BOOKS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 9565, 22 October 1892, Page 5 (Supplement)

BOOKS.

The letters of Philip Dormer Stanhope, Earl of_ Chesterjidd, with The. Characters— Edited, with Introduction, Notes, and Index, by JoiiK Bradsiiaw, M.A., LL.D. London • Swan, Sonneuscncin, aud Co. (3v-ols, octavo).

Phcstcvficld's Letters to Ms San, so firmly established as an English classic, may be had in a great variety of edition's, but some accessible edition of the whole of pho Chesterfield letters face been long a felt-want. Tjiese three handsome volume's place all that is'valnable of the .Chesterfield correspondeuce within reach of a moderate purse, and will not look amiss ou tta shelves of the most respectable library W.e hay.a been very glad tlo refresh and extern! our knowledge of Chester#eld by the ' perusal of this useful cuitjon; and we are more thin ever convinced that Johu3on was right hi'his opinion that, with the oniiesstHj. of' certain notoriously immoral passages, PkesteuJ/eWs Letters to'lds Son ought to bo placed iij the hands of every joung gentleman, The truth is tbut few Enclisii authors haya had (teult put to" them by posterity such hard measure as Chesteruold. i'he essays and ' other iiiorary trifles publislied it* Jiis lifetime, 'wlyeji he was fain to believe Us<J h ' them something imperishable, are now kr.ovju only to the bock-man who explores the byways of literature; whilst the intimate letters meant only for the eyes of bis son or of his godson give him a place in literature which if; is difficult to conceive he can ever lose. Rules of conduct litted for a young man in the middle of tho 18th century avo not likely to be altogether suitable! for youths in the last decade of the 19th. Times, no doubt, change, and manners iind morals change with them. The Chesterfield of the last century with his exquisite and elaborate manners—his Grandisonjan bowa and farfetched compliments—would appearridioulously formal to the courtiers aud scckity gentlemen who surround tho Prince of Wales. But ailor/'mg for this, the philosophy of the suooir vivre, as it always has been aud ever must be in communities of cultivated men and women, has never bsea so exhaustively aud shrewdly expounded.

In the general feeling of the world Chesterfield is a cold, calculating egotist, whose paief end in life, ignoble in itself, was pursued by ignoble means. "How to geton, "■ to adept a vulgarism that would have made Chesterfield shudder, was with him the one thing worth considering; se fairs xaloir, to gain every man's vote and every wotnau's love, in the full conviction that each Eoeiiat power and place. But to win men and women, ode must know them ; and this knowledge, the indispensable means to his end, Chesterfield prized above all ; took some pride to himself for possessing- it; never wearied in urging his son to acquire it. Your bssfc books are men and women ;go where there is abundant opportunity of studying them ; eonpi,der how each may best be won; iusinuato yourself, cajole, flitter, practise all your arts and graces upon them: ■so you will win thorn. This % the "highest good" seems a miserable Hind al ambition ; and \l there were anything 'wauted feo show iis futility aud tho inadequacy of the means recommended for its attainment, it \i tho history of Chesterfield himself and that of his son, for whom mos.t of these wonderful letters I vve;re written. This modern JJaphiavel started j iif life seemingly witU erery endowment which | fiGi&l go to equip him for the inqs|i bri!iiai;t j-areef cp £ statesman. He was bora rjch, the heu' to atl earldom, was possessed ot quite extraOtV 1 mary ability, had every advantage of education IMQ- training, and moved from his youth in ihs -Moss brilji.uifc society of the time. Hd V 7.18 not 21 when he made his first speech iv I'tfrlininenfc; as, isi'lasH, on sitting down he was quietly r&ajinded by a political opponent, who called his attention to the fact that ka had rendered himcolf liable to a line of LSOO by sdch-sssing the House while still 2. minor; ,to which remimi'S?, it may be said in passing, Giiestprfield had the good sense to reply with a low bow and a speedy retreat to the Continent. The one disadvantage Chesterfield had to contend against .<«e;as to have been his not prepossessing personal appearance. Like his son he was undersized, eoaree-featured, and clumsily put together. Jiab, unlike his son, he was able to disarm this disadvantage of personal appearance by cultivating an exquisite manner. If wo are to accept his own account of his first appearance in good company we must credit Chesterfield with acquiring by assiduous effort and attention a grace of manner hi which he was naturally deficient. Writing to his son in 1750 he gives an amusing account of his first appearance in tiie society of men and women of the world, while he had yeb nbont him " all the awkwardness and rust of Cambridge." He recailw his elaborate low bows, his embarrassment, his fo*r of ridicule, Itis hesitancy of speech ; How, gnju*

