Peel's part in the drama in terms less of censure than of affectionate regret. The article was, of course, Croker's, and was followed up by a private letter, of which, as well as of Peel's reply, we subjoin copies :"MR CROKER TO SIR ROBERT PEEL. EXTRACT. "WEST MOULSEY, January 12th, 1847. "I cannot write to you without expressing my deep regret at having been placed, by my zeal for and confidence in your former measures, in a position which has forced me into so decided a difference of political opinions as must render any personal in tercourse between us awkward and for painful. Thus closes, with this note, a correspondence of seven-and-thirty years; but it does not alter my-I believe unalterable affection yourself, and my regard for Lady Peel and your family, which are as lively and sincere as my wishes for the failure, as I understand them, of all your political views. If we should happen to meet (which is not very likely, as I go very little from home), I hope it may be with such civil forms and as much personal kindness as may very well coexist with strong political differences.-I am, my dear Peel, very sincerely and affectionately yours, Up to the Altar. J. W. CROKER." "SIR ROBERT PEEL TO MR CROKER. "DRAYTON MANOR, January 15th, 1847. "SIR,-As I am confirmed by your letter in my previous impressions that you are the author of certain articles which have appeared in recent numbers of the Quarterly Review,' I concur entirely in the opinion you express, that any personal intercourse between us would be awkward and painful. "There are, no doubt, many cases in which personal goodwill may coexist with strong political differences, but personal goodwill cannot coexist with the spirit in which those articles are written, or with the feelings they must naturally have excited. "I trust there is nothing inconsis tent with perfect civility in the expression of an earnest wish that the same principle which suggests to you the propriety of closing a written correspondence of seven- and - thirty years, may be extended to every other species of intercourse.-I have the honour to be, sir, your obedient servant, ROBERT PEEL." So came to a close a friendship which, subject only to one, and that not a very protracted interruption, had lasted upwards of thirty years. Never again did Peel and Croker take counsel together, either by letter or in social intercourse, though none felt more deeply than Croker the ex-Minister's untimely death, or expressed himself on the occasion with greater tenderness. And now it is high time to look for a brief space at Croker through another medium than that of politics. That he continued to the end true to his convictions, and gave them expression as often as occasion required, every reader of these very interesting volumes will discover. But Croker was much more than a politician; and in whatever light regarded-whether as himself a man of letters, or a friend to literature and literary men, or as a member, and a leading member, in society-we shall find that his proper place is very much that which his able and judicious biographer has assigned to him. He contrived, no doubt, to make for himself enemies, at once more numerous and more vindictive than perhaps assailed any other public man of his day. This was due, in part, to the line which he early took as a writer, and to which he adhered throughout his life. For he who lashes the follies of his age must expect to be lashed in his turn, and to be charged, as Croker was, with many a bitter thing which he never said or wrote. But if he had many enemies, he had also many friends; and one who could number among these Southey, Scott, Lockhart, and, above all, the great Duke of Wellington, might well be content to know that Macaulay and Miss Martineau hated him. The gulf that separated Disraeli and him, as it was never, unfortunately, filled up, so it would appear to have had its beginnings in mistakes on both sides. Croker was not the reviewer of any of Disraeli's novels; indeed he never, according to his own showing, read them. Hence the attack upon him in 'Coningsby,' as it originated in a misunderstanding, so it was doubly ungenerous because unprovoked, and ought therefore to have been atoned for. These, however, are accidents for which all who take part in the strife of tongues or of pens must be prepared; and Croker, it is only fair to add, recognised the fact, and treated it with indifference. It is unfortunate for Croker's reputation as an author that he never found time to devote his great powers to the elucidation of any one masterful object. Had he gone on with his history of the French Revolution, he might have taken his place as a historian beside Hume and Grote, and even beside Gibbon. For he was not the man to treat that great convulsion, as Macaulay has treated his romance of William III., from a mere party point of view, much less as an isolated fact in time's progress. We should have had, on the contrary, or we deceive ourselves, effects traced back to their causes far enough to make us acquainted with every incident, small or great, which conduced to bring on the decline and fall of the French monarchy. Instead of this we have only two or three papers in the 'Quarterly Review,' each of them excellent to the extent to which it goes, but as a whole unsatisfactory, because without either system or continuity. Again, his edition of