_Panizzi and Austria; Policy of Palmerston; Mr Ellice; Scotch Sabbath;
Mr Gladstone on Tasso; Panizzi and Thomas Carlyle._
Panizzi’s correspondence with the sketches drawn from it and from that
of the society with which he was connected, will now be continued, for
from these is to be derived his private opinion on various subjects, and
no doubt can possibly be suggested as to this course furnishing
irrefragable proofs of his real sentiments. Miscellaneous as are the
matters of which these letters of Panizzi treat, it is not surprising,
considering the disturbed and eventful state of this period, that a
large proportion of them relate to politics, to which he was so
irrepressibly addicted. The following to Mr Haywood and Lord Rutherfurd,
contain the comments of an acute observer of the unsettled state of
government and of affairs in general in this country and in the East
immediately before and after the Crimean War. It is to be wished that,
in addition to skill and vigilance, the credit of impartiality could
also be ascribed to Panizzi. The fact is, however, that, so deep was his
dislike to Austria (scarcely to be wondered at), that it strongly
tinctured his political views of affairs both at home and abroad. It
will be observed also that he was less of a true prophet than a keen
observer.
Herein, too, he gives his opinion of the policy of Lord Palmerston and
other statesmen, showing very decided and biassed views of the course
they would probably adopt, and venturing on surmises which, as events
have proved, were not well grounded. They, however, are valuable, not
only as clear expositions of his views on the subject, but as specimens
of his open and undisguised style of writing, without fear or favour,
when his own political ideas required elucidation:—
“B. M., July 25, 1853.
“My dear Haywood,
Here there is nothing new. There will be no war, as the Emperor
of Russia will gain something. He never meant to get all he asked,
now, at once, and will make a merit of his moderation. In five or six
years hence we shall have another row, and he will get something
more—and so on till he will get all he wishes. Time will come when
England will repent her supineness. You think that to keep at peace
‘coûte que coûte’ is the high road to prosperity: I think it is ruin.
I am reminded of the debtor who will not look at the state of his
affairs boldly, and pay off: he goes on accumulating compound
interest, till at last he finds himself ruined past redemption.”
Yours, &c., &c.,
A. PANIZZI.”
“August 15, 1853.
“My dear Rutherfurd,
“... I agree with you as to the deplorable state of affairs,
both at home and abroad. The Government, beaten regularly twice a day,
is brought into contempt. Lord Palmerston has fallen very much in
public opinion; his escapade last Christmas has done him very great
harm. He is considered by _all his friends_ the very worst Home
Secretary that ever was. As to foreign affairs, things are bad. The
allied powers are at the feet of Austria, who will never make war on
Russia except the infamy is submitted to by France and England
guaranteeing Austria all her dominions. I hope that England will not
join in it, but I think France will do it, and the guarantee of France
is the important one. Here Liberals are at a discount....”
Ever thine,
A. PANIZZI.”
“September 12, 1853.
“My dear Rutherfurd,
... I told Lord John, Lord Clarendon, Granville, Lansdowne, and
Palmerston, that Austria would never make war against Russia, now they
have allowed her to make herself the mistress of the situation, as the
French say, and to seize two of her best provinces of her ally, who
had by his own individual exertions driven the enemies from it. That
is what they call backing their friends—Austria will take Russia’s
side if England and France mean to press her too hard, in case they
are victorious; should they be beaten, still worse. Delay is
everything to Russia, and that has been gained for her by Austria, who
sees that Turkey must fall to pieces, and has meanwhile got a share of
the inheritance of the dying man before he dies.
Ever yours,
A. PANIZZI.”
To the Right Honourable Edward Ellice (whose name is familiar to all),
who was an intimate friend of Panizzi, and to whose son, the lately
deceased Mr. Edward Ellice, we are much indebted for the documents
placed at our disposal. We find a letter on the same subject, written on
the 4th of December, 1854:—
[Illustration: Edward Ellice]
“My dear Ellice,
I see there is a so-called treaty of alliance signed at Vienna.
You will see it is merely to say that next spring Austria will take
counsel with her new allies as to the best mode of enforcing what is
not yet settled. She now will more than ever embarrass France and
England, and prevent them from making war in the only way that such a
war should be made. My dear friend, I am as good an Englishman as you
are, so far as attachment to this country goes, and I feel confident
that the Government are mistaken, and go to ruin the country as fast
as they can. All these delays and weaknesses give all the advantage to
the enemies of England, and Austria is among the foremost ... and yet
the greatest confidence is expressed in her future conduct, because it
is assumed that it is her interest to join England and France; as if
people acted always as they ought, and as if it was quite clear that
she has more to fear from Russia and her system of government, and
ultra-legitimist principles, than from two revolutionary governments
like England and France. I have no patience with such reasoning.
