LORD SALISBURY.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1651, 21 October 1903, Page 11

LORD SALISBURY.

A GREAT PERSONALITY. SOME COMPARISONS AND CONTRASTS. (From Our Special Correspondent.) LONDON, August 28. Lord Salisbury’s fight with King Death lasted much longer than anyone anticipated, and it was not until the shades of night had fallen over Hatfield on Saturday last that the grim Conqueror could claim a victory. On Friday no one thought the aged statesman could survive tho night. Early on the morrow a change for the better set m, hut no vain hopes were entertained, and before day had fully broken came a relapse, from which the patient never rallied. Slowly tho pulse grew feebler, the heart’s beat weaker, and by almost imperceptible degrees the dying man crossed tho border of life. -The passing was painless; it was, indeed, unseen by those of the Cecil family gathered round Lord Salisbury’s death-bod. This was a largo for, owing to the patient’s difficulty in breathing, it was found necessary to keep him in a more or less erect posture for many days before the end came. So, on the fiftieth anniversary of his election to Parliament, tho head of the Cecil family entered into rest, surrounded by all the members of his family save Lord Edward Cecil, absent on military duty in Egypt. The deceased statesman will be buried next Monday by his wife’s side at Hatfield; that was his wish, and it is the wish of liiis family, and the nation has acquiesced without a murmur, recognising that there are other fitting methods of doing honour to the memory of a great statesman than the provision of a grave in the Abbey. The nation had its toll from him in life, and has signified its recognition of that fact by letting the last wishes of its dead leader prevail.

History’s repetition of a Cecil as the trusted Minister of Queen Victoria three hundred years after his ancestor’s same position under Queen Elizabeth has often been remarked. Personally, also, Lord Salisbury bore a striking resemblance to the Elizabethan Cecil. His aversion to society and bluntness of manner was an 'instance of atavism. “My Lord of Burleigh, y© bo burly,” was Elizabeth’s punning comment on some uncouth speech of her Minister’s, and of Lord Salisbury’s disregard of ceremony there are many instances. A curious shyness and avoidance of recog-

ration marked the old age of William Cecil, and the late Marquis in his walks abroad showed the same temperament. He hated recognition, and if saluted in tiro street touched his hat and walked away, with obvious shyness and discomfiture. Lord Salisbury’s “ passion for retirement” was well known. Primrose League habitues wore frequently given' the use of the grounds at Hatfield for their outings, and knights and dames would set forth with high hopes of a close view of the Prime Minister. But if Lord Salisbury hurried on to a distant balcony, bowed, and as quickly withdrew, his visitors were lucky. Once a pastoral play formed the chief attraction of tho programme. The Prime Minister said ho would like to see the performance. His wish was made known, but, although tho manager delayed the commencement of tho piece for some time, no Lord Salisburymppeared. The mystery was solvod towards tho end of the performance, when the Premier waa observed to bo watching it from a window through a telescope!

Lord Salisbury enjoyed the clistlnotion of being the last survivor of the plenipotentiaries who attended tho Congress of erlin a quarter of a century ago. His fellow-members for Englanfi were Lord Beaconsfieiu and Lord Odo Russell, who predeceased him long ago. Dead also are Princes Bismarck and Hobenlohe and Herr von Bulow, who represented Germany; Prince Gorcehakoff, Count Sokouvaloff, and M. d’Ouberl, for Russia; M. Waddington and Count St. Vallier, for France; Counts Anflrassy and Kurolyi and Baron Haymerle, for Ajustria; Counts Corti and De Launay, for Italy; while tho Turkish representatives have also joined the majority. Only a few of the minor are still in the land of the living. Terribly jejune are th 6 personal accounts of Lord Salisbury which have appeared in the newspapers. Odd stories about his neglect of his wearing-apparel, of his being turned away from his own park gates or from the Casino at Monte Carlo; his liking for Dumas, and his various means of dodging the public and the press—this is about all that anybody seems to know. One hears a great many people claiming to be intimate with other statesmen, but I never heard anyone outside his own family claim to be intimate with Lord Salisbury. Yet it. would be a complete mistake, according to those who know him better than their fellows, to suppose that he was an austere man, or that there was any affectation in this cult of anti-publicity. His own family spoke of him with tho utmost affection, and though they respected him greatly, they did not stand in awe or him. Lcrd Salisbury was completely happy n his own home, and here he was open, affectionate, confidential, warm-hearted, with never <a trace of morosity or embarrassment. But to even the comparative stranger he remainod inaccessible. It is hard to believe, bfut ne was really a shy man, almost painfully shy. In later years he .more and more shrank from the effort of making a new acquaintance, not from unkindiiness, but because it caused him embarrassment which no effort could overcome. Ho would write many letters rather than see a man whom he knew slightly, even though tho fatigue of writing was greater than that of a brief conversation.

Tho contrast between Lord Salisbury and Mr Gladstone in their relations to the public is well set forth by a “Westminster Gazette” writer: —“Both,” he says, “had this in common, that it was absolutely sincere and arose naturally from their respective characters. The publicity which attended Mr Gladstone, and followed him into his private life, was a natural result of his fervent andi zealous character, and was in no respect worked tip or artificially produced. Similarly the barrier which kept the public from Lord Salisbury. It was the result of a character front which the element of popularity was wanting, which really regarded politics as an affair of the few, which was intellectual, sceptical, literary, but also extremely conscientious and laborious. The propagandist instinct was altogether lacking in him; it was an effort to him to pretend to desire to convert anybody to any views; he could talk caustically, satirically, incisively, but he seldom troubled to talk persuasively. The party system he regarded as a system of double-shifts the relief of public men, and he believed that it would operate mechanically when the public were tired of one shift to bring the other shift on to the scene. Oratorical appeals, therefore, and party programmes were not naturally in the order of his thoughts, and he conceived it to be the business of a public man to speak as seldom as possible and to say as little as possible. But all this was compatible with a really religious and conscientious temperament, and when his shift came ho was at his best a tremendously hard worker. At the same tiling he sincerely believed that the aristocracy, and especially the House of Cecil, had a sort of right to govern tho country; and the multiplication of Cecils and relatives of Cecils in high administrative places never struck him as offering any ground for .criticism or complaint. Ho was certain they were mora capable than other people, and quite easily persuaded that it would be moral cowardice on his part to pass them over for fear* of popular clamour*”