, as it
“bloweth where it listeth,” to bring down from the pure blue sky
fresh supplies of life-giving air wherever it is wanted; and to
catch up from the earth, wherever it may be found, that which has
become stale; to force it up, there to be deflagrated among the
clouds, purified and renovated by processes known only to Him whose
ministers they are. The slightest change in the purity of the
atmosphere, though it may be too slight for recognition by chemical
analysis in the laboratory, is sure to be detected by its effects
upon the nicer chemistry of the human system; for it is known to be
productive of disease and death. No chemical tests are sensitive
enough to tell us what those changes are; but experience has taught
us the necessity of ventilation in our buildings, of circulation
through our groves. The cry, in cities, for fresh air from the
mountains or the sea, reminds us continually of the life-giving
virtues of circulation. Experience teaches that all air, when pent
up and deprived of circulation, becomes impure and poisonous. In
referring to ventilation, we are never to forget that, in order
to secure Nature’s pure air, it is essential to guard against the
many sources of its pollution. The air which descends to us is
pure; but it is left to man to maintain it so; hence we have to
drain our marshes, empty foul ditches, remove cesspools, and see
that our streets are sewered and paved. The Deity has given laws
for the moral government of society; but He leaves to man, on whom
He has bestowed intelligence, the discovery and the application of
those scientific means which are necessary to health and physical
happiness.--_Captain Maury._
_Artificial Ventilation._
In Wyman’s _Practical Treatise on Ventilation_ we find these
curious results. In a weaving-mill near Manchester, where the
ventilation was bad, the proprietor caused a fan to be mounted.
The consequences soon became apparent in a curious manner. The
operatives, little remarkable for olfactory refinement, instead
of thanking their employer for his attention to their comfort
and health, made a formal complaint to him that the ventilator
had increased their appetites, and therefore entitled them to a
corresponding increase of wages! By stopping the fan a part of the
day, the ventilation and voracity of the establishment were brought
to a medium standard, and complaints ceased. The operatives’ wages
would but just support them; any additional demands by their
stomachs could only be answered by draughts upon their backs, which
were by no means in a condition to answer them. In Edinburgh a
club was provided with a dinner in a well ventilated apartment,
the air being perfumed as it entered, imitating in succession
the fragrance of lavender and the orange-flower. During dinner
the members enjoyed themselves as usual, but were not a little
surprised at the announcement of the provider, that they had drunk
three times as much wine as he had usually provided. Gentlemen of
sober, quiet habits, who usually confined themselves to a couple of
glasses, were not satisfied with less than half a bottle; others,
who took half a bottle, now extended their potations to a bottle
and a half. In fact, the hotel-keeper was drunk dry. That gentlemen
who had indulged so freely were not aware of it at the time is
not wonderful; but that they felt no unpleasant sensations the
following morning, which they did not, is certainly quite so.
_Worth of Fresh Air._
Among the sanitary enactments of the last few years is the Local
Government Act, for the better enforcement of appliances for
Public Health. An Office has been established specially for the
business of this Act, with a well-paid Secretary and Medical
Inspector: it arose upon the cessation of the labours of the Board
of Health; and the gain by the change may be estimated by the
following Hints from an engineering Sanitary Inspector of the Local
Government Office:
Sanitary work is not necessarily doing some great thing, but
consists more in prompt and efficient attention to small matters.
Fresh air is the best disinfectant, but most people, even in
England, treat fresh air as if it were an evil. We shut it out of
our houses by day, and confine foul air in our rooms by night,
especially during the time we use them for sleep.
An invalid takes a carriage airing with closed windows; such a
ride is, however, in truth, a carriage poisoning. If an open
carriage cannot be used on any day in the year with safety,
the individual had better not use a carriage; and no room
should be occupied which has not an unceasing flow of fresh
air through it--not necessarily a draught, but motion. Open
flues, open doors, or open windows admit of change of air; not,
however, always with comfort to the inmates. But as a room
cannot be hermetically sealed up, provision ought to be made
for an admission of fresh air, rather than for the stealing
in of sewer, drain, cesspool, or sink gases. List up doors,
carpet floors, paper window-joints, and block up fireplaces, if
contagious diseases are to have their most malignant effects;
ventilate houses, by open windows on staircases or in corridors
if possible, but by all means ventilate. Cold does not kill so
many as foul air, although a low temperature generally increases
the weekly bills of mortality. But it is the very poor who
suffer most. The Chinese say, “Fools and beggars only suffer
from cold; the one have not wit to clothe properly, the others
are too poor to clothe sufficiently.” Clothing ought to be the
protection against cold, not warm and foul air. In every house
in which typhus fever or small-pox prevails it will be safer for
the inhabitants of such houses to remove the windows rather than
to keep them closed. An open shed in a field with warm clothing
will be better than a closed room in a town. I have seen fever
patients and small-pox patients treated beneath open sheds in
the country safely, and I have heard experienced surgeons remark
that fresh air and diet were of more avail than medicine. I have
seen a British army in hospital and in the field surrounded by
foul air, wasting away by fever. I have seen that army restored
to health by cleanliness and an admission of fresh air. The
air was not cooked nor manipulated by any patented apparatus,
but was admitted direct from the vast ocean of fresh air about
and above, by slits in the ridge of huts in the Crimea, by the
removal of top squares from fixed windows at the great hospitals
on the Bosphorus, and by the opening up of flues wherever these
could with advantage be formed in those hospitals. The ordinary
atmosphere of any country freely admitted and unceasingly changed
is the only safe medium in which to breathe. In all countries
and under all climates excessive disease to man comes from foul
air generated within his dwelling rather than from any external
influences. The remedy against disease is, therefore, fresh air.
Infection is scarcely possible amid abundance of fresh air. Soap
and water can kill contagion if used in time.
The intercepting main sewers of the metropolis, if brought into
use, will actually add to existing evils rather than remove them,
if these sewers only pass away large volumes of surplus water
which now dilute the deposit in many scores of miles of secondary
and branch sewers and drains. There are hundreds of open sewer
ventilators within the metropolis sending out unceasingly
thousands of cubic feet of sewage gases to the streets above. All
this vast volume of gas might be cheaply disinfected by being
made to pass slowly through charcoal, and all foul sewers may
either be cleansed or be disinfected in time.
_Town and Country._
Sir E. B. Lytton, in _Blackwood’s Magazine_, observes: We who are
lovers of the country are not unnaturally disposed to consider that
our preference argues some finer poetry of sentiment--some steadier
devotion to those ennobling studies which sages commend as the
fitting occupations of retirement. But the facts do not justify
that self-conceit upon our part. It was said by a philosopher who
was charged with all the cares of a world’s empire, that “there is
no such great matter in retirement. A man may be wise and sedate
in a crowd as well as in a desert, and keep the noise of the world
from getting within him. In this case, as Plato observes, the walls
of a town and the enclosure of a sheep-fold may be made the same
thing.” Certainly, poets, and true poets, have lived by choice
in the dingy streets of great towns. Men of science, engaged in
reasonings the most abstruse, on subjects the most elevating, have
usually fixed their dwelling-place in bustling capitals, as if the
din of the streets without deepened, by the force of a contrast,
the quiet of those solitary closets wherein they sat analysing the
secret heart of that nature whose every-day outward charms they
abandoned to commonplace adorers. On the other hand, men perforce
engaged in urban occupations, neither bards nor sages but City
clerks and traders, feel a yearning of the heart towards a home in
the country; loving rural nature with so pure a fervour that, if
closer intercourse is forbidden, they are contented to go miles
every evening to kiss the skirt of her robe. Their first object is
to live out of London, if but in a suburb; to refresh their eyes
with the green of a field; to greet the first harbinger of spring
in the primrose venturing forth in their own tiny realm of garden.
It is for them, as a class, that cities extend beyond their ancient
bounds; while our nobles yet clung to their gloomy halls in the
Fleet, traders sought homesteads remote from their stalls and wares
in the pleasing village of Charing.
_Recreations of the People._
The preservation of open places for the recreation of the people
is watched with much jealousy by those who take an interest in the
assertion of popular rights. Mr. J. S. Mill, the historian, has put
in this eloquent plea for their maintenance:
There is room in the world no doubt, and even in old countries,
for an immense increase of population, supposing the arts of life
to go on improving, and capital to increase. But although it may
be innocuous, I confess I see very little reason for desiring it.
The density of population necessary to enable mankind to obtain
in the greatest degree all the advantages, both of co-operation
and of social intercourse, has in all the more populous countries
been attained. A population may be too crowded, though all be
amply supplied with food and raiment. It is not good for man to
be kept perforce at all times in the presence of his species. A
world from which solitude is extirpated is a very poor ideal.
Solitude, in the sense of being often alone, is essential
to any depth of meditation or of character, and solitude in
the presence of natural beauty and grandeur, is the cradle
of thoughts and aspirations which are not only good for the
individual, but which society could ill do without. Nor is there
much satisfaction in contemplating the world with nothing left
to the spontaneous activity of nature, with every rood of land
brought into cultivation which is capable of growing food for
human beings, every flowery waste or natural pasture ploughed
up, all quadrupeds or birds which are not domesticated for
man’s use exterminated as his rivals for food; every hedgerow
or superfluous tree rooted out, and scarcely a place left where
a wild shrub or flower could grow without being eradicated as
a weed in the name of improved agriculture. If the earth must
lose that great portion of its pleasantness which it owes to
things that the unlimited increase of wealth and population would
extirpate from it for the mere purpose of enabling it to support
a larger, but not a better or happier population, I sincerely
hope, for the sake of posterity, that they will be content to be
stationary long before necessity compels them to do so.
This is picturesquely eloquent; but it may be argued that a public
“green” or common, in the neighbourhood of a large town, is often
a rendezvous for the idle and abandoned, in their brutalizing
sports: the great city, like a cauldron, with more evils than that
in _Macbeth_, seems to boil over, and deposit its scum upon the
circumjacent ground.
_The Druids and their Healing Art._
We might expect to find, from the universality of their
application, remedies for
the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to
preserved _in perpetuo_. In ancient Britain, the Druids were the
depositaries of these secrets.
Amongst the early Britons, the ranks of the priests were recruited
from the noblest families: their education, which often extended
over a period of twenty years, comprehended the whole of the
sciences of the age; and besides their sacred calling, they were
invested with power to decide their civil disputes. Their dwellings
and temples were situated in the thickest oak-groves, which
were sacred to the Supreme Deity. The acorn, and above all, the
parasitical mistleto, were held in high veneration: the latter was
sought on the sixth day of the moon, and when found was only cut
by a priest of the highest rank, for it was accounted a sovereign
remedy for all diseases. The practice of the healing art has ever
commanded the esteem of the rudest nations: hence it was the
obvious policy of the priests, or Druids, to study the properties
of plants. Of their progress we have no record; but who knows from
what a far antiquity come the traditionary virtues of many of our
native plants?
Their famous Mistleto, or _all-heal_, was considered a certain
cure in many diseases, an antidote to poison, and a preventive of
infection. And, we have, in the present day, a very old _nostrum_,
named _Heal-all_, the universal virtues of which are described as
equalling the mistleto of our ancestors.
_Remedies for Cancer._
A multitude of strange remedies are prescribed for Cancer. When
Lord Metcalfe, the Governor of Canada, was beset with this cruel
disease, Mr. Kaye, his biographer, tells us: “One correspondent
recommended Mesmerism, which had cured Miss Martineau; another
Hydropathy, at the pure springs of Malvern; a third, an application
of the common dock-leaf; a fourth, an infusion of couch-grass; a
fifth, the baths of Docherte, near Vienna; a sixth, the volcanic
hot-springs of Karlsbad; a seventh, a wonderful plaster made of
rose-leaves, olive-oil, and turnip-juice; an eighth, a plaster
and powder, in which some part of a young frog was a principal
ingredient; a ninth, a mixture of copperas and vinegar; a tenth,
an application of pure ox-gall; an eleventh, a mixture of Florence
oil and red precipitate; whilst a twelfth was certain of the good
effects of Homœopathy, which cured Charlotte Elizabeth. Besides
these varied remedies, many men and women with infallible recipes,
or certain modes of treatment, were recommended by themselves and
others. Learned Italian professors, mysterious American women,
erudite Germans, and obscure Irish quacks--all had cured cancers of
twenty years’ standing, and all were pressing, or pressed forward,
to operate on Lord Metcalfe.”
_Improved Surgery._
The basis, and no small portion of the superstructure, of
scientific surgery, was laid by the famous Ambroise Paré, who
possessed the rare gift of seeing things as they were, and not as
his preconceived notions would have them to be. Sharing the common
belief that gunshot wounds were, by their nature, poisonous, he
used to treat them with boiling oil; but having failed once to
apply the usual remedy, he was surprised to find that his patients
were much the better for the omission. Thereupon, he renounced the
ordinary practice, and from that time gunshot wounds have received
a more rational treatment. Paré was the first to revive the
practice known to the Arabians of stopping the flow of blood from
arteries by tying them. The French Faculty of Medicine ridiculed
the innovation as the system of hanging life upon a thread, and
declared its preference for the use of boiling pitch which had
stood the test of so many centuries; but wounded persons could
not be brought to see the force of such reasoning. Anatomy was
prosecuted with great assiduity and precision of detail throughout
the whole of the sixteenth century, and the way was cleared for
Harvey’s grand discovery, which he first publicly taught in 1619.
John Hunter introduced what is probably the most capital
Improvement in Surgery ever effected by a single man;--namely, the
practice in aneurism of tying the artery at a distance from the
seat of disease. This one suggestion has saved thousands of lives;
and both the suggestion, and the first successful execution of it,
are entirely owing to John Hunter, who, if he had done nothing
else, would on this account alone have a right to be classed among
the principal benefactors of mankind.
_Restoration of a Fractured Leg._
M. Flourens has communicated to the Paris Academy of Sciences a
letter from Dr. Mottet, giving an account of the Restoration of
a Fractured Leg under circumstances of peculiar difficulty. The
fracture had been occasioned by a fall of stones on the limb;
it was complex, and such that amputation presented peculiar
difficulties; still, notwithstanding gangrene and other untoward
circumstances, the fracture, being reduced, was kept in its normal
position by a peculiar apparatus for the space of a year, at the
end of which time the bone was completely regenerated, and the limb
perfectly cured without any diminution in length.
_The original “Dr. Sangrado.”_
Thousands may have enjoyed the humour of _Gil Blas_ without
suspecting that the genius of Dr. Sangrado had any living
prototype. Yet such was Botal, who revolutionized the practice of
medicine by a freedom of bleeding that was quite unprecedented.
He bled largely and repeatedly, both young and old, male and
female, in all diseases, whether low in type or acute. “The young
he bled freely, on account of the rapid reproduction of blood in
youth; the old, because he saw in the practice a conduciveness
to rejuvenescence. He bled freely in low and wasting diseases,
even of a malignant nature, because a richer and better blood was
formed; in dysentery, because he recognised in it an affinity to
inflammation of the lungs, in which all physicians bled; in all
forms of flatulency, because of its power to relieve obstructions;
in short, he had a reason for bleeding in every special distemper,
and when reproached for the indiscriminate routine of practice,
he argued that the more water you draw from a well the purer and
better is that which filters in. From him originated the system of
bleeding in pregnancy, which is continued to this day.” Botal was a
man of happy despatch, like Van Helmont, under whose hands, as his
biographer relates, “the sick never languished long, being always
killed or cured in three days.” Botal’s patients were probably more
often killed than cured; but they did not die in vain, for his
practice set medical men observing and thinking, so that good came
of it in the end--a great consolation for his victims, could they
have foreseen it.--_Spectator newspaper._
_False Arts advancing true._
After the death of Galen, Medicine ceased to make progress.
Amidst the Gothic invasions the medical sects “dwindled down
to individuals, who achieved for medicine what the monastics
effected for ancient classic literature: they maintained it in the
condition of a small but continuous stream, in the midst of so much
charlatanism that no man could talk nonsense so gross, or profess
supernatural powers so incredible, but that the ignorance of the
community would give credit to his assertions.” All through the
dark and the Middle Ages astrology, alchemy, magic, and cabalistic
arts predominated; all physical phenomena were ascribed to occult
causes; in short, as Sir John Herschel remarks, “If the logic of
that gloomy period could be justly described as ‘the art of talking
unintelligibly on matters of which we are ignorant,’ its physics
might, with equal truth, be summed up in a deliberate preference
of ignorance to knowledge in matters of every day’s experience
and use.” Sometimes, however, the false arts served indirectly to
advance the true. Alchemy led the way to chemistry, and enriched
medicine with new remedies, and at least one crotchet of scholastic
divinity may be supposed to have done something for the progress
of anatomy; for “the skeleton received, perhaps, an adventitious
attention in consequence of the popular belief that, in man, some
one particular bone existed of an imponderable, incombustible,
and indestructible nature, around which, as a nucleus, all other
tissues and organs would collect and re-assume their vital actions
at the resurrection. Accordingly, every bone was tested by fire,
for the purpose of discovering the hypothetical one.”--Dr. Meryon’s
_History of Medicine_.
_Brief History of Medicine._
Great honour is, unquestionably, due to those medical men who by
their learning, counsel, and experience, have contributed so many
and great things to the improvement of their profession. The art of
healing may be considered as a legacy left to us by former ages and
enriched by ancient writers, and no doubt ordained by a benevolent
Creator for the benefit of His creatures, who, being endowed with
reason, are enabled to prosecute Medicine and the collateral
sciences with wonderful sagacity. The impossibility of learning
medicine properly by experience alone, implies the necessity of
studying both ancient and modern writers; but, in the words of
Harvey, “men were not to swear such fealty to their mistress
Antiquity, as openly and in sight of all to deny and desert their
friend Truth.” Medical history unfortunately affords many examples
of despisers of the mighty dead and of eminent living authorities.
Paracelsus burnt the writings of Galen and Avicenna before his
pupils, and proclaimed himself the king of medicine. Hahnemann
much resembled Paracelsus, for he despised the inspection of dead
bodies, and preferred the homœopathic doctrine to pathology;
but both had dared to do “aliquid Gyaris vel carcere dignum.”