"■if coin-ago, iiu was at length bold oiiough lo go up to a fine woman ami toll hoi- that he thought it was a warm clay. But this account of himself must be taken with a little said. It is difficult to believo Chesterfield ever to liavfi boon the awkward b-joby whoso first entrance! into society he paints in this letter: no doubt knowing the character of the youth to whom ho is writing ho makes an example of himself for his son's encouragement. Favoured as he was by nature and fortune, ib can hardly bo said that, after perfecting himself in the art of rising, the laws of which he codifies in these lei tors, Chesterfield achieved that distinction in politicswhich was likely to satisfy himself. He was twice Ambassador at the Hague, was for some 18 months one of the best Lord-lieutenants that Ireland has ever had, ami in 1744 became pec-rotary of State. But a real guiding power in the Stato he never was. Coarse, swearing, brutal V/dpolo, who lacked every quality Chesterfield esteemed, and owned every foible Chesterfield despised, had ten limes Chesterfield's weight in political history, in the matter cf finesse there is probably not much to choose betwoen the two men; but \\ alpole had what Burns calls " the better ait of hiding." There can be no doubt that the elaborate civility of Chesterfield must have filled with distrust a good many honest people who found the best proof of sincerity in Waipole's downright brutality. Once, at anyrate, the keen insight and the savoir faire on which Chesterfield plumed himself signally tailed him. Taking a hint, perhaps, from Versailles, ho imagined the safe course to iie in paying court to the fmistress and not to the Queen. And so on the accession of George II he laid siege to my Lady Suffolk and neglected Caroline. But the Queen was the real power with whom politicians of the time had to reckon, whilst Lady Suffolk was, politically, a nobody; and Caroline never forgave Chesterfield for big preference of the mistress. "Where Caroline would not forgive George could not forgive; and so it came about that, like Charles James I'ox after him, and for a similar reason—the Kings antipathy— Chesterfield generally found himself in Opposition. At anyrato when he mialfy retires from public life to cultivate pears and peaches at Blackheath it is not possible to look upon him as a complete political success in his own meaning of the term. We must conclude either that in order to climb the highest steep ot statesmanship something more is wanted than the savoir vivre, savoir fairs, avoir <ln month, aud other French virtues which Chesterfield is always insisting on assovereigu specifics for rising in the world; or else that his savoir faire was in certain essentials incomplete. If one might venture to conjecture where the savoir- faire of so shrewd a politician came short, we should say it was in loying his calculations too much on the base qualities of man, and refusing to believe that most men aud women are just ns muoh angel as devil. Simulation aud dissimulation were the arm 3of Chesterfield, offensive aud defensive; and it must have been difficult for a statesman so armed to affect successfully the sincerity necessary to inspire confifeoo. At anyrate, Chesterfield seems to have failed to convince men of his sincerity. Where we think ChesterfVd has been hardly used by posterity is in its detei miuation to pass judgment upon him solely on the evidence of his letters to his sou; and that, too secmiugly on the evidence of certain passages, which certainly do not inculcate a high standard of morals, and are the more objectionable as belug addressed by a father to a son ; but which are, alter all, few in number, and such as ought to be read with an eye wide awake to the moral standard of the time. To accuse Chesterfield, on account of these few passages, of beine without heart and without morals is not fair He had probably just as much heart as many excellent fathers of families. It cannot ba doubted for a moment by anyone wljo reads .-he letter* that his love for his sou is a genuine heartfelt affection.' Philip Stanhope, the boy and man to whom the letters were addressed, was a natural son of Chqsterfield. In fiaswcll's Life of Johnson there is an amusing note on the subject of Chesterfield, in which Bos well says amongst other things.- ---± hough. I can by no means approve of confounding the distinction between lawful and illicit offspring, which is, iv effect, insulting the civil establishment of our country, to look no higher ; I cannot help thinking it laudable to be kindly attentive to those of whose existence we have in any way bom ths cause " Boswell, it is clear, would not have found it difficult to pardon a father for neglecting • a child v;hich has clearly no right o be bora at all, and which must accept the consequences if it comes into a world where it has no manner of business to be. Such a little waif came to shame Chesterfield Its mother was a certain Franco Dutch lady, Madame Da Bouchet, whom Chesterfield had met at the Hague. From the very birth of the little boy the father takes him to his heart. iie could not exactly have him iv the paternal household, because there was a Lady Chesterfield—not of much account, it would appear, in Chesterfield's life; still there she was. But the father writes to his son, when the little tellow is a mero infant, little stories from (,rreek mythology, little essays on manners aud morals, level with the child's intelligence, little criticisms on men and history. In the midst of the most pressing cares or State, when the father's heart must have been full of uneasy ambitions and harassing oaves, there is always time to write to little Philip, the Dateh waif, of whose existence Chesterfield • had "in some way been the cause ' The affection of this so - called heartless egotist for his base-born child never sleeps. He is full of ambition for the boy. grudges him nothing—not even his valuable time, least or all his money. The heart's desire of the fathar is to see Philip Stanhope one day a power in the land—an adroit man of tne world, an orator in Parliament, an ■'influential Minister of State. His'sleepless affection forfcnoladisi'ealiypathutie, especially when one remembers how, after all his oarc, the father's dearest hopes were frustrated. For Philio Stanhope was not a hopeful subject. Not that j he was exactly a mauvati sujtt. Ho seems1 to have bsen studious at school anil afterwards :to have been even learned, or at anyr.to bookish. But by a strange perversity of fate ho was for the most part the opposite of what his father would have had him—awkward, slovenly,' careless' of all the graces—an educated Tony' Lump-tin. lie was apparently not without a sense of humour ; bub it sometimes displayed itself in objectionable practical jokes, which would have made his father quiver with shame if he had known ot them. Lord Charlcmoufi narrates one characteristic piece of young Stanhope's horseplay. Stanhope was travelling on' the Continent with his * fear-loader, IJarte, and happened to come to' Borne, where he was invited to an evening parity to meet the chief Iferneje bjg-wigs and solemnity. It was the period' of pigtails, " arid of simple, unsophisticated bi-eselws, attached with points. Dunng the evening tup senators were deep in the abstractions Of whist—so much so that Chesterfield's young hopeful found jt possible uuonserved to fasten thair querns to their caairs, and to cat ths points oa"which depended their knickerbockers. Hereupon Master Stanhops quickly leaves the rqam, amY presently returns shouting, " Fire! Fire !" Dp start tho wnisu players, but, to the arnassemeiit of all who see, sans wig, saus-in fact, sans everything, liven at his father's table, in the presence of Laay Chesterfield, the youth could not restrain his swinish propensities. Ho wi>s a glutton and amongot other delicacies he loved whipped cream Ontons occasion after l^dy Chesterfield had helped him liberally he culled the servant with the disa, placed it under his chiu, and bo«an greedily to lap up the cream. Probably no one but a C&esteweld could understand Chesterfield's emotions at this sight; but all he did was to address the valet who stood behind his son's ouair s "John, why do you not fetch the strop and razors? You sec your mister is going to

