Haunted London — Lincoln's Inn Fields Part 2

The Whig party, in their eagerness to restrain the Papists and exclude the Duke of York from the throne, had gone too far, and their zeal for the Dissenters had produced a violent reaction in the High Church party.

Charles and the Duke, taking advantage of the return tide, began to persecute the Dissenters, denounce Shaftesbury, assail the liberties of the City, and finally dissolved the Parliament.

Soon after this, that subtle politician, Shaftesbury, finding it impossible to rouse the Duke of Monmouth, Essex, or Lord Russell, denounced them all as sold and deceived, and fled to Holland.

After his flight, meetings of his creatures were held at the chambers of one West, an active talking man.

Keeling, a vintner of decaying business, betrayed the plot, as also did Lord Howard, a man so infamous that Charles himself said “he would not hang the worst dog he had upon his evidence.

” Keeling and his brother swore that forty men were hired to intercept the king, but that a fire at Newmarket, which had hastened Charles’s return, had defeated their plans.

Goodenough, an ex-sheriff, had told them that the Duke of Monmouth and other great men were to raise 4000 soldiers and £20,000. The brothers also swore that Goodenough had told them that Lord Russell had joined in the design of killing the king and the duke.

Lord Russell acted with great composure.

He would not fly, refused to let his friends surrender themselves to share his fortunes, and told an acquaintance that “he was very sensible he should fall a sacrifice.

”[702] When he appeared at the council, the king himself said that “nobody suspected Lord Russell of any design against his own person, but that he had good evidence of his being in designs against his government.

” The prisoner denied all knowledge of the intended insurrection, or of the attempt to surprise the guards.

The infamous Jeffries was one of the counsel for his prosecution.

Lord Russell argued at his trial, that, allowing he had compassed the king’s death, which he denied, he had been guilty only of a conspiracy to levy war, which was not treason except by a recent statute of Charles II.

, the prosecutions upon which were limited to a certain time, which had elapsed,[703] so that both law and justice were in this case violated.

The truth seems to be that Lord Russell was a true patriot, of a slow and sober judgment, a taciturn, good man, of not the quickest intelligence, who had allowed himself to listen to dangerous and random talk for the sake of political purposes.

He wished to debar the duke from the throne, but he had never dreamt of accomplishing his purpose by murder.

It has since been discovered that Sidney, doing evil that good might come, had accepted secret-service money from France, and that Russell himself had interviews with French agents.

Lord John Russell explains away this charge very well.

Charles was degraded enough to take money from France.

The patriots, told that Louis XIV.

wished to avoid a war, intrigued with the French king to maintain peace, fearing that if Charles once raised an army under any pretence, he would first employ it to obtain absolute power at home, which it is most probable he would have done.

[704] On the whole, these disingenuous interviews must be lamented; they could not and they did not lead to good.

It has been justly regretted also that Lord Russell on his trial did not boldly denounce the tyranny of the court, and show the necessity that had existed for active opposition.

After sentence the condemned man wrote petitions to the king and duke, which were unjustly sneered at as abject.

They really, however, contain no promise but that of living beyond sea and meddling no more in English affairs.

Of one of them at least, Burnet says it was written at the earnest solicitation of Lady Rachel; and Lord Russell himself said, with regret, “This will be printed and sold about the streets as my submission when I am led out to be hanged.

” He lamented to Burnet that his wife beat every bush and ran about so for his preservation; but he acquiesced in what she did when he thought it would be afterwards a mitigation of her sorrow.

When his brave and excellent wife, the daughter of Charles I. ’s loyal servant, Southampton, who was the son of Shakspere’s friend, begged for her husband’s life, the king replied, “How can I grant that man six weeks, who would not have granted me six hours?

”[705] There is no scene in history that “goes more directly to the heart,” says Fox, “than the story of the last days of this excellent man.

” The night before his death it rained hard, and he said, “Such a rain to-morrow will spoil a great show,” which was a dull thing on a rainy day.

He thought a violent death only the pain of a minute, not equal to that of drawing a tooth; and he was still of opinion _that the king was limited by law, and that when he broke through those limits, his subjects might defend themselves and restrain him_.

[706] He then received the sacrament from Tillotson with much devotion, and parted from his wife with a composed silence; as soon as she was gone he exclaimed, “The bitterness of death is past,” saying what a blessing she had been to him, and what a misery it had been if she had tried to induce him to turn an informer.

