19th—Dined at the Duc d'Aumale's, who had bought Moncorvo House in Ennismore Gardens. Comte and Comtesse de Paris, Haussonville, Segur, Target, Audiffret, Leighton.

December 21st.—To Timsbury. 24th, to Foxholes. The Ogilvies there.

1887. January 3rd.—Came to London. 10th, dinner at Pender's to meet Stanley, the African traveller, before he went to find Emin Bey.

19th.—The third part of Greville published, 3,007 copies subscribed.

Among the many letters which the publication of these last volumes of the 'Greville Memoirs' brought him, the following from Sir Arthur Gordon [Footnote: Fourth son of the Earl of Aberdeen.]—now Lord Stanmore, and then Governor of Ceylon—have a peculiar interest from their exact criticism of a point of detail with which the writer was personally acquainted at first hand:—

Queen's House, Colombo, June 18th.

My dear Mr. Reeve,—I have very long delayed answering your last letter, in the hope that, when I did so, I might at the same time be able to send you my notes on the two last volumes of 'Greville.' But these notes will be numerous, and my time is scant for such work. On one point, the 'graspingness' alleged to have been shown by the Peclites after the formation of the Government in December 1852, and its modification to satisfy their exigencies, I have felt constrained to address the 'Times.' [Footnote: June 13th. The letter is reprinted in the Appenduxm post, p. 411.] The truth happens to have been exactly the other way, and Greville's notes are only the echo of the grumblings of the disappointed Whig placemen who talked to him. It is decidedly unjust not only to my father, Graham, and Gladstone, who are indirectly charged with this trafficking, but to the Duke of Newcastle and Herbert also, who more directly are so.

I have, of course, read the volumes with great interest, but have had my suspicions greatly heightened that whatever may have been the case before—say 1841, the confidences Mr. Greville received in the later years of his life were not unfrequently only half-confidences, for the sake of obtaining his opinion on some collateral point, or of flattering or pleasing him by the show of confidence. There are, of course, many matters treated of in these volumes as to which I have no personal or private information, and I have no reason to question what he says about them; but I have some inclination to doubt, even as to these; for I find that as regards almost every transaction of which I do happen to know the whole history, he knows a good deal about it, but not all about it. He was kept specially in the dark about the real history of Lord Palmerston's resignation in 1853 which is all the odder because he very nearly found it out. Hardly anybody does know what lay behind, though the difference about Reform was a very real one, so far as it went, and quite sufficient to justify—at all events, ostensibly—Lord P.'s virtual dismissal. Again, on another occasion, I see Mr. G.'s special friend, Lord Clarendon—I will not say, deliberately deceived him, but, certainly with full knowledge —allowed him to deceive himself on the strength of a half-confidence. [Footnote: A politic reticence, that has been called 'an economy of truth.']

I am more disappointed than I can say to find that M. de Sainte-Aulaire's elaborate Memoirs have been 'used up' for that stupid book of Victor de Nouvion's, [Footnote: Histoire du Regne de Louis Philippe (4 tom 8vo. 1857-61)], if—as I suppose-that is the book you refer to. I thought it had never got beyond the first two volumes, and have never seen any more of it. I am vexed that M. de Sainte-Aulaire's elaborate Memoirs should have been utilised for such a book; generally, because I know M. de Sainte-Aulaire contemplated their publication, and because they deserved to appear in a separate form; and, personally and specially, because, of course, his accounts of his intercourse with my father, and the elaborate study of his character which he had written, are thus lost....

Yours ever faithfully,

A. GORDON.

To Sir Arthur Gordon

C.O., June 13th.—I have just read in the 'Times' of this morning your interesting letter on the formation of Lord Aberdeen's ministry. I have no doubt you are quite right. It was John Russell and the Whigs who were rapacious for office—much more than the Peelites. John Russell, I know, kept Cardwell out of the Cabinet. You observe that Greville only notes what Lord Clarendon told him; and I have no doubt that Clarendon was rather out of humour with arrangements which were personally disagreeable to himself. But that again was John Russell's fault, because he insisted on taking the Foreign Office pro tem. I shall probably publish another complete edition of Greville next year, and I think it would be well to insert in a note the whole of your letter, or at least the greater part of it. [Footnote: See Appendix, post, p. 411.] If you have any other criticisms to make, they would be valuable to me. I have availed myself of those you were so good as to send me on the second series.

You are aware that Mme. de Jarnac is dead. I do not know who has her husband's papers; but the Comte de Paris is here, and as I frequently see him, I will take an early opportunity of asking him whether he can give me any information about Lord Aberdeen's letters. M. Thureau's 'Histoire de la Monarchic de Juillet' is a remarkable book, because he has access to original sources and quotes largely from them, especially from the Memoirs of M. de Sainte-Aulaire which are still in MS. [Footnote: And still so in 1898.] They appear to be extremely interesting.

We are getting on here pretty well. If the Whigs had joined the Government, there might have been a scramble for office, as there was in 1853; for the Whigs are now in the same position as the Peelites were at that time—officers without an army. It is much more to the credit of my friends to give a disinterested support to Lord Salisbury; and this alliance gives a sufficiently Liberal colour to the measures of the administration. There is every appearance that the Unionists will hold together. Mr. Gladstone continues to be in a state of hallucination and excitement which exceeds belief. It is a case of moral and political suicide. The crisis will probably end by the death of Mr. Parnell, the falling [off] of the American subscriptions, and the extinction of Mr. Gladstone; but in the meantime they have totally ruined Ireland.

From Sir Arthur Gordon

August 30th.—Your letter of June 13th must have crossed one from me, in which I explained to you why I had written to the 'Times' about the formation of the Government of 1853 instead of merely sending my observations to you as a note for future use. I need not say that I am much flattered by your proposal to insert the letter—or part of it—in a note to a future edition of Mr. Greville's Memoirs... I am struck very much by what I think I mentioned once before—the frequency with which Mr. Greville's friends gave him what may be called 'a three-quarters knowledge' of pending affairs. They told him a great deal, but frequently not all. In the affairs with which I am really acquainted, there is almost always something—and that an important something—which does not appear in his notes... I have specially noticed this with regard to Lord Palmerston's 'resignation' in 1853, It is the more remarkable, because it is apparent from various passages that he 'burnt'—as they say in a game of hide and seek—but never actually quite caught the true facts. I have never known a secret better guarded than the fact—which, after a lapse of four and thirty years, one may, I think, mention—that Lord P.'s resignation on that occasion was not voluntary, and that he was, in fact, extruded. [Footnote: In a later letter, June 5th, 1888, Sir Arthur Gordon wrote:—'He had given great offence to the Queen; and his colleagues—at least, his most important colleagues—distrusted his action in reference to pending negotiations, Lord Clarendon especially resenting the intrigues he believed he was carrying on. Things being in this state, he announced his hostility to Reform, and it was determined to take advantage of this announcement to remove him; and removed he would have been, but for the two causes I have noted.'] But, to be sure, half the Cabinet did not know this; and it was their ignorance, coupled with Newcastle's and Gladstone's dislike of Lord John, that brought him back again.

I must get M. Thureau's 'Histoire de la Monarchic de Juillet,' of which I never even heard. It is dreadful to reflect how utterly behindhand one gets in all things, literary, artistic, and political, through long sojourns out of Europe. But I do hope there is some prospect of M. de Sainte-Aulaire's Memoirs themselves being published at full length. I know it was M. de Sainte-Aulaire's wish and deliberate intention that they should be given to the world, and he took much trouble with them.

From the Duke of Argyll

Inveraray, January 22nd.

My dear Mr. Reeve,—I have been longer in getting the book off my hands than I had hoped. It is now in the press, and Douglas talks of getting it out about February 10th or a little later.... There is a good deal in the book which, in one sense, may be called 'padding,' because I have endeavoured to relieve the very dry subject of Tenures and Agricultural Improvement with historical episodes, with pictures of manners, and even with personal anecdote. But I think there is a considerable bulk of new matter, or at least of old matter put in new points of view, and every part is written with an aim to establish the principles which we think 'sound' on Law, on Property, and on Union. Your new Greville seems to be very interesting.

Yours very sincerely,

ARGYLL.

From M. B. St.-Hilaire

Paris, 29 janvier.—Je vous remercie de la peine que vous voulez bien prendre, et j'ai profite des corrections que vous avez bien voulu m'indiquer. J'avais deja profite des deux articles de la 'Revue d'Edimbourg' sur les chemins de fer russes en Asie et sur l'armee indienne.

I have no wish to appear more royalist than the king himself; but I cannot feel so sure as you do about the security of India. The Russians are already threatening it, and I do not think they are near stopping. The base of their operations will be in the Caucasus, where they already have very considerable forces. It is true that their finances are in bad order; but this may perhaps be an additional motive to them to undertake a war of conquest. I agree with you, however, that before the attack on India will come the attack on Constantinople, the consequences of which will be very great. On the other hand, the railway connecting Candahar with the Indus will certainly be a great obstacle to the advance of the Russians on Cabul. In all this I see many of the elements of catastrophes which the next generation will witness. I hope I may be out of this world before they come.

To Mr. T. Norton Longman

Foxholes, April 17th.—I see the 'Athenaeum' complains that I did not correct all Vitzthum's mistakes and rearrange his book; but that is more than I undertook to do. We did correct a good many mistakes, natural enough in a foreigner; but I do not hold myself responsible for his facts or his opinions.

April 22nd.—I know more about M. Barthelemy St.-Hilaire's book on India than any other Englishman, for I revised and corrected the proof-sheets for him. A French writer on the subject was sure to make blunders. The book is most valuable to foreigners, for it is a perfectly fair account of the British administration of India; but it would be entirely useless in this country, inasmuch as it is a mere compilation from well-known English documents. I think, therefore, that a translation into English would be a work of supererogation and a failure.

