ALBERT R. MANN 
 LIBRARY 
 
 AT 
 
 CORNELL UNIVERSITY 
 
COR ELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 
 
 3 1924 054 707 212. 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of tliis book is in 
 tlie Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924054707272 
 
HEREDITAEY GENIUS 
 
HEEEDITARY GENIUS 
 
 AN INQUIRY INTO 
 
 ITS LAWS AND CONSEQUENCES 
 
 FEANCIS GALTON, F.E.S., etc. 
 
 MACMILLAN AND CO. 
 
 AND NEW YORK 
 1892' 
 
 The Bight of Translation and Seproduction is Reserved 
 
ElCHARD Ql-AY AND SONS, LIMITED 
 LOKDON AND BUNGAY 
 
 First Edition (Svo) 1869 
 Second Edition (Extra Crown Svo) 1892 
 
 3f 
 
Ql3 
 
 PEEFAGE TO THE OEIGINAL EDITION 
 
 The idea of investigating the subject of hereditary genius 
 occurred to me during the course of a purely ethnological 
 inquiry, into the mental peculiarities of different races; 
 when the fact, that characteristics cling to families, was 
 so frequently forced on my notice as to induqe me to pay 
 especial attention to that branch of the subject. I began 
 by thinking over the dispositions and achievements of my 
 contemporaries at school, at college, and in after life, 
 and was surprised to find how frequently ability seemed 
 to go by descent. Then I made a cursory examination 
 into the kindred of about four hundred illustrious men of 
 all periods of history, and the results were such, in my 
 own opinion, as completely to establish the theory that 
 genius was hereditary, under limitations that required to 
 be investigated. Thereupon I set to work to gather a 
 large amount of carefully selected biographical data, and 
 in the meantime wrote two articles on the subject, which 
 appeared in Macmillan's Magazine in June and in August, 
 1865. I also attacked the subject from many different 
 sides and sometimes with very minute inquiries, because 
 it was long before the methods I finally adopted were 
 matured. I mention all this, to show that the foundation 
 
PREFACE TO THE ORIGINAL EDITION 
 
 for my theories is broader than appears in the book, and 
 as a partial justification if I have occasionally been be- 
 trayed into speaking somewhat more confidently than the 
 evidence I have adduced would warrant. 
 
 I trust the reader will pardon a small percentage of 
 error and inaccuracy, if it be so small as not to affect the 
 general value of my results. No one can hate inaccuracy 
 more than myself, or can have a higher idea of what an 
 author owes to his readers, in respect to precision ; but, in 
 a subject like this, it is exceedingly difficult to correct 
 every mistake, and still more so to avoid omissions. I have 
 often had to run my eyes over many pages of large bio- 
 graphical dictionaries and volumes of memoirs to arrive 
 at data, destined to be packed into half a dozen lines, in 
 an appendix to one of my many chapters. 
 
 The theory of hereditary genius, though usually scouted, 
 has been advocated by a few writers in past as well as in 
 modern times. But I may claim to be the first to treat 
 the subject in a statistical manner, to arrive at numerical 
 results, and to introduce the " law of deviation from an 
 average " into discussions on heredity. 
 
 A great many subjects are discussed in the following 
 pages, which go beyond the primary issue, — whether or 
 no genius be hereditary. I could not refuse to consider 
 them, because the bearings of the theory I advocate are 
 too important to be passed over in silence. 
 
PEEFATORY CHAPTEE TO THE 
 EDITION OF 1892 
 
 This volume is a reprint of a work published twenty- 
 three years ago, which has long been unpurchasable, 
 except at second-hand and at fancy prices. It was a 
 question whether to revise the whole and to bring the 
 information up to date, or simply to reprint it after 
 remedying a few staring errata. The latter course has 
 been adopted, because even a few additional data would 
 have made it necessary to recast all the tabulations, while 
 a thorough reconstruction would be a work of greater 
 labour than I can now undertake. 
 
 At the time when the book was written, the human 
 mind was popularly thought to act independently of 
 natural laws, and to be capable of almost any achieve- 
 ment, if compelled to exert itself by a will that had a power 
 of initiation. Even those who had more philosophical habits 
 of thought were far from looking upon the mental faculties 
 of each individual as being limited with as much strict- 
 ness as those of his body, still less was the idea of the 
 hereditary transmission of ability clearly apprehended. 
 The earlier part of the book should be read in the light 
 of the imperfect knowledge of the time when it was 
 written, since what was true in the above respects 
 
PREFATORY CHAPTER 
 
 for the year 1869 does not continue to be true for 
 1892. 
 
 Many of the lines of inquiry that are suggested or 
 hinted at in this book have since been pursued by 
 myself, and the results have been published in various 
 memoirs. They are for the most part epitomised in three 
 volumes — namely, English Men of Science (1874), fftoman 
 Faculty (1883), Natural Inheritance (1889) ; also to some 
 small extent in a fourth volume, now about to be pub- 
 lished, on Finger- Marks. 
 
 The fault in the volume that I chiefly regret is the 
 choice of its title of Hereditary Genius, but it cannot be 
 remedied now. There was not the slightest intention on 
 my part to use the word genius in any technical sense, 
 but merely as expressing an ability that was exceptionally 
 high, and at the same time inborn. It was intended to be 
 used in the senses ascribed to the word in Johnson's Dic- 
 tionary, viz. "Mental power or faculties. Disposition of 
 nature by which any one is qualified to some peculiar 
 employment. Nature ; disposition." A person who is a 
 genius is defined as — A man endowed with superior 
 faculties. This exhausts all that Johnson has to say on 
 the matter, except as regards the imaginary creature of 
 classical authors called a Genius, which does not concern 
 us, and which he describes as the protecting or ruling 
 power of men, places, or tilings. There is nothing in the 
 quotations from standard authors with which Johnson 
 illustrates his definitions, that justifies a strained and 
 technical sense being given to the word, nor is there 
 anything of the kind in the Latin word ingcnium. 
 
 Hereditary Genius therefore seemed to be a more 
 expressive and just title than Hereditary Ability, for 
 ability does not exclude the effects of education^, which 
 
TO THE EDITION OF 1892 
 
 genius does. The reader will find a studious abstinence 
 throughout the work from speaking of genius as a special 
 quality. It is freely used as an equivalent for natural 
 ability, in the opening of the chapter on " Comparison of 
 the Two Classifications." In the only place, so far as I 
 have noticed on reading the book again, where any dis- 
 tinction is made between them, the uncertainty that still 
 clings to the meaning of the word genius in its technical 
 sense is emphatically dwelt upon (p. 320). Tliere is iiu 
 confusion of ideas in this respect in the book, but its title 
 seems apt to mislead, and if it could be altered now, it 
 should appear as Hereditary Ability. 
 
 The relation between genius in its technical sense 
 (whatever its precise definition may be) and insanity, 
 has been much insisted upon by Lombroso and others, 
 whose views of the closeness of the connection between 
 the two are so pronounced, that it would hardly be 
 surprising if one of their more enthusiastic followers 
 were to remark that So-and-So cannot be a genius, 
 because he has never been mad nor is there a single 
 lunatic in his family. I cannot go nearly so far as they, 
 nor accept a moiety of their data, on which the connection 
 between ability of a very high order and insanity is 
 supposed to be established. Still, there is a large 
 residuum of evidence which poiats to a painfully close 
 relation between the two, and I must add that my own 
 later observations have tended in the same direction, for 
 I have been surprised at finding how often insanity or 
 idiocy has appeared among the near relatives of excep- 
 tionally able men. Those who are over eager and ex- 
 tremely active in mind must often possess brains that 
 are more excitable and peculiar than is consistent with 
 soundness. They are likely to become crazy at times, 
 
PREFATORY CHAPTER 
 
 and perhaps to break down altogether. Their hiborn 
 excitability and peculiarity may be expected to appear 
 in some of their relatives also, but unaccompanied with 
 an equal dose of preservative qualities, whatever they 
 may be. Those relatives would be "crank," if not 
 insane. 
 
 There is much that is indefinite in the application of 
 the word genius. It is applied to many a youth by his 
 contemporaries, but more rarely by biographers, who do 
 not always agree among themselves. If genius means a 
 sense of inspiration, or of rushes of ideas from apparently 
 supernatural sources, or of an inordinate and burning 
 desire to accomplish any particular end, it is perilously 
 near to the voices heard by the insane, to their delirious 
 tendencies, or to their monomanias. It cannot in such 
 cases be a healthy faculty, nor can it be desirable to 
 perpetuate it by inheritance. The natural ability of 
 which this book mainly treats, is such as a modern 
 European possesses in a much greater average share 
 than men of the lower races. There is nothing either in 
 the history of domestic animals or in that of evolution to 
 make us doubt that a race of sane men may be formed^ 
 who shall be as much superior mentally and morally to 
 the modern European, as the modern European is to the 
 lowest of the Negro races. Individual departures from 
 this high average level in an upward direction would 
 afford an adequate supply of a degree of ability that is 
 exceedingly rare now, and is much wanted. 
 
 It may prove helpful to the reader of the volume to 
 insert in this introductory chapter a brief summary of its 
 data and course of arguments. The primary object was 
 to investigate whether and in what degree natural ability 
 was hereditarily transmitted. This could not be easily 
 
TO THE EDITION OF 1892 
 
 accomplished without a prehminary classification of ability 
 according to a standard scale, so the first part of the book 
 is taken up with an attempt to provide one. 
 
 The method employed is based on the law commonly 
 known to mathematicians as that of " frequency of error," 
 because it Avas devised by them to discover the frequency 
 with which various proportionate amounts of error might 
 be expected to occur in astronomical and geodetical opera- 
 tions, and thereby to estimate the value that was probably 
 nearest the truth, from a mass of slightly discordant 
 measures of the same fact. 
 
 Its application had been extended by Quetelet to the 
 proportions of the human body, on the grounds that the 
 differences, say in stature, between men of the same race 
 might theoretically be treated as if they were Errors made 
 by Nature in her attempt to mould individual men of the 
 same race according to the same ideal pattern. Fantastic 
 as such a notion may appear to be when it is expressed in 
 these bare terms, without the accompaniment of a full 
 explanation, it can be shown to rest on a perfectly just 
 basis. Moreover, the theoretical predictions were found 
 by him to be correct, and their correctness in analogous 
 cases under reasonable reservations has been confirmed by 
 multitudes of subsequent observatioiis, of which perhaps 
 the most noteworthy are those of Professor WeMon, on 
 that humble creature the common shrimp {Proc. Royal 
 Society, p. 2, vol. 51, 1892). 
 
 One effect of the law may be expressed under this 
 form, though it is not that which was used by Quetelet. 
 Suppose 100 adult Englishmen to be selected at random, 
 and ranged in the order of their statures in a row ; the 
 statures of the 50th and the 51st men would be almost 
 identical, and would represent the average of all the 
 
PREFATORY CHAPTER 
 
 statures. Then the difference, according to the law of 
 frequency, between them and the 63rd man would be the 
 same as that between the 63rd and the 75th, the 76th 
 and the 84th, the 84th and the 90th. The intervening 
 men between these divisions, whose numbers are 13, 12, 
 9, and 6, form a succession of classes, diminishing as we 
 see in numbers, but each separated from its neighbours by 
 equal grades of stature. The diminution of the successive 
 classes is thus far small, but it would be found to proceed 
 at an enormously accelerated rate if a much longer row 
 than that of 100 men were taken, and if the classificatiGn 
 were pushed much further, as is fully shown in this book. 
 
 After some provisional verification, I applied this same 
 law to mental faculties, working it backwards in order to 
 obtain a scale of ability, and to be enabled thereby to give 
 precision to the epithets employed. Thus the rank of first 
 in 4,000 or thereabouts is expressed by the word" eminent." 
 The application of the law of frequency of error to mental 
 faculties has now become accepted by many persons, for it 
 is found to accord well with observation. I know of exam- 
 iners who habitually use it to verify the general accuracy of 
 the marks given to many candidates in the same examina^ 
 tion. Also I am informed by one mathematician that before 
 dividing his examinees into classes, some regard is paid to 
 this law. There is nothing said in this book about the law of 
 frequency that subsequent experience has not confirmed 
 and even extended, except that more emphatic warning 
 is needed against its unchecked application. 
 
 The next step was to gain a general idea as to the 
 transmission of ability, foimded upon a large basis of 
 homogeneous facts by which to test the results that might 
 be afterwards obtained from more striking but less homo- 
 geneous data. It was necessary, in seeking for these, to 
 
TO THE EDITION OF 1892 
 
 sedulously guard against any bias of my own ; it was also 
 essential that the group to be dealt with should be suffi- 
 ciently numerous for statistical treatment, and again, that 
 the family histories of the persons it contained should be 
 accessible, and, if possible, already published. 
 
 The list at length adopted for this prefatory purpose 
 was that of the English Judges since the Reformation. 
 Their kinships were analyzed, and the percentage of 
 their " eminent " relations in the vai'ious near degrees 
 were tabulated and the results discussed. These were 
 very striking, and seemed amply sufficient of themselves 
 to prove the main question. Various objections to the 
 validity of the inferences drawn from them may, how- 
 ever, arise ; they are considered, and, it is believed, 
 disposed of, in the book. 
 
 After doing this, a series of lists were taken in suc- 
 cession, of the most illustrious statesmen, commanders, 
 literary men, men of science, poets, musicians, and painters, 
 of whom history makes mention. To each of these lists 
 were added many English eminent men of recent times, 
 whose biographies are familiar, or, if not, are easily acces- 
 sible. The lists were drawn up without any bias of my 
 own, for I always relied mainly upon the judgment of 
 others, exercised without any knowledge of the object of 
 the present inquiry, such as the selections made by his- 
 torians or critics. After the lists of the illustrious men 
 had been disposed of, a large group of eminent Protestant 
 divines were taken in hand — namely, those who were in- 
 cluded in Middleton's once well known and highly esteemed 
 biographical dictionary of such persons. Afterwards the 
 Senior Classics of Cambridge were discussed, then the north 
 country oarsmen and wrestlers. In the principal lists all 
 the selected names were inserted, in which those who 
 
PREFATORY CHAPTER 
 
 were known to have eminent kinsmen were printed in 
 italics, so the proportion of failures can easily be compared 
 with that of the successes. Each list was followed, as the 
 list of the judges had been, with a brief dictionary of 
 kinships, all being afterwards tabulated and discussed in 
 the same way. Finally the various results were brought 
 together and compared, showing a remarkable general 
 agreement, with a few interesting exceptions. One of 
 these exceptions lay in the preponderating influence of the 
 maternal side in the case of the divines ; this was discussed 
 and apparently accounted for. 
 
 The remainder of the volume is taken up with topics 
 that are suggested by the results of the former portion, 
 such as the comparative worth of different races, the 
 influences that affect the natural ability of nations, and 
 finally a chapter of general considerations. 
 
 If the work were rewritten, the part of the last chapter 
 which refers to Darwin's provisional theory of pangenesis 
 would require revision, and ought to be largely extended, 
 in order to deal with the evidence for and against the 
 hereditary transmission of habits that were not inborn, 
 but had been acquired through practice. Marvellous as is 
 the power of the theory of pangenesis in bringing large 
 classes of apparently different phenomena under a single 
 law, serious objections have since arisen to its validity, and 
 prevented its general acceptance. It would, for example, 
 almost compel us to believe that the hereditary trans- 
 mission of accidental mutilations and of acquired aptitudes 
 would be the rule and not the exception. But leaving 
 out of the question all theoretical reasons against this 
 belief, such as those which I put forward myself many 
 years ago, as well as the more cogent ones adduced by 
 Weissman in late years, — putting these wholly aside, and 
 
TO THE EDITION OF 1892 
 
 appealing to experimental evidence, it is now certain that 
 the tendency of acquired habits to be hereditarily trans- 
 mitted is at the most extremely small. There may be 
 some few cases, like those of Brown-Sequard's guinea- 
 pigs, in which injury to the nervous substance of the 
 parents affects their offspring ; but as a general rule, with 
 scarcely any exception that cannot be ascribed to other 
 influences, such as bad nutrition or transmitted microbes, 
 the injuries or habits of the parents are found to have 
 no effect on the natural form or faculties of the child. 
 Whether very small hereditary influences of the supposed 
 kind, accumulating in the same direction for many genera- 
 tions, may not ultimately affect the qualities of the species, 
 seems to be the only point now seriously in question. 
 
 Many illustrations have been offered, by those few per- 
 sons of high authority who still maintain that acquired 
 habits, such as the use or disuse of particular organs in 
 the parents, admit of being hereditarily transmitted in a 
 sufiicient degree to notably affect the whole breed after 
 many generations. Among these illustrations much stress 
 has been laid on the diminishing size of the human jaw, 
 in highly civilized peoples. It is urged that their food is 
 better cooked and more toothsome than that of their 
 ancestors, consequently the masticating apparatus of the 
 race has dwindled through disuse. The truth of the 
 evidence on which this argument rests is questionable, 
 because it is not at all certain that non-European races 
 who have more powerful jaws than ourselves use them 
 more than we do. A Chinaman lives, and has lived for 
 centuries, on rice and spoon-meat, or such over-boiled diet . 
 as his chopsticks can deal with. Equatorial Africans live 
 to a great extent on bananas, or else on cassava, which, 
 being usually of the poisonous kind, must be well boiled 
 
PREFATORY CHAPTER 
 
 before it is eaten, in order to destroy the poison. Many of 
 the Eastern Archipelago islanders live on sago. Pastoral 
 tribes eat meat occasionally, but their usual diet is inilk 
 or curds. It is only the hunting tribes who habitually live 
 upon tough meat. It follows that the diminishing size of 
 the human jaw in highly civilized people must be ascribed 
 to other causes, such as those, whatever they may be, that 
 reduce the weight of the whole skeleton in delicately 
 nurtured animals. 
 
 It seems feasible to subject the question to experiment, 
 whether certain acquired habits, acting during at least ten, 
 twenty, or more generations, have any sensible effects on 
 the race. I will repeat some remarks on this subject which 
 I made two years ago, first in a paper read at a Congress 
 in Paris, and afterwards at the British Association at 
 Newcastle. The position taken was that the experiments 
 ought to be made on a large scale, and upon creatures that 
 were artificially hatched, and therefore wholly isolated 
 from maternal teachings. Fowls, moths, and fish were the 
 particular creatures suggested. Fowls are reared in in- 
 cubators at very many places on a large scale, especially in 
 France. It seemed not difficult to devise piractices as- 
 sociated with peculiar calls to food, with colours connected 
 with food, or with food that was found to be really good 
 though deterrent in appearance, and in certain of the 
 breeding-places to regularly subject the chicks to these 
 practices. Then, after many generations had passed by, to 
 examine whether or no the chicks of the then generation 
 had acquired any instinct for performing them, by compar- 
 ing their behaviour with that of chicks reared in other 
 places. As regards moths, the silkworm industry is so 
 extensive and well understood that there would be abund- 
 ant opportunity for analogous experiments with moths 
 
TO THE EDITION OF 1892 
 
 both in France and Italy. The estabUshments for piscicul- 
 ture afford another field. It would not be worth while to 
 initiate courses of such experiments unless the crucial 
 value of what they could teach us when completed had first 
 been fully assented to. To my own mind they would rank 
 as crucial experiments so far as they went, and be worth 
 undertaking, but they did not apf)ear to strike others so 
 strongly in the same light. Of course before any such 
 experiments were set on foot, they would have to be con- 
 sidered in detail by many competent minds, and be closely 
 criticised. 
 
 Another topic would have been treated at more length 
 if this book were rewritten — namely, the distinction be- 
 tween variations and sports. It would even require a 
 remodelling of much of the existing matter. The views 
 I have been brought to entertain, since it was written, are 
 amplifications of those which are already put forward in 
 pp. 354-5, but insufficiently pushed there to their logical 
 conclusion. They are, that the word variation is used 
 indiscriminately to express two fundamentally distinct 
 conceptions : sports, and variations properly so called. It 
 has been shown in Natural Inheritance that the distribution 
 of faculties in a population cannot possibly remain con- 
 stant, if, on the average, the children resemble their parents. 
 If they did so, the giants (in any mental or physical par- 
 ticular) would become more gigantic, and the dwarfs more 
 dwarfish, in each successive generation. The counteract- 
 ing tendency is what I called "regression." The filial 
 centre is not the same as th.e parental centre, but it is nearer 
 to mediocrity ; it regresses towards the racial centre. In 
 other words, the filial centre (or the fraternal centre, if we 
 change the point of view) is always nearer, on the average, 
 to the racial centre than the parental centre was. There 
 
 h 
 
PREFATORY CHAPTER 
 
 must be an average " regression " in passing from the 
 parental to the fihal centre. 
 
 It is impossible briefly to give a full idea, in this place, 
 either of the necessity or of the proof of regression ; they 
 have been thoroughly discussed in the work in question. 
 Suffice it to say, that the result gives precision to the 
 idea of a typical centre from which individual variations 
 occur in accordance with the law of frequency, often to 
 a small amount, more rarely to a larger one, very rarely 
 indeed to one that is much larger, and practically never 
 to one that is larger still. The filial centre falls back 
 further towards mediocrity in a constant proportion to the 
 distance to which the parental centre has deviated from it, 
 whether the direction of the deviation be in excess or in 
 deficiency. All true variations are (as I maintain) of 
 this kind, and it is in consequence impossible that the 
 natural qualities of a race may be permanently changed 
 through the action of selection upon mere variations. The 
 selection of the most serviceable variations cannot even 
 produce any great degree of artificial and temporary im- 
 provement, because an equilibrium between deviation and 
 regression will soon be reached, whereby the best of the 
 offspring will cease to be better than their own sires and 
 dams. 
 
 The case is quite different in respect to what are tech- 
 nically known as "sports." In these, a new character 
 suddenly makes its appearance in a particular individual, 
 causing him to differ distinctly from his parents' and from 
 others of his race. Such new characters are also found to 
 be transmitted to descendants. Here there has been a 
 change of typical centre, a new point of departure has 
 somehow come into existence, towards which regression 
 has henceforth to be measured, and consequently a real 
 
TO THE EDITION OF 1892 
 
 step forward has been made in the course of evolution. 
 When natural selection favours a particular sport, it works 
 effectively towards the formation of a new species, but the 
 favour that it simultaneously shows to mere variations 
 seems to be thrown away, so far as that end is concerned. 
 
 There may be entanglement between a sport and a 
 variation which leads to a hybrid and unstable result, well 
 exemplified in the imperfect character of the fusion of dif- 
 ferent human races. Here numerous pure specimens of their 
 several ancestral types are apt to crop out, notwithstanding 
 the intermixture by marriage that had been going on for 
 many previous generations. 
 
 It has occurred to others as well as myself, as to Mr. 
 Wallace and to Professor Romanes, that the time may 
 have arrived when an institute for experiments on here- 
 dity might be established with advantage. A farm and 
 garden of a very few acres, with varied exposure, and well 
 supplied with water, placed under the charge of intelligent 
 caretakers, supervised by a biologist, would afford the 
 necessary basis for a great variety of researcti upon in- 
 expensive animals and plants. The difficulty lies in the 
 smallness of the number of competent persons who are 
 actively engaged in hereditary inquiry, who could be de- 
 pended upon to use it properly. 
 
 The direct result of this inquiry is to make manifest the 
 great and measurable differences between the mental and 
 bodily faculties of individuals, and to prove that the laws 
 of heredity are as applicable to the former as to the latter. 
 Its indirect result is to show that a vast but unused power 
 is vested in each generation over the very natures of their 
 successors — that is, over their inborn faculties and disposi- 
 tions. The brute power of doing this by means of appro- 
 priate marriages or abstention from marriage undoubtedly 
 
 h 2 
 
PKEFATOEY CHAPTER 
 
 exists, however much the circumstances of social life may 
 hamper its employment.^ The great problem of the future 
 betterment of the human race is confessedly, at the present 
 time, hardly advanced beyond the stage of academic inter- 
 est, but thought and action move swiftly nowadays, and 
 it is by no means impossible that a generation which has 
 witnessed the exclusion of the Chinese race from the cus- 
 tomary privileges of settlers in two continents, and the 
 deportation of a Hebrew population from a large portion 
 of a third, may live to see other analogous acts performed 
 under sudden socialistic pressure. The striking results of 
 an evil inheritance have already forced themselves so far 
 on the popular mind, that indignation is freely expressed, 
 without any marks of disapproval from others, at the yearly 
 output by unfit parents of weakly children who are con- 
 stitutionally incapable of growing up into serviceable 
 citizens, and who are a serious encumbrance to the nation. 
 The questions about to be considered may unexpectedly 
 acquire importance as falling within the sphere of practical 
 politics, and if so, many demographic data that require 
 forethought and time to collect, and a dispassionate and 
 leisurely judgment to discuss, will be hurriedly and sorely 
 needed. 
 
 The topics to which I refer are the relative fertility of 
 different classes and races, and their tendency to supplant 
 one another under various circumstances. 
 
 The whole question of fertility under the various con- 
 ditions of civilized life requires more detailed research 
 than it has yet received. We require further investigations 
 into the truth of the hypothesis of Malthus, that there is 
 really no limit to over-population beside that which is 
 
 ^ These remarks were submitted in my Presidential Address to the 
 International Congress of Demography, held in London in 1892. 
 
TO THE EDITION OF 1892 
 
 afforded by misery or prudential restraint. Is it true that 
 misery, in any justifiable sense of that word, provides the 
 only check which acts automatically, or arc other causes in 
 existence, active, though as yet obscure, that assist in re- 
 straining the overgrowth of population ? It is certain that 
 the productiveness of different mamages differs greatly 
 in consequence of unexplained conditions. The variation 
 in fertility of different kinds of animals that have been 
 captured when wild and afterwards kept in menageries is, 
 as Darwin long since pointed out, most notable and appar- 
 ently capricious. The majority of those which thrive in con- 
 finement, and apparently enjoy excellent health, are never- 
 theless absolutely infertile ; others, often of closely allied 
 species, have their productivity increased. One of the 
 many evidences of our great ignorance of the laws that 
 govern fertility, is seen in the behaviour of bees, who have 
 somehow discovered that by merely modifying the diet and 
 the size of the nursery of any female grub, they can at 
 will cause it to develop, either into a naturally sterile 
 worker, or into the potential mother of a huge hive. 
 
 Demographers have, undoubtedly, collected and collated 
 a vast amount of information bearing on the fertility of 
 different nations, but they have mainly attacked the prob- 
 lem in the gross and not in detail, so that we possess little 
 more than mean values that are applicable to general 
 populations, and are very valuable in their way, but we 
 remain ignorant of much else, that a moderate amount of 
 judiciously directed research might, perhaps, be able to tell. 
 
 As an example of what could be sought with advantage, 
 let us suppose that we take a number, sufficient for 
 statistical purposes, of persons occupying different social 
 classes, those who are the least efficient in physical, intel- 
 lectual, and moral grounds, forming our lowest class, and 
 
PREFATORY CHAPTKR 
 
 those who are the most efficient forming our highest class. 
 The question to be solved relates to the hereditary per- 
 manence of the several classes. What proportion of each 
 class is descended from parents who belong to the same 
 class, and what proportion is descended from parents who 
 belong to each of the other classes ? Do those persons 
 who have honourably succeeded in life, and who are pre- 
 sumably, on the whole, the most valuable portion of our 
 human stock, contribute on the aggregate their fair share 
 of posterity to the next generation ? If not, do they con- 
 tribute more or less than their fair share, and in what 
 degree ? In other words, is the evolution of man in each 
 particular country, favourably or injuriously affected by its 
 special form of civilization ? 
 
 Enough is already knov/n to make it certain that the 
 productiveness of both the extreme classes, the best and 
 the worst, falls short of the average of the nation as a 
 whole. Therefore, the most prolific class necessarily lies 
 between the two extremes, but at what intermediate point 
 does it lie ? Taken altogether, on any reasonable principle, 
 are the natural gifts of the most prolific class, bodily, in- 
 tellectual, and moral, above or below the line of national 
 mediocrity ? If above that line, then the existing con- 
 ditions are favourable to the improvement of the race. If 
 they are below that line, they must work towards its 
 degradation. 
 
 These very brief remarks serve to shadow out the prob- 
 lem; it would require much more space than is now 
 available, before it could be phrased in a way free from 
 ambiguity, so that its solution would clearly instruct us 
 whether the conditions of life at any period in any given 
 race were tending to raise or to depress its natural 
 qualities. 
 
TO THE EDITION OF 1892 
 
 Whatever other countries may or may not have lost, 
 ours has certainly gained on more than one occasion by 
 the infusion of the breed of selected sub-races, especially 
 of that of the Protestant refugees from religious persecu- 
 tion on the Continent. It seems reasonable to look upon 
 the Huguenots as men who, on the whole, had inborn 
 qualities of a distinctive kind from the majority of their 
 countrymen, and who may, therefore, be spoken of as a 
 sub-type — that is to say, capable, when isolated, of con- 
 tinuing their race without its showing any strong tendency 
 to revert to the form of the earlier type from which it was 
 a well-defined departure. It proved, also, that the cross 
 breed between them and our ancestors was a singularly 
 successful mixture. Consequently, England has been 
 largely indebted to the natural refinement and to the solid 
 worth of the Huguenot breed, as well as to the culture 
 and technical knowledge that the Huguenots brought 
 with them. 
 
