influence which he had lost. It was essential, for the sake of his own reputation, that he should pass a definite period as an independent member of Parliament.

For nearly four years Lord John remained out of office; but this period of release from official work was anything but one of idleness. Lord John's literary instincts were so strong that they were certain to assert themselves at a fresh opportunity. At the time of his retirement the heavy task, which he had undertaken in 1852, of editing Mr. Moore's Memoirs, was practically finished; the final volume was in the printer's hands. The duty, to which he had concurrently committed himself, of editing Mr. Fox's correspondence, was approaching completion; while, as for minor literary labours, such as prefaces and introductions to other people's works, they were-like silver in the days of Solomon-of not much account in the life of Lord John.1

The gradual conclusion of these labours suggested to him another work; and it occurred to him very naturally that, after editing Fox's letters, he had peculiar qualifications for writing his life. Sir George Lewis, whom he consulted on the subject, advised him to expand his project into a History of England from the Peace of Paris in 1763 to the Peace of Paris in 1815; and Lord John thus disposed of the suggestion :

MY DEAR LEWIS,- . . I have thought much of your suggestion of giving an account of our whole history from 1763 to 1815, instead of hanging all my remarks on the biography of Fox. But, although I might have attempted such a task twenty years ago, or even in 1841, I must now confess non eadem ætas, non mens; and, if I can extend and connect Mr. Fox's life, so as to bring in his speeches and letters, it is as much as I can hope to accomplish. Besides, biography has no dignity, and neither forces one to insert long and tiresome accounts of battles (except in case of a General), nor to omit small and interesting details. Mahon, though intentionally fair, is trifling and depreciating;

1 Lord John wrote in 1853 a preface to the letters of Rachel Lady Russell, and in 1854 he edited, or at any rate wrote a graceful introduction to, his sisterin-law's (Mrs. Grove Cradock's) Calendar of Nature. Mrs. Grove Cradock was the Miss Lister whose letters in 1840 and 1841 have already been given.

and, if I can raise biography as much as he lowers history, I think I shall have done much.

Besides, it is well to have a hero, and a hero with a good many faults and failings. Pitt's ambition was unscrupulous; but his other failings were confined to a love of strong liquor. Heaven save us from such another Minister! . . .-Yours,

J. R.

The biography which was thus projected is one of the best known of its author's works. Since Sir G. Trevelyan has only carried his own narrative down to 1774, it is practically the only life of the great Whig statesman. It is not only the best known, but it is also one of the best, of its author's productions. One of the greatest masters of the English language has lately said that Lord John was one of the few men of his time 'able to write a sentence so naturally that it recalled the very sound of his voice.'1 Perhaps of all its author's works the 'Life of Fox' is the one which most naturally illustrates this saying. Whether he is reading the political history which it comprises, or the personal and literary details which form so agreeable a feature in the concluding volume, the reader feels that he is not merely engaged on a 'Life of Mr. Fox,' but that he is listening to Lord John. This feature in the book may be a merit or a demerit. Authors of less distinction are wise to sink their personality in their subject, and to let their hero speak instead of using their own voice. But when Prime Ministers become authors, a contrary rule, if not ogically permissible, has at least its advantages. It is very interesting to know what Mr. Fox thought of the 'Odyssey' or the 'Task'; but it is quite as interesting to learn what Lord John thought of Mr. Fox.

The first volume of the 'Life' was published in 1859; the second in 1860. Official labours deferred the publication of the third, which did not appear till 1866. But the preparation of this work formed Lord John's chief occupation during his four years of immunity from official toil. Other labours, however, of a similar character, diversified his studies. In November 1855 he delivered a lecture on the obstacles which 1 Kinglake, Hist. of Crimean War, viii. 87.

have retarded moral and political progress to a company of 4000 persons assembled under the auspices of the Young Men's Christian Association in Exeter Hall; in May 1856 he delivered another lecture to his old constituents at Stroud on the study of history; in the autumn of 1857 he attended and spoke at the first meeting of the Social Science Congress at Birmingham; and in the following October he presided over the second meeting of the Congress at Liverpool. The addresses which he made on these several occasions must have required both thought and time. The first of them was subsequently published, and will repay perusal, especially by those who wish to understand its author's opinions. The main obstacle to moral and political progress was, in Lord John's opinion, the abuse of the functions of Government. The attempt of authority to suppress inquiry and to direct opinion had interfered, over and over again in the world's history, with improvement; and progress, therefore, depended on that civil and religious liberty which was both the basis of the lecturer's creed and the object of his career. In certain countries, however, the human conscience was no longer shackled by Government or by laws. In these, Lord John added-probably with special reference to his audience-other obstacles to moral and political progress remained. The vice of intemperance, the want of education, were interfering with the advancement of the poor; just as sensuality, excess, selfishness, evil-speaking, and want of charity were retarding the development of the rich. Civilisation had shown, in the days both of Augustus and of Louis XIV., that it was powerless to deal with these evils.

