war), that he, Aberdeen, " had once seen forty thousand men dead or dying on the field of battle,* and that he had solemnly vowed never to be connected with a Government engaged in war!" This, of course, she communicated to Nicolas, and hence he was encouraged to go on, step by step, in the conviction that, do what he might, pen and ink would have been the extent of our opposition.

I look forward with delight to our meeting at Moulsey. Why should I not pass your birthday with you, with a day or two thrown into the bargain? I cannot undertake the Alverbank expedition in the present state of my precious liver; but at Moulsey I see no difficulty in our playing old grasshoppers together.

Ever yours affectionately,

S.

Lord Lonsdale to Mr. Croker.

MY DEAR CROKER.

December 16th, 1853.

You submit to me a question that requires much consideration, and more information than I possess at present-that is, the state of our party? Malmesbury is just come up from Lord Derby's, where he had been to meet Dizzy and some others. I believe they agreed to oppose the principle of Reform. Dizzy, I understand, promises to be entirely Conservative; to have no flirtation with the Manchester men. He is our only man. He has nerve to face the pelting from the opposite benches. Pakington has also good pluck. I hear from different sources that our party show a disposition to unite and co-operate together.

* [Probably at the battle of Leipsig.]

CHAPTER XXIX.

1854.

The Controversy over Lord John Russell's 'Memoirs of Moore'-Mr. Croker's Challenge-His Policy of "Living Down" Slander-Mr. Disraeli's attacks upon him-Not a Reader of Novels-Never read 'Coningsby' or 'Vivian Grey,' or a volume of Dickens-Repudiates the Suggestion of "Retaliating" on Mr. Disraeli.-Hook's Novels Mr. Croker and O'Connell-Letter from Lord Lyndhurst-The "Biography" of Mr. Disraeli-The Crimean War-Mr. Croker opposed to it, and agrees with Mr. Bright-His Reasons-Correspondence with Mr. Murray -Mr. Croker's attacks on Napoleon III.—Announces his Retirement from the Quarterly Review-Correspondence with Lord LyndhurstMr. Croker denies being a "Russian "—His Views on the Eastern Question-And on the French Alliance-Lord Lonsdale's Opinions on Russia and America-Lord Raglan's thanks to Mr. Croker-Defeat of the Aberdeen Ministry-The "Raw Coffee" in the Crimea-Mr. Pitt and the Faro Bank at Goostree's-Was Pitt a gambler ?-The Borough of Midhurst Lord Brougham on the Fitzherbert Marriage - The Weakness of Government-Power of the Press-The Force which controls Public Opinion-Mr. Secretary Johnston-Last Letter from Mr. Lockhart-His Death.

--

IN the early part of 1854, a somewhat bitter controversy arose between Lord John Russell and Mr. Croker, with regard to certain entries in the Diary of Moore, which Lord John had seen fit to publish. Until the appearance of this Diary, Mr. Croker had no suspicion that Moore entertained any unfriendly feelings towards him. He knew that he had more than once been of service to the author of the Irish Melodies,' especially at the time of his Bermuda difficulties.

་

Moore had acknowledged these obligations somewhat profusely; on one occasion he wrote:-"No one feels more high respect for your talents, or bears more ready testimony to the great good nature experienced from you and yours, than yours sincerely, Thomas Moore." No doubt, therefore, it was a disagreeable surprise to Mr. Croker when he found himself spoken of by Moore in disparaging strains-for example, as a "quick skirmisher of reviews," but "as to anything of a higher order of talent, I am greatly mistaken if he has the slightest claim to it." To this was afterwards added a note by Lord John Russell to the effect that there were passages still more offensive in the Diary, which the editor had suppressed-a note scarcely calculated to redress the injustice done by Moore. Mr. Croker defied Lord John to produce the passages referred to. He wrote:

"There is another very serious consideration arising out of this surprising confession, which is, that for the purpose, I suppose, of attributing to yourself the gloriole of a generous delicacy towards me, as well as others, you sacrifice not only your argument, but the character of your poor friend, by revealing, what I never suspected, that during the many years in which he was living on apparently the most friendly terms with me, and asking, and receiving, and acknowledging such good offices, both consultative and practical, as my poor judgment and interest were able to afford him, he was making entries in his 'Diary' concerning me so 'offensive,' that even the political and partisan zeal of Lord John Russell shrank from reproducing them.