Another foible of Sianhopo's w.as to make somewaat too frcquont reference in company to' his "fachcr, milord Chesterfield." Chesterflold liinasolr, aware probably of his son's weakness more than ouoe takes occasion to dwell on tba roolishneos ot assuming credit to ourselves for our parentage. But probably a snub the youth received at the riding school in Lausanne did more to cu-o him of hia weakness tnan all the exhortations of his father The raaster of the manoge at Lausanne was irritated by Stanhope's perpetual reference to ' man. pere, milord Chesterfield," and at last retorted: "Comment, monsieur, milord Chesterfield eH volre p'ere—ripparemment done, miladi CheUerftdd at votre mere. After that, there wua no further mention of " mon phn, milord Chesterfield."

These being the chavacteristios of his son, it is easily intelligible why Chesterfield is always, in season and out of season, insisting on the cultivation of the grcmes. Not tha1; he neglects to inculcate other virtues—truth, honour, respect for religion. But ho is always returning to the old subject—manners, and ever manners. If Chesterfield can be held to have encouraged his son to 'practise dissimulation, the son ceriaiuly bettered the father's instructions: for only after Stanhope's (ic-ath did Chesterfield discover that his sou had been married for several yoars and had left behind him a wife and two boys. Mrs Stanhope was iv certain Eugenia Peters, whom Stanhope had Br.;t met at liome—not exactly ;i ludy, but a "person" possessed of soms accomplishments. After iiis son's death Ghebterueld extended his kimluess to tha widow and children—sent the two boys to school, and wrote to them ouu oi> two charming letters. But soon came the death of sl'liesterlieUl himself, and Mrs Stanhope found herself ignored by his heirs and representatives. ]?y way 'i>f having her revenge, .and at the same time of raising the wind, she published tho letters which hasl been written Lo her husband by his father. Xheiso three volumes contain, however a great boiiy of correspondence other than tho lotlers to his sou. Thn short series addressed to his godson aud smiaasstß* (ijakc admirable reading, whilst those addresser! to other correspondents, many o? them in 3?roneh, whiuh he wrote with native purity, are 0? great interest not morely for the insight they give us ififco Chesterfield's phaK-ieter, but for the light they throw on the political history of tho time. Chesterfield is a mine of larse, aphoristic wit aud wisdom. If his letters woro laid under contribution by some judicious compiler, a body of lav-dan could, he put together quits (:C|i'.?>l in quantity find quality to the tgatjms of his favourite Uovhcfoueiuld.