It is to Christian principle, Christian morals, and a Christian spirit, that we must look for a better and higher civilisation than any that has been attained. . . Some there are who shut their eyes to one truth lest it should impair another that they deem more sacred. But one truth can no more quench another truth than one sunbeam can quench another sunbeam.1 Truth is one,

1 The metaphor, as it originally stood, was more elaborate, and referred to the inability of one ray of light to quench another ray, or of one sound to destroy

as God is one. Go forward to meet her in whatever garb, welcome her from whatever quarter she comes: till at last, beyond the grave, you shall hail her in a blaze of glory which mortal eye can only strain in vain to contemplate.

The lecture was received with extraordinary enthusiasm. M. Panizzi, who was present, declared that Lord John's success was splendid,' 'a triumph.' Professor Owen, who merely read it in the Times, said of it—

6

It is worthy of being printed in letters of gold—or, still better, in good legible type of printer's ink-and [read] by millions, that the excellence of its teaching, and the beauty and truth of its illustrations, may be known wherever the English language is spoken or read. I should calculate the good it will do as equal to that of all the speeches and sermons which have been spoken and preached in the present century.

Three years afterwards, in the address at Liverpool, Lord John travelled over another but a very wide field: Bankruptcy Reform; the codification of the statute book; the statistics and prevention of crime; the punishment of criminals; the gradual abolition of transportation which was making it a necessity for us to consume our own crime; the reformation of juvenile offenders; the happy and increasing influence of women on society; the extension of education; and the requirements of sanitary reform.

It was remarkable that Lord Shaftesbury, who had presided over the lecture in 1855, was present at the Social Science Congress in 1858, and, to quote his diary

refused to move a vote of thanks to Lord J. Russell, because I could not honestly praise him (a political intriguer, and the unfeeling adversary of the wretched chimney-sweeps).

The extract is only equalled by the statement in the same diary, which has already been quoted, that its author had long considered Peel and John Russell among the most another sound. But it was pointed out to Lord John that his metaphors were wrong. 'Two rays of light have the power of extinguishing each other, and two waves of sound have a similar power, under certain circumstances;' and he consequently slightly modified the passage.

criminal of mankind. But, as hasty entries of this kind, never intended for the public eye, have been published, it is right to contrast them with Lord Shaftesbury's true and deliberate opinion of Lord John:

To have begun with disapprobation; to have fought through many difficulties; to have announced, and acted on, principles new to the day in which he lived; to have filled many important offices, to have made many speeches, and written many books; and in his whole course to have done much with credit, and nothing with dishonour, and so to have sustained and advanced his reputation to the very end, is a mighty commendation.

During most of the period, in which Lord John was thus reverting to the old literary pursuits in which he took so deep an interest, he continued chiefly to reside at Pembroke Lodge. In 1857 he let his London house to Lord Panmure, sleeping the few nights in which Parliament detained him in town at an hotel. But during the four years he paid many visits to his friends, and made some longer excursions. In August 1855 he was the guest of his old friend Lord Fortescue in Scotland, but was unfortunately hurriedly recalled to Pembroke Lodge by Lady John's serious and sudden illness. Later in that year he resided for many months at a property which he had just bought in the immediate neighbourhood of Stroud. Rodborough Manor, the name of this estate, is in the parish of Amberley, and the purchase was therefore destined ultimately to confer a second title on its owner. Lord John never resided at Rodborough after the autumn and winter of 1855-56. The place was let soon afterwards to Lord Ribblesdale; and, at a still later date, was occupied by Lord John's son, Lord Amberley. Later still, it was sold, and passed away from the family of the man who has made the name of the parish in which it is situated familiar as a household word.1

1 At Christmas, in 1855, Lord John paid a visit to Woburn, taking with him his eldest daughter (Lady Georgiana Peel) and his youngest son. He was detained there longer than he had expected, from his son being attacked by croup, and he received the following consolatory letter from his eldest son :MY DEAR POOR PAPA,-As you get so very few letters, I thought I would write