"I must be allowed to say, under such strange circumstances, that I reject your Lordship's indulgence with contempt, and despise the menace, if it be meant for one, that you have such weapons in your sleeve; I not only dare you, but I condescend to entreat you to publish all about me that you may have suppressed. Let me know the full extent of your crooked indulgence, and of Moore's undeviating friendship. Let us have the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, while I am still living to avail myself of it. Let it not be said that 'poor dear Moore told such things of

Croker that even Lord John Russell would not publish them. I feel pretty confident that there will not be found any entry of Moore's derogatory of me against which I shall not be able to produce his own contemporaneous evidence of a contrary tendency."

The correspondence was first published in the Times, and afterwards reproduced by Mr. Croker in a pamphlet. To this pamphlet he refers in the following letter:

Mr. Croker to M. Guizot.

West Moulsey, February 23rd, 1854.

I have postponed answering yours of the 13th for a few days that I might send you the accompanying little brochure, which perhaps may interest you on my account. I began very early in life, full fifty years ago, to be a dabbler in literary and political polemics, and had given and received a good many hard knocks in various encounters in Parliament and the Press. In Parliament I could take my own part, and in the Press that of my party, but I seldom (indeed I believe never) noticed the personal abuse of which I was the subject -I was content to live it down! But when just on the verge of the grave I found myself assailed both in moral character and personal honour by a person of Lord John Russell's rank and station, I thought it a case to justify, nay to require, a direct defence and so I made one-first, against Lord John in the Times newspaper; and, as I wished to place it in a more permanent shape than the feuilles volantes of a newspaper, I have added to my correspondence with his Lordship some account of my acquaintance and connection with Mr. Moore, whom Lord John had made the prête-nom of his old political and personal malevolence against me. All the world here, "of all parties," as Brougham writes to me, agree that I have had a complete victory; I hope you will think so too.

Mr. Croker here affirms that he had never before noticed any personal abuse of which he was made the subject, and undoubtedly this was the case. Whether it is always wise to allow personal attacks to pass unheeded, in reliance upon the

"living down" principle, is a very delicate question, turning much upon circumstances which every man ought to be able to judge best for himself. The plan does not always answer; it can scarcely be said to have answered very well in Mr. Croker's own case; for calumnies which he could have disposed of very easily while living, were repeated and renewed after his death. Sometimes the prudent course is to grapple boldly with slander, and strangle it on the spot. But however this may be, Mr. Croker consistently followed the rule which he prescribed for himself, and never replied to his assailants. Some one remarked of him, in a magazine sketch, that he had "embroiled himself rather frequently in literary feuds," and his note upon the margin of the paper was this: "I can hardly be said to have embroiled myself' with either Macaulay or Lord John. They were both the aggressors, and attacked me as a writer because they hated me as a political antagonist." A biographical sketch appeared about the same time, in which he and Mr. Disraeli were described as enemies. Mr. Croker returned an answer to the gentleman who had forwarded him a copy of the sketch, and the correspondence which ensued is given below.

Mr. Croker to Mr. Charles Phillips.*

West Moulsey, Surrey, December 29th, 1853.

I looked hastily into the work to see if I could guess why it was sent to me, and I suppose it was because my name is mentioned two or three times in reference to some supposed hostility between me and Mr. Disraeli, which at least, as to my supposed hostility, is a mistake. I never, I think, met Mr. Disraeli above twice-once, when he was very young, at his father's, and once, many years later, at Lord Lyndhurst's table, and nothing certainly happened to create any coolness on my part; on the contrary, my impressions, as far as I

. [Author, as it has been stated, of 'Recollections of Curran,' &c.]