SOME FAMOUS PEOPLE ABROAD.
Gladstone. Dr. Brown. Dean
Stanley. Shaftesbury, etc.
In a former chapter of this volume
I gave my reminiscences of some celebrities in Great
Britain sixty years ago. In the present chapter
I group together several distinguished persons whom
I met during subsequent visits. The first time
I ever saw Mr. Gladstone was in August, 1857, when
Lord Kinnaird kindly took me into the House of Commons,
and pointed out to me from a side gallery the most
prominent celebrities. A tall, finely formed
man, in a clear resonant voice, addressed the House
for a few moments. “That is Gladstone,”
whispered Lord Kinnaird. Mr. Gladstone had already
won fame as a great financier in the rôle of Chancellor
of the Exchequer; but was at this time out of office,
occupying an independent position. He was already
beginning to break loose from Toryism, and ere long
became the most brilliant and powerful leader that
the British Liberal party has ever followed. As
an orator he is ranked next to Bright; as a party
manager, he was always a match for Disraeli, and as
a statesman he has won the foremost place in British
annals during the last half century.
In June, 1872, I happened to be in
London at the time of the great excitement over the
famous “Alabama difficulty.” The Court
of Arbitration was sitting at Geneva; things were
not going smoothly, and there was danger of a rupture
with the United States. At an anniversary meeting
at Exeter Hall I had made a speech in which I spoke
of the cordial feeling of my countrymen, and their
desire to avoid a conflict with the mother country.
It was suggested to me that I should call on Mr. Gladstone,
who was then Premier; and my friend, Dr. Newman Hall, who
had always had a warm personal attachment to Gladstone, accompanied
me. The Premier then occupied a stately mansion
in Carlton House Terrace, next to the Duke of York’s
column. We found him in his private sitting room
with a cup of coffee before him and a morning newspaper
in his hand. Fifteen years had made a great change
in his appearance. He had become stouter and
broader shouldered. His thin hair was turned gray,
and his large eyes and magnificent brow reminded me
of Daniel Webster. He received me cordially,
and we spent half an hour in conversation about the
difficulties that seemed to be obstructing an amicable
settlement of the Alabama controversy. Mr. Gladstone
appeared to be puzzled about a recent belligerent
speech delivered by Mr. Charles Sumner in our Senate
chamber, and I was glad to give him a hint or two
in regard to some of our eloquent Senator’s idiosyncrasies.
What impressed me most in Gladstone’s free,
earnest talk was its solemn and thoroughly Christian
tone he was longing for peace on principle.
On my telling him playfully that the time which belonged
to the British Empire was too precious for further
talk, he said: “Come and breakfast with
me to-morrow morning, and we will finish our conversation.”
The next morning Dr. Hall and myself presented ourselves
at ten o’clock in Mr. Gladstone’s parlor.
We had a very pleasant chat with Mrs. Gladstone (a
tall, slender lady, whose only claim to beauty was
her benevolent countenance), about the schemes of
charity in which she was deeply interested. At
the breakfast table opposite to us were the venerable
Dean Ramsey, of Edinburgh, and Professor Talbot, of
Oxford University. The Premier indulged in some
jocose remarks which encouraged me to tell him stories
about our Southern negroes, in whom he seemed to be
much interested. He laughed over the story of
the eloquent colored brother who, when asked how he
came to preach so well, said: “Well, Boss,
I takes de text fust; I splains it; den I spounds
it, and den I puts in de rousements.”
Gladstone was quite delighted with this, and said it
was about the best description of real parliamentary
eloquence. He told us that one secret of his
own marvelous health was his talent for sound, unbroken
sleep. “I lock all my public cares outside
my chamber door,” said he, “and nothing
ever disturbs my slumbers.” While we were
at breakfast a package of dispatches was brought in
and laid beside Mr. Gladstone’s plate.
He left them quietly alone until the meal was over
and then, taking them to a corner of the parlor, perused
them intently. I saw that his face was lighted
up with a pleasant smile. Beckoning me to come
to him he said, with much enthusiasm: “Doctor,
here is good news from the arbitrators at Geneva.
The worst is over. I do not pretend to know the
purposes of Providence, but I am sure that no earthly
power can now prevent an honorable peace between your
country and mine.” It has always been a
matter of thankfulness that I should have been with
the greatest of living Englishmen when his warm heart
was relieved of the apprehension of the danger of
a conflict with America. After entering our names
in the autograph book on the parlor table, we withdrew,
and at the door we met the Duke of Argyll, a member
of the Premier’s Cabinet, who was calling on
official business.