 The frequency in history with which one race has sup- 
 planted another over wide geographical areas is one of the 
 most striking facts in the evolution of mankind. The deni- 
 zens of the world at the present day form a very different 
 human stock to that which inhabited it a dozen generations 
 ago, and to all appearance a no less difference will be found 
 in our successors a dozen of generations hence. Partly it 
 may be that new human varieties have come into per- 
 manent or only into temporary existence, like that most re- 
 markable mixed race of the Normans many centuries ago, 
 in whom, to use well-known words of the late Professor 
 Freeman, the indomitable vigour of the Scandinavians, 
 joined to the buoyant vivacity of the Gaul, produced the 
 conquering and ruling race of Europe. But principally 
 the change of which I spoke is due to great alterations in 
 
PREFATORY CHAPTER 
 
 the proportions of those who belong to the old and well 
 established types. The Negro now boin in the United 
 States has much the same natural faculties as his distant 
 cousin who is born in Africa ; the effect of his transplanta- 
 tion being ineffective in changing his nature, but very 
 effective in increasing his numbers, in enlarging the range 
 of his distribution, and in destroying native American races. 
 There are now some 8,000,000 of Negroes in lands where 
 not one of them existed twelve generations ago, and prob- 
 ably not one representative of the race which they displaced 
 remains there ; on the other hand, there has been no 
 corresponding diminution of numbers in the parent home 
 of the Negro. Precisely the same may be said of the 
 European races who have during the same period swarmed 
 over the temperate regions of the globe, forming the nuclei 
 of many future nations. 
 
 It is impossible, even in the vaguest way, in a brief 
 space, to give a just idea of the magnitude and variety of 
 changes produced in the human stock by the political 
 events of the last few generations, and it would be difficult 
 to do so in such a way as not to seriously wound the 
 patriotic susceptibilities of many readers. The natural 
 temperaments and moral ideals of different races are 
 various, and praise or blame cannot be applied at the dis- 
 cretion of one person without exciting remonstrance from 
 others who take different views with perhaps equal justice. 
 The birds and beasts assembled in conclave may try to 
 pass a unanimous resolution in favour of the natural duty 
 of the mother to nurture and protect her offspring, but the 
 cuckoo would musically protest. The Irish Celt may desire 
 the extension of his race and the increase of its influence 
 in the representative governments of England and America, 
 but the wishes of his Anglo-Saxon or Teuton fellow-sub- 
 
TO THE EDITION OF 1892 
 
 jects may lie in the opposite direction ; and so on indefin- 
 itely. My object now is merely to urge inquiries into the 
 historical fact whether legislation, which has led to the 
 substitution on a large scale of one race for another, has 
 not often been the outcome of conflicting views into which 
 the question of race hardly entered at all, and which were 
 so nearly balanced that if the question of race had been 
 properly introduced into the discussion the result might 
 have been different. The possibility of such being the 
 case cannot be doubted, and affords strong reason for justly 
 appraising the influence of race, and of hereafter including 
 it at neither more nor less than its real value, among the 
 considerations by which political action will be determined. 
 
 The importance to be attached to race is a question that 
 deserves a far larger measure of exact investigation than 
 it receives. We are exceedingly ignorant of the respective 
 ranges of the natural and acquired faculties in different 
 races, and there is too great a tendency among writers 
 to dogmatize wildly about them, some grossly magnifying, 
 others as greatly minimising their several provinces. It 
 seems however possible to answer this question unam- 
 biguously, difficult as it is. 
 
 The recent attempts by many European nations to utilize 
 Africa for their own purposes gives immediate and practical 
 interest to inquiries that bear on the transplantation of 
 races. They compel us to face the question as to what 
 races should be politically aided to become hereafter the 
 chief occupiers of that continent. The varieties of 
 Negroes, Bantus, Arab half-breeds, and others who now 
 inhabit Africa are very numerous, and they differ much 
 from one another in their natural qualities. Some of them 
 must be more suitable than others to thrive under that 
 form of moderate civilization which is likely to be intro- 
 
PREFATORY CHAPTER 
 
 duced into Africa by Europeans, who will enforce justice 
 and order, excite a desire among the natives for comforts 
 and luxuries, and make steady industry almost a condition 
 of living at all. Such races would spread and displace the 
 others by degrees. Or it may prove that the Negroes, 
 one and all, will fail as completely under the new con- 
 ditions as they have failed under the old ones, to submit 
 to the needs of a superior civilization to their own ; in this 
 case their races, numerous and prolific as they are, will in 
 course of time be supplanted and replaced by their betters. 
 It seems scarcely possible as yet to assure ourselves as 
 to the possibility of any variety of white men to work, to 
 thrive, and to continue their race in the broad regions of 
 the tropics. We could not do so without better knowledge 
 than we now possess of the different capacities of indivi- 
 duals to withstand their malarious and climatic influences. 
 Much more care is taken to select appropriate varieties of 
 plants and animals for plantation in foreign settlements, 
 than to select appropriate types of men. Discrimination 
 and foresight are shown in the one case, an indifference 
 born of ignorance is shown in the other. The importance 
 is not yet sufficiently recognized of a more exact examina- 
 tion and careful record than is now made of the physical 
 qualities and hereditary antecedents of candidates for em- 
 ployment in tropical countries. We require these records 
 to enable us to learn hereafter what are the conditions in 
 youth that are prevalent among those whose health sub- 
 sequently endured the change of climatic influence satis- 
 factorily, and conversely as regards those who failed. It is 
 scarcely possible to properly conduct such an investigation 
 retrospectively. 
 
 In conclusion I wish again to emphasize the fact that 
 the improvement of the natural gifts of future generations 
 
TO THE EDITION OF 1892 
 
 of tlie human race is largely, though indirectly, under our 
 control. We may not be able to originate, but we can guide. 
 The processes of evolution are in constant and spontaneous 
 activity, some pushing towards the bad, some towards the 
 good. Our part is to watch for opportunities to intervene 
 by checking the former and giving free play to the latter. 
 We must distinguish clearly between our power in this 
 fundamental respect and that which we also possess of 
 ameliorating education and hygiene. It is earnestly to be 
 hoped that inquiries will be increasingly directed into 
 historical facts, with the view of estimating the possible 
 effects of reasonable political action in the future, in gra- 
 dually raising the present miserably low standard of the 
 human race to one in which the Utopias in the dreamland 
 of philanthropists may become practical possibilities. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 INTEODUCTOET CHAPTEE . . 1 
 
 CLASSIFICATION OF MEN ACCORDING TO THEIR REPUTATION . . 5 
 
 CLASSIFICATION OF MEN ACCORDING TO THEIR NATURAL GIFTS . 12 
 
 COMPARISON OF THE TWO CLASSIFICATIONS ... 33 
 
 NOTATION , . 44 
 
 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 . 49 
 
 STATESMEN . . . , , 98 
 
 ENGLISH PEERAGES, THEIR INFLUENCE UPON RACE . . 123 
 
 COMMANDERS ... . ... .... 134 
 
 LITERARY MEN . ... 160 
 
 MEN OF SCIENCE . . 185 
 
 POETS .... . .... . . 218 
 
 MUSICIANS . . . ■ . 230 
 
 PAINTERS . , . 239 
 
 DIVINES . .... . .... 249 
 
 SENIOR CLASSICS OF CAMBRIDGE .... . 289 
 
 OARSMEN . . . . 296 
 
 WRESTLERS OF THE NORTH COUNTRY . 303 
 
 COMPARISON OF RESULTS . . . . . . 307 
 
 THE COMPARATIVE WORTH OF DIFFERENT RACES . 325 
 
 INFLUENCES THAT AFFECT THE NATURAL ABILITY OF NATIONS . 338 
 
 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS . . 349 
 
 APPENDIX . . 362 
 
 INDEX .... 369 
 
HEEEDITAEY GENIUS 
 
IJSrTEODUOTORY CHAPTEK 
 
 great gratification, by many of the highest authorities on 
 heredity. In reproducing them, as I now do, in a much 
 more elaborate form, and on a greatly enlarged basis of 
 induction, I feel assured that, inasmuch as what I then 
 wrote was sufficient to earn the acceptance of Mr. Darwin 
 ("Domestication of Plants and Animals," ii. 7), the increased 
 amount of evidence submitted in the present volume is not 
 likely to be gainsaid. 
 
 The general plan of my argument is to show that high 
 reputation is a pretty accurate test of high ability ; next 
 to discuss the relationships of a > large body of fairly 
 eminent men— namely, the Judges of England from 1660 
 to 1868, the Statesmen of the time of George III., and 
 the Premiers during the last 100 years — and to obtain 
 from these a general survey of the laws of heredity in 
 respect to genius. Then I shall examine, in order, the 
 kindred of the most illustrious Commanders, men of 
 Literature and of Science, Poets, Painters, and Musicians, 
 of whom history speaks. I shall also discuss the kindred 
 of a certain selection of Divines and of ihodern Scholars. 
 Then will follow a short chapter, by way of comparison, 
 on the hereditary transmission of physical gifts, as deduced 
 from the relationships of certain classes of Oarsmen and 
 Wrestlers. Lastly, I shall collate my results, and draw 
 conclusions. 
 
 It will be observed that I deal with more than one 
 grade of ability. Those upon whom the greater part of 
 my volume is occupied, and on whose kinships mj argu- 
 ment is most securely based, have been generally reputed 
 as endowed by nature with extraordinary genius. There 
 are so few of these men that, although they are scattered 
 throughout the whole historical period of human existence, 
 their number does not amount to more than 400, and yet 
 a considerable proportion of them will be found to be 
 interrelated. 
 
 Another grade of ability with which I deal is that which 
 includes numerous highly eminent, and all the illustrious 
 names of modem English history, whose immediate de- 
 scendants are living among us, whose histories are popularly 
 known, and whose relationships may readily be traced by 
 
INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER 
 
 the help of biographical dictionaries, peerages, and similar 
 ■books of reference. 
 
 A third and lower grade is that of the English Judges, 
 massed together as a whole, for the purpose of the pre- 
 fatory statistical inquiry of which I have already spoken. 
 No one doubts that many of the ablest intellects of our 
 race are to be found among the Judges ; nevertheless the 
 average ability of a Judge cannot be rated as equal to that 
 x>f the lower of the two grades I have described. 
 
 I trust the reader will make allowance for a large and 
 somewhat' important class of omissions I have felt myself 
 compelled to make when treating of the eminent men 
 of modern days. I am prevented by a sense of decorum 
 from quoting names of their relations in contemporary life 
 who are not recognized as public characters, although their 
 abilities may be highly appreciated in private life. Still 
 less consistent with decorum would it have been, to intro- 
 duce the names of female relatives that stand in the same 
 category. My case is so overpoweringly strong, that I am 
 perfectly able to prove my point without having recourse 
 to this class of evidence. Nevertheless, the reader should 
 bear in mind that it exists; and I beg he will do me 
 the justice of allowing that I have not overlooked the 
 whole of the evidence that does not appear in my pages. 
 I am deeply conscious of the imperfection of my work, 
 but my sins are those of omission, not of com^mission. 
 Such errors as I may and must have made, which give 
 a fictitious support to my arguments, are, I am confident, 
 out of all proportion fewer than such omissions of facts as 
 would have helped to establish them. 
 
 I have taken little notice in this book of modern men 
 of eminence who are not English, or at least well known 
 to Englishmen. I feared, if I included large classes of 
 foreigners, that I should make glaring errors. It requires 
 a very great deal of labour to hunt out relationships, 
 even with the facilities afforded to a countryman having 
 access to persons acquainted with the various families; 
 much more would it have been difficult to hunt out the 
 kindred of foreigners. I should have especially liked to 
 investigate the biographies of Italians and Jews, both of 
 
 B 2 
 
INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER 
 
 whom appear to be rich in families of high intellectual 
 breeds. Germany and America are also full of interest. 
 It is a little less so with respect to France, where the 
 Revolution and the guillotine made sad havoc among the 
 progeny of her abler races. 
 
 There is one advantage to a candid critic in my having 
 left so large a field untouched ; it enables me to propose 
 a test that any well-informed reader may easily adopt who 
 doubts the fairness of my examples. He may most reason- 
 ably suspect that I have been unconsciously influenced 
 by my theories to select men whose kindred were most 
 favourable to their support. If so, I beg he will test my 
 impartiality as follows : — Let him take a .dozen names of 
 his own selection, as the most eminent in whatever pro- 
 fession and in whatever country he knows most about, and 
 let him trace out for himself their relations. It is necessary, 
 as I find by experience, to take some pains to be sure that 
 none, even of the immediate relatives, on either the male 
 or female side, have been overlooked. If he does what 
 I propose, I am confident he will be astonished at the 
 completeness with which the results will confirm my 
 theory. I venture to speak with assurance, because it has 
 often occurred to me to propose this very test to incre- 
 dulous friends, and invariably, so far as my memory serves 
 me, as large a proportion of the men who were named 
 were discovered to have eminent relations, as the nature 
 of my views on heredity would have led me to expect. 
 
CLASSIFICATION OF MEN 
 
 CLASSIFICATION OF MEN ACCORDING TO 
 THEIR REPUTATION 
 
 The- arguments by which I endeavour to prove that 
 genius is hereditary, consist in showing how large is the 
 nuriiber of instances iu which men who are more or less 
 illustrious have eminent kinsfolk. It is necessary to have 
 clear ideas on the two following matters before my argu- 
 ments can be rightly appreciated. The first is the degree 
 of selection implied by the words " eminent " and " illus- 
 trious." Does " eminent " mean the foremost iu a hundred, 
 in a thousand, or in what other number of men ? The 
 second is the degree to which reputation may be accepted 
 as a test of ability. 
 
 It is essential that I, who write, should have a minimum 
 qualification distinctly before my eyes whenever I employ 
 the phrases " eminent " and the like, and that the reader 
 should understand as clearly as myself the value I attach 
 to those qualifications. An explanation of these words 
 will be the subject of the present chapter. A subsequent 
 chapter will be given to the discussion of how far 
 "eminence" may be accepted as a criterion of natural 
 gifts. It is almost needless for me to insist that the sub- 
 jects of these two chapters are entirely distinct. 
 
 I look upon social and professional life as a continuous 
 examination. All are candidates for the good opinions of 
 others, and for success in their several professions, and they 
 achieve success in proportion as the general estimate is 
 large of their aggregate merits. In ordinary scholastic 
 examinations marks are allotted in stated proportions to 
 
CLASSIFICATION OF MEN 
 
 various specified subjects — so many for Latin, so many for 
 Greek, so many for English history, and the rest. The 
 world, in the same way, but almost unconsciously, allots 
 marks to men. It gives them for originality of conception, 
 for enterprise, for activity and energy, for administrative 
 skill, for various acquirements, for power of literary ex- 
 pression, for oratory, and much besides of general value, 
 as well as for more specially professional merits. It does 
 not allot these marks according to a proportion that can 
 easily be stated in words, but there is a rough common- 
 sense that governs its practice with a fair^ approximation 
 to constancy. Those who have gained most of these 
 tacit marks are ranked, by the common judgment of the 
 leaders of opinion, as theforemost me^ of tl^eir day. 
 
 The metaphor of an examination may be stretched much 
 further. As there are alternative groups in any one of 
 which a candidate may obtain honours, so it is with repu- 
 tations — they naay be made in law, literature, science, art, 
 and in a host of other pursuits. Again: as the mere 
 attainment of a general fair level will obtain no, honours 
 in an examination, no more will it do so in the struggle 
 for eminence. , A man must show conspicuous power in at 
 least one subject in order to achieve a high reputation. 
 
 Let us see how the world classifies people^ after ex- 
 amining each of them; in her patient, persistent manner, 
 during the years of their manhood. How many men of 
 " eminence " are there, arid what .proportion do they bear 
 to the whole cpmmunity ? 
 
 I will begin by analysing a very painstaking biographical 
 handbook, ktely published by Routledge and Co.,-called 
 " Men of the Time." Its intention, which is very fairly 
 and honestly carried out, is to include none but those 
 whom the world honours for their ability. The catalogue 
 of names is 2,.500, and a full half of it consists of American 
 and Continental celebrities. It is well I should give in a 
 foot-note ^ an analysis of its contents, in order to show the 
 
 ^ Contenis.of tM " Bidimmry of Men of the Time," Ed. 1865: 
 
 62 actors, singers, dancers, &e. ; 7 agriculturists ; 71 antiquaries, arcjise- 
 ologists, "numismatists, . &c. ; 20 architects ; 120 artists (painters and 
 designers) ; 950 authors ; 400 dJTines ; 43 engincjers and mechanicians ; 
 
ACCORDING TO THEIR REPUTATION 
 
 exhaustive character of its range. The numbers I have 
 prefixed to each class are not strictly accurate, for I 
 measured them off rather than counted them, but they 
 are quite close enough. The same name often appears 
 under more than one head. 
 
 On looking over the book, I am surprised to find how 
 large a proportion of the "Men of the Time" are past 
 middle age. It appears that in the cases of high (but by 
 no means in that of the highest) merit, a man must outlive 
 the age of fifty to be sure 'of being widely appreciated. 
 It takes time for an able man, born in the humbler ranks 
 if life, to emerge from them and to' take his natural posi- 
 ion. It would not, therefore, be just to compare the 
 numbers of Englishmen in the book with that of the whole 
 adult male population of the Biitish isles ; but it is neces- 
 sary to confine our examination to those of the celebrities 
 who are past fifty years of age, and to compare their number 
 with that of the whole male population who are also above 
 fifty years. I estimate, from examining a large part of 
 the bpok, that there are about 850 of these men, and that 
 500 of them are decidedly well known to persons familiar 
 with literary and scientific society. Now, there are about 
 two millions of adult males in the British isles above fifty 
 years of age ; consequently, the total number of the " Men 
 of the Time" are as 425 to a million, and the more select 
 paitt of them as 250 to a million. 
 
 The qualifications for belonging to what I call the more 
 select part. are, in my mind, that a man should have dis- 
 tinguished himself pretty freqiiently either by purely 
 original work, or as a . leader of opinion. I wholly 
 exclude notoriety obtained by a single act. This is 
 a fairly well-defined line, because there is not room for 
 
 10 engravers ; 140 lawyers, judges, barristers, and legists ; 94 medical 
 practitioners, physicians, surgeons, and physiologists ; 39 merchants, 
 capitalists, manufacturers, and traders; 168 military officers; 12 miscel- 
 laneous ; 7 moral and metaphysical philosophers, logicians ; 32 musicians 
 and composers; 67 naturalists, botanists, zoologists, &c. ; S6.navjil officers ; 
 40 philologists and ethnologists ; 60 poets (but also included in authors) ; 
 60 political and social economists and philanthropists ; 154 men of science, 
 astronomers, chemists, geologists, mathematicians, &c. ; 29 sculptors ; 
 64" sovereigns, members of Toyal families, &c. ; 376 statesmen, diplomatists, 
 colonial governors, &c. ; 76 travellers and geographers. 
 
CLASSIFICATION OF MEN 
 
 many men to be eminent. Each interest or idea has 
 its mouthpiece, and a man who has attained and can 
 maintain his position as the representative of a party 
 or an idea, naturally becomes much more conspicuous 
 than his coadjutors who are nearly equal but inferior in 
 ability. This" is eminently the case in positions where 
 eminence may be won by official acts. The balance may 
 be turned by a grain that- decides whether A, B, or C 
 shall be promoted, to a vacant post. The man who 
 obtains it has opportunities of distinction denied to the 
 others. I do not, however, take much note of official 
 rank. People who have left very great names behind 
 them have mostly done so through non-professional 
 labours. I certainly should not include mere officials, 
 except of the highest ranks, and in open professions, 
 among my select list of eminent men. 
 
 Another estimate of the proportion of eminent men 
 to the whole population was made on a different basis, 
 and gave much the same result. I took the obituary 
 of the year 1868, published in the Times on January 1st, 
 1869, and found, in it about fifty names of men of the 
 more select class. This was in one sense a broader, and 
 in another a more rigorous selection than that which I 
 have just described. It was broader, because I included 
 the names of many whose abilities were high, but who 
 died too young to have earned the wide reputation they 
 deserved ; and it was more rigorous, because I excluded 
 old men who had earned distinction in years gone by, 
 but had not shown themselves capable in later times 
 to come again to the front. On the first ground, it was 
 necessary to lower the limit of the age of the population 
 with whom they should be compared. Forty-five years 
 of age seemed to me a. fair limit, including, as it was 
 supposed to do, a year or two of broken health preceding 
 decease. Now, 210,000 males die annually in the British 
 isles above the age of forty-five ; therefore, the ratio 
 of the more select portion of the " Men of the Time " 
 on these data is as 50 to 210,000, or as 238 to a 
 million. 
 
 Thirdly, I consulted obituaries of many years back. 
 
ACCORDING TO THEIR REPUTATION 
 
 wken the population of these islands was mnch smaller, 
 and they appeared to me to lead to similar conclusions, 
 viz. that 250 to a million is an ample estimate. 
 
 There would be no difficulty in making a further selec- 
 tion out of these, to any degree of rigour. We could 
 select the 200, the 100, or the fifty best out of the 250, 
 without much uncertainty. But I do not see my way 
 to work downwards. If I were asked to choose the 
 thousand per million best men, I should feel we had 
 descended to a level where there existed no sure data 
 for guidance, where accident and opportunity had undue 
 influence, and where it was impossible to distinguish 
 general eminence from local reputation, or from mere 
 notoriety. 
 
 These contsiderations define the sense in which I 
 propose to employ the word " eminent." When I speak 
 of an eminent man, I mean one who has achieved a 
 position that is attained by only 250 persons in each 
 million of men, or by one person in each 4,000. 4,000 
 is a very large number — difficult for persons to realize 
 who are not accustomed to deal with great assemblages. 
 On the most brilliant of starlight nights there are 
 never so many as 4,000 stars visible to the naked eye 
 at the same time ; yet we feel it to be an extraordinary 
 distinction to a star to be accounted as the brightest 
 in the sky. This, be it remembered, is my narrowest 
 area of selection. I propose to introduce no name 
 whatever into my lists of kinsmen (unless it be marked 
 off from the rest by brackets) that is less distin- 
 guished. 
 
 The mass of those with whom I deal are far more 
 rigidly selected — many are as one in a million, and not 
 a few as one of many millions. I use the term "illus- 
 trious " when speaking of these. They are men whom the 
 whole intelligent part of the nation mourns when they die ; 
 who have, or deserve to have, a public funeral ; and who 
 rank in future ages as historical characters. 
 
 Permit me to add a word upon the meaning of a million, 
 being a number so enormous as to be difficult to conceive. 
 It is well to have a standard by which to realize it. Mine 
 
TO CLASSIFICATION OF MEN 
 
 will be understood by many Londoners ,■ it is as; follows : — • 
 One' summer day I passed the afternoon in Bushey Park 
 to see the magnificent spectacle of its avenue of horse-r 
 chestnut trees, a mile long, in full flower. -As -the hours 
 passed by, it occurred to me to try to count the number 
 of spikes of flowers facing the drive on one side of the 
 long avenue — I mean all the spikes that were visible in 
 full sunshine on one side of the road. Accordingly, I fixed 
 upon a tree of average bulk and flower, and drew ima- 
 ginary lines — first halving the tree, theft quartering, and 
 so on, until I arrived at a subdivision that was not too 
 large to allow of my counting the spikes of flowers it 
 included. I did this with three different trees, and arrived 
 at pretty much the same result : as well as I recollect, the 
 three estimates were as nine, ten, and eleven. Then I 
 counted the trees in the avenue, and, multiplying all to- 
 gether, I found" the spikes to be just about 100,000 in 
 number. Ever since then, whenever a million is mentioned, 
 I recall the long perspective of the avenue of Bushey Park, 
 with its stately chestnuts clothed from top to bottom with 
 spikes of flowers, bright in the sunshine, and I imagine a 
 similarly continuous floral band, of ten miles in 'length. 
 
 In ilhistration of the value of the extreme rigour 
 implied by a selection of one in a million, I will take 
 the following instance. The Oxford and Cambridge boat- 
 race excites almost a national enthusiasm, and the men 
 who represent their Universities as competing crews have 
 good reason to be proud of being the selected champions 
 of such large bodies. The crew of each boat consists of 
 eight men, selected out of about 800 students ; namely," the 
 available undergraduates of about two successive years. In 
 other words, the selection that is popularly felt to be so 
 strict, is only as one in a hundred. Now, suppose there 
 had been so vast a num"ber of universities that it would 
 have been possible to bring together 800 men, each of 
 whom had pulled in a University crew, and that from this" 
 body the eight best were selected to form a special' crew 
 of comparatively rare merit : the selection of each of these 
 would be as 1 to 10,000 ordinary men; Let this process 
 be irepeated, and then, and not till then, do you arrive at 
 
ACCORDma TO THEIR REPUTATION 11 
 
 a superlative crew, representing selections of one in a 
 million. This is a perfectly fair deduction, because the 
 youths at the Universities are a hap-hazard collection 
 of men, so far as regards their thews and sinews. No 
 one is sent to a University on account of his powerful 
 muscle. Or, to put the same facts into another form : — 
 it would require a period of no less than 100 years, before 
 either University could furnish eight men, each of whom 
 would have sufficient boating erriinence to rank as one of 
 the medium crew. Ten thousand years must elapse 
 before eight men could be furnished, each of whom would 
 have the rank of the superlative crew. 
 
 It is, however, quite another matter with respect to brain 
 power, for, as I shall have occasion to show, the Uni- 
 versities attract to themselves a large proportion of the 
 eminent scholastic talent of all England. There are 
 nearly a quarter of a million males in Great Britain who 
 arrive each year at the proper age for going to the Urii-' 
 versity : therefore, if Cambridge, for example, received only- 
 one in every five of the ablest scholastic intellects, she 
 would be able, ip. every period of twenty years, to boast of 
 the fresh arrival of an undergraduate, the rank of whose 
 scholastic eminence was that of one, in a million. 
 
12 CLASSIFICATION OF MEN 
 
 CLASSIFICATION OF MEN ACCORDING 
 TO THEIE NATURAL GIFTS 
 
 T HAVE no patience with the hypothesis occasionally ex- 
 pressed, and often implied, especially in tales written to 
 teach children to be good, that babies are born pretty 
 much alike, and that the sole agencies in creating dif- 
 ferences between boy and boy, and man and man, are 
 steady application and moral effort. It is in the most 
 unqualified manner that I object to pretensions of natural 
 equality. The experiences of the nursery, the school, the 
 University, and of professional careers, are a chain of 
 proofs to the contrary. I acknowledge freely the great 
 power of education and social influences in developing 
 the active powers of the mind, just as I acknowledge the 
 effect of use in developing the muscles of a blacksmith's 
 arm, and no further. Let the blacksmith labour as he 
 will, he will find there are certain feats beyond his power 
 that are well within the strength of a man of herculean 
 make, even although the latter may have led a sedentary 
 life. Some years ago, the Highlanders held a grand 
 gathering in Holland Park, where they challenged all 
 England to compete with them in their games of strength. 
 The challenge was accepted, and the well-trained men of 
 the hills were beaten in the foot-race by a youth who 
 was stated to be a pure Cockney, the clerk of a London 
 banker. 
 
 Everybody who has trained himself to physical exercises 
 discovers the extent of his muscular powers to a nicety. 
 When he begins to walk, to row, to use the dumb bells. 
 
ACCORDING TO THEIR NATURAL GIFTS 13 
 
 or to run, he finds to his great delight that his thews 
 strengthen, and his endurance of fatigue increases day after 
 day. So long as he is a novice, he perhaps flatters himself 
 there is hardly an assignable limit to the education of his 
 muscles ; but the daily gain is soon discovered to diminish, 
 and at last it vanishes altogether. His maximum per- 
 formance becomes a rigidly determinate quantity. He 
 learns to an inch, how high or how far he can jump, when 
 he has attained the highest state of training. He learns 
 to half a pound, the force he can exert on the dyna- 
 mometer, by compressing it. He can strike a blow against 
 the machine used to measure impact, and drive its index 
 to a certain graduation, but no further. So it is in running, 
 in rowing, in walking, and in every other form of physical 
 exertion. There is a definite limit to the muscular powers 
 of every man, which he cannot by any education or 
 exertion overpass. 
 