Journal

April 30th.—Dined at the Royal Academy dinner.

May 9th.—Great Unionist meeting at Winchester.

28th.—Barthelemy St.-Hilaire came to Foxholes on a visit.

June 10th.—Dined with the Duc d'Aumale, Moncorvo House. Electric light.

15th.—Dined at the Middle Temple. Grand day; Prince of Wales in the chair.

18th.—Dined with the Lord Mayor. Literature, Science, and Art.

21st.—Celebration of the Jubilee. Splendid day.

July 3rd.—Went to Eastbourne.

7th.—Dined at East Sheen with the Comte de Paris. Duc and Duchesse of Braganza there. Duke of St. Albans, Arran and daughter, Duc de la Tremoille—twenty.

18th.—Duc d'Aumale's evening party; very brilliant.

25th.—To Ostend and Brussels. 26th, to Cologne. Great heat.

27th.—To Wiesbaden. Lady Dartrey died while I was at Wiesbaden. I took leave of her on her death-bed just before I started. It was the loss of a most kind, faithful, and affectionate friend.

August 5th.—Ill in the night; incipient fever. 6th, to Cologne. 7th, to Aix, very unwell. 9th, got back to London by Ostend-Dover.

From Captain Bridge, R.N.

H.M.S. 'Colossus,' Gibraltar, August 3rd.

Dear Mr. Reeve,—The Naval Review and the ensuing operations have not, I hope, given you such a surfeit of naval affairs as to indispose you to hear a little of the recent cruise of the Mediterranean squadron. We left Malta, under the command of the Duke of Edinburgh, in May, and visited several ports on the coast of Italy. During H.R.H.'s absence in England, when attending the Jubilee, we stayed at the convenient harbour of Aranci Bay in the island of Sardinia. There we carried out a series of instructive torpedo and under-water mining exercises. After leaving Sardinia, we called at several Spanish ports—Barcelona, Valencia, Cartagena and Malaga—eventually reaching this place last Friday evening.

The effect of our visits to both Italy and Spain has been—especially in the case of the latter country—remarkably gratifying. The presence of a son of the Queen was evidently taken as a compliment by Italians and Spaniards of all classes. Barcelona, Cartagena, and Malaga are notoriously anti-monarchical in sentiment. Yet in every one H.R.H. had a most flattering reception. The enthusiasm of the populace at Cartagena was fully equal to any shown by an English crowd for any popular royal personage. People may say what they like, but the advantages to the country of having a prince in the position held by the Duke are considerable. The friendliness of the Italians is striking; and I am confident the feelings of Spaniards of all classes are more favourable to England than they have been for half a century. We hear now that we are to go on to Cadiz, where a maritime exhibition is to be opened this month; and it is understood that this extension of our cruise is at the request of the Spaniards themselves. I have visited Spanish ports often before now, and never noticed any friendliness towards us. Should the necessity of looking for allies arise, it is nearly certain that both Italy and Spain would be disposed to range themselves on our side. It will be a pity if diplomatic bungling occurs to alter this satisfactory condition of things....

Pray give my kind remembrances to Mrs. Reeve.

Yours sincerely,

CYPRIAN A. G. BRIDGE.

It has been seen that for some years back Reeve had been occasionally thinking of retiring from his post of Registrar. The near completion of fifty years' service revived the notion, and his illness at Wiesbaden, following an earlier attack in April, confirmed it. When his mind was once made up, the rest was a matter of detail. The Journal notes:—

August 10th.—Taxed costs and wound up business at the Council Office for the last time again; but went there again on October 11th.

12th.—To Foxholes, where fever and bad fit of gout came on; I was very unwell till September 3rd.

21st.—My dog Sylvia [Footnote: A collie, so called after her donor, M. Sylvain van de Weyer. A brother of hers belonged to the Queen.] died. A fond and faithful companion of sixteen years.

September 5th.—Mr. G. H. Dorrell came as my secretary, and I dictated an article on foreign affairs.

From Mr. C. L. Peel [Footnote: Clerk of the Council in succession to Sir Arthur Helps. Now Sir Charles Peel.]

56 Eccleston Square, October 5th.

My Dear Reeve,—I was so taken aback by your announcement to-day, that I really could not find words in which to express the sincere regret with which I heard it. You are so thoroughly identified in my mind with the Council Office, and I am so much indebted to you for advice and assistance during the last twelve years, that I shall feel quite lost when I can no longer rely upon the experience, judgement, and kindness which have hitherto been available to me in any difficulty.

I only trust that by relieving yourself in good time from the ties of office, you may enjoy a long spell of happy and active retirement, which you have so well earned, and into which you will be followed by the best wishes of all you leave behind. Believe me always,

Yours most sincerely,

C. L. PEEL.

It appears from the Journal that the resignation was not officially made till some days later.

October 24th.—I resigned the Registrarship of the Privy Council, which I had held, as Clerk of Appeals and Registrar, since November 17th, 1837. The rest of the year at Foxholes.

At the sitting of the Judicial Committee on November 2nd, Sir Barnes Peacock formally announced to the Bar the resignation of the Registrar, and after briefly mentioning the dates of his service as Clerk of Appeals since 1837 and Registrar since the creation of the office in 1853, he went on:—

'It is unnecessary to state to the Bar the manner in which the duties of that office have been performed by Mr. Reeve. He is not present to-day. He has been prevented, I believe, by the state of his health, from travelling to London. Their Lordships are sorry that he is not present, that they might personally bid him farewell. They have given me, as the oldest member of the Judicial Committee now present, the privilege of expressing and recording their deep sense of the loss which must be sustained, both by the Judicial Committee and the public, by being deprived of the valuable services of Mr. Henry Reeve. His long and varied experience, extending over a period of nearly half a century, his extensive knowledge, his great tact and the sound judgement which he brought to bear in the discharge of the duties of his office, render his retirement a serious loss both to the Judicial Committee and to the public. Their Lordships could not allow Mr. Reeve to depart from his office in silence. They trust that he may long enjoy in health and happiness that rest, relaxation, and repose which he has so fully and meritoriously earned, and to which he is so justly entitled. Many men retire from an arduous profession or office, and when they are relieved from the duties which they have for many years been called upon to discharge, sink into a state of ennui and listlessness which are not conducive either to a long life or to health or happiness. But their Lordships feel sure that that will not be the case with Mr. Henry Reeve. His literary and other congenial tastes and pursuits, and his industrious habits, will no doubt supply him with full employment for his still active and vigorous mind. In taking their leave of Mr. Henry Reeve on his departure from office their Lordships will only add, 'Let honour be where honour is justly deserved.'

To this Mr. Aston, Q.C., replied, as the oldest member of the Bar present:—

'I refrain from attempting to add anything to what your Lordship has said, for fear that the feebleness of my addition might detract from the force of that which your Lordship has expressed. But I cannot help saying that, after having appeared at your Lordships' Bar in this place for upwards of a quarter of a century, I have myself personally received, and I have seen the members of the Bar who have practised with me always receive, from Mr. Reeve the utmost courtesy, attention, and assistance. We often have, my Lords, in practising before you, a difficult task to discharge. Our clients are not familiar with the practice of your Lordships' Court, if I may use the term. But on all occasions Mr. Registrar Reeve has given the utmost assistance, and therefore I beg to say, on behalf of the Bar whom I venture to represent, that we cordially endorse all that your Lordship has said, and express our unfeigned regret that we shall no longer have the services of Mr. Reeve in your Lordships' chamber.'

To Mr. T. Norton Longman

Foxholes, November 4th.—I hope you saw the funeral oration Sir Barnes Peacock pronounced on me in the Privy Council. It is in the outer sheet of the 'Times' of Tuesday [Nov. 1st], and perhaps in some other papers; a very kind and handsome tribute; and it is pleasanter to have these things said when one is alive than when one is dead.

The notice in the 'Times' brought Reeve many letters from his friends; amongst others, the following:—

From Lord Ebury

November 9th.—I see you are going to desert the Council altogether. I hope you will long enjoy the otium which you have so worthily merited, and will have time to assist in extinguishing Gladstone.

From the Duc d'Aumale

Woodnorton, 15 novembre.—Je regrette d'apprendre que votre sante a ete si eprouvee.... Je suis toujours affligee de voir mes amis se retirer de la vie active; mais je comprends les motifs qui vous ont dicte votre demission....

Je suis si honteux de ce qui se passe en France que je n'ose pas vous en parler, et je me borne a vous serrer bien cordialement la main.

The Journal then notes:—

1888.—The year began at Foxholes. The Ogilvies there for three weeks. Came to London on January 3rd.

February 4th.—Sir Henry Maine died at Cannes. A great loss.

March 5th.—The railroad from Brockenhurst to Christchurch opened. Went down to the ceremony. Came back at 7 and dined with Millais to meet the Lord Chancellor. Mrs. Procter died.

9th—Emperor William of Germany died. Various dinners.

April 10th.—Gladstone dined at The Club. Froude, Smith, Hewett, and Hooker there.

27th—Left London for Basle with Christine at 11 A.M. and arrived there, and thence, at Lucerne, on the 28th at 9 A.M. Capital journey.

From Lucerne they went on to Milan and Bologna and to Florence, which they reached on May 3rd, which they made their headquarters for the next three weeks, seeing all that was interesting in the city and the neighbourhood, and visiting Siena, Chiusi, Perugia, and Assisi. Then to Spezia, Turin, Geneva, and to Paris on the 24th.

Meantime Reeve, having been proposed by St.-Hilaire, supported by the Duc d'Aumale, Jules Simon, and Duruy, as a foreign member of the Institut de France, in succession to Sir Henry Maine, had been elected by a large majority on May 8th. He seems to have received the first news of this from the Duc d'Aumale, who wrote from Palermo on May 10th:—

Mon ancien maitre, confrere et ami, Duruy, m'ecrit que vous venez d'etre nomme associe etranger de son Academie par vingt-sept voix. C'est un beau succes dont je veux tout de suite me rejouir avec vous, en attendant que je puisse le faire de vive voix. Je compte etre le 20 de ce mois a Bruxelles, et diner avec le Club quelque jour du mois de juin.