My next meeting with Gladstone was
a very brief one, in the summer of 1885. He had
lately resigned his third Premiership; his health was
badly impaired, his splendid voice was apparently
ruined by an attack of bronchitis, and the world supposed
that his public career was ended. I called at
his house in Whitehall Terrace, and the servant informed
me at the door that the physicians had forbidden Mr.
Gladstone to see any one. I handed in my card,
and said to the servant: “I leave for America
to-morrow, and only called to say good-bye to Mr. Gladstone.”
He overheard my voice (not one of the feeblest), and,
coming out into the hall, greeted me most warmly,
but in a voice almost inaudible from hoarseness.
I told him: “Do not attempt to speak, Mr.
Gladstone; the future of the British Empire depends
upon your throat.” He hoarsely whispered,
“No, no, my friend, it does not,” and with
a very hearty handshake we parted. My prediction
came true. Within a year the marvelous old man
had recovered his voice, recovered his popularity,
resumed the Liberal leadership, and for the fourth
time was Prime Minister of Great Britain.
I supposed that I should never see
the veteran statesman again, but four years afterward,
in July, 1889, he kindly invited me to come and see
him, and to bring my wife. It was the week before
the celebration of his golden wedding. He was
occupying, temporarily, a house near Buckingham Palace.
Mrs. Gladstone, the good angel of his long life and
happy home, received us warmly, and, bringing out
a lot of photographs of her children and grandchildren,
gave us a family talk. When her husband came
in, I was startled to observe how much thinner he had
become and how loosely his clothes hung upon him.
But as soon as he began to talk, the old fire flamed
up, and he discoursed eloquently about Irish Home-Rule,
the divorce question, (one of his hobbies), and the
dangers that threatened America from plutocracy and
laxity of wedlock, and the facilities of divorce that
sap the sanctities of domestic life. It was during
that conversation that Gladstone tittered the sentence
that I have often had occasion to quote. He said:
“Amid all the pressure of public cares and duties,
I thank God for the Sabbath with its rest for the
body and the soul.” One reason for his
wonderful longevity was that he had never robbed his
brain of the benefits of God’s appointed day
of rest. After our delightful talk was ended,
the Grand Old Man went off in pursuit of an imperial
photograph, which he kindly signed with his autograph,
and gave to my wife, and it now graces the walls of
the room in which I am writing.
Many men have been great in some direction:
William Ewart Gladstone was great in nearly all directions.
Born in the same year with our Lincoln, he was a great
muscular man and horseman; a great orator, a great
political strategist, a great scholar, a great writer,
great statesman and a great Christian. The crowning
glory of his character was a stalwart faith in God’s
Word, and in the cross of Jesus Christ. He honored
his Lord, and his Lord honored him. Wordsworth
drew a truthful picture of Gladstone when he portrayed
“The man who lifted high
Conspicuous object in a nation’s
eye,
Who, with a toward or untoward lot,
Prosperous or adverse, to his wish
or not,
Plays in the many games of life,
that one
Where what he most doth value must
be won;
Whom neither shape of danger can
dismay,
Nor thought of tender happiness
betray;
And while the mortal mist is gathering,
draws
His breath in confidence of Heaven’s
applause.”
Who has not wept over the brilliant
and beloved Dr. John Brown’s unrivalled story,
“Rab and His Friends,” and been charmed
with his picture of “Pet Marjorie”?
What student of style will deny that his “Monograph”
of his father is the finest specimen of condensed and
vivid biography in our language? When his “Spare
Hours” appeared in America I published an article
in the “Independent” entitled, “The
Last of the John Browns,” several copies of
which had been forwarded to him by his friends in
this country. On my arrival in Edinburgh, July,
1862, he called on me at the Waverly Hotel and invited
me to breakfast with him. He had the fair Saxon
features of Scotland, with a smile like a Summer morning.
Not tall in stature, his head was somewhat bald, and
he bore a striking resemblance to our ex-President,
Van Buren. He showed me in his house some choice
literary treasures; among them a little Greek Testament,
given to his great-grandfather, the famous John Brown,
of Haddington, the eminent commentator. Its history
was curious: Brown of, Haddington, was a poor
shepherd boy, and once he walked twenty miles through
the night to St. Andrews to get a copy of the Greek
Testament. The book-seller at first laughed at
him and said: “Boy, if you can read a verse
in this book, you may have it.” Forthwith
the lad read the verse off glibly, and was permitted
to carry off the Testament in triumph. You may
well suppose that the little volume is a sacred heirloom
in the Brown family, which for four generations has
been famous. Of course, the author of “Rab
and His Friends” had several pictures of the
illustrious dog that figured in his beautiful story,
and I noticed a pet spaniel lying on the sofa in the
drawing room. A day or two after, Dr. Brown called
on me, and kindly took me on a drive with him through
Edinburgh; and it was pleasant to see how the people
on the sidewalk had cheery salutes for the author
of “Rab” as he rode by. We went up
to Calton Hill and made a call on Sir George Harvey,
the famous artist, whom we found in his studio, with
brush in hand, and working on an Highland landscape.