 This is precisely analogous to the experience that every 
 student has had of the working of his mental powers. 
 The eao-er boy, when he first goes to school and confronts 
 intellectual difficulties, is astonished at his progress. He 
 glories in his newly-developed mental grip and growing 
 capacity for application, and, it may be, fondly believes 
 it to be within his reach to become one of the heroes who 
 have left their mark upon the history of the world. The 
 years go by ; he competes in the examinations of school 
 and college, over and over again with his fellows, and soon 
 finds his place among them. He knows he can beat such 
 and such of his competitors ; that there are some with 
 whom he runs on equal terms, and others whose intellectual 
 feats he cannot even approach. Probably his vanity still 
 continues to tempt him, by whispering in a new strain. It 
 tells him that classics, mathematics, and other subjects 
 taught in universities, are mere scholastic specialities, and 
 no test of the more valuable intellectual powers. It 
 reminds him of numerous instances of persons who had 
 been unsuccessful in the competitions of youth, but who 
 had shown powers in after-life that made them the foremost 
 men of their age. Accordingly, with newly furbished hopes, 
 and with all the ambition of twenty-two years of age, he 
 leaves his University and enters a larger field of compe- 
 
14 CLASSlriCATION OF MEN 
 
 tition. The same kind of experience awaits hinj here that 
 he has already gone through. Opportunities occur — they 
 occur to every man — and he finds himself incapable of 
 grasping them. He tries, and is tried in many things^ - In 
 a few years more, unless he is incurably blinded by self- 
 conceit, he learns precisely of what performances he is 
 capable, and what other enterprises lie beyond his compass. 
 When he reaches mature life, he is confident only within 
 certain limits, and knows, or ought to' know, himself just 
 as he is probably judged of by the world, with all his 
 unmistakeable weakness and all his undeniable strength. 
 He is no -longer tormented into hopeless efforts by the 
 fallacious promptings of overweening vanity, but he limits 
 his undertakings to matters below the level of his reach, 
 and finds true moral repose in an honest conviction that 
 he is engaged in as much good work as his nature has 
 rendered him capable of performing. 
 
 There ca:n hardly be a surer evidence of the enormous 
 difference between the intellectual capacity of men, than 
 the prodigious differences in the numbers of marks ob- 
 tained by those who gain mathematical honours at Cam- 
 bridge. I therefore crave permission to speak at some 
 length upon this subject, although the details are dry and 
 of little general interest. There are between 400 and 450 
 students who take their degrees in each year, and of these, 
 about 100 succeed in gaining honours in mathematics, and 
 are ranged by the examiners in strict order of merit. 
 About the first forty of those who take mathematical 
 honours are distinguished by the title of wranglers, and it 
 is a decidedly creditable thing to be even a low wrangler ; 
 it will secure a fellowship in a small college. It must be 
 carefully borne in mind that the distinction of being the 
 ■first in this list of honours, or what is called the senior 
 wrangler of the year, means a vast deal more than being 
 the foremost mathematician of 400 or 450 men taken at 
 hap-hazard. No doubt the large bulk of Cambridge men 
 are taken almost at hap-hazard. A boy is intended by 
 his parents for some profession ; if that profession be either 
 the Church or the Bar, it used to be almost requisite, and 
 it is still important, that he should be sent to Cambridge 
 or, Oxford, These youths may justly be considered as 
 
ACCOEDINGt TO THEIR NATURAL GIFTS 15 
 
 haying been taken Eft hap-hazafd. ' But ther^ are many 
 others who have fairly won their way to the Universities, 
 and are therefore selected from an enormous area. Fully 
 one-half of the wra;nglers have been boys of note at their 
 respective schools, and, conversely, almost all boys of note 
 at schoolsfind their way to the Universities. Hence it is 
 that among their comparatively small number of students, 
 the Universities include the highest youthful scholastic 
 ability of all England. The senior wrangler, in each suc- 
 cessive year, is the chief of these as regards mathematics, 
 and this, the highest distinction, is, or was, continually 
 won by youths who had no mathematical training of 
 importance before they went to Cambridge. All their 
 instruction had been received during the three years of 
 their residence at the University. Now, I do not say 
 anything here about the merits or demerits of Cambridge 
 mathematical studies having been directed along a too 
 narrow groove, or about the presumed disadvantages of 
 ranging ca-ndidates . in strict order of merit, instead of 
 grouping them, as at Oxford, in classes, where their names 
 appear alphabetically arranged. All I am concerned with 
 here are the results; and these are most appropriate to 
 my argument. The youths start on their three years' 
 race as fairly as possible. They are then stimulated to 
 run by the most powerful inducements, namely, those of 
 competition, of honour, and of future wealth (for a good 
 fellowship is wealth) ; and at the end of the three years 
 they are examined most rigorously according to a; system 
 that they all understand and are equally well firepared 
 for. The examination lasts five and a half hours a day 
 for eight days. All the answers are carefully marked by 
 the examiners, who add up the marks at the end and 
 range the candidates in strict order of merit. The fair- 
 ness and thoroughness of Cambridge examinations have 
 never had a breath of suspicion cast upon them. 
 
 Unfortunately for my purposes, the marks are not 
 published. They are not even assigned on a uniform 
 system, since each examiner is permitted to employ his 
 own scale of marks ; but whatever scale he uses, the results 
 :as to proportional merit are the same. I am indebted to 
 a Cambridge examiner for a copy of his marks, in respect 
 
16 
 
 CLASSIFICATION OF MEN 
 
 to two examinations, in which the scales of marks were so 
 alike as to make it easy, by a slight proportional adjust- 
 ment, to compare the two together. This was, to a certain 
 degree, a confidential communication, so that it would be 
 improper for me to publish anything that would identify 
 the years to which these marks refer. I simply give them 
 as groups of figures, sufficient to show the- enormous 
 differences of merit. The lowest man in the list of honours 
 gains less than 300 marks; the lowest wrangler gains 
 about 1,-500 marks ; and the senior wrangler, in one of the 
 lists now before me, gained more than 7,500 marks. Con- 
 sequently, the lowest wrangler has more than five times 
 the merit of the lowest junior optime, and less than one- 
 fifth the merit of the senior wrangler. 
 
 Scale of merit among the men who obtain mathematical honours at 
 Cambridge. 
 
 The results of two years are thrown into a single table. 
 
 The total number of marks obtainable in each year was 17,000. 
 
 Numlier of marks obtained by 
 candidates. 
 
 Number of candidates in 
 tlie two years, taken 
 together, wlio obtained 
 those marks. 
 
 Under 500 
 
 24 1 
 
 500 to 1,000 
 1,000 to 1,500 
 1,500 to 2,000 
 2,000 to 2,500 
 2,500 to 3,000 
 3,000 to 3,500 
 
 74 
 38 
 21 
 11 
 8 
 11 
 
 3,500 to 4,000 
 4,000 to 4,500 
 4,500 to 5,000 
 5,000 to 5,500 
 5,500 to 6,000 
 6,000 to 6,500 
 6,500 to 7,000 
 7,000 to 7,500 
 7,500 to 8,000 
 
 5 
 2 
 1 
 3 
 1 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 ' 
 
 20D 
 
 I have included in this table only the first 100 men in each year. The 
 omitted residue is too small to be important. I have omitted it lest, if the 
 precise numbers of honour men were stated, those numbers would have 
 served to identify the years. For reasons already given, I desire to afford 
 no data to serve that purpose. 
 
ACCORDING TO THEIR NATURAL GIFTS 17 
 
 The precise number of marks obtained by the senior 
 wrangler in the more remarkable of these two years was 
 7,634; by the second wrangler in the same year, 4,123 ; 
 and by the lowest man in the list of honours, only 237. 
 Consequently, the senior wrangler obtained nearly twice 
 as many marks as the second wrangler, and more than 
 thirty-two times as many as the lowest man. I have 
 received from another examiner the marks of a year in 
 which the senior wrangler was conspicuously eminent. 
 He obtained 9,422 marks, whilst the second in the same 
 year — whose merits were by no means inferior to those 
 of second wranglers in general — obtained only 5,642. The 
 man at the bottom of the same honour list had only 309 
 marks, or one-thirtieth the number of the senior wrangler. 
 I have some particulars of a fourth very remarkable year, 
 in which the senior wrangler obtained no less than ten 
 times as many marks as the second wrangler, in the 
 " problem paper." Now, I have discussed with practised 
 examiners the question of how far the numbers of marks 
 may be considered as proportionate to the mathematical 
 power of the candidate, and am assured they are strictly 
 proportionate as regards the lower places, but do not afford 
 lull justice to the highest. In other words, the senior 
 wranglers above mentioned had more than thirty, or thirty- 
 twa times the ability of the lowest men on the lists of 
 honours. They would be able to grapple with problems 
 more than thirty-two times as difficult ; or when dealing 
 with subjects of the same difficulty, but intelligible to 
 all, would comprehend them more rapidly in perhaps the 
 square root of that proportion. It is reasonable to expect 
 that marks would do some injustice to the very best men, 
 because a very large part of the time of the examination 
 is taken up by the mechanical labour of writing. When- 
 ever the thought of the candidate outruns his pen, he gains 
 no advantage from his excess of promptitude in conception. 
 I should, however, mention that some of the ablest men 
 have shown their superiority by comparatively little writing. 
 They find their way at once to the root of the difficulty in 
 the problems that are set, and, with a few clean, apposite, 
 powerful strokes, succeed in proving they can overthrow it, 
 
 c 
 
18 CLASSIFICATION OF MEN 
 
 and then they go on to another question. Every word 
 they write tells. Thus, the late Mr. H. Leslie Ellis, who 
 was a brilliant senior wrangler in 1840, and whose name 
 ■is familiar to many generations of Cambridge men as a 
 prodigy of universal genius, did not even remain during 
 the full period in the examination room : his health was 
 weak, and he had to husband his strength. 
 
 The mathematical powers of the last man on the list of 
 honours, which are so low when compared with those of 
 a senior wrangler, are mediocre, or even above mediocrity, 
 when compared with the gifts of Englishmen generally. 
 Though the examination places 100 honour men above 
 him, it puts no less than 300 " poll men " below him. 
 Even if we go so far as to allow that 200 out of the 300 
 refuse to work hard enough to get honours, there will 
 remain 100 who, even if they worked hard, could not 
 get them. Every tutor knows how difficult it is to drive 
 abstract conceptions, even of the simplest kind, into the 
 brains of most people — how feeble and hesitating is their 
 mental grasp — how easily their brains are mazed — ^how 
 incapable they are of precision and soundness of know- 
 ledge. It often occurs to persons familiar with some 
 scientific subject to hear men and women of mediocre gifts 
 relate to one another what they have picked up about it 
 frona some lecture — say at the Royal Institution, where 
 they have sat for an hour listening with delighted atten- 
 tion to an admirably lucid account, illustrated by experi- 
 ments of the most perfect and beautiful character, in all 
 of which they expressed themselves intensely gratified 
 and highly instructed. It is positively painful to hear 
 what they say. Their recollections seem to be a mere 
 chaos of mist and misapprehension, to which some sort of 
 shape and organization has been given by the action of 
 their own pure fancy, altogether alien to what the lecturer 
 intended to convey. The average mental grasp even of 
 what is called a well-educated audience, will be found to 
 be ludicrously small when rigorously tested. 
 
 In stating the differences between man and ma,n, let it 
 not be supposed for a moment that mathematicians are 
 necessarily one-sided in their natural gifts. There are 
 
ACCORDING TO THEIR NATI/R'AI GIFTS 19 
 
 numerous instances of the reverse, of whom the following 
 will be found, as instances of hereditary genius, in the 
 appendix to my chapter on "Science." I would espe- 
 cially name Leibnitz, as being universally gifted ; but 
 Ampke, Arago, Condorcet, and D'Alembert, were all of 
 them very far more than mere mathematicians. Nay, 
 since the range of examination at Cambridge is so ex- 
 tended as to include other subjects besides mathematics, 
 the differences of ability between the highest and lowest 
 of the successful candidates is j'et more glaring than what 
 I have already described. We still find, on the one 
 hand, mediocre men, whose whole energies are absorbed 
 in getting their 237 marks for mathematics ; and, on the 
 other hand, some few senior wranglers who are at the same 
 time high classical scholars and much more besides. 
 Cambridge has afforded such instances. Its lists of 
 classical honours are comparatively of recent date, but 
 other evidence is obtainable from earlier times of their 
 occurrence. Thus, Dr. George Butler, the Head Master 
 of Harrow for very many years, including the period 
 when Byron was a schoolboy (father of the present Head 
 Master, and of other sons, two of whom are also head 
 masters of great public schools), must have obtained 
 that classical office on account of his eminent classical 
 ability ; but Dr. Butler was also senior wrangler in 1794, 
 the year when Lord Chancellor Lyndhurst was second. 
 Both Dr. Kaye, the late Bishop of Lincoln, and Sir E. 
 Alderson, the late judge, were the senior wranglers and 
 the first classical prizemen of their respective years. 
 Since 1824, when the classical tripos was first established, 
 the late Mr. Goulburn (son of the Right Hon. H. Goulburn, 
 Chancellor of the Exchequer) was second wrangler in 1835, 
 and senior classic of the same year. But in more recent 
 times, the necessary labour of preparation, in order to 
 acquire the highest mathematical places, has become so 
 enormous that there has been a wider differentiation of 
 studies. There is no longer iime for a man to acquire 
 the necessary knowledge to succeed to the first place in 
 more than one subject. There are, therefore, no instances 
 of a man being absolutely first in both examinations, but 
 
 c 2 
 
20 CLASSIFICATION OF MEN 
 
 a few can be found of high eminence in both classics and 
 mathematics, as a reference to the lists published in the 
 "Cambridge Calendar" will show. The best of these 
 more recent degrees appears to be that of Dr. Barry, late 
 Principal of Cheltenham, and now Principal of King's 
 College, London (the son of the eminent architect, Sir 
 Charles Barry, and brother of Mr. Edward Barry, who 
 succeeded his father as architect). He was fourth 
 wrangler and seventh classic of his year. 
 
 In whatever way we may test ability, we arrive at 
 equally enormous intellectual differences. Lord Macaulay 
 {see under "Literature" for his remarkable kinships) 
 had one of the most tenacious of memories. He was able 
 to recall many pages of hundreds of volumes by various 
 authors, which he had acquired by simply reading them 
 over. An average man could not certainly carry in his 
 memory one thirty-second — ay, or one hundredth — part as 
 much as Lord Macaulay. The father of Seneca had one of 
 the greatest memories on record in ancient times {see 
 under " LITERATURE " for his kinships). Person, the Greek 
 scholar, was remarkable for this gift, and, I may add, the 
 "Person memory" was hereditary in that family. In 
 statesmanship, generalship, literature, science, poetry, art, 
 just the same enormous differences are found between 
 man and man ; and numerous instances recorded in this 
 book, will show in how small degree, eminence, either in 
 these or any other class of intellectual powers, can be con- 
 sidered as due to purely special powers. They are rather 
 to be considered in those instances as the result of con- 
 centrated efforts, made by men who are widely gifted. 
 People lay too much stress on apparent specialities, think- 
 ing over-rashly that, because a man is devoted to some 
 particular pursuit, he could not possibly have succeeded in 
 anything else. They might just as well say that, because a 
 youth had fallen desperately in love with a brunette, he could 
 not possibly have fallen in love with a blonde. He may or 
 may not have more natural liking for the former type of 
 beauty than the latter, but it is as probable as not that 
 the affair was mainly or wholly due to a general amorous- 
 ness of disposition. It is just the same with special 
 
ACCORDING TO THEIR NATURAL GIFTS 21 
 
 pursuits. A gifted man is often capricious and fickle 
 before he selects his occupation, but when it has been 
 chosen, he devotes himself to it with a truly passionate 
 ardour. After a man of genius has selected his hobby, and 
 so adapted himself to it as to seem unfitted for any other 
 occupation in life, and to be possessed of but one special 
 aptitude, I often notice, with admiration, how well he 
 bears himself when circumstances suddenly thrust him into 
 a strange position. He will display an insight into new con- 
 ditions, and a power of dealing with them, with which even 
 his most intimate friends were unprepared to accredit him. 
 Many a presumptuous fool has mistaken indifference and 
 neglect for incapacity ; and in trying to throw a man of 
 genius on ground where he was unprepared for attack, has 
 himself received a most severe and unexpected fall. I am 
 sure that no one who has had the privilege of mixing in 
 the society of the abler men of any great capital, or who 
 is acquainted with the biographies of the heroes of history, 
 can doubt the existence of grand human animals, of natures 
 pre-eminently noble, of individuals born to be kings of 
 men. I have been conscious of no slight misgiving that I 
 was committing a kind of sacrilege whenever, in the 
 preparation of materials for this book, I had occasion to 
 take the measurement of modern intellects vastly superior 
 to my own, or to criticise the genius of the most magni- 
 ficent historical specimens of our race. It was a process 
 that constantly recalled to me a once familiar sentiment 
 in bygone days of African travel, when I used to take 
 altitudes of the huge cliffs that domineered above me as 
 I travelled along their bases, or to map the mountainous 
 landmarks of unvisited tribes, that loomed in faint grandeur 
 beyond ray actual horizon. 
 
 I have not cared to occupy myself much with 
 people whose gifts are below the average, but they 
 would be an interesting study. The number of idiots 
 and imbeciles among, the twenty million inhabitants of 
 England and Wales is approximately estimated at 
 50,000, or as 1 in 400. Dr. Seguin, a great French 
 authority on these matters, states that more than thirty 
 per cent, of idiots and imbeciles, put under suitable 
 
22 CLASSIFICATION OF MEN 
 
 instruction, have been taught to conform to social and 
 moral law, and rendered capable of order, of good feel- 
 ing, and of working like the third of an average man. 
 He says that more than forty per cent, have become 
 capable of the ordinary transactions- of life, under friendly 
 control ; of understanding moral and social abstractions, 
 and of working like two-thirds of a man. And, lastly, 
 that from twenty-five to thirty per cent, come nearer 
 and nearer to the standard of manhood, till some of 
 them will defy the scrutiny of good judges, when com- 
 pared with ordinary young men and women. In the 
 order next above idiots and imbeciles are a large number 
 of milder cases scattered among private families and 
 kept out of sight, the existence of whom is, however, 
 well known to relatives and friends ; they are too silly 
 to take a part in general society, but are easily amused 
 with . some trivial, harmless occupation. Then comes 
 a class of whom the Lord- Dundreary of the famous play- 
 may be considered a representative; and so, proceeding 
 through successive grades, we gradually ascend to 
 mediocrity. I know two good ■ instances - of hereditary 
 silliness short of imbecility, and have reason to believe 
 I could easily obtain a large number of similar facts. 
 
 To conclude, the range of mental power between — 
 I will not say the highest Caucasian and the lowest 
 savage — but between the greatest and least of English 
 intellects, is enormous. There is a continuity of natural 
 ability reaching from one knows not what height, and 
 descending to one can hardly say what depth. I propose 
 in this chapter to range men according to their natural 
 abilities, putting them into classes separated by equal 
 degrees of merit, and to show the relative number of 
 individuals included in the several classes. Perhaps some 
 person might be inclined to make an offhand guess 
 that the number of men included in the several classes 
 would be pretty equal. If he thinks so, I can assure him 
 he is most egregiously mistaken. 
 
 The method I shall employ . for discovering all this 
 is an application of the very curious theoretical law 
 of " deviation from an average." First, I will explain. 
 
ACCORDING TO THEIR NATURAL GIFTS 23 
 
 the law, and then"! will show that the production of 
 natural intellectual gifts comes justly within its scope. 
 
 The law is an exceedingly general one. M. Quetelet, 
 the Astronomer-Royal of Belgium, and the greatest 
 authority on vital and social statistics, has largely used 
 it in his inquiries. He has also constructed numerical 
 tables, by which the necessary calculations can be easily 
 made, whenever it is desired to have recourse to the 
 law. Those who wish to learn more than I have space 
 to relate, should consult his work, which is a very read- 
 able octavo volume, and deserves to be far better known 
 to statisticians than it appears to be. Its title is " Letters 
 on Probabilities," translated by Downes. Layton and Co. 
 London : 1849. 
 
 So much has been published in recent years about 
 statistical deductions, that I am sure the reader will 
 be prepared to assent freely to the following hypothetical 
 case: — Suppose a. large island inhabited by a single 
 race, who intermarried freely, and who had lived for 
 many generations under constant conditions ; then the 
 average height of the male adults of that population 
 would xmdoubtedly be the same year after year. Also 
 — still arguing from the experience of modern statistics, 
 which are found to give constant results in far less 
 carefully-guarded examples — we should undoubtedly find, 
 year after year, the same proportion maintained between 
 the number of men of different heights. I mean, if 
 the average stature was found to be sixty-six inches, 
 and if it was also found in any one year that 100 per 
 million exceeded seventy-eight inches, the same proportion 
 of 100 per million would be closely maintained in all other 
 years. An equal constancy of proportion would be main- 
 tained between any other limits of height we pleased to 
 specify, as between seventy-one and seventy-two inches ; be- 
 tween seventy-two and seventy-three inches ; and so on. 
 Statistical experiences are so invariably confirmatory of 
 what I have stated would probably be the case, as to 
 make it unnecessary to describe analogous instances. 
 Now, at this point, the law of deviation from an average 
 steps in. It shows that the number per million whose 
 
24 
 
 CLASSIFICATION OF MEN 
 
 heights range between seventy-one and seventy-two inches 
 (or between any other limits we please to name) can 
 be predicted from the previous datum of the average, 
 and of any one other fact, such as that of 100 per 
 million exceeding seventy-eight inches. 
 
 The appended diagram will make this more intelligible. 
 Suppose a million of the men to stand in turns, with their 
 
 backs against a vertical 
 
 JtR£ABOVS THIS LIKE 
 
 Scale 
 
 of 
 feet 
 
 AVER/H:£ HEIGHT 
 
 ISO PER MILLION 
 
 board of sufficient height, 
 and their heights to be 
 dotted off upon it. The 
 board would then present 
 the appearance shown in 
 the diagram. The line 
 of average height is that 
 jooRERmLLim _ which divides the dots 
 
 into two equal parts, and 
 stands, in the case we 
 have assumed, at the 
 height of sixty-six inches. 
 M,EBEL<m-maLim The dots wiU be found to 
 
 be ranged so symmetric- 
 ally on either side of the 
 line of average, that the 
 lower half of the diagram 
 will be almost a precise 
 reflection of the upper. 
 Next, let a hundred dots 
 be counted from above 
 downwards, and let a line 
 be drawn below them. 
 According to the con- 
 ditions, this line will stand at the height of seventy-eight 
 inches. Using the data afforded by these two lines, it is 
 possible, by the help of the law of deviation from an 
 average, to reproduce, with extraordinary closeness, the 
 entire system of dots on the board. 
 
 M. Quetelet gives tables in which the uppermost line, 
 instead of cutting off 100 in a million, cuts off only one in 
 a million. He divides the intervals between that line and 
 
ACCORDING TO THEIK NATURAL GIFTS 25 
 
 the line of average, into eighty equal divisions, and gives 
 the mimber of dots that fall within each of those divisions. 
 It is easy, by the help of his tables, to calculate what 
 would occur under any other system of classification we 
 pleased to adopt. 
 
 This law of deviation from an average is perfectly general 
 in its application. Thus, if the marks had been made by 
 bullets fired at a horizontal line stretched in front of the 
 target, they would have been distributed according to the 
 same law. Wherever there is a large number of similar 
 events, each due to the resultant influences of the same 
 variable conditions, two effects will follow. First, the 
 average value of those events will be constant ; and, 
 secondly, the deviations of the several events from the 
 average, will be governed by this law (which is, in prin- 
 ciple, the same as that which governs runs of luck at a 
 gaming-table). 
 
 The nature of the conditions affecting the several events 
 must, I say, be the same. It clearly would not be proper 
 to combine the heights of men belonging to two dissimilar 
 races, in the expectation that the compound results would 
 be governed by the same constants. A union of two dis- 
 similar systems of dots would produce the same kind of 
 Confusion as if half the bullets fired at a target had been 
 directed to one mark, and the other half to another mark. 
 Nay, an examination of the dots would show to a person, 
 ignorant of what had occurred, that such had been the 
 case, and it would be possible, by aid of the law, to dis- 
 entangle two or any moderate number of superimposed 
 series of marks. The law may, therefore, be used as a 
 most trustworthy criterion, whether or no the events of 
 which an average has been taken, are due to the same or 
 to dissimilar classes of conditions. 
 
 I selected the hypothetical case of a race of men living 
 on an island and freely intermarrying, to ensure the con- 
 ditions under which they were all supposed to live, being 
 uniform in character. It will now be my aim to show there 
 is sufficient uniformity in the inhabitants of the British 
 Isles to bring them fairly within the grasp of this law. 
 
 For this purpose, I first call attention to an example 
 
26 
 
 CLASSIFICATION OF MEN 
 
 given in Quetelet's book. It is of the measurements of the 
 circumferences of the chests of a large number of Scotch 
 soldiers. The Scotch are by no means a strictly uniform 
 race, nor are they exposed to identical conditions. They 
 are a mixture of Celts, Danes, Anglo-Saxons, and others, 
 in various proportions, the Highlanders being almost purely 
 Celts. On the other hand, these races, though diverse in 
 origin, are not very dissimilar in character. Consequently, 
 it will be found that their deviations from the average 
 follow theoretical computations with remarkable. accuracy. 
 The instance is as follows. M. Quetelet obtained his facts 
 from the thirteenth volume of the Edinburgh Medical 
 Journal, where the measurements are given in respect to 
 5,738 soldiers, the results being grouped in order of mag- 
 nitude, proceeding by differences of one inch. Professor 
 Quetelet compares these results with those that his tables 
 give, and here is the result. The marvellous accordance 
 between fact and' theory must strike the i^ost unpractised 
 eye. I should say that, for the sake of convenience, both 
 the measurements and calculations have been reduced to 
 per thousandths : — 
 
 
 Number of 
 
 Number of 
 
 
 Number of 
 
 Number of 
 
 the chest in 
 
 1,000 hy 
 
 1,000 by 
 
 the chest in 
 
 1,000 by 
 
 men per 
 1,000 by 
 
 
 experience. 
 
 calculation. 
 
 
 experience. 
 
 calculation. 
 
 33 
 
 5 
 
 7 
 
 41 
 
 1,628 
 
 - 1,675 
 
 34 
 
 31 
 
 29 
 
 42 
 
 1,148 
 
 1,096 
 
 35 
 
 141 
 
 110 
 
 43 
 
 . 645 
 
 560 
 
 36 
 
 322 
 
 323 
 
 44 
 
 160 
 
 221 
 
 37 
 
 732 
 
 732 
 
 45 
 
 87 
 
 69 
 
 38 
 
 1,305 
 
 1,333 
 
 46 
 
 38 
 
 16 
 
 39 
 
 1,867 
 
 1,838 
 
 47 
 
 7 
 
 3 
 
 40 
 
 1,882 
 
 1,987 
 
 48 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 I will now take a case where there is a grea^ter dis- 
 similarity in the elements of which the average has been 
 taken. It is the height of 100,000 French conscripts. 
 There is fully as much variety in the French as in the 
 English, for it is not very many generations since France 
 
ACCORDINCf-TO ;THEIR NATURAL GIFTS 
 
 ?7 
 
 was 'divided into, completely independent l^iiigdoms. 
 Among its peculiar races are those of Normandy, Brit- 
 tany, Alsatia, Provence, Bearne, Auvergne — each with 
 their special characteristics ; yet the following table shows 
 a most striking agreement between the results of experience 
 compared with those derived by calculation, from a purely 
 theoretical hypothesis : — 
 
 Height of Men. 
 
 Number of JVIen. 
 
 Measured. 
 
 Calculaterl. 
 
 Inches. 
 
 Under 61-8 
 61-8 to 62-9 
 62-9 to 63-9 
 63-9 to 65-0 
 65-0 to 66-1 
 66-1 to 67-1 
 67-1 to 68-2 
 68-2 to 69-3 
 Above 69-3 
 
 28,620 
 
 11,580 
 
 13,990 
 
 ' 14,410 
 
 11,410 
 
 8,780 
 
 5,530 
 
 3,190 
 
 2,490 
 
 26,345 
 13,182 
 14,502 
 13,982 
 11,803 
 - 8,725 
 - 5,527 
 3,187 
 2,645 
 
 The gi-eatest differences are in the lowest ranks. They 
 include the men who were rejected from being too short 
 for the army. M. Quetelet boldly ascribes these differ- 
 ences to the effect of fraudulent returns. It certainly 
 seems that men have been improperly taken out of the 
 second rank and put into the first, in order to exempt 
 them from service. Be this as it may, the coincidence of 
 fact with theory is, in this instance also, quite close enough 
 to serve my purpose. 
 
 I argue from the results obtained from Frenchmen and 
 from Scotchmen, that, if we had measurements of the 
 adult males in the British Isles, we should find those 
 measurements to range in close accordance with the law 
 of deviation from an average, although our population is 
 as much mingled as I described that of Scotland to have 
 been, and although Ireland is mainly peopled with Celts. 
 
28 CLASSIFICATION" OF MEN 
 
 Now, if this be the case with stature, then it will be 
 true as regards every other physical feature — as circum- 
 ference of head, size of brain, weight of grey matter, 
 number of brain fibres, &c. ; and thence, by a step on 
 which no physiologist will hesitate, as regards mental 
 capacity. 
 
 This is what I am driving at — that analogy clearly shows 
 there must be a fairly constant average mental capacity in 
 the inhabitants of the British Isles, and that the deviations 
 from that average — upwards towards genius, and down- 
 wards towards stupidity — must follow the law that governs 
 deviations from all true averages. 
 