The election had to be approved by the President of the Republic, and the result was not officially communicated till the 19th. It would seem that Reeve did not receive it till his arrival in Paris, and on the next day, May 25th, St.-Hilaire wrote:—

Demain je vous accompagnerai pour votre entree a l'Academie. Vous verrez que le ceremonial est des plus simples. Je vous presenterai specialement a M. Franck, qui, sur ma demande, a ete votre rapporteur, et qui a parle de vous en termes excellents.

From the Duc d'Aumale he received, a few days later:—

Bruxelles, 31 mai.—Je ne doutais pas du bon accueil qui vous serait fait a l'Institut, et je suis ravi d'en recevoir le temoignage par votre lettre. Je voudrais bien pouvoir assister au diner du Club du 12 juin; mais j'en ai quelque doute, tandis que je crois etre certain, Deo adjuvante, de pouvoir m'asseoir a notre table fraternelle le mardi 26. Je vous serre affectueusement la main.

On May 28th Reeve returned to London. The entries in the Journal are of little interest, but he noted:—

June 12th.—At Lady Knutsford's, evening, met Lord and Lady Lansdowne, just back from Canada.

15th.—To Foxholes. The Emperor Fritz of Germany died. During the whole of his short reign, which lasted ninety-nine days, the most bitter quarrels went on about his medical treatment. It was a great tragedy.

25th.—To London again. 26th, breakfasted with the Duc d'Aumale, who dined at The Club.

July 2nd.—To Winchester Quarter Sessions to qualify as J.P. for Hampshire, having been recently appointed by Lord Carnarvon.

9th.—Attended Petty Sessions at Christchurch.

30th.—Winchester Assizes. On the Grand Jury.

The next letter, from Sir Arthur Gordon, refers to an incident alluded to in the 'Greville Memoirs,' [Footnote: Third Part, i. 54-5.] which Reeve had commented on at some length, with a reference to the Memoirs of Lord Malmesbury, published some four years before.

What Lord Malmesbury had said amounted to this—that in 1844, when the Russian Emperor Nicholas was in London, 'he, Sir Robert Peel (then prime minister) and Lord Aberdeen (then foreign secretary) drew up and signed a memorandum' to the effect that England 'would support Russia in her legitimate protectorship of the Greek religion and the Holy Shrines, without consulting France. Lord Malmesbury added that the fact of Lord Aberdeen, one of the signers of this paper, being prime minister in 1853, was taken by Nicholas as a ground for believing that England would not join France to restrain the pretensions of Russia, and therefore, by implication, that Lord Aberdeen's being prime minister was a—if not the—principal cause of the war. [Footnote: Lord Malmesbury's Memoirs of an Ex-Minister (1st edit.), i. 402-3.]

The memorandum itself, as printed in the Blue Book, differs essentially, both in matter and form, from Lord Malmesbury's description of it. It is entitled 'Memorandum by Count Nesselrode delivered to Her Majesty's Government and founded on communications received from the Emperor of Russia subsequently to His Imperial Majesty's visit to England in June 1844.' [Footnote: Parliamentary Papers, 1854, lxxi. 863.] It is unsigned, and from the nature of it must be so; it is in no sense an agreement, but a proposal that England should agree to act in concert with Russia and Austria; and nothing whatever is said about the Greek religion, the Holy Places, or the Russian protectorate. It is of course possible that conversations between Nicholas and Lord Aberdeen, which preceded the drawing up of this memorandum, may have encouraged the one and hampered the other; but of this there is no evidence, and Lord Malmesbury could not possibly know anything about it, though he did know something—very inaccurately it appears—about the memorandum. The discrepancies had, in fact, led Reeve to suppose that Malmesbury's statement must refer to another memorandum; and thus Lord Stanmore's letter has a singular historical interest, bearing, as it does, on a point that has been much discussed.

From Sir Arthur Gordon

Queen's House, Colombo, July 30th—I am very sorry that I did not contrive to meet you while in England.... I am almost equally sorry—in fact, am equally sorry—that my laziness and procrastination in sending you my notes prevented their being of any use in the revision of the seventh volume [of the Greville Memoirs]. I am the more sorry because I confess I greatly regret that the mare's-nest of the Russian Memorandum of 1844 should remain unpulled to pieces. You seem half-incredulous as to my explanation, and ask very naturally, If that is all, why should there have been any secrecy about it? The secrecy was due to the form, not the matter. The memorandum was the Emperor's own account of his conversations with the Duke, Sir R. Peel, and Lord Aberdeen, and a copy of it was sent in a private letter from Count Nesselrode to Lord Aberdeen. It was never in the hands of the ordinary diplomatic agents for official communication to the English Government, nor was it ever treated as an official document. But its importance was too great to allow its being treated as an ordinary private letter, and my father personally handed it to Lord Palmerston when replaced at the F. O. by him. Lord Palmerston delivered it in the same way to Lord Granville, Lord Granville to Lord Malmesbury, Lord Malmesbury to Lord John Russell, and Lord John to Lord Clarendon. In 1853 the Emperor made some reference to this paper which was supposed to make it a public document, and it was then printed and laid before Parliament soon after the beginning of the war. This I assure you is the whole history and mystery of the Russian Memorandum, Lord M. notwithstanding. This is not the only instance in which Lord M. has mixed up, in singular fashion, what he himself knew and what was the club gossip at the time.

The Journal here notes:—

August 20th.—Drove over to Lytchet Heath, to stay with the Eustace Cecils.

September 10th.—Joined Mrs. Watney in the 'Palatine' yacht at Bournemouth. Crossed to Trouville in the night. Lay in 'the ditch' for twenty hours. 12th, Cherbourg. Met the French fleet and saw the arsenal. 13th, back to Southampton and to Foxholes. Pleasant trip; good weather.

20th—The Eustace Cecils came: took them to Heron Court. This was the last time Lord Malmesbury saw people there.

From the Duc d'Aumale

Woodnorton, 26 septembre.

Tres cher ami,—Vous etes bien heureux de pouvoir aller vous promener a Cherbourg et a Paris. Enfin!

Oui, j'ai recu un peu de plomb, et meme assez pres de l'oeil gauche; mais le proverbe dit que ce metal est ami de l'homme. J'en serai quitte pour quelques petites bosses sous la peau, et je vous souhaite de vous porter aussi bien que je le fais en ce moment.

J'irai a Knowsley dans la seconde quinzaine d'octobre; a Sandringham, dans les premiers jours de novembre; puis mes neveux viendront tirer mes faisans. J'espere bien prendre part aux agapes du Club le 27 novembre et 11 decembre, et serai bien heureux de vous revoir un peu. En attendant je vous serre la main, mon cher confrere.

H. D'ORLEANS.

To Lord Derby

Foxholes, October 2nd.—I am amused by the Court quarrel in Germany, though I am afraid the broken heads will not be royal heads. Bismarck will wreak his vengeance on numberless victims. Geffcken is a very old friend of mine, and an occasional contributor to the 'Edinburgh Review;' but I am afraid it will go hard with him, for Bismarck regards him as a personal enemy. If the Prince had lived Bismarck could not have remained in office, and the course of affairs might have been materially changed.

* * * * *

On October 25th Reeve, with his wife, crossed over to Paris. He attended the Institut on the 26th, and heard mass at Notre Dame on the 27th; but his principal object seems to have been to consult Dr. Perrin about his eyes, which for some time back had caused him some uneasiness. A literary man of seventy-five is naturally quick to take alarm, and an English oculist had recommended an operation. This Reeve was unwilling to undergo, at any rate without another and entirely independent opinion; and as Dr. Perrin pronounced strongly against it, no operation was performed; and with care and good glasses his eyes continued serviceable to the last. On November 8th the Reeves returned to London, where, as Parliament was sitting, they remained till Christmas; and, according to the Journal:—

November 27th.—The Club was brilliant with the Duc d'Aumale, Wolseley, Lord Derby, and Coleridge. Boehm and Maunde Thompson were elected.

December 1st.—To All Souls, Oxford. Prothero, Dicey, Oman, George Curzon, &c. Stayed over Sunday.

27th.—To Timsbury: thence to Foxholes on the 29th.

January 15th, 1889.—Returned to London.

From M. B. St.-Hilaire

Paris, January 20th.—It was very good of you to think of my book on 'L'Inde Anglaise,' and I thank you for the 'Edinburgh Review' which you have sent me. I read the article with great interest. It is very well done, and I beg you to thank the author in my name for having taken the trouble to read me with so much attention and good will. I do not think I have exaggerated the danger which threatens your great enterprise in India. The Transcaspian Railway, which will very soon run from Samarkand to Tashkend, seems to me one source of it. Yours will, indeed, soon reach to Candahar; but Russia is at home in the country, whilst England is very far off. The magnanimous confidence you have in your own strength is most praiseworthy—provided that your watchfulness is not allowed to slumber.... Meanwhile I remain constant in my admiration of what the English are doing in India; and the administration of Lord Dufferin may well confirm me in my opinion. There is nothing like it, or so great as it, in the history of the past.

From Lord Dufferin

British Embassy, Rome, January 27th.

My dear Reeve,—Many thanks for your letter of the 16th. As you may well suppose, I am delighted with Lyall's article; for he is acknowledged, both by Indian and by so much of English public opinion as knows anything of the matter, to have been the best Indian public servant that the present generation has produced. In addition, or, as perhaps some would say, in spite of possessing real literary genius, he proved himself a most wise, shrewd, and capable administrator. I do not believe he made a single mistake during his whole career. At all events, I never heard of his having done so; and a slip is scarcely made in India without the fact being duly recorded. What pleases me most is that the kind words he uses about myself should be embedded in the exposition of his own opinions upon Indian questions—opinions full of acuteness, justice, and knowledge. It is these that will really make the article interesting to your readers, and consequently give a greater importance to what he has said about me than otherwise would have been the case. I have obeyed your orders in regard to sending a copy of my speech to M. Barthelemy St.-Hilaire.