He slept soundly that night and rose in a few hours, but would take no care in dressing.

He prayed six or seven times by himself, and drank a little tea and some sherry.

He then wound up his watch, and said, “Now I have done with time and shall go into eternity.

” When told that he should give the executioner ten guineas, he said, with a smile, that it was a pretty thing to give a fee to have his head cut off.

When the sheriffs came at ten o’clock, Lord Russell embraced Lord Cavendish, who had offered to change clothes with him and stay in his place in prison, or to attack the coach with a troop of horse and carry off his friend; but the noble man would not listen to either proposal.

In the street some in the crowd wept, while others insulted him.

He said, “I hope I shall quickly see a better assembly.

” He then sang, half to himself, the beginning of the 149th Psalm.

As the coach turned into Little Queen Street, he said, looking at his own house, “I have often turned to the one hand with great comfort, but now I turn to this with greater,” and then a tear or two fell from his eyes.

As they entered Lincoln’s Inn Fields he said, “This has been to me a place of sinning, and God now makes it the place of my punishment.

” When he came to the scaffold, he walked about it four or five times: then he prayed by himself, and also with Tillotson; then he partly undressed himself, laid his head down without any change of countenance, and it was cut off in two strokes.

Lord William’s walking-stick and a cotemporary account of his death are kept at Woburn Abbey.

Lady Rachel Russell, the excellent wife of this patriot, had been his secretary during the trial.

She spent her after-life, not in unwisely lamenting the inevitable past, but in doing good works, and in educating her children.

Writing two months after the execution to Dr. Fritzwilliams, this noble woman says:[707] “_Secretly_, my heart mourns and cannot be comforted, because I have not the dear companion and sharer of all my joys and sorrows.

I want him to talk with, to walk with, to eat and sleep with.

All these things are irksome to me now; all company and meals I could avoid, if it might be....

When I see my children before me, I remember the pleasure he took in them: this makes my heart shrink.

” In 1692 Lady Russell appears to have regained her composure.

But she had other trials in store: for in 1711 she lost her only son, the Duke of Bedford, in the flower of his age, and six months afterwards one of her daughters died in childbed.

It is said that, in his hour of need, James II.

was mean enough to say to the Duke of Bedford, “My lord, you are an honest man, have great credit, and can do me signal service.

” “Ah, sir,” replied the duke, with a grave severity, “I am old and feeble now, but I once had a _son_.

” The Sacheverell riots culminated in these now quiet Fields.

In 1710 Daniel Dommaree, a queen’s waterman, Francis Willis, a footman, and George Purchase, were tried at the Old Bailey for heading a riot during the Sacheverell trial and pulling down meeting-houses.

This Sacheverell was an ignorant, impudent incendiary, the adopted son of a Marlborough apothecary, and was impeached by the House of Commons for preaching at St. Andrew’s, Holborn, sermons denouncing the Revolution of 1688. His sermons were ordered to be burnt, and he was sentenced to be suspended for three years.

Atterbury helped the mischievous firebrand in his ineffectual defence, and Swift wrote a most scurrilous letter to Bishop Fleetwood, who had lamented the excesses of the mob.

Sacheverell had been at Oxford with Addison, who inscribed a poem to him.

During the trial, a mob marched from the Temple, whither they had escorted Sacheverell, pulled down Dr. Burgess’s meeting-house, and threw the pulpit, sconces, and gallery pews into a fire in Lincoln’s Inn Fields, some waving curtains on poles, shouting, “High Church standard!

” “Huzza!

High Church and Sacheverell!

” “We will have them all down!

” They also burnt other meeting-houses in Leather Lane, Drury Lane, and Fetter Lane, and made bonfires of the woodwork in the streets.

They were eventually dispersed by the horse-grenadiers and horse-guards and foot.

Dommaree was sentenced to death, but pardoned; Willis was acquitted; and Purchase was pardoned.

[708] Wooden posts and rails stood round the Fields till 1735, when an Act was passed to enable the inhabitants to make improvements, to put an iron gate at each corner, and to erect dwarf walls and iron palisades.

[709] Before this time grooms used to break in horses on this spot.