Hahnemann’s doctrine, that numerous chronic diseases originated
in the itch, was neither new, safe, nor true. Dr. C. G. Zieger
had many years before promulgated the same idea in a dissertation
published at Leipsic in 1758, without boasting, as the other did,
that he was engaged twelve years in the discovery. False theories,
however, with scientific pretensions, have flourished through
many ages. Hence arose homœopathy, kinesipathy, table-turning,
and various despicable “isms” of the present day. But, happily
for the poor, at least, such lies could not exist in the schools
of Harvey, Baillie, and Hunter. The low condition of medicine at
the time of Linacre, and the improvement with the aid of Henry
VIII. and Cardinal Wolsey, may next be mentioned. Linacre, the
founder of the College, and Dean Colet, the founder of St. Paul’s
School, of grateful memory to the orator, were among the first to
restore ancient learning to this island. The College of Physicians
having been established, its members were separated from vulgar
empirics; but by a new law homœo-empirics may be registered, which
was nothing less than legal homicide, and strongly to be protested
against.--_Harveian Oration_, 1863.
_What has Science done for Medicine?_
The practice of Medicine is full of difficulty. Modern Science has
done something to aid in the diagnosis, often the most difficult
part of the physician’s task. Auscultation and the use of the
microscope have substituted certainty for conjecture in many
cases. But, for this essential preliminary of ascertaining what is
the matter with the patient, a combination of faculties is often
needed which cannot be communicated in the schools. The power
may be developed and improved by use, and corrected by careful
observation; but it is born with certain men, and it is not to be
gained by teaching or study. Then, supposing the disease to be
ascertained, it constantly happens that there is little or nothing
to be done that can with any confidence be expected to shorten
or reduce the intensity of the attack. The option lies between a
system of slight palliatives, almost or quite inoperative, and
the application of stronger remedies whose action is uncertain.
Fortunately, the effects of medicine in general are far less
considerable than is commonly supposed. The statistics of hospitals
in which the most different systems of treatment have been adopted
do not, indeed, prove that all the systems have been equally good
or bad; but they do show that in many diseases there is no known
system of treatment that has any marked advantage over others. It
is not too much to say that, for one case in which the medicine
administered has been of real use, there are ten where the patients
would have thriven as well or better without it.
A further difficulty in medical practice has been less noticed than
it deserves to be. All that is known of the effect of remedies is
the general or average result of a large number of cases in which
they have been applied. But no two men are exactly alike in the
manner of action of their various organs. When the chemist who
has once tried an experiment brings the same substances together
under similar conditions, he is absolutely certain that they
will act on each other as they did before. Not so is it with the
living organism. The idiosyncracy of each patient is more or less
unknown to the physician; and till the experiment has been tried,
he can have no certainty as to the result of his treatment. It is
quite true that the exceptional cases that sometimes arise present
apparent rather than real anomalies. There is no reason to suppose
that the laws of physics have been suspended by an independent
disturbing power when a drug produces on a particular patient an
unusual effect. The conditions of the experiment have doubtless
been changed by some peculiarity in his organization, which the
present means of science are powerless to detect.
The main cause why medicine is still so little advanced is to be
found in the backward condition of the science on which it mainly
rests. Physiology, including pathology--the first taking cognizance
of all the vital functions of organized beings, the second of the
disturbance of those functions by disease--is far from maintaining
its place in the general march of physical science.--_Saturday
Review._
_The Element of Physic in Medical Practice._
The Element of Physic in Medical Practice becomes constantly more
simple. Our drugs are fewer and less complicated.[20] Of course it
is all otherwise in pseudo-medicine. Here “specifics” are as rank
as weeds. Here little account is taken of natural provisions for
the cure of disease. Here physic is everything, and nature and the
physician are unimportant. Given the symptoms of a disease and a
book of “testings,” every old lady thinks herself as competent a
physician as Hahnemann. Every disease and symptom of disease has
its corresponding remedy, or rather we should say two remedies,
for it will nearly always be found that homœopathic patients
take two medicines, in equal doses and with equal frequency.
Homœopathy abounds in principles. Its great principle is that
of “specifics”--that certain medicines have the most definite
and designed relation to certain ailments--are _the_ thing and
the _only_ thing. Then there is what we may call the alternating
principle, in virtue of which two medicines--each, we suppose, a
specific!--are so much better than one. Upon these two principles
the enlightened patron of homœopathy is made the receptacle of a
most unprincipled amount of physic. We conclude by impressing upon
our brethren who are studying medicine in the light of reason and
science, the urgency of the duty that devolves upon them of so
using the element of physic in medical practice as to make more and
more apparent the great gulf that is fixed between their practice
and the rival quackeries of the day. Let them use medicine so that
the most undiscerning patient will perceive that it is only one
of many means to an end, auxiliary only to great provisions in
the body itself, and for the most part acting, not mysteriously,
like quinine, but sensibly or chemically. Let the form of their
drugs be unpretentious and inexpensive, so that whatever the cost
to the patient may be, he may understand that he pays, not for
physic, but for the attention, the skill, and the judgment, of the
physician.--_Lancet._
_Physicians’ Fees._
In the Court of Exchequer in January, 1863, in an action brought by
a physician to recover 21_l._ for services rendered to a patient,
it was contended that as there was no special promise to pay,
the plaintiff could not recover. Such was the state of the law
formerly, physicians being presumed to attend for an _honorarium_;
but an Act was passed to enable registered physicians and surgeons
to recover their reasonable charges, subject to such bye-laws as
might be passed by the College of Physicians. The latter body,
however, it appears, have thwarted the intention of the Legislature
by enacting that physicians shall not recover, even though a
contract existed; the object, it seems, being to make the payment
of physicians’ fees immediate, and to discourage credit. A verdict
was found for the plaintiff, leave being granted to move the Court
above on the construction of the Medical Act.
Attention has been called to the careless manner in which
consulting physicians write their prescriptions; more especially
as regards the dose, the drachm often resembling the ounce, and
the writing so generally blotted and crabbed that the dispensers
are often obliged to make guesses, with very little light to
guide them to a right conclusion. The blame, whenever a mistake
occurs, is always attached to the chemist or assistant, without
considering the anxiety and trouble they have in deciphering
writing worse than falls to the lot of a post-office master.
The public have often ridiculed the style of physicians’
prescriptions, but will be unable to joke when a mistake more
serious than usual occurs.
_Prevention of Pitting in Small-pox._
This desirable end is stated to have been attained in the clinical
wards of the Royal Infirmary at Edinburgh. The application consists
of a solution of india-rubber in chloroform, which is painted
over the face (and neck in women) when the eruption has become
fully developed. When the chloroform has evaporated, which it very
readily does, there is left a thin elastic film of india-rubber
over the face. This the patient feels to be rather comfortable than
otherwise, inasmuch as the disagreeable itchiness, so generally
complained of, is almost entirely removed, and, what is more
important, “pitting” once so common, and even now far from rare,
is thoroughly prevented wherever the solution has been applied.
It may be as well to state that india-rubber is far from being
very soluble in chloroform; so that, in making the solution, the
india-rubber must be cut into small pieces, and chloroform added
till it is dissolved. The medical gentleman who has introduced
this treatment has tried several other substances, but found none
so generally useful. For instance, gutta-percha was tried. It has
the advantage of being very soluble in chloroform, and would have
been a very admirable application but for the tendency it has to
tear into ribands whenever the mouth is used, or even when the
features play. India-rubber, on the other hand, is pliable and
elastic, allowing free use of the mouth without any danger (as a
rule) of its tearing off. If, however, from some cause or other, a
portion is torn off, a fresh application of the solution by means
of a large hair-pencil remedies the defect, and the mask is once
more complete. Several patients who have had this india-rubber mask
applied concur in stating that they found it agreeable to wear,
and their faces were perfectly free from “pitting,” although other
parts of the body, such as the arms, were covered. The credit of
this valuable invention and application belongs to Dr. Smart, house
physician to the Infirmary.
_Underneath the Skin._
All over the surface of our bodies there are scattered millions
of minute orifices, which open into the delicate convoluted
tubes lying underneath the Skin, and are called by anatomists
sudoriparous glands. Each of these tubes, when straightened,
measures about a quarter of an inch; and as, according to Erasmus
Wilson, whose figures we follow, there are 3528 of these tubes on
every square inch of the palm of the hand, there must be no less
than 882 inches of tubing on such a square inch. In some parts of
the body the number of tubes is even greater: in most parts it
is less. Erasmus Wilson estimates that there are 2800 on every
square inch, on the average; and, as the total number of such
inches is 2500, we arrive at the astounding result that, spread
over the surface of the body, there are not less than twenty-eight
miles of tubing, by means of which liquid may be secreted, and
given off as vapour in insensible perspiration, or as water in
sensible perspiration. In the ordinary circumstances of daily life
the amount of fluid which is thus given off from the skin (and
lungs) during the twenty-four hours varies from 1⅔ lb. to 5
lb.; under extraordinary circumstances the amount will, of course,
rise enormously. Dr. Southwood Smith found that the workmen in the
gasworks employed in making up the fires, and other occupations
which subjected them to great heat, lost on an average 3 lb. 6 oz.
in forty-five minutes; and when working for seventy minutes in
an unusually hot place their loss was 5 lb. 2 oz., and 4 lb. 14
oz.--_Blackwood’s Magazine._
_Relations of Mind and Organization._
We may safely assume, as an established fact, that it is only
through the instrumentality of the central parts of the nervous
system that the Mind maintains its communication with the external
world. The eye is necessary to sight, and the ear to hearing;
and so with the other organs of sense. But the eye does not see,
and the ear does not hear; and if the nerve which forms the
communication between any one organ of sense and the brain be
divided, the corresponding sense is destroyed. In like manner it is
from the brain that all those impulses proceed by which the mind
influences the phenomena of the external world. The division of
the nerves which extend from the brain to the larynx destroys the
voice. The division of the nerves of a limb causes the muscles of
the limb to be paralysed, or, in other words, withdraws them from
the influence of the will; the division of the spinal cord destroys
at once the sensibility and the power of voluntary motion in all
the parts below that at which the division has been made.
The brain has a central organ, which is a continuation of the
spinal cord, and to which anatomists have given the name of
_medulla oblongata_. In connexion with this there are other bodies
placed in pairs. That each of these bodies has its peculiar
functions there cannot be the smallest doubt; and it is, indeed,
sufficiently probable that each of them is not a single organ, but
a congeries of organs having distinct and separate uses.
Experimental physiology, joined with the observation of the changes
produced by disease, has thrown some light on this mysterious
subject. There is reason to believe that, whatever it may do
besides, one office of the _cerebellum_ is to combine the action of
the voluntary muscles for the purpose of locomotion. The _corpora
quadrigemina_ are four tubercles which connect the _cerebrum_,
_cerebellum_, and _medulla oblongata_ to each other. If one of
the uppermost of these bodies be removed, blindness of the eye of
the opposite side is the consequence. If the upper part of the
_cerebrum_ be removed, the animal becomes blind, and apparently
stupified, but not so much so but that he can walk with steadiness
and precision. The most important part of the whole brain seems
to be one particular part of the central organ, or _medulla
oblongata_. While this remains entire, the animal retains its
sensibility, breathes, and performs instinctive motions. But if
this very minute portion of the nervous system be injured, there is
an end of these several functions, and death immediately ensues.
These facts, and some others of the same kind, for a knowledge of
which we are indebted to modern physiologists, and more especially
to M. Magendie and M. Flourens, are satisfactory as far as they go;
and warrant the conclusion that there are various other organs in
the brain, designed for other purposes, and that if we cannot point
out their locality, it is not because such organs do not exist, but
because our means of research into so intricate a matter are very
limited.--_Sir B. Brodie’s Psychological Inquiries._
_Deville, the Phrenologist._
In 1817 a Mr. Deville, a lamp-manufacturer of London, was a member
of the Institution of Civil Engineers. He had been originally a
pot-boy, then a journeyman plasterer, and afterwards kept a shop
for the sale of plaster figures, which he cast. He had risen to a
respectable position simply by the force of his natural powers.
Mr. Bryan Donkin, a civil engineer, was an early auditor of Gall
at Vienna, and subsequently a friend of Spurzheim. He was also,
like Mr. Deville, a member of the Institution of Civil Engineers;
and when, in 1817, he with others determined to make a collection
of casts as records of phrenological facts, Mr. Deville was
applied to for his assistance, which he rendered as a matter of
business for three or four years. In 1821 he became interested
in phrenology, and began to form a collection of casts on his
own account. Already, in 1826, Spurzheim said it was finer than
any he had seen elsewhere. At Mr. Deville’s death, in 1846, this
collection consisted of about 5450 pieces; of these 3000 were
crania of animals, and the remainder (2450) illustrations of
human phrenology. There were 200 human crania, and 300 casts of
crania; amongst the latter, those which Baron Cuvier permitted
Mr. Deville to take from all the authenticated human skulls in
the Museum of Comparative Anatomy of Paris. Mr. Deville was a
practical observer, and possessed the large number of 1500 casts
of heads taken by himself from persons while living. Amongst these
were 50 casts of persons remarkably devoted to religion: 40 of
distinguished painters, sculptors, architects, &c.; 30 of eminent
navigators and travellers; 80 of poets, authors, and writers; 70 of
musicians, amateurs, and composers of music; 25 of pugilists; 150
of criminals; 120 pathological casts illustrative of insanity, &c.
Perhaps the most interesting of all are 170 casts which illustrate
the changes caused in the cranial conformation of from 60 to 70
individuals by age, special devotion to one pursuit, and the like.
Mr. Deville’s account of some of these has been published.
“_Seeing is believing._”
Supreme disregard of the accuracy of the facts on which its
conclusions are based, is one of the marks of an uncultivated
intellect. It is a part of the credulousness continued from
childhood; and is seen in the acceptance, without misgiving, of
any _statement_ of facts which is made confidently, and without
obvious motive for deceit. Not only in matters of science, but in
matters of daily life, is this credulity observed. You cannot step
into an omnibus, or chat with an acquaintance at the club, without
hearing distinct, positive, and important statements respecting the
_intentions_ of public men,--statements involving their personal
honour, perhaps the national safety, and uttered with an air of
conviction which would be ludicrous were it not so sad; yet if
you happen to ask on what _evidence_ the speaker relies, you find
perhaps that there is nothing better than surmise or gossip.
The object of the foregoing remarks is to show how easily an
inference may be mistaken for a fact, and how habitually men
declare they have seen what they have only inferred. Seeing is, in
all cases, believing; but in all cases we must assure ourselves
of _what_ we have seen, carefully discriminating it from what we
have not seen but only imagined, and carefully ascertaining whether
the facts seen by us are all the facts then present. It is by no
means easy to see accurately any series of events; nor, when under
any strong emotion, is it easy to prevent the imagination from
usurping the place of vision. “Many individuals,” says Liebig,
“overlook half the event through carelessness; another adds to what
he observes the creation of his own imagination; whilst a third,
who sees sufficiently distinctly the different parts of the whole,
confounds together things which ought to be kept separate. In the
Gorlitz trial, in Darmstadt, the female attendants who washed and
clothed the body, observed on it neither arms nor head; another
witness saw one arm, and a head the size of a man’s fist; a third,
a physician, saw both arms and head of the usual size.”[21]
There is no popular adage less understood than that “Seeing is
believing.” With an ill-suppressed irritation at any expression of
scepticism respecting things said to have been seen, a narrator
asks whether or not he may believe the evidence of his own senses?
That argument seems to him final; and it often happens that his
opponent, evading instead of meeting it, retorts:--“No; the
evidence of the senses is not to be trusted, when they report
anything so absurd as that. I would not believe such a thing if I
were to see it--the absurdity is too glaring.”
Both are wrong. Seeing _is_ believing; and he that distrusts the
evidence of his own sight, will find a difficulty in bringing
forward evidence more convincing. The fallacy lies in confounding
vision with inference--in supposing that facts are seen which are
only inferred. There can be no mistake in trusting to the evidence
of sense, as far as that goes. The mistake is supposing it to go
much further than it does. It is one thing to believe _what_ you
have seen, and another to believe that you have seen _all_ there
was to be seen.--_Blackwood’s Magazine._
_Causes of Insanity._
From an interesting Report on Lunatic Asylums in Ireland, issued
in 1862, we find that the moral Causes of Insanity predominate
in females, the physical causes to a larger extent in males,
particularly intemperance and irregularity of life. The cause of
disease was ascertained in 2186 cases: in 323 it was intemperance
and irregularity; in 183, religious excitement; in 115, love,
jealousy, and seduction. Thirty-seven per cent. of the cases
were ascribable to hereditary transmission and intemperance
combined. With regard to the hereditary character of insanity,
it is observed that mental, like bodily affections, gradually
wear out from the intermixture of blood. There was no case found
in Ireland in unbroken descent to the fourth generation. On the
important question whether insanity is on the increase, there is
no certain proof furnished. We know that, with fresh accommodation
for the insane, fresh, though long-existing cases, are presented
for admission into asylums, creating an apparent increase of
lunacy; and we know that improved treatment and care have tended
materially to the prolongation of life among lunatics, and to their
consequent accumulation. We know also that science, and even public
opinion, now accept as indicative of lunacy affections formerly
classed under a different category. Lunacy, also, is now less
concealed as a discreditable visitation. Emigration has not taken
its proportion of lunatics. But, insanity being in great measure a
disease of intellect--one connected with the development of the
human mind--it is highly presumable that, in this age of excitement
and rapid advancement in arts and sciences, mental affections may
be more prevalent than before. In a northern district of Ireland,
during the two months of religious revivalism, there were more
cases of insanity than in the whole preceding year.
