The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1906-12-02


thas .h all yhs Isttsrs ] have ne ssan6
. single unktnd phsase shou4 auyteAUN
The sbsenee % sven On ~ocuaakenal essuAna
struck mo % ~rexnarksbie.s He ada
'Lowell's letters, II I may Judge f~rurn<hass
speCtmcns and others I have sesn, vfl
prove ocnclusively The fality Of ths com
mon theory that tho srt OF tstesr ws4xAus
10 being lost. I don's think that Ccwpsr
or Gray or any ons could wrtts bseessA"
It was Stephen; by tho wsy; vho IN hs
spring Of fse7 wrote 30 thu fksss pss-
posing a. English memorial % Lowell O
proposal which was carried Gus hy o csnA.
mittse beaded by the Duks OF Argyll
In December OF Tho sstns year sesphan
was elected president Of the London IA
brsry. In succession to Tennyxon. who
succeeded Houghton; who bad mccssdsd
Carlyle. He tells Norton thAa ths bssAowaA
Of tina ONCE 'amused me, hecanss xhe sasos
ton In made BY thu oonnmittos, and she
frst proposal was 70 skcs GhAknsAunA
Somebody then proposed me- sd modsssy
induced ma 20 retire from ths room. OShss.
wise I should hsvs lked 10 hns~ o nom.
parison between my clAtms and tAcuNnf
the great man.
In ths following year 10 rscstyva fssm
Norton the volume containing Iowuus
letters, and 10 moved by candoY % sAy
Of Lowel's ~poems-othsr than ths sBixiou
Papsrs' and tho sCommsmorstaon Odsp
that 4 IKE khsm, but shsy do NOT taks
hold OF me a. frst rate. Il sounds atmoss
disloyal TO DO saying thia. and ! do nos
love him n jot tho b@. But "a q b, and
therefore I was rathsr u-npgepared Sos
your evidently strong conviction that b.
WA ESSENTIALLY . poet. He was Of courss
in . degree, but his pross laid bold Of M
more Elsewhere In tho sans sttsP he
says: Anyhow. I love him. svsn - a
author, N some people love ChaxAss Lamb
and other favorites; I think that be was
about as good on paper ~ any Of them,
and than / have tho blessing Of remembsr-
ing him In his own person. II b one OF the
greatest comforts hat remain 10 me, md
will stick to me as long - I live
VII.
In a letter dated December; 1885, and
addressed TO Mr.. G. +. Adams. son Of Tho
former Minister 10 london, Stephan tails
his correspondent that he has besn reading
his book on Massachusetts," and has
been struck by the likeness OF the New
England Congregationalists 10 the Scotch
Presbyterians. The same letter contains
an interesting comment on Buckles re-
marks about the Scottish Kirk. -The
Scots, / take IL, were no moro slaves Of
their ministers than their ministers OF
them. The ministers were bigoted because
they had bigoted congregations, and the
truth Is, I take il, that the Kirk really
represented the democratic element in
Scotland, and was popular because Il
represented the people In a way which
Parliament did not. 1t had ever through the
eighteenth century the same kind of hold
on the country that the Irish priests have
on their people Stephen goes on 70 say
that after the union the Assembly was
the representative body, and while
in England the Church was practically the
property of the landed gentry! who gave
all the preferment TO their SOM and de-
pendants, the Scotch minister war oon
stantly the son of a peasant or small farmer,
n the body was altogether national In .
sense In which the Anglican Church has
never been. Therefore IL was both demo-
cratic and Wnperstitioss."
Stephens second wife died I'm 1895; and he
survived her less than nina years. In
December, 1907, he had TO submit TO q sur
gical operation, which brought Temporary
relief, but It was evident 20 all around him
hat his strength was waning day BY day.
When the present biographer saw him In
the summer Of 1908 he was wasted and
shrunken, and could hardly walk from
his house to the garden, but Was still trying
TO write for two or three hours daily. When
he came to London q few months later he
had 10 take to his bed, knowing that his
work was done. His last letter TO Norton
Is dated December 1; 1908. As late, how
ever, A. February n, 1906. Stephen talked
to a visitor, a lady, In his usual way about
people and books. Afterward his mind
began TO wander, snd " night came on
he lay still and silent. Shortly before :
o'clock ON tho following morning he passed.
from sleep to death.
No attempt is made in tbs book before
us to appraise the value Of Stephens writ
ings. Stephen himself strongly believed
that as a general rule books soon hnd
their level, and that, at any rate, they can
not be buoyed up by bladders blown by
friendly biographers. or his own career
Stephen said: THE sense in which l do
take myself to have been a failure is this:
I have scattered myself too much. I think
that l had 1t in me to make something like
a real contribution to philosophical or
ethical thought. Unluckily, what with
journalism and dictionary making. I have
been a jack Of all trades. and instead
of striking home I have only lone enough
to persuade friendly judges that I could
have struck He added that II ever a his
tory OF English thought in the nineteenth
century were written his name would
only appear in ~footnotes, whereas had he
concentrated his forces he might perhaps
have had a paragraph or some section Of .
chapter all to himself. II any one doubts
that this is much too strongly stated let him
read what has been written about Stephen
by John Morley, James Bryce, Frederic
Harrison. A. W. Ward, Sir Frederick Pol
lock, Herbert Paul md others. We can