The social history of the season is adequately chronicled in the Journal:—

February 5th.—The Ogilvies in London.

22nd.—Mr. Gollop [Mrs. Reeve's father] died; born October 11th, 1791. Christine had been down just before.

March 12th.—The Club. Good party: Lord Salisbury, Walpole, Tyndall, Hooker, Hewett, Lecky, Lyall, A. Russell, Layard, and self.

March 20th.—Meeting at Lord Carnarvon's about the bust of Sir C. Newton.

25th.—Breakfast at Sheen House with Comte and Comtesse de Paris, to meet Lefevre-Pontalis and Bocher.

28th.—Lunched with Major Dawson at Woolwich and went over the Arsenal. Very interesting.

April 12th.—Meeting for Matthew Arnold's Memorial. 7,000 l. raised.

May 4th.—Dined at the Royal Academy dinner. Sat by Horsley, Tyndall, and Chitty.

From Sir Arthur Gordon

May 5th.—You may rely upon it that I am absolutely right as to the Russian Memorandum—Lord Malmesbury does not himself assert that he ever saw it, which, had it existed, he must have done when Foreign Secretary. I cannot, of course, expect you to attach the same weight that I do to what I may call the personal reasons which make me utterly incredulous of Lord Malmesbury's story; but there are other reasons for doubting it, some of which may have already occurred to you. One is the alleged form of the document, which is said to be signed by the Emperor, the Duke, my father, and Sir R. Peel. Lord Malmesbury prides himself on the knowledge of diplomatic forms and etiquettes derived from his grandfather's papers. He might have known that the signature of an engagement by a Sovereign (and such a Sovereign!) on the one side and three ministers of another Sovereign on the other (thereby putting them on species of equality) was an impossibility. Such a paper, if it existed, would be signed either by both Sovereigns or by the ministers of both. I think I may say with confidence that the Emperor Nicholas was a most unlikely man to perform such an act of condescension. And why should he? He had his confidential minister with him. Another, and I think fatal, objection is that neither my father nor Lord Clarendon were altogether absolute fools, and when, in answer to the Emperor's challenge, they published the secret memorandum which had till then been handed on privately from minister to minister, they knew what they were about, and would never have put it into the power of the Emperor to retort that that was not what he referred to, but to a paper which would not improve the cordiality of the Anglo-French alliance. Again, is it likely that, if the Emperor had entered into such an agreement, he would take the trouble to write another long memorandum, containing the 'substance' of his discussions with the English ministers? This is the memorandum which was sent in a private letter, which I possess, from Count Nesselrode to my father; which was handed from minister to minister, and which was published in 1854. The original draft, Count Nesselrode said, was in the Emperor's own hand. I have another little bit of evidence which I think also goes to prove that no such agreement was entered into in 1844, as Lord Malmesbury supposes. In 1845 Count Nesselrode visited England. My father, writing to the Queen, gives an account of his conversations with Nesselrode, and says: 'His language very much resembled that held by the Emperor; and although he made no specific proposals, his declarations of support, in case of necessity, were more unequivocal.' (The italics are mine.) Could he have written this if he had already, some months before, signed an agreement with the Emperor, which was both unequivocal and specific?

From the Comte de Paris

Sheen House, 7 mai.

Mon cher Monsieur Reeve ,—Nous aussi, nous n'avons pas oublie votre presence a notre mariage le 30 mai 1864. La Comtesse de Paris et moi nous sommes bien touches de la maniere dont vous nous le rappelez, et je vous remercie de tout coeur de ce que vous me dites et des voeux que vous m'adressez en cette occasion. Au milieu de toutes les vicissitudes de notre vie pendant ces vingt-cinq ans nous avons ete constamment soutenus par le bonheur domestique que cette union nous a donne et par toutes les satisfactions que nous ont causees nos enfants.

Lorsque j'ai recu votre lettre j'allais vous ecrire, ainsi qu'a Madame Reeve, de vouloir bien venir ici le 30 mai dans l'apres-midi: nous recevons entre 2 et 5 tous les amis qui viendront feter cet anniversaire avec nous. Je me souviens bien que Madame Reeve etait avec vous a la chapelle de Kingston, mais ma memoire n'est pas sure en ce qui concerne Madame votre fille. Je vous serais bien reconnaissant de me faire savoir si elle etait avec vous ce jour-la. En attendant je vous prie de me croire Votre bien affectionne,

PHILIPPE COMTE DE PARIS.

The Journal notes:—

May 7th.—The Club: Due d'Aumale, Lord Salisbury, Wolseley, Carlisle, A. Russell, Hewett, Stephen—very brilliant.

8th.—Returned to Foxholes.

16th.—Drove to Heron Court. Lord Malmesbury dying.

17th.—Lord Malmesbury died. 22nd, attended his funeral in Priory Church. 29th, to London.

30th.—The silver wedding of the Comte and Comtesse de Paris at Sheen. All the French Royalties, Prince of Wales, &c. About five hundred people; 169 persons still alive who were at the wedding in 1864. A silver medal was sent to all the survivors.

From M. B. St.-Hilaire

Paris, June 6th.—If I am free in the autumn, it will give me great pleasure to pay you another visit at Foxholes; the first has left a pleasant memory, and I ask no better than to repeat it. But, without having to complain of old age, I find more difficulty in going about. I am not exactly ill, but my strength gradually fails—a sign that the end is not far off.

I foresaw that General Boulanger would have no success in England; you are much too serious for such a nature as his. His popularity diminishes daily; and if the Cabinet act with judgement from now to the October elections, I have no doubt they may regain public favour. The triumph of Boulangism would be the signal for horrible anarchy at home and war abroad, provoked by the madmen who had climbed into power.

Monarchy, in the person of the Comte de Paris, is losing rather than gaining ground here. If France should ever return to a dynasty, it would be more likely to be the Bonapartes. The terrible name of Napoleon has still an immense prestige, however unworthy his successors.

M. St.-Hilaire's visit did not come off. The Journal mentions many dinners, receptions, and garden parties in town during June and July, and eleven days in August on board Mrs. Watney's yacht 'Palatine,' to see the naval review on the 5th. 'Very rough weather all the time.' In September a journey to Edinburgh and on the 14th to Chesters, chronicled as 'my first visit to my daughter.' A week later Reeve returned south; and, paying a few short visits on the way, including a day at Knowsley, was back at Foxholes by the 26th.

From Count Vitzthum

Villa Vitzthum, Baden Baden, August 30th.

My dear Mr. Reeve,—I beg to send you the proofs of the preface and contents, in order to show you the plan of my book.

I am very sorry that you do not approve of the account I have given of our interview in September 1866. It was unfortunately too late to cancel the letter, but nothing would prevent leaving it out if those memoirs should ever be translated. On further consideration, and after reading the foregoing pages, you will find, I am sure, that your comment on the situation in September 1866 was not only correct, but very valuable. The peace of Europe then was threatened by two eventualities, of which one happened: by an ostensible alliance between Prussia and France, or by an immediate war between both. Rouher and Lavalette worked very hard for the alliance, and your sound judgement indicated the consequences which such an alliance would have had. I quite agree with you about these relations. But the opinion of a man like you is a fact, and an important fact; because you have been in those days what they call a representative man; because you represented a great portion of the Liberal party. It does not take one iota off the value of your opinion—which, you may depend upon it, was correctly recorded—if the course of events took another turn, and if this monster alliance remained a dream of adventurous French politicians. The thing was on the cards.

As for Napoleon's malady, all I can say [is] that Nelaton, who then was consulted for the first time, wrote a letter to King Leopold of Belgium, stating that it was very probable the Emperor of the French would be found any morning dead in his bed, and that he would most likely die before the end of November. Very truly yours,

VITZTHUM.

In consequence of this letter Mr. Reeve wrote to Mr. T. Norton Longman:—

Foxholes, September 3rd.—Count Vitzthum is about to publish two more volumes of his political reminiscences during his mission in London. I send you the index of the work, from which you will see that it contains a good deal of matter, anecdotes, &c., of interest to English readers. You will judge from the result of the former work whether you think it worth while to engage in the publication of a translation of these later volumes. But, as I am going away till the end of the month, I cannot negotiate with Count Vitzthum or with the translator, and I must beg you to take that upon yourself.

A month later, however, on October 2nd, he wrote that, after seeing the book, he was of opinion that it would not stand translation. It was reviewed in the 'Edinburgh' of January 1890, but was not translated.

From Lord Derby

November 11th.—I have only begun the Life of Lord John. It would be a very difficult one to write in a spirit at once of fairness and friendship. My impression of the man was and is that he was more thoroughly and essentially a partisan than anyone I have known; and sometimes open to the comment, that he seemed to consider the Universe as existing for the sake of the Whig party. Perhaps this would not strike anyone who was trained up in the same school, as strongly as it did me. On the other hand, I think he was more generally consistent, and had fewer of his own words to eat, than any politician of his time or of ours. His religious politics were his weak part; they were rather narrow and sectarian. I suppose he was forced by the Court into his quarrel with Palmerston; which was the trouble of his later official life, and caused these uneasy struggles to recover a lost position which did him harm. But with all drawbacks he has left an honoured and distinguished name. Do you think there is any ground for the idea which Lady Russell puts about that, if he had lived till now, he would have gone for Home Rule?