Boswell's Johnson,' however creditable to him as an investigator into the manners and habits of thought which characterised which characterised a particular period in literary history, scarcely gives him his proper place in literature. We are doubtless indebted to him for the skill with which he has supplemented what was wanting in Boswell's story; yet, after all, it is not Croker's life of Johnson, but Boswell's, which we have been reading; and when we lay aside the book, it is much more of Johnson, and even of Boswell, that we think, than of Croker. Besides editing Boswell, Croker meditated giving to the world a new edition of Pope. It was the age for such undertakings-witness Lockhart's and Allan Cunningham's editions of Burns, Scott's edition of Swift, and many more, from which the public has learned a great deal, without, however, for the most part, keeping in mind the source whence the information came. But though he made considerable progress in collecting materials for his work, and had gone so far as to agree with Mr Murray concerning the terms on which the copyright should be parted with, he by-and-by abandoned the project, and made over his notes-and very valuable notes they were-to the Rev. Mr Elwin. It was as well, perhaps, that he did so; for while we cannot doubt that he might have ably performed a task for which his familiarity with the literature of our Augustan age peculiarly fitted him, it may be questioned whether, in his case, the game would have been worth the candle. We think of him, therefore, weighed in this scale, as of an author who might have done infinitely better than he did had not circumstances induced him to be content with the reputation of a painstaking English scholar and a very able and brilliant essayist. Of Croker's sympathy with literary and artistic merit, and his readiness to give a helping hand to struggling authors and artists, we have, in the volumes now before us, abundant proof. And well it is that Mr Jennings should have thus done justice to his hero, because seldom has it fallen to the lot of any man of mark to have been, in these respects, more cruelly misrepresented. As we have elsewhere said, Croker made many enemies, not only among politicians and writers, to whom he often, it must be confessed, gave reasonable ground of offence, but among persons whom he had certainly never injured, and to some of whom he had gone out of his way to render important services. Such a one was Dr Maginn, the most reckless and wayward man of genius of his day, who found in Croker a frequent subject of ill-natured banter, and whom Croker paid back by getting for him, in his hour of greatest need, substantial pecuniary assistance through Sir Robert Peel. And such, too, was Moore, whom he saved from ruin through declining to be a party with him in a job. Very different were the relations in which he stood towards other and more generous natures whom it was his good fortune to befriend. Scott was well pleased to owe to him the colonial appointment which rendered the latter days of his brother Tom comfortable. Through him the Laureateship which Scott declined came to Southey; and mainly in consequence of his intercession with Lord Bathurst, Hook regained his liberty by the remission of a debt to Government, carelessly rather than criminally contracted, yet not on that account lightly to be thought of. To Peel the credit of granting a pension to Mrs Somerville has usually been accredited. It now appears that Peel only acted on Croker's suggestion. But we need not go farther into details of this sort. It may suffice to say, that against appeals for help, whether they came from high or lowly stations, Croker, so long as they commended themselves in any degree to his better judgment, never closed his ear. He was always ready to meet them by the exercise of influence when influence offered the best chance of effectually serving the petitioner. When immediate want was to be removed, his purse always stood open. Besides thus befriending individuals, Croker did what he could to benefit literature and the arts in more ways than one. The Athenæum-in its original design a club in which authors, painters, sculptors, and the patrons of art and literature, might meet and associate together owes its existence entirely to his exertions. He was ready at all times to give advice to aspiring artists and authors; and if it sometimes happened that he himself acted in controversion of the course he had recommended to others, what more can be said than that he could not, more than other men, claim to be consistent in all things? Read, for example, his early correspondence with Lockhart on the subject of the Quarterly Review.' Lockhart undertook the management of that important publication in 1824, and Croker immediately writes to point out how the work of editorship should be carried on. The Quarterly' is not, on any account, to become a party organ in politics. It is to put forth only able and interesting criticisms on books connected with literature, science, and the arts, not one of which ought to extend beyond the limits of a single sheet, or, at the most, of two sheets. No sooner is he put in a position to give a tone to the Quarterly,' than it becomes a party organ of the purest water, and sends forth papers which, when his own pen comes into play, cover twice, sometimes as much as thrice, the number of pages