table between the windows. The old man's hand shook while he took it. Aunt Anne, looking at him like a culprit waiting for punishment, noticed a blackness round his mouth and that the lines on his face were rigid.

"Shall I bring you some chicken-broth, Sir William?" the servant asked.

"When I ring. Go." Then he turned to Aunt Anne. "Now I will tell you why this young man loved you." He said the last words with an almost fiendish chuckle. "He loved you because, being a clerk in his uncle's office, the office from which he had to be kicked, he probably knew in fact, I am certain that he knew, for he came to ask me your Christian name when the instructions were being given - that I had provided for you in my will. I do not choose to pauperize people while I live, but I considered it my duty to leave some portion of my wealth to my relations, no matter how small a claim they had upon me. He knew that you would get a fourth share of my money-probably he reckoned it up and calculated that it would amount to a good many thousand pounds, so he and Boughton concocted a scheme to get hold of it together."

"Mr. Boughton knew nothing of our marriage."

"I tell you it was all a scheme. What should Boughton allow you a hundred a year for?" He was grasping the will while he spoke.

"He knew nothing about it, William, neither did Alfred."

"Well, we'll put his disinterestedness to the test," and he tried to tear the will in half, but his fingers were too weak.

"I think I have made the case clear," he said, "and that you will see there is nothing to be gained by staying. My money was not made to benefit Mr. Alfred Wimple. I shall make another will, and it will not contain your name." He rang the bell again.

"You have treated me cruelly - cruelly but heaven will frustrate you yet." Anguish and dignity were strangely blended in her voice, but she hesitated a moment, and it seemed as if the latter had gained the victory, when she went on: "You and I will probably never meet again, William; you have insulted me shamefully, and you will remember it when it is too late to ask my forgiveness. You have insulted me, and treated me heartlessly, yet it was beside us when we were children that our mothers The servant entered with a cup of chicken-broth.

From The New Review.

STUDY IN CHARACTER.

LORD SALISBURY.

THE absolute unimportance of every

"Oh, no," she cried, "no, no." "Do you suppose a young man would marry an old woman like you for any reason but gain? That you should have been such a fool—and for that unwhole-individual to the world is a common belief some-looking cur, with his long, rickety legs and red hair, why he looks like a stale prawn," the old man said derisively, and made another effort to tear the will.

amongst thoughtful persons in it. Exception may be made in the case of a few poets and one or two philosophers of a practical turn, but as to our rulers and governors, the doctrine so dear to Manchester in its braver days is still believed in. This doctrine is that individual gifts, personal will, count for little in times when intelligence and power are widely diffused. Nations are now governed (so the argument runs) by the common stock of will and wisdom; making use of this or that representative of itself, but neither used by nor dependent upon any individual, no matter what his apparent place in the world or his seeming authority.

It is a great mistake, and one that ought

not to have survived observation of the | themselves; the Third Napoleon, for excareer of two or three men of our own ample. Of others, like Mr. Disraeli, distime: Cavour, Bismarck, and Mr. Gladstone, for example. The truth is that with all her apparatus of Parliament, public meeting, caucuses, newspapers, and reviews, even free and democratic England is almost as much in the hands of one or two men as with-liberty-half-endowed Germany is. Whether the empire is uplifted or cast down may be decided by the bee in one man's bonnet, or the fluctuations of wisdom in the head and courage in the heart of another. So it has been hitherto, so it is now, and so, no doubt, it will ever be. Wherefore it is always interesting to look about us and see what sort of statesmanship we happen to be provided with.

At this moment the fortunes of the empire are pretty much in the hands of two men, Mr. Gladstone and Lord Salisbury; and it is the last-named statesman who sits in the seat of actual power, where he has exercised an authority far in excess of what is generally supposed. Prime ministers endowed with a masterful spirit have much more command in affairs than the popular imagination attributes to them; and in Lord Salisbury's case this power has been greatly enhanced by the fact that he chose to become, or had to become for there is no Conservative half so well qualified for the post-foreign secretary as well as prime minister. No doubt it is true that as his present term of power ran on (his first term, soon to be renewed or terminated) he took an ever-diminishing interest in the domestic affairs of the country, leaving them more and more to the handling of men who are not in the Cabinet and giving an all-but exclusive attention to the conduct of foreign affairs. The fact remains, however, that he holds a position of extraordinary personal authority; and that the combination of the two offices in his own hands leaves him quite unchecked in matters of the highest and most enduring importance. And since he is about to ask for a renewal of that authority, it should be all the more interesting to inquire what manner of man is he?

