TO-DAY’S BIRTHDAYS

Te Awamutu Courier, Volume 53, Issue 3808, 14 September 1936, Page 3

TO-DAY’S BIRTHDAYS

A QUINTET OF THE GREAT. SWORD AND PEN. (By H.K.) The month of August, so delightful in the old land for its laughing gold of harvests and its purple hills, is rich in its contribution to the list of world leaders in all departments of human activity. The familiar Book of Days furnishes five names eminent for services in their day and generation and each of them was born on the same day and month of their respective years. Separated by centuries as some of them were, they all 'appeared on the stage on the 15th day of August. The first to make his bow was Robert Blake, second only to Nelson among English admirals. He was one of a family of twelve sons of a merchant at Bridgewater, and was born in 1599. After completing his education at Oxford he was elected to Parliament in 1640, cast in his lot with Cromwell, and greatly distinguished himself in the Civil War. In 1649 he was appointed to the command of the fleet, blockaded Lisbon and destroyed the squadron of Prince Rupert. The struggle with the Dutch' 1 for the supremacy of the sea brought him into grips with such seamen as Van Tromp, de Ruyter and dei Witt, and after some most creditable victories he was defeated by Van Tromp, whose fleet was twice that of Blake. It was at this fight that Blake lost six ships, and Van Tromp afterwards scoured the Channel, but about three months later Blake reversed the situation. His crowning exploit, says Chambers, was the victory at Santa Cruz, and ha returned home to die as his ship entered Plymouth in 1657. He was as much admired and honoured in his day as Nelson Was in a later age. Patriotism and love of justice adorned his character and career, and he is said to have had the Nelson touch of boldness and novelty in tactics. Though buried in Westminster Abbey, his body was ousted at the Restoration, but as recently as 1888 a window wtas erected to his memory in St Margaret’s Westminster. The next notable whose birthday is set down as being on 15th August (some authorities say May) was Frederick William 1., born in 1688, a memorable year in English history. Ascending the throne in 1713, he found himself in a war-tricken Europe, but with a firmness of character which earned for him the reputation of being a narrow-minded, obstinate, brutal, barrack-yard ruler, with more than contempt for pomp and pageantry, tinsel and hypocrisy. Taking Peter the Great for pattern, he developed into an enthusiastic reformer. Impulsive and frequently furious aS a whirlwind, he would foam at the mouth with rage, but when the outburst passed “he would sit silent and remorseful with the tears in his eyes.” He would rise at 3 in the morning and w’drk sixteen hours a day, and for relaxation loved hunting and the pleasures of the, table. Partial to oysters he would eat a hundred at a sitting. To save money he drank beer instead of wine, and when writing wore a pair of linen sleeves and an apron to save his uniform.

His height was only five foot five, but he was solidly built; had a military deportment, a florid complexion and blue eyes which flamed like fire w’hen his anger was roused. French fashions and finery he abhorred, and made his children wear homespun. His Queen regarded him as uncultured. She had been educated in the elegant court of Hanover, while he had a Spartan ideal of duty. It may be said without fear of dispute that he had more to do with moulding the destiny of Prussia than any other King ever had. Military discipline was regarded by him as the foundation of efficiency in the State. The principle; is still in operation in a wider field than Prussia—the idea of nationalism organised and schooled to perfection. He set up a policy of Protection, and was blessed for it by thousands of industrious workers. Quick to reward the worthy, he did not scruple to hang high officials found guilty of dishonesty. He worked so hard and drank so hard that gout and dropsy killed him off in 1740. He was the maker of modern Prussia —and al! Germany. The libraries that have been written about Napoleon have surely rendered it unnecessary to add anything to them. At the present moment, according to some judges, France seems as much in need of wise control as she was when Napoleon seized the reins. The horrors of threatening anarchy and social dissolution prepared the way for Napoleon, and Franco, these critics think, may repeat the experience of 1790. The last of a long series of changes culminated in that year in his appointment as First Consul of the Republic. He was vested with ample powers, and used them for amalgamating parties and irtterests, and replacing violence by conciliation and clemency. France had found her master, and threw herself into his arms. He was therefore free to deliver- his country from her foreign foes, and this he did for a time spectacularly and in reality. He lifted France from an abyss of degradation, and brought her peace and prosperity. A certain wisdom and beneficence marked his internal policy,'and particularly so in the restoration of religion. Yet the intoxication of power