CHAPTER XXIII

THE ONE MORE CHANGE

The very wide range of Reeve's studies has appeared from many indications scattered through these pages, and it has been seen how, at different times, he was occupying himself with various subjects far outside the ordinary course of reading. These were, however, connected by some general idea which pervaded the whole. Of natural science he knew little. As a boy, the study of mathematics was irksome to him and repulsive, nor was he at any later time more favourably inclined towards it. His acquaintance with astronomy, chemistry, physics, and the cognate sciences was very limited—not more, perhaps, than he picked up in his careful and intelligent study of the articles published in the 'Edinburgh Review' during the forty years of his editorship. His real knowledge was confined by a band of history, but of history in its very widest sense, including not only war and politics and law, but political economy, literature, religion, and superstition. Of military science he had read sufficient to take a technical interest in the details of battles and campaigns, and he was perhaps one of the first landsmen of this age to understand the 'influence of sea-power.' His attention had been called to this at a very early period in his career by the utter collapse of Mehemet Ali in Syria; and reasoning on that, he had learned that 'sea-power,' or, as he preferred to call it, 'maritime-power,' controlled and directed affairs with which, at first sight, it seemed to have absolutely nothing to do.

Long before Captain Mahan began to teach, or to write those admirable works which came as a revelation to the English and the European public, he had opened the pages of the 'Edinburgh Review' to writers who, in different ways and in different degrees, were inculcating the same doctrine, which during the long peace, and by reason of the overwhelming superiority of the allies in the Russian war, had been almost forgotten, even by professional men. It would not be difficult to show how, during the thirty years which preceded the publication of Captain Mahan's 'Influence of Sea-Power,' its most important theories were illustrated and discussed in the pages of the 'Review.' The following, by one of the most accomplished officers in our navy, refers to such an article in the January number:—

From Captain Bridge, R.N.

January 19th.—As an Englishman and a sailor, I feel it to be a duty again to congratulate you on the article 'Naval Supremacy,' &c., in the new number of the 'Edinburgh Review.' That article and the one concerning which I previously addressed you can hardly fail to do good. The Maurician school and its 'two Army-corps and a cavalry division,' which were to be launched at the Caucasus, must have received a severe check from the earlier article. The disaster-breeding facts of the fort-builders can hardly survive many more such assaults as that so sharply driven home in 'Naval Supremacy.' The opinions of the writer of the latter, I venture to think, foreshadow those of the Navy on the subject of huge ships and huge guns. I hold it to be highly beneficial to the country that the editor of the 'Edinburgh Review' should have so keen an appreciation and, for a civilian, so rare a knowledge of naval affairs.

From Lord Derby

April 3rd—What a new Europe is beginning! Bismarck dismissed; Emperors holding Socialist conferences; more attempts to murder the Tsar; strikes all over the world; Germans going to Prussianise Central Africa! No want of novelty in our time and amusing enough, if one is far enough off.

From the Duc d'Aumale

Chantilly, 14 juin.—Ou diable avais-je la tete, mon cher ami? (ne montrez pas ce preambule a nos amis puritains.) Je croyais bien vous avoir ecrit que je comptais passer la mer vers le 22, diner avec le Club le 24, embrasser mes neveux et nieces de toutes generations, voir quelques amis, et rentrer ici vers la fin de la semaine. Je persiste dans ce projet, weather permitting; c'est-a-dire sauf le cas de tempete que l'on est bien force de prevoir avec une pareille saison. A bientot donc, s'il plait a Dieu. Je finis mieux que je ne commence, et je vous serre la main.

H. D'O.

From the Duc d'Aumale

Chantilly, 26 juillet.—J'essaye de chasser par le travail les preoccupations qui m'obsedent. Je n'y reussis pas toujours. Est-ce l'effet de l'age? mais je suis de plus en plus anxieux sur l'avenir de mon pays et meme de l'Europe. Nous sommes dans le faux depuis 1848, et il est sorti de la guerre de '70 un etat de choses bien perilleux.

Au revoir et mille amities.

The diary and the correspondence for the rest of the year are singularly barren of interest. A troublesome attack of sciatica in the end of July led to Reeve's being advised to try Harrogate, whither he accordingly went in the beginning of August. He found the place—possibly also the water—disagreeable, and after a week's stay he went on to Bolton Abbey, to Minto, and to Chesters. By the end of the month he was back at Foxholes, where he remained throughout September. Early in October he went for a ten days' visit to Knowsley, where he met Froude and the Duc d'Aumale, with whom he returned to London. Then to Foxholes for a month, coming up to town in the middle of November, and—with the exception of a week at Easter—staying there till May 1891.

From Lord Derby

Knowsley, January 20th.—What do you think of Home Rule in its present phase? Chamberlain says it is dead; I say it is badly crippled, but capable of a good deal of mischief still. I see no new question coming forward, except that of strikes, eight-hours legislation, and Socialism generally.

Do you ever see the 'New Review'? I picked it up yesterday, and read a very pretty Socialist programme by Morris and a Mr. Bernard Shaw, whom I never heard of before, but who is apparently rather clever and rather cracked. I suspect ideas of that class are making progress.

This letter, though not calling for any hurry, Reeve answered immediately, as was his general custom. It was indeed only by this prompt attention that, with the enormous correspondence which he carried on, he could prevent an accumulation which would have been overwhelming.

To Lord Derby

62 Rutland Gate, January 21st.—I think Home Rule, as an English party cry, has received a death blow, and cannot be used to bring a party into power. But Ireland remains open, an eternal field of agitation, and the Irishmen are still in the House of Commons. Perhaps the want of funds may embarrass them. I have not seen the 'New Review,' but there is a vast deal of lawlessness and wild speculation in the air, injurious to the first conditions of social life, and I confess I have no unbounded confidence in the boasted good sense of the English people; they are very ignorant and very selfish. No one tells them so many sensible home truths as yourself. As for the strikes, the strikers are the greatest sufferers.

I have published a remarkable article on the fiscal system of the United States—by an American—which I hope you will read. My contributor thinks there are great difficulties ahead in America, and Mr. Blaine's bluster is an attempt to direct public attention into another channel.

I have been laid up for some days with a cold and gout, but have been out to-day and am better. I never remember so terrible a winter; but we hope it is passing away, though it is still freezing here.

Foxholes, May 12th.—I was sorry to leave London without seeing you and Lady Derby again; but the Fates were against me: you were laid up with cold, and I have been troubled for some weeks with sciatica, which impedes my movements. I hope you have shaken off your attack and will get out of town. The atmosphere of London seems to be in a very noxious state, and I don't know that the atmosphere of the House of Commons is much better. A committee of the whole House strikes an outsider as the clumsiest machine for legislation that was ever invented.

An unlimited power of moving amendments brings us to the same results as the Polish Veto.

I hope to come up to the dinners of The Club on June 2nd and 16th. On the latter day the Duc d'Aumale will dine with us, so I trust you will keep it free.

From Lord Derby

May 13th.—You are quite right about the House of Commons. They will pass the Land Bill, I suppose, but scarcely anything else. Most of the obstruction is unintended; loquacity, vanity, and fear of constituents do more mischief than faction. I am not sure that it is an unmixed evil that the legislative coach should be compelled to drive slowly.

For Reeve the principal social event of the year, or rather the one most out of ordinary course, was the conferring an honorary degree on the Duc d'Aumale by the University of Oxford. Of the preliminary step no record remains, but it would seem that at a very early stage Reeve was requested to sound the Duke, who wrote on November 30th, 1890, that he should feel greatly honoured if the University of Oxford should confer on him the degree of D.C.L.—'si pauvre legiste que je sois.' On this Reeve wrote to Dr. Liddell, then Dean of Christ Church, [Footnote: After having held this office for thirty-six years, Dr. Liddell retired in 1891, and died at the age of 87, on January 18th, 1898.] who replied on December 2nd:—

Dear Mr. Reeve,—I shall be proud to propose H.R.H.'s (the Duc d'Aumale's) name for an Honorary Degree at the next Encaenia. This will not be till June 17th, 1891. I hope his R.H. will be my guest on the occasion. Meantime, it is our rule that no mention should be made of the name to be proposed. Yours very truly,

H. G. LIDDELL.

Other correspondence about this there was, and on February 25th, 1891, Dr. Liddell again wrote:—

The arrangements you suggest for the Duc d'Aumale will suit very well. Of course it is running it rather fine to arrive at 11.13; but we will see about this as the time approaches. Meantime I must ask you and the Duke's friends not to say anything about the matter at present. I shall have to give notice to our Council in May. A fortnight after, his name will be submitted to ballot; and though there can be no reasonable doubt that H.R.H.'s name will be received with acclamation, they make a great point of secrecy till the ballot takes place.

Perhaps about the beginning of May you will be so good as to send me a complete statement of H.R.H.'s claims to an Honorary Degree. I know much about them, but should be glad to be fully equipped.

From the Duc d'Aumale

Chantilly, 9 juin.—Bon! tres cher ami, nous irons, s'il plait a Dieu, ensemble a Oxford, le 17, par 9.55 en cravate blanche. Je compte arriver le 14 au soir a Claridge's, ou je serai present le lundi, 15, de 10 a midi, et de 6 a 7; le mardi, 16, de 10 a midi. Si vous pouvez venir m'y voir, je serai tres heureux, car j'ai encore besoin de quelques renseignements complimentaires.

Vous m'avez offert l'hospitalite du Dean, et je lui ai ecrit que je l'acceptais. Mais en quoi consiste cette hospitalite? Simple luncheon suivi d'un depart, ou diner et coucher au doyenne? Je ne voudrais pas manquer de courtoisie; but above all I would not intrude—et je suis tres dispose a me retirer de tres bonne heure. Seulement j'aimerais a etre fixe pour prendre tous mes arrangements.

The Journal simply notes that on June 16th the Duc d'Aumale dined at The Club; and on the 17th 'with Duc d'Aumale to Oxford, where he was made D.C.L. Lunch at All Souls; very pleasant day.' Reeve left early and returned at once to Foxholes.

