I have spoken of his familiarity with rather out-of-the-way books. Upon
one occasion we were talking of Schliemann’s discoveries at Troy and of
Lowe’s refusal, when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer, to purchase
the contents of King Priam’s treasure house—a decision which I greatly
regretted. I mentioned that Lowe snuffed out the suggestion with a
quotation: “Etiam periere ruinæ” was all that he said. “Ah!” said Lord
Beaconsfield, “from Lucan’s ‘Pharsalia,’ a fine poem.” The quotation is
of course well known, but as Lucan is not one of the authors whom the
head masters have taken under their wing, I much doubt whether there
were two men in the two Houses of Parliament who could have said offhand
whence it came, or have given an opinion as to the merits of the poem.
Deeply read as he was, I never heard him talk of modern literature. The
only comparatively modern book that I knew him to praise was “Walpole’s
Letters.” Of those he spoke with enthusiasm: “No man need be dull who
possesses ‘Walpole’s Letters.’” Indeed, although he was himself a man of
letters, and had the deepest veneration for his father as a literary man,
he had but little knowledge of the writers of his own day. Probably he
was too much absorbed by politics to care for the society of the literary
brotherhood. On one occasion he asked me whether there was any man whom
he could invite to his official dinner on the Queen’s birthday as the
representative of letters.
His answer to a fine lady who at one of the Foreign Office parties asked
him “whether he wanted a really good novel?” raised much laughter. “My
dear, when I want a good novel I write it.”
Lord Beaconsfield as an actor was inimitable. He was a master of stage
effect, and he never gave a better example of his histrionic powers
than when, in 1877, he was attacked upon his appointment of Mr. Pigott
to the Controllership of the Stationery Office, which a committee of
the House of Commons had declared ought to be filled by a professional
stationer and printer. Ignoring this for wise and practical reasons,
when the office became vacant he appointed to the post, which was worth
£1,500 a year, Mr. Pigott, a clerk in the War Office. The truffle dogs
of the House of Commons scented a job, and yapped all the more fiercely
when they found out that Mr. Pigott was the son of the former rector
of Hughenden. The Conservative Whips somehow mismanaged the affair,
and a vote of censure was passed in the lower House by a majority of
four votes. There was a great commotion in the country and the _Times_
condemned the appointment as “too splendidly audacious.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account