One day while looking at these centaurs, Sir Joseph Jekyll, who had brought a very obnoxious bill into Parliament in 1736 in order to raise the price of gin, was mobbed, thrown down, and dangerously trampled on.

His initials, “J. J.

,” figure under a gibbet chalked on a wall in one of Hogarth’s prints.

[710] Macaulay’s _History_ contains a very highly coloured picture of these Fields.

A comparison of the passage with the facts from which it is drawn would be a useful lesson to all historical students who love truth in its severity.

[711] Newcastle House stands at the north-west angle of the Fields, at the south-eastern corner of Great Queen Street.

It derived its name from John Holles, Duke of Newcastle, a relative of the noble families of Vere, Cavendish, and Holles.

This duke bought the house before 1708, but died in 1711 without issue, and was succeeded in the house by his nephew, the leader of the Pelham administration under George II.

The house had been bought by Lord Powis about 1686. It was built for him by Captain William Winde, a scholar of Webbe’s, the pupil and executor of Inigo Jones.

[712] William Herbert, first Marquis of Powis, was outlawed and fled to St. Germain’s to James II.

, who made him Duke of Powis.

Government had thought of buying the house when it was inhabited by the Lord Keeper, Sir Nathan Wright,[713] and to have settled it officially on the Great Seal.

It was once the residence of Sir John Somers, the Lord Chancellor.

In 1739 Lady Henrietta Herbert, widow of Lord William Herbert, second son of the Marquis of Powis, and daughter of James, first Earl of Waldegrave, was married to Mr. John Beard,[714] who seems to have been a fine singer and a most charitable, estimable man.

Lady Henrietta’s grandmother was the daughter of James II.

by the sister of the great Duke of Marlborough.

Dr. Burner speaks of Beard’s great knowledge of music and of his intelligence as an actor.

[715] In an epitaph on him, still extant, the writer says-- “Whence had that voice such magic to control?

’Twas but the echo of a well-tuned soul;

Through life his morals and his music ran In symphony, and spoke the virtuous man.

...

Go, gentle harmonist!

our hopes approve, To meet and hear thy sacred songs above;

When taught by thee, the stage of life well trod, We rise to raptures round the throne of God.

” Beard, excellent both in oratorios and serious and comic operas, became part proprietor of Covent Garden Theatre, and died in 1791. The Duke of Newcastle’s crowded levées were his pleasure and his triumph.

He generally made people of business wait two or three hours in the ante-chamber while he trifled with insignificant favourites in his closet.

When at last he entered the levée room, he accosted, hugged, embraced, and promised everything to everybody with an assumed cordiality and a degrading familiarity.

[716] “Long” Sir Thomas Robertson was a great intruder on the duke’s time; if told that he was out, he would come in to look at the clock or play with the monkey, in hopes of the great man relenting.

The servants, at last tired out with Sir Thomas, concocted a formula of repulses, and the next time he came the porter, without waiting for his question, began--“Sir, his grace is gone out, the fire has gone out, the clock stands, and the monkey is dead.

”[717] Sir Timothy Waldo, on his way from the duke’s dinner-table to his own carriage, once gave the cook, who was waiting in the hall, a crown.

The rogue returned it, saying he did not take silver.

“Oh, don’t you, indeed?

” said Sir Timothy, coolly replacing it in his pocket; “then I don’t give gold.

” Jonas Hanway, the great opponent of tea-drinking, published eight letters to the duke on this subject,[718] and the custom began from that time to decline.

But Hogarth had already condemned the exaction.

The duke was very profuse in his promises, and a good story is told of the result of his insincerity.

At a Cornish election, the duke had obtained the turning vote for his candidate by his usual assurances.

The elector, wishing to secure something definite, had asked for a supervisorship of excise for his son-in-law on the present holder’s death.

“The moment he dies,” said the premier, “set out post-haste for London; drive directly to my house in the Fields: night or day, sleeping or waking, dead or alive, thunder at the door; the porter will show you upstairs directly; and the place is yours.

” A few months after the old supervisor died, and up to London rushed the Cornish elector.

Now that very night the duke had been expecting news of the death of the King of Spain, and had left orders before he went to bed to have the courier sent up directly he arrived.

The Cornish man, mistaken for this important messenger, was instantly, to his great delight, shown up to the duke’s bedroom.

“Is he dead?

--is he dead?

” cried the duke.

