The Press.
London, England, 1855-06-16 00:00:00

described throughout. Too soon she discovers the
error she had committed :

She married Wilmslow, and soon found out what was
meant by a man having been too gay. Poor dear, good
Jane ! She struggled with all a woman's noble obstinacy
against her conviction that her husband was a good-for-
nothing fellow, but the conviction was too strong for her.
Her fifteen hundred a year was speedily squsnilered, with
the exception of two hundred, which bloteswurth had
thought proper to secure, and to secure in a way which
enabled him to defy all Henry's attempts to get at. the
principal, and even to resist poor Jane's entreaties, when
her husband had compelled the poor girl to ask that this
little fund might be given up to him. The hardships, pri-
vations, and humiliations to which a vicious spendthrift's
wife is exposed, came heavily on pour .cane Wilmslow.
Sometimes more heavily than she could well bear ; for she
never had the consolation of being loved, to arm her
against all this world's storms, and to be her assurance of
another world's peace. And, at last, though not without a
desperate resistance on the poor woman's part, her hus-
band took from her the power of loving him. All was at.
length over between thew, except the mariage fink, and
Jane's Lever weakened sense of duty.
As a sketch of character, that of Lord Rookbury is
among the best:—

Lord Rookbury's family friends were chiefly Tories,
which was perhaps a sufficient reason for the young lord,
who always held that relations were a mistake' taking the
other side. However, though he eschewed his native
benches, he would nut be naturalised ou those opposite,
and early gave evidence of the self-will, ur independence,
as he preferred to Call it, which intuited him through lite.
Of course, the Court and Carlton blandishments were alike
tried upon the wealthy young nobleman, but while he
could be made to like neither the king's wit not the
queen's snuff, he was also proof to " the virtuous Dau-
phin," and the vocal Morris. It was suou fouud that Lord
ituukbury could nut be " had." lint he attended in his
place very regularly, and often made a brief smart speech,
full of sarcasm, and designed to show both sides that they
were incapable of going to the bottom of the question.
The latter half of his address generally overthrew the argu-
ment of the former, tund his practical commentary on buth
halves was going away without voting at all. Even as a
young man, recently printed diaries have shown that Lord
Roukbury sometimes set older lords thinking, when they
had only intended dividing.
• • • • • •

So far I have stated nothing against Lord Itookbury.
He was au exceedingly clever person, shrewd, audacious
and sarcastic, with ample means, and plenty of will. Also,
let us give him his further due. He was a finished gentle-
man in manners, incapable of coarseness, except wider
strong provocations, and remarkably pleasant in the society
of women.

I am afraid that I must not let him down so easily.
He was a sad old reprobate,—and there you have it in
half a hne A fine classical scholar, he wrote Latin verses
as good as Lord Wellesley's, but all the purity war in t .e
style. He liked Juvenal, which was odd, fur that unborn•
promising gentleman lashes avarice, fraud, and luxury,
and Lord llookhury practised all three. Chiefly, you
would wonder that a man who looked so well, and
spoke so boldly, was a downright cheat. And yet he was
one. Ido not think he exactly loved money for its own
sake, and he would certainly spend it unhesitatingly in the
gratification either of a pleasure or a vengeance, but he
liked to take advantage of everybody. It was curiously
developed, this passion for " getting the pull," as he called
it; and he would make private sacrifices that the world
might see him a winner. During part of his life he took
to the turf; and more than one person now lives virtu-
ously on the pension Lord Itookbury bestowed as a
reward for taking the public shame of a daring turfawindle,
contrives by himself. You cannot cheat much at whist in
England, but at icarle, in his own house, Lord Itookbury
managed to win so wonderfully from a French gentleman,
who knew himself to be of the first force, that the latter
insisted on moving the table. There were looking glasses
in the room, by the way, and somehow Lord Hookbuy
not only won uo wore, but thought it well to return his
past winnings.
- • -

The description of the House on a great debate
night is evidently from the same lively pen that re-
cently in the Quarterly gave so graphic a description
of the manner in which business is transacted in the
Commons :

After the petitions came the questions. Mr. Cornwall
was anxious to know whether we were going to war with
Russia this week or the next; Mr. Devonshire, what
pattern Goveniment recommended fur the stamps on
butter; Mr. Dorset, when the Archbishop of Canterbury
was to be put on half salary ; Mr. Somerset, why the
Edinburgh post had been late on Tuesday fortnight ; Mr.
Wiltshire, whether there was any objection to his having
copies of all letters ever written by Government since the
accession of William Rufus; dtc., dm.

And Minister after Minister having answered, refused
to answer, or evaded the inquiry addressed to him, it was
hoped that the great business of the evening was coming
on. But no: an Irish member, Mr. Valerian Fitzhog, had
a notice on the paper, and was enchanted at finding a full
house, which was compelled to remain, instead of a dead
certaiu:y of a count out. He favoured the assembly with
an hour and a half of brogue, the theme being the dis-
missal of the master of the workhouse at Killyscullyoh ery.
Five minutes would have sufficed a Saxon for stating this
grievance, but then a Saxon, in hie stolid dulness, would
not have enriched his argument with a sketch of the
Danish invasion, the battle of the Boyne, the French
Revolution, Lord Castlereagh and the tjnion, and a few
other matters apparently not necessarily connected with
the case of Mr. Macpariugs, the dismissed master, but