From the Duc d'Aumale

Chantilly, 1er juillet.—Apres votre depart de Christ Church [Oxford] le 17 nous avons eu le ou la 'Gaudy.' Ainsi que vous l'aviez prevu, j'ai du dire quelques mots a peine prepares. Comme il n'y avait pas de reporter, et que je n'avais aucune note, et comme l'auditoire, y compris nos Seigneurs les eveques, avait accueilli mon speech avec bienveillance, je l'ai note sur le papier—comme disent les musiciens—avant de me coucher. Vous avez ete presque mon parrain a Oxford, je vous en dois bien la copie. C'est, en tous cas, un temoignage de ma fidele amitie.

The speech which follows, although delivered under circumstances which necessitated a complimentary tone, is a more than usually graceful tribute to our old Universities, and the introduction of the little analogue is singularly happy. The Duke, whose letters to Reeve are all in French, wrote this verbatim as here given, in correct English, perfectly well spelt.

Mr. Dean, my Lords and Gentlemen,—Let me first express how highly I prize the honour which has been conferred upon me to-day, and how glad I am to be so connected with your illustrious University. I have always admired the University of Oxford. I have more than once visited this town, when I received a princely hospitality in the noble baronial halls of this neighbourhood—Nuneham, Blenheim—or when I was quietly living on the banks of the Avon. Often I brought here my French friends, and I tried to explain the peculiarities, the complicated machinery of this illustrious corporation; to show how, remaining faithful to the traditions, preserving your old customs, you did not remain deaf to what might be said without, nor blind to the movement of the world; how, slowly perhaps, but prudently, step by step, you managed to bring the necessary changes, the wanted modifications, so as to keep pace with the times without breaking with the past.

'Mais c'est le couteau de Jeannot que cette Universite,' said one of my interlocutors. Well, I will give you the tale of Jeannot's knife.

There was once a young peasant called Jeannot, and he had a knife of which he took great care. He found that the blade was rusting and he changed the blade. Then he found that the handle was decaying from dry-rot, and he changed the handle; and so on. His friends laughed at him, and would not take the same care of their knives, which they lost—one breaking the blade, another the handle. But Jeannot, having always kept his knife in good order, could always make use of it, cleverly and powerfully.

Well, I think there is some analogy between the tale of this humble man and the history of your great University. It seems to me I see the huge frame of a large fabric which has stood for centuries glorious and proud. The stones are changed, the bricks, the mortar, or the roof are renewed; and the fabric still stands through the ages, through the storms, glorious and proud. And I hope it will so remain and stand everlasting, with its old frame and the new materials; and I wish glory and prosperity to the University of Oxford.

To all who have thought of my name and conferred upon me the honour I have just received, and to those who have given me such a kindly reception, I send my best thanks, and I wish prosperity and success.

At this time, and indeed ever since his retirement from the Council Office, Reeve's chief work was in connexion with the 'Review;' but he also did a very great deal as literary adviser of the Longmans. He had indeed, to some extent, acted in this capacity ever since he undertook the conduct of the 'Review;' the two offices fitted into and were supplementary to each other; and it will be remembered that in 1875 [Footnote: See ante, p. 243.] he had contemplated retiring from the public service, with the view of undertaking the main responsibility of this work for the firm. Circumstances had delayed his retirement; but by an arrangement with the firm in 1878, which continued in force during the rest of his life, the number of works he examined and reported on was considerably increased, and must have been very large. Books in French, German, or Italian offered for translation, MSS. in English offered for publication—whatever there was of grave, serious, or important, as well as a good deal that was not, was sent to him for a first or a revised opinion. And this opinion was given very frankly, and most commonly in the fewest possible words: 'My advice is that you have nothing to do with it' was a not unfrequent formula. Another, less frequent, was, 'He—the aspirant to literary fame and emolument—can neither write nor spell English;' 'I wish they wouldn't send their trash to me' was an occasional prayer; 'Seems to me sheer nonsense;'—'What a waste of time and labour!'—'It is very provoking that people should attempt to write books who cannot write English,' were occasional reports. Of course many of his judgements were very different: 'A work of great interest which must have a large sale;' 'Secure this if you possibly can;' 'A most able work, but will scarcely command a remunerative sale;' 'Not worth translating, but send me a copy for the "Review,"' are some of his more favourable verdicts. But in all cases the judgements were sharp and decisive; there was about them nothing of the celebrated 'This work might be very good if it was not extremely bad,' or its converse. These reports were, of course, in the highest degree confidential; and, especially of the unfavourable ones, Reeve made a point of forgetting all about the origin of them. On one occasion, when a reference was made to a work he had reported on a few weeks before, he wrote in reply, 'The numerous MSS. &c. sent for an opinion leave no trace on my memory.'

As it was with printed books and larger MSS., so it was with articles submitted for the 'Review;' but he did not encourage casual contributions, and seldom—perhaps never—accepted any without some previous understanding. The political articles and the reviews of important books were almost invariably written in response to a direct invitation; but whether the articles sent in were invited or offered, he equally reserved the right to express his approval or disapproval or disagreement, and to insist, if necessary, on the article being remodelled or withdrawn. Such an insistence is more than once noticed in his correspondence, quite irrespective of the high reputation of the author. Probably every one whose contributions have been at all numerous has had an opportunity of noticing how perfectly candid and yet how courteous his remarks always were. If an article pleased him, he said so in terms that from anyone else might have seemed extravagant. Many letters of this type might be given; one must suffice, written to a valued contributor, dead, unfortunately, many years ago—Colonel Charles Cornwallis Chesney:—

C. O., February 26th, 1873.—I received the proofs of your article on Lee last night, and therefore I conclude that you have received them also. I don't exaggerate the least when I say that the article strikes me as a chef d'oeuvre of military biography. You have drawn a most heroic character with peculiar grace and fervour, and the account of the military operations is singularly clear and interesting. It only strikes me that you have repeated the comparison with Hannibal rather too often.

Pray be so good as to return the proofs to me as soon as you can, that I may have the article made up and printed off. I feel infinitely obliged to you for it.

The value of such praise was heightened, its apparent extravagance done away with, by the knowledge that dissatisfaction would be expressed in language equally unmistakable, and that either by the contributor or the editor the modifications which seemed to him desirable would be made. It was partly because he reserved to himself this power and accepted all the responsibility, that he insisted so strenuously on the anonymous character of the articles. But more even than that was his abhorrence of anything like 'log-rolling,' which, in his opinion, was inseparable from signed reviews. To the very last he discouraged, and indeed openly expressed his disapproval and dislike of the presumably inspired announcements of authors' names in the 'Athenaeum' or other journals. Here is an extract from a letter dated October 6th, 1891, which illustrates this objection:— 'The only objection I have to the republication of articles with the name of the writer is that it destroys their anonymous character, which ought especially to be retained when they contain criticism of contemporaries.' So careful was he lest anything might warp the perfect fairness of criticism, which should 'nothing extenuate, nor set down aught in malice.' I, who write these lines, can say positively, after having written for the 'Review' under Reeve for upwards of twenty years, that in all that time I never received a hint or suggestion that any book should be dealt with otherwise than on its merits; and whilst engaged on this present work I have learned, for the first time, that men whose books I have reviewed, not always favourably, were personal friends of the editor. The following letter, addressed to Mr. T. N. Longman, is merely a concrete illustration of this:—

December 26th, 1891.—I thought it best to tell Froude frankly that the review of his book [Footnote: The Divorce of Catherine of Aragon,' in the Review of January 1892.] in the 'Edinburgh' would be an unfavourable one. At the same time I disclaimed in the strongest language any disposition to make a personal attack on himself. Unfortunately he seems to ascribe adverse criticism of his works to personal animosity, which, in his case, is entirely wanting.

It is a painful necessity. Froude and his book are too important to be passed over in silence. But the judicial character and consistency, and I may say honour, of the 'Review' absolutely require that the truth should be told about the book. I should consider it a derogation to my duty to the 'Review' if, from personal motives or affection, I suppressed an adverse criticism of a work which imperatively demands an answer. The independence of the 'Review' requires an independent judgement; but I expressly stipulated with the writer of the article that he should abstain from bitterness, which was carried too far in Goldwin Smith's article on the same subject in 1858. The 'Review' is pledged to the views already expressed on that occasion.

I have therefore modified as far as possible any expressions which appeared to be of too censorious a character; but it is impossible to avoid condemning a mistaken book because the author is a personal friend. Judex damnatur si nocens absolvitur is our motto.

Froude does not like Mr. Gardiner's book. He says, 'It's a menagerie of tame beasts.' I think very highly of the book; and as we differ, I have yielded to his wish to be released from the engagement.

Nobody can regret more than I do any differences between old friends; but my duty is to look solely to the consistency and integrity of the 'Review,' without which criticism is worthless; and this consideration leaves me no other course.

Another point, of a similar nature, I can illustrate by my own experience. I had undertaken, at Reeve's request, to review a rather important historical work published by Longmans, but on reading it was so unfavourably impressed by it that I wrote to say that the best thing I could do would be to return the volumes; that the book was bad, and if I reviewed it I must say so; but that doing this in the publisher's own Review would have a certain resemblance to seething a kid in its mother's milk, and might probably be objected to. 'Not a bit of it,' was the sense of the reply I received by return of post: 'a bad book may be the text for an interesting article, and we have nothing to do with who published it.' So I expressed my opinion of the book in very plain terms; the review was printed exactly as I wrote it, and the editor thanked me warmly for what he was pleased to speak of as an 'excellent article.' It may, perhaps, be assumed that this was not an isolated case; but written evidence of any others is not before me.