_Brain-Disease._
Dr. Forbes Winslow, whose professional life has been devoted to the
study of Insanity, in his work _On Obscure Diseases of the Brain,
and Disorders of the Mind_, attaches much importance to premonitory
ailments, as indicative not only of the fatal mischief which will
inevitably succeed them if neglected, but of the only period when
remedies can be applied with a fair chance of cure. This period it
is difficult even to the medical expert to detect, for the aversion
to own any affection of the mind or weakness of the head is so
strong, that both patient and friends will often repudiate and
ignore it altogether; yet there are unmistakeable signs, such as
“headache attributed to derangement of the stomach, vacillation of
temper, feebleness of purpose, flightiness of manner, irritability,
inaptitude for business, depression and exaltation of spirits;
and even weakness of sight, when the optician has been consulted
rather than the physician.” None of these signs, if caused by
Brain Disease, can exist, says Dr. Winslow, for any length of time
without seriously perilling the reason and endangering life: yet
“it is a well-established fact that seventy, if not eighty, per
cent. of cases of insanity admit of easy and speedy cure if treated
in the early stage, provided there be no strong constitutional
predisposition to cerebral and mental affections, or existing
cranial malformation. And, even when an hereditary taint exists,
derangement of mind generally yields to the steady and persevering
administration of remedies, combined with judicious moral measures,
provided the first inclinations of the malady are fully recognised,
and without loss of time grappled with. A vast and frightful amount
of chronic and incurable insanity exists at this moment in our
county and private asylums, which can be clearly traced to the
criminal neglect of the disease in the first or incipient stage.”
Dr. Winslow insists upon the great importance of self-control as a
preventive. He says: “This power is in many instances weakened or
altogether lost by a voluntary and criminal indulgence in a train
of thought which it was the duty of the individual in the _first_
instance resolutely to battle with, control, and subdue. Nervous
disorders, as well as insane, delusive thoughts, are thus often
self-created. The morbid soon becomes a deranged mind--the insanity
manifesting itself in an exaggerated, extravagant, and perverted
conception of a notion which had originally some semblance of
truth for its foundation. The self-created, delusive idea may thus
obtain a fearful influence over the mind, and eventually lead to
the commission of criminal acts.” The forced education of youth
frequently leads to mental alienation. “It is,” says Dr. Winslow,
“undoubtedly an important element in education to carefully,
steadily invigorate and discipline the memory in early life;
but, in effecting this most desirable object, it is our duty to
avoid mistaking _natural_ mental dulness for culpable idleness,
and _organic_ cerebral incapacity for criminal indifference to
intellectual culture and educational advancement.” Again, the
tremendous strain that now taxes the brain-power of society in
every direction, is an additional reason why the voice of this
minister to the mind diseased should be listened to in time: in the
statistics of insanity the terrible fact is admitted, that there is
an absolute increase of madness throughout Europe and America.
Dr. Winslow has assembled some very interesting instances of
retention of the vigour of the mind in old age, and arrived at,
_inter alia_, these conclusions: “1. That an active and vigorous
condition of the mental faculties is compatible with old age. 2.
That a continuous and often laborious exercise of the mind is not
only consistent with a state of mental health, but is apparently
productive of longevity.” It is indeed particularly satisfactory to
be told that even in the worst types of mental disease there are
some salient and bright spots upon which the physician may act;
and that formidable and apparently hopeless and incurable cases
of derangement admit, if not of cure, at least of considerable
alleviation and mitigation.
_The Half-mad._
The Commissioners in Lunacy have reason to know that there are
many, not insane, but who, being conscious of a want of power of
self-control, or of addiction to intemperate habits, or fearing an
attack or a recurrence of mental malady, but being in all respects
free agents, may be desirous of residing as voluntary boarders in
an institution for the care and treatment of persons of unsound
mind, submitting to a modified control, and conforming to the
general regulations of the hospital. There is not in the statutes
for the regulation of registered hospitals any prohibition on such
persons being admitted as inmates on the terms above suggested;
provided they contract alone, or jointly with others, to conform to
certain regulations expressed or referred to.
_Motives for Suicide._
In the _Westminster Review_, New Series, No. 23, we find this
suggestive return:
In the year 1851, there were 3598 suicides recorded in France,
to each of which the presumed motive was affixed. Out of these
no less than 800 are set down to mental alienation; and to that
number we should add 70 cases of monomania, 39 of cerebral
fever, and 54 of idiocy--all ranking under the general head of
uncontrollableness--which will make a total of 963, or more than
a fourth of the whole cases. If we now examine the remaining
cases, we find “domestic quarrels” next in amount, being no less
than 385; while grief for the loss of children amounts to only
46, grief at their ingratitude or bad conduct, 16; sudden anger,
only 1. Next in importance to domestic quarrels is the desire to
escape from physical suffering: these amount to 313. Debt and
embarrassment rank next--203. Want, and the fear of want, 179.
Disgust at life--which may properly be called low spirits--stands
high--166; shame and remorse, very low, only 7. Thwarted love
shows only 91, and jealousy, 25. Losses at play, 6; loss of
employment, 25.
Fallacious as all such figures must necessarily be, from the
impossibility of always assigning the real motive to the act,
they point with sufficient distinctness to certain general
conclusions:--First, that insanity is the origin of by far the
largest proportion of cases; secondly, that, except the dread of
physical suffering, the other large proportions are all of cases
which belong to the deliberative kind. In literature it is always
passion, and passion of vehement sudden afflux, which determines
suicide: the agonies of despair or jealousy, the arrowy pangs of
remorse, or the dread apprehension of shame, are the only motives
which the dramatist or novelist ever conceives.
_Remedy for Poisoning._
Pouring cold water on the face and head appears to be a good remedy
in case of poisoning by narcotics. A young woman accidentally
swallowed six drachms of a mixture of laudanum and chloroform with
some hydrocyanic acid in it. She immediately vomited a portion of
the liquid, and then fell down in a state of coma. Professor Harley
being called in, he administered hot coffee and nitric ether, and
proceeded to effect artificial respiration. No great improvement
was perceptible, but on the application of cold water to the
forehead the effect was magical. The patient began to breathe more
freely, and she lost some blood from the nose. As soon as the
affusion of cold water ceased, the coma returned, and was again
removed by renewing the affusion; the patient soon moved her arms
and legs, and seemed anxious to avoid the stream of water, as if it
caused her pain. This treatment was renewed at intervals until the
following day, and after the lapse of sixty hours all distressing
symptoms disappeared completely.
_New Remedy for Wounds._
The _Antwerp journal_ states that perchloride of iron combined with
collodion is a good hæmostatic in the case of wounds, the bites of
leeches, &c. To prepare it, one part of crystallized perchloride of
iron is mixed with six parts of collodion. The perchloride of iron
should be added gradually and with care, otherwise such a quantity
of heat will be generated as to cause the collodion to boil. The
composition, when well made, is of a yellowish red, perfectly
limpid, and produces on the skin a yellow pellicle, which retains
great elasticity.
_Compensation for Wounds._
The Regulations under which pensions and allowances are granted to
officers of the Army were revised by a Royal Warrant issued towards
the close of 1860. The loss of an eye or limb from injury received
in action will be compensated by a gratuity in money of one
year’s full pay of his then rank or staff appointment. He may be
recommended for a pension also, at a rate varying from 400_l._ for
a lieutenant-general, to 50_l._ for a cornet; and if more than one
eye or limb be lost, he may be recommended for a pension for each.
For minor injuries, “not nearly equal to the loss of a limb,” he
may receive a gratuity varying from three to twelve months of his
then pay. If the injury shall be so diminished as to be “not nearly
equal to the loss of a limb,” at the end of five years, during
which the claimant must be twice examined by a medical board, the
pension will then be permanent, otherwise it will cease. No pension
or gratuity for these causes will be granted unless the actual loss
shall have occurred within five years after the wound or injury was
received. This scale of compensation is more liberal than by the
previously existing custom.--_Lancet_, 1860.
_The Best Physician._
What chiefly characterizes the most eminent physicians, and gives
them their real superiority, is not so much the extent of their
theoretical knowledge--though that, too, is often considerable--but
it is that fine and delicate perception which they owe, partly
to experience, and partly to a natural quickness in detecting
analogies and differences which escape ordinary observers. The
process which they follow, is one of rapid, and, in some degree,
unconscious, induction. And this is the reason why the greatest
physiologists and chemists, which the medical profession possesses,
are not, as a matter of course, the best curers of disease. If
medicine were a science, they would always be the best. But
medicine being still essentially an art, depends mainly upon
qualities which each practitioner has to acquire for himself,
and which no scientific theory can teach. The time for a general
theory has not yet come, and probably many generations will have to
elapse before it does come. To suppose, therefore, that a theory
of disease should, as a matter of education, precede the treatment
of disease, is not only practically dangerous but logically
false.--Buckle’s _History of Civilization_, vol. ii.
In 1857, Sir John Forbes, M.D., after fifty years of professional
experience, left, as a legacy to his successors, the emphatic
avowal, that Nature is, after all, the real physician--since,
however human ingenuity may devise means of alleviation and
acceleration, it is Nature and not Art which cures all curable
diseases. Sir John is, however, far from implying that the art
of medicine is without its use and importance, especially in
preventing disease; but he wishes attention to be more sedulously
fixed upon the degree to which nature can be left entirely to
herself, in order that we might know how, and to what extent,
art may with advantage interfere. There are many cases in which
nature, left to herself, will infallibly kill her patient--say,
for instance, in a case of poisoning--whereas the application of a
stomach-pump, or a chemical reagent, arrests the evil at once.
Sir John Forbes invites his brethren to collect and classify the
evidence which shows how nature cures disease; and the prejudices
which hamper the physician, he indicates in the following
enumeration of current delusions:
1. Ignorance of the natural course and progress of diseases which
are essentially slow and not to be altered by any artificial
means, often leads the friends of the patient to be urgent with
the medical attendant to employ more powerful measures, or at
least to change the means used, to give more frequent or more
powerful doses, &c.
2. Ignorance of the power of Nature to cure diseases, and an
undue estimate of the power of medicines to do so, sometimes
almost compel practitioners to prescribe remedies when they are
either useless or injurious.
3. The same ignorance not seldom occasions dissatisfaction
with, and loss of confidence in, those practitioners who, from
conscientious motives, and on the justest grounds of Art, refrain
from having recourse to measures of undue activity, or from
prescribing medicines unnecessarily; and leads to the countenance
and employment of men who have obtained the reputation of greater
activity and boldness, through their very ignorance of the true
character and requirements of their art.
4. It is the same state of mind that leads the public generally
to give ear to the most ridiculous promises of charlatans:
also to run after the professors and practisers of doctrines
utterly absurd and useless, as in the instance of Homœopathy and
Mesmerism, or dangerous, except in the proper cases, as in the
instance of Hydropathy.
5. Finally, it is the same ignorance of Nature and her
proceedings that often forces medical men to multiply their
visits and their prescriptions to an extent not simply
unnecessary, but really injurious to the patient, as could be
easily shown.
The sick man is impatient to be well. Ignorant of nature’s slow
processes, “the strongest and most effective powers of art,” says
Sir John, “are usually employed for the very purpose of setting
aside or counteracting, or modifying in some way or other, the
powers of nature. Generally speaking, we may even say that all
the heroic arms of physic are invoked purposely to disturb, and
obstruct, and overwhelm the normal order of the natural processes.”
_The Uncertainty of Human Life._
Some men there are who cannot bear the thought of the Uncertainty
of Life; since, were they to entertain it, their worldly views
would be cut short, and the prospect of fruition, or living to
enjoy their gains, be considered so insecure, as to lessen, if
not destroy, the inducement to extraordinary exertion. One of
fortune’s favourites, on being reminded of _the uncertainty of
life_, replied, in a confident tone, that had he suffered such
a thought to possess him, he should never have got on in the
world--the doubt being to him an unwelcome intruder. Every record
of human character--every volume of reminiscences that we can take
up--almost every day’s newspaper,--abounds with evidence of the
uncertain tenure of our existence.
In Lord Cockburn’s _Memorials_, we read of these three remarkable
deaths. At the close of 1809, Dr. Adam, of the High School,
Edinburgh, died, after a few days’ illness. His ruling passion
was for teaching. He was in his bedchamber: finding that he could
not see, he uttered a few words, which have been variously given,
but all the accounts of which mean--“It is getting dark, boys;
we must put off the rest till to-morrow.” It was the darkness of
death. On May 20, 1811, President Blair had been in court that day,
apparently in good health, and had gone to take his usual walk
from his house in George-square round by Bruntfield Links and the
Grange, when he was struck with sudden illness, staggered home, and
died. The day before his funeral, another unlooked-for occurrence
deepened the solemnity. The first Lord Melville had retired to
rest in his usual health, but was found dead in bed next morning.
These two early, attached, and illustrious friends were thus lying
suddenly dead, with but a wall between them; their houses, on the
northeast side of George-square, Edinburgh, being next each other.
It has always been said, and never, so far as the writer
knows, contradicted, and he is inclined to believe it, that a
letter written by Lord Melville was found on his table or in a
writing-case, giving a feeling account of his emotions at President
Blair’s funeral. It was a fancy-piece, addressed to a member of the
Government, with a view to obtain some public provision for Blair’s
family; the writer had not reckoned on the possibility of his own
demise before his friend’s funeral took place.
Dr. Granville, in his work on _Sudden Death_, has related a
number of instances of the uncertainty of life, which came to his
knowledge between the years 1849 and 1854, from which we select the
following:
Mr. Horace Twiss, whose stout frame and laborious habits seemed to
promise long life, while sitting in the board-room of one of the
Companies of which he was a Director, and in the act of addressing
the members, ceased to live, early in May, 1849.
Not long after, at Florence, Harriett Lady Pellew suddenly expired
in her carriage, on the drive at the Cascine; and at Paris, the
Countess of Blessington, returning home from dinner at the Duchess
de Grammont’s, was seized with apoplexy, and died next morning,
June 4.
In the same year, on September 9, the Grand Duke Michael, brother
of Nicholas, Emperor of Russia, a prince of gigantic frame, while
reviewing his troops at Warsaw, fell from his horse, and expired a
few hours after.
At Rome, Richard Wyatt, the sculptor, was suddenly carried off by
apoplexy, May 27, 1851; and on June 7, at Fontainebleau, Reynolds,
the author of _Miserrimus_, died suddenly.
“I must rise instantly, or I shall be suffocated,” said the wife of
a banker, on July 8, at Trent Park: she rose, rushed to a window,
which she threw open to inhale fresh air: it was the last breath
she took in, for she fell a corpse!
In the same year, Audin, the well-known publisher, died suddenly in
his carriage, while travelling from Marseilles to Avignon; and Herr
Carl Sander, the celebrated German surgeon, expired while seated at
his desk, writing a treatise on anatomy.
On New Year’s Day, 1852, Sir Charles Wager Watson, of Westwratting
Park, while riding briskly to meet the Suffolk foxhounds, fell from
his horse, and on his friends coming up, they found him dead. On
April 5, Prince Schwartzenberg was holding a Cabinet council, when
he suddenly appeared to gasp for breath, and withdrew: he rallied,
and retired to dress for dinner, during which he fell senseless on
the floor, and died within an hour from his first seizure.
Mr. Frank Forster, the engineer, on April 13, while writing a
letter, was struck with apoplexy, and almost immediately expired.
A. N. Welby Pugin, the architect, scarcely of mature age, died
suddenly at Ramsgate, September 14; and on the same day, the Duke
of Wellington, who had retired to rest apparently quite well on
the previous night, died, it is stated of apoplexy, within the
brief space of six or seven hours. Dr. Granville states, from the
testimony of medical and other near attendants, that, from the very
first seizure, when the duke ordered distinctly the apothecary
to be fetched _immediately_, down to the last moment of his
existence, paralysis of the brain had been complete, for no other
comprehensible word could he utter after that direction. On the day
before, Dr. Stokoe, the appointed medical attendant to Napoleon I.,
during the last years of his exile, died suddenly in a public room
at York, as he was preparing to continue his journey to London.
On March 12, 1853, Marshal Haynau, having supped with the prime
minister, Buol, retired to rest, when, just after midnight, he rang
for a glass of water; when the servant returned, his master was
gasping for breath, and soon after died. On the same night, the
gallant Lieutenant-General Sir Edward Kerrison was found dead in
his bed. And, not many days after, Vice-Admiral Zarthmann, while
walking in the streets of Copenhagen, complained of vertigo, sank
to the ground, and expired in an hour. On April 30, Dr. Butler,
Dean of Peterborough, while seated at table with his family,
suddenly became insensible, and in ten minutes passed away, almost
without a struggle. Maurice O’Connell, the eldest son of “the
Liberator,” appeared in his usual health in the House of Commons;
on the morrow, at midnight, he breathed his last. On December 12,
1853, Dr. Harrington, Principal of Brazenose College, Oxford,
having retired to rest in his usual health and spirits, was shortly
after seized with spasms, and died before eight o’clock next
morning, in his fifty-third year. On the 5th of the same month,
Captain Warner, of the “long range,” expired suddenly. On a Sunday
evening in the same month, a stout middle-aged yeoman was crossing
Ovington Park, near Southampton, on his way to the church, which
he never reached: the park-keeper found him seated with his back
to a tree, his hat on, his umbrella under his arm--dead--with
no appearance of convulsion or previous struggle. Visconti, the
architect, on December 29, had attended the first meeting of the
Imperial Commission for the Exposition building at Paris, and was
returning home in his carriage: on the door being opened, he was
found dead.
One of the most awfully sudden visitations recorded in our time was
the death of Mr. Justice Talfourd, in his fifty-eighth year, March
13, 1845, at Stafford, while delivering his charge to the grand
jury. He was speaking of the increase of crime--of the neglects
of the rich, the ignorance of the poor--of the want of a closer
knowledge and more vital sympathy between class and class--and
of the thousand social evils which arise from that unhappy and
unnatural estrangement of human interests--when his face flushed
and he bent forward on his desk, almost as if the Judge were bowed
in prayer by some sharp and overpowering emotion. A moment more,
and the bystanders saw him swerve, as if he were already senseless.
He was dying, calmly and happily. In a few seconds he was gone--and
all that was mortal of the poet was carried to the Judges’ Chambers
and there laid down in breathless awe. “The people were trembling
at the thought of coming before him; but in a minute his function
was over, and he was gone to his own account.”
Respecting the frequency of these fatal occurrences, Dr. Granville
remarks: “Where is the friend, where the acquaintance, or the
passing associate at a club, who has not some sad story of the
sort, or many of them, to tell you, if you once enter on the
dismal subject? From every quarter of the country, from families
whom you knew to be in the full bloom of youth, of individuals who
were deemed vigorous and in the flower of manhood, we hear as we
meet in our daily intercourse, of some one of them having suddenly
disappeared from among the living!” Our newspapers abound with such
records as the following.