 I have, however, done somewhat more than rely on 
 analogy, by discussing the results of those examinations in 
 which the candidates had been derived from the same 
 classes. Most persons have noticed the lists of successful 
 competitors for various public appointments that are 
 published from time to time in the newspapers, with the 
 marks gained by each candidate attached to his name. 
 These lists contain far too few names to fall into such 
 beautiful accordance with theory, as was the case with the 
 Scotch soldiers. There are rarely more than 100 names 
 in any one of these examinations, while the chests of 
 no less than 5,700 Scotchnien were measured. I cannot 
 justly combine the marks of several independent exami- 
 nations into one fagot, for I understand that different 
 examiners are apt to have different figures of merit ; so 
 each examination was analysed separately. The following 
 is a calculation I made on the examination last before me ; 
 it will do as well as any other. It was for admission into 
 the Royal Military CoJlege at Sandhurst, December 1868. 
 The marks obtained were clustered most thickly about 
 3,000, so I take that number as representing the average 
 ability of the candidates. From this datum, and from the 
 fact that no candidate obtained more than 6,500 marks, 
 I computed the column B in the following table, by 
 the help of Quetelet's numbers. It will be seen that 
 column B accords with column A quite as closely as the 
 small number of persons examined could have led us to 
 expect. 
 
ACCORDING TO THEIR NATURAL GIFTS 
 
 29 
 
 
 Number of Candidates who obtained 
 
 
 those marks. 
 
 
 Number of marks obtained 
 
 
 
 by the Candidates. 
 
 
 
 
 
 A. 
 
 
 B. 
 
 
 According to fact. 
 
 According 
 
 ! to theory. 
 
 6,500 and above 
 
 \ 
 
 
 
 
 5,800 to 6,500 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 5,100 to 5,800 
 
 3 
 
 
 ■ 5 
 
 
 4,400 to 5,100 
 
 6 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 3,700 to 4,400 
 
 11 
 
 ^3 
 
 13 
 
 72 
 
 3,000 to 3,700 
 
 22 
 
 
 16 
 
 
 2,300 to 3,000 
 
 22 
 
 
 16 
 
 
 1,600 to 2,300 
 
 8 ) 
 
 
 13 j 
 
 
 1,100 to 1,600 C 
 
 Either did not 
 
 1 ^ 
 
 
 400 to 1,100 J 
 
 venture to com- 
 
 \ 5 
 
 
 Below 400 [ 
 
 pete, or were 
 plucked. 
 
 J ^ 
 
 
 The symmetry of the descending branch has been rudely 
 spoilt by the conditions stated at the foot of column A. 
 There is, therefore, little room for doubt, if everybody in 
 England had to work up some subject and then to pass 
 before examiners who employed similar figures of merit, 
 that their marks would be found to range, according to the 
 law of deviation from an average, just as rigorously as the 
 heights of French conscripts, or the circumferences of the 
 chests of Scotch soldiers. 
 
 The number of grades into which we may divide ability 
 is purely a matter of option. We may consult our con- 
 venience by sorting Enghshmen into a few large classes, or 
 into many small ones. I will select a system of classi- 
 fication that shall be easily comparable with the numbers 
 of eminent men, as determined in the previous chapter. 
 We have seen that 250 men per million become eminent ; 
 accordingly, I have so contrived the classes in the following 
 table that the two highest, F and G, together with X 
 (which includes all cases beyond G, and which are 
 unclassed), shall amount to about that number — namely 
 to 248 per million : — 
 
30 
 
 CLASSlriCATION OF MEN 
 
 CLASSIFICATION OF MEN 
 
 ACCORDING TO 
 
 THBIB 
 
 NATURAL GIFTS. 
 
 Grades of natural 
 ability, separated 
 
 Numbers of men comprised in the several gi'ades of natural ability, whether 
 in respect to tlieii- general powers, or to special aptitudes. 
 
 
 
 Propor- 
 tionate, 
 viz. 
 one in 
 
 In each 
 
 million 
 
 of the 
 
 same age. 
 
 In total male population of tlie United Kingdom, say 
 15 millions, of the'underjnentioned ages ; — 
 
 Below 
 average. 
 
 Above 
 average. 
 
 20—30 
 
 30—40 
 
 40—50 
 
 60—60 
 
 63-70 
 
 70—80 
 
 77,000 
 
 48,000 
 
 19,000 
 
 4,700 
 
 729 
 
 70 
 
 4 
 
 a 
 1) 
 c 
 d 
 e 
 f 
 g 
 
 X 
 
 all grades 
 
 below 
 
 g 
 
 A 
 B 
 
 D 
 E 
 F 
 G 
 
 X 
 
 all grades 
 
 above 
 
 G 
 
 4 
 
 6 
 
 16 
 
 64 
 : 413 
 4,800 
 
 7d,ooo 
 
 1,000,000 
 
 256,791 
 
 161,279 
 
 6?, 663 
 
 15,696 
 
 2,423 
 
 1 233 
 
 : 14 
 
 1 
 
 661,000 
 
 409,000 
 
 161,000 
 
 89,800 
 
 6,100 
 
 690 
 
 36 
 
 3 
 
 496,000 
 
 312,000 
 
 123,000 
 
 30,300 
 
 4,700 
 
 460 
 
 27 
 
 2 
 
 891,000 
 
 246,000 
 
 97,000 
 
 23,900 
 
 3,700 
 
 355 
 
 21 
 
 . 2 
 
 761,000 
 1,522,000 
 
 268,000 
 
 168,000 
 
 66,000 
 
 16,400 
 
 2,620 
 
 243 
 
 16 
 
 2 
 
 171,000 
 
 107,000 
 
 42,000 
 
 10,400 
 
 1,600 
 
 185 
 
 9 
 
 On either side of ■ 
 Total, both sides 
 
 iverage . 
 
 500,000 
 1,000,000 
 
 1,268,000 
 2,636,000 
 
 964,000 
 1,928,000 
 
 621,000 
 1,042,000 
 
 332,000 
 664,000 
 
 149,000 
 298,000 
 
 The proportions of men living at ditferent ages are calculated from the 
 proportions that are true for England and Wales. (Gensusl861, Appendix, 
 p. 107.) 
 
 Example. — The class F contains 1 in every 4,300 men. In other words, 
 there are 233 of that class in each million of men. The same is true of 
 class f. In the whole United Kingdom there are 590 men of class F (and 
 the same numher of f) hetween the ages of 20 and 30 ; 450 between the 
 ages of 30 and 40 ; and so on. 
 
 It will, I trust, be clearly understood that the numbers 
 of men in the several classes in my table depend on no 
 uncertain hypothesis. They are determined by the assured 
 law of deviations from an average. It is an absolute fact 
 that if we pick out of each million the one man who is 
 naturally the ablest, and also the one man who is the 
 most stupid, and divide the remaining 999,998 men into 
 fourteen classes, the average ability in each being separated 
 from that of its neighbours by rqual grades, then ■ the 
 numbers in each of those classes will, on the average of 
 many millions, be as is stated in the table. The table may 
 
ACCORDING TO THEIR NATURAL GIFTS 31 
 
 be applied to special, just as truly as to general ability. 
 It would be true for every examination that brought out 
 natural gifts, whether held in painting, in music, or in 
 statesmanship. The proportions between the different 
 classes would be identical in all these cases, although the 
 classes would be made up of different individuals, according 
 as the examination differed in its purport. 
 
 It will be seen that more than half of each million 
 is contained in the two mediocre classes a and A ; the 
 four mediocre classes a, b, A, B, contain more than four- 
 fifths, and the six mediocre classes more than nineteen- 
 twentieths of the entire population. Thus, the rarity of 
 commanding ability, and the vast abundance of mediocrity, 
 is no accident, but follows of necessity, from the very nature 
 of these things. 
 
 The meaning of the word " mediocrity " admits of little 
 doubt. It defines the standard of intellectual power found 
 in rnost provincial gatherings, because the attractions of a 
 more stirring life in the metropolis and elsewhere, are a;pt 
 to draw away the abler classes of men, and the silly and 
 the imbecile do not take a part in the gatherings. Hence, 
 the residuum that forms the bulk of the general society 
 of small provincial places, is commonly very pure in its 
 mediocrity. 
 
 The class C possesses abilities a trifle higher than those 
 commonly possessed by the foreman of an ordinary jury. 
 D includes the mass of men who obtain the ordinary 
 prizes of life. E is a stage higher. Then we reach F, 
 the lowest of those yet superior classes of intellect, with 
 which this volume is chiefly concerned. 
 
 On descending the scale, we find by the time we have 
 reached f, that we are already among the idiots and im- 
 beciles. We have seen in p. 21, that there are 400 idiots 
 and imbeciles, to every million of persons living in this 
 country ; but that 30 per cent, of their number, appear to 
 be light cases, to whom the name of idiot is inappropriate. 
 There will remain 280 true idiots and imbeciles, to every 
 million of our population. This ratio coincides very closely 
 with the requirements of class f. No doubt a certain pro- 
 portion of them are idiotic owing to some fortuitous cause, 
 
32 CLASSIFICATION ACCOKDING TO GIFTS ' 
 
 which may interfere with the working of a naturally good 
 brain, much as a bit of dirt may cause a first-rate chrono- 
 meter to keep worse time than an ordinary watch. But 
 I presume, from the usual smallness of head and absence 
 of disease among these persons, that the proportion of 
 accidental idiots cannot be very large. 
 
 Hence we arrive at the undeniable, but unexpected 
 conclusion, that eminently gifted men are raised as much 
 above mediocrity as idiots are depressed below it ; a fact 
 that is calculated to considerably enlarge our ideas of the 
 enormous differences of intellectual gifts between man 
 and man. 
 
 I presume the class F of dogs, and others of the more 
 intelligent sort of animals, is nearly commensurate with 
 the f of the human race, in respect to meniory and powers 
 of reason. Certainly the class G of such animals is far 
 superior to the g of humankind. 
 
COMPARISON OF THE TWO CLASSIFICATIONS 
 
 COMPARISON OF THE TWO 
 CLASSIFICATIONS. 
 
 Is reputation a fair test of natural ability ? It is the only 
 one I can employ — am I justified in using it ? How much 
 of a man's success is due to his opportunities, how much 
 to his natural power of intellect ? 
 
 This is a very old question, on which a great many 
 commonplaces have been uttered that need not be repeated 
 here. I will confine myself to a few considerations, such 
 as seem to me amply adequate to prove what is wanted 
 for my argument. 
 
 Let it clearly be borne in mind, what I mean by repu- 
 tation and ability. By reputation, I mean the opinion oi 
 contemporaries, revised by posterity — the favourable result 
 of a critical analysis of each man's character, by many 
 biographers. I do not mean high social or official position, 
 nor such as is implied by being the mere lion of a London 
 season ; but I speak of the reputation of a leader of 
 opinion, of an originator, of a man to whom the world 
 deliberately acknowledges itself largely indebted. 
 
 By natural ability, I mean those qualities of intellect 
 and disposition, which urge and qualify a man to perform 
 acts that lead to reputation. I do not mean capacity 
 without zeal, nor zeal without capacity, nor even a com- 
 bination of both of them, without an adequate power of 
 doing a great deal of very laborious work. But I mean 
 a nature which, when left to itself, will, urged by an in- 
 herent stimulus, climb the path that leads to eminence, 
 and has strength to reach the summit — one which, if 
 hindered or thwarted, will fret and strive until the hin- 
 
 D 
 
34 COMPARISON OF THE 
 
 drance is overcome, and it is again free to follow its 
 labour-loving instinct. It is almost a contradiction in 
 terms, to doubt that such men will generally become emi- 
 nent. On the other hand, there is plenty of evidence in 
 this volume to show that few have won high reputations 
 without possessing these peculiar gifts. It follows that 
 the men who achieve eminence, and those who are naturally 
 capable, are, to a large extent, identical. 
 
 The particular meaning in which I employ the word 
 ability, does not restrict my argument from a wider appli- 
 cation ; for, if I succeed in showing — as I undoubtedly 
 shall do — that the concrete triple event, of ability combined 
 with zeal and with capacity for hard labour, is inherited, 
 much more will there be justification for believing that any 
 one of its three elements, whether it be ability, or zeal, or 
 capacity for labour, is similarly a gift of inheritance. 
 
 I believe, and shall do my best to show, that, if the 
 " eminent " men of any period, had been changelings when 
 babies, a very fair proportion of those who survived and 
 retained their health up to fifty years of age, would, not- 
 withstanding their altered circumstances have equally 
 risen to eminence. Thus — to take a strong case — it is 
 incredible that any combination of circumstances, could 
 have repressed Lord Brougham to the level of undis- 
 tinguished mediocrity. 
 
 The arguments on which I rely are as follow. I will 
 limit their application for the present to men of the pen 
 and to artists. First, it is a fact, that numbers of men rise, 
 before they are middle-aged, from the humbler ranks of 
 life to that worldly position, in which it is of no importance 
 to their future career, how their youth has been passed. 
 They have overcome their hindrances, and thus start fair 
 with others more fortunately reared, in the subsequent race 
 of life. A boy who is to be carefully educated is sent to 
 a good school, where he confessedly acquires little useful 
 information, but where he is taught the art of learning. 
 The man of whom I have been speaking has contrived 
 to acquire the same art in a school of adversity. Both 
 stand on equal terms, when they have reached mature life. 
 They compete for the same prizes, measure their strength 
 by efforts in the same direction, and their relative successes 
 
TWO CLASSIFICATIONS 35 
 
 are thenceforward due to their relative natural gifts. There 
 are many such men in the " eminent " class, as biographies 
 abundantly show. Now, if the hindrances to success were 
 very great, we should expect all who surmounted them 
 to be prodigies of genius. The hindrances would form a 
 system of natural selection, by repressing all whose gifts 
 were below a certain very high level. But what is the 
 case ? We find very many who have risen from the ranks, 
 who are by no means prodigies of genius ; many who have 
 no claim to " eminence," who have risen easily in spite of 
 all obstacles. The hindrances vmdoubtedly form a system 
 of natural selection that represses mediocre men, and even 
 men of pretty fair powers — in short, the classes below D ; 
 but many of D succeed, a great many of E, aad I believe 
 a very large majority of those above. 
 
 If a man is gifted with vast intellectual ability, eagerness 
 to work, and power of working, I cannot comprehend how 
 such a man should be repressed. The world is always 
 tormented with difficulties waiting to be solved — struggling 
 with ideas and feelings, to which it can give no adequate 
 expression. If, then, there exists a man capable of solving 
 those difficulties, or of giving a voice to those pent-up 
 feelings, he is sure to be welcomed with universal accla- 
 mation. We may almost say that he has only to put his 
 pen to paper, and the thing is done. I am here speaking 
 of the very first-class men — prodigies — one in a million, or 
 one in ten millions, of whom numbers will be found described 
 in this volume, as specimens of hereditary genius. 
 
 Another argument to prove, that the hindrances of 
 English social life, are not effectual in repressing high 
 ability is, that the number of eminent men in England, 
 is as great as in other countries where fewer hindrances 
 exist. Culture is far more widely spread in America, 
 than with us, and the education of their middle and 
 lower classes far more advanced ; but, for all that, 
 America most certainly does not beat us in first-class 
 works of literature, philosophy, or art. The higher kind 
 of books, even of the most modern date, read in America, 
 are principally the work of Englishmen. The Americans 
 have an immense amount of the newspaper-article-writer, 
 or of the member-of-congress stamp of ability; but the 
 
 D 2 
 
36 COMPARISON OF THE 
 
 number of their really eminent authors is more limited 
 even than with us. I argue that, if the hindrances to the 
 rise of genius, were removed from English society as com- 
 pletely as they have been removed from that of America, 
 we should not become materially richer in highly eminent 
 men. 
 
 People seem to have the idea that the way to eminence 
 is one of great self-denial, from which there are hourly 
 temptations to diverge : in which a man can be kept in 
 his boyhood, only by a schoolmaster's severity or a jaarent's 
 incessant watchfulness, and in after life by the attrac- 
 tions of fortunate friendships and other favourable cir- 
 cumstances. This is true enough of the great majority 
 of men, but it is simply not true of the generality of 
 those who have gained great reputations. Such men, 
 biographies show to be haunted and driven by an in- 
 cessant instinctive craving for intellectual work. If 
 forcibly withdrawn from the path that leads towards 
 eminence, they will find their way back to it, as surely 
 as a lover to his mistress. They do not work for the 
 sake of eminence, but to satisfy a natural craving for 
 brain work, just as athletes cannot endure repose on 
 account of their muscular irritability, which insists upon 
 exercise. It is very unhkely that any conjunction of cir- 
 cumstances, should supply a stimulus to brain work, 
 commensurate with what these men carry in their own 
 constitutions. The action of external stimuli must be 
 uncertain and intermittent, owing to their very nature ; 
 the disposition abides. It keeps a man ever employed — 
 now wrestling with his difficulties, now brooding over his 
 immature ideas — and renders him a quick and eager 
 listener to innumerable, almost inaudible teachings, that 
 others less keenly on the watch, are sure to miss. 
 
 These considerations lead to my third argument. I have 
 shown that social hindrances cannot impede men of high 
 ability, from becoming eminent. I shall now maintain that 
 social advantages are incompetent to give that status to 
 a man of moderate ability. It would be easy to point 
 out several men of fair capacity, who have been pushed 
 forward by all kinds of help, who are ambitious, and exert 
 themselves to the utmost, but who completely fail in 
 
TWO CLASSIFICATIONS 37 
 
 attaining eminence. If great peers, they may be lord- 
 lieutenants of counties; if they belong to great county 
 families, they may become influential members of parlia- 
 ment and local notabilities. When they die, they leave a 
 blank for a while in a large circle, but there is no West- 
 minster Abbey and no public mourning for them^ — perhaps 
 barely a biographical notice in the columns of the daily 
 papers. 
 
 It is difficult to specify two large classes of men, with 
 equal social advantages, in one of which they have high 
 hereditary gifts, while in the other they have not. I must 
 not compare the sons of eminent men with those of non- 
 eminent, because much which I should ascribe to breed, 
 others might ascribe to parental encouragement and ex- 
 ample. Therefore, I will compare the sons of eminent 
 men with the adopted sons of Popes and other dignitaries 
 of the Roman Catholic Church. The practice of nepotism 
 among ecclesiastics is universal. It consists in their giving 
 those social helps to a nephew, or other more distant 
 relative, that ordinary people give to their children. 
 Now, I shall show abundantly in the course of this book, 
 that the nephew of an eminent m.an has far less chance 
 of becoming eminent than a son, and that a more remote 
 kinsman has far less chance than a nephew. We may 
 therefore make a very fair comparison, for the purposes of 
 my argument, between the success of the sons of eminent 
 men and that of the nephews or more distant relatives, 
 who stand in the place of sons to the high unmarried 
 ecclesiastics of the Romish Church. If social help is really 
 of the highest importance, the nephews of the Popes will 
 attain eminence as frequently, or nearly so, as the sons of 
 other eminent men ; otherwise, they will not. 
 
 Are, then, the nephews, &c., of the Popes, on the whole, 
 as highly distinguished as are the sons of other equally 
 eminent men ? I answer, decidedly not. There have been 
 a few Popes who were offshoots of illustrious races, such as 
 that of the Medici, but in the enormous majority of cases 
 the Pope is the ablest member of his family. I do not 
 profess to have worked up the kinships of the Italians 
 with any especial care, but I have seen amply enough of 
 them, to justify me in saying that the individuals whose 
 
38 COMPARISON OF THE 
 
 advancement has been due to nepotism, are curiously un- 
 distinguished. The very common combination of an able 
 son and an eminent parent, is not matched, in the case 
 of high Romish ecclesiastics, by an eminent nephew and 
 an eminent uncle. The social helps are the same, but 
 hereditary gifts are wanting in the latter case. 
 
 To recapitulate : I have endeavoured to show in respect 
 to literary and artistic eminence — 
 
 1. That men who are gifted with high abilities — even 
 men of class E — easily rise through all the obstacles caused 
 by inferiority of social rank. 
 
 2. Countries where there are fewer hindrances than in 
 England, to a poor man rising in life, produce a much 
 larger proportion of persons of culture, but not of what I 
 call eminent men. 
 
 3. Men who are largely aided by social advantages, are 
 unable to achieve eminence, unless they are endowed with 
 high natural gifts. 
 
 It may be well to add a few supplementary, remarks on 
 the small effects of a good education on a mind of the 
 highest order. A youth of abilities G, and X, is almost 
 independent of ordinary school education. He does not 
 want a master continually at his elbow to explain diffi- 
 culties and select suitable lessons. On the contrary, he is 
 receptive at every pore. He learns from passing hints, 
 with a quickness and thoroughness that others cannot 
 comprehend. He is omnivorous of intellectual work, 
 devouring a vast deal more than he can utilize, but ex- 
 tracting a small percentage of nutriment, that makes, 
 in the aggregate, an enormous supply. The best care 
 that a master can take of such a boy is to leave him 
 alone, just directing a little here and there, and checking 
 desultory tendencies. 
 
 It is a mere accident if a man is placed in his youth in 
 the profession for which he has the most special vocation. 
 It will consequently be remarked in my short biographical 
 notices, that the most illustrious men have frequently 
 broken loose from the life prescribed by their parents, and 
 followed, careless of cost, the paramount dictation of their 
 own natures : in short, they educate themselves. D'Alem- 
 bert is a striking instance of this kind of self-reliance. He 
 
TWO CLASSIFICATIONS 39 
 
 was a foundling (afterwards shown to be well bred as 
 respects ability), and put out to nurse as a pauper baby, 
 to the wife of a poor glazier. The child's indomitable 
 tendency to the higher studies, could not be repressed by 
 his foster-mother's ridicule and dissuasion, nor by the 
 taunts of his schoolfellows, nor by the discouragements of 
 his schoolmaster, who was incapable of appreciating him, 
 nor even by the reiterated deep disappointment of finding 
 that his ideas, which he knew to be original, were not 
 novel, but long previously discovered by others. Of course, 
 we should expect a boy of this kind, to undergo ten or 
 more years of apparently hopeless strife, but we should 
 equally expect him to succeed at last ; and D'Alembert 
 did succeed in attaining the first rank of celebrity, by the 
 time he was twenty-four. The reader has only to turn 
 over the pages of my book, to find abundant instances of 
 this emergence from obscurity, in spite of the utmost 
 discouragement in early youth. 
 
 A prodigal nature commonly so prolongs the period 
 when a man's receptive faculties are at their keenest, that 
 a faulty education in youth, is readily repaired in after 
 life. The education of Watt, the great mechanician, was 
 of a merely elementary character. During his youth and 
 manhood he was engrossed with mechanical specialities. 
 It was not till he became advanced in years, that he had • 
 leisure to educate himself, and yet by the time he was an 
 old man, he had become singularly well-read and widely 
 and accurately informed. The scholar who, in the eyes of 
 his contemporaries and immediate successors, made one of 
 the greatest reputations, as such, that any man has ever 
 made, was Julius Csesar Scaliger. His youth was, I be- 
 lieve, entirely unlettered. He was in the army until he 
 was twenty-nine, and then he led a vagrant professional 
 life, trying everything and sticking to nothing. At length 
 he fixed himself upon Greek. His first publications were 
 at the age of forty-seven, and between that time and the 
 period of a somewhat early death, he earned his remark- 
 able reputation, only exceeded by that of his son. Boy- 
 hood and youth — the period between fifteen and twenty- 
 two years of age, which afford to the vast majority of men, 
 the only period for the acquirement of intellectual facts 
 
40 COMPAEISON OF THE 
 
 and habits — are just seven years — neither more nor less 
 important than other years — in the lives of men of the 
 highest order. People are too apt to complain of their 
 imperfect education, insinuating that they would have done 
 great things if they had been more fortunately circum- 
 stanced in youth. But if their power of learning is 
 materially diminished by the time they have discovered 
 their want of knowledge, it is very probable that their 
 abilities are not of a very high description, and that, how- 
 ever well they might have been educated, they would 
 have succeeded but little better. 
 
 Even if a man be long unconscious of his powers, 
 an opportunity is sure to occur — they occur over and 
 over again to every man — that will discover them. He 
 will then soon make up for past arrears, and outstrip 
 competitors with very many years' start, in the 
 race of life. There is an obvious analogy between 
 the man of brains and the man of muscle, in the 
 unmistakable way in which they may discover and 
 assert their claims to superiority over less gifted, but 
 far better educated, competitors. An average sailor 
 chmbs rigging, and an average Alpine guide scrambles 
 along cliffs, with a facility that seems like magic to a 
 man who has been reared away from ships and mountains. 
 But if he have extraordinary gifts, a very little trial 
 will reveal them, and he will rapidly make up for his 
 arrears of education. A born gymnast would soon, 
 in his turn, astonish the sailors by his feats. Before 
 the voyage was half over, he would outrun them like 
 an escaped monkey. I have witnessed an instance of 
 this myself. Every summer, it happens that some 
 young English tourist who had never previously planted 
 his foot on crag or ice, succeeds in Alpine work to a 
 marvellous degree. 
 
 Thus far, I have spoken only of literary men and 
 artists, who, however, form the bulk of the 250 per 
 million, that attain to eminence. The reasoning that 
 is true for them, requires large quahfications when 
 applied to statesmen and commanders. Unquestionably, 
 the most illustrious statesmen and commanders belong' 
 to say the least, to the classes F and G of abiUty; 
 
TWO CLASSIFICATIONS. 41 
 
 but it does not at all follow that an English cabinet 
 minister, if he be a great territorial lord, should belong 
 to those classes, or even to the two or three below them. 
 Social advantages have enormous power in bringing a man 
 into so prominent a position as a statesman, that it is 
 impossible to refuse him the title of "eminent," though 
 it may be more than probable that if he had been changed 
 in his cradle, and reared in obscurity he would have 
 lived and died without emerging from humble life. Again, 
 we have seen that a union of three separate qualities — 
 intellect, zeal, and power of work — are necessary to 
 raise men from the ranks. Only two of these qualities, 
 in a remarkable degree, namely intellect and power of 
 work, are required by a man who is pushed into public 
 life ; because when he is once there, the interest is so 
 absorbing, and the competition so keen, as to supply the 
 necessary stimulus to an ordinary mind. Therefore, many 
 men who have succeeded as statesmen, would have been 
 nobodies had they been born in a lower rank of life : they 
 would have needed zeal to rise. Talleyrand would have 
 passed his life in the same way as other grand seigneurs, 
 if he had not been ejected from his birthright, by a family 
 council, on account of his deformity, and thrown into the 
 vortex of the French Revolution. The furious excitement 
 of the game overcame his inveterate indolence, and he 
 developed into the foremost man of the period, after 
 Napoleon and Mirabeau. As for sovereigns, they belong 
 to a peculiar category. The qualities most suitable to the 
 ruler of a great nation, are not such as lead to eminence 
 in private life. Devotion to particular studies, obstinate 
 perseverance, geniality and frankness in social relations, are 
 important qualities to make a man rise in the world, but 
 they are unsuitable to a sovereign. He has to view many 
 interests and opinions with an equal eye ; to know how 
 to yield his favourite ideas to popular pressure, to be 
 reserved in his friendships and able to stand alone. On 
 the other hand, a sovereign does not greatly need the 
 intellectual powers that are essential to the rise of a 
 common man, because the best brains of the country 
 are at his service. Consequently, I do not busy myself in 
 this volume with the families of merely able sovereigns 
 
42 COMPARISON OF THE 
 
 only with those few whose miUtary and administrative capa- 
 city is acknowledged to have been of the very highest order. 
 
 As regards commanders, the qualities that raise a man 
 to a peerage, may be of a peculiar kind, such as would not 
 have raised him to eminence in ordinary times. Strategy 
 is as much a speciality as chess-playing, and large practice 
 is required to develop it. It is difficult to see how strate- 
 gical gifts, combined with a hardy constitution, dashing 
 courage, and a restless disposition, can achieve eminence in 
 times of peace. These qualities are more likely to attract 
 a man to the hunting-field, if he have enough money ; or 
 if not, to make him an unsuccessful speculator. It con- 
 sequently happens that generals of high, but not the very 
 highest order, such as Napoleon's marshals and Cromwell's 
 generals, are rarely found to have eminent kinsfolk. Very 
 different is the case, with the most illustrious commanders. 
 They are far more than strategists and men of restless 
 dispositions ; they would have distinguished themselves 
 under any circumstances. Their kinships are most re- 
 markable, as will be seen in my chapter on commanders, 
 which includes the names of Alexander, Scipio, Hannibal, 
 Csesar, Marlborough, Cromwell, the Princes of Nassau, 
 Wellington, and Napoleon. 
 
 Precisely the same remarks are applicable to demagogues. 
 Those who rise to the surface and play a prominent part 
 in the transactions of a troubled period, must have courage 
 and force of character, but they need not have high in- 
 tellectual powers. Nay, it is more appropriate that the 
 intellects of such men should be narrow and one-sided, 
 and their dispositions moody and embittered. These are 
 not qualities that lead to eminence in ordinary times. 
 Consequently, the families of such men, are mostly un- 
 known to fame. But the kinships of popular leaders of 
 the highest order, as of the two Gracchi, of the two 
 Arteveldes, and of Mirabeau, are illustrious. 
 