proved too great for him, and finally caused his downfall. His passions overmastered his reason, and transformed him into a curse to humanity. He became arrogant, careless of guarantees imposed by good faith, and put innocent people to death. Upon his proclamation as Emperor he established an Empire blazing with outward glory, but based upon tyranny. Fire, famine, and frost arrayed themselves against him. God Almighty is too much for me.” His army perished, but while Europe, embattled and united, marched to crush him, his former genius flashed out, and he stood like a rock. At Leipzig he may be said to have received his mortal wound. Then followed Elba, and later Wiaterloo, With their sequel of St Helena. In his island prison he inscribed his plate with the boastful motto, “Felix Übique” (happy anywhere). It was empty bravado. He never learned that true greatness is based eternally on “good will towards men.” The faithful Lockhart and a crowd of later writers have done full justice to Scott, and the general mind fixes reverently on the triumph of “Waverley,” the glory of Abbotsford, the essential nobility of the man and his pathetic and successful refusal to escape from debt by bankruptcy. Involved in financial disaster, he killed himself by toiling at his desk in order to pay every penny he owed. He did pay it, for what was unpaid at his death in 1832 was cleared off by the profits of the author’s edition of his works in 38 volumes which he devised and prefaced. It was his great ambition to be the founder of a distinct branch of the family and <! of long distinct generations rejoicing in the name of ‘Scott of Abbotsford.’ ” “It was closely associated as one can see with his passion for antiquity, a feeling which found expression in the baronial style of the architecture of his home. His hospitality, his decorations, his pibrochs, hunts and dances all conformed to the traditions of the past. It must, however, be said that his native kindness was as noble as his ambition and as distinct from selfish motives. To his own loss he neglected making sure of the honesty and competence of publishers. In all other relationships he was regular, precise and praiseworthy. Scott was ,the ideal romanticist, as his many volumes show. He lived “more than half his life in worlds purely fantastic ” The world now knows how just when he thought himself secure, the great crash came, and he was as desolate as Job. Like the patriarch, he emerged triumphant. His supreme virtue and he had many—was fortitude. The world was poorer by his departure, but richer by his example. “He s’ts ’mongst men like a descended god.” The last of the quintet is Thomas de Quincey, and whoever has not yet read “The Confessions of an Opium Eater” may be envied the joy that awaits him. The author was born at Manchester in 1785, but his father died when Thomas was about seven, and left him to the care of four guardians. At thirteen he wrote Greek with ease, could compose Greek veises, and, according to one of his masters, “could harangue an Athenian mob better than I could address an English one.” Three of his guardians died, and the remaining one was such a tyrant that at seventeen the boy ran off to London, and after suffering the pangs of hunger, was befriended by a poor creature of the street, when better days returned he sought “poor Ann” daily and nightlyin the labyrinths of London, but never saw her again.

At oxford University he had begun to take opium as a means of intellectual excitement. As usual, the depression following the thrill, compelled him to take another dose. He gradually increased the dose until he could take as much as would have poisoned scores of people. In 1808 he went to the English lakes district, and took up his abode in Wordsworth’s former cottage at Grasmere. He made his living chiefly by journalism. Settling in Edinburgh in 1843, he occupied the cottage in which Scott once had lived at Lasswade. He died in 1859. With a better guardian to what heights he would have risen! The biographies of these five great men present a fair spectacle of human strength and weakness. They’ raise the question for every new generation: Wherein lies true greatness? Whatever the answer, this is certain that when it asserts that greatness lies in service the thoughtful agree, and the rest of men feel in their hearts that no other answer will satisfy man or bring peace on earth.