The Press.
London, England, 1856-05-03 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

in his hand, he was working not in unison
with his nature. He succeeded when he
aimed at being a modern Anacreon; he failed
when he tried to become a domestic chroni•
cler, like Evelyn or Mr. Pepys. Thus the
reading of his Memoirs produces an odd
sensation. No Muse ever before twaddled so
tediously as the •" retired cherub " of Sloper-
ton-cottage ; but we must turn to the last
instalment of his Memoirs.

The eighth volume contains several letters
from Lady Donegal, Miss Godfrey, Samuel
Rogers, " Monk" Lewis, James Corry, and
others. Of these Miss Godfrey's are the best,
but several of the others might have been
omitted with advantage. Of passages which
may be considered " disclosures " there are but
few. Those relating to Moore's low opinion of
his own party, the Whigs, are the most remark.
able. None of them are more curious than one,
in which we find so eminent a statesman and so
pure a Whig as the Marquis of Lansdowne
bearing his attestation to the political sound-
ness of the views put forward by Mr. Disraeli
Under date of 27th December, 1835, while at
Bowood, we find Moore thus writing in his
diary :

A good deal of conversation at and after breakfast.
Speaking of Disraeli " the Younger's " view of the political
character of Whigs and Tories, in his late pamphlets,
Lord Lansdowne remarked, that there was a good deal of
truth in what he said, as to the Tories having taken a more
democratic line, in general, than the Whigs; their political
position, since the Revolution, having led them Li. e., the
Tories] to court the alliance of the people against the aris-
tocracy. Hence (as I suggested) the popular view they took
of the subjects of a standing army, the Debt, septennial par-
liaments, &c. I mentioned the laugh lately raised among a
party of Burdett's constituents, when the deputation they
appointed to wait on him reported his having said to them,
that " lie had always been a Tory." This, however, is
perfectly true. Burdett has said the same thing to me
more than once :—" I am a Tory of the school of Sir Wil-
liam Wyndham."

Moore of course alluded here to the " Vindi
cation of the English Constitution," addressed
to Lord Lyndhurst. (The reference to this
passage in the diary is erroneous, as the index-
maker has placed it under the name of the
author of the " Curiosities of Literature.") Mr.
Disraeli has always contended that the Whig
party was essentially an oligarchy, and that its
system approximated to the Venetian model.
Let us see what Moore says :

The short taste of the sweets of power with which the
Whigs have been regaled has evidently intoxicated
the whole party ; and their bearing in authority, from
wanting that mellowness which a long course of
possession gave to the others, has the misfortune of being
neither imposing nor conciliatory ; but while it reminds
one constantly of their station, too often fails, at the same
time, to inspire much respect for it. When I say this I
mean it of the party generally, and of almost all the under-
strappers. Some of the leaders—as, for instance, Lord
Lansdowne, Lord John, and, I may add, perhaps, Lord
Melbourne—furnish exceptions to the remark, though
even they are far better men out of office than in. The
aristocratic prejudices of the party have already been
shown in their choice of the materials of their Ministries;
and the same patrician exclusiveness which drove Canning
to adopt early the resolution of keeping clear of a party, by
whose lordly branches he foresaw he would be over-
shadowed, still exists in full pride and force. Neither
Canning, indeed, nor Peel, would have ever risen to be
Prime Ministers had they first started into political exist-
ence under the " umbrage broad " of the Whigs. What !
the son of a cotton spinner take the pas of a Lord Morpeth
or a Lord Duncannon ! Impossible ! We shall, before
long, however, see what it will all come to ; even in our
own times we shall, I think, see the denouement.

Elsewhere Moore records (vol. vii. p. 70) that
the Whigs were losing that claim to respect
which he was once disposed to allow them;
and he continues :

It has been, indeed, one of the natural consequences of
the Reform Bill, that, in proportion as it has reduced the
power of the Tories, it has improved, of course, the
chances of the Whigs in all future struggles between them
for power ; and this change in the relative position of the
two parties is bringing rapidly into play some of the most
disagreeable characteristics of both. Long possession of
place, and the apparent certainty of its future tenure,
gave to the Tories all that repose which a consciousness
of power usually generates; they could afford, from their
feeling of security, to be civil, and even liberal ; and their
elevation being not from birth, but position, and therefore
accessible to all, was more intelligible, and therefore less
offensive than pretensions derived from the Herald's-
office. On the other hand, the Whigs were surrounded,
from their political position, with extrinsic advantages and
associations which threw into the shade or rendered
inactive all that was intrinsically unpopular in them. The
aristocratic pride which is chiefly found among that party
was a good deal softened down, and even lost sight of, in
their habitual advocacy of the cause of the people, and the
intimate connection with popular leaders to which it in-
tn duced them.

