The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1905-06-18

so well. Elsewhere III Tue shhe cihplei
We read In tho splendid winter OF Mr.
Gladstone'- days there was no ice in his
heart. Like the light that ever glowed
in the temple Of Montezuma the generous
fire Of his enthusiasm never went out.
The nation mourned his loss with pomp
of sorrow more deep and universal than
ever exalted the memory OF king.
The reader ought not to miss a word
of the chapter entitled THE Singular Career
of Mr.. Disraeli." Repugnant as Disraeli
was to the instincts, the predictions and
the convictions OF our author. the latter
strove to he equitable. Though the one
had no respect for the others career, he
had admiration for his courage. and was
for seeing justice done him. When 1t was
thought the Tories would prevent Dis
raei's accession to the Premiership, which
was his right, earned by service. Mr.. Hol-
yoake was one of those who cheered him in
the lobby of the House of Commons, to show
that opponents of his politics we're against
his being defrauded of the dignities he had
won. Recalling that it was the Liberals
who we're the champions of the jews and
Parliament, our author opines that Disraeli
must have retained some generous memo
ries Of the fact. He has seen Mr.. Bright
cross the floor OF the House sometimes
to confer with Disraeli. He infers that
there must M We been elements In the latters
character in which Mr. Bright had conf
dence. and he records the impression current
at tho time that 1t was owing to respect
for Mr.. Bright's Judgment that Dsraeh
took no part against the Washington Gov
eminent when his party did all they could
to In lure the cause OF the Union In our civil
war.
Neverthele Mr.. Holyoake ia Of Lord Ac-
toms opinion that Mr.. Disraeli was morally
insupportable though otherwise astonish-
ing. The pitiess resentment of Vivian
Grey toward whoever stood in his way
was the prevailing characteristic OF the
triumphant jew Like other men OF pro-
fessional ambition, he had the charm OF en-
"a cling amity to those who were for the
time being no longer impediments to him.
Does the reader detect IN these words a
trace of anti-Semtic pref udice? 1t Is
possible that the writer was not entirely
free from bias yet in the same chapter we
among the Jews. and, az a class, they are
az good. or better than Chrie;is1s would be-
had they been treated for nineteen centuries
as badly as Jews have been According
to Mr.. Holyoake the moral Of Disraeli's
singular career Ia that genius and versa
tility, animated by ambition without scru-
pie, may attain distinction without prlnci-
pie II can win national admiration. but
not public affection. All it can accomplish
is TO lea We behind a name OF sinister reno an. :
Then follows a characteristic admission:
yet If we knew all. no doubt Lord Beacons-
field had, apart from the exigencies Of am
htion. personal qualities commanding
esteem"
In the chapter now under our eye, our
author poses the interesting question how
it came to pass that Disrnel's standing at
court was never affected by what would
In any other person be deemed seditio'ls
defamation OF the Crown. When MIR.
Holyoake mentioned In the United States
the revolutionary license Of Dsraeli =
tongue in declaring Queen Victoria TO lie
physically and morally incapable OF govern
ing. the statement was received with in
creduity 1t seems that the reporters
who took down Dsraeli's AylesbuTy speech
containing the astounding words hesitateel
to transcribe them. and one of them asked
permission to read the passage to the ora
tor. who assented to it's correctness, and the
words appea red IN the Standard and in the
Telegraph Of Sept. q, 1871. The Times
and the Daily Neps omitted the word
morally" dee,ning It incredible. Never
theless, as our author testtes the word
had been pronounced. Disraeli's precise
language was We cannot conceal from
ourselves that her Majesty is physically
and morally incapacitated from perform
ing her duties This meant that her
Ma je-ty was imOecile, a brutal thing TO
! suggest. in view Of her family traditions.
Our author goes on TO recall that, lat a
| Lord Mayors banquet Mr.. Disraeli gave
an insulting and deianatory account of
the Russian royal family and Government,
and boosted. like an inebriate lingo, of
Euzlauds capacity to sustain three cam
paigns against that Power" As Queen
Victoria had a daughterin-law who was a
member Of the imperial house Of Russia
, this act Of international otfensiveness must
have produced a sensation Of shame and
| pain in the English royal family. Il well
TeUleUlI)tI SdHS wv hwy oahS' viz N'il
sieruation and disapproval with which both
speeches were regarded 10y the people
Whatever even Republicans may think Of
the theory Of the Crown. they are against
any personal outrage upon It, Yet Mr..
| Gladstone, who was always forward to
sustain. by graceful and deserving praise
| the interests Of the royal family and to
procure them national grants to which Mr..
! Di-raeli could never have reconciled the
nation. was simply endured by her Majesty
while to Mr. Disraeli ostentatous prefer
| ence was shown. 1t was said in explanation
that Mr. Gladstone had none OF the small
| talk with which Mr. Dsraeli entertained
his eminent hostess" Our author sug-
gests that it was not small talk, : but 'rory
| talk which the Queen rewarded
Though Mr., Holyoake has outlived him,
he seems never to have forgiven Lor d
Salisbury for the acrid, sneering, insulting
contemptuous speeches made by the heir
Of the Cecils in the House Of Commons
against workingmen seeking the franchise.
| what gave this man. he asks, the right
to speak with bitterness and scorn of the
people whose industry kept him in the
! opuence he so little deserved? Some
I frapdS IF NINA " hp haI