 I may mention a class of cases that strikes me forcibly 
 as a proof,_ that a sufficient power of command to lead to 
 eminence in troublous times, is much less unusual than is 
 commonly supposed, and that it lies neglected in the course 
 of ordinary Hfe. In beleaguered towns, as, for example, 
 during the great Indian mutiny, a certain type of character 
 
TWO CLASSIFICATIONS 43 
 
 very frequently made its appearance. People rose into 
 notice who had never previously distinguished themselves, 
 and subsided into their former way of life, after the occa- 
 sion for exertion was over ; while during the continuance 
 of danger and misery, they were the heroes of their situa- 
 tion. They were cool in danger, sensible in council, cheer- 
 ful under prolonged suffering, humane to the wounded and 
 sick, encouragers of the faint-hearted. Such people were 
 formed to shine only under exceptional circumstances. 
 They had the advantage of possessing too tough a fibre to 
 be crushed by anxiety and physical misery, and perhaps 
 in consequence of that very toughness, they required a 
 stimulus of the sharpest kind, to goad them to all the 
 exertions of which they were capable. 
 
 The result of what I have said, is to show that in 
 statesmen and commanders, mere " eminence " is by no 
 means a satisfactory criterion of such natural gifts as 
 would make a man distinguished under whatever circum- 
 stances he had been reared. On the other hand, states- 
 men of a high order, and commanders of the very highest, 
 who overthrow all opponents, must be prodigiously gifted. 
 The reader himself must judge the cases quoted in proof 
 of hereditary gifts, by their several merits. I have 
 endeavoured to speak of none but the most illustrious 
 names. It would have led to false conclusions, had I taken a 
 larger number, and thus descended to a lower level of merit. 
 
 In conclusion, I see no reason to be dissatisfied with the 
 conditions of accepting high reputation as a very fair test 
 of high ability. The nature of the test would not have 
 been altered, if an attempt had been made to readjust each 
 man's reputation according to his merits, because this 
 is what every biographer does. If I had possessed the 
 critical power of a Ste. Beuve, I should have merely thrown 
 into literature another of those numerous expressions of 
 opinion, by the aggregate of which all reputations are built. 
 
 To conclude : I feel convinced that no man can achieve 
 a very high reputation without being gifted with very high 
 abilities ; and I trust that reason has been given for the 
 belief, that few who possess these very high abilities can 
 fail in achieving eminence. 
 
44 NOTATION 
 
 NOTATION 
 
 , I ENTREAT my readers not to be frightened at the 
 first sight of the notation I employ, for it is really very 
 simple to understand and easy to recollect. It was im- 
 possible for me to get on without the help of something 
 of the sort, as I found our ordinary nomenclature far 
 too ambiguous as well as cumbrous for employment in 
 this book. 
 
 For example, the terms "uncle," "nephew," "grand- 
 father," and " grandson," have each of them two distinct 
 meanings. An uncle may be the brother of the father, 
 or the brother of the mother ; the nephew may be the 
 son of a brother, or the son of a sister ; and so on. 
 There are four kinds of first cousins, namely, the sons of 
 the two descriptions of uncles and those of the two cor- 
 responding aunts. There are sixteen kinds of first cousins 
 " once removed," for either A. may be the son of any one 
 of the four descriptions of male or of the four female 
 cousins of B., or B. may bear any one of those relation- 
 ships to A. I need not quote more instances in illustration 
 of what I have said, that unbounded confusion would have 
 been introduced had I confined myself in this book, to our 
 ordinary nomenclature. 
 
 The notation I employ gets rid of all this confused 
 and cumbrous language. It disentangles relationships 
 in a marvellously complete and satisfactory manner, and 
 enables us to methodise, compare, and analyse them in any 
 way we like. 
 
 Speaking generally, and without regarding the type in 
 
NOTATION 45 
 
 which the letters are printed, F. stands for Father ; G. for 
 Grandfather; U. for Uncle; N. for Nephew; B. for 
 Brother ; S. for Son ; and P. for Grandson {Pdit-fils in 
 French). 
 
 These letters are printed in capitals when the relation- 
 ship to be expressed has passed through the male line, 
 and in small type when through the female line. There- 
 fore U. is the paternal uncle ; G. the paternal grandfather ; 
 N. is a nephew that is son of a brother ; P. a grandson 
 that is the child of a son. So again, u. is the maternal 
 uncle ; g. the maternal grandfather ; n. a nephew that is 
 son of a sister; p. a grandson that is the child of a 
 daughter. 
 
 Precisely the same letters, in the form of Italics, are 
 employed for the female relations. For example in cor- 
 respondence with TJ. there is U. to express an aunt that 
 is the sister of a father ; and to u. there is u. to express an 
 aunt that is the sister of a mother. 
 
 It is a consequence of this system of notation, that F. 
 and B. and S. are always printed in capitals, and that 
 their correlatives for mother, sister, and daughter are 
 always expressed in small italicised type, as/., &., and s. 
 
 The reader must mentally put the word his before the 
 letter denoting kinship, and ivas after it. Thus : — 
 
 Adams, John ; second President of the United States. 
 S. John Quincey Adams, sixth President. 
 P. C P. Adams, American Minister in England ; author. 
 
 would be read — 
 
 His [i.e. John Adams') son vjas John Quincey Adams. 
 IJis „ „ grandson was C. P. Adams. 
 
40 
 
 NOTATION 
 
 The following table comprises the whole of this no- 
 tation : — 
 
 G. G. 
 
 Grandfather. = Grandmother. 
 
 I 
 
 u 
 
 Uncle. 
 
 I 
 
 u. 
 
 Aunt. 
 
 Father. = Mother. 
 
 Grandfather. = Grandmother, 
 
 \ 
 
 I \ 1 
 
 11. U. 
 
 Uncle. Aunt. 
 
 B. 
 
 Brother. 
 
 The Person 
 described. 
 
 I. 
 
 Sister. 
 
 N. 
 
 Nephew. 
 
 N. 
 
 Niece. 
 
 s. 
 
 Son. 
 
 Daughter. 
 
 n. 
 
 Nephew. 
 
 ~1 
 11. 
 Niece. 
 
 V. r. 
 
 Gr. -son. Gr. -daughter. 
 
 p. p. 
 
 Gr. -son. Gr. -daughter. 
 
 The last explanation I have to make, is the meaning 
 of brackets [ ] when they enclose a letter. It implies 
 that the person to whose name the letter in brackets is 
 annexed has not achieved sufficient public reputation to 
 be ranked, in statistical deductions, on equal terms with 
 the rest. 
 
 For facility of reference I give lists, in alphabetical 
 order, of all the letters, within the limits of two letters, 
 that I employ. Thus I always use GF. for great-grand- 
 father, and not FG., which means the same thing. 
 
 F. 
 B. 
 
 s. 
 
 Father. 
 
 Brother. 
 
 Son. 
 
 F. 
 h. 
 s. 
 
 Mother. 
 
 Sister. 
 
 Dangliter. 
 
 
 GEAjSJDFATHEES. 
 
 
 GRANDMOTHERS. 
 
 G. 
 
 Father's father. 
 Mother's father. 
 
 a. 
 
 9- 
 
 Father's mother. 
 Mother's mother. 
 
 
 GRANDSONS. 
 
 
 GRANDDAUGHTERS. 
 
 P. 
 
 Son's son. 
 Daughter's son. 
 
 F. 
 
 Son's daughter. 
 Daughter's daughter. 
 
 
 UNCLES 
 
 
 AUNTS. 
 
 U. 
 u. 
 
 Father's brother. 
 Mother's brother. 
 
 V. 
 
 Father's sister. 
 Mother's sister. 
 
 
 NEPHEWS. 
 
 
 NIECES. 
 
 N 
 n. 
 
 Brother's son 
 Sister's son.. 
 
 n. 
 
 Brother's daughter. 
 Sister's daughter. 
 
NOTATION 
 
 47 
 
 GREAT-UNCLES. 
 GB. Father's father's T^rother, 
 gB. Mother's father's brother. 
 GB. Father's mother's brother. 
 pB. Mother's mother's brother. 
 
 GBBAT-GRANBFATHEES. 
 -GF. Father's father's father. 
 gF. Mother's father's father. 
 GF, Father's mother's father, 
 g¥^ Mother's mother's father. 
 
 GREAT-NEPHE"WS, 
 NS. Brother's son's son. 
 nS. Sister's son's son. 
 NS, Brother's daughter's son. 
 nS. Sister's daughter's son. 
 
 GREAT-GRANDSONS. 
 PS Son's son's son. 
 pS, Daughter's son's son. 
 PS. Son's daughter's son. 
 jiS. Daughter's daughter's son. 
 
 FIRST COUSINS, MALE. 
 US. Father's brother's son. 
 uS. Mother's brother's sou. 
 US. Father's sister's son. 
 «S. Mother's sister's son. 
 
 GREAT-GREAT-GRANDFATHERS. 
 (G, g, G or g) followed by (G or g). 
 
 FIRST COUSINS, MALE, ONCE 
 REMOVED. 
 
 ASCENDIHO. 
 
 (G, g, Gf or g) followed by (N or n). 
 
 Descending. 
 (U, n, IT" or v) followed by (P or p). 
 
 GREAT-GREAT-UNCLES. 
 
 (G, g, G or g) followed by (U or u). 
 
 GREAT-GREAT-GRANDSONS. 
 (P or p) followed by (P or p). 
 
 GREAT-AUNTS. 
 
 G&, Father's father's sister. 
 g6. Mother's father's sister. 
 Gb. Father's mother's sister. 
 gb. Mother's mother's sister. 
 
 GREAT-GRANDMOTHERS. 
 
 Gf. Father's father's mother. 
 gf. Mother's father's mother. 
 Gf. Fatlier's mother's mother. 
 gf. Mother's mother's mother. 
 
 GREAT-NIECES. 
 
 Ns. Brother's son's daughter. 
 n«. Sister's son's daughter. 
 Ns. Brother's daughter's daughter. 
 ns. Sister's daughter's daughter. 
 
 GREAT-GRAND-DAUGHTERS. 
 Ps. Son's son's daughter, 
 ps. Daughter's son's daughter. 
 Fs. Ron's daughter's daughter. 
 ps. Daughter's daughter's daughter, 
 
 FIRST COUSINS, FEMALE. 
 U*. Father's brother's daughter. 
 US. Mother's brotlier's daughter. 
 Us. Father's sister's daughter. 
 us. Mother's sister's daughter. 
 
 GREAT-GREAT-GRANDMOTHERS. 
 (G, g, G or g) followed by (G or g). 
 
 FIRST COUSINS, FEMALE, ONCE 
 REMOVED. 
 Ascending. 
 (G, g, G or g) followed by (N or n). 
 
 Descending. 
 (U, u., U or 1/) followed by (P or p). 
 
 GREAT-GREAT-AUNTS. 
 (G, g, G or g) followed by (U or u). 
 
 GREAT-GREAT-GRANDDAUGHTERS 
 (P oTp) followed by (P or p). 
 
THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 49 
 
 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND BETWEEN 
 1660 AND 1865 
 
 The Judges of England, since the restoration of the 
 monarchy in 1660, form a group peculiarly well adapted 
 to afford a general outline of the extent and limitations of 
 heredity in respect to genius. A judgeship is a guarantee 
 of its possessor being gifted with exceptional ability ; the 
 Judges are sufficiently numerous and prolific to form an 
 adequate basis for statistical inductions, and they are the 
 subjects of several excellent biographical treatises. It is 
 therefore well to begin our inquiries with a discussion of 
 their relationships. We shall quickly arrive at definite 
 results, which subsequent chapters, treating of more illus- 
 trious men, and in other careers, will check and amplify. 
 
 It is necessary that I should first say something in 
 support of my assertion, that the office of a judge is really 
 a sufficient guarantee that its possessor is exceptionally 
 gifted. In other countries it may be different to what it 
 is with us, but we all know that in England, the Bench is 
 never spoken of without reverence for the intellectual 
 power of its occupiers. A seat on the Bench is a great 
 prize, to be won by the best men. No doubt there are 
 hindrances, external to those of nature, against a man 
 getting on at the Bar and rising to a judgeship. The 
 attorneys may not give him briefs when he is a young 
 barrister ; and even if he becomes a successful barrister, 
 his political party may be out of office for a long period, 
 at a time when he was otherwise ripe for advancement. 
 I cannot, however, believe that either of these are serious 
 
 E 
 
50 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND 
 
 obstacles in the long run. Sterling ability is sure to make 
 itself felt, and to lead to practice ; while as to politics, the 
 changes of party are sufficiently frequent to give a fair 
 chance to almost every generation. For every man who 
 is a judge, there may possibly be two other lawyers of 
 the same standing, equally fitted for the post, but it is 
 hard to believe there can be a larger number. 
 
 If not always the foremost, the Judges are therefore 
 among the foremost, of a vast body of legal men. The 
 Census speaks of upwards of 3,000 barristers, advocates, 
 and special pleaders ; and it must be recollected that 
 these do not consist of 3,000 men taken at hap-hazard, 
 but a large part of them are already selected, and it is 
 from these, by a second process of selection, that the 
 judges are mainly derived. When I say that a large part 
 of the barristers are selected men, I speak of those among 
 them who are of humble parentage, but have brilliant 
 natural gifts — who attracted notice as boys, or, it may be, 
 even as children, and were therefore sent to a good school. 
 There they won exhibitions and fitted themselves for col- 
 lege, where they supported themselves by obtaining scholar- 
 ships. Then came fellowships, and so they ultimately 
 found their way to the Bar. Many of these have risen to 
 the Bench. The parentage of the Lord Chancellors jus- 
 tifies my statement. There have been thirty of them 
 within the period included in my inquiries. Of these. 
 Lord Hardwicke was the son of a small attorney at Dover, 
 in narrow circumstances ; Lord Eldon (whose brother was 
 the great Admiralty Judge, Lord Stowell) was son of a 
 " coal fitter ; " Lord Truro was son of a sheriff's officer ; 
 and Lord St. Leonards (like Lord Tenterden, the Chief 
 Justice of Common Pleas) was son of a barber. Others 
 were sons of clergymen of scanty means. Others have 
 begun life in alien professions, yet, notwithstanding their 
 false start, have easily recovered lost ground in after life. 
 Lord Erskine was first in the navy and then in the army, 
 before he became a barrister. Lord Chelmsford was 
 originally a midshipman. Now a large number of men 
 with antecedents as unfavourable to success as these, and 
 yet successful men, are always to be found at the Bar, and 
 
BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 51 
 
 therefore I say the barristers are themselves a selected 
 body ; and the fact of every judge having been taken 
 from the foremost rank of 3,000 of them, is proof that his 
 exceptional ability is of an enormously higher order than 
 if the 3,000 barristers had been conscripts, drawn by lot 
 from the general mass of their countrymen. I therefore 
 need not trouble myself with quoting passages from 
 biographies, to prove that each of the Judges whose name 
 I have occasion to mention, is a highly gifted man. It 
 is precisely in order to avoid the necessity of this tedious 
 work, that I have selected the Judges for my first chapter. 
 In speaking of the English Judges, I have adopted the 
 well-known Zives of the Judges, by Foss, as my guide. 
 It was published in 1865, so I have adopted that date as 
 the limit of my inquiries. I have considered those only as 
 falling under the definition of "judges " whom he includes 
 as such. They are the Judges of the Courts of Chancery 
 and Common Law, and the Master of the Rolls, but not 
 the Judges of the Admiralty nor of the Court of Canter- 
 bury. By the latter limitation, I lose the advantage of 
 counting Lord Stowell (brother of the Lord Chancellor 
 Eldon), the remarkable family of the Lushingtons, that of 
 Sir R. Phillimore, and some others. Through the limitation 
 as regards time, I lose, by ending with the year 1865, the 
 recently-created judges, such as Judge Selwyn, brother 
 of the Bishop of Lichfield, and also of the Professor 
 of Divinity at Cambridge. But I believe, from cursory 
 inquiries, that the relations of these latter judges, speaking 
 generally, have not so large a share of eminence as we 
 shall find among those of the judges in my list. This 
 might have been expected, for it is notorious that the 
 standard of ability in a modern judge is not so high as 
 it used to be. The number of exceptionally gifted men 
 being the same, it is impossible to supply the new demand 
 for heads of great schools and for numerous other careers, 
 now thrown open to able youths, without seriously limiting 
 the field whence alone good judges may be selected. By 
 beginning at the Restoration, which I took for my com- 
 mencement, because there was frequent jobbery in earher 
 days, I lose a Lord Keeper (of the same rank as a Lord 
 
 E 2 
 
52 
 
 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND 
 
 Chancellor), and his still greater son, also a Lord Chan- 
 cellor, namely, the two Bacons. I state these facts to 
 show that I have not picked out the period in question, 
 because it seemed most favourable to my argument, but 
 simply because it appeared the most suitable to bring out 
 the truth as to hereditary genius, and was, at the same 
 time, most convenient for me to discuss. 
 
 There are 286 judges within the limits of my inquiry; 
 109 of them have one or more eminent relations, and three 
 others have relations whom I have noticed, but they are 
 marked off with brackets, and are therefore not to be 
 included in the following statistical deductions. As the 
 readiest method of showing, at a glance, the way in which 
 these relations are distributed, I give a table below in 
 which they are all compactly registered. This table is 
 a condensed summary of the Appendix to the present 
 chapter, which should be consulted by the reader when- 
 ever he desires fuller information. 
 
 TABLE I. 
 
 SUMMARY OF RELATIONSHIPS OF 109 JUDGES, GROUPED 
 INTO 85 FAMILIES. 
 
 One relation {or 
 Atuey ... U. 
 
 Alibone . . G. 
 
 Bedingfield .... U. 
 
 Best (Lord Wynford) . . g. 
 Bickersteth (Lord Langdale) u. 
 Bramston . . . . F. 
 
 Browne . . . uS. 
 
 Brougham, Lord . gB. 
 
 Campbell, Lord .... N. 
 Cooper (Earl Shaftesbury). P. 
 Copley (Lord Lyiidhurst) . F. 
 
 De Grey (Lord Walsingham) S. 
 
 Erie 
 
 Eyre, Sir R. and father 
 Forster . . . . , 
 
 Gurney . 
 Harcourt, Lord . . 
 
 Heath S. 
 
 Henley (E. of Northington) F. 
 Hotham ... . . . B. 
 
 B. 
 F. 
 F. 
 S. 
 G. 
 
 two in family). 
 
 Keating F. 
 
 King, Lord ... u. 
 
 Lawrence . . E. 
 
 Lee B. 
 
 Mansfield, Lord . P. 
 
 Milton ... B. 
 
 Patteson S. 
 
 2. Powis, Sir L. and brother. B. 
 
 2. Raymond, Lord, and father F. 
 2. Reynolds, Sir J. and nephew N. 
 
 Romilly, Lord ^ S 
 
 Scott (Earl Eldon) B. 
 
 Sewell p. 
 
 Thesiger (Lord Chelmsford) S.' 
 
 Thurlow, Lord . ' B. 
 
 Treby s. 
 
 (Twisden, see Finch.) 
 
 Verney . . . g. 
 
 Wigram B. 
 
 Wood (Lord Hatherley) . F. 
 
 ' The kinship is reckoned from Sir Samuel Romilly. 
 
BETM''EE]Sr 1660 AND 1865 
 
 53 
 
 Two and three relations [or three and four in family). 
 
 Alderson . . . . F. Us. 
 
 (Bathiirst, Earl, see Bullev.) 
 
 JBlackburn .... B. {?. 
 
 Blackstoiie S. N. 
 
 2. BuUerandBathurstjEaiiU. u N. 
 
 Burnet G. F. 
 
 Churchill 1 . . . UP. n. 
 
 Clarke B. u. 
 
 2. Clive, Sir E. and uncle U. UP. 
 2. Cowper, Earl, & brother B. NS. 
 
 Dampier F. B. 
 
 Dolben S. B. gB. 
 
 2. Erskine, Lord, and son B. S. 
 2. Gould, Sir H. and 
 
 grandson ... P. p. 
 
 Hewitt (Lord Lifford). 2 S. 
 2. Jeffreys, Lord, and 
 
 Trevor G. ?7S. 
 
 Jervis F. GN. 
 
 Lechmero P. u. 
 
 Lovell . . . . pS. pi". 
 
 Wares S. B. 
 
 Parker (E. of Maccles- 
 field) and Sir Thomas S. UP. 
 
 Pepys(E.ofCottenham) G. g. B. 
 
 Pollock 2 B. S. 
 
 Rolfe (Lord Cranworth) ffN". gF. 
 
 Scarlett (Lord Abinger) 2 S. 
 
 Spelman F. GF. 
 
 Sutton (Lord Manners) B. N. 
 
 Talbot, Lord . . . . F. N". 
 
 Turner 2 U. ' 
 
 2. Wilde, Lord Truro, and 
 
 nephew B. N. 
 
 2. Willes, Sir J. and son. B. S. 
 
 Willmot P. PS. 
 
 2. Windham, Sir W. and 
 
 brother .... B.P.ffN. 
 
 F. 2S. t^S. GN. PS. (?gN). 
 2 S. 2 US. 
 2 U. 3 US. S. 
 F. 2S. 2B. 
 
 B. F. u. g. pS. 
 
 Four or more relations {or five and more in family). 
 4. Atkyns, Sir E. and three others ... . G. F. B. p. 
 
 Coleridge '^ S. s. 3 N. P. NS. 
 
 Denison ... . . . . . 4 NS. 
 
 Denman F. S. uS. uP. 
 
 3. Viz. Finch (Earl of Nottingham), Twisden, 
 andLegge 
 
 2. Herbert, Lord Keeper, and son . . . 
 
 3. Hyde, Earl Clarendon, and cousin . . 
 
 Law (Lord Ellenborough) 
 
 (Leggo, see Finch. ) 
 
 Lyttleton ' 
 
 3. Viz. 2 Montagu'' and 1 Noith (Ld. Guilford) G. B. 2S. 2N. 2P. NS. 5iV 
 
 (North, see Montagu.) 
 2. Pratt, Earl Camden, and Sir J F. S. n. nS. 
 
 Somers, Earl (6trf see Yorke) . ... 2iVS. 2JVP. 
 
 Trevor, Lord g. F. S. U. GB. 
 
 (Trevor, Master of the Rolls, see Jeffreys.) 
 
 Vaughan 3 B. 2 N. p. 
 
 2. Yorke, Earl Hardwioke, and son ; also, in 
 
 part. Earl Somers 2 S. 2 P. PS. 
 
 1 The kinship is reckoned from the Great Duke of Marlborough. 
 
 "■ Ditto, from Coleridge the Poet 
 
 ^ Ditto, from the Lord Keeper. 
 
 * Ditto, from Chief Justice the first Earl of Manchester ; the two nephews 
 are William, Ch. B. E., and the Earl of Sandwich ; the two grandsons, 
 the Earl of Halifax and James, Ch.B.E. The genealogical table in the 
 Appendix to this chapter, will explain these and the other kinships of the 
 Montagu family. 
 
54 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND 
 
 Several remarkable features in the contents of this table 
 will catch the eye at once. I will begin by shortly alluding 
 to them, and will enter more into details a little further 
 on. First, it will be observed, that the Judges are so 
 largely interrelated, that 109 of them are grouped into 
 only 85 families. There are seventeen doublets, among 
 the Judges, two triplets, and one quadruplet. In addition 
 to these, might be counted six other sets, consisting of 
 Ihose whose ancestors sat on the Bench previously to the 
 accession of Charles II., namely, Bedingfield, Forster, 
 Hyde, Finch, Windham, and Lyttleton. Another fact 
 to be observed, is the nearness of the relationships in iny 
 list. The single letters are far the most common. Also, 
 though a man has twice as many grandfathers as fathers, 
 and probably more than twice as many grandsons as sons, 
 yet the Judges are found more frequently to have eminent 
 fathers than grandfathers, and eminent sons than grandsons. 
 In the third degree of relationship, the eminent kinsmen 
 are yet more rare, although the number of individuals in 
 those degrees is increased in a duplicate proportion. When 
 a judge has no more than one eminent relation, that relation 
 is nearly always to be found in the first or second degree. 
 Thus in the first section of the table, which is devoted to 
 single relationships, though it includes as many as thirty- 
 nine entries, there are only two among them (viz. Browne 
 and Lord Brougham) whose kinships extend beyond the 
 second degi'ee. It is in the last section of the table, which 
 treats of whole families, largely gifted with ability, that the 
 distant kinships are chiefly to be found. I annex a table 
 (Table II.) extracted from the preceding one, which 
 exhibits these facts with great clearness. Column A con- 
 tains the facts just as they were observed, and column D 
 shows the percentage of individuals, in each degree of 
 kinship to every 100 judges, who have become eminent. 
 
BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 
 
 55 
 
 TABLE II. 
 
 Degrees of Kinship. 
 
 A. 
 
 B. 
 
 C. 
 
 D. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Name of the degree. 
 
 CoiTCsponding letter. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 i r Father. . . 
 
 0,°-^ Brother . 
 
 ■= Uou 
 
 22 P. 
 .30 B. 
 31 S. 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 22 
 30 
 31 
 
 26 
 35 
 36 
 
 100 
 150 
 100 
 
 26-0 
 23-3 
 36-0 
 
 9-1 
 8-2 
 12-6 
 
 o /Grandfather 
 £ 1 Uncle . 
 ^) Neiihew . 
 ^, I, Grandson 
 
 9U. 
 UN. 
 UP. 
 
 Se- 
 2n. 
 5 p. 
 
 
 
 13 
 15 
 16 
 IS 
 
 15 
 18 
 19 
 19 
 
 200 
 400 
 400 
 200 
 
 Y-5 
 4-5 
 4-75 
 9-5 
 
 2-6 
 1-6 
 1-7 
 3-7 
 
 w /Great-grandfather 
 « Great-uncle 
 ^ • First-cousin . 
 "S Great-nephew . . 
 " V Great-grandson . 
 
 1 6P. 
 1GB, 
 
 6 IIS. 
 7NS. 
 
 2 PS. 
 
 IgF. 
 2gB. 
 2uS. 
 InS. 
 2ijS. 
 
 OF. 
 
 GB. 
 
 1 PS. 
 T NS. 
 IPS. 
 
 17F. 
 OffB. 
 lufi. 
 OnS. 
 OjiS. 
 
 2 
 3 
 9 
 1.5 
 6 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 11 
 
 17 
 
 6 
 
 400 
 800 
 800 
 800 
 400 
 
 0-5 
 0-6 
 1-4 
 2-1 
 1-6 
 
 0-2 
 0-2 
 0-6 
 0-7 
 0-6 
 
 All more remote . 
 
 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 14 
 
 
 0-0 
 
 0-0 
 
 A. Number of eminent men in each degree of kinship to the most eminent man of the 
 family (85 families). 
 
 B. The preceding column raised in proportion to 100 families. 
 
 C. Number of individuals in each degi-ee of kinship to 100 men. 
 
 D. Percentage of eminent men in each degree of kinship to the most eminent member 
 of distinguished families ; it was obtained by dividing B by C and multiplying by 100. 
 
 E. Percentages of the previous column reduced in the proportion of (286 - 24,1 or) 242 
 to 85, in order to apply to families generally. 
 
 Table II. also gives materials for judging of the com- 
 parative influence of the male and female lines, in con- 
 veying ability. Thanks to my method of notation, it is 
 perfectly easy to separate the two lines in the way I am 
 about to explain. I do not attempt to compare relations 
 in the first degiree of kinship — namely, fathers with 
 mothers, sons with daughters, or brothers with sisters, 
 because there exists no criterion for a just comparison of 
 the natural ability of the different sexes. Nay, even if 
 there were means for testing it, the result would be falla- 
 cious. A mother transmits masculine peculiarities to her 
 male child, which she does not and cannot possess ; and, 
 similarly, a woman who is endowed with fewer gifts of a 
 masculine type than her husband, may yet contribute in 
 a larger degree to the masculine intellectual superiority 
 of her son. I therefore shift my inquiry from the first, to 
 
 1 That is to say, 236 Judges, less 24, who are included as subordinate members of the 
 85 families. 
 
66 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND 
 
 the second and third degrees of kinship. As regards the 
 second degree, I compare the paternal grandfather with 
 the maternal, the uncle by the father's side with the uncle 
 by the mother's, the nephew by the brother's side with the 
 nephew by the sister's, and the grandson by the son with 
 the grandson by the daughter. On the same principle 
 I compare the kinships in the third degree : that is to 
 say, the father of the father's father with the father of the 
 mother's mother, and so on. The whole of the work is 
 distinctly exposed to view in the following compact 
 table : — 
 In the Second Degbeb. 
 
 7G. + 9U. + 14N. + 11 P. = 41 kinships through males. 
 
 6g. + 6u. + 2 n. + 5p. =19 ,, ,, females. 
 
 In the Third Degree. 
 
 IGF. + 1GB. + 5 US. + 7NS. + 2PS. = 19 kinships through males. 
 O^F. + OgB. + luS. + OnS. +OpS. = 1 „ ,, females. 
 
 Total, 60 through males, 20 through females. 
 