Sir George was a hearty old fellow, and the two friends
had a merry “crack” together. When
I asked Harvey if he had seen any of our best American
paintings, he replied “No, I have not; the best
American productions I have ever seen have been some
of your missionaries. I met some of them; they
were noble characters.” On our return from
the drive Dr. Brown gave me an elegant edition of
“Rab,” with Harvey’s portrait of
the immortal dog, whose body was thickset like a little
bull, and who had “fought his way to absolute
supremacy, like Julius Cæsar or the Duke
of Wellington.”
When in Edinburgh ten years afterwards,
as a delegate to the General Assemblies, I was so
constantly occupied that I was able to see but little
of my genial friend, Dr. Brown. I sent him a copy
of the little book, “The Empty Crib,”
which had been recently published, and received from
him the following characteristic reply:
25 RUTLAND STREET, EDINBURGH,
May 25, 1872.
My Dear Dr. Cuyler
Very many thanks for your kind note,
and the little book. It will be my own fault
if I am not the better for reading it. I have
seen nothing lovelier or more touching than the
pictures of those twin heads “like
unto the angels”; even there Georgie looks nearer
the better world than his brother. There
is something perilous about his eyes with their
wistful beauty. With him “it is far better”
now, and may it be meet for Theodore to be long
with you here. I hoped to leave with you
a book of my father’s on the same subject, entitled,
“Comfortable Words,” but it is out of print.
If I can get a copy, I will send it you.
There are some letters of Bengel’s which,
if you do not know, you will enjoy.
I send you a note of
introduction to John Ruskin, and I hope to
hear you to-morrow in
Mr. Candlish’s church.
With much regret and
best thanks, yours very truly,
JOHN BROWN
P.S. I was in Glen-Garry
the other week, and quite felt that look
of nakedness, and as
if it just came from the Maker’s hand; it was
very impressive
During the closing years of the Doctor’s
life he was often shadowed by fits of deep melancholy.
One day he was walking with a lady, who was also subject
to depression of spirits, and he said to her:
“Tell me why I am like a Jew?” She could
not answer and he replied: “Because I am
sad-you-see” Tears and mirth dwelt very
closely together in his keen, fervid, sensitive spirit.
It is remarkable that one who devoted himself so assiduously
to his exacting profession should have been able to
master such an immense amount of miscellaneous reading,
and to have won such a splendid name in literature.
It is the attribute of true genius that it can do
great things easily, and can accomplish its feats in
an incredibly short time. He affirms that the
immortal story of “Rab” was written in
a few hours! The precious relics of my friend
that I now possess are portraits of his father and
of Dr. Chalmers, and of Hugh Miller, which he presented
to me, and which now adorn my study walls.
While I have always dissented from
some of his theological views and utterances, I have
always had an intense admiration for Dean Stanley,
in whose character was blended the gentleness of a
sweet girl with occasional display of the courage
of a lion. Froude once said to me: “I
wish that Stanley was a little better hater.”
My reply was: “It is not in Stanley to
hate anybody but the devil.” My acquaintance
with the Dean of Westminster dates from the summer
of 1872. The Rev. Samuel Minton, a very broad
Church of England clergyman, was in the habit of inviting
ministers of the Established church and non-conformists
to meet at lunch parties with a view of bringing them
to a better understanding. One day I was invited
by Mr. Minton to attend one of these lunch parties,
and I found that day at his table, Dr. Donald Frazer,
Dr. Newman Hall, Dr. Joseph Parker, Dean Stanley and
Dr. Howard Wilkinson, afterwards Bishop of Truro.
Stanley felt perfectly at home among these “dissenters”
and asked me to give the company some account of a
remarkable discourse, which, he was told, Bishop McIlvaine,
of Ohio, had recently delivered in my Lafayette Presbyterian
Church, Brooklyn, on “Christian Unity.”
In the discourse, Bishop McIlvaine had said:
“The only difference between the Presbyterian
denomination, and Episcopal denomination, is their
difference as to the orders of the ministry.”