423

These seem strange sentiments for a Whig
partisan; but so it is throughout. Moore,
indeed, can hardly be called a Whig in any
sense, if we are to place faith in the declara-
tions of his diary. In one place he prints a
lively epigram published in Dublin at the
time that the representation of Limerick was
offered to him :

When Limerick, in idle whim,
Moore as her member lately courted,
" The boys," for form's sake, ask'd of him
To state what patty he supported.
When thus his answer promptly ran
(Now give the wit his meed of glory),
" I'm of no party, as a man,—
But, as a poet, am-a.tory."
We have heard those clever verses attributed
to the pen of the late witty Dominick Renayne,
M.P. for Clonmel, who suppliedlO'Connell with
some choice points for the Agitator's invec-
tives. Lord John Russell sees this flagrant
inconsistency between Moore's professions in
public and his confessions in private, and his
Lordship thus tries to account for the incon-
sistency :

It is singular that Mr. Moore should have been one of
the gloomy prophets who predicted revolution and cala-
mity as the consequences of the Reform Act. Lord Grey,
with a truer knowledge of the English people, was of
opinion that the measure, to be safe, must be large ; and
those who acted with him and under him, framed the
Reform Bill in that spirit.
There is, perhaps, in men of letters, a tendency to be
dissatisfied with the political system under which they
live. Sir James Mackintosh used to observe that the
greatest authors of Athens were evidently averse to the
rule of the democracy. In France, before the Revolution,
the moat brilliant writers were as evidently hostile to the
absolute monarchy under which they lived. In our own
time Southey and Coleridge began with democracy, Scott
as a Jacobite, Moore as a disaffected Irish Catholic. The
freedom of literary pursuits leads men to question the
excellence of the ruling power ; and thus despotism and
democracy alike find enemies among the most highly
gifted of those who live under their sway. Had Reform
never been triumphant. Moore would, in all probability,
have remained a warm Reformer.

But Lord John has not there touched the
question at issue. The charge against Moore
(and it is 9. serious one) is, that he did not
show his candid opinions, and that he was
writing up the Whigs while he entertained so
low an opinion of them. Moore's reputation
will certainly not be improved by these con-
cluding volumes.

We get some good glimpses of " party"
behind the scenes. There rarely has been so
great a party battle as the contest for the
Speakership in 18:35, between Mr. Manners
Sutton (Lord Canterbury) and Mr. Aber-
cromby (Lord Dunfermline). This is a lively
description of the interior at Brookes's.
Under date of 19th February, 1835, he
writes:—

Towards evening set out for the West, intending to dine
at Brookes's, if I met with nothing better. Found there
a great number assembled, peers and others not members
of the House of Commons, waiting the result of the great
trial of strength this evening on the question of the
Speakership. Immense anxiety, and reports of the pro-
gress of the debate coming in from time to time. Post
hour at length approaching, and the letters still kept open
for the chance of the news arriving in time to be communi-
cated to country friends. But no intelligence arrived, and
many sat down to seal their letters, when a young fellow
( Dundas, I believe,) came running breathless into the room
and cried out, " Won it by ten ! won it by ten !" He was
soon encircled, and questioned, and pulled about by one
and another, while the whole party hnrrahed and shook
hands. and were as uproarious as a party of schoolboys.
Instantly all the letters that had been sealed were again
opened, and every one sat down to communicate the joyful
news to his correspondent; but had not proceeded far,
when a sort of panic of doubt seized them all at the same
moment as to whether the news just brought might be
depended upon, Dundas's only authority for it having
been a man whom he saw running into Abercromby's
house (not far from Brookes's), and shouting upstairs to
Mrs. Abercromby, " Won it by ten !" All now sat looking
at each other, bewildered with the unfinished letters before
them, and even our enthusiastic informant himself was
beginning to be infected with the general distrust, when a
whole party from the house came trooping in (Denison,
the mover of Abercromby, among the rest), and no doubt
was any longer left of the victory. Denison himself was
hurrahed, and hugged, and twirled about like a top, and
the whole group gave one as little notion of a party of
grave and mature legislator! as can be well conceived.
The cry was then, "Let's all dine here." Some scruples
were stated by one or two as to not being dressed, but
these were soon overmled, and frock-coats were the order
of the day. I had before agreed with Lord Ducie to join
him at the house dinner here, which had been prepared
only for nine or ten persons ; but we now sat down a party
of more than thirty (the waiters having added what they
could to the repast), and Denison was put in the chair,
with the Duke of Argyll on one side of him, and Lori
Ducie on the other. I got seated between young Ai °Mop