In 1837, a communication to a Bristol journal recorded
“The fearfully sudden decease of Thomas Kington, Esq., of Manilla
hall, Clifton. Apparently without the slightest indisposition he
died in his counting-house, Queen-square, Bristol, surrounded by
all the accumulations of wealth, and the advantages accruing from
the interests of that wide range of commerce, the Melbourne and
Australian trade.”
And, in the _Times_, June, 1862:
“On the 19th inst., at Nine Elms, very suddenly, Mr. John Miller,
on the anniversary of his birth and wedding days, which events
he had intended to celebrate at the Star and Garter, Richmond,
where he had gone with a few friends, but was suddenly attacked
with illness on his arrival there, and was re-conveyed to his own
residence, where he expired shortly afterwards, aged fifty.”
In 1862, Mr. F. W. Gingell, of Wood House, East Ham, while sitting
at dinner with the family, observed to his father, “I have a
presentiment that I shall die suddenly:” at the same time his head
dropped, and he expired.
FOOTNOTES:
[20] Many years since, the writer heard Sir Lucas Pepys, (some time
President of the College of Physicians,) inquire of a druggist
at Dorking what use he could possibly make of the many drugs in
his shop; “for,” added Sir Lucas, “I have only used five or six
articles in all my practice.”--J. T.
[21] Liebig: _Letters on Chemistry_, p. 28.
Religious Thought.
_Moveable Feasts._
The following short explanation of the Moveable Feasts of the
Church, and their dependence on Easter, cannot be improved:
“In the English nomenclature Easter Sunday has always the _six_
Sundays in Lent immediately preceding, and the _five_ Sundays
_after_ Easter, immediately following. Of these the nearest to
Easter before and after are _Palm_ Sunday and _Low_ Sunday; the
farthest before and after are _Quadragesima_ (first in Lent), and
_Rogation_ Sunday (fifth after Easter). Preceding all these are, in
reverse order, _Quinquagesima_, _Sexagesima_, _Septuagesima_: and
following them, in direct order, are the Sunday after _Ascension_
(Holy Thursday, Thursday five weeks after Easter); _Whit_ Sunday
and _Trinity_ Sunday. So that Easter Sunday, as it takes its
course through the almanacks, draws after it, as it were, _nine_
Sundays, and pushes _eight_ before it, all at fixed denominations.
Looking farther back, every Sunday preceding Septuagesima, but
not preceding the fixed day of Epiphany (June 6), is named as
of _Epiphany_ or after _Epiphany_: the least number of Sundays
after Epiphany is one, the greatest number six. Looking farther
forwards, all the Sundays following Trinity are named as _after_
Trinity in succession, until we arrive at the nearest Sunday (be
it before or after) to the St. Andrew’s Day (November 30th),
which is the first Sunday in Advent. The least number of Sundays
after Trinity is twenty-two; the greatest, twenty-seven. From
thence, up to Christmas Day, exclusive, the Sundays are named as
in _Advent_, and from Christmas Day to Epiphany, exclusive, they
are named as Christmas Day, or as the first or second Sunday after
Christmas.”--_Prof. de Morgan’s Book of Almanacks._
_Christmas._
The celebration of Christmas is still rife among us. Its stream of
joy is not narrowed, but more equally diffused through society;
and although much of the custom of profuse hospitality has passed
away, Christmas is yet universally recognised as a season when
every Christian should show his gratitude to the Almighty for the
inestimable benefits procured to us by the Nativity, by an ample
display of goodwill towards our fellow-men:
“What comfort by Him doe we winne,
Who made Himself the price of sinne
To make us heirs of glory?
To see this Babe all innocence,
A Martyr borne in our defence--
Can man forget this storie?”
_Ben Jonson._
It is, however, an error of the day to deplore a falling-off in
Christmas commemorations; whereas the enjoyment has but assumed a
healthier tone. The Past is ever more picturesque than the Present.
We stroll into the Great Hall at Westminster, where our Plantagenet
kings feasted at Christmas and Epiphany: it is, however, forsaken
and dreary; and, looking up roofward, we can scarcely see the
louvre through which the smoke of many huge Christmas fires has
gone up; or the noble hammer-beams, or the carved angels, and
other glories of this majestic roof. But, step into Inigo Jones’
banqueting-house, at Whitehall; and there you will see the Lord
High Almoner distributing the Royal alms, as he was wont to do
centuries since. At Windsor the Sovereign herself is superintending
the distribution of her seasonable bounty; the Lord Steward fills
the hungry prisoner with good things; the good cheer shines
upon Ragged Schools and other havens of charity. The moderation
observable in our times is conformable to the precept in the _Whole
Duty of Man_, enjoining us not to make the day “an occasion of
intemperance and disorder, as do too many, who consider nothing
in Christmas and other good times but the good cheer and jollity
of them.” It is, however, one of the signs of the more gracious
and hallowed tone that the singing of Carols has increased of late
years; together with the decoration of churches, and the revival of
several minor observances, which tend to show the universality of
this improved feeling.
_Doubt about Religion._
The Bishop of Oxford, in one of his eloquent Sermons upon _the
Temptation to Doubt about Religion_, thus describes one class of
doubts, and, by implication, of doubters:
“There are the doubts which are the fruits of an evil life,
which come forth as the obscene creatures of the night come
forth--because it is the night; because the darkness is abroad,
and they are the creatures of the darkness. These are, for the
most part, self-chosen doubts, bred of corruption and of fear;
of a clinging to sin and yet of a fear of its punishment; of
a conscious resistance to the ways and the works of a God of
purity and truth; of an evil interest which men have in finding
revelation to be false, because it is a system which, if true,
is fatally opposed to them. Men pursued by these doubts are a
fearful spectacle. The terrors which at times shake them are
often appalling to witness; and yet even these are less awful
than the forced grimace with which they try to laugh them off;
vaunting their doubts, like the lonely wanderer who sings noisily
to conceal or overcome his fear of the darkness, that they may,
if possible, scatter by the loudness of their laugh the besetting
crowd of their alarms.”
Another class of doubts the Bishop describes are those which
address themselves to specific and clearly-revealed points in
the revelation, which yet, as a whole, the doubting man does not
disbelieve. Against these doubts he would utter his warning,
because he believes that their presence, and even their indulgence,
is at this moment by no means rare; because their true character is
often disguised under the most specious forms; because the young,
and among the young the generous, the ardent, the thoughtful, and
the inquiring, are often their special victims; and because their
cause is one of weakness, both intellectual and spiritual, while
their end, when they triumph, is misery here, and, too often,
everlasting loss hereafter. Having observed that there must be room
for doubts and questions such as these,[22] the Bishop proceeds:
“It may often seem that these doubts are the pauses of modesty,
and these questions the interrogations of an inquiring faith.
Thus the doubts are cherished and encouraged under the garb of
piety, until a habit is formed in the mind of subjecting the
written word and the authoritative declarations of faith to the
scrutiny of each man’s intellectual faculties; and, according
to their decision, of his accepting, modifying, or rejecting
them. Now, such a mode of dealing with revelation is exceeding
attractive. It promises to make the faith so rational--to give
every man a reason for the hope that is in him--to be so free
from all forcing of doctrines on him, that it naturally wins
to itself young and ardent minds. Yet it is against this that
I would so earnestly warn you, and that for the weightiest
reasons--for no less a reason than this, that in its very first
principle it is subversive of all true faith, and that it is
therefore in its consequences full of ruin to the soul.”
The relation of the Christian revelation to nature, the Bishop thus
intelligibly points out:
“The Christian revelation teaches nothing merely to gratify our
curiosity. In this respect it is the very opposite of nature.
The handwriting of the Creator in the works of nature seems to
be imprinted on them for the very purpose of stimulating our
curiosity and training and rewarding our powers of investigation
and discovery. In the Christian revelation, on the contrary,
nothing is revealed for the sake merely of its being known, but
that the degree of knowledge given us may in some way or other
affect our moral and spiritual training.”
An Undergraduate of Oxford, in bearing testimony to the influence
of these Sermons upon him at the time they were preached, describes
the Free Inquiry of the present day as working in three classes
of men. With some it was hailed as a relief from the annoyance
of a conscience which told them that if the “old paths” were the
true ones, there was certainly an ill look-out for them; and it
was a pleasure, therefore, to hear those who ought to know say
that the hard things (such as eternal punishment, &c.) which
had been told them from their cradles were matters, to say the
least, of considerable doubt. With others it was adopted with
the gratifying feeling that thus they showed themselves “wiser
than their sires,” and as intellectual champions “in the foremost
files of time,” superior to all old wives’ fables. With others
it was entertained, in a spirit eager for truth, with a painful
sense of perplexity--the distress of men who feel that, while they
have conscientiously left the old way as a way averse to all true
progress, they neither know nor like to contemplate the issue of
the new.
Of these three classes of “free inquirers,” the first two were of
course contemptible, but the third could not be passed by unheeded;
and after a vehement effort to stand up for truths hitherto on his
part unquestioned, the writer felt that he was more or less with
them. He then acknowledges to reading the _Essays and Reviews_
through three times, which gave him a new freedom, with which he
felt self-satisfied: still, he was miserable with uncertainty, for
he had nothing beneath his feet but his own private judgment; and
he asks, what was that as regards the truth, when he saw that no
two men arrived at the same conclusion? In the midst of all this
he went, with others, to hear these sermons: instead of hearing
the Bishop steer between conflicting opinions in this matter,
our Undergraduate was influenced by these sermons to feel that
reverence must go hand-in-hand with knowledge, in order that the
true harmony may exist between mind and soul; that a man’s reason
and judgment alone are a poor support and comfort, and the kingdom
of God _must_ be received in the spirit of a little child.[23]
The Bishop concludes an earnest deprecation of the habit of
doubting, with the following awful picture of the death-bed of a
victim to this pernicious practice:
“It is not from imagination that I have drawn this warning. I
can tell you of an overshadowed grave which closed in on such
a struggle and such an end as that at which I have glanced.
In it was laid a form which had hardly reached the fulness of
earliest manhood. That young man had gone, young, ardent, and
simply faithful, to the tutelage of one, himself I doubt not a
believer, but one who sought to reconcile the teaching of our
Church, in which he ministered, with the dreams of Rationalism.
His favourite pupil learnt his lore, and it sufficed for his
needs while health beat high in his youthful veins: but on him
sickness and decay closed early in, and as the glow of health
faded, the intellectual lights for which he had exchanged the
simplicity of faith began to pale; whilst the viper brood of
doubts which almost unawares he had let slip into his soul, crept
forth from their hiding-places and raised against him their
fearfully envenomed heads. And they were too strong for him. The
teacher who had suggested could not remove them: and in darkness
and despair his victim died before his eyes the doubter’s death.”
_Our Age of Doubt._
The intellect of the present generation is usually acknowledged
to have gone off on quite a different tack from that of its
predecessor. _Not belief, but doubt, is the present fashion._ Now,
belief and doubt, both of them, have their uses. Each of them has
its good and its bad side. Doubt is the more daring and impressive;
but belief, even if sometimes rather illogical, is decidedly the
more amiable. Let a negative system be true, and a positive system
be false; still the positive system will call out some of the best
qualities of our nature in a way that the negative system cannot.
It is certain that the present generation is growing up in a spirit
of greater independence and self-reliance, of less deference to
age, to tradition, to authority of all kinds, than was in vogue
twenty years since. The change may be for the better or for the
worse, but the fact of the change is undeniable. Probably, if
minutely examined, it has both its good and its bad side. The young
men of the present day have gained something in wideness of view,
and at least apparent worldly knowledge; but they have certainly
lost much that was very attractive in their predecessors. On the
other hand, acts of petty persecution are doing all that can be
done to enlist their best feelings on the side on which it is
wished that they should not be enlisted. If any man, especially
one of the most conscientious and hard-working officers of the
University, is proscribed and insulted on account of his opinions,
those opinions are at once put in an attractive light to every
generous mind. Men in authority are slow to believe it, but there
is no policy so foolish as that of making martyrs.--_From the
Saturday Review._
Mr. Ruskin, in his _Modern Painters_, has this striking passage
upon what he terms “the Faithlessness of our Age:”
“A Red Indian, or Otaheitan savage, has more sense of a Divine
existence round him, or government over him, than the plurality
of refined Londoners and Parisians; and those among us who may
in some sense be said to believe are divided almost without
exception into two broad classes, Romanist and Puritan; who, but
for the interference of the unbelieving portions of society,
would, either of them, reduce the other sect as speedily as
possible to ashes; the Romanist having always done so whenever he
could, from the beginning of their separation, and the Puritan
at this time holding himself in complacent expectation of the
destruction of Rome by volcanic fire.... Hence nearly all our
powerful men in this age of the world are unbelievers: the best
of them in doubt and misery; the worst in reckless defiance; the
plurality, in plodding hesitation, doing as well as they can what
practical work lies ready in their hands. Most of our scientific
men are in this last class; our popular authors either set
themselves definitely against all religious form, pleading for
simple truth and benevolence, or give themselves up to bitter and
fruitless statement of facts, or surface-painting, or careless
blasphemy, sad or smiling. Our earnest poets and deepest thinkers
are doubtful and indignant.”
_A Hint to Sceptics._
Reason is always striving, always at a loss; and of necessity, it
must so come to pass, while it is exercised about that which is not
its proper object. Let us be content at last to know God by his
own methods, at least so much of Him as He is pleased to reveal
to us in the Sacred Scriptures. To apprehend them to be the Word
of God is all our reason has to do, for all beyond it is the work
of faith, which is the seal of Heaven impressed upon our human
understanding.--_Dryden._
Bishop Mant, writing in a more scientific age than that in which
Dryden flourished, says:
“Persons have, perhaps, been sometimes found who, from their
attachment to pursuits of science, and to the acquisition of
general knowledge, have appeared sceptical upon the subject
of Divine revelation. But others, at least equally endowed
with intellectual powers, and equally rich in intellectual
acquirements, have been serious, rational, and conscientious
believers. Amongst these may be ranked the great apostle, St.
Paul, who has been rarely surpassed in strength of understanding,
or in the treasures of a cultivated mind; and in connexion with
him it may be added, that ‘Luke, the beloved physician, whose
praise is in the Gospel,’ was professionally acquainted with the
operations of nature, and the effects of secondary causes, and
thus qualified to appreciate the miraculous and supernatural
character of the works which he has recorded as foundations of
our belief.”
_What is Egyptology?_
The object of Egyptology is to render it a sort of elevated
standing-point, from which all the realms of ethnography and
philology might be surveyed, and the most distant and isolated
points brought within range of view. This undertaking has been
attempted chiefly by Bunsen, who has completed in five volumes his
work entitled _Ægypten’s Stelle in der Weltgeschichte_ (“Egypt’s
Place in Universal History,” Hamburg, 1845-1857), and has discussed
some of the same subjects in a more general and miscellaneous book,
or collection of treatises, called _Christianity and Mankind, their
Beginnings and Prospects_ (London, 1854). It is Bunsen’s theory
that “the Egyptian language is the point in universal history at
which the creative energy of language still shows its original
form, just before it raises its pinions aloft, and assumes in the
world-ruling nations an entirely different and more spiritual form;
while in the other races, according to laws not yet explored, it
sinks into the atomic and mechanical, or at best deflects into
subordinate ramifications.”--(_Ægypten_, i. 338). Looking back over
a period of more than twenty thousand years, this philological
speculator recognises a time when the as yet undivided families of
Japhet and Shem lived together in a civilized state in Northern
Asia. From this undivided Asiatic stock Egypt, according to Bunsen,
must be a colony, gradually degenerated into the African type; for
the old Egyptian language claims affinity at once with the Aramaic
idioms in immediate contact with it, and with the Indo-Germanic
tongues, with which it has no direct commerce--(_Report of the
Brit. Assoc._, 1847, p. 280; _Ægypten_, iv., Pref., p. 10).
It must be owned that these sweeping conclusions do not rest
upon philological inductions of the most accurate kind, and are
supported by arguments which are sometimes as arbitrary as they are
precarious.--_Encyclopædia Britannica_, 8th edition.
_Jerusalem and Nimroud._
The greatest light which has yet been thrown upon the architectural
character of the Palace of Solomon, Mr. Lewin (in his _Sketch of
Jerusalem_, published in 1861) is of opinion is derived from the
recent discoveries in and near Nineveh; Solomon having studiously
copied the Assyrian style.
“Take, for instance, the north-west palace of Nimroud, which would
almost seem to have been the pattern after which the royal palace
at Jerusalem was built. Thus the Nimroud Palace is nearly a square,
of about 330 feet each way; and the area of Solomon’s Palace is
325 feet by 290 feet. In front at Nimroud was a great hall, 152
feet long by 32 feet wide; and in front, at Jerusalem, was a hall,
the house of Lebanon, 150 feet by 75 feet. The halls at Nimroud
were supported by rows of pillars, not of stone, but of wood; and
the Hall of Lebanon was supported by three rows of cedar pillars,
fifteen in a row, making forty-five in the whole. In the centre, at
Nimroud, was a spacious open court; and in the centre at Jerusalem
was also a court. On the sides, at Nimroud, were suites of
apartments three deep, decreasing in width as they receded from the
light supplied from the great court; and at Jerusalem were windows
in three rows, and light against light in three ranks. At Nimroud,
in the rear was a double suite of apartments; and in the rear at
Jerusalem were the separate suites of the king and the queen. At
Nimroud, the interior walls were lined with sculptured slabs; and
at Jerusalem the apartments were also lined with stones carved in
imitation of trees and plants.”
_What is Rationalism?_
Rationalism, in its widest acceptation, is applicable to all who
follow the dictates of reason, whether in their speculative or
practical life. In its more restricted signification it is applied
specially to that system of religious opinion whose final test of
truth is placed in the direct assent of the human consciousness,
whether in the form of logical deduction, moral judgment, or
religious intuition, by whatever previous process these faculties
may have been raised to their assumed dignity as arbitrators.