The Dean was delighted with my account, and said:
“Just imagine the Bishop of London preaching
such a sermon in Newman Hall’s or Spurgeon’s
pulpit; it would rock the old dome of St. Paul’s.”
In all of his intercourse with his dissenting brethren
the Dean never put on any airs of patronage, for though
a loyal Episcopalian, he recognized their equally
divine ordination as ministers of Jesus Christ.
A few days afterwards I went up to
get a look at Holly Lodge, the residence of Lord Macaulay,
in a side street just off Campden Hill. I met
the Dean just coming out of the gate. He had been
attending a garden party given by Lord Airlie, who
then occupied the lodge. It was a pleasant coincidence
to meet the most brilliant ecclesiastical historian
at the door of the most brilliant civil historian of
England. The Dean stopped and chatted about Macaulay,
of whom he was very fond, and then said: “Just
beyond is Holland House.” We went a few
paces and got a glimpse of the famous mansion in which
Lord Holland had entertained the celebrities of America
and Europe. One of the best hours I ever spent
with Stanley was at his own table in the Deanery.
He was the most delightful of hosts. Lady Augusta
Stanley, daughter of the Earl of Elgin, had been a
favorite Maid of Honor to the Queen, and the Dean had
accompanied the Prince of Wales on his tour to the
Orient. The Queen quite frequently slipped away
from the palace for a quiet chat at the Deanery with
this pair whom she so loved. A marble bust of
Victoria, by her daughter, the Princess Louise, stood
in the parlor, a gift of the Queen. If the Dean
was very broad in his theology, his cultured wife was
as decidedly evangelical in hers and her religious
influence was very tonic in all respects. After
lunch that day the Dean very kindly took me into the
famous Jerusalem chamber and showed me where the Westminster
Assembly had sat for six years to give birth to our
Presbyterian Confession of Faith and Catechism.
I was surprised at the small size of the room that
had held seventy or eighty commissioners.
As I was very desirous of hearing
the Dean preach in the Abbey, he sent me a very kind
invitation to come on the next Sabbath to the Deanery
before the service, and on account of my deafness Lady
Augusta would take me into a seat close to his pulpit.
Accordingly she stowed me in a small box-pew, which
was close against the pulpit, and within arms’
length of the Dean. His sermon was a beautiful
essay on Solomon and great men, and in the course
of it he said: “Such was the greatness of
our Lord Jesus Christ.” I felt so pained
by what he did not say that I ventured to write
him a most frank and loving note, in which I expressed
my deep regret that when he referred to the “greatness”
of our Saviour he had so entirely ignored what was
infinitely His most sublime work, that
of our human redemption by His atoning death on Calvary.
The dear Dean, instead of taking offense, accepted
the frank letter in the same spirit in which it was
written. A day or two after he sent me a characteristic
note, whose peculiar hieroglyphics, after much labor,
I was able to decipher; for it has been often said
that the only reason why he was never made a bishop
was that no clergyman in his diocese would ever have
been able to read his letters.
THE DEANERY OF WESTMINSTER,
July 22, 1872
Dear Doctor –Pray accept
my sincere thanks for your very kind note.
I quite appreciate your candor in mentioning what
you thought a defect in my sermon. It arose from
a fixed conviction which I have long formed, that
the only chance there is of my sermons doing any
good is by taking one topic at a time. The
effect and the nature of the death of Jesus Christ,
I quite agree with you in thinking to be a most
important part of the Christian doctrine, and Christian
history. But as my sermon was on a different
subject that of the right use of greatness I
felt that I could not speak, even by way of allusion,
to the other great doctrine on which I had often
preached before.
I sincerely wish that I could come
to America. Every
year that passes increases the number
of my kind friends
in the New World, and my desire
to see the United States.
Farewell; and may all the blessings
of our State and
Church follow you westward
Yours faithfully,
A.P. STANLEY.
When Dean Stanley visited America
in the autumn of 1878, I met him several times, and
he was especially cordial, and all the more so because
of my out-spoken letter. The first time I met
him was at the meeting of ministers of New York to
give him a reception, and hear him deliver a discourse
on Dr. Robinson, the Oriental geographer. He
recognized me in the audience, came forward to the
front of the platform, beckoned me up, and gave me
a hearty grasp of the hand. I arranged to take
him to Greenwood Cemetery on the morning before he
sailed for home, and after breakfasting with him at
Cyrus W. Field’s we started for the cemetery.
Dr. Phillip Schaff and Dr. Henry M. Field met us at
the ferry, and accompanied us. When we entered
the elevated railroad car, Stanley exclaimed:
“This is like the chariots on the walls of Babylon.”
