The Press. — London, England, 1857-08-15 00:00:00

800 Yittraturt. Memorials and Correspondence of Charles James Fox. Edited by Lord John Russell. Vol. IV. London : Bentley. POOR Charles Fox ! So brilliant a man and so famous a Whig deserved better than that his fragments should be tossed to the world in the reckless manner of the present publica tion. Between the abortive efforts of ,the late Lord Holland and Mr. John Allen, and the meagre attempt of Lord John Russell in this work, there is no biography of Fox at all; and it reads oddly to see the caution printed on the fiy-leaf—" The author of this work gives " notice that he reserves to himself the right "of translating it." We should like to be told who is the author of the patchwork? The last volume is the worst executed of the four. It has no table of contents, the pages are not headed, there are no elucidatory notes, and there is no final index to the entire publication ! Lord John Russell, wo have no hesitation in saying, is the worst editor of books that ever came under our critical notice. His lordship says:— - - - Political employments still more absorbing than those of the late Lord Holland have hitherto prevented my doing more than publishing the collections made by Lord Holland and Mr. Allen, with such comments as I thought essential, and with the assistance of some valuable notes furnished me by a friend, in illustration of the letters to Lord Holland published in the third volume. I shall endea• your, in a separate form, to place in a connected narrative the relation of Mr. Fox's political career, and an account of his times. In that manner the great events of his life will be prominently set forth, and Ins publics policy fully discussed. Lord John Russell is now sixty-five years of age, and the notion that the noble member for London, with a Reform Bill to provide for, could possibly undertake a new life of Fox, after his failure in this instance, is utterly ridiculous. It appears that, some time ago, it was asserted in our contemporary the A the rueum that it might be necessary for " some one " else to present a consecutive view of the life " of the most eloquent of the Whig statesmen," and it seems that Lord John Russell is not ready to part with that responsibility. " Some one else " must be a bad biographer, if his work would not be better finished than the olla podrida now before us for review. Fox, though deservedly condemned as a politician by many, has always been a favourite character with Englishmen. Of all our famous statesmen, none had so much human heartedness. Violent in views and vehement in speech, he was gentle and generous, " a man " made to be loved." His life was a brilliant series of unsuccessful struggles, in which he displayed extraordinary talents in atoning for extravagant errors. It is as a man, as a social character, as a shining figure, variously en dowed with qualities seemingly opposite in their nature, that Fox has gained such post humous celebrity. Most of his qualities, we think, are traceable to the sparkling Burgundy blood of the Lennox family which foamed and mounted in his veins. His father was a coarse type, and had nothing of the ideal in his na ture; his mother (Lady Georgiana Caroline, eldest daughter of the second Duke of Rich mond) had much romance in her character, and her sisters were also women of remark able qualities. Hee next sister, Emilia, mar ried the first Duke of Leinster, and was mother of Lord Edward Fitzgerald; and the youngest sister, Lady Sarah, was near being the wife of George 111., and was mother of the con lueror of Scinde and the historian of the Peninsular war. We think, also, that a comparison between the portraits of Charles James Fox and those of his mother's family in the early part of the last century would show that phy sically Fox was a Lennox. When a young man Charles Fox had a singularly swarthy appearance; he had great black eyebrows, and his nickname in the caricatures was " Niger." His face, complexion, and some of the indolent, pleasure-seeking parts of his character recall the memory of Charles If., and also of the Duke of Monmouth. Fox, we auspect, had in early life ()ilea thought of the fame of Bolingbroke, and we surmise that he wished to realise such a character as Hoary THE PRESS, St. John had been in his youthful manhood. But Bolingbroke was a far more brilliant man, and had many subtle and exquisite qualities that were wanted in Fox. He had a capacity for literary composition, and excelling in it, en• tirely beyond the powers of Charles Fox, whose style is wordy, tautologous, and without the light of imagination. The excesses of their private lives, and many other traits, assimilate them to each other. Fox, above all men, was the politician who was most made to be the charm of his own circle and to be beloved by his friends. Grattan said of him, with something of the double exaggeration of friendship and genius, " His heart was that of " a woman, but his mind was adamant : his " weaknesses wero virtues; they did much to " relieve him from the hard habits of a politi " cian, and assisted nature to make him " amiable and interesting." From the con templation of Fox himself we must proceed to the shreds and patches here stitched loosely together by Lord John Russell. Ono half of this volume is not new. The long correspondence with Gilbert Wakefield was printed many years ago, and it was criti cised at length in the Quarterly Review by the late Lord Dudley. The letters to Fox's secretary, Trotter, were also published before. The other portions of it, however, are of great value, and cast considerable light on the political history of the times during the last three years of Fox's stormy life. There arc, also, some valuable letters from the third Duke of Portland, which wo have read with much interest. They were lent to the editor by the present Duke of Portland. There are not many of them, but they are highly curious. The third Duke of Portland was a very re markable man. Ho was believed to be too much of a diplomatist for a leader of parties, and there were traits in his character which were to be ascribed either to insincerity or fluctuation of mind. He was only a mode rate Whig, and he broke away from the Foxite connection at the time of the Burke schism, consequent on the French Revolution. Mr. Fox most anxiously endeavoured to keep the Duke of Portland in his connection in 1792. After urging his Grace to go to the House of Lords and make an ultra-Whig speech, Fox (December 31, 1792) wrote in these pressing terms : It is with regard to this declaration to be made to-day, as I understand, by Lord Titchtield, that I feel myself incredibly anxious. If it should be in the smallest degree