“Yes, my lord, yes,” answered the aspirant, promptly.

“When did he die?

” “The day before yesterday, at half-past one o’clock, after three weeks in his bed, and taking a power of doctor’s stuff; and I hope your grace will be as good as your word, and let my son-in-law succeed him.

” “_Succeed him!

_” shouted the duke; “is the man drunk or mad?

Where are your despatches?

” he exclaimed, tearing back the bed-curtains; and there, to his vexation, stood the blundering elector, hat in hand, his stupid red face beaming with smiles as he kept bowing like a joss.

The duke sank back in a violent fit of laughter, which, like the electric fluid, was in a moment communicated to his attendants.

[719] It is not stated whether the Cornish man obtained his petition.

There is an agreement in all the stories of the duke, who was thirty years Secretary of State, and nearly ten years First Lord of the Treasury, “whether told,” says Macaulay, “by people who were perpetually seeing him in Parliament and attending his levées in Lincoln’s Inn Fields, or by Grub Street writers, who had never more than a glimpse of his star through the windows of his gilded coach.

”[720] Smollett and Walpole mixed in different society, yet they both sketch the duke with the same colours.

Smollett’s Newcastle runs out of his dressing-room with his face covered with soapsuds to embrace the Moorish envoy.

Walpole’s Newcastle pushes his way into the Duke of Grafton’s sick-room to kiss the old nobleman’s plaisters.

“He was a living, moving, talking caricature.

His gait was a shuffling trot, his utterance a rapid stutter.

He was always in a hurry--he was never in time; he abounded in fulsome caresses and in hysterical tears.

His oratory resembled that of Justice Shallow--it was nonsense effervescent with animal spirits and impertinence.

‘Oh yes, yes, to be sure--Annapolis must be defended; troops must be sent to Annapolis.

Pray, where is Annapolis?

’--‘Cape Breton an island!

Wonderful!

Show it me on the map.

So it is, sure enough.

My dear sir, you always bring us good news.

I

must go and tell the king that Cape Breton is an island.

’ His success is a proof of what may be done by a man who devotes his whole heart and soul to one object.

His love of power was so intense a passion, that it almost supplied the place of talent.

He was jealous even of his own brother.

Under the guise of levity, he was false beyond all example.

” “All the able men of his time ridiculed him as a dunce, a driveller, a child, who never knew his own mind for an hour together, and yet he overreached them all round.

” If the country had remained at peace, this man might have been at the head of affairs till a new king came with fresh favourites and a strong will; “but the inauspicious commencement of the Seven Years’ War brought on a crisis to which Newcastle was altogether unequal.

After a calm of fifteen years, the spirit of the nation was again stirred to its inmost depths.

” This is strongly etched, but Macaulay was too fond of caricature for a real lover of truth.

Walpole, recounting this greedy imbecile’s disgrace, reviews his career much more forcibly, for in a few words he shows us how great had been the power which this chatterer’s fixed purpose had attained.

The memoir-writer describes the duke as the man “who had begun the world by heading mobs against the ministers of Queen Anne; who had braved the heir-apparent, afterwards George I. , and forced himself upon him as godfather to his son; who had recovered that prince’s favour, and preserved power under him, at the expense of every minister whom that prince preferred; who had been a rival of another Prince of Wales for the chancellorship of Cambridge; and who was now buffeted from a fourth court by a very suitable competitor (Lord Bute), and reduced in his tottery old age to have recourse to those mobs and that popularity which had raised him fifty years before.

” Lord Bute was mean enough to compliment the old duke on his retirement.

The duke replied, with a spirit that showed the vitality of his ambition: “Yes, yes, my lord, I am an old man, but yesterday was my birthday, and I recollected that Cardinal Fleury _began_ to be prime-minister of France just at my age.

”[721] Newcastle House, now occupied by the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, was, for forty years or more, inhabited by Sir Alan Chambre, one of King George III.

’s judges.

The society, then lodged in Bartlett’s Buildings, in Holborn, derived its first name from that place, and at Sir Alan’s death they purchased the house and site.

About the centre of the west side of the square, in Sir Alan’s time, lived the Earl and Countess of Portsmouth.

The earl was half-witted, but was always well-conducted and quite producible in society under the guidance of his countess, a daughter of Lord Grantley.