With his keen interest in history he inquired when
we reached the lower part of the Bowery, near the
junction of Chatham Square “Was it not near
here that Nathan Hale, the martyr, was executed?”
and he showed then a more accurate knowledge of our
local history than one New Yorker in ten thousand
can boast! That was probably the exact locality,
and Dean Stanley had never been there before.
Before entering the Greenwood Cemetery he requested
me to drive him to the spot where my little child
was buried, whose photograph in “The Empty Crib”
I have referred to in a previous chapter. When
we reached the burial lot he got out of the carriage,
and in the driving wind, of a raw November morning,
spent some time in examining the marble medallion of
the child, and in talking with my wife most sweetly
about him. I could have hugged the man on the
spot. It was so like Stanley. I do not wonder
that everybody loved him. We then drove to the
tomb of Dr. Edward Robinson and the Dean said to us:
“In all my travels in Palestine I carried Dr.
Robinson’s volume, ‘Biblical Researches,’
with me on horseback or on my camel; it was my constant
guide book.”
Three years afterward, on my arrival
in London, from Palestine I learned that Stanley was
dangerously ill. On the door of the Deanery a
bulletin was posted: “The Dean is sinking.”
That night the good, great man, died. On the
25th of July the august funeral service took place
in Westminster Abbey. Outside the Abbey thousands
of people were assembled, for the Dean was loved by
all London. From a small gallery over the “Poets’
Corner” I looked down on the group, which contained
Gladstone, Shaftesbury, Matthew Arnold, and scores
of England’s mightiest and best. After
the “Dead March,” began a long procession
headed by Stanley’s lifelong friend, Archbishop
Tait, of Canterbury, and the Prince of Wales (his
pupil), and followed by Browning, Tyndall, and a long
line of bishops, and poets and scholars moved slowly
along under the lofty arches to the tomb in Henry
VII.’s Chapel. A fresh wreath of flowers
from the Queen was laid on the coffin. Many a
tear was shed on that sad day beside the tomb in which
the Church of England laid her most fearless and yet
her best beloved son. I never have visited the
Abbey since, without halting for a few moments beside
the chapel in which the Dean and his beloved wife
are slumbering. Greater than all his books or
literary achievements was Arthur Penryn Stanley, the
modest, true-hearted, unselfish, childlike, Christian
man.
Soon after I had begun my pastorate
in New York, I became a member of the Young Men’s
Christian Association, which was one of the first that
was organized in this country. Since that time
I have delivered more than one hundred addresses,
in behalf of this institution, in my own country and
abroad. In June, 1857, the New York organization
honored me with what was then a novelty in America a
public breakfast, and commissioned me as a delegate
to the original parent association in London.
I there met that remarkable Christian merchant, Mr.
George Williams, who was the founder of the Association,
and who had got much of his first spiritual inspiration
from reading the writings of our American, Charles
G. Finney. He is now Sir George Williams, my much
loved friend, and I do not hesitate to say that there
is not another man living who has accomplished such
a world-wide work for the glory of God and the welfare
of young men. The President of that first organized
London Association was the celebrated philanthropist,
the Earl of Shaftesbury, a man whom I had long desired
to meet. My acquaintance with him began in Exeter
Hall, at a Sabbath service held to reach the non-church
going classes. With one or two others we knelt
together in a small side room to invoke a blessing
on the service in the great hall, and he prayed most
fervently. The Earl of Shaftesbury was not only
the author of great reformatory legislation in Parliament,
and the acknowledged leader of the Low Church Party
in the Established Church. He was also a leader
of city missions, ragged schools, shoe-black brigades,
and other organizations to benefit the submerged classes
in London. He once invited all the thieves in
London to meet him privately in a certain hall, and
there pleaded with them to abandon their wretched
occupation, and promised to aid those who desired to
reform. He was fond of telling the story of how,
when his watch was stolen, the thieves themselves
compelled the rascal to come and return it, because
he had been the benefactor of the “long-fingered
fraternity.” The last time that I saw the
venerable philanthropist was just before his death
(at the age of eighty-four years). He was presiding
at a convention of the Young Men’s Christian
Association in Exeter Hall. In my speech I said:
“To-day I have seen Milton’s Mulberry Tree
at Cambridge University, and the historic old tree
is kept alive by being banked around with earth clear
to its boughs; and so is all Christendom banking around
our honored President to-night to keep him warm and
hale, and strong, amid the frosts of advancing age,”
The grand old man rewarded me with a bow and a gracious
smile, and the audience responded with a shout of
appreciation.