 The numbers are too small to warrant any very decided 
 conclusion ; but they go far to prove that the female in- 
 fluence is inferior to that of the male in conveying ability. 
 It must, however, be observed, that the difference between 
 the totals in the second degree is chiefly due to the 
 nephews — a relationship difficult to trace on the female 
 side, because, as a matter of fact, biographers do not speak 
 so fully of the descendants of the sisters of their hero as 
 of those of his brothers. As regards the third degree, the 
 relationships on the female side are much more difficult to 
 ferret out than those on the male, and I have no doubt 
 I have omitted many of them. In my earlier attempts, 
 the balance stood still more heavily against the female 
 side, and it has been reduced exactly in proportion to the 
 number of times I have revised my data. Consequently, 
 though I first suspected a large residuum against the 
 female line, I think there is reason to believe the influ- 
 ence of females but little inferior to that of males, in 
 transmitting judicial ability. 
 
 It is, of course, a grief to me, in writing this book, that 
 circumstances make it impossible to estimate the influence 
 of the individual peculiarities of the mother — for good or 
 
BETWEEW 1660 AND 1865 57 
 
 for bad — upon her offspring. They appear to me, for the 
 reasons stated, to be as important elements in the inquiry 
 as those of the father, and yet I am obliged to completely 
 ignore them in a large majority of instances, on account of 
 the lack of reliable information. Nevertheless, I have 
 numerous arguments left to ■ prove that genius is here- 
 ditary. 
 
 Before going further, J must entreat my readers to 
 abandon an objection which very likely may present itself 
 to their minds, and which I can easily show to be untenable. 
 People who do not realize the nature of my arguments 
 have constantly spoken to me to this effect : " It is of no use 
 your quoting successes unless you take failures into equal 
 account. Eminent men may have eminent relations, but 
 they also have very many who are ordinary, or even stupid, 
 and there are not a few who are either eccentric or down- 
 right mad." I perfectly allow all this, but it does not in 
 the least affect the cogency of my arguments. If a man 
 breeds from strong, well-shaped dogs, but of mixed pedigree, 
 the puppies will be sometimes, but rarely, the equals of 
 their parents. They will commonly be of a mongrel, 
 nondescript type, because ancestral peculiarities arc apt to 
 crop out in the offspring. Yet notwithstanding all this, it 
 is easy to develop the desirable characteristics of individual 
 dogs into the assured heirloom of a new breed. The 
 breeder selects the puppies that most nearly approach the 
 wished-for type, generation after generation, until they 
 have no ancestor, within many degrees, that has objection- 
 able peculiarities. So it is with men and women. Because 
 one or both of a child's parents are able, it does not in the 
 least follow as a matter of necessity, but only as one of 
 moderately unfavourable odds, that the child will be able 
 also. He inherits an extraordinary mixture of qualities 
 displayed in his grandparents, great-grandparents, and 
 more remote ancestors, as well as from those of his father 
 and mother. The most illustrious and so-called "well- 
 bred " families of the human race, are utter mongrels as 
 regards their natural gifts of intellect and disposition. 
 
 What I profess to prove is this : that if two children are 
 taken, of whom one has a parent exceptionally gifted in 
 
58 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND 
 
 a high degree — say as one in 4,000, or as one in a million — 
 and the other lias not, the former child has an enormously 
 greater chance of turning out to be gifted in a high degree, 
 than the other. Also, I argue that, as a new race can be 
 obtained in animals and plants, and can be raised to so 
 great a degree of purity that it will maintain itself, with 
 moderate care in preventing the more faulty members of 
 the flock from breeding, so a race of gifted men might be 
 obtained, under exactly similar conditions. 
 
 I must apologize for anticipating, in this off-hand and 
 very imperfect manner, the subject of a future chapter by 
 these few remarks; but I am really obliged to do so, 
 knowing from experience how j)ertinaciously strangers 
 to the reasoning by which the laws of ■ heredity are 
 established, are inclined to prejudge my conclusions, by 
 blindly insisting that the objection to which 1 have 
 referred has overbearing weight. 
 
 I will now proceed with an examination of what may 
 be learnt from the relationships of the Judges. First, I 
 would ask, are the abler judges more rich in eminent 
 relations than those who are less able ? There are two 
 ways of answering this question : the one is to examine 
 into the relationships of the law lords as compared with 
 that of the puisne judges, or of the chancellors compared 
 with that of the judges generally ; and the other is to 
 determine whether or no the persons whose names are 
 entered in the third column of Table I. are above the 
 average of judges in respect to ability. Here are a few of 
 the Lord Chancellors. There are only 30 of those 
 high legal officers within the limits of my inquiry, yet 24 
 of these have eminent relations ; whereas out of the (286 
 — 30 or) 256 other judges, only (114 — 24 or) 90 have 
 eminent relations. There are therefore 80 per cent, of 
 the chancellors, as compared to 36 per cent, of the rest of 
 the judges, that have eminent relations. The proportion 
 would have been greater if I had compared the chancellors, 
 or the chancellors and the other law lords, with the puisne 
 judges. 
 
 The other test I proposed, is equally satisfactory. 
 There can be no doubt of the exceptionally eminent 
 
BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 59 
 
 ability of the men whose names appear in the third 
 column. To those who object to my conclusion because 
 Lord Chancellors have more opportunities of thrusting 
 relatives, by jobbery, into eminence than are possessed by 
 the other judges, I can do no more than refer them to 
 what I have already said about reputation being a test of 
 ability, and by giving a short list of the more remarkable 
 cases of relations to the Lord Chancellors, which I think 
 will adequately meet their objection. They are — ■ 
 
 1. Earl Bathurst and his daughter's son, the famous 
 judge. Sir F. Buller. 2. Earl Camden and his father. 
 Chief Justice Pratt. 3. Earl Clarendon and the remark- 
 able family of Hyde, in which were two uncles and one 
 cousin, all English judges, besides one Welsh judge, and 
 many other men of distinction. 4. Earl Cowper, his 
 brother the judge, and his great-nephew the poet. 5. 
 Earl Eldon and his brother Lord Stowell. G. Lord 
 Erskine, his eminent legal brother the Lord Advocate of 
 Scotland, and his son the judge. 7. Earl Nottingham and 
 the most remarkable family of Finch. 8, 9, 10. Earl 
 Hardwicke and his son, also a Lord Chancellor, who died 
 suddenly, and that son's great-uncle. Lord Somers, also a 
 Lord Chancellor. 11. Lord Herbert, his son a judge, his 
 cousins Lord Herbert of Cherbury and George the poet 
 and divine. 12. Lord King and his uncle John Locke the 
 philosopher. 13. The infamous but most able Lord 
 Jeffreys had a cousin just like him, namely. Sir J. Trevor, 
 Master of the Rolls. 14. Lord Guilford is member of a 
 family to which I simply despair of doing justice, for it 
 is linked with connexions of such marvellous ability, 
 judicial and statesmanlike, as to deserve a small volume to 
 describe it. It contains thirty first-class men in near 
 kinship, including Montagus, Sydneys, Herberts, Dudleys, 
 and others. 15. Lord Truro had two able legal brothers, 
 one of whom was Chief Justice at the Cape of Good 
 Hope; and his nephew is an English judge, recently 
 created Lord Penzance. I will here mention Lord 
 Lyttleton, Lord Keeper of Charles I., although many 
 members of his most remarkable family do not fall within 
 my limits. His father, the Chief Justice of North Wales, 
 
60 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND 
 
 married a lady, the daughter of Sir J. Walter, the Chief 
 Justice of South Wales, and also sister of an English 
 judge. She bore him Lord Keeper Lyttleton, also Sir 
 Timothy, a judge. Lord Lyttleton's daughter's son (she 
 married a cousin) was Sir T. Lyttleton, the Speaker of 
 the House of Commons. 
 
 There is, therefore, abundant reason to conclude that 
 the kinsmen of Lord Chancellors are far richer in natural 
 gifts than those of the other judges. 
 
 I wiil now take another test of the existence of heredi- 
 tary ability. It is a comparison of the number of entries 
 in the columns of Table I. Supposing that natural gifts 
 were due to mere accident, unconnected with parentage, 
 then the entries would be distributed in accordance with 
 the law that governs the distribution of accidents. If it 
 be a hundred to one against some member of any family, 
 within given limits of kinship, drawing a lottery prize, it 
 would be a million to one against three members of the 
 same family doing so (nearly, but not exactly, because the 
 size of the family is limited), and a million millions to one 
 against six members doing so. Therefore, if natural gifts 
 were due to mere accident, the first column of Table I. 
 would have been enormously longer than the second column, 
 and the second column enormously longer than the third ; 
 but they are not so. There are nearly as many cases of 
 two or three eminent relations as of one eminent relation ; 
 and as a set-off against the thirty-nino cases that appear 
 in the first column, there arc no less than fifteen cases in 
 the third. 
 
 It is therefore clear that ability is not distributed at 
 hap-hazard, but that it clings to certain families. 
 
 We will proceed to a third test. 
 
 If genius be hereditary, as I assert it to be, the character- 
 istics that mark a judge ought to be frequently transmitted 
 to his descendants. The majority of judges belong to a 
 strongly-marked type. They are not men who are carried 
 away by sentiment, who love seclusion and dreams, but 
 they are prominent members of a very different class, one 
 that Englishmen are especially prone to honour for at 
 least the six lawful days of the week. I mean that they 
 
BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 63 
 
 are vigorous, shrewd, practical, helpful men ; glorying in 
 the rough-and-tumble of public life, tough in constitution 
 and strong in digestion, valuing what money brings, 
 aiming at position and influence, and desiring to found 
 families. The vigour of a judge is testified by the fact 
 that the average age of their appointment in the last 
 three reigns has been fifty-seven. The labour and respon- 
 sibility of the office seem enormous to lookers-on, yet 
 these elderly men continue working with ease for many 
 more years ; their average age of death is seventy-five, 
 and they commonly die in harness. Now are these 
 remarkable gifts and peculiarities inherited by their sons ? 
 Do the judges often have sons who succeed in the same 
 career, where success would have been impossible if they 
 had not been gifted with the special qualities of their 
 fathers ? The best answer is a list of names. They will 
 be of much interest to legal readers ; others can glance 
 them over, and go on to the results. 
 
 JUDGES OF ENGLAND, AND OTHER HIGH LEGAL OFFICERS, 
 BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865, WHO WERE, OR ARE, RELATED. 
 
 I mark those cases with an asterisk (*) where both relations are English 
 
 Judges. 
 
 FATHERS. SONS. 
 
 ^^A^^„„„ =■■ T?,!,.. ^ n w /rt\,„« TT \ f Sir Robert, Chief Just. C.P. 
 
 •Atkyns, Sir Edward, B.B. (Chas. II.) \ gjj. Edward, B.E. (Jas. II.) 
 
 Atkyns, Sir Richard, Chief Just. N. Wales. Sir Edward, B.E. (Clias. H.) 
 
 »Bramston, Sir Francis, Cliief K.B.(Chas.I.)' Sir Francis, B.E. (Chas. II.) 
 
 Coleridge, Sir Jolm, Just. Q.B. (Vict.) Sir John Duke, Solic.-Gen. 
 
 Dolhen, Sir Wni., Just. K.B. (Will. III.) Sir Gilbert, Just. C.P. Ireland ; cr. Bart. 
 
 *Erskine, T. ; cr. Lord Erskine ; Lord. Chan. Hon. Sir Thomas, Just. C P. (Vict.) 
 
 •Byre, Sir Samuel, Just. K.B. (Will. III.) Sir Robert, Chief Just. C.P. (Geo. II.) 
 
 rinch,Heneage,L.Ch.;cr. E.otNottingliam. Heneage, Solic.-6en, ; or. Earl Aylesford. 
 
 Finch, Sir Heneage, Recorder of London. Heneage, Ld. Chan. ; cr. E.of Nottinglxam. 
 
 •Forster, Sir James, Just. C.P. (Cha,s. I.) Sir Robert, Chief Just. K.B. (C.ias. II.) 
 
 Gurney, Sir John, B.E. (Vict.) Rt.Hon. Russell Gurney,RecorderofLond. 
 
 'Herbert, Sir Edw., Lord Keeper. (Chas. II.) Sir Edward, Chief Just. K.B. (Jas. II.) 
 
 Hewitt, James ; cr. Ld. Lifford ; Just. K.B. Joseph, Just. K.B. Ireland. 
 
 Jervis, , Chief Just, of Chester. Sir John, Chief Just. C.P. (Vict.) 
 
 Law, Edw. ;or. Ld.Ellenborough ; Ch. K.B. Chas. Ewan, M. P., Recorder of London. 
 
 'Pratt, Sir Jolm, Chief Just. K.B. (Geo. II.) Earl Camden, Lord Chanc. (Geo. III.) 
 
 •Raymond, SirThomas, Just. C.B. Robert; cr.Ld. Raymond ;Ch.K.B. (Geo II.) 
 
 Romilly, Sir Samuel, Solic-Gen. Cr. Lord Bomilly, Master of Rolls. (Vict.) 
 
 •Willes, Sir John, Chief Just. C.P. (Geo. III.) Sir Edward, Just. K.B. (Geo. III.) 
 
 •Yorke, Philip, Ld. Chanc; cr.E. Hardwicke. Hon. Charles, Lord Chanc. (Geo. III.) 
 
 1 I count the fathers of the judges of Charles II. because the judges of 
 the present reign are too young to have judges for sons. 
 
62 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND 
 
 BEOTHBES. 
 
 'Atkyns, Sir Eobert, Chief C.P. (Will. III.) Sir Edward, B.B. (Jas. II.) 
 'Cowper, Wm. ; cr. Earl Cowper ; Ld.Chanc. Sir Spencer, Just. C.P. (Geo. II.) 
 
 Erskine, T. ; cr. Lord Erskine ; Lord Chanc. Henry, twice Lord Advocate, Scotland. 
 
 ■CTj tjT5i...i.^i,-»iTT> /r,i. TT \ f Sir Frcderick, 8 Judgc ju S. Walcs. 
 
 Hyde, Sir EoDert, Chief Z.B. (Chas. II.) { j^^^^g^ of Admii-alty. 
 
 Lee, Sir ■William, Chief K.B. (Geo. II.) George, Dean of Arches, Ac. 
 
 «Lyttleton, Lord, Lord Keeper. (Chas. I.) Sir Timothy, B.E. (Chas. IL) 
 
 North, E. ; cr. Earl of Guilford ; Ld. Chanc. Eoger, Attorney-Gen. to Queen. 
 
 Pollock, Sir F. Chief B.E. (Vict.) Sir David, Chief Just. Bombay. 
 
 •Powis, Six Lyttleton, Just. K.B.(Gco. I.) Sir Thomas, Just. K.B. (Geo L) 
 
 Scarlett, Sir J. ; cr. Ld. Abinger ; Ch. B.B. Sir Wm. Ch. Just. Jamaica. 
 
 Scott, John ; cr.Earl of Eldon ; Lord Chanc. William ; cr. LordStowell ; Judge Adm. 
 
 Wilde, T. ; cr. Lord Truro ; Lord Chanc. Sir , Ch. Just. Cape of Good Hope. 
 
 'Wynham, Sir Hugh, B.E. (Chas. IL) Sir Wadham, B.E. (Chas. II.) 
 
 GEANDPATHEES. GEANDSONS. 
 
 •Atkyns, Sir Eobt. Chief C.P. (Will. IIL) Sir J. Tracy (assumed name of Atkyns), 
 
 Cursitor B.B. (Geo. III.) 
 
 Biu'net, , Scotch Judge ; Lord Cramond. Sir Thomas Burnet, Just. C.P. 
 
 *Gould, Sir Henry, Just. Q.B. (Anne.) Sir Henry Gould, Just. C.P. (Geo. IIL) 
 
 Jeffreys, , Judge in N. Wales. Jeffreys, Lord, Lord Chanc. (Jas. II.) 
 
 Pinch, H. Solic-Gen. ; cr. E. Aylesford. Hon. H. Legge, B.E. (Geo. II.) 
 
 Walter, Sir E. Chief Just. S. Wales. Lyttleton, Sir T. B.B, (Chas. II.) 
 
 "Heath, Sfr E. Chief K.B. (Chas. L) Verney, Hon. Sir J. Master of EoUs. 
 
 Out of the 286 Judges, more than OTie in every nine of 
 them have been either father, son, or brother to another 
 judge, and the other high legal relationships have been 
 even more numerous. There cannot, then, remain a doubt 
 but that the peculiar type of ability that is necessary to 
 a judge is often transmitted by descent. 
 
 The reader must guard himself against the supposition, 
 that because the Judges have so many legal relations, 
 therefore they have few other relations of eminence in 
 other walks of life. A long list might be made out of 
 those who had bishops and archbishops for kinsmen. No 
 less than ten judges — of whom one. Sir Robert Hyde, 
 appeared in the previous list — have a bishop or an arch- 
 bishop for a brother. Of these. Sir William Dolben was 
 brother to one Archbishop of York and son of the sister 
 of another, namely of John Williams, who was also the 
 Lord Keeper to James I. There are cases of Poet-relations, 
 as Cowper, Coleridge, Milton, Sir Thomas Overbury, and 
 Waller. There are numerous relatives who are novelists, 
 physicians, admirals, and generals. My lists of kinsmen 
 at the end of this chapter are very briefly treated, but 
 they include the names of many great men, whose deeds 
 have filled large volumes. It is one of my most serious 
 
BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 63 
 
 drawbacks in writing this book, to feel that names, which 
 never now present themselves to my eye without asso- 
 ciations of respect and reverence, for the great qualities 
 of those who bore them, are likely to be insignificant and 
 meaningless to the eyes of most of my readers — indeed 
 to all of those who have never had occasion to busy them- 
 selves with their history. I know how great was my own 
 ignorance of the character of the great men of previous 
 generations, before I occupied myself with biographies, and 
 I therefore reasonably suspect that many of my readers 
 will be no better informed about them than I was myself 
 A collection of men that I have learned to look upon as 
 an august Valhalla, is likely to be regarded, by those who 
 are strangers to the facts of biographical history, as an 
 assemblage of mere respectabilities. 
 
 The names of North and Montagu, among the Judges, 
 introduce us to a remarkable breed of eminent men, set 
 forth at length in the genealogical tree of the Montagus, 
 and again in that of the Sydneys (see the chapter on 
 " Literary Men "), to whose natural history — if the ex- 
 pression be permitted — a few pages may be profitably 
 assigned. There is hardly a name in those pedigrees 
 which is not more than ordinarily eminent : many are 
 illustrious. They are closely tied together in their kin- 
 ship, and they extend through ten generations. The 
 main roots of this diffused ability lie in the families of 
 Sydney and Montagu, and, in a lesser degree, in that 
 of North. 
 
 The Sydney blood — I mean that of the descendants 
 of Sir William Sydney and his wife — had extraordinary 
 influence in two different combinations. First with the 
 Dudleys, producing in the first generation. Sir Philip 
 Sydney and his eminent brother and sister ; in the second 
 generation, at least one eminent man ; and in the third 
 generation, Algernon Sydney, with his able brother and 
 much be-praised sister. The second combination of the 
 Sydney blood was with the Harringtons, producing in the 
 first generation a literary peer, and Elizabeth the mother 
 of the large and most remarkable family that forms the 
 chief feature in my genealogical table. 
 
64 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND 
 
 The Montagu blood, as represented by Sir Edward, who 
 died in the Tower, 1644, is derived from three distinct 
 sources. His great-grandfather (^F.) was Sir John Fin- 
 nieux, Chief Justice of the King's Bench ; his grandfather 
 (g.) was John Roper, Attorney-General to Henry VHI. ; 
 and his father — by far the most eminent of the three — 
 was Sir Edward Montagu, Chief Justice of the King's 
 Bench. Sir Edward Montagu, son of the Chief Justice, 
 married Elizabeth Harrington, of whom I have just 
 spoken, and had a large family, who in themselves and 
 in their descendants became most remarkable. To men- 
 tion only the titles they won : in the first generation they 
 obtained two peerages, the earldom of Manchester and 
 the barony of Montagu ; in the second they obtained two 
 more, the earldom of Sandwich and the barony of Capel ; 
 in the third five more, the dukedom of Montagu, earl- 
 doms of Halifax and of Essex, the barony of Guilford, 
 and a new barony of Capel (second creation) ; in the 
 fourth one more, the dukedom of Manchester (the Premier 
 in 1701) ; in the fifth one more, the earldom of Guilford. 
 The second Earl of Guilford, the Premier of George III. 
 (best known as Lord North), was in the sixth generation. 
 
 It is wholly impossible for me to describe the charac- 
 teristics of all the individuals who are jotted down in , 
 my genealogical tree. I could not do it without giving a 
 vast deal more room than I can spare. But this much 
 I can do, and ought to do ; namely, to take those who 
 are most closely linked with the Judges, and to show that 
 they possessed sterling ability, and did not hold their 
 high positions by mere jobbery, nor obtain their reputa- 
 tions through the accident of birth or circumstances. I 
 will gladly undertake to show this, although it happens 
 in the present instance to put my cause in a peculiarly 
 disadvantageous light, because Francis North, the Lord 
 Keeper, the first Baron Guilford, is the man of all others, 
 in that high position (identical, or nearly so, with that 
 of a Lord Chancellor), whom modem authorities vie in 
 disparaging and condemning. Those who oppose my 
 theories might say, the case of North being Lord Keeper 
 shows it is impossible to trust official rank as a criterion 
 
BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 ' 65 
 
 of ability; he was' promoted by jobbery, and jobbed 
 when he was promoted •, he inherited family influence, 
 not natural intellectual gifts : and the same may be said 
 of all the members of this or of any other pedigree. As 
 I implied before, there is enough truth in this objection 
 to make it iinpossible to meet it by a flat contradiction, 
 based on a plain and simple statement. It is necessary 
 to analyse characters, and to go a little into detail. I 
 will do this, and when it is concluded I believe many of 
 my readers will better appreciate than they did before, 
 how largely natural intellectual gifts are the birthright of 
 some families. 
 
 Francis North, the Lord Keeper, was one of a family of 
 five brothers and one sister. The lives of three of the 
 brothers are familiarly known to us through the charming 
 biographies written by another brother, Roger North. 
 Their position in the Montagu family is easily discovered 
 by means of the genealogical tree. They fall in the third 
 of those generations I have just described — the one in 
 which the family gained one dukedom, two earldoms, and 
 two baronies. Their father was of a literary stock, con- 
 tinued backwards in one line during no less than five 
 generations. The first Lord North was an eminent lawyer 
 in the time of Queen Elizabeth, aiid his son — an able man 
 and an ambassador — ^married the daughter of Lord Chan- 
 cellor Rich. His son again — who did not live to enjoy the 
 peerage — married the daughter of a Master of the Court 
 of Requests, and his great-great-grandsons — the inter- 
 mediate links being more or less distinguished, but of 
 whose marriages I know little — were the brothers North, 
 of whom I am about to speak. 
 
 The father of these brothers was the fourth Baron North. 
 He was a literary man, and, among other matters, wrote 
 the life of the founder of his family. He was an " eco- 
 nomical " man, and " exquisitely virtuous and sober in 
 his person." The style of his writings was not so bright 
 as that of his father, the second baron, who was described 
 as full of spirit and flame, and who was an author both 
 in prose and verse ; his poems were praised by Walpole. 
 The mother of the brothers, namely, Anne Montagu, is 
 
^6 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND 
 
 described by her son as a compendium of charity and 
 wisdom. I suspect it was from the fourth Baron North 
 that the disagreeable qualities in three of the brothers 
 North were derived — such as the priggishness of the Lord 
 Keeper, and that curious saving, mercantile spirit that 
 appeared under different forms in the Lord Keeper, the 
 Financier, and the Master of Trinity College. I cannot 
 avoid alluding to these qualities, for they are prominent 
 features in their characters, and find a large place in their 
 biographies. 
 
 In speaking of the Lord Keeper, I think I had better 
 begin with the evil part of his character. When that has 
 been admitted and done with, the rest of my task will be 
 pleasant and interesting. In short, the Lord Keeper is 
 mercilessly handled in respect to his public character. 
 Lord Campbell calls him the most odious man that ever 
 held the Great Seal, and says that throughout his whole life 
 he sought and obtained advancement by the meanest arts. 
 Bishop Burnet calls him crafty and designing. Lord 
 Macaulay accuses him of selfishness, cowardice, and mean- 
 ness. I have heard of no writer who commends his public 
 character except his brother, who was tenderly attached to 
 him. I should say, that even Lord Campbell acknowledges 
 the Lord Keeper to have been extremely amiable in all his 
 domestic relations, and that nothing can be more touching 
 than the account we have of the warm and steady affec- 
 tion between him and his brother, who survived to be his 
 biographer. I am, however, no further concerned with 
 the Lord Keeper's public character than to show that, 
 notwithstanding his most unworthy acts to obtain advance- 
 ment, and notwithstanding he had relatives in high offices 
 to help him, his own ability and that of his brothers were 
 truly remarkable. 
 
 Bishop Burnet says of him that he had not the virtues 
 of his predecessor (Lord Nottingham), but he had parts 
 far beyond him. However, Lord Campbell dissents from 
 this, and remarks that " a Nottingham does not arise above 
 once in a century." (I will here beg the reader not to 
 be unmindful of the marvellous hereditary gifts of the 
 Nottingham or Finch family.) Macaulay says his in- 
 
BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 67 
 
 tellect was clear, his industry great, his proficiency in 
 letters and science respectable, and his legal learning more 
 than respectable. His brother Roger writes thus of the 
 Lord Keeper's youth : — 
 
 " It was singular and remarkable in him that, together 
 with the study of the law, which is thought ordinarily to 
 devour the whole studious time of a young gentleman, he 
 continued to pursue his inquiries into all ingenious arts, 
 history, humanity, and languages ; whereby he became not 
 only a good lawyer, but a good historian, politician, mathe- 
 matician, natural philosopher, and,! must add, musician 
 in perfection." 
 
 The Hon. Sir Dudley North, his younger brother, was 
 a man of exceedingly high abilities and vigour. He went 
 as a youth to Smyrna, where his good works are not 
 yet forgotten, and where he made a large fortune ; then, 
 returning to England, he became at once a man of the 
 highest note in Parliament as a financier. There was 
 an unpleasant side to his character when young, but he 
 overmastered and outgrew it. Namely, he first showed a 
 strange bent to traffic when at school ; afterwards he 
 cheated sadly, and got into debts ; then he cheated his 
 parents to pay the debts. At last he made a vigorous 
 effort, and wholly Reformed himself, so that his brother 
 concludes his biography in this way : — 
 
 " If I may be so free as to give my thoughts of his 
 morals, I must allow that, as to all the mercantile arts and 
 stratagems of trade wliich could be used to get money 
 from those he dealt with, I believe he was no niggard ; but 
 as for falsities ... he was as clear as any man living." 
 
 It seems, from the same authority, that he was a very 
 forward, lively, and beautiful child. At school he did not 
 get on so well with his books, as he had an excessive desire 
 for action ; still, his ability was such that a little applica- 
 tion went a long way with him, and in the end he came out 
 a moderate scholar. He was a great swimmer, and could 
 live in the water for a whole afternoon. (I mention this, 
 because I shall hereafter have occasion to speak of physical 
 gifts not unfrequently accompaiiying intellectual ones.) He 
 sometimes left his clothes in charge of a porter below 
 
 f2 
 
68 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND 
 
 London Bridge, then ran naked upon the mud-shore of the 
 Thames up ahnost as high as Clielsea, for the pleasure of 
 swimming down to his clothes with the tide, and he loved 
 to end by shooting the cascade beneath old London Bridge. 
 I often marvel at his feat, when I happen to be on the 
 river in a steamer. 
 
 I will now quote Macaulay's description of his first 
 appearance, in his after life, on the stage of English 
 politics. Speaking, in his " History of England," of the 
 period immediately following the accession of James II., 
 Macaulay says — 
 
 " The person on whom devolved the task of devising 
 ways and means was Sir Dudley North, younger brother 
 of the Lord Keeper. Dudley North was one of the ablest 
 men of his time. He had early in life been sent to the 
 Levant, where he had long been engaged in mercantile 
 pursuits. Most men would, in such a situation, have 
 allowed tlieir .faculties to rust ; for at Smyrna and Con- 
 stantinople there were few books and few intelligent 
 companions. But the young factor had one of those 
 vigorous understandings which are independent of external 
 aids. In his solitude he meditated deeply on the philo- 
 sophy of trade, and thought out, by degrees, a complete 
 and admirable theory — substantially the same with that 
 which a hundred years later was expounded by Adam 
 Smith." North was brought into Parliament for Banbuiy ; 
 and, though a new member, was the person on whom the 
 Lord Treasurer chiefly relied for the conduct of financial 
 busiuess in the Lower House. " North's ready wit and 
 perfect knowledge of trade prevailed, both in the Treasury 
 and the Parliament, against all opposition. The old 
 members were amazed at seeing a man who had not been a 
 fortnight in the House, and whose life had been chiefly 
 passed in foreign countries, - assume with confidence, and 
 discharge with ability, all the functions of a Chancellor of 
 the Exchequer." He was forty ^four .years old at the 
 time. ■ ) . 
 