Near Surgeons’ Hall, at the same epoch, lived the first Lord Wynford, Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, better known as Serjeant Best.

A

quarrel between this irritable lawyer and Serjeant Wilde, afterwards Lord Chancellor Truro, one of the most stalwart gladiators who ever won a name and title in the legal arena, gave rise to an epigram, the point of which was--“That Best was wild, and Wilde was best.

” In 1774, when Lord Clive had rewarded Wedderburn, his defender, with lacs of rupees and a villa at Mitcham, the lawyer had an elegant house in Lincoln’s Inn Fields, not far from the Duke of Newcastle’s,--“a quarter,” says Lord Campbell, “which I recollect still the envied resort of legal magnates.

” Wedderburn, afterwards better known as Lord Chancellor Loughborough, had a special hatred for Franklin, and loaded him with abuse before a committee of the Privy Council, for having sent to America letters from the Lieutenant-Governor of Massachusetts, urging the Government to employ military force to suppress the discontents in New England.

[722] The effect of Wedderburn’s brilliant oratory in Parliament was ruined, says Lord Campbell, by “his character for insincerity.

”[723] When George III.

heard of his death, he is reported to have said, “He has not left a greater knave behind him in my dominions;” upon which Lord Thurlow savagely said, with his usual oath, “I perceive that his majesty is quite sane at present.

” Wedderburn was a friend of David Hume; his humanity was eulogised by Dr. Parr, but he was satirised by Churchill in the _Rosciad_.

Montague, Earl of Sandwich, the great patron of Pepys, lived in Lincoln’s Inn Fields, paying £250 a year rent.

[724] Pepys calls it “a fine house, but deadly dear.

”[725] He visits him, February 10, 1663-4, and finds my lord very high and strange and stately, although Pepys had been bound for £1000 with him, and the shrewd cit naturally enough did not like my lord being angry with him and in debt to him at the same time.

The earl was a distant cousin of Pepys, and on his marriage received him and his wife into his house, and took Pepys with him when he went to bring home Charles II.

, when he was elected one of the Council of State and General at Sea.

He brought the queen-mother to England and took her back again.

He also brought the ill-fated queen from Portugal, and became a privy-councillor, and was sent as ambassador to Spain.

He seems to have been not untainted with the vices of the age.

He was in the great battle where Van Tromp was killed, and in 1668 he took forty-five sail from the Dutch at sea, and that is the best thing known of him.

He died in 1672, and was buried in great state.

Inigo Jones built only the west side of the square.

No. 55 was the residence of Robert Bertie, Earl of Lindsey, a general of King Charles.

It is described in 1708 as a handsome building of the Ionic order, with a beautiful and strong Court Gate, formed of six spacious brick piers, with curious ironwork between them, and on the piers large and beautiful vases.

[726] The open balustrade at the top bore six urns.

The Earl of Lindsey was shot at Edgehill in 1642, when a reckless and intemperate charge of Rupert had led to the total defeat of the unsupported foot.

His son, Lord Willoughby, was taken in endeavouring to rescue his father.

Clarendon describes the earl as a lavish, generous, yet punctilious man, of great honour and experience in foreign war.

He was surrounded by Lincolnshire gentlemen, who served in his regiment out of personal regard for him.

He was jealous of Prince Rupert’s interference, and had made up his mind to die.

As he lay bleeding to death he reproved the officers of the Earl of Essex, many of them his old friends, for their ingratitude and “foul rebellion.

”[727] The fourth Earl of Lindsey was created Duke of Ancaster, and the house henceforward bore that now forgotten name.

It was subsequently sold to the proud Duke of Somerset, the same who married the widow of the Mr. Thynne whom Count Königsmarck murdered.

In the early part of George III.

’s reign Lindsey House became a sort of lodging-house for foreign members of the Moravian persuasion.

The staircase, about 1772, was painted with scenes from the history of the Herrnhuthers.

The most conspicuous figures were those of a negro catechumen in a white shirt, and a missionary who went over to Algiers to preach to the galley-slaves, and died in Africa of the plague.

There was also a painting of a Moravian clergyman being saved from a desert rock on which he had been cast.

[728] Repeated mention of the Berties is made in Horace Walpole’s pleasant _Letters_.

Lord Robert Bertie was third son of Robert the first Duke of Ancaster and Kesteven.