The Bishop of Oxford, in one of his Charges, has thus eloquently
denounced the present dangerous spirit of Rationalism in the Church:
“Are there not, my reverend brethren, signs enough abroad now
of special danger to make us drop our lesser differences and
combine together as one man, striving earnestly for the faith
once delivered to the Saints? When from within our own encampment
we hear voices declaring that our whole belief in the Atonement
wrought out for us by the sacrifice on the Cross is an ignorant
misconception--that the miracles and the prophecies of Scripture
are part of an irrational supernaturalism, which it is the duty
of a remorseless criticism to expose and to account for, by such
discoveries as that the imagination has allied itself with the
affections to produce them, and that they may safely be brought
down to a natural Rationalism;--by such suggestions as that the
description of the passage of the Red Sea is the latitude of
poetry--that the Avenger who slew the firstborn is the Bedouin
host, akin nearly to Jethro, and more remotely to Israel--when
the history of the Bible is explained away by being treated as a
legend, and its prophecy deprived of all supernatural character
by being turned into a history of past or present events--when
we are told that had our Lord come to us now, instead of in the
youth of the world, the truth of His Divine nature would not
have been recognised; that is to say, that it was the peculiar
stage in which flesh and blood then were, and not the revelation
of His Father who was in heaven which enabled the Apostles to
believe in Him--when in words, as far as opinion is privately
entertained is concerned, the liberty of the English clergyman
appears to be complete--when we are told that men may sign any
Article of the National Church, if it is only their own opinions
which are at variance with them--when we are told that they may
sign, solemnly before God, that they allow certain articles of
belief, meaning thereby only that they allow their existence as
the lesser of two great evils, and that under the Sixth Article
one may literally or allegorically, or as a parable, or as poetry
or a legend, receive the story of the Serpent tempting Eve and
speaking in a man’s voice; and in like manner the arresting of
the earth’s motion, the water standing still, the universality
of the Deluge, the confusion of tongues, the taking up of Elijah
corporeally into Heaven, the nature of Angels, and the miraculous
particulars of many other events:--when Abraham’s great act of
obedient faith in not withholding his son, even his only son,
but offering him up at the express command of God is commuted by
the gross ritual of Syrian notes into a traditional revelation;
while the awe of the Divine voice bidding him slay his son, and
his being stayed by the angel from doing so, is watered down into
an allegory meaning that the Father in whom he trusted was better
pleased with mercy than with sacrifice; when it is maintained
that St. Stephen, full of the Holy Ghost, in the utterances of
his martyrdom, and St. Paul proving from the history of his
people that Jesus was the Christ, would naturally speak not only
words of truth, but after the received accounts--when, I say,
such words as these are deliberately uttered by our ordained
Clergy, while the slowness even of English theologians to accept
such a treatment of God’s revelation is scoffed at in such words
as the following, even by those in our Universities who no longer
repeat fully the Shibboleth of the Reformers, the explicitness
of truth and error:--‘He who assents most committing himself
least to baseness being reckoned the wisest:’ whilst those who
maintained the old truth, I trust with most of us, my brethren,
are branded as Baal’s prophets and the four hundred prophets of
the grove who cry out for falsehood--whilst, I say, such words as
these are heard from ordained men amongst us, and who still keep
their places in the National Church, is it not a time for us,
if we do hold openly by the Holy Scriptures as the one inspired
voice of God’s written revelation--if we do hold to the ancient
Creeds as the summary of the good deposit--if we believe in the
Lord Jesus Christ as very God and very Man--if we believe in His
offering Himself on the Cross as the one only true and sufficient
sacrifice, satisfaction, and atonement for the sins of the whole
world--is it not time for us, laying aside our suspicions and our
divisions about small matters, to combine together in prayer, and
trust, and labour, and love, and watching, lest whilst we dispute
needlessly about the lesser matters of the law, we be robbed
unawares of the very foundations of the faith?”
_What is Theology?_
In the widest sense of the word Theology, including both natural
and revealed theology, we have, among theologians who reject
revelation, the systems of--(1) _Atheism_, or that doctrine
concerning God which rejects his existence altogether.[24] (2)
_Deism_, or the system which teaches that God is the Creator of all
things, but that, having once created them and impressed upon them
certain laws for the regulation of their future existence, commonly
called the _laws of nature_, He has left them to the government of
those laws, and concerns Himself no more with his creation; or,
in other words, this system acknowledges the existence of God,
but denies his providence. (3) _Theism_, the system which differs
from Deism by acknowledging the providence of God. The systems
of _Deism_ and _Theism_ suppose the existence of an Almighty
Creator, whose existence is independent of the universe; but there
is another system, according to which the laws of Nature are in
themselves the external self-existent causes of all the phenomena
of the universe, and there is no causative principle external to
Nature. This system takes two different forms: _Materialism_,
which makes all the phenomena of Nature to result from the
physical constitution of matter itself; and the various shades of
_Pantheism_, which suppose an intelligent principle (_anima mundi_)
to be inseparably connected with everything that exists, and to
pervade the whole creation.
Deism properly means belief in the existence of a God, but is
generally applied to all such belief as goes no further, that
is to say, to disbelief of revelation. It is always applied
dyslogistically, and frequently merely as a term of reproach. But
the identical word, in its Greek form, _theist_, is not a word of
disapprobation; and, consistently with established usage, may be
appropriately applied as opposed to atheist, when the latter term
is correctly used. For it must be observed that the term atheist
has been not unfrequently employed in the sense of an unbeliever in
Christianity, though at the same time professing theism.--_Penny
Cyclopædia._
_Religious Forebodings._
Nearly sixty years since, Southey wrote his famous anticipation of
Mormonism, and of some other matters as important as Mormonism, in
a letter to Rickman (1805), as follows:
“Here I do not like the prospects: sooner or later a hungry
government will snap at the tithes; the clergy will then become
State pensioners or parish pensioners; in the latter case more
odious to the farmers than they are now, in the former the first
pensioners to be amerced of their stipends. Meantime, the damned
system of Calvinism spreads like a pestilence among the lower
classes. I have not the slightest doubt that the Calvinists will
be the majority in less than half a century; we see how catching
the distemper is, and do not see any means of stopping it. There
is a good opening for a new religion, but the founder must start
up in some of the darker parts of the world. It is America’s turn
to send out apostles. A new one there must be when the old one
is worn out. I am a believer in the truth of Christianity, but
truth will never do for the multitude; there is an appetite for
faith in us, which if it be not duly indulged, it turns to green
sickness, and feeds upon chalk and cinders. The truth is, man was
not made for the world alone; and speculations concerning the
next will be found, at last, the most interesting to all of us.”
_Folly of Atheism._
Morphology, in natural science, teaches us that the whole animal
and vegetable creation is formed upon certain fundamental types
and patterns, which can be traced under various modifications and
transformations through all the rich variety of things apparently
of most dissimilar build. But here and there a scientific person
takes it into his foolish head that there may be a set of moulds
without a moulder, a calculated gradation of forms without a
calculator, an ordered world without an ordering God. Now, this
atheistical science conveys about as much meaning as suicidal life;
for science is possible only where there are ideas, and ideas are
only possible where there is mind, and minds are the offspring of
God; and atheism itself is not merely ignorance and stupidity--it
is the purely nonsensical and the unintelligible.--_Professor
Blackie_: _Edinburgh Essays_, 1856.
_The first Congregational Church in England._
In the State-Paper Office has been discovered a manuscript, showing
that in the Bridewell of London[25] were imprisoned the members of
the Congregational Church first formed after the accession of Queen
Elizabeth. They were committed by the Privy Council to the custody
of the gaoler, May 20, 1567. It is, no doubt, to this company
that Bishop Grindal refers, in his letter to Bullinger, July
11, 1568:--“Some London citizens,” he says, “with four or five
ministers, have openly separated from us; and sometimes in private
houses, sometimes in fields, and occasionally even in ships, they
have held meetings, and administered the sacraments. Besides this,
they have ordained ministers, elders, and deacons, after their
own way.” The Rev. Dr. Waddington has discovered some original
papers, written by the members of this Church in the Bridewell,
signed chiefly by Christian women, together with a statement of
the principles of the sect. It appears from these interesting
records, which have been kept, though in a loose form, for nearly
three hundred years, that Richard Fitz, their first pastor, died
in the prison. Dr. Waddington shows, by indisputable evidence,
from original papers in the public archives, that the succession
of Congregational Churches from the above period is continuous;
so that the Bridewell may be regarded as the starting-point of
Congregationalism after the Reformation; or, in other words, the
origin of the first voluntary church in England, after the Marian
persecution, was contemporaneous with the Anglican movement. And
it is as remarkable as it is satisfactory, that these touching and
simple memorials should have been preserved by the Metropolitan
Bishop, and finally transmitted to the Royal Archives.
_Innate Ideas, and Pre-existence of Souls._
In the Second Series of _Things not Generally Known_, pp. 147-152,
we have illustrated this doctrine at some length; but return to it
here for the purpose of quoting an argument directly opposed to the
above illustrations, by the writer of the eloquent exposition of
Plato, in the _Edinburgh Essays_, 1856:
“Plato was distinguished from all previous philosophers by the
prominence which he gave to the doctrine of _innate ideas_. Now,
the current opinion in this country certainly is, that these innate
ideas were a sort of sublime phantasm blown to the winds by John
Locke and the inductive philosophy of external facts which has
been achieving such conquests in the modern world from the time
of Bacon downwards. But the fact is, that the doctrine of innate
ideas, as taught by Plato, never was touched either by Locke or
Bacon; and never can be touched in substantials by any thinker
who believes that he has thoughts, and that these thoughts have
their roots in a simple sovereign and plastic principle which he
calls his soul. No doubt there are some pleasant imaginations
floating with irridescent colours round the borderland of this
Platonic philosophy, which may be blown to the wind by the puff
of any cheek, without special inflation from Locke or Bacon. When
the great thinker, for instance, pushes his argument for the
independence of mind so far as to seem to assert, in positive
terms, the existence of ideas in the human soul in ready-made
panoply transferred from a previous state of existence into the
present, this must be regarded as a trick of the poet immanent
in the philosopher, ever ready to mistake a beautiful analogy
for a substantial argument. Wordsworth, as a philosophic poet,
was certainly more at liberty to illustrate this pleasant fancy
than Plato as a practical philosopher.[26] _Reminiscence_, as
explained by Socrates in the _Menon_ and elsewhere, is not a fact,
if the word be taken in its natural and obvious sense; it is not
true that a person studying mathematics, for instance, when the
truth of any profound relation of quantity or number flashes upon
his mind, is recollecting anything that he ever knew before in a
previous state of existence; the simple fact is, that he recognises
the evolution of this truth from other truths of which he finds
himself in possession, as a consequence that cannot be avoided when
once his mind is set to work in a certain direction. As certainly
as a sportsman’s dog will raise game when it comes near the spot
where the bird is lying, and the scent begins to tell on his eager
organ, so certainly will an idea lurking in a man’s mind be hunted
out into startled consciousness by a Socratic questioner. But the
simile limps, like all similes, in one point: the hidden idea is
not lying in the soul, like the bird in the heather, ready-made;
it must be shaped, moulded, and evolved, by a long and sometimes a
very painful process. All that we can legitimately say, therefore,
is, that there lies in every normal human soul the dormant capacity
of acknowledging every necessary truth; and that this capacity is
not borrowed from without. In this sense, and this sense only, are
innate ideas true; and in this sense, unquestionably, they are very
far removed from what may be called a reminiscence.”
_The Sabbath for Professional Men._
Sir Joshua Reynolds used to say, “he will never make a painter
who looks for the Sunday with pleasure for an idle day;” and Sir
Joshua’s journals afford indisputable proofs that it was his habit
to receive sitters on Sundays as well as on other days. This was
naturally displeasing to Dr. Johnson; and we are told by Boswell,
that he (Johnson) made three requests of Sir Joshua, a short time
before his death: one was to forgive him thirty pounds which he had
borrowed of him; another was, that Sir Joshua would carefully read
the Scriptures; and lastly, that he would _abstain from using his
pencil on the Sabbath-day_: to all of these requests Reynolds gave
a willing assent, and kept his word.
The lax practice of working on the Sabbath is, we fear, too common.
That it is a short-sighted practice there can be no doubt. With
respect to it, the Hon. B. F. Butler, of New York, recently made
the following statement:
“If I may be permitted to refer to my own experience, I can truly
say that, although often severely pressed, and sometimes for
years together, by professional occupations and official duties,
I cannot call to mind more than half a dozen cases during the
twenty-seven years which have elapsed since my admission to the
Bar, in which I have found it necessary to devote any portion of
the Sabbath to professional or official studies or labours. Of
these instances only two, I believe, occurred during my connexion
with the Government at Washington, one of which was a case of
mercy as well as of necessity, and neither of which prevented my
regular attendance at the house of God. The course I have pursued
has sometimes compelled me to rise on the ensuing day somewhat
earlier than my wont; but an occasional inconvenience of this
kind is of small account when compared with the preservation of
a useful habit. I am therefore able to testify that it is not
necessary to the ordinary duties of professional life, that men
should encroach upon the Sabbath; and that the cases of necessity
or of mercy, in which professional labour can be required on that
day, are few and far between.”
“_In the Beginning._”
That the vast and unknown Antiquity of the Earth, compared with
the 6000 years of its supposed existence is but as yesterday, is
the first great startling fact which the researches of Geology
have brought to light within the last thirty years. “With rare
exceptions,” says Archdeacon Pratt, “this is become, like the
motion of the earth, the universal creed. The prejudice of
long-standing interpretation and ignorance of the records which the
earth carries in its own bosom regarding its past history, had shut
up us and our forefathers for ages, in the notion that the heavens
and the earth were but six days older than the human race. But
science reveals new phenomena, opens up new ideas, and creates new
demands. The torch of nature and reason sheds its light upon the
letter of Scripture.”
The Rev. Dr. Chalmers was the first to supply this new reading in
his _Natural Theology_, vol. i. p. 251, as follows:--“Between the
initial act and the details of Genesis, the world, for aught we
know, might have been the theatre of many revolutions, the traces
of which geology may still investigate, and to which she, in fact,
has confidently appealed as the vestiges of so many continents that
have now passed away.”
“_In the beginning God created the heaven and earth; the earth
was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the
deep_,” is seen to refer to the first calling of matter into
existence, and to a state of emptiness and waste into which the
earth long after fell, ere God prepared it as the residence of the
most perfect of His creatures.
This commentary and explanation was adopted by the late Rev. Dr.
Buckland, in his _Bridgewater Treatise_:
“The word _beginning_,” he says, “as applied by Moses, in the
first verse of the Book of Genesis, expresses an undefined period
of time, which was antecedent to the last great change that
affected the surface of the earth, and to the creation of its
present animal and vegetable inhabitants, during which period a
long series of operations may have been going on; which, as they
are only connected with the history of the human race, are passed
over in silence by the sacred historian, whose only concern was
barely to state that the matter of the universe is not eternal
and self-existent, but was originally created by the power of
the Almighty. The Mosaic narrative commences with a declaration
that, ‘_in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth_.’
These few words of Genesis may be fairly appealed to by the
geologist as containing a brief statement of the creation of the
material elements, at a time distinctly preceding the operations
of the first day; it is nowhere affirmed that God created the
heaven and the earth in the _first day_, but in the _beginning_;
this beginning may have been an epoch at an immeasured distance,
followed by periods of undefined duration, during which all the
physical operations disclosed by geology were going on.
“The first verse of Genesis, therefore, seems explicitly to
assert the creation of the universe; the heaven, including the
sidereal systems and the earth, more especially specifying our
planet, as the subsequent scene of the operations of the six days
about to be described; no information is given as to events which
may have occurred upon this earth, unconnected with the history
of man, between the creation of its component matter recorded
in the first verse, and the era at which its history is resumed
in the second verse; nor is any limit fixed to the time during
which these intermediate events may have been going on; millions
of millions of years may have occupied the indefinite interval
between the beginning in which God created the heaven and the
earth, and the evening or commencement of the first day of the
Mosaic narrative.
“The second verse may describe the condition of the earth
on the evening of this first day; for in the Jewish mode of
computation used by Moses, each day is reckoned from the
beginning of one evening to the beginning of another evening.
This first evening may be considered as the termination of the
indefinite period which followed the primeval creation announced
in the first verse, and as the commencement of the first of the
six succeeding days in which the earth was to be filled up and
peopled in a manner fit for the reception of mankind. We have in
this second verse a distinct mention of the earth and waters, as
already existing and involved in darkness; their condition also
is described as a state of confusion and emptiness (_tohu bohu_),
words which are usually interpreted by the vague and indefinite
Greek term chaos, and which may be geologically considered as
designating the wreck and ruins of a former world. At this
intermediate period of time, the preceding undefined geological
periods had terminated, a new series of events commenced, and the
work of the first morning of this new creation was the calling
forth of light from a temporary darkness, which had overspread
the ruins of the ancient earth.”
Such was the modified diluvial theory in which Dr. Buckland brought
the weight of his authority to support the views now generally
received.
_The last Religious Martyrs in England._
In the seventeenth century, as theology became more reasonable it
became less confident, and therefore more merciful. Seventeen years
after the publication of Hooker’s _Ecclesiastical Polity_, two men
were publicly burned by the English bishops for holding heretical
opinions. These were Legat, burned by King, Bishop of London;
and Wightman, by Neyle, of Lichfield. They suffered in 1611.
“But this,” says Buckle, “was the last gasp of expiring bigotry;
and since that memorable day, the soil of England has never been
stained by the blood of a man who has suffered for his religious
creed.”
“It should be mentioned, to the honour of the Court of Chancery,
that late in the sixteenth and early in the seventeenth century,
its powers were exerted against the exaction of those cruel laws
by which the Church of England was allowed to persecute men who
differed from its own views.”--See _Lord Campbell’s Chancellors_,
vol. ii.
_Liberty of Conscience._
The principle of perfect respect for Liberty of Conscience is the
last, the hardest, the most precious conquest of humanity over
itself. On its maintenance depends the only real assurance which
the world can have even of revealed truth; for where would be the
assurance even of revealed truth in a world of mental slaves?
