THE GREAT MEN OF YESTERDAY.

Otago Witness, Issue 3015, 27 December 1911, Page 83

THE GREAT MEN OF YESTERDAY.

STORIES OF PEEL, "DIZZY," AND PALMERSTON. The touching and manly speech in which Mr Balfour resigned his leadership of the Unionist party, and in which he reviewed a political career begun in 1874, has sent men's thoughts back to uolitical heroes and events of the Victorian age. Thus, the last two volumes of Lord Brought on's memoirs, edited by his daughter, Lady Dorchester, full of memories of Palmerston, ".Dizzy/' Melbourne, and Peel, gain especial significance. These volumes show the old Radical and companion of Byron, John Cam Hobhouse, mellowed by years and the responsibility of office. Of Pitt we read that at the new? of the Nore Mutiny in 1797 he despaired, and even used the famous quotation from Virgil " venit summa dies" —"the last day has come." Of the Palmerstns we learn that they were never in time for the soup at any dinner to which thev were asked. Several interesting traits ol Nelson are recorded which will endear him all the more to posterity :

Sir Thomas Hardy often said of him . . . '. that, when, he engaged in talk or in action about sea affairs, he was like one inspired. He saw and foresaw, and arranged and commanded in a way that showed he was above all around him. He was so beloved in his ship that no service was ever thought too hard or perilous under his command. He hated corporal punishment, and when it was forced upon him, said, " Well, you are captain of the ship, but don't let me hear or see it." Southey's story of that last embarkation at Portsmouth, when the people poured about hiin, kneeling and blessing him as he passed, is confirmed by an anecdote of what happened "to him at Vienna after the battle of the Nile, when the people ran after him to touch his clothes. Yet heroism had its weakness: Mr Hamilton told us he saw Lady Hamilton, sitting between her husband . and Lord Nelson at Naples and feeding them both most plentifully with oysters. . . . Lord Minto . . . said that in common life Lord Nelson had nothing whatever to distinguish him, except that he looked like a goose in his gait and manner ; but that he was intensely given up to his profession and thought of little or nothing else—so much so that in talking or other matters he was rather below than aoove ordinary men. ■ Melbourne's Charm. — Melbourne's grace and charm of manner are brought home vividly, and we understand why Queen Victoria so liked and honoured him:

He was most -watchful that nothing should be spoken of in her presence that a child of 15 might not hear. He was respectful, but firm, when he wished to stop anything he disapproved, and her Majesty bore his mild remonstrances with the most amiable submission. When someone objected to an apartment being always kept engaged for Lord Melbourne at Windsor Castle, the Duke of Wellington, who always had from her birth a fatherly affection for the Queen, exclaimed, "By G ! it is all right, and if I were Lord Melbourne I would seldom bs out of the way. The idea that Melbourne was a lazy, careless, incompetent Minister, weak of will, is dispelled by Lord Broughton. Hf> shows that Melbourne was a; Whig: of very different temperament from. Fox, that he had a passion for the greatness of: England, and that in the critical period after the Reform Act he showed great concern for the strength of her armaments. Thus, at a Cabinet Council in 1838, we are told that:

Lord Melbourne . . . assumed a tone not usual with him, and said he considered England to have been under the special protection of Providence at certain periods of her history, several of which he mentioned, from the dispersion of the Spanish Armada to the retirement of the French squadron in Bantry Bay; but Melbourne added that *' no man ought to count upon such interposition of, Divine favour and use no human effort.

William IV There are some curious pictures of Court life. Broughton's judgment on William IV is far more favourable than that of Greville. He speaks of the King as " a kind, good man, generally most just and generous, but, when irritated, scarcely himself. He -was more sincere than suited his Royal office and could not conceal his likings or dislikings." We learn that at Queen Victoria's Court her mother the Duchess of Kent, did not always give correct change at cards: (Lord John) Russell had to pay her ei°ht shillings, and he put down a sovereign. She gave him nine shillings, saying, "I believe that is right." He smiled and took his change, but did not seem pleased with" this specimen of Royal arithmetic. The Queen evidently liked Lord Broughton, and he was a frequent guest at her entertainments. He notes that on her accession she "poke like an emancipated school girl, without, however, forgetting her great station." She surprised her Ministers by her tact and knowledge, and her courage was that of her family: Whe n her Majesty went to see Van Amburgh's wild beasts fed, the tiger made a spring which nearly overturned the cage. Lord Oonyngham Lord Chamberlain) was much startled, as well he might be; but her Majesty never ihoved a muscle nor showed the slightest sign of alarm.

She shewed a singular tenderness for Ministers whom she liked and admired. “At the death of Sir Robert Peel she was inconsolable, wept like a child, and was with difficulty persuaded to proceed with the ordinary business of State.” —Peel’s Table Manners...— Of Peel Lord Broughton had a poor opinion. He was an “awkward', shy fellow.” His table manners wore quite lamentable. Never quiet nor at ease. He asked many people to drunk wine with him when the Queen was at the table, and could not keep his hands off the dishes at dessert until Ire had pulled down a pyramid of giant gooseberries that thundered oveir the table like billiard balls. He was on bad terms with the member's of his party, and w r as disliked by them for bis coldness and hauteur. Lord Broughton somewhat unkindly recalls the fact that Peel’s own father had predicted that his son would ruin the country. Even so fair and lenient a judge as Lord Melbourne condemned his conduct in the repeal of the Corn Laws. “Peel,” be said, “had disgraced himself to all eternity.” - . . . Uf Disraeli there are some curious impression. When Broughton first met him in 1844 “he was very communicative, and spoke -with that .sort of confidence which sometimes belongs to men of genius and sometimes to very impudent pretenders.” In 1848 he visited Broughton: The Orator seems to be a goodnatured and good-humoured man, but with a melancholy turn of mind which is impresed upon lids countenance. He does not talk much, and what he says is given in set phrases. . . . He told Mr Peacock . . . tlrat his real turn wad for classical literature, of which he lamented that he knew so little, adding that the summit oi heaven’s bliss was to be possessed of £.300 a year and live a retired life amongst books. In the same way Napoleon at St. Helena declared that the real ideal was to live the life of a bourgeois on a modem annual income. Lord Broughton’s memoirs may he recommended to all. They form an invaluable supplement to Greville,