Ever yours,
A. PANIZZI.”
Here follows a terse little note, written in the true Panizzi style.
Whether the ass mentioned in his comment on a piece of Scotch
Sabbatarianism was, in the common acceptation of the term, “hired,” may
be questioned. But we can testify, from our own personal experience, to
the peculiar tyranny exercised on the unfortunate inhabitants of
Glasgow, and which falls most heavily on innocent sojourners in that
cheerful city:—
“November 25, 1854.
“My dear Rutherfurd,
I see the cabs and omnibuses of Glasgow do not ply on Sundays.
Was not the donkey on which Jesus Christ entered Jerusalem on Palm
Sunday a hired ass? And if he went about on a hired donkey, why should
not the Glasgow people be allowed to ride in omnibuses or hired cabs
on Sundays?”
The next letter we shall quote is from Mr. Gladstone:—
“Hawarden, December 17, 1855.
“My dear Panizzi,
I entirely feel, upon a recent deliberate re-perusal, Tasso’s
right to stand in the very restricted class of the great epic writers.
It is true that in that class he seems to me to stand immediately
below Homer, but I should boldly say the same of Virgil.
His own life and fortunes are indeed deeply moving.
Yours, &c., &c.,
W. E. GLADSTONE.”
With all due deference to so great an authority, and fully agreeing with
his estimate of Tasso, the position assigned by Mr. Gladstone to Virgil
is scarcely doing justice to the chief of the Latin poets. Panizzi, in a
letter to Mr. Gladstone, says:—“I shall be happy, you may be sure, to
read what you say on Tasso, who is, no doubt, greatly below Homer, but
not so much below Virgil as people affect to say.”
It is true that Virgil laboured under one unfortunate disadvantage; the
language in which he wrote is certainly less fitted, in point of
simplicity and sublimity, as a vehicle for epic poetry than the Greek.
It will not detract from the miscellaneous character of the information
promised in this chapter to subjoin a few extracts from a correspondence
which took place between Panizzi and Mr. Thomas Carlyle, who was not one
of those who were entirely satisfied with the defective Reading-Room at
the British Museum, which preceded the present splendid building, soon
to be described. Full of sad experiences of the manifold inconveniences
of the former, he pardonably, but erroneously, imagined that it might be
possible to obtain some more private and more comfortable spot wherein
to pursue his studies at the Museum. In his endeavours to attain this
end, however, he was not altogether successful.
On the 11th of April, 1853, the eminent historian addressed a letter to
Panizzi, which he answered, we fear, in terms somewhat too severe, so
much so, that we purposely avoid making public anything which was simply
the fruit of former quarrels; be that as it may, the correspondence was
submitted to the Trustees four days afterwards, together with a report
in which Panizzi stated that he knew of no Private Room, nor of any
quieter corner in all the Library for the purpose of study, than the
Reading-Room; but even if he did, he did not think that in a Public
Library, supported at the National expense for public use, any person
should enjoy advantages and facilities denied to the generality. Better
accommodation was, undoubtedly, desirable for readers—for them all—but
not for any especial individual, leaving others to fare as well or as
ill as they might. On May 7th the Trustees approved of Panizzi’s
conduct.
Not altogether content with this decision, Mr. Carlyle seems to have
made an attempt to enlist on his behalf the interest of Lady Ashburton,
and, through her, that of Lord Clarendon. The result of this attempt
will be gathered from the following letter, addressed to the latter:—
“August 10, 1853.
“I heartily wish it were in my power to do what Lady Ashburton
requests. The following statement will show your Lordship how I am
placed. Mr. Carlyle wrote to me asking what Lady Ashburton asks. I
informed him that there was no Private-Room whatever in the Library
which could be assigned to him, and that the quietest place for study
was the Reading-Room. I moreover pointed out to him how invidious it
would be in a public place to favour anyone—however great his merits
or strong my desire to serve him.... I know that individual Trustees
have been applied to; I know that they have mentioned the subject to
their colleagues; and I have myself submitted Mr. Carlyle’s letter and
my answer to the Trustees, who have approved of what I have done, and
who have declined to accede to similar applications. Your Lordship, I
am sure, will see that it is impossible for me to depart from the rule
under such circumstances....”
Let us, however, say no more about this unpleasant affair, and look upon
it as another example of the unbending, unswerving nature of Panizzi in
all matters of duty; for although he was, doubtless, impressed with the
great deserts of the applicant for relief and especial accommodation, on
this occasion he saw no reason for laying himself open to a charge of
favouritism, or, under any pretence, being a party to conceding to one
reader, however great his merits, that which would undoubtedly be denied
to another.
[Illustration]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Illustration]