England seems chosen as the guardian of liberty of conscience in
Europe at the present time. To guard it faithfully is her best
tribute to Heaven--her best title to the respect of all that is
good and noble in the world. That she has guarded it well will
be her glorious epitaph, when, in the revolutions of empire, her
power and wealth shall have become a legend of the past. Distance
and climate do not change principle. The conscience of the Hindoo
is conscience, however clouded, though declaimers may pretend
that good is evil and evil good, by the law of the prophet and
the institutes of Menu. If it were not so, it would be vain to
offer him a purer religion, for he would be incapable of seeing
that our religion is purer than his own. Double, treble the number
of your missionaries and your bishops. Speed in every way the
apostolic work of Christian love. But the sword is forbidden; and
not only the sword, but every influence that can compel or induce
the heathen to offer to the God of Truth the unholy tribute of a
hypocritical profession--the unclean sacrifice of a lie.--_Saturday
Review._
_Awful Judgments._
There cannot be a more impious abuse of the authority of the name
of God than its employment in solemn asseveration of the truth of
that which the utterer knows to be a lie. Such wickedness has been
marked with divine vengeance; and Dr. Watts has sought to impress
this fact upon the minds of children, in one of his “Divine Songs,”
telling us how
Ananias was struck dead,
Caught with a lie upon his tongue.
An instance of this heinous sin is recorded upon the Market-cross
at Devizes, in Wiltshire, in these words:--
“The Mayor and Corporation of Devizes avail themselves of the
stability of this building, to transmit to future time, the record
of an awful event, which occurred in this market-place in the year
1753; hoping that such record may serve as a salutary warning
against the danger of impiously invoking Divine vengeance, or of
calling on the holy name of God to conceal the devices of falsehood
and fraud.
“On Thursday, the 25th of January, 1753, Ruth Pierce, of Potterne,
in this county, agreed with three other women to buy a sack of
wheat in the market, each paying her due proportion towards the
same; one of these women, in collecting the several quotas of
money, discovered a deficiency, and demanded of Ruth Pierce the sum
which was wanting to make good the amount; Ruth Pierce protested
that she had paid her share, and said, _She wished she might drop
down dead, if she had not_. She rashly repeated this awful wish,
when, to the consternation and terror of the surrounding multitude,
she instantly fell down, and expired, having the money concealed in
her hand.”
It is not long since, in one of the parish churches of Canterbury,
the officiating minister alluded to an awful instance of the
interposition of the Almighty, which was presented a few miles
from the above city. A woman who was accused of theft positively
denied it, and in her protestations solemnly appealed to God in
testification of her innocence, and wished she might be struck dead
if guilty. She had no sooner used the expression than she fell a
lifeless corpse. The articles imputed to her as having been stolen
were afterwards found in her house.
_Christian Education._
If we look to the nature of the human mind itself, if we consider
its longings, how comprehensive is its range, how great its
capabilities, how little its best and highest faculties are
satisfied with the objects that are placed before us upon earth,
how many marks this dispensation bears of being a temporary, and,
as it were, an initiatory dispensation, is it not monstrous to
pretend that we are giving to the human being such a cultivation as
befits his nature and his destiny, when we put out of sight all the
higher and more permanent purposes for which he lives, and confine
our provision to matters which, however valuable (and valuable they
are in their own place), yet of themselves bear only upon earthly
ends? Is it not a fraud upon ourselves and our fellow-creatures? is
it not playing and paltering with words? is it not giving stones
to those who ask for bread, if, when man, so endowed as he is, and
with such high necessities, demands of his fellow-men that he may
be rightly trained, we impart to him, under the name of an adequate
education, that which has no reference to his most essential
capacities and wants, and which limits the immortal creature to
objects that perish in the use?--_W. E. Gladstone._
On the whole subject of National Education, how enlarged and
liberal are the views taken by the Bishop of Oxford, in one of
his recent Sermons. “Our National Education is at this moment
surrounded by many difficulties. Among the chief of these are
those which spring from the relations of our Church and State.
There is no use in disguising from ourselves the fact that these
questions exist, and some of them press for settlement. I believe
it to be the more manly and the more Christian way freely to admit
their existence, and to lend our aid with all honesty in working
out their true solution. We cannot, of course, concede one of our
principles. We must teach the truth as we have received it--whole,
unmixed, uncompromised. But this point secured, whatever we can do
we ought to do, by a kindly regard to the feelings of others, by an
allowable co-operation and all lawful concession, to loose the hard
knot which discord has tied, and unite the hearts of this people in
the mighty work of educating its youth to do good service to our
God, and to maintain truth and righteousness throughout his world.”
_The Book of Psalms._
On the Psalms, that inexhaustible treasury of divine wisdom and
prophetic inspiration, Hooker asks:
“What is there necessary for man to know which the Psalms are
not able to teach? They are to beginners an easy and familiar
introduction--a mighty augmentation of all virtue and knowledge;
in such as are entered before, a strong confirmation to the most
perfect amongst others. Heroical magnanimity, exquisite justice,
grave moderation, exact wisdom, repentance unfeigned, unwearied
patience, the mysteries of God, the sufferings of Christ, the
terrors of wrath, the comforts of grace, the works of Providence
over this world, and the promised joy of the world which is
to come, all good necessarily to be either known, or done, or
had--this one celestial fountain yieldeth. Let there be any grief
or disease incident to the soul of man--any wound or sickness
named, for which there is not in this treasure-house a present
comfortable remedy at all times ready to be found.”
With what satisfaction the pious Bishop Horne composed his
Commentary on these sacred lyrics of the Sweet Singer of Israel,
may be judged from the following passage from the Commentator’s
Preface:
“Could the author flatter himself that any one would have the
pleasure in reading the following exposition which he hath had
in writing it, he would not fear the loss of his labour. The
employment detached him from the bustle and hurry of life, the
din of politics, and the noise of folly. Vanity and vexation
flew away for a season; care and disquietude came not near his
dwelling. He arose fresh as the morning to his task; the silence
of the night invited him to pursue it; and he can truly say that
food and rest were not preferred before it. Every Psalm improved
infinitely on his acquaintance with it, and no one gave him
uneasiness but the last; for then he grieved that his work was
done. Happier hours than those which have been spent in these
meditations on the Songs of Sion, he never expects to see in
this world. Very pleasantly did they pass, and move smoothly and
swiftly along; for when thus engaged, he counted no time. They
are gone, but have left a relish and a fragrance on the mind, and
the remembrance of them is sweet.”
Elsewhere the Bishop thus characterizes the Psalms:
“Calculated alike to profit and to please, they inform the
understanding, elevate the affections, and entertain the
imagination. Indited under the influence of Him to whom all
hearts are known, and all events foreknown, they suit mankind in
all situations; grateful as the manna which descended from above,
and conformed itself to every palate. The fairest productions of
human wit, after a few perusals, like gathered flowers, wither
in our hands and lose their fragrancy; but these unfading plants
of Paradise become, as we are accustomed to them, still more and
more beautiful. Their bloom appears to be daily heightened; fresh
odours are emitted and new sweets extracted from them. He who
hath once tasted their excellences will desire to taste them yet
again; and he who tastes them oftenest will relish them best.”
The pure and sweet feeling with which this excellent prelate dwells
on his past labours, if labours they can be called, could scarcely
have been greater, had he foreseen the immense circulation which
his work enjoys, and the universal esteem in which it is held.
A more recent Commentator concludes his remarks on the last Psalm
with these touching words: “I shall never again so dwell upon them
on earth. My God! prepare me for heaven, and for joining there in
the songs of the redeemed in the high services of eternity.”
_The Book of Job._
Diversified are the opinions of the most learned critics concerning
the author of the Book of Job, the period at which it was written,
in what part of the world the events there recorded occurred; and,
though last not the least difficult and perplexing, whether the
whole composition may not be regarded rather as allegorical than
natural and true. Dr. Mason Good observes of this poem, in his
Introductory Dissertation on the Book of Job:--
“It is the most extraordinary composition of any age or country,
and has an equal claim to the attention of the theologian, the
scholar, the antiquary, and the zoologist--to the man of taste,
of genius, and of religion. Amidst the books of the Bible it
stands alone, and though its sacred character is sufficiently
attested both by the Jewish and Christian Scriptures, it is
isolated in its language, in its manner, and in its matter.
Nothing can be purer than its morality, nothing sublimer than
its philosophy, nothing simpler than its ritual, nothing more
majestic than its creed.”
Perhaps all our readers may not be aware that, with the exception
of the first two chapters and the last ten verses, the book is
poetic--it is everywhere reducible to the hemistich form; but
whether it is to be considered as dramatic or epic has not been
determined. That Moses was the author of this sublime composition
seems now almost universally agreed upon by learned commentators.
The work itself, moreover, possesses internal evidence to the
truth of this statement, many parts of it harmonizing with his
acknowledged writings. Dr. Mason Good contends that--
“In his style the author appears to have been equally master of
the simple and the sublime--to have been minutely and elaborately
acquainted with the astronomy, natural history, and general
science of his age--to have been a Hebrew by birth and native
language, and an Arabian by long residence and local study; and
finally, that he must have flourished and composed the work
before the Egyptian Exody. Now it is obvious that every one of
these features is consummated in Moses, and in Moses alone;
and that the whole of them gives us his complete lineaments
and character; whence there can be no longer any difficulty in
determining as to the real author of the poem. Instructed in
all the learning of Egypt, it appears little doubtful that he
composed it during some part of his forty years’ residence with
the hospitable Jethro, in that district of Idumæa which was named
Midian.”
Against the supposition that Moses was the author of the Book of
Job, it has been alleged that the word “Jehovah” frequently occurs
in it--a word which was first revealed to Moses by the Almighty,
preparatory to his undertaking the deliverance of the Hebrew
nation. But, although we are told that this term was communicated
to Moses for the first time in Exodus vi. 3, we yet find it used
nearly thirty times in the Book of Genesis; we may, therefore, with
Dr. Mason Good, suppose that he was in possession of this name
long before the promulgation of this poem; and the novelty of the
communication might have induced him at once to exchange whatever
term he had antecedently employed for this new and consecrated term.
It seems now to be universally agreed upon that the land of Arabia
Petræa, on the south-western coast of the lake Asphaltites, in a
line between Egypt and Philistia, surrounded by Kedar, Teman, and
Midian, all of which are districts of Arabia Petræa, situated in
Idumæa, is the land of Edom or Esau. With regard to the supposition
of some learned authors, that the book is wholly allegorical,
Dr. Chalmers does not concur in such a conjecture. He appears to
have thoroughly studied the arguments both for and against such
a theory, and to have decided against it. He is conclusively
of opinion that Job was a real character, and that the history
recorded of him is a statement of facts. “There is,” says our
author, “a very distinct scriptural testimony for the inspiration
of his book in 1 Cor. iii. 19.”
Uz, where Job lived, was Edom. “We disclaim,” says Dr. Chalmers,
“all consent to this being an allegorical and not a literal
history; and we found our disclaimer on the subsequent references
in the Bible to Job as to a real personage; as in James, v. 11, and
still more in Ezekiel xiv. 14-20, where he is ranked with Noah and
Daniel, whose reality no one doubts. Would the prophet have thus
mixed a fictitious with real and historical characters?”
It is also worthy of remark, that the history of Job, although
much altered from the original, is still well known among the
Asiatics. Though our author does not consider Job’s history, as a
whole, as being allegorical, yet he thinks the transcendental or
supernatural parts of it may be so; and he compares these passages
with those in 1 Kings xxii. 19; Zech. iii. 1; and Rev. xii., all
of them representations more or less resembling similar ones in
Job.--_Times journal.
APPENDIX.
_Great Precedence Question._
The great question relative to precedence which agitated the cities
of Dublin and Edinburgh in 1863, arose at the presentation of
addresses to the Queen at Windsor by the respective corporations of
those two cities, on the occasion of the marriage of the Prince of
Wales, when the corporation of Dublin was given precedence, under
protest on the part of the corporation of Edinburgh.
The question was subsequently referred to the chief Irish heraldic
authority, the Ulster King of Arms, Sir Bernard Burke, LL.D., and
the report which Ulster thereupon wrote was ordered by the House of
Commons to be printed. Ulster begins by stating that
“The claim of Edinburgh to the higher precedence is made to rest on
the following reasons:--1. The Scottish Act of Union being earlier
in date than the Irish Act of Union. 2. The arms of Scotland being
quartered in the royal shield before the arms of Ireland. 3. By the
Acts of Union of Scotland and Ireland, the Peers of Scotland taking
rank before the Peers of Ireland.”
However, “Dublin founds its claim to precedence on broader and
more intelligible grounds; viz.--1. Prescriptive right of Dublin
as second city in the dominion of England from the reign of King
Henry II., a right unaffected in any way by the Acts of Union. 2.
Greater antiquity of the city of Dublin. 3. Greater antiquity of
the charters of incorporation of the city of Dublin. 4. Seat of
Government and the Viceroyalty being still retained in Dublin. 5.
Greater and more dignified privileges of the corporation of Dublin.”
Ulster then shows that the quartering of the royal arms, which
were capriciously varied at different periods, proves nothing in
favour of Edinburgh; and that, by her Act of Union, Scotland was
amalgamated with England as Great Britain; while Ireland, though
united, preserved in her union a quasi separate position, being
still a viceroyalty, with a vice-king and court, having their
capital in Dublin.
He concludes by urging that, from the Lord Mayor and Corporation
of Dublin being privileged to present their addresses to the
Sovereign on the throne at St. James’s, Edinburgh not having that
privilege,--and from the immense antiquity of the city of Dublin,
Dublin is clearly entitled to precedence.
Sir George Grey transmitted this report of Ulster to
Garter-King-of-Arms, Sir Charles Young, D.C.L., F.S.A.; Garter gave
an opinion, which was also ordered by the House of Commons to be
printed. Garter, in his opinion, inclines in favour of Edinburgh,
on the grounds--1st, That Scotland occupies the second quarter in
the royal shield; 2nd, that England itself became on the accession
of James I. an “appanage of the Scottish crown;” 3rd, that as the
peers of Scotland were given special precedence by the Irish Act of
Union, all other precedence followed “by analogy;” and 4th, that
the Mayor of Dublin was not “Lord” Mayor till 1665, while Maitland
avers that the style of “Lord” Provost was enjoyed by the chief
magistrate of Edinburgh in 1609.
A remark of Sir George Grey’s in the House of Commons, wrongly
reported, led to the belief that this opinion of Garter was to
decide the question. But, on the contrary, the discussion was
continued.
Ulster gave, in reply to Garter, a second opinion, which was
ordered by the House of Commons to be printed. In his further
observations Ulster commences by saying: “The point at issue is
not a question of nationalities, or of the relative superiority of
Ireland over Scotland, or Scotland over Ireland. That question, a
very invidious one, is not now raised, and will, I trust, never be:
the only result which could arise from such a discussion would be
to wound the feelings and love of country of one or other of two
very sensitive peoples.... The only question to be determined is
simply which of the two corporations has the higher precedence?--a
right to be determined by municipal charters, royal grants, and
other legal evidence.” Ulster then still insists on the far longer
existence of Dublin. He repudiates the idea altogether that England
was an “appanage” of Scotland, any more than France was an appanage
of Navarre, when Henry IV., King of the latter country, inherited
the crown of France. Appanage has not that meaning. Garter is wrong
as to the date of the Mayor of Dublin being “Lord” Mayor in 1665:
he was made so by Charles I. 29th July, 1642, while the Provost was
not “Lord” Provost till 1667. Ulster concludes for Dublin, on the
greater antiquity of Dublin’s charters over those of Edinburgh, on
it being contrary to all law to construe acts of Parliament “by
analogy,” and on the undoubted fact, that George IV. conferred in
1821 on Dublin, which Sir Robert Peel emphatically styled “the
second city of the Empire,” the exclusive (except as to the city
of London) honour of presenting addresses to the Sovereign on the
throne at Windsor or St. James’s.
With these observations of Ulster the question rests in abeyance.
FOOTNOTES:
[22] The Bishop has elsewhere observed, with respect to what he
terms “the prescriptive rights of the Church,” that, “there always
must be subjects upon which good men, from the mere natural law of
the mind contemplating one side of a subject with greater interest
than another, will arrive at different conclusions.”
[23] See _Times_, May 2nd and 5th, 1863.
[24]
“Atheist, use thine eyes;
And having view’d the order of the skies,
Think (if thou canst) that matter blindly hurl’d
Without a guide, should frame this wondrous world.”
_Creech._
[25] In Blackfriars: originally the Palace of Bridewell, and
subsequently a House of Correction.
[26] See the beautiful poem entitled, “Intimations of Immortality.”
INDEX.
Accidents on Railways, 200.
Accommodation Bill, never sign, 168.
Adams, President, Ancestry of, 18.
Advocate, Payment of, 109.
Age of the People, 233.
Air, Fresh, Worth of, 241.
America, Discovery of, 79.
Ancestors of Washington, 16.
Ancestry of President Adams, 18.
Anti-Corn Law League, Origin of, 37.
Appellate Jurisdiction of the House of Lords, 108.
Archæology and Manufactures, 229.
Aristocracy, the word, 99.
Armstrong, Sir W., on “Seeds of Invention,” 176.
Arrest of the Body after Death, 133.
Art, Good and Cheap, 230.
Arts, False, advancing True, 247.
Astronomy, Limitations of, 213.
Atheism, Folly of, 276.
Attorney, do not make your Son, 108.
Augustine, St., Mission of, 77.
Bacon, Roger, Science of, 173.
Balloon Ascents, High Temperatures in, 218.
Bank Failures, Losses by, 165.
Bar, Success at, Secret of, 107.
Barometer for Farmers, 222.
Baronetcy, Expense of, 97.
Bayonet, History of the, 228.
Benefit of Clergy, 116.
Bidder, Mr. George, C.E., 146.
Blindness, on, 235.
Bonaparte, the House of, 20.
Border Marriages, 120.
Bowyer, Sir George, on Public Executions, 143, 144.
Brain Disease, Dr. Forbes Winslow on, 257.
Brass, Antiquity of, 191.
Bridewell of the City of London, 135.
Britain, Great, on the World’s Map, 80.
Britain, Roman Civilization of, 61.
Brodie, Sir B., on Mind and Organization, 253.
Brunswick, House of, and Casting Vote, 78.
Burial of Sir John Moore, 15.
Burying Gold and Silver, 155.
Calculation, Mental, Precocious, 146.
Cambridge Man, 76.
Cancer, Remedies for, 245.
Catholic Emancipation and Sir Robert Peel, 53.
Castlereagh, Lord, at the Congress of Vienna, 33.
Cato-street Conspiracy, the, 34.