tinct but contrary conceptions have been formed. Lord Salisbury is not a "mystery man." Nobody would think of applying to him that romantic but yet derogatory designation; nevertheless, after years and years of public life (or rather of public business), there are few minds in which his image takes a firm outline. Yet more remarkable, perhaps, is the fact that, notwithstanding the high place he fills, there is little curiosity about him personallylittle public curiosity. Of course, those whose business is politics, or who take a sustained interest in public affairs, must needs speculate from time to time upon the character of so great a personage. But while they do so to small advantage, the rest of the world seems to trouble itself with the subject not at all. It is a remarkable but not an inexplicable fact that with all his high qualities, with all his commanding abilities including a large share of the winning gift of eloquence Lord Salisbury has little interest for the people at large; which is explained by a lack of sympathy in his own character. That amiable quality, so useful to statesmanship, governed as England is, has been denied to him altogether. But sympathy lives by sympathy; and it must be a matter of common remark that wherever a distinct want of it becomes manifest it is not only met with coldness, but is in danger of setting up an antipathetic sentiment. Would it be too much to say that this untoward consequence is sometimes observed in the "feeling" for Lord Salisbury? Perhaps so. But at least it cannot be doubted that a general indifference to the prime minister as a personality exists in the public mind. The mass of Englishmen under Lord Salisbury's gov. ernment are content to remain in ignorance of him. Himself destitute of sympathetic charm, he draws from them no part of the personal interest that was bestowed on Lord Palmerston, for example, not to speak of other men Lord Salisbury's intellectual inferiors.

This is a grave privation, though it is probably one that he is little inclined by nature to repine at. Useful as it would be to him, it is more than likely that Hatfield's lord and Burleigh's descendant would take small pride in the strength derived from uninformed popular sympathy. Not that we are entitled to say "that because he has never tried to gain it he would rather do without it. Temperament is temperament; we all have some

Put this question in any society, and it will be strange if you receive a confident reply. There are doubtless some who can speak from observation that should be sufficient, but they are comparatively few, and even of these it may be said that they do not venture on forming definite conclusions. There have been "mystery men who yet impressed the world with a tolerably distinct and fairly accurate idea of

might have been great with good reason even if he had no more resembled his noblest ancestors than other gentlemen that might be named would naturally become intensified ; and therewith, and on the same account, the pride of intellect. As it happens, these are Lord Salisbury's predominant characteristics; and as might be inferred from the very origin of his pride of birth, it is the pride of intellect which is the most vivid and assertive. Now, take these two sentiments alone; understand that they can hardly be stronger in any mind, to remain rational; imagine how such a combination must affect character and conduct; and everything in Lord Salisbury's public life is explained.

Only, we must assume a ground-work of what has been called the Italian mind; which is not much of an assumption either. On reasonably close inspection it is seen that the better qualities of that cast of intellect are always at work wherever the noble marquis may be, for the public good. But occasionally some of its other qualities, in harmony with the rest but much less admirable, appear also; and it is a mighty pity that the use of them is not perceived to be quite anachronistic. It was all very well in the sixteenth century. That sort of thing was even necessary in old days, perhaps ; but it comes to no good now. It would be absurd, of course, to suppose that the conduct of foreign affairs can be carried on in public like a cricket match. Concealments there must be; sometimes there must be that kind of deceit which is called putting off the scent; and the business of diplomacy is such that the necessity most often arises upon affairs of the highest importance. All that is understood. But it is possible to use these practices to excess, without need, and merely as part of the refinements of the game; and when that is done by a statesman in our time and country, the result is to place between nation and minister a distance which Lord Salisbury must have been very conscious of more than once. The like of it is often seen in domestic life; when wife and husband go on together in comfort enough, though each is never long unconscious of the void that opened between them when some selfrevealing word was spoken. It is unnecessary to dwell on the occasions when the revealing word was uttered by Lord Salisbury, but to put them out of sight in a sketch of character would be as if a portrait painter drew a floating scarf over that part

of the canvas where the mouth should be. Light in themselves, perhaps, these selfrevelations are often significant of fundamentals; and what was signified in Lord Salisbury's case was a preference, evidently rooted in character and tradition, for carrying on a certain kind of public business in ways more ancient than lovely.

Another illustration of the same preference has been much less remarked upon, and, therefore, may be noticed here. It is to be found in the famous "large maps" speech. At the time when that speech was delivered, the country was agitated to what anybody may understand as a most inconvenient degree by the Russian encroachments towards India. In all likelihood, it was impossible for the government to satisfy the public demand for active means of prevention; and so what Lord Salisbury did was to declare that the demand was based upon a ridiculously ignorant conception of the facts. The prevalent fears, he said, arose entirely from the irrational practice of studying small maps; which, to the eyes of those who were so absurdly content with them, reduced boundless wastes and enormous mountain ranges to the limit of a long day's walk. But statesmen studied large maps, and therefore understood that alarm at the Russian advance to India was merely ludicrous. Nothing could be more ingenious or more telling than that speech; and nothing more disingenuous and deluding. But it served its purpose to a miracle. There was a burst of laughter throughout the country, so glad were we to believe in the pathless hills and deserts vast revealed by the Foreign Office maps; and the government was left quite undisturbed about the Russian advance till a few years after, when the fighting at Penjdeh declared that Lord Salisbury's large-map revelations were mythical, and that the Russian advance up to the Afghan frontier had been accomplished out of hand. As a first result of this discovery, it seemed for a time that war was almost inevitable. But it was avoided; and avoided, let us hasten to add, on the most honorable terms that could have been hoped for under the circumstances, by the sagacity and firmness of Lord Salisbury himself.