proposed as a maximum. But Mr Croker was more than a politician and an author. He was one of the foremost conversationalists in a social circle which comprised many of the most distinguished and influential men of the age. Mr Jennings, without expressly stating this fact, leads his readers to infer it from the portions he has given them of Croker's diaries and some of his correspondence. Nor, indeed, as it appears to us, could he have done more, because only they who met Croker in his own or other men's houses, could do justice to his powers in this respect; and of these, few, if any, now survive. Yet we may be permitted to say that his talk bore a strong family likeness to his letters. Both were lengthy, pregnant with knowledge, generally interesting, sometimes overwhelming. No presence abashed the man -no suspicion seems ever to have entered his mind that possibly one or other of the persons present might know more of the subject under discussion than himself. To one talker, and only to one, whom it is scarcely necessary to particu larise, he was accustomed at times to give way. But even Scott, whom everybody else was anxious to trot out, found it difficult, whenever Croker happened to be pres ent, to get an occasional opening for one of his capital stories. How Croker's last days were spent, how patient he was under suffering, how vigorous his intellect continued to be amid the body's decay, Mr Jennings has well told. Well too, and touchingly, has he described the parting interview between Croker, and his illustrious friend, not omitting to place on record the memorandum made by Croker at the time, of all that passed in conversation be tween them. But in truth the whole story of Croker and his times has been admirably put together. In making his selections from letters and diaries, Mr Jennings has shown equal judgment and delicacy; while his own portion of the work, the links in the chain which connect various epochs to gether, is not more remarkable for good taste than for general ac curacy. We do not, therefore, hesitate to say, that three volumes more full of interest than these, more rich in amusing anecdote, more pregnant with historical information, have not for many a long year claimed the attention of an English reading public. THE CRISIS. AFTER the ever-growing political excitement of the recess, culminating in the disgraceful outrages at Dumfries and Birmingham, the opening of the autumn session must be regarded as comparatively dull and uninteresting; and this even though the Queen's Speech, ex necessitate rei, was not confined to the cause of all the autumnal turmoil the Franchise Bill. By informing the House of Commons that a vote for the operations in the Soudan would be required, the Government might reasonably hope that their miserable policy of sending an abnormal and costly expedition into the Soudan, for the purpose of effectively abandoning it again to to anarchy and slave-driving, would escape immediate discussion; and by promising long-delayed papers on the subject of their deplorable fiasco in South Africa, they expected to ward off all notice of it on the Address; but Mr Stafford Howard's manly and outspoken references to the results of their previous incapacity naturally led to the debate inaugurated by Sir Henry Holland, which may be described as a reconnaissance en force previous to the pitched battle which it was obvious would have to be fought when, the papers being presented, an opportunity could be secured for it. The pressing and serious character of these two questions raised in the Queen's Speech would alone have largely detracted from the importance and interest with which Mr Gladstone endeavoured to invest his factitious quarrel with the House of Lords; but, as might be expected, the chariot-wheels of the Franchise Bill were clogged and delayed, not by debates on foreign or colonial mismanagement, but by the perennial stream of Irish discontent. In vain had Mr Trevelyan in his farewell speech as Irish Secretary expressed for himself, and presumably for his successor, the most liberal intentions as to handing over the whole local government of Ireland to the populace; neither those professions as to the future, nor his resignation, conciliated in the slightest degree Mr Parnell and his followers; nor indeed could the substitution of one hard-headed and unemotional Scotch member for another in the office of Chief Secretary be reasonably expected to produce any such result. So long as Lord Spencer remains Viceroy, so long must the Government expect to be relentlessly opposed by the so-called Nationalists in the House of Commons. The only other subject which delayed the debate on the second reading of the Franchise Bill was the duel between Lord Randolph Churchill and Mr Chamberlain on the Birmingham riots. As those deplorable transactions are undergoing legal investigation, it is only necessary to remark, that Lord Randolph's amendment to the Address need not, and probably would not, have been proposed, had Mr Chamberlain adopted Mr Gladstone's tone in speaking of the misconduct of a small section of his constituents: for whatever delay, therefore, that amendment created, Mr Chamberlain is responsible. But in truth the complaints of Mr Gladstone and his followers against the length of the debate on the Address strike us as misplaced. The Government deliberately-for the pur |