After returning from Oxford, Reeve spent the rest of the year at Foxholes, He had intended going to London and possibly to Scotland in October, but an accidental stumble in his library over a heavy despatch box made a nasty wound on the left shin, which took many weeks in healing and prevented his travelling till the middle of December. On the 19th he went to town, where, with the exception of some short visits to Bath or to Foxholes, he remained till June, dining several times at The Club, entertaining at home in his customary manner, and keeping up a constant—almost daily—correspondence, such as has been indicated, with the Longmans, for the most part with the head of the firm, whom he had known from childhood and habitually addressed by his Christian name.

As he returned to Foxholes the country was in the throes of a general election. Tired, it would seem, of steady and consistent government, it longed for a change—anything for a change; and so opened the door for an administration whose almost avowed object was to play skittles with the Constitution—to bowl down the Union, the Established Church, the House of Lords, the rights of property, and any other little trifles that were sacred to law and religion. It was with deep regret that Reeve watched the overthrow of what he considered the true Liberal party, and he wrote to Mr. T. Norton Longman:—

Foxholes, July 14th—The results of the elections are far worse than could be expected. Some of them are very odd. I have to deplore the defeat of many of my friends. I suppose the Queen will have to make up her mind to a ministry composed of men she abhors; but the majority will have in it inherent weakness and the seeds of dissolution.

I have found it difficult to say anything about the elections and have been as short as possible.

From a somewhat different point of view, he wrote a few days later to Lord Derby:—

Foxholes, July 22nd.—I have, of course, been watching with great interest the progress of the elections, and I am happy to say that Hampshire, like all the southern counties, comes out with a clean Unionist bill. If the ultimate majority was to be small, is it not better to be in opposition than in power? Mr. Gladstone's position, as the man responsible for the conduct of affairs, is much less desirable than that of Lord Salisbury, for he has the better half of the country dead against him. How curious it is to trace on the map in the 'Times' the old traditions of Saxon, Celtic, Mercian, and Danish origin in the counties of England, Ireland, and Wales! Are the Celts to govern the Saxons?

Early in August Reeve was visited at Foxholes by Count Adam Krasinski [Footnote: Son of Ladislas and grandson of Reeve's early friend Sigismond Krasinski. He was born in 1870, and married at Vienna in 1897.]—a connecting link with the past, the merry days when he was young; and on Krasinski's departure, he went north to visit some friends in Wales and thence on to Chesters.

Parliament met on August 4th, and on a simple motion of want of confidence, as an amendment to the Address, the Ministry was defeated. Lord Salisbury resigned, and Mr. Gladstone came into office with a Cabinet in which every shade of unconstitutional opinion and every socially destructive fad were fully represented. Reeve consoled himself with the belief that such a ministry could not last. To Mr. T. Norton Longman he wrote:—

Chesters, August 22nd.—I have been paying some visits in Wales and have come on here, where Mrs. Reeve preceded me. We find the Ogilvies very flourishing, and the place beautiful. Here, at least, it is not hot, which seems to be the grievance elsewhere.

We are going to Rutland Gate on Friday and to Foxholes on Monday, and shall remain there, except for a visit to a neighbour.

I think Mr. Gladstone's Ministry a wretched affair. The old ones are worn out, and the young ones are not broken in, and bring no weight at all. The sole gratification of every one of them is absolute submission and obedience to the Chief. But he will have some troublesome outsiders.

Foxholes, September 7th.—We shall stay here till October 6th, when I mean to come to London for two or three days, on our way to Knowsley. The world seems fast asleep after the excitement of the summer, and people have nothing to talk or write about but the cholera—which is not amusing.

It was whilst at Chesters that Reeve received a curious note from the Marquis of Lorne, written to 'The Editor of the "Edinburgh Review,"' as to a total stranger:—

Osborne, August 21st.

SIR,—I have found a number of original unpublished letters written by the Duke of Argyll in 1705 and the Earl of Leven in 1706, from Edinburgh, to Queen Anne and Godolphin, on the measures taken in the Scots Parliament for the Union between England and Scotland, and am writing a notice of and giving extracts from these papers, and wish to ask if you would care to have this notice as an article in your 'Review.'

I remain, yours faithfully,

LORNE.

Reeve's answer corrected the mistake, and in forwarding the MS. referred to, to Foxholes, Lord Lorne wrote:—

Kensington Palace, September 5th.

My dear and ancient friend and editor,—I did not know, to my disgrace, that you are still in command. I never thought when the grey mare subsided under you at Inveraray, in—year, [Footnote: Blank in the original; meaning presumably—'so long ago that I've forgotten.' Reeve's one recorded visit to Inveraray was in August 1858 (ante, vol. i. p. 395), when the Marquis of Lorne was a boy of thirteen.] that in 1892 I should be writing to you about proofs! It makes me feel young again to think of you in your old capacity. If old times' gossip suits the 'Review,' please send the proofs to me here—to Kensington Palace—whence, if I be away, they will be forwarded to me.

Yours very faithfully,

LORNE.

A few days later came the following letter from Count Adam Krasinski, to whom, when at Foxholes, Reeve had given the letters of his grandfather, Sigismond Krasinski.

Royalin, September 10th.

SIR,—On arriving in Warsaw a few days ago, I took the liberty of sending you some bottles of wine from our cellar, among which is some Hungarian Tokay, one of the oldest wines we have, bought by my great-great-grandfather, the father of General Vincent, in the year of the latter's birth. I hope you will be so good as to accept this little present and make it welcome; for, being young myself, I have chosen an old ambassador to thank you for your kindness to me. I can never sufficiently thank you for the charming way in which you have made me the handsome present of my grandfather's correspondence, which is of inestimable value to me. The more I read it the more I realise its value. It contains the whole developement of a noble character, and a fine nature, set forth in long, full, and frequent letters to a trusted friend. And what a pleasure it is to have the answers of this friend, so clearly showing your relations to each other, and the reciprocal influence of two minds! Thanks, and again thanks.

I am very well, and am at present with my stepfather in the Grand Duchy of Posnanie. Our plans for the winter are not yet fixed. Paris attracts me greatly; but, on the other hand, I am advised to go to Heidelberg, where there is better air and a milder climate. In any case, I will endeavour to revisit England next year, and so recall myself to your memory.

Agreez, Monsieur, l'expression de ma tres grande consideration, a laquelle je joins des sentiments respectueux pour Madame votre femme.

ADAM KRASINSKI.

To Mr. Norton Longman at this time Reeve wrote—primarily on the business of the 'Review,' but incidentally on a literary conundrum which was just then causing a little excitement:—

Foxholes, September 16th.—I do not think the translation of a French book on Political Economy is prima facie advisable. But the book seems (from the accounts in the 'Nation') to be so excellent that I should be glad to see it, and may have it reviewed in the 'Edinburgh.' The title is, 'Le Capital, la Speculation et la Finance au XIXe Siecle;' par Claudio Jannet. Published by Plon.

No one who knew Sir Richard Wallace could believe that he wrote 'The Englishman in Paris.' I said from the first that it was a mere collection of old gossip to be passed off on the English public as something racy. If Grenville Murray were alive, this is exactly the sort of thing he would have done. But Grenville Murray left a son, who must now be grown up, and who may have inherited some of his father's sinister talents. They have lived for many years in Paris. Sir Richard Wallace was the very type of a gentleman of the highest breeding—rather stern, melancholy, not at all humorous, and incapable of vulgarity or pretence.

October slipped away in visits to Stratton (Lord Northbrook's) and to Knowsley, and the remainder of the year for the most part at Foxholes. In December Reeve was proposing to have a review of Sir Mountstuart Grant Duff's 'Life of Sir Henry Maine,' and consulted the author as to who would be the best fitted to write it. This is what Sir Mountstuart wrote in reply:—

Twickenham, December 11th.—I am very proud to find that so excellent a judge thinks well of my little memoir of Maine. As to the article about which you write, I think Sir Frederick Pollock would be very much the best man to undertake it—the only man who could tell us, without any bias, what I exceedingly want to know: how much of Maine's juridical speculations, especially in 'Ancient Law,' is finally accepted. He may say that he has said his say about Maine; but he has not; he has said a little, but I am sure he has a great deal more to say. I wish to know the real value of each of Maine's books.... I am writing a quite small book about Renan—the only great Frenchman of our day whom you did not know very well.

The next was a Christmas greeting from Lord Derby, with an interesting comment on the situation in France:—

Knowsley, December 5th.—Thanks for your letter of inquiry and good wishes; the latter are cordially returned. Lady Derby joins me in the hope that the coming year may be one of health and happiness to you and yours. I cannot give a very rosy account of myself, being still ill and weak; even if all goes well, I expect to have to lead in future a life of quiet and privacy. My days of speeches are almost certainly ended; and after forty-four years of public life, I do not much regret it.

The developement of events in 1893 will be interesting to watch. All reports agree that Gladstone is taking the work of his office very easily, and that he leaves nearly everything to his colleagues. That will not be so easy in the Session. The Cabinet will be prevented by fear of ridicule from breaking up on the Irish Bill, but all their friends and backers seem prepared for its failure.

You are a hopeless pessimist as to French affairs. They certainly are not going on smoothly, but where is the new Boulanger? Bourbons and Bonapartes are played out; and France might advertise for a dictator without finding one. If that be so, what threatens the republic? A socialist outbreak would only strengthen it. Surely a nation may go on muddling its affairs a long while without mortal harm.

Waddington, I am told, was informed by his friends that he had no right to remain a Senator without taking his seat, and that he must give up one position or the other. This is the excuse made for his recall. The truth, I suppose, is that his place was wanted. He will be a real loss.

With the new year the party from Foxholes came to town, and there Reeve was laid up with a serious illness which lasted nearly a month. The Journal notes on February 7th—'I attended a dinner of The Club, and resigned the treasurership, which I had held for twenty-five years.' A corresponding entry a month later, on March 7th, is 'At the third dinner of The Club. Lord Salisbury came "to my obsequies" and Gladstone wrote to me. Grant Duff elected to the treasurership.'