He was a general in the army, a colonel in the Guards, and a lord of the bedchamber.

He married Lady Raymond in 1762, and died in 1782. The proud Duke of Somerset, in 1748, left to his eldest daughter, Lady Frances, married to the Marquis of Granby, three thousand a year, and the fine house built by Inigo Jones in Lincoln’s Inn Fields, which he had bought of the Duke of Ancaster for the Duchess, hoping that his daughter would let her mother live with her.

[729] In July 1779 the Duke of Ancaster, dying of drinking and rioting at two-and-twenty, recalls much scandal to Walpole’s mind.

He had been in love with Lady Honoria, Walpole’s niece; but Horace does not regret the match dropping through, for he says the duke was of a turbulent nature, and, though of a fine figure, not noble in manners.

Lady Priscilla Elizabeth Bertie, eldest sister of the duke, married the grandson of Peter Burrell, a merchant, who became husband of the Lady Great Chamberlain of England, and inherited a barony and half the Ancaster estate.

[730] “The three last duchesses,” goes on the cruel gossip, “were never sober.

” “The present duchess-dowager,” he adds, “was natural daughter of Panton, a disreputable horse-jockey of Newmarket.

The other duchess was some lady’s woman, or young lady’s governess.

” Mr. Burrell’s daughters married Lord Percy and the Duke of Hamilton.

In 1791 Walpole writes to Miss Berry to describe the marriage of Lord Cholmondeley with Lady Georgiana Charlotte Bertie: “The men were in frocks and white waistcoats.

The endowing purse, I believe, has been left off ever since broad pieces were called in and melted down.

We were but eighteen persons in all....

The poor duchess-mother wept excessively; she is now left quite alone,--her two daughters married, and her other children dead.

She herself, I fear, is in a very dangerous way.

She goes directly to Spa, where the new married pair are to meet her.

We all separated in an hour and a half.

”[731] Alfred Tennyson in early life had fourth-floor chambers at No. 55, and there probably his friend Hallam, whose early death he laments in his _In Memoriam_ spent many an hour with him.

There, in the airy regions of Attica, in a low-roofed room, the single window of which is darkened by a huge stone balustrade--a gloomy relic of past grandeur--the young poet may have recited the majestic lines of his “King Arthur,” or the exquisite lament of “Mariana,” and there he may have immortalised the “plump head-waiter of the Cock,” in Fleet Street.

Mr. John Foster, the author of many sound and delightful historical biographies, had also chambers in this house.

No. 68, on the west side, stands on the site of the approach to the stables of old Newcastle House.

Here Judge Le Blanc lived, and at his death the house was occupied by Mr. Thomas Le Blanc, Master of Trinity Hall, Cambridge.

At No. 33, on the same side as the Insolvent Debtors’ Court, dwelt Judge Park, a man much beloved by his friends; in his early days, as a young and poor Scotch barrister, he had lived in Carey Street till his house there was burnt down.

He used to say that his great ambition in youth had been to one day live at No. 33 in the Fields, at that time occupied by Chief Justice Willis; but in later days, as a judge, leaving the former goal of his ambition, he migrated to Bedford Square, where he died.

Nos.

40 and 42, on the south side, form the Museum of the College of Surgeons, incorporated in 1800. The Grecian front is a most clever contrivance by Sir John Soane.

The building contains the incomparable anatomical collection of the eminent John Hunter, bought by the Government for £15,000 and given to the College of Surgeons on condition of its being opened to the public.

John Hunter died in 1793; and the first courses of lectures in the new building were delivered by Sir Everard Home and Sir William Blizard, in 1810. The Museum was built by Barry in 1835, and cost about £40,000. [732] It is divided into two rooms, the normal and abnormal.

The total number of specimens is upwards of 23,000. The collection is unequalled in many respects; every article is authentic and in perfect preservation.

The largest human skeleton is that of Charles O’Brien, the Irish giant, who died in Cockspur Street, Charing Cross, in 1783, aged twenty-two.

It measures eight feet four inches.

By its side, in ghastly contrast, is the bony sketch of Caroline Crachami, a Sicilian dwarf who died in 1824, aged ten years.

There is also a cast of the hand of Patrick Cotter, another Irish giant, who measured eight feet seven and a half inches.