Cavour’s Estimate of Napoleon III., 51.
Celtes, what are they? 60.
Centre of the Earth, 206.
Change of Surname, 102.
Changes, a few of the World’s, 55.
Chartists, the, in 1848, 41.
Christmas, Past and Present, 266.
Church, Compulsory Attendance at, 117.
Civilization, the Lowest, 67.
Civilization, true Source of, 66.
Crown, the Imperial State, 93.
Coal-mine, deepest in England, 188.
Coal Resources, our, 185-189.
Coal, Theory of, 185.
Coburg, House of, 53.
Cockfighting, Law against, 136.
Coin, Counterfeit, 161.
Coinage, Wear and Tear of, 161.
Coleridge, Sir John, on Trial by Jury, 112.
Colonial Empire, British, 82.
Comfort, what is it? 69.
Common Law, 104.
Concrete not new, 190.
Congregational Church, First in England, 276.
Conscience, Liberty of, 281.
Conscience, the National, 11.
Consumption not hopeless, 238.
Convicts, What is to be done with our, 138.
Cooling of the Earth, 207.
Copper-sheathing Ships’ bottoms, 190.
Copper-smelting, 191.
Copyright, the Law of, 124.
Correlation of Physical Forces, 180.
Coup d’Etat Predictions, 44.
Cross, Mark of the, 118.
Crowns, English, 93.
Curiosities of the Exchequer, 151.
Curiosities of the Statute Law, 105.
“Custom, the Queen of the World,” 74.
Death-bed of the Doubting, 269.
Death-Warrants, 140.
Deodands, Law of, 132.
Despot deceived, 66.
Deville, the Phrenologist, 254.
Diamond, Brilliancy of, 191.
“Dieu et mon Droit,” 91.
Distances measured, 149.
Discoverers, not Inventors, 172.
Doubt, our Age of, 270.
Doubt about Religion, 267.
Druids, and their Healing Art, 245.
Earth, Cooling of the, 207.
Earth and Man compared, 206.
Earth, how it was peopled, 57.
Earth, Centre of the, 206.
Earth, Distance of, from the Sun, 215.
Earth’s Surface, Inequalities of, 210.
Earth, why presumed to be Solid, 206.
Education, Christian, 283.
Egyptology, what is it? 271.
Eloquence of the Day, 6.
Employment, giving, 168.
Enamel, French, 232.
Enghien, the Duke of, 24.
English People, the, 84.
English, what they owe to Naturalized Foreigners, 203.
Evidence, what is it? 110.
Exchequer, Curiosities of, 151.
Executions, Public, 142.
Feasts, Moveable, 266.
Fees, Ecclesiastical, 153.
Field-Marshal, the rank, 101.
Fitzroy, Admiral, on the Weather, 218.
Flint, use of, in Pottery, 197.
Foot, the Roman, 147.
“Fourth Estate, the,” 5.
Fractured Leg, how restored, 246.
Freedom, Love of, 65.
Free-speaking, Whately on, 9.
French Emperorship, Revival of, 43.
Friendly Societies’ Laws, 166.
Game Laws, the, 139.
Gardens, Law of, 131.
Gavelkind Customs, 126.
Geology, Revelations of, 58.
George III., what drove him mad, 27.
Gibbet, the Last in England, 141.
Glory of the Past, 72.
Gold and Silver, burying, 155-157.
Gold seeking, Results of, 157.
Gold, Standard, 162.
“Great Events from Little Causes spring,” 76.
Gretna Green Marriages, 120.
Growth, Geological, 204.
Guilds, Ancient and Modern Benefit Clubs, 75.
Gunpowder, Philosophy of, 192.
Gustavus III. of Sweden, 38.
Hair suddenly changing Colour, 237.
Half-mad, the, 258.
Hands, why do we shake? 67.
Head, Sir F., on Public Executions, 142.
Hearing, Sense of, 234.
Heart, the Human, 234.
Heat and Motion, Identity of, 208.
Heat, Universal Source of, 209.
Heir to the British Throne always in Opposition, 4.
Heralds’ College, 86.
Heraldry, Worth of, 85.
Hoarding Money, 157.
Holding over after Lease, 125.
Hop Duty, Abolition of, 125.
Horse-power, calculation of, 198.
Horses, Value of, 166.
Icebergs and the Weather, 223.
Ignorance and Irresponsibility, 137.
Imitative Gold Chains, 232.
Imperial State Crown, the, 93.
“Implements in the Drift,” 205.
“In the Beginning,” 279.
Innate Ideas and Pre-existence of Souls, 277.
Insanity, Causes of, 256.
Insurance, Origin of, 163.
Insurance Policies, 130.
Invasion of England, 47.
Invasion of England projected by Napoleon I., 21.
Invasions and Railways, 202.
Inventions and Discoveries, contemporary, 227.
Irish, the, and Potatoes, 81.
Irish-speaking Population, 81.
Irish Titles of Honour, 87.
Irish Union, the, 19.
Iron as a Building Material, 189.
Jerusalem and Nimroud, 272.
Jewellery, Imitative, 231.
Job, the Book of, 285.
Judge’s Black Cap, origin of, 141.
Judgments, Awful, 282.
Jurors, Attendance of, 113.
Justice, Cupar and Jedburgh, 138.
Jury, Trial by, 111.
King’s-Book, the, 116.
King and Queen, 89.
Knighthood, Expense of, 97.
Law, Statute and Common, 104.
Legal Hints, 129.
Legitimacy and Government, 5.
Lenses, Burning, 182.
Leonard’s, St., Lord, his Handy-Book, 129.
Leopold, King of the Belgians, 54.
Libel, the Law of, 113.
Libel, Propagation of, 115.
Liberty of Conscience, 281.
Life, Periods and Conditions of, 233.
Life, Uncertainty of, 262.
Life, What do we know of it, 70.
Light, Velocity of, how measured, 216.
Lightning, Death by, 226.
Lightning, Force of, 226.
Lime, Phosphate of, what is it? 194.
London, Ancient and Modern, 81.
London, the See of, 96.
Loot, derivation of, 229.
Lottery, the First, 160.
Louis Philippe, Fall of, 40.
Lucifer Match, Safety, 195.
Luxury, what is it? 70.
Machiavelism, 9.
Majesty, title of, 90.
Marriage Fines, 119.
Marriage Law of England, 118.
Marriage, Solemnization of, 123.
Marriages, Irregular, 120.
Martyrs, Religious, Last, in England, 281.
May Fair Marriages, 120.
Mechanical Arts, the, 178.
Mechanical Effects, Imposing, 197.
Medicine, brief History of, 248.
Medicine, what has Science done for it? 249.
Melbourne, Lord, Statesmanship of, 44.
Metals, Precious, What becomes of, 158.
Meteorological Observations, Value of, 218.
Methylated Spirit, 193.
Militia, what it can do, 48.
Mind and Organization, Relations of, 253.
Mineralogy, Uses of, 185.
Mining, Vicissitudes of, 183-185.
Ministries, Whig and Tory, 2.
Money, Interest of, 162, 163.
Money Panic of 1832, 36.
Moonlight and Blindness, 227.
Moonlight, Effect of, on Vegetation, 227.
Moore, Sir John, Burial of, 15.
Moveable Feasts, 266.
Mutiny at the Nore, 52.
Napoleon I., Downfal of, predicted, 29.
Napoleon III., Estimate of, by Count Cavour, 51.
Napoleon III., early Life of, 43.
“Nation of Shopkeepers,” 12.
National Conscience, 11.
Nature’s Ventilation, 240.
Naval Heroes, 50.
Northwick, Lord, his Pictures, 133.
Numbers descriptive of Distance, 146.
Observance, Ungraceful, 45.
Oil, Effect of, in stilling Waves, 180.
Opinion, Popular, Worth of, 8.
Over-Speculation, 165.
Oxford, Bishop of, on Rationalism, 273.
Oxford, Bishop of, on Religious Doubt, 267-270.
Oxford Man and Cambridge Man, 75.
Pardon, Queen’s, 140.
Parliament, Placemen in, 99.
Parliament, Precedence in, 99.
Parliament, Seats in, sold, 99.
Parliament, Speakers of, 10.
Partition of Poland, 46.
Past, the Guide for the Present, 79.
Patents, Object of, 177.
Patriot, the truest, the greatest Hero, 71.
Peace Statesmanship, 15.
Pear-flavouring, New, 192.
Peel, Sir Robert, and Catholic Emancipation, 53.
Peers, New, 100.
Pensions, Noteworthy, 56.
Perfumes, Nature of, 239.
Perspective, what is it? 181.
Philosopher and Historian, the, 1.
Philosophers, the old, 71.
Physic, Element of, in Medical Practice, 250.
Physician, the best, 260.
Physicians’ Fees, 251.
Pillory, the, in England, 139.
Pitt, Mr., Last Moments of, 25.
Pitting in Small-pox prevented, 251.
Poisoning, Remedy for, 259.
Poland, the Partition of, 46.
Political Cunning, 100.
Politics not yet a Science, 1.
Popular Opinion, Worth of, 8.
Potatoes the national food of the Irish, 81.
Pottery, Manufacture of, 196.
Precedence of Dublin and Edinburgh, 287.
Preferment, Church, 15.
Press, Power of the, 6.
Press, Writing for the, 6.
Principal and Agent, 129.
Protectionist Party, 4.
Psalms, the Book of, 283.
Punishment, Baron Alderson on, 145.
Queen Anne’s Bounty, 154.
Queen’s Messengers, 95.
Queen’s Serjeants, Queen’s Counsel, and Serjeants-at-Law, 107.
Queen, Presents and Letters to, 95.
Queen’s State Crown, 93.
Quietus and Bodkin, 153.
Quipus, the Peruvian, 148.
Railway Accidents, 200.
Railway, Social Effect of the, 200.
Railways, British, and Roman Roads, 62.
Railways and Invasions, 202.
Rain, and St. Swithun, 224.
Rainfall in London, 225.
Rainy Saints’ Days, 225.
Rationalism, what is it? 273.
Rats and Ratting, Political, 4.
Recreations of the People, 244.
Rector, Induction of, 115.
Religion, Doubt about, 267-270.
Religious Forebodings, 275.
Rent, Origin of, 150.
Republic, Worth of a, 14.
Revenue, Public, what becomes of, 153.
Revolutions, Great Sufferer by, 37.
Revolutions, Results of, 13.
Roman Civilization of Britain, 61.
Roman Roads and British Railways, 62.
Russell Family, the, 100.
Russia, how bound to Germany, 50.
Sabbath for Professional Men, 278.
“Safe Men” for Office, 14.
Safety Match, the, 195.
Salutation, Various Modes of, 68.
“Sangrado, Dr.,” original of, 247.
Sanitary Hints, 242.
Saxons, Domestic Life of, 64.
Sceptics, Hint to, 271.
Science, the One, 174.
Science, Practical, 178.
Science, Social, Changes in, 171.
Science, what has it accomplished? 171.
Scotch Thistle, 88.
Sea, Chemistry of, 212.
Seas, Heavy, and Large Vessels, 199.
Sea, its Perils, 213.
“Seeds of Invention,” 176.
“Seeing is believing,” 255.
Servants’ Characters, 131.
Shamrock, the, 87.
Ships, Sheathing with Copper, 190.
Shorthand Writers, 7.
Shyness, how it spoils Enjoyment, 73.
Sky, Beauty of the, 217.
Sky, Blue Colour of, 216.
Sleeping and Dreaming, 236.
Sleeping, Position in, 237.
Souls, Pre-existence of, 277.
Sovereign, Coinage of, 160.
Speakers of the Houses of Parliament, 10.
Special Pleading, what was it? 110.
Spectacles, How to wear, 183.
Spirit, Methylated, 193.
Spontaneous Generation, 181.
“Star-spangled Banner” of the United States, 18.
Statute Law, 104.
Steam-boat, the First, 198.
Stereoscope, the, 182.
Stockbrokers, 164.
Stone Age, the, 59, 205.
Storm Glass, 223.
Sudden Deaths, various, 262-265.
Suicides, Motives for, 259.
Sun-force, on, 175.
Sun, Distance of, from the Earth, 215.
Surgery, Improved, 246.
Surname, Change of, 102.
Swithun, St., his true history, 224.
Tally, antiquity of the, 152.
Teeth, Care of the, 234.
Telegram, Origin of, 229.
Theology, what is it? 274.
Theory and Practice, 177.
Thistle, the Scotch, 88.
Ticket-of-Leave Men, 137.
Tory Ministry, 2.
Town and Country Air, 243.
Treasure-Trove, Usage of, 126-129.
Trial, what is it? 111.
Trial by Jury, 111.
Tribute-money, 159.
Trinity High-Water Mark, 150.
Underneath the Skin, 253.
Union, the Irish, 19.
Union-Jack, the, 101.
Utter-Barristers, 109.
Ventilation, Artificial, 241.
Victoria, 92.
Vienna Congress, Lord Castlereagh at, 33.
Vitiating a Sale, 130.
Votes, memorable, 78.
Wages heightened by Machinery, 167.
Wales, Prince of, his Plume and Motto, 91.
Wars by trivial Causes, 77.
Washington, Ancestors of, 16.
Water, Running Force of, 180.
Waterloo, Battle of, 31, 32.
Waterloo, Prince of, 96.
Watt and Telford compared, 177.
“We,” the Royal, 90.
Weather Signs, various, 220-222.
Weights and Measures, Uniformity of, 149.
Wellington’s Defence of the Waterloo Campaign, 32.
Wellington’s Military Administration, 38.
Wellington predicts the Peninsular Campaign, 30.
Whig and Tory Ministries, 2.
Whiteboys, 49.
Wild Oats, 73.
Will, Duty of Making, 133.
Will, Don’t make your own, 134.
Wills, making of, 170.
Wills, a Year’s, 169.
Wood, how long will it last? 194.
Wood, what is it? 194.
Wounds, Compensation for, 260.
Wounds, New Remedy for, 260.
Yellow Fever, Cure for, 240.
THE END.
Savill and Edwards, Printers, 4, Chandos-street, Covent-garden.
COMPANION VOLUME TO “THINGS NOT GENERALLY KNOWN.”
_Now ready, in small 8vo, 3s. 6d., cloth_,
Things to be Remembered in Daily Life.
With Personal Experiences and Recollections.
By JOHN TIMBS, F.S.A.,
Author of “Things not Generally Known.”
CONTENTS.
TIME:
Poetry of Time.
Time--Past, Present, and Future.
Measurement of Time.
Sun-dials and the Hour-glass.
Celebrated Clocks and Watches.
Early Rising.
Art of Employing Time.
Value of Method.
Habits of the Great Duke of Wellington.
LIFE AND LENGTH OF DAYS:
First Twenty years of Life.
What is a Generation?
Average Duration of Life.
What is Memory?
Consolation in Growing Old.
Historic Traditions through Few Links.
Longevity in Families.
Longevity and Localities.
Longevity of Classes.
Future Earthly Existence of the Human Race.
THE SCHOOL OF LIFE:
What is Education?
Teaching Young Children.
Education at Home.
Business of Education.
Classical Education.
School Reform.
Unsound Teaching.
Self-Formation. “Cramming.”
Mathematics. Aristotle.
Geology in Education.
The best Education.
Books for the Young.
Dictionary English.
What is Argument?
English Style. Art of Writing.
BUSINESS-LIFE:
Want of a Pursuit. Worth of Energy.
Choice of a Profession.
Official Life and Qualifications.
Public Speaking--Contemporary Orators.
Men of Business.
Security of Character.
Eminent Engineers and Mechanicians.
Scientific Farming.
How Large Fortunes are made.
Civic Worthies of the Present Century.
Working Authors and Artists.
Wear and Tear of Public Life.
HOME TRAITS:
Love of Home. Family Portraits.
How to Keep Friends.
THE SPIRIT OF THE AGE:
Progress of Knowledge.
Time and Improvement.
Evil Influences. Worldly Morality.
Speaking the Truth.
Restlessness and Enterprise.
Marvels of the Universe.
WORLD-KNOWLEDGE:
Predictions of Success.
Management of Time.
Ease of Mind. The Good Man’s Life.
CRITICAL OPINIONS OF THE ABOVE WORK.
“Another of Mr. Timbs’s useful books. It is full of information,
carefully compiled. Anecdotes are interspersed, bearing happily
upon each topic.”--_London Review._
“Mr. Timbs’s personal experiences and recollections are peculiarly
valuable, as embodying the observations of an acute, intelligent,
and cultivated mind. As a companion to _Things not Generally
Known_, by the same painstaking Author, _Things to be Remembered_
must certainly become equally popular. More reflective, and more
original, and not less truthful in its deductions, _Things to
be Remembered_ carries with it an air of vitality which augurs
well for perpetuation. It cannot fail to find many grateful
readers.”--_Observer._
“_Things to be Remembered_ is crammed with information, and written
with consecutiveness, care, and sometimes real eloquence. Equally
interesting and instructive with its predecessor, _Things not
generally Known_, the present _Things to be Remembered_ is much
more reflective in its character, and will most likely possess a
special charm for many readers on this account. It has our most
cordial commendation.”--_Sunday Times._
“A pleasant companion, and the number of useful hints it contains
should make every reader grateful to the painstaking and thoughtful
compiler. It is an excellent present for young people, or town
lending-libraries.”--_The Era._
“Mr. Timbs’s volume may be found a useful companion to a distressed
_littérateur_ who wants an opening anecdote for an article upon the
last social topic of the day.”--_Parthenon._
“This is perhaps the most reflective of all Mr. Timbs’s many useful
books. We have no doubt that as a companion volume to _Things not
Generally Known_, this of _Things to be Remembered in Daily Life_
will be as popularly received as its predecessor. We cordially
recommend the book.”--_The Builder._
“Here we have our indefatigable friend pouring out the contents of
his well-filled note-books, and richly-stored memory, upon those
vast themes, Time and Human Life, which, as he well observes,
are ‘great matters for so small a book.’ And, while Mr. Timbs
claims for this volume the merit of being more reflective than its
predecessors, those who read it will add to that merit--that it is
equally instructive.”--_Notes and Queries._
“Of all the contributions to collected and condensed literature
for which the public is indebted to Mr. Timbs, this little volume
will, probably, be the favourite. The author sets down many of
the results of the experience of a long life, in which truthful
observation has been the cardinal aim. In the sections devoted to
‘The School of Life,’ and ‘The Spirit of the Age,’ the calm and
mature judgment, and the common sense of the writer, render his
precepts practical and valuable.... No portion of this book is
without value, and several biographical sketches which it contains
are of great interest.... _Things to be Remembered in Daily Life_
is a valuable and memorable book, and represents great research,
and considerable and arduous labour.”--_Morning Post._
LONDON:
W. KENT AND CO., PATERNOSTER ROW; AND LOCKWOOD AND CO., STATIONERS’
HALL COURT.