According to the natural order of things, the strength and ambition of Lord Salisbury's intellect came out before its subtlety. They came out not long after he entered the House of Commons (he was

Lord Robert Cecil and twenty-three at the time when Lord Salisbury was sent to that time), where he soon gave proof of Constantinople, which the rest of the Cabhis very remarkable powers and of a cer- inet was unaware of. This was in 1876. tain aggressive courage in the use of Lord Salisbury was despatched out of them. This was the most noticeable the Cabinet he was Indian secretary thing about his quarrel with Mr. Disraeli. then to see what British influence could But that Lord Robert should stand up to do to avert a threatened attack on Turkey his political chief when he did was less by the Russians. He had no sooner remarkable than it might have seemed at started than signs of an ambitious indeother times; for at that period there was pendency of action appeared in his cona great deal of discontent with Mr. Dis- duct. Somewhat later, his carriage at raeli amongst influential Conservatives - Constantinople was such as to excite asa discontent largely mixed with contempt. tonishment amongst his fellow countrymen It was not surprising, therefore, that a at home, who could not reconcile it with young patrician, conscious of great parts the understood sympathies and policies of and gifted with a full share of fighting the government. And their doubts were eloquence, should dream of pushing Mr. so far justified that Lord Salisbury's conDisraeli out of the leadership and taking duct was equally unintelligible to his own his place. Yet that Lord Robert Cecil colleagues. Possibly it was only his should hope to beat Mr. Disraeli on the methods of going about the business he floor of the House of Commons argued a had in hand that looked dubious; but confidence which, though not without however that may be, warm remonstrances merit, was hardly justified. He fought on were sent out to him from Downing good conscientious grounds, but in the Street, complaining that he seemed to be end it was not Mr. Disraeli who received not only exceeding his instructions but the most "punishment " in that encounter; departing from them. This little episode, which was marked on the side of his the details of which have never been laid youthful opponent by precisely the same before the public, is recalled to illustrate merits and defects that distinguish his Lord Salisbury's masterfulness in a posicontroversial speeches to this day. The tion of advantage. That position he cerquarrel engendered much bitterness, and tainly enjoyed at Constantinople; for of the memory of it was lasting. Fortu- course he knew that an envoy from the nately, it is not the habit of public men in Cabinet is not to be controlled or recalled England to cherish the rancors that do as easily as another man might be. At arise from time to time in political con- the same time he may have been right in flict. The relations between these two what he did, and wiser than those whom men became very close afterwards, and, he astonished and offended; but that is no doubt, beneficially; but if the truth not a question for discussion in a paper must be told, much that we have heard like this, though to put it out of view since Lord Beaconsfield's death of the would be unfair to the political character affectionate trust reposed in the younger we are dealing with. Neither are we to statesman by the elder is mere invention. forget that when some time afterwards When the shah made his tour in Europe other important ministers departed from a he was accompanied by a large number of Cabinet long and deeply troubled by difPersian gentlemen, who were no doubt ferences of opinion, Lord Salisbury resupposed to have been selected for their mained with Mr. Disraeli and worked in merits and as a mark of honor and confi- harmony with him to the end. dence. Some of them were; but others were chosen because his Majesty thought it wouldn't be wise to leave them at home; wiser to carry them about with him and keep them under his eye. Should this story apply to the appearance of Lord Salisbury in Mr. Disraeli's 1874 administration (which many wondered at), let it be remembered that the Disraelian motive, like the shah's, may have been groundless. If so, however, good reason for mistrusting Lord Salisbury soon reappeared; unless, indeed, there was an understanding between him and his chief, at

On Lord Derby's resignation in 1878 his noble kinsman (who publicly likened him on one occasion to Titus Oates) took the foreign secretaryship; and it is necessary to recall the fact that Lord Salisbury signalized his appearance in that rôle by publishing a declaration of policy that won boundless plaudits for its boldness and the defiant patriotism that spoke in every line. It had as great an effect on the country as the small maps speech — an immense effect; and almost immediately afterwards proof appeared that it was equally trustworthy. No doubt one