Nor must we overlook the vast framework of Chunee, the elephant that went mad with toothache at Exeter Change, and was shot by a company of riflemen in 1826. The sawn base of the inflamed tusk shows a spicula of ivory pressing into the nervous pulp.

Toothache is always terrible, but only imagine a square foot of it!

Very curious too, are the jaw of the extinct sabre-toothed tiger, and the skeleton of a gigantic extinct Irish deer found under a bed of shell-marl in a peat bog near Limerick.

The antlers are seven feet long, eight feet across, and weigh seventy-six pounds.

The height of the animal (measured from his skull) was seven feet six inches.

Amongst other horrors, there is a cast of the fleshy band that united the Siamese twins, and one of a woman with a long curved horn growing from her forehead.

There are also many skulls of soldiers perforated and torn with bullets, the lead still adhering to some of the bony plates of the crania.

But the wonder of wonders is the iron pivot of a trysail-mast that was driven clean through the chest of a Scarborough lad.

The boy recovered in five months, and not long after went to work again.

It is a tough race that rules the sea.

There are also fragments of the skeleton of a rhinoceros discovered in a limestone cavern at Oreston during the formation of the Plymouth Breakwater.

In a recess from the gallery stands the embalmed body of the wife of Martin Van Butchell, an impudent Dutch quack doctor.

It is coarsely preserved, and is very loathsome to look at.

It was prepared in 1775 by Dr. W.

Hunter and Mr. Cruikshank, the vascular system being injected with oil of turpentine and camphorated spirits of wine, and powdered nitre and camphor being introduced into the cavities.

On the case containing the body is an advertisement cut from an old newspaper, stating the conditions which Dr. Van Butchell required of those who came to see the body of his wife.

At the feet of Mrs. Van Butchell is the shrunken mummy of her pet parrot.

The pictures include the portrait of John Hunter by Reynolds, which Sharp engraved: it has much faded.

There is also a posthumous bust of Hunter by Flaxman, and one of Clive by Chantrey.

Any Fellow of the College can introduce a visitor, either personally or by written order, the first four days of the week.

In September the Museum is closed.

It would be much more convenient for students if some small sum were charged for admission.

It is now visited but by two or three people a day, when it should be inspected by hundreds.

That great surgeon, John Hunter, was the son of a small farmer in Lanarkshire.

He was born in 1728, and died in 1793. In early life he went abroad as an army-surgeon to study gunshot-wounds; and in 1786 he was appointed deputy surgeon-general to the army.

In 1772 he made discoveries as to the property of the gastric juice.

He was the first to use cutting as a cure for hydrophobia, and to distinguish the various species of cancer.

He kept at his house at Brompton a variety of wild animals for the purposes of comparative anatomy, was often in danger from their violence, and as often saved by his own intrepidity.

Sir Joseph Banks divided his collection between Hunter and the British Museum.

Unequalled in the dissecting-room, Hunter was a bad lecturer.

He was an irritable man, and died suddenly during a disputation at St. George’s Hospital which vexed him.

His death is said to have been hastened by fear of death from hydrophobia, he having cut his hand while dissecting a man who had died of that mysterious disease.

Hunter used to call an operation “opprobrium medici.

” In Portugal Row, as the southern side of the square used to be called, lived Sir Richard Fanshawe, the translator of the _Lusiad_ of Camoens, and of Guarini’s _Pastor Fido_.

Sir Richard was our ambassador in Spain; but Charles, wishing to get rid of Lord Sandwich from the navy, recalled Fanshawe, on the plea that he had ventured to sign a treaty without authority.

He died in 1666, on the intended day of his return, of a violent fever, probably caused by vexation at his unmerited disgrace.

Sir Richard appears to have been a religious, faithful man and a good scholar, but born in unhappy times and to an ill fate.

Charles I. had very justly a great respect for him.

His wife was a brave, determined woman, full of affection, good sense, and equally full of hatred and contempt for Lord Sandwich, Pepys’s friend, who had supplanted her husband in the embassy.

On one occasion, on their way to Malaga, the Dutch trading vessel in which she and her husband were was threatened by a Turkish galley which bore down on them in full sail.

The captain, who had rendered his sixty guns useless by lumbering them up with cargo, resolved to fight for his £30,000 worth of goods, and therefore armed his two hundred men and plied them with brandy.