A LIST
OF
POPULAR WORKS
PUBLISHED BY
LOCKWOOD & CO.
7 STATIONERS’-HALL COURT, LONDON, E.C.
=The Boy’s Own Book=: A Complete Encyclopædia of all the
Diversions, Athletic, Scientific, and Recreative, of Boyhood
and Youth. With many Hundred Woodcuts, and Ten Vignette Titles,
beautifully printed in Gold. New Edition, greatly enlarged and
improved, price 8s. 6d. handsomely bound in cloth.
N.B.--This is the original and genuine ‘Boy’s Own Book,’ formerly
published by Mr. Bogue, and more recently by Messrs. Kent and Co.
Care should be taken, in ordering the above, to give the name of
either the former or present publishers, otherwise some inferior
book, with a nearly similar title, may be supplied.
=The Little Boy’s Own Book of Sports and Pastimes.= With numerous
Engravings. Abridged from the above. 16mo. price 3s. 6d. cloth.
‘=Many Happy Returns of the Day!=’ A Birthday Book. By
CHARLES and MARY COWDEN CLARKE, Authors of ‘The Concordance
to Shakespeare,’ &c. Beautifully illustrated by the Brothers
Dalziel. Small post 8vo. price 6s. cloth elegant, gilt edges.
‘Since the renowned volumes of “Peter Parley,” we know of no book
more likely to become popular among the young.’--CRITIC.
‘It will be as acceptable to the young as “Sandford and Merton”
was wont to be half a century since. The authors will henceforth
share the affections of the young with Hans Andersen, Peter
Parley, and the Brothers Grimm.’--PLYMOUTH JOURNAL.
‘Sure to be a favourite with the boys.’--LEADER.
‘The best book that can be found for a birthday present.’--COURT
JOURNAL.
‘An unobjectionable child’s book is the rarest of all books.
“Many Happy Returns of the Day” is not only this, but may rely,
without shrinking, upon its positive excellencies for a long and
deserved popularity.’--WESTMINSTER REVIEW.
=Victorian Enigmas=; being a Series of Enigmatical Acrostics
on Historical, Biographical, Geographical, and Miscellaneous
Subjects; combining Amusement with Exercise in the Attainment of
Knowledge. Promoted and encouraged by Royal Example. By CHARLOTTE
ELIZA CAPEL. Royal 16mo. cloth, elegantly printed, price 2s. 6d.
[Illustration: pointer] The idea for this entirely original style
of Enigmas is taken from one said to have been written by Her
Majesty for the Royal children, which, with its Solution, is given.
‘A capital game, and one of the very best of those commendable
mental exercises which test knowledge and stimulate study. To
the Queen’s loyal subjects it comes, moreover, additionally
recommended by the hint in the title-page and the statement in
the preface, that it is a game practised by Her Majesty and the
Royal children, if, indeed, it were not invented by the Queen
herself.’--CRITIC.
‘A good book for family circles in the long and dreary winter
evenings, inasmuch as it will enable the young to pass them away
both pleasantly and profitably.’
CITY PRESS.
JOHN TIMBS’S POPULAR WORKS.
‘Any one who reads and remembers Mr. Timbs’s encyclopædic
varieties should ever after be a good table talker, an excellent
companion for children, a “well-read person,” and a proficient
lecturer; for Mr. Timbs has stored up in this little volume
[“Things Not Generally Known”] more knowledge than is to be found
in a hundred books that might be named.’--ATHENÆUM.
=Things Not Generally Known Familiarly Explained.= A Book for
Old and Young. By JOHN TIMBS, F.S.A. First Series, Twenty-sixth
Thousand; and Second Series, Tenth Thousand. Fcap. 2s. 6d. each,
cloth.
‘A remarkably pleasant and instructive little book; a book as
full of information as a pomegranate is full of seed.’--PUNCH.
‘A very amusing miscellany.’--GENTLEMAN’S MAGAZINE.
‘And as instructive as it is amusing.’--NOTES AND QUERIES.
=Curiosities of Science=, Past and Present. By JOHN TIMBS, F.S.A.
First Series. Second Edition (‘Things Not Generally Known’ in
Science.) Fcap. 2s. 6d. cloth.
=Curiosities of Science=, Past and Present. By JOHN TIMBS, F.S.A.
Second Series. (‘Things Not Generally Known’ in Science). Fcap.
2s. 6d. cloth.
‘Marked by the tact, care, and usefulness which characterise all
Mr. Timbs’s books.’--NOTES AND QUERIES.
‘“Curiosities of Science” contains as much information in 250
pages as could otherwise be gleaned from reading elaborate
treatises on physical phenomena, acoustics, optics, astronomy,
geology, and palæontology, meteorology, nautical geography,
magnetism, the electric telegraph, &c.’--MINING JOURNAL.
=Curiosities of History.= A Book for Old and Young. (‘Things
Not Generally Known’ in History.) By JOHN TIMBS, F.S.A. Tenth
Thousand. Fcap. 2s. 6d. cloth.
This book is an extension of the design of its predecessor to
‘Things Not Generally Known in History;’ or, where known, but
imperfectly understood: as, in the salient points of history;
such historic incidents and classical quotations as are often
employed by public writers; and the _Popular Errors of History_,
in the section of ‘Historic Doubts.’ By these means the work
presents, in picturesque forms, many hundred Events and
Incidents, Sayings and Origins, and noteworthy instances of Human
Action.
‘We can conceive no more amusing book for the drawing-room, or
one more useful for the school-room.’--ART JOURNAL.
=Popular Errors Explained and Illustrated.= By JOHN TIMBS, F.S.A.
Sixth Thousand. Fcap. 2s. 6d. cloth.
‘We know of few better books for young persons; it is
instructive, entertaining, and reliable. This book cannot
but enhance the author’s repute for curious research, and
entertaining as well as instructive writing.’--BUILDER.
‘A work which ninety-nine persons out of every hundred would
take up whenever it came in their way, and would always learn
something from.’
ENGLISH CHURCHMAN.
=The Year-Book of Facts in Science and Art.= Exhibiting the
most important Improvements and Discoveries of the Past Year in
Mechanics and the Useful Arts, Natural Philosophy. Electricity,
Chemistry, Zoology and Botany, Geology and Mineralogy,
Meteorology and Astronomy. By JOHN TIMBS, F.S.A. With fine
Engraved Frontispiece and Vignette. Fcap. 5s. cloth.
[Illustration: pointer] This work, published annually, records
the proceedings of the principal Scientific Societies, and is
indispensable for such as wish to possess a faithful picture of the
latest novelties of Science and the Arts.
‘Ably and honestly compiled.’--ATHENÆUM.
THE INTERNATIONAL EXHIBITION.
=The Industry, Science, and Art of the Age;= or, the
International Exhibition of 1862, Popularly Described from
its Origin to its Close; including Details of the Principal
Objects and Articles Exhibited. By JOHN TIMBS, F.S.A., Author of
‘Curiosities of Science,’ &c. In a closely-printed volume, pp.
362, price 6s. cloth elegant; illustrated with a fine Photograph
from negatives specially retained for this work by the London
Stereoscopic Company.
‘A very timely, useful, and interesting compendium and memento of
the Exhibition of 1862.’--BUILDER.
‘Here is just as much preserved about the Exhibition as, when
it has been swept away, any one would care to know.’--MORNING
ADVERTISER.
=School-days of Eminent Men.= Containing Sketches of the Progress
of Education in England, from the reign of King Alfred to that
of Queen Victoria; and School and College Lives of the most
celebrated British Authors, Poets, and Philosophers; Inventors
and Discoverers; Divines, Heroes, Statesmen, and Legislators. By
JOHN TIMBS, F.S.A. Second Edition, entirely Revised and partly
Re-written. With a Frontispiece by John Gilbert, 13 Views of
Public Schools, and 20 Portraits by Harvey. Fcap. 5s. handsomely
bound in cloth.
[Illustration: pointer] Extensively used, and specially adapted
for a Prize-Book at Schools.
‘The idea is a happy one, and its execution equally so. It
is a book to interest all boys, but more especially those of
Westminster, Eton, Harrow, Rugby, and Winchester; for of these,
as of many other schools of high repute, the accounts are full
and interesting.’--NOTES AND QUERIES.
=Stories of Inventors and Discoverers in Science and= Useful
Arts. By JOHN TIMBS, F.S.A. Second Edition. With numerous
Illustrations. Fcap. 5s. cloth.
‘Another interesting and well-collected book, ranging from
Archimedes and Roger Bacon to the Stephensons.’--ATHENÆUM.
‘This last book is, we think, Mr. Timbs’s best.’--NATIONAL
MAGAZINE.
‘These stories by Mr. Timbs are as marvellous as the _Arabian
Nights’ Entertainments_, and are wrought into a volume of great
interest and worth.’--ATLAS.
=Painting Popularly Explained=, with Historical Sketches of the
Progress of the Art. By THOMAS JOHN GULLICK, Painter, and JOHN
TIMBS, F.S.A. With a Frontispiece and Vignette, in small 8vo. pp.
336, price 6s. cloth.
[Illustration: pointer] This work has been adopted as a Prize-Book
in the Schools of Art at South Kensington.
‘We can heartily recommend this volume to all who are desirous of
understanding what they admire in a good painting.’--DAILY NEWS.
=Something for Everybody=; and a Garland for the Year. By JOHN
TIMBS, F.S.A., Author of ‘Things Not Generally Known,’ &c. With a
Coloured Title, post 8vo. 5s. cloth.
‘This volume abounds with diverting and suggestive extracts.
It seems to us particularly well adapted for parochial lending
libraries.’--SATURDAY REVIEW, August 31, 1861.
‘Full of odd, quaint, out-of-the-way hits of information upon all
imaginable subjects is this amusing volume, wherein Mr. Timbs
discourses upon domestic, rural, metropolitan, and social life;
interesting nooks of English localities; time-honoured customs
and old-world observances; and, we need hardly add, Mr. Timbs
discourses well and pleasantly upon all.’--_Notes and Queries_,
July 20, 1861.
A SERIES OF ELEGANT GIFT-BOOKS.
=Truths Illustrated by Great Authors=; A Dictionary of nearly
Four Thousand Aids to Reflection, Quotations of Maxims,
Metaphors, Counsels, Cautions, Proverbs, Aphorisms, &c. &c. In
Prose and Verse. Compiled from the Great Writers of all Ages and
Countries. Eleventh Edition, fcap. 8vo. cloth, gilt edges, 568
pp. 6s.
‘The quotations are perfect gems; their selection evinces sound
judgment and an excellent taste.’--DISPATCH.
‘We accept the treasure with profound gratitude--it should find
its way to every home.’--ERA.
‘We know of no better book of its kind.’--EXAMINER.
=The Philosophy of William Shakespeare=; delineating, in Seven
Hundred and Fifty Passages selected from his Plays, the Multiform
Phases of the Human Mind. With Index and References. Collated,
Elucidated, and Alphabetically arranged, by the Editors of
‘Truths Illustrated by Great Authors.’ Second Edition, fcap. 8vo.
cloth, gilt edges, nearly 700 pages, with beautiful Vignette
Title, price 6s.
[Illustration: pointer] A glance at this volume will at once show
its superiority to Dodd’s ‘Beauties,’ or any other volume of
Shakespearian selections.
=Songs of the Soul during its Pilgrimage Heavenward=: being a New
Collection of Poetry, illustrative of the Power of the Christian
Faith; selected from the Works of the most eminent British,
Foreign, and American Writers, Ancient and Modern, Original
and Translated. By the Editors of ‘Truths Illustrated by Great
Authors,’ &c. Second Edition, fcap. 8vo. cloth, gilt edges, 638
pages, with beautiful Frontispiece and Title, price 6s.
[Illustration: pointer] This elegant volume will be appreciated
by the admirers of ‘The Christian Year.’
=The Beauty of Holiness=; or, The Practical Christian’s Daily
Companion: being a Collection of upwards of Two Thousand
Reflective and Spiritual Passages, remarkable for their
Sublimity, Beauty, and Practicability; selected from the Sacred
Writings, and arranged in Eighty-two Sections, each comprising
a different theme for meditation. By the Editors of ‘Truths
Illustrated by Great Authors.’ Third Edition, fcap. 8vo. cloth,
gilt edges, 536 pp., 6s.
‘Every part of the Sacred Writings deserves our deepest attention
and research, but all, perhaps, may not be equally adapted to the
purposes of meditation and reflection. Those, therefore, who are
in the constant habit of consulting the Bible will not object to
a selection of some of its most sublime and impressive passages,
arranged and classed ready at once to meet the eye.’--EXTRACT
FROM PREFACE.
* * * * *
=Events to be Remembered in the History of England.= Forming
a Series of interesting Narratives, extracted from the Pages
of Contemporary Chronicles or Modern Historians, of the most
Remarkable Occurrences in each Reign; with Reviews of the
Manners, Domestic Habits, Amusements, Costumes, &c. &c., of the
People, Chronological Table, &c. By CHARLES SELBY. Twenty-fifth
Edition, 12mo. fine paper, with Nine Beautiful Illustrations by
Anelay, price 3s. 6d. cloth, elegant, gilt edges.
N.B.--A SCHOOL EDITION, without the Illustrations, 2s. 6d. cloth.
[Illustration: pointer] Great care has been taken to render
this book unobjectionable to the most fastidious, by excluding
everything that could not be read aloud in schools and families,
and by abstinence from all party spirit, alike in politics as in
religion.
WORKS BY THE AUTHOR OF ‘A TRAP TO CATCH A SUNBEAM.’
‘In telling a simple story, and in the management of dialogue,
the Author is excelled by few writers of the present
day.’--LITERARY GAZETTE.
=A Trap to Catch a Sunbeam.= Thirty-fifth Edition, price 1s.
‘_Aide toi, et le ciel t’aidera_, is the moral of this pleasant
and interesting story, to which we assign in this Gazette
a place immediately after Charles Dickens, as its due, for
many passages not unworthy of him, and for a general scheme
quite in unison with his best feelings towards the lowly and
depressed.’--LITERARY GAZETTE.
_A Cheap Edition of the above popular story has been prepared for
distribution. Sold only in packets price 1s. 6d. containing 12
copies._
Also, by the same Author,
‘COMING HOME;’ a New Tale for all Readers, price 1s.
OLD JOLLIFFE; not a Goblin Story. 1s.
The SEQUEL to OLD JOLLIFFE. 1s.
The HOUSE on the ROCK. 1s.
‘ONLY;’ a Tale for Young and Old. 1s.
The CLOUD with the SILVER LINING. 1s.
The STAR in the DESERT. 1s.
AMY’S KITCHEN, a VILLAGE ROMANCE: a New Story. 1s.
The DREAM CHINTZ. With Illustrations by James Godwin. 2s. 6d.
with a beautiful fancy cover.
‘A MERRY CHRISTMAS.’ 6d.
SIBERT’S WOLD. Second Edition, 3s. 6d. cloth.
=Sunbeam Stories.= A Selection of the Tales by the Author of ‘A
Trap to Catch a Sunbeam,’ &c. &c. In one volume, price 5s. cloth
elegant, or 5s. 6d. gilt edges. Illustrated by John Absolon and
Henry Anelay.
CONTENTS:
A Trap to Catch a Sunbeam.
Old Jolliffe.
The Sequel to Old Jolliffe.
The Star in the Desert.
‘Only.’
‘A Merry Christmas.’
=Minnie’s Love=: a Novel. By the Author of ‘A Trap to Catch a
Sunbeam.’ In 1 vol. post 8vo. 10s. 6d. cloth.
‘An extremely pleasant, sunshiny volume.’--CRITIC.
‘“Minnie’s Love” adds to the reputation of the Author of “A Trap
to Catch a Sunbeam.”’--ATLAS.
‘We were first surprised, then pleased, next delighted, and
finally enthralled by the story.’--MORNING HERALD.
=Little Sunshine=: a Tale to be Read to very Young Children.
By the Author of ‘A Trap to Catch a Sunbeam.’ In square 16mo.
coloured borders, engraved Frontispiece and Vignette, fancy
boards, price 2s.
‘Young people will read it with avidity.’--CHRISTIAN WITNESS.
‘Just the thing to rivet the attention of children.’--STAMFORD
MERCURY.
‘Printed in the sumptuous manner that children like
best.’--BRADFORD OBSERVER.
‘As pleasing a child’s book as we recollect seeing.’--PLYMOUTH
HERALD.
BOOKS FOR NURSERY OR MATERNAL TUITION.
=La Bagatelle=: Intended to introduce Children of Five or Six
Years old to some knowledge of the French Language. Revised
by Madame N. L. New and Cheaper Edition, much improved, and
embellished with entirely new cuts. 18mo. bound and lettered,
price 2s. 6d.
‘A well-known little book, revised, improved, and adorned with
some very pretty new pictures. It is, indeed, French made very
easy for very little children.’--THE SCHOOL AND THE TEACHER.
‘A very nice book to be placed in the hands of children;
likely to command their attention by its beautiful
embellishments.’--PAPERS FOR THE SCHOOLMASTER.
=Chickseed without Chickweed=: being very Easy and Entertaining
Lessons, for Little Children. A Book for every Mother. New
Edition, with Frontispiece by Anelay, 12mo. cloth, 1s.
=Peter Parley’s Book of Poetry.= With numerous Engravings. New
Edition, 16mo. cloth, 1s. 6d.
=Cobwebs to Catch Flies=; or, Dialogues and Short Sentences
adapted for Children from Three to Eight Years of age, With
Woodcuts. New Edition, 12mo. cloth, 2s.; or in Two Parts, 1s.
each.
PART I. For Children from Three to Five Years of Age.