Sir Mountstuart Grant Duff has been so good as to amplify this by a note from his own diary. 'At the dinner on February 7th, 1893'—he writes—'I was in the chair.... Reeve made a statement for which he had prepared me by letter, to the effect that his great age, breaking health, and frequent absences from London, would oblige him to resign ere long the treasurership of The Club—the only office which exists in connection with it. He has held it for some five-and-twenty years, and it is not surprising that his voice faltered as he addressed us....

March 21st—Dined with The Club, taking my seat for the first time as treasurer. After the last meeting mentioned, Reeve wrote to me to say that there was a feeling in favour of my becoming his successor, and asked whether I should object. I replied in the negative, and on the 7th I was unanimously elected, upon the proposal of Sir Henry Elliot, who was in the chair, and was seconded by Lord Salisbury.'

Of the correspondence of this period there is little. Lord Derby, who was almost, or quite, the last of his political correspondents, was too ill to write, and died on April 21st. On the 27th Reeve attended the funeral service at St. Margaret's. Letters relating to the 'Review,' of course, continued. Here are three referring to a political problem which, so lately as five years ago, few could have the patience to be bothered with. That Reeve, at his advanced age, could take it up with such interest is a strong proof of the vitality and even freshness of his intellect.

To Rear-Admiral Bridge

62 Rutland Gate: April 27th.

My dear admiral,—I wish you would read an article in 'Blackwood's Magazine' for May (just out) on the Russian occupation of Manchuria. I never read a more impudent piece of blague. ——— must have written it. Nobody else would boast of swindling the Chinese with a false map.

This induces me to ask whether you could not give me a short article for the 'Review' on The Russians on the Pacific' and the naval effects of their position at Vladivostock. They have made it a fortress, but it will take a long time to make it a settlement. But it may become important.

Yours very faithfully,

H. REEVE.

April 30th.—I am very glad you will revert to the North Pacific. You should refer to your excellent article of 1880, which I have read over again. It seems to exhaust the subject as far as relates to the settlements on the Amoor, and even as to Vladivostock; but I suppose that thirteen years have materially augmented the strength of Russia on the Pacific, and any additional information would be valuable.

Foxholes, May 23rd.—I am much obliged to you for your interesting article. I think the best heading would be 'Russia on the Pacific.' As I am much pressed for room, I have ventured to excise some of your introductory remarks, which are not essential to the main objects of the paper; but when you come to positive business at Vladivostock, all that you say is most excellent and important. I believe the Siberian railroad—like the line to Samarkand—is only a single line. Such a line 5,000 miles long is a very ineffective instrument for military and commercial purposes. How much can it carry, allowing for return trains, chiefly empty? Where is Russia, with a debt equal in charge to our own, to find forty millions sterling for such a work, which would be wholly unproductive? It is true that, by employing troops and Turkomans, the work may be done cheaply; but all this will take a long time.

I am very glad you touch on the question between France and Siam: it is a serious one.

In the early days of July the Reeves settled down for the summer at Foxholes, avoiding the great heat, with the thermometer at 80 deg. F. when in London it was reaching as high as 93 deg. F. In the beginning of September Reeve, together with his wife, returned to London, crossed over to Boulogne, and so to Chantilly, where, as the guests of the Due d'Aumale, they spent his 80th birthday. They stayed there till the 12th, and returned, again by Boulogne and London, to Foxholes. It was his last visit to the France he had loved so well. The year was in many respects a sad one. His own health was becoming very uncertain, and gout, feverish colds, and violent bleeding of the nose laid him up for weeks at a time. The deaths of his friends, too, recurring in rapid succession, were frequent reminders of what he had written nearly sixty-two years before: 'Between seventy and eighty there rarely remains more than one change to be made.' [Footnote: See ante, vol. i. p. 17.] He had now exceeded the higher limit, and it happened that the obituary of 1893 contained an unusual number of men of high literary and scientific distinction. Through all, however, Reeve's head remained clear, and his work was seldom disturbed. There is no sickness or feebleness in the following:—

To Mr. T. Norton Longman

Foxholes, October 3rd.—I have read a great part of the 'Life of Pusey'—an appalling book from the length of the letters in it. In my opinion it lays bare, as nothing else has done, the total weakness and inconsistency of the Tractarians, and their absolute disloyalty to the Church of England. It is very difficult and very important to find a suitable person to review such a work, for it must be done in the spirit of the articles of Arnold, Tait, and Arthur Stanley, which express the principles of the 'Edinburgh Review.' I incline to think it had better be done by a layman. The parsons are all hostile to their own Church.

To Rear-Admiral Bridge

62 Rutland Gate, November 12th.—We are come to town, and I hope it will not be long before I have the pleasure of seeing you. Meanwhile, I have been reading again the article on Mediterranean Politics which you gave us last autumn. The combination of the French and Russian fleets seems to me to be a matter of grave importance. Both those countries are unhappily animated by very hostile intentions to us. They have discovered that it is only by a superiority of sea power in the Mediterranean that they can accomplish their twofold object, which I take to be for Russia to force the Dardanelles and for France to compel us to evacuate Egypt. This seems to me to be the but of the alliance, in as far as it is an alliance. It is all very well to talk of our maritime supremacy, but have we got it? You know, and I do not. But to my mind, the worst is that we have got a Government—or rather a minister—profoundly incapable of foreseeing a great emergency or providing against it. It is quite possible that the Gladstone administration may be blown up by a tremendous catastrophe. These thoughts perplex me; but I hope you will tell me that I am quite wrong and that Britannia rules the waves.

An exceptional chance gives us a picture of Foxholes, at this time, when twenty years' occupation had enabled its owner to perfect all the details which go to make up comfort.

During his absence in London in the beginning of 1894, he let it, for the only time, to his friend, Lord Hobhouse, for many years a member of the Judicial Committee, and just then convalescent after a serious illness. A couple of notes which Lord Hobhouse wrote during his four weeks' tenancy may be classed as 'Interiors' or 'Exteriors' from the practical point of view.

Foxholes, February 16th.

My dear Reeve,—I imagine that this morning Mrs. Reeve will have got a note from my wife telling her of our settlement here. I was contemplating 'a few words' to you, when Lady H. told me of her writing; and now comes your letter, partly of welcome, partly of information.

I don't think it possible that we could be more happily housed. Size, arrangement, warmth, beauty, inside and out, evidences everywhere of cultivated taste and refined pursuits—all is calculated for enjoyment and repose, probably for anybody, certainly for an invalid. I have established myself in a corner of the library—which, partly from its intrinsic advantages and partly from the presence of a thick cushion in the seat of the armchair, I conjecture to be yours—between the writing desk and the N.W. bookcase, with the N.E. window at my back and my legs protruding beyond the jamb of the mantelpiece into the sacred [Greek: temeuos], which is guarded by a low marble fence, and over which the fire which I worship has sway. Both by day and by night the situation is perfect for distribution of light and warmth. And I can read almost all my waking hours; for all through my illness my head has been clear. My principal embarrassment is to choose among the many temptations with which your goodly bookcases beset me. However, after reading Traill's 'William III.' (a rather thin composition, I think) I have settled into Gardiner's 'Civil War,' which is much more solid and satisfying.

This morning I have been reading your little notice of Lord Derby; and I think you do not speak at all too highly of his capacity for examining political and social movements. In 1880 I delivered a lecture, which was printed and circulated, on the eternal division of political tendencies—movement and rest; and I took Lord Derby (then temporarily in the Liberal Camp) as the best type of conservatism; cool, patient, keen, sceptical, critical, just, impartial, with a mind always open to conviction, but refusing to move until convinced. Such men are an invaluable element in the deliberative stages of every question; but their very critical powers paralyse action, and when movement becomes necessary their hesitations are a drawback. I fancy that Cornewall Lewis was just such another, but I did not know so much about him....

For me, I improve, slowly but enough, I think, to show at least that our move was not premature. In the pick of the day (would that it were always afternoon) I am able to walk for an hour or more, and I get good sleep in the most luxurious of beds. Pray give my kind remembrances to Mrs. Reeve, and believe me,

Sincerely yours,

HOBHOUSE.

Foxholes, March 6th.—Alas, alas! time flies away, and pleasant things come to an end, and I shall not have many days' more enjoyment of your charming house and library and outlook. But my time has not been wasted. I have recovered strength, a good deal more than I expected, and am probably now—at all events hope, by our return next Monday or Tuesday, to be—able to re-enter the ordinary routine of life. Of course, we have had, like other people, a great deal of blustering wind—for the most part from north-west—very cold and very noisy in your chimneys. But there has also been a great deal of sunshine with the gales, and the exposure of your house to south-east has, on most days, given us a sheltered walk. Moreover, your soil is so porous and absorbent, that one gets dry walking immediately after rain. I have only been kept indoors two days since our arrival.

A few letters from Reeve himself show the continued activity of his mind, and at the same time his consciousness of, his readiness for, the end which was drawing nigh.

To Mr. T. Norton Longman

Foxholes, May 29th.—Lord Derby's Speeches contain more political wisdom than any other book of our time. I think people will find out its permanent value.

June 13th.—I have nothing to correct or alter in the Greville Memoirs, and am glad to find that some sale of them goes on.

I am much touched by the [approaching] death of Coleridge, whom I have known so well and so long. I expect he will not survive to-day. He dined with us at The Club on April 24th, and was then very well. Sic transit.

Foxholes, October 23rd.—The notices of our old friend Froude [Footnote: He died on October 20th, in his 77th year.] have been very gratifying—especially the leader in the 'Times.' He leaves the world quite glorified, and they now find out what a great man he was. I wonder whether you are going to attend the funeral. I never send wreaths on such occasions, but if I ever did send one it would be now, for I am truly affected by the loss of such a friend. The newspapers seem to have discovered that there were some big men in the last generation, and that there are very few of them in the present.