The decks were partially cleared, and the women ordered below for fear the Turks might think the vessel a merchant-ship and board it.

Sir Richard, taking his gun, bandolier, and sword, stood with the ship’s company waiting for the Turks.

[733] But we must quote the brave wife’s own simple words:--“The beast the captain had locked me up in the cabin.

I

knocked and called long to no purpose, until at length the cabin-boy came and opened the door.

I, all in tears, desired him to be so good as to give me the blue thrum cap he wore and his tarred coat, which he did, and I gave him half-a-crown; and putting them on, and flinging away my night-clothes, I crept up softly and stood upon the deck by my husband’s side, as free from fear as, I confess, from discretion; but it was the effect of that passion which I could never master.

By this time the two vessels were engaged in parley, and so well satisfied with speech and sight of each other’s forces, that the Turks’ man-of-war tacked about and we continued our course.

But when your father saw me retreat, looking upon me, he blessed himself and snatched me up in his arms, saying, ‘Good God!

that love can make this change!

’ and though he seemingly chid me, he would laugh at it as often as he remembered that journey.

” This same vessel, a short time after, was blown up in the harbour with the loss of more than a hundred men and all the lading.

[734] This brave, good woman showed still greater fortitude when her husband died and left her almost penniless in a strange country.

She had only twenty-eight doubloons with which to bring home her children, and sixty servants, and the dead body of her husband.

She, however, instantly sold her carriages and a thousand pounds’ worth of plate, and setting apart the queen’s present of two thousand doubloons for travelling expenses, started for England.

“God,” she says, in her brave, pious way, “did hear, and see, and help me, and brought my soul out of trouble.

” In 1677 Lady Fanshawe took a house in Holborn Row, the north side of the square, and spent a year lamenting “the dear remembrances of her past happiness and fortune; and though she had great graces and favours from the king and queen and whole court, yet she found at the present no remedy.

”[735] Lord Kenyon lived at No. 35 in 1805. Jekyll was fond of joking about Kenyon’s stinginess, and used to say he died of eating apple-pie crust at breakfast to save the expense of muffins; and that Lord Ellenborough, who succeeded on Kenyon’s death to the Chief Justiceship, always used to bow to apple-pie ever afterwards which Jekyll called his “apple-pie-ety.

” The princesses Augusta and Sophia once told Tom Moore, at Lady Donegall’s that the king used to play tricks on Kenyon and send the despatch-box to him at a quarter past seven, when it was known the learned lord was in bed to save candlelight.

[736] Lord Ellenborough used to say that the final word in “Mors janua vitæ” was mis-spelled _vita_ on Kenyon’s tomb to save the extra cost of the diphthong.

[737] George III.

used to say to Kenyon, “My Lord, let us have a little more of your good law, and less of your bad Latin.

” Lord Campbell, who gives a very pleasant sketch of Chief Justice Kenyon, with his bad temper and bad Latin, his hatred of newspaper writers and gamblers, and his wrath against pettifoggers, describes his being taken in by Horne Tooke, and laughs at his ignorantly-mixed metaphors.

He seems to have been a respectable second-rate lawyer, conscientious and upright.

“He occupied,” says Lord Campbell, “a large gloomy house, in which I have seen merry doings when it was afterwards transferred to the Verulam Club.

” The tradition of this house was that “it was always Lent in the kitchen and Passion Week in the parlour.

” On some one mentioning the spits in Lord Kenyon’s kitchen, Jekyll said, “It is irrelevant to talk about the spits, for nothing _turns_ upon them.

” The judge’s ignorance was profound.

It is reported that in a trial for blasphemy the Chief Justice, after citing the names of several remarkable early Christians, said, “Above all, gentlemen, need I name to you the Emperor Julian, who was so celebrated for the practice of every Christian virtue that he was called Julian the Apostle?

”[738] On another occasion, talking of a false witness, he is supposed to have said, “The allegation is as far from truth as ‘old Boterium from the northern main’--a line I have heard or met with, God knows where.

”[739] Lord Erskine lived at No. 36, in 1805, the year before he rose at once to the peerage and the woolsack, and presided at Lord Melville’s trial.

He did not hold the seals many months, and died in 1823. This great Whig orator was the youngest son of the Earl of Buchan.

He was a midshipman and an ensign before he became a student at Lincoln’s Inn.