ambiguous, if it should not be as perspicuous and explicit as laugusge can make it, the consequences to me will be very unpleasant indeed, but to you much worse ; if after to day it should remain a question, whether you are or are not a supporter of the Ministry—whether you still remain the head of that Opposition which has so long considered you as such, I must speak the truth and tell you, that your name will be bandied about in a manner which I cannot bear to think of, and possibly it may become necessary for you to make another explanation and to have the repetition of these scenes, in which, if I am to judge from myself, you must have felt much more than is commonly understood by the words " anxiety " and " distress." And ho concludes by stating the immediate object of the letter to be— To press you by every consideration both of friendship for me, and regard for yourself, as well as wish for the preservation of the Whig party, to think justly of the im portance of this day ; to see the necessity of being com pletely explicit. But Fox was too violent a politician for an " Old Whig " like the Duke of Portland. It was only a month previously that Fox wrote to the Duke the following "heated " letter:— My dear Lord,—l send you inclosed a note I have just received from Adam. If they mention danger of insur rection, or rather, as they must do to legalise their pro ceedings, of rebellion, surely the first measure all honest men ought to take is to impeach them fur so wicked and detestable a falsehood. I fairly own that, if they have done this, I shall grow savage, and not think a French lanterne too bad for them. Surely it is impossible—if anything were impossible for such monsters, who, fur the purpose of weakening or destroying the honourable con nection of the Whigs, would not scruple to run the risk of a civil war. I cannot trust myself to write any more, for I confess I am too much heated.—Yours affectionately, C. J. Fox. Lord John Russell admits (p. 491) that Fox at the time of the French Revolution " lust the national confidence." The state of mind exhi bited iu the foregoing letter explains how and why he forfeited the public support. In this volume, as in the preceding parts, Sheridan is disparaged and sneered at. In 1803 Fox wrote to Dennis O'Brien :-- I will not say anything of public affairs, but Sheridan has outdone his usual outdoings. Folly beyond all the past; but what degree of folly will not extreme levity and vanity be capable of producing? The Prince's otter, and the refusal of it, ought, I repeat, to be noticed more than it is. Cannot you, without troubling yourself, give a hint to some friend that it should be done ? Had Charles James Fox himself no " no " levity," no " vanity "? On three of the most critical occasions in Fox's life Sheridan gave him advice, which if Fox had followed he would not have forfeited the " national confidence." There are several letters to Dennis O'Brien in this volume. He was a pamphleteer and political writer of considerable power. Lord John Russell has a note on O'Brien, thus describing him:— A gentleman connected with the press. He was a warm adherent of Mr. Fox, but much distrusted by many of his friends. The noble editor might have stated something more. At one time O'Brien was connected with the first Marquis of Lansdowne, and was even spoken of as " Lord Lansdowne's man." He was the author of the once-famous pam phlet " Utrum Horum ?" There is a complete absence of reserve in the familiar letters of Fox to O'Brien. There are some striking letters in 1806 from Fox to John Duke of Bedford, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, and wo are surprised that so little reference is made in any of them to Grattan. In one of them Fox writes : I hear great complaints of the bat example shown in retaining Marsden, who is represented as a man willing, and, from his situation, capable of doing all manner of mischief to you and your friends ; but of this I know nothing; in my brother's business he certainly behaved very ill. There are, besides, complaints of many torturers and persecutors being left in power, but of this you must be able to get far better information than J. My advice is, if you cannot steer quite even, rather to risk offending those attached to the old system than our real friends. Their revolutionary friends, no doubt, gave much trouble to the Whigs in Ireland iu 1806. " The advent of the Whig Viceroy was hailed " by the voices that had before hailed the " coming of the French. To his first levee " crowded, in the levelling audacity of their " joy, persons of every rank except the " highest—of every description but the loyal ; " from their concealment or exile suddenly " emerged the unexecuted patriots of 1798, " &c. &c." (Croker's " Sketch of Ireland.") We can judge by Fox's letters to the Duke of Bedford that these " unexecuted patriots " wanted to be elevated in a fashion beyond their deserts. In place of being hanged, they wished to be gazetted, and to be commemo rated in the "Red Book," and not the "New gate Calendar." Of the celebrated orator, Curran, Fox writes : Particularly in regard to Curran I know that he, more than anybody, feels the necessity of marking strongly the favour of Government to him. I am afraid what you say is true, that Curran's private character does not stand so high as one might wish, but his public conduct, his resist ing of temptations, his support of the cause of justice and humanity, when few, very few dared support it, are merits which cannot be overlooked without disgrace to us, more especially as the reasons against making him Attorney- General (very weak ones in my judgment) cannot be alleged. I most anxiously hope, therefore, that the nego tiation you allude to will soon be brought to bear. Wo think that Curran was treated hardly by his party. He desired to be Attorney General of Ireland, and to have a seat in the English House of Commons. The Irish Lord Chan cellor (Mr. George Ponsonby) would not consent to that arrangement, and succeeded iu making Curran Master of the Rolls—a place for which he was entirely unsuited. We suspect that Mr. Ponsonby was jealous of Curran's superior fame and genius. Curran was bitterly disappointed at the way in which the Whigs behaved to him. It is really re markable how nearly all the celebrated Whig orators quarrelled with their party. The ardour and zeal of Fox as a political leader are very conspicuous in these letters. He is always urging on his friends to be active, and not to neglect their duty. Even in 1805 he writes to " Young One " (Lord Holland) about " the dreadful power of the Crown." Towards Pitt, even when there was a prospect of junction with him, his feelings were ranee UGUST 15, 1857.