, 424

and old Sir It. Heron. Toasts were drunk with hip, hip,
hurrah, eke., and all was very merry.
-

There is only one allusion, and that of a
most cursory character, to Mr. Wilson Croker
in these volumes. There is little kindly praise
of any working man of letters in them ; and
Moore had obviously no esprit de corps with the
literary profession. The tone of a sentimental
upstart is felt throughout in his glozing praise
of " Lords " and " Ladies " and great rulers of
society. He rather makes an exception in favour
of Mr. and Mrs. S. C. Hall. In recording a visit
of a few days from them in l 840, Moore says,—
" We found them very agreeable as well as
" clever people, qualities not always found
" together." Elsewhere he alludes to Mrs.
Hall as the writer "of those inimitable Irish
stories," but in general he has little to say for
his brethren of the pen. He writes one
caustic thing of Mr. Abraham Hayward which,
as a dictum of Moore, will probably adhere
to that learned Queen's Counsel. In de-
scribing the guests at a dinner at Longmans,
Moore mentions " Mr. Hayward, the trans-
" lator of ' Faust,' but better known as the author
" of some late culinary articles in the Quarterly
" Review." The conversation at table turned
on the merits of " Boz." We are rather sur-
prised to find Sydney Smith thus brought in
desiring to run " Boz ' down :

Conversation turned on Boz, the new comic writer.
Was sorry to hear Sydney cry him down, and evidently
without having given him a fair trial. Whereas, to me it
appears one of the few proofs of good taste that "the
masses," as they are called, have yet given, there being
some as nice humour and fun in the " Pickwick Papers"
as in any work I have seen in our day. Hayward, the
only one of the party that stood by me in this opinion,
engaged me fur a dinner (at his chambers) on Thursday
nest.

In Sydney Smith's letters there is extravagant
praise, written to Mr. Dickens himself, and
swallowed accordingly. It struck us at the
time of reading it as being too exaggerated for
perfect sincerity on the part of Sydney Smith. It
is worth notice that the company at the dinner
consisted of Sydney Smith himself, Canon
Tate, Mr. Merivale, Dr. Lardner, Mr. J. R.
M'Cullocb, Moore, their entertainers of Pater-
noster-row (well qualified to speak on such
critical subjects), and Mr Abraham Hayward.
A reaction is now beginning to take place
against Mr. Dickens, and the question dis-
cussed above is au " open" one; for since
" Uncle Tom" and the striking successes of
Mr. Thackeray, the claims of" Buz " are not of
the overpowering character first claimed for
them. It is, perhaps, worth notice that
although Moore gives minute accounts of
various dinners at that time, he omits to take
the slightest further notice of the literary
gentleman who was " better known for his
" culinary articles !" and who had engaged
Moore to dine.

The world has often heard of S 3 dney
Smith's celebrated characterisation of Lord
John Russell. We get hints here of what the
Whirrs thought about it. From the notoriety
of the particular passage, the following is well
worth notice :

A note from Mrs. Smith to say, that Sydney would take
me to the Longmans today, if 1 liked. Had already half
promised to go with Lardner, but sent a note to put
him off. On our way to Hampstead, Sydney talked of his
" Letter," rather nervously, as I thought. Forget whether
I have mentioned Luttrell's saying to me the other day,
" Wel, my dear Moore, could you have conceived any man
taking such pains to upset a brilliant position in society
as Sydney has been taking lately." In the course of our
talk, Smith mentioned his having received a letter lately
from Lord Carlisle, in acknowledgment of a copy of the
pamphlet he had sent him. Repeated the substance, and,
I suppose, nearly the words of the letter, which appeared
to me a very polished but pointed condemnation of the
pamphlet. Lord Carlisle, it is clear, in writing it, felt
himself bound to express, as politely as possible, what lie
knew to be the opinion of the persons he lived with on
the subject ; and being himself unscathed by the pamphlet,
he could of course do it with a better grace. This, how-
ever, Sydney did not seem to me to feel.

The Whigs %yew evidently nettled at Smith
having turned his battery upon them, after
they had shown their disinclination to make
him a Bishop. But what follows is more
curious :

While we were on the subject, I thought it my duty,
also, to tell him what I thought of Ids attack on Lord
John ; his repreAenting him to be so totally devoid of feel•
ing as to hear with unconcern the loss of the Channel
fleet, the dying of a man under en operation for the stone,
&c. &c., through his means. This he denied to be the
puport or effect of the passage in question, which meant
merely, he contended, that you could not perceive by Lord