 - Roger North describes the financial theories of his 
 brother, thus; "One is, that trade is not distributed, as 
 government, }3j' nations and kingdoms, but is one through- 
 
BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 69 
 
 oi(t the whole world; as the maiu sea, which cannot- be 
 emptied or replenished in one part, but the whole more or 
 less will be affected." Another was " concerning money ; 
 that no nation could wartt inoney (specie), and they would 
 not abound in it. . . . For if a people want money, they 
 will give a price for it ; and then merchants, for gain, 
 bring it and lay it down before them." 
 . Ebger North, speaking of Sir iDudley and of the Lord 
 Keeper, says : " These brothers lived with extreme satis- 
 faction in each other's society; for both had the skill and 
 knowledge of the world, as to all affairs relating to their 
 several professions, in perfection, and each was an Indies 
 to the other, producing always the richest novelties, of 
 which the best understandings are greedy." < ; 
 
 ■ The Hon. Dr. John North, Master of Trinity College, 
 Cambridge, differed in some respects from his brothers, 
 and resembled them in others : — ' 
 
 " When he was very young, a.ndalso as he grew lip, he 
 was of a nitfe and tender constitution— ^ not so vigorous and 
 athletic as miost of his brothers were." "His temper was 
 always reserved and studious. ... If anything so early 
 seemed amiss 'in him, it was a non-natural gravity, which 
 in youths i.s seldom a good sign, for it argues imbecility x)i 
 body and mind, or both; but his lay wholly in the 
 former, for his mental capacity was vigorous, as none 
 more;" ' ' 
 
 Thus he became devoted to study, and the whole of his 
 expenditure went to books ; in other respects he was penu- 
 rious and hoarding. Consequently, as his brother says, 
 "he was over-much addicted to thinking, or else- he per- 
 formed it with niore labour, and intenseness than other men 
 ordinai'ily do. : . . He was, in a word, the most intense 
 and passibnate thinker that ever lived, and was in his right 
 mind." This ruined his health. " His flesh was strangely 
 flaccid and soft ; his ' going weak and shuflling, often 
 crossing his legs as if he were tipsy ; his sleep seldom or 
 never easy, but interrupted with unquiet and painful 
 dreams — the reposes he had' were short and by snatches ; 
 his active spirit, had rarely any settlement or rest." 
 
 It is evident that he played foolish tricks: with; his brain, 
 
70 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND 
 
 and the result was that he had a stroke, and utterly broke 
 up, decaying more and more in mind and body until death 
 relieved him, set. 38. 
 
 There is no doubt that Dr. John North deserved more 
 reputation than he has obtained, partly owing to his early 
 death, and partly to his exceeding sensitiveness in respect 
 to posthumous criticism. He left peremptory orders that 
 all his MSS. should be burnt. He appears to have been 
 especially skilled in Greek and Hebrew scholarship. 
 
 The Lord Keeper and the Master of Trinity resembled 
 each other in their painfully shy dispositions and studious 
 tastes. The curious money-saving propensities were 
 common to all three brothers. The indolent habits of the 
 Master of Trinity were shared by Sir Dudley after his 
 return to England, who would take no exercise what- 
 ever, but sat all day either at home, or else steering a little 
 sailing-vessel on the Thames. The Lord Keeper was 
 always fanciful about his health. 
 
 The Hon. Mary North, afterwards Lady Spring, was the 
 sister of these brothers, and no less gifted than they. 
 Roger North says — 
 
 " Besides the advantage of her person, she had a superior 
 wit, prodigious memory, and was most agreeable in con- 
 versation." She used to rehearse " by heart prolix 
 romances, with the substance of speeches and letters, as 
 well as passages ; and this with little or no hesitation, but 
 in a continual series of discourse — the very memory of 
 which is to me at this day very wonderful." 
 
 She died not long after the birth of her iirst child, and 
 the child died not long after her. 
 
 Roger North, the biographer of his brothers, from whom 
 I have quoted so much, was the author of other works, and 
 among them is a memoir on Music, showing that he shared 
 the musical faculty that was strongly developed in the 
 Lord Keeper. Little is known of his private life. He was 
 Attorney-General to the consort of James II. Tliere can 
 be no doubt as to his abilities. The " Lives of the Norths " 
 is a work of no ordinary writer. It is full of touches of 
 genius and shrewd perception of character. Roger North 
 Sterns to have been a most loving and loveable man. 
 
BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 71 
 
 Charles, the fifth Lord North, was the eldest of the 
 family, and succeeded to the title ; but he did not, so far 
 as I am aware, show signs of genius. However, he had a 
 daughter whose literary tastes were curiously similar. to 
 those of her imcle. Dr. John. She was a Dudley North, 
 who, in the words of Roger, " emaciated herself with study, 
 whereby she had made familiar to her not only the Greek 
 and Latin, but the Oriental languages." She died early, 
 having collected a choice library of Oriental works. 
 
 I will conclude this description of the family with a 
 characteristically quaint piece of their biogi'apher'a preface : 
 " Really, the case is memorable for the happy circumstance 
 of a flock so numerous and diffused as this of the last 
 Dudley Lord North's was, and no one scabby sheep, in it." 
 
 The nearest collateral relation of the North family by 
 the Montagu side is Charles Hatton, their first cousin. 
 He is alluded to three times in Roger North's " Lives," 
 and each time with the same epithet — " the incomparable 
 Charles Hatton." Why he was so distinguished there is 
 no information, but it is reasonable to accept Roger North's 
 estimate of his merits, so far as to classify him among the 
 gifted members of the Montagu family. 
 
 I will mention only four more of the kinsmen of the 
 Norths. The first is their great-uncle, Sir Henry Montagu, 
 Chief Justice of the King's Bench, and created Earl of 
 Manchester, who was grandfather to James Montagu, Ch. 
 B.E. (Geo. III.), and uncle of William, Ch. B. E. (Jas. IL), 
 both of whom are included in my list. Lord Clarendon 
 says of Sir Henry, that he was " a man of great industry 
 and sagacity in business, which he delighted in exceedingly ; 
 and preserved so great a vigour of mind, even to his death, 
 that some who had known him in his younger years 
 did believe him to have much quicker parts in his age 
 than before." 
 
 The second Earl of Manchester, gN. to the Norths, was 
 the Baron Kimbolton, of Marston Moor, and, as Lord 
 Campbell says, " one of the most distinguished men who 
 appeared in the most interesting period of our history ; 
 having, as Lord Kimbolton, vindicated the liberties of his 
 country in the Senate, as Earl of Manchester in the field. 
 
72 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND 
 
 and having afterwards mainly contributed ' to the sup- 
 pression of anarchy by the, restoration of the royal line." • [ 
 
 The first Earl of Sandwich; also gN. to the Norths, was 
 the gallant High Admiral of England in the time 6f 
 Gharles.II. He began life as, a soldier, when only eighteen 
 years of age^ with a Parliamentary regiment that he himself 
 had raised ; and he ended it in a naval battle against the 
 Dutch' in Southwold Bay. He also trandated a Spanish 
 work on Metallurgy. I do not know that the book is of 
 any Value, but the fact is worthy of notice as showing that 
 he was more than a mere soldier or sailor. 
 
 The last of the eminent relations of the Norths of whom 
 I shall speak at length, was the great-grandson of the 
 eldest brother, who became the famous Premier — the Lord 
 North — of the time of the American war. Lord Brougham 
 says that all contemporaries agree in representing his talents 
 as having shone with a great and steady lustre during that 
 singularly trying period. He speaks of a wit that never 
 failed him, and a" suavity of temper that conld never be 
 ruffled, as peculiar qualities in which he, and indeed all his 
 family (his immediate family), excelled most other men. 
 The admirable description of Lord North by his daughter, 
 Lady Charlotte Lindsay, that is appended to his bio- 
 graphy by Lord Brougham, is sufficient proof of that lady's 
 high ability. 
 
 There is yet another great legal family, related to the 
 Norths, whose plaice in the pedigree I do not know : it is 
 that of the Hydes,, and includes the illustrious first Earl 
 of Clarendon. It appears that the Lord Chief Justice 
 Hyde used to take kindly notice of the Lord Keeper, 
 Francis North, when a young rising barrister, and allude 
 to his kinship, artd call him " cousin." 
 
 It is want of space, not want of material, that compels 
 me to conclude the description of the able relatives of the 
 Norths and Montagus. But I am sure I have said enough 
 to prove the assertion with which I prefaced it, that natural 
 gifts of an exceedingly high order were inherited by a 
 very large number of the members of the family, and that 
 these owed their reputations to their abilities, and not to 
 family support, 
 
BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 73 
 
 Another test of the truth of the hereditary character of 
 ability is to see whether the near relations of very eminent 
 men are more frequently eminent than those who are 
 more remote. Table II. (p. 55) answers this question with 
 great distinctness in the way I have already explained. 
 It shows that the near relations of the Judges are far 
 richer in ability than the more remote — so niuch so, that 
 the fact of being born in the fourth degree of relationship 
 is of no sensible benefit at all. The data from which 
 I obtained column C joi that table are as follow : — I find 
 that 23 of the Judges are reported to have had " large 
 families," say consisting of four adult sons in each ; 11 
 are simply described as having " issue," say at the rate of 
 1^ sons each ; and that the number of the sons of others 
 are specified as amounting between them to 586 ; forming 
 thus far a total of 294. In addition to these, there are 
 9 reported marriages of judges in which no allusion is 
 made to children, and there are 31 judges in respect to 
 whom nothing is said about marriage at all. I think we 
 are fairly justified, from these data, in concluding^ that 
 each judge is father, on an average, to not less than one 
 soil who 'lives to an age at which he might have distin- 
 guished himself, if he had the ability to do so. I also 
 find the (adult) families to consist on an average of 
 not less than 2J sons and 2| daughters each, conse- 
 quently each judge has an average of 1| brothers and 2^ 
 sisters. 
 
 From these data it is perfectly easy to reckon the 
 number of kinsmen in each order. Thus the nephews 
 consist of' the brothers' sons and the sisters' sons : now 
 100 judges are supposed to have 150 brothers and 250 
 sisters, and each brother and each sister to have, on the 
 average, only one son ; consequently the 100 judges will 
 have (150 + 250, or) 400 nephews. 
 
 I need not trouble the reader with more figures ; suffice 
 it to say, I have divided the total numbers of eminent 
 kinsmen to 100 judges by the number of kinsmen in each 
 degree, and from that division I obtained the column D 
 in Table II., which I now project into a genealogical tree 
 in Table III, 
 
74 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND 
 
 TABLE III. 
 
 Pehcentage of Eminent Men in each Degree of Kinship to the 
 
 MOST GIFTED MeMBEE OF DISTINGUISHED FAMILIES. 
 
 I Great-grajulfathers. 
 
 7g Grandfathers. 'J Great-uncles. 
 
 26 FATHERS. 4J Uncles. 
 
 I I 
 
 The most eminent members of oq T!T(nTHT?'R.c! M Tfirtf rmiiiiii 
 lOO distinguished families. ^"^ I3KU1 lliiJto. 14 Mtrsl cousins. 
 
 36 SONS. 4| Nephews. 
 
 9i Grandsons. 2 Great-nephezos. 
 
 li Great-grandsons. 
 
 It will be observed that Table III. refers only to distin- 
 guished families. If we modified it to correspond with 
 column E of Table II., in which all the Judges, whether 
 they have distinguished relations or no, are considered, 
 the proportion between the eminent kinsmen in each 
 different degree would be unchanged, though their abso- 
 lute numbers would be reduced to about one-third of 
 their value. 
 
 Table III. shows in the most unmistakable manner 
 the enormous odds that a near kinsman has over one that 
 is remote, in the chaijce of inheriting ability. Speaking 
 roughly, the perdentages are quartered at each successive 
 remove, whether by descent or collaterally. Thus in the 
 first degi'ee of kinship the percentage is about 28 ; in the 
 second, about 7 ; and in the third, 1 J. 
 
 The table also testifies to another fact, in which people 
 do not commonly believe. It shows that when we regard 
 the averages of many instances, the frequent sports of 
 pature in producing prodigies must be regarded as appa- 
 
BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 75 
 
 rent, and not as real. Ability, in the long run, does not 
 suddenly start into existence and disappear with equal 
 abruptness, but rather, it rises in a gradiial and regular 
 curve out of the ordinary level of family life. The statistics 
 show that there is a regular average increase of ability 
 in the generations that precede its culmination, and as 
 regular a decrease in those that succeed it. In the 
 first case the marriages have been consentient to its 
 production, in the latter they have been incapable of 
 preserving it. 
 
 After three successive dilutions of the blood, the descend- 
 ants of the Judges appear incapable of rising to eminence. 
 These results are not surprising even when compared with 
 the far greater length of kinship through which features 
 or diseases may be transmitted. Ability must be based 
 on a triple footing, every leg of which has to be firmly 
 planted. In order that a man should inherit ability in 
 the concrete, he must inherit three qualities that are 
 separate and independent of one another : he must in- 
 herit capacity, zeal, and vigour; for unless these three, 
 or, at the very least, two of them are combined, he 
 cannot hope to make a figure in the world. The proba- 
 bility against inheriting a combination of three qualities 
 not correlated together, is necessarily in a triplicate pro- 
 portion greater than it is against inheriting any one of 
 them. 
 
 There is a marked difference between the percentage of 
 ability in the grandsons of the judge when his sons (the 
 fathers of those grandsons) have been eminent than when 
 they have not. Let us suppose that the son of a judge 
 wishes to marry : what expectation has he that his own 
 sons will become eminent men, stipporters of his family, 
 and not a burden to it, in their after life ? 
 
 In the case where the son of the judge is himself emi- 
 nent, I find, out of the 226 judges previous to the present 
 reign, 22 whose sons have been distinguished men. I do 
 not count instances in the present reign, because the 
 grandsons of these judges are for the most part too young 
 to have achieved distinction. 22 out of 226 gives 10 in 
 10-0 as the percentage of the judges that have had distin- 
 
70 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND 
 
 gwished sons. (The reg-der : will retoark how lieav thi? 
 result is to the 9| as entered in 'my table, showing' the 
 general truth of both estimates.) Of these 2? I cpunt^th^ 
 following triplets. The Atkyns family as two.; It, is true 
 that the grandfather was only Chief Justice of ; North 
 Wales, and not an English judge, but the vigour of ^the 
 blood is proved by the line of hot iQnly . his soa and two 
 grandsons being English judges, but also by the grandson 
 of one of them, through the female line, being an English 
 judge also. Another line is that of the Praltts, viz. the 
 Chief Justice and his son; the Lord Chancellor, Earl 
 Camden, and his grandson, the son of the Earl, created 
 the Marquis Camden ; the latter was Chancellor of the 
 University of Camlaridge, and a man of note in many 
 ways. Another case is in the Yorke line, for the son of 
 the Lord Chancellor, the Earl of Hardwicke, was Charles 
 Yorke, hiniself a Lord Chancellor. His sons/were able 
 men: otie became First Lord of the Admiralty, another 
 was Bishop* of Ely, a third was a military officer of dis- 
 tinction and created Baron Dover, a fourth was an admiral 
 of distinction. I, will not count; all these, but will reckon 
 them as thre^ favourable iiistances." The total, thus far, is 
 six ; to which might be added in fairness Something frow 
 that most remarkable Montagu family and itsconnexionsi, 
 of which several judges, both before and ^ifter thesaiDces- 
 sion of Charles I., were members. However, I wish to b§ 
 well within bounds, and therefore will -claim" only six 
 successes out of the 22 cases (I allow one son to each 
 judge, as before), or 1 in 4. Even under these Ifmita'- 
 tions it. is only 4 to 1, on the average, against each 
 child of an eminent son of a judge becoming a distin- 
 guished man. -, i ' ^ • 
 
 Now for the second category, where the son iS not emi- 
 nent, but the grandson is. There are only seven of these 
 cases to the (226 — 22 or) 204 judges that remain, and 
 one or two of them are not of' a very high order. They 
 are the third Earl Shaftesbury, author of the " Charac- 
 teristics ; " Cowper, the poet ; Lord Lechmere, the Attor- 
 ney-General ; Sir Wm, Mansfield, Commander-in-Chief in 
 India ; Sir Eardley Willmot; wKq filled various offices with 
 
BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 11 
 
 credit and was created a baronet ; and Lord Wyndham, 
 Lord Chancellor of Ireland. Fielding, the novelist, was 
 grandson of Judge Gould, by the female line. Hence it 
 is 204 to 7, or 30 to 1, against the non-eminent son of 
 a judge having an eminent child. 
 
 The iigures in these two categories are clearly too few 
 to justify us in relying on them, except so far as to show 
 that the probability of a judge having an eminent grand- 
 son is largely increased if his sons are also eminent. It 
 follows that the sons or daughters of distinguished men 
 who are themselves gifted with decidedly high ability, as 
 tested at the University or elsewhere, cannot do better 
 than marry early in life. If they have a large family, the 
 odds are in their favour that one at least of their children 
 will be eminently successful in life, and will be a subject of 
 pride to them and a help to the rest. 
 
 Let us for a moment consider the bearing of the facts 
 j^ust obtained, on the theory of an aristocracy where able 
 men earn titles, aiid transmit them by descent through the 
 line of their eldest male representatives. The practice 
 may be justified on two distinct grounds. On the one 
 hand; the future peer is reared in a home full of family 
 tradition?, that-forni his disposition. On the other hand, 
 he is presumed to inherit the ability of the founder of the 
 family. The former is a real justification for the law of 
 primogeniture, as applied to titles and possessions; the 
 latter, as we see from the table, is not, A man who has 
 no able ancestor nearer in blood to him than a great- 
 grandparent, is inappreciably better off in the chance of 
 being himself gifted with ability, than if he had been taken 
 out of the general mass of men. An old peerage is a 
 valueless title to natural gifts, except so far as it may 
 have been furbished up by a succession of wise inter- 
 marriages. When, however, as is often the case, the direct 
 line has become extinct and the title has passed to a 
 distant relative, who had not been reared in the family 
 traditions, the sentiment that is attached to its possession 
 is utterly unreasonable. I cannot think of any claim to 
 respect, put forward in modern days, that is so entirely 
 an imposture, as that made by a peer on the ground of 
 
78 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND 
 
 descent, who lias neither been nobly educated, nor has any 
 eminent kinsman, within three degrees. 
 
 I will conclude this chapter with a few facts I have 
 derived from my various jottings, concerning the " natural 
 history " of Judges. It appears that the parentage of the 
 Judges in the last six reigns, viz. since the accession of 
 George I., is as follows, reckoning in percentages : noble, 
 honourable, or baronet (but not judges), 9 ; landed gen- 
 tlemen, 35 ; judge, barrister, or attorney, 15 ; bishop or 
 clergyman, 8 ; medical, 7 ; merchants and various, un- 
 classed, 10 ; tradesmen, 7 ; unknown, I). There is, there- 
 fore, no very marked class peculiarity in the origin of the 
 Judges. They seem to be derived from much the same 
 sources as the scholars of our Universities, with a decided 
 but not excessive preponderance in favour of legal parents. 
 
 I also thought it worth while to note the order in which 
 the Judges stood in their several families, to see whether 
 ability affected the eldest more than the youngest, or if 
 any important fact of the kind might appear. I find in 
 my notes that I have recorded the order of the birth of 
 72 judges. The result of the percentages is, that the judge 
 was an only son in 11 cases ; eldest in 17 ; second in 38 ; 
 third in 22 ; fourth in 9 ; fifth in 1 ; and of a yet later 
 birth in 2 instances. It is clear that the eldest sons do 
 not succeed as judges half as well as the cadets, I suppose 
 that social influeaces are, on the whole, against their 
 entering, or against their succeeding at the law. 
 
BETWEEW 1660 AND 1865 79 
 
 APPENDIX TO JUDGES 
 
 There have been 286 Judges, according to the "Lives of the Judges," 
 by Foss, lietween the accession of Charles II. and the year 1864. No less 
 than 112 of them find a place in the following list. Among the Judges are 
 included the Lord Chancellors, 30 in number, and of these eminent officers 
 no less than 24, or 80 per cent, of the whole, will be found to have eminent 
 relations. 
 
 Contractimis employed in the List. 
 
 The name of a Sovereign in parentheses, as (Charles II.), shows the latest 
 reign in which each judge held office. 
 
 Ch. K. B. (or Q. B.) = Chief Justice of the King's (or Queen's) Bench. 
 
 Just. K. B. (orQ. B.) = Justice of the King's (or Queen's) Bench. 
 
 Ch. B. E. = Chief Baron of the Exchequer. 
 
 B. E. = Baron of the Exchequer. 
 
 Curs. B. E. = Cursitor Baron of the Exchequer. 
 
 Ch. C. P. = Chief Justice of the Common Pleas. 
 
 Just. C. P. = Justice of the Common Pleas. 
 
 M. R. = Master of the KoUs. 
 
 Abinger, Lord. See Scarlett. 
 Abney, Sir Thomas ; Just. C. P (Geo. II.) 
 U. Sir Thomas Abney, a famous Lord Mayor of London ; 
 one of the promoters of the Bank of England ; pro- 
 tector of Dr. Isaac Watts. See Watts' Elegy on him. 
 [F.] Sir Edward Abney, LL.D. and M.P., a man of import- 
 ance in his day. 
 Alderson, Sir Edward Hall ; B. E. (Vict.) 
 r. Recorder of Norwich, Ipswich, and Yarmouth. 
 TJs. Mrs. Opie, the novelist. 
 Alibone, Sir Richard; Just. K. B. (James II.) 
 G. Eminent Protestant divine. (P. turned Papist.) 
 
80 I'HE JUDGES OF ENGLAND 
 
 Atkyns, Sir Edward; B. E. (Charles II.) 
 [G.] Thomas, twice Reader in Lincoln's Inn. 
 F. Sir Richard, Ch. Just. N. Wales. 
 S. Sir Robert, Ch. Just. C. P. (Will. III.) 
 S. Sir Edward, B. E. (James II.) 
 
 PS. Sir John Tracy, who assumed his mother's name of 
 Atkyns, Curs. B. E. (Geo. III.) 
 
 Thomas, Reader in Lincoln's Inn. 
 
 Sir Richard, Ch. Just. N. Wales. 
 
 Sir Edward, B.E. (Chas. IL) 
 
 Sir Robert, Ch. Just. C. P. Sir Edward, B. E. (James IL) 
 
 I 
 Daughter. 
 
 Sir J. Tracy (Atkyns), Curs. B. E. 
 
 Atkyns, Sir Robert ; Ch. C. P. (Will. III.) 
 G. Sir Richard, Ch. Just. N. Wales. 
 
 F. Sir Edward,. B. E. (Charles II.) 
 B. Sir Edward, B. E. (James II.) 
 
 p. Sir John Tracy, who assumed the name of Atkyns, Curs. 
 B. E. 
 Atkyns, Sir Edward ; B. E. (James II.) 
 
 G. Sir Richard, Ch. Just. N. Wales. 
 F. Sir Edward, B. E. (Charles II.) 
 B. Sir Robert, Ch. C. P. 
 
 Bp. Sir J. Tracy, assumed name of Atkyns, Curs. B. E. 
 Atkyns, Sir John Tracy, (his mother was named Atkyns, 9,nd 
 he adopted her name) ; Curs. B. E. (Geo. III.^ 
 
 g. Sir Robert Atkyns, Ch. C. P. 
 
 gB. Sir Edward Atkyns, B. E. (James II.) 
 
 gP.' Sir Edward Atkyns, B. E. (Charles II.) 
 Bathurst, Henry ; 2d Earl of Bathurst ; Ld. Chanc. (Geo. 
 
 ™-) 
 
 F. The first Earl, an accomplished wit. 
 
 n. Sir Francis Buller, Just. K. B., the famous judge; (Geo. 
 
 III.) 
 Bedingfield, Sir Henry ; Ch. C. P. (James 11.) 
 U. Sir Thomas Bedingfield, Just. C. P. (Charles I.) 
 Best, Wm. Draper ; created Ld. Wynford ; Ch. 0. P. (Geo.' IV.) 
 g. General Sir William Draper, the well-known antagonist 
 of " Junius." 
 
BETWEEN 1660 AND 1.865 81 
 
 Bickersteth, Henry ; created Lord Langdale ; W. R. (Vict. ) 
 
 u. Dr. Batty, the famous physician. 
 Birch, Sir John ; Curs. B. E. (Geo. II.) 
 [U.] Colonel Thomas Birch, well known under the Common- 
 wealth. 
 Blackburn, Sir Colin ; Just. Q. B. (Vict.) 
 B. Professor of Mathematics at Glasgow, 
 g. Rev. John Gillies, LL.D., historian, and successor to Dr. 
 Robertson (the gr. uncle of Lord Brougham) as 
 historiographer of Scotland. 
 Blackstone, Sir William ; Just. C. P. (Geo. III.) 
 S. His second son held all his University preferments. 
 N. Henry, wrote " Reports " that were even more popular 
 
 than his own. 
 Bramston, Sir Francis; B. B. (Charles II.) 
 
 F. Sir John Bramston, Ch. K. B. under Charles I. 
 Browne, Samuel ; Just. C. P. (Charles 11.) 
 
 uS. Oliver St. John, Ch. Just. C. P. under the Protectorate. 
 Brougham, Henry ; cr. Ld. Brougham ; Ld. Chanc. (Will. 
 
 gB. Robertson, the historian. 
 BuUer, Sir Francis ; Just. C. P. (Geo. III.) 
 
 U. William BuUer, Bishop of Exeter. 
 
 u. Earl of Bathur.st, Lord Chancellor. (Geo. III.) 
 
 N. Rt. Hon. Charles BuUer, statesman. 
 Burnet, Sir Thomas ; Just. C. P. (Geo. II.) 
 
 G. Eminent Scotch lawyer, titled Lord Cramond. 
 F. The celebrated Whig bishop. Bishop Burnet, 
 
 Camden, Earl. See Pratt. 
 
 Campbell, Lord ; Lord Chancellor. (Vict.) 
 
 [G.] Eminently successful scholar at St. Andrew's. 
 
 [F.J Had distinguished literary attainments ; was pious and 
 eloquent. 
 
 N. George Campbell, member of Supreme Court of Calcutta ; 
 writer on Indian politics. 
 Chelmsford,. Lord. See Thbsiger. 
 Churchill, Sir John ; M. R. (James II.) 
 
 GN. John Churchill, the great Duke of Marlborough. 
 
 GNS. Duke of Berwick, great general. 
 Clarendon, Earl. See Hyde. 
 Clarke, Sir Charles ; Ch. B. E. (Geo. II.) 
 
 B. Dean of Chester. 
 
 u. Charles Trimnell, Bishop of Winchester. 
 
 a 
 
82 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND 
 
 Clive, Sir Edward ; Just. C. P. (Geo. III.) 
 U. Sir George CUve, Curs. B. E. (Geo. II.) 
 UP. The great Lord Clive, Governor-General of India. 
 Clive, Sir George ; Curs. B. E. (Geo. II.) 
 N. Sir Edward Clive, Just. C. P. (Geo. III.) 
 NS. The son of another nephew was the great Lord Clive. 
 Cockburn, Sir Alexander James ; Ch. Q. B. (Vict.) 
 
 [F.] Envoy and Minister Plenipotentiary to Columbia. 
 Coleridge, Sir John Taylor; Just. Q. B. (Vict.) 
 U. Samuel Taylor Coleridge, poet and metaphysician. See 
 under Poets. (He was father of Hartley, Derwent, 
 and Sara.) 
 US. Hartley Coleridge, poet. 
 US. Edward, Master at Eton. 
 US. Derwent Coleridge, Principal of St. Mark's College, 
 
 Chelsea. 
 U/S'. Sara Coleridge, authoress. (Married her cousin, Henry 
 
 Nelson Coleridge.) 
 US. Henry Nelson Coleridge (son of Col. Coleridge, brother 
 
 of Samuel Taylor C), author. 
 S. Sir John Duke Coleridge, Solicitor-General. 
 Cooper, Sir Anthony Ashley ; created Earl of Shaftesbury ; 
 Lord Chancellor. (Charles II.) 
 P. The 3d Earl, author of the " Characteristics." 
 Copley, Sir John Singleton ; cr. Ld. Lyndhurst ; Ld. Chanc. 
 (Vict.) 
 P. A painter, and an eminent one, judging from the prices 
 that his pictures now fetch. 
 Cottenham, Lord. See Pbpys. 
 Cowper, Sir "Wm. ; created Earl Cowper; Ld. Chanc. (Geo. 
 
 !•) 
 B. Sir Spencer Cowper, Just. C. P. (Geo. II.) 
 
 NS. The grandson of Sir Spencer was Cowper the poet. See 
 
 Poets. 
 Co\wper, Sir Spencer; Just. C. P. (Geo. II.) 
 
 B. 1st Earl Cowper, Lord Chancellor. (Geo. I.) 
 
 P. William Cowper, the poet. 
 Cranworth, Lord. See Eolpe. 
 Dampier, Sir Henry; Just. K. B. (Geo. III.) 
 
 F. Dean of Durham. 
 
 B. Bishop of Ely. 
 
 De Grey, Sir Wm. ; cv. Lord Walsingham ; Ch. C. P. (Geo. 
 III.) 
 
BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 83 
 
 S. Thomas, 2d Baron ; for twenty years Chairman of Com- 
 mittees in House of Lords. 
 Denison, Sir Thomas ; Just. K. B. (Geo. III.) 
 4 NS. and [2 NS.] His brother was grandfather to a remark- 
 able family of six brothers, namely, the present Speaker 
 of the House of Commons, the Bishop of Salisbury, the 
 Archdeacon of Taunton, the ex-Governor of South 
 Australia, and two others, both of whom are scholars. 
 Denman, Sir Thomas ; created Lord Denman ; Ch. Q. B. 
 (Vict.) 
 F. Physician, a celebrated accoucheur. 
 S. Hon. George Denman, Q.C., M.P., and the first classic of 
 
 his year, 1842, at Cambridge. 
 uS. Sir Benjamin Brodie, 1st Bart., the late eminent 
 
 surgeon. 
 uP. The present Sir Benjamin Brodie, 2d Bart., Professor 
 of Chemistry at Oxford. 
 Dolben, Sir William ; Just. K. B. (Will. III.) 
 S. Sir Gilbert Dolben, Just. C. P. in Ireland, created a 
 
 Bart. 
 B. John Dolben, Archbishop of York. 
 
 gB. Archbishop John Williams, the Lord Keeper to James I. 
 Eldon, Lord. See Scott. 
 Ellenborough, Lord. SeeljAVf. 
 Erie, Sir William ; Ch. C. P. (Vict.) 
 B. Peter Erie, Commissioner of Charities. 
 Erskine, Thomas; cr. Ld. Erskine ; Ld. Chanc. (Geo 
 
 in.) 
 
 B. Henry Erskine, twice Lord Advocate of Scotland. 
 S. Hon. Sir Thomas Erskine, Just. C. P. (Vict.) 
 Erskine, Hon. Sir Thomas; Just. C. P. (Vict.) 
 F. Lord Erskine, Lord Chancellor. (Geo. III.) 
 U. Henry Erskine, twice Lord Advocate of Scotland. 
 Eyre, Sir Robert; Ch. C. P. (Geo. II.) 
 
 F. Sir Samuel Eyre, Just. K. B. (Will. III.) 
 Eyre, Sir Samuel ; Just. K. B. (Will. III.) 
 S. Sir Robert Eyre, Ch. C. B. (Geo II.) 
 
 [Sir Giles Eyre, Just. K. B. (Will. III.), was only his 2d 
 cousin.] 
 Finch, Sir Heneage ; cr. E. of Nottingham ; Ld. Chanc. 
 (Chas. II.) 
 F. Sir Heneage Finch, Recorder of London, Speaker of the 
 House of Commons, 
 
 G 2 
 
THE JUDGES OF ESTGLAND 
 
 Hyde, Sir Edward, continued — 
 [/S'.] Anne, married to the Duke of York, afterwards James II. 
 A woman of strong character, who insisted, in spite of 
 menace, that publicity should be given to the marriage, 
 let the consequences be what they might. 
 
 Family of Hyde. 
 
 I I 
 
 Sir Lawrence, Sir Nicholas, 
 
 Attorney-Gen. to Consort of James I. Ch. K. B. 
 
 ,( \ \ VT\ 
 
 Robert, Fradei'ick, Alexander, 3 others, all 1st Earl of Clarendon, 
 Ch. K. 13. Judge, Wales. Bishop, distinguished. Ld. Chanc. & historian. 
 
 I \ I 
 
 Henry, Lawrence, Anne, 
 
 2d Earl. cr. E. Rochester, marr. Jas. IL 
 
 I 
 Duchess of Queensberry, 
 patroness of Gray, the poet. 
 
 Hyde, Sir Eobort; Ch. K. B. (Charles II.) 
 
 F., 2 B., [3 B.], U., and US. See above. 
 Jeffreys, Geo. ; cr. Ld. Jeffreys of Wem ; Ch. K. B., Ld. Chanc. 
 (Jas. II.) 
 
 G. A judge in N. Wales. 
 
 U^. Sir John Trevor, M. E. (Geo. I.) 
 Jervis, Sir John; Ch. C. P. (Vict.) 
 
 F. Ch. Justice of Chester. 
 
 GN. J. Jervis, Admiral, 1st Earl St. Vincent. See Pakkee. 
 
 Pakker. 
 
 X Earl Macclesfield, 
 
 JunviB. - I Ld. Chanc. (Geo. L) 
 
 I I ' I 
 
 X X =; Sister. Sir Thos. Parker, 
 
 I I Ch. B. E. (Geo. in.) 
 
 X Admiral, 
 
 I 1st Earl St. Vincent. 
 
 Sir John Jervis, 
 
 Ch. C. P. (Vict.) 
 
 Keating, Sir Henry Singer ; Just. C. P. (Vict.) 
 F. Sir Henry Keating, K.C.B., distinguished in India, &c. 
 
BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 
 
 King, Sir Peter ; created Lord King ; Ld. Chancellor. (Geo. 
 II.) 
 u. John Locke, the philosopher. 
 Langdale, Lord. See Bickeestetii. 
 Law, Sir Edward ; cr. Ld. Ellenborough ; Ch. K. B. (Geo, 
 
 in.) 
 
 F. E. Law, Bishop of Carlisle, author. 
 
 S. Edward, Governor-General of India, cr. Earl Ellen- 
 borough. 
 S. C. Ewan, Recorder of London and M.P. for Camb. 
 
 University. 
 B. G. H., Bishop of Bath and Wells. 
 B. John, Bishop of Elphin, in Ireland. 
 
 There are many other men of ability in this family. 
 Lawrence, Sir Soulden ; Just. C. P. (Geo. III.) 
 F. President of the College of Physicians. 
 Lechmere, Sir Nicholas ; B. E. (Will. IH.) 
 P. Nicholas Lechmere, Attorney-Gen., created Baron 
 
 Lechmere. 
 u. Sir Thomas Overbury, poet (poisoned). 
 Lee, Sir William ; Ch. K. B. (Geo. II.) 
 B. George, Dean of the Arches and Judge of the Prerogative 
 Court of Canterbury. Thus the two brothers were 
 simultaneously, the one at the head of the highest 
 court of Common Law, and the other of the highest 
 court of Civil Law; a similar case to that of Lords 
 Eldon and Stowell. 
 Legge, Hon. Heneage; B. E. (Geo. II) 
 
 F. William, 1st Earl of Dartmouth, Secretary of State, &c. 
 
 G. George, 1st Baron Dartmouth, Master of the Ordnance 
 
 and Admiral of the Fleet, 
 g. 1st Lord Aylesford, Attorney- General and eminent 
 
 lawyer. 
 gF, (Father of Lord Aylesford) was the 1st Earl of Notting- 
 ham, Lord Chancellor (see Finch). 
 Lifford, Lord. See Hewitt. 
 Lovell, Sir Salathiel ; B. E. (Anne.) 
 pS. Was Richard Lovell Edgeworth, author. 
 pP, Maria Edgeworth, novelist. 
 Lyndhurst, Lord. See Copley. 
 Lyttleton, Sir Timothy ; B. E. (Charles II.) 
 GG. Sir Thomas Lyttleton, the eminent judge under 
 Edward IV. 
 
MONTAGU AND NORTH. 
 
 {See also under " Literatfee "for Sydney.) 
 
 Lord Rich, Edward, 1st Baron North ; 
 
 Lord Chancellor, Cliancellor of Court of AugmentationB, 
 
 Sir Valentine 
 
 Dale, 
 
 Master of the 
 
 Requests. 
 
 Daxighter. = Rooer, 2rl Baron ; 
 Ambassador. 
 
 S*ii Thomas, 
 a learned man, 
 
 Si3. John Jeffreys, 
 Ch. B. Exuh. 
 
 Daughter. = Sir Johm North. 
 
 Sir Ralph ] 
 
 AVlNWOOI>. 
 
 Prin. Sec. to 
 Jam* s I. 
 
 : Si n Edward, 
 
 1st Baron 
 Montagu. 
 
 Sir Henry, 
 
 Ch. Jiiat. K. B. 
 
 1st Karl Manchester. 
 
 3d Baron North, 
 
 literary. 
 
 " Full of spirit 
 
 and flame." 
 
 Sir Charles. 
 
 Anne=Edward, 
 
 2 I Baron 
 Montagiu 
 
 Ralph, 
 
 3d Baron ; 
 
 Ambassador ; 
 
 created 
 
 Duke of 
 
 Montagu. 
 
 William, 
 Ch. B. 
 
 Bxch. 
 
 Edward, Georgi:. 
 
 2d Earl. 
 
 The Baron 
 
 Kimbolton 
 
 of Marston Moor. 
 
 Wali'er, Dudley North, = Akne Montagu, 
 Abbutof 4th Baron North. [ " Compendium of 
 Pontoise. I cliarlty and wisdom." 
 
 Robert, 
 3d Eirl. 
 
 Charles, James, 
 
 1st Earl of Ch. B. 
 
 Halifax; Exch. 
 
 Statesman. 
 
 Charles, 
 6th Baron. 
 
 Charles, 4tli 
 
 Eiirl Manchester. 
 
 Premier, 1701. 
 
 1st Duke of 
 
 Manchester. 
 
 Francis, Dudley, 
 Ld. Keeper; Financier. 
 1 st Baron ^ 
 Ouilford. 
 
 d. s. p. 
 
 William, 
 6th Baron. 
 Served' 
 under Marl- 
 borough. 
 
 d. s. p. 
 
 DuDLEVA Francis, 
 
 Scholar, ' 2d Baron 
 
 Orientalist. Guilford. 
 
 Francis, 
 
 Sd Barnn 
 
 and 1st Eirl 
 
 Guilford. 
 
 Frederick, 
 
 2d Earl. The Lord Nortll, 
 
 Premier to George III. 
 
Sir John Finnieox, 
 Ch. Jnst. King's Bench, 
 
 Daughter. : 
 
 ; John Ropkr, 
 Attorney-General, 
 Henry VIII. 
 
 Ellen Ropeb, = Sib. Edward Montagu, 
 (his 3(1 wife). Cliief Justice, King's 
 Bench. 
 
 Sir John Harrington, 
 
 Treasurer of Army at 
 
 Boulogne to Henry VIII. 
 
 
 Sir James = Lucy Sidney, 
 Harrington. sister of Sir 
 Henry Sidney. 
 
 Sir Edward Montagu. = Elizabeth Harrington. 
 
 John, cventod Barnn Harrington, 
 
 Tutor lo Princess Elizabethj 
 
 daughter of James 1. 
 
 James, 
 
 Bishop of 
 
 Bath and Wells. 
 
 Daughter. = Lord 
 , Hatton. 
 
 Em SVDNliV,=PAULlNA 
 
 Master of Tepys. 
 Court of 
 
 Sir Edward, 
 1st Earl of 
 Sandwich; 
 Lord High 
 Admiral. 
 
 Brother. 
 
 Samuel 
 
 Pepys. 
 
 (His 
 
 "Diary,") 
 
 I 
 Brother. 
 
 Richard 
 Pepys, 
 
 Ch. Just. 
 
 of 
 Ireland. 
 
 Theodosia. : 
 
 Sir Henry 
 
 Capel. 
 
 Arthur Capel, 1st Baron 
 Capel of Hadham. Be- 
 headed, 1648, as a Royalist. 
 
 John, Roger, Mary. Charles 
 
 D. D. the Prodigious Hatton. 
 
 Master biogi'apher, memory. *' Tlie Incom- 
 
 of Trin. I parable." 
 
 ColL V 
 
 Arthur, 
 1st Earl of 
 
 Essex ; 
 
 Viceroy of 
 
 Ireland. 
 
 D. in Tower. 
 
 Henry, 1st 
 Baron Capel 
 of Tewkes- 
 bury ; Lord 
 Lieut, of Ire- 
 land. 
 
90 
 
 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND 
 
 Lyttleton, Sir Timothy, continued — 
 g. Sir E. "Walter, Ch. Justice of S. Wales, 
 u. Sir John Walter, Ch. B. E. (Charles I.) 
 F. Sir Edward Lyttleton, Ch. Justice of N. Wales. 
 B. Edward, Lord Lyttleton, Lord Keeper. (Charles I.) 
 N^. Sir Thomas Lyttleton, Speaker of the House of 
 
 Commons, 1698. (His mother was daughter of the 
 
 Lord Keeper.) 
 
 Sir Thos. Lyttleton, the eminent judge. 
 
 Kicliarcl, 
 eminent lawyer. 
 
 1 
 
 Sir Edmund Walter, 
 
 Ch. Just. S. Wales. 
 
 I 
 
 Sir Edward, 
 Judge, N. Wales. 
 
 Sir J. Walter, 
 Ch. B. E. 
 
 Edward, 
 Lord Keeper. 
 
 Timothy, 
 B. E. 
 
 1 
 
 Sergeant-at-law. 
 
 X = O 
 
 Sir Thos. Lyttleton, Speaker H. Commons. 
 
 Macclesfield, Lord. See Parkee. 
 Manners, Lord. See Sutton. 
 Mansfield, Sir James; Ch. C. P. (Geo. III.) 
 P. General Sir William Mansfield,' K.C.B., Commander-in- 
 chief in India. 
 [There are other gifted brothers.] 
 Milton, Sir Christopher ; Just. C. P. (James II.) 
 B. Milton the poet. See under Poets. 
 
 [Milton's mother was a kinswoman (? what) of Lord 
 President Bradshaw, the I'egicide.] 
 Montagu, Sir William ; Ch. B. E. (James II.) 
 F. Created Baron Montagu. 
 
 FB. Sir Henry Montagu, 1st Earl of Manchester, Ch. K. B. 
 (James I.) 
 
BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 91 
 
 Montagu, Sir William, continued — 
 N. Created Duke of Montagu ; statesman. 
 g. Sir John Jeffreys, Ch. B. E. 
 GF. Sir Edward Montagu, Oh. K. B. (Henry VIII.) 
 
 (See pedigree pp. 88, 89.) 
 
 Montagu, Sir J. ; Ch. B. E. (Geo. I.) 
 G. Henry Montagu, 1st Earl of Manchester, Ch. K. B. 
 U. Walter, Abbot of Pontoise ; poet, courtier, councillor to 
 
 Marie de Medicis. 
 U. Edward, 2d Earl of Manchester, the successful Parlia- 
 mentary General, Baron Kimbolton of Marston Moor. 
 GB. 1st Baron Montagu. 
 
 UP. (Grandson of Baron Kimbolton.) The 4th Earl of 
 Manchester, Principal Secretary of State, 1701, created 
 1st Duke of Manchester. 
 Nares, Sir George ; Just. 0. P. (Geo. III.) 
 S. Regius Professor of Modern History at Oxford. 
 B. Dr. James Nares, musician. 
 North, Francis; created Ld. Guilford; Ld. Chanc. (James 
 
 B. Dudley North, Levantine merchant, eminent English 
 
 financier. 
 B. Rev. John North, D.D., scholar. Master of Trin. Coll. 
 
 Camb. 
 B. Roger North, the biographer ; Attorney-General to the 
 
 Queen. 
 b. Mary, had a prodigious memory. 
 uS. Charles Hatton, " the incomparable.'' (-S'ee " Lives of 
 
 the Norths.") 
 gB. Sir Henry Montagu, 1st Earl of Manchester. See Mon- 
 tagu, Sir J. 
 gN. Edward, 2d Earl of Manchester, the Baron Kimbolton 
 
 of Marston Moor. 
 gN. George Montagu, Abbot of Pontoise, courtier and 
 
 minister of Catherine de Medicis. 
 .tN. Sir Edward Montagu, 1st Earl of Sandwich. (His unt-Ie 
 
 [u.] -was Pepys, "his Diary.") 
 [K] Dudleya North, Oriental scholar. 
 PS. Frederick, 2d Earl Guilford, Premier. (The " Lord 
 
 North" of George III.'s reign.) 
 Northington, Lord. See Henley. 
 Nottingham, Earl of. See Finch. 
 
92 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND 
 
 Parker, Sir Thomas ; cr. E. of Macclesfield ; Ld. Chanc. 
 
 (Geo. I.) 
 S. 2d Earl, President of the Royal Society, mathematician 
 
 and astronomer. 
 UP. Sir Thomas Parker, Ch. B. E. 
 Parker, Sir Thomas j Ch. B. E. (Geo. III.) 
 n. John Jervis, admiral, 1st Earl St. Vincent. See 
 
 Jervis. 
 GN. Sir T. Parker, 1st Earl of Macclesfield, Lord Chancellor. 
 Patteson, Sir John ; Just. K. B. (Vict.) 
 S. Missionary Bishop to Pacific Islands. 
 Pengelly, Sir Thomas ; Ch. B. E. (Geo. II.) 
 [G.] (Reputed, but questionable.) Oliver Cromwell. (Foss's 
 "Judges.") 
 Pepys, Sir Chas. Christopher ; cr. E. of Cottenham ; Ld. Chanc. 
 (Vict.) 
 [F.] A Master in Chancery. 
 G. Sir L. Pepys, physician to George III. 
 g. Rt. Hon. W. Dowdeswell, Chancellor of the Exche 
 
 quer. 
 B. Bishop of Worcester. 
 Pollock, Sir Frederick ; Ch. B. E- (Vict.) 
 B. Sir David, Ch. Justice of Bombay. 
 B. Sir George, general in Affghanistan. 
 S. Frederick, Master in Chancery ; translator of Dante. 
 [P.] Frederick (also [p.] to the Right Hon. C. Herries, Chan- 
 cellor of the Exchequer) ; second classic of his year, 
 1867, at Cambridge. 
 Powis, Sir Lyttleton ; Just. K. B. (Geo. I.) 
 B. Sir Thomas Powis, Ju.st. K. B. (Geo. I.) 
 Powis, Sir Thomas ; Just. K. B. (Geo. I.) 
 B. Sir Lyttleton Powis, Just. K. B. (Geo. I.) 
 Pratt, Sir John ; Ch. K. B. (Geo. I.) 
 S. Sir Charles Pratt, 1st Earl Camden, Ld. Chanc. (Geo. 
 
 m.) 
 
 P. J. J. Pratt, 2d Earl and created 1st Marquis Camden, 
 Lord Lieut, of Ireland, Chancellor of University of 
 Cambridge. 
 
 p. George Hardinge. {See next paragraph.) 
 
 ps. Field Marshal 1st Visct. Hardinge, Governor-Gen. of 
 India. 
 
 [ps.] {See next paragraph.) 
 
BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 
 
 Pratt, Sir Charles ; cr. Earl Camden ; Ld. Chanc. (Geo. III.) 
 
 F. Sir John Pratt, Ch. K. B. (Geo. I.) 
 
 S. J. J. Pratt, 2d Earl and created Marquis of Camden, 
 
 Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, and Chancellor of the 
 
 University of Cambridge. 
 
 n. George Hardinge, Attorney-General to the Queen, Chief 
 
 Justice of the Brecon Circuit. 
 nS. Field Marshal 1st Viscount Hardinge, Governor-General 
 
 of India. (His father was a literary man.) 
 [nS.]A naval Captain, to whom a monument in St. Paul's 
 
 was voted by the nation. 
 Raymond, Sir Edward ; cr. Ld. Raymond ; Ch. K. B. (Geo. 
 
 IL) 
 F. Sir Thomas Raymond, a Judge in each of the three Courts, 
 
 (Charles II.) 
 Raymond, Sir Thomas ; Just. K. B. &c, (Charles II.) 
 S. Robert, Lord Raymond, Ch. K. B. (Geo. II.) 
 Reynolds, Sir James (1) ; Ch. B. E. (Geo. IL) 
 N. Sir James Reynolds (2), B. E. (Geo. II.) 
 Reynolds Sir James (2) ; B. E. (Geo. IL) 
 U. Sir James Reynolds (1), Ch. B. E. (Geo. II.) 
 Rolfe, Sir Robt. Monsey ; cr. Ld. Cran worth ; Ld. Chanc. 
 (Vict.) 
 GrN. Admiral Lord Nelson. 
 gF. Dr. Monsey, the celebrated and eccentric physician to 
 
 Chelsea Hospital. 
 Romilly, Sir John ; created Lord Romilly ; M. R. (Vict.) 
 F. Sir Samuel Romilly, Solicitor-General and eminent jurist. 
 Scarlett, Sir James ; created Lord Abinger ; Ch. B .E. (Vict. ) 
 [B.] Sir William Scarlett, Ch. Justice of Jamaica. 
 S. Gen. Sir James Scarlett, chief in command of the cavalry 
 
 in the Crimea ; then Adjutant-General. 
 S. Sir Peter Campbell Scarlett, diplomatist. 
 Scott, Sir John ; created Earl of Eldon ; Ld. Chanc. (Geo. IV.) 
 B. Sir William Scott, created Lord Stowell, Judge of the 
 High Court of Admiralty. (See remarks under Ch. 
 Just. Sir W. Lee.) 
 Sewell, Sir Thomas ; M. R. (Geo. III.) 
 p. Matthew G. Lewis, novelist, commonly called "Monk" 
 Lewis. 
 Shaftesbury, Earl of. See Cooper. 
 
 Somers, Sir J. ; created Earl Somers ; Lord Chanc, 
 (Will. III.) 
 
94 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND 
 
 Somers, Sir J., continued — 
 iVS. Charles Yorke, Ld. Chanc. (Geo. III.) 
 N^. and 2 NV. See Yohke. 
 gNP. Richard Gibbon, the historian. 
 Spelman, Sir Clement; Curs. B. E. (Charles II.) 
 GF. Just. K. B. (Henry VIII.) 
 F. Sir Henry, antiquarian author of celebrity. 
 [B.] Sir John Spelman, also an antiquarj'. "Alfred the 
 Great." 
 Sutton, Sir Thomas Manners; B. E. ; subsequently Lord 
 Chancellor of Ireland, and created Lord Manners. 
 (Geo. III.) 
 B. Charles Sutton, Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 N. (Son of the Archbishop.) Charles Manners Sutton, 
 Speaker of the House of Commons, created Viscount 
 Canterbury. 
 Talbot, Hon. Chas. ; cr. Lord Talbot ; Ld. Chanc. (Geo. II.) 
 F. Bishop successively of three sees. 
 
 N. Rev. William Talbot, an early and eminent advocate of 
 
 Evangelism. {See Venn's Life, Pi-eface, p. xii.) 
 
 Thesiger, Sir Frederick ; cr. Ld. Chelmsford ; Ld. Chanc. 
 
 . (Vict.) 
 S. Adjutant-General of India. 
 
 [G., F., U.] All noteworthy, but hardly of sufficient eminence 
 to be particularly described in this meagre outline of 
 relationships. 
 Thurlow, Edward • cr. Lord Thurlow ; Ld. Chanc. (Geo. III.) 
 B. Bishop of Durham. 
 
 [S.] (Illegitimate.) Died at Cambridge, where, as is said, he 
 was expected to attain the highest honours. 
 Treby, Sir George ; Ch. C. P. (Will. III.) 
 S. Rt. Hon. Robert Treby, Secretary at War. 
 Trevor, Sir Thomas ; created Lord Trevor ; Ch. 0. P. (Geo. 
 
 I.) 
 
 g. J. Hampden, the patriot. 
 
 F. Sir John Trevor, Secretary of State. 
 
 S. Bishop of Durham. 
 
 U. Sir John Trevor, Ch. B. E. (Charles I.) 
 
 GB. Sir Thomas Trevor, B. E. (Charles I.) 
 Trevor, Sir John ; M. R. (Geo. I.) 
 
 uS. Lord Jeffreys, Lord Chancellor. (James II.) 
 Truro, Lord. See Wilde. 
 Turner, Sir George James; Lord Justice. (Vict) 
 
BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 
 
 Turner, Sir George James, continued — 
 TJ. Dawson Turner, botanist and antiquary. 
 TJ. Dean of Norwich and Master of Pembroke Coll., Cam- 
 bridge. 
 [S.] Bishop of Grafton and Armidale, in Australia. 
 (There are numerous other distinguished members of this 
 family, including Dr. Hooker, the botanist, Gilford 
 Palgrave, the Arabian traveller, and Francis Palgrave, 
 author.) 
 Twisden, Sir Thomas; Just. K. B. (Charles II.) 
 uS. Earl of Nottingham (Finch), Lord Chancellor. (Chas. II.) 
 [B.] Roger, antiquary and historian. 
 Vaughan, Sir John; Just. C. P. (Vict.) 
 B. Henry Vaughan, assumed name of Halford and became 
 the celebrated physician. Sir Henry Halford, 1st Bart. 
 B. Rev. Edward (of Leicester), Calvinist theologian. 
 B. Sir Charles R., Envoy Extraordinary to the United 
 
 States. 
 [B.] Peter, Dean of Chester. 
 
 N. Rev. Charles Vaughan, D.D., joint first classic of his 
 year, 1838, at Cambridge; Head Master of Harrow; 
 refused two bishoprics. 
 N. Professor Halford Vaughan, of Oxford. 
 p. Vaughan Hawkins, first classic of his year, 1854, at 
 Cambridge. 
 Verney, Hon. Sir John ; M. R. (Geo. IL) 
 
 g. Sir R. Heath, Ch. K. B. (Charles I.) 
 Walsingham, Lord. See Dk Grey. 
 Wigram, Sir James ; V. C. (Vict.) 
 
 B. Bishop of Rochester. 
 Wilde, Sir Thomas ; created Lord Truro ; Ld. Chanc. (Vict.) 
 B. Ch. Justice, Cape of Good Hope. 
 
 N. Sir James Wilde, B. E. (Vict.) ; now Lord Penzance. 
 Wilde, Sir James Blasted ; B. E. (Vict.) ; since cr. Ld. 
 Penzance. 
 U. Lord Truro, Lord Chancellor. (Vict.) 
 U. Ch. Justice, Cape of Good Hope. 
 Willes, Sir John ; Ch. C. P. (Geo. III.) 
 B. Bishop of Bath and Wells. 
 S. Sir Edward Willes, Just. K. B. (Geo. III.) 
 Willes, Sir Edward ; Just. K. B. (Geo. III.) 
 F. Sir John Willes, Ch. C. P. (Geo. III.) 
 U. Bishop of Bath and Wells. 
 
96 THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND 
 
 Wilmot, Sir John Eardley ; Ch. C. P. (Geo. III.) 
 P. F.R.S. and F.A.S., Governorof Van Diemen's Land, and 
 
 1st Baronet. 
 PS. Recorder of Warwickshire and Judge of the County Court 
 of Bristol. 
 Wood, Sir William Page ; V. C. (Vict.) (Since created 
 Lord Hatherley, Lord Chancellor, 1868.) 
 P. Sir Matthew, M.P. for London for twenty-eight years 
 and twice Lord Mayor. 
 
 [U.l Benjamin Wood, M.P. for Southwark. 
 
 Western Wood, M.P. for London. 
 Wyndham, Sir Hugh ; B. E., C. P. (Charles II.) 
 B. Sir William Wyndham, Just. K. B. (Charles II.) 
 GIST. Sir JjTancis Wyndham, Just. C. P. (Eliz.) 
 NS. Thomas Wyndham, Lord Chancellor of Ireland (Geo. I.), 
 
 created Baron Wyndham. 
 Wyndham, Sir Wadham; Just. K. B. (Charles II.) 
 B. Sir Hugh Wyndham, B. E., Just. C. P. (Charles II.) 
 P. Thomas Wyndham, Lord Chancellor of Ireland (Geo. 
 
 I. ), created Baron Wyndham. 
 GN. Sir Francis Wyndham, Just. C. P. (Eliz.) 
 
 
 Wr 
 
 NDHAM Family. 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 X 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 X 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 X 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 1 
 Francis, Just. C. 
 
 P 
 
 !' 1 
 
 X . X Hugh 
 
 Just. 
 
 C. 
 
 1 
 P. Wadham, Just. K. B. 
 
 
 ■ — , Sergeant- 
 i at-law. 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 X 
 
 Thomas, Ld. Chanc. Ireland, 
 created Baron Wyndh.am. 
 
 
 Rt. Hon. Wm. Wyndham. 
 
 Wynford, Lord. See Best. 
 
 Yorke, Philip ; cr. Earl of Hardwicke ; Ld. Chanc. (Geo. 
 
 S. Hon. Charles (by niece of Lord Chancellor Somers), Lord 
 Chancellor. (Geo. III.) 
 
 S. Hon. James, Bishop of Ely. 
 
 P. Philip, 3d Earl, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. 
 
 P. Et. Hon. Charles Philip, E.R.S., First Lord of the Ad- 
 miralty. 
 
BETWEEN 1660 AND 1865 
 
 97 
 
 Yorke, Philip, contimied — 
 PS, Lord Goderich and Earl of Ripon, Premier. 
 
 O = 
 
 ^ John Somers, 
 
 1st Earl Somers, Ld. Chanc. 
 
 R. Gibbon, 
 the historian. 
 
 O = Philip Yorke, 1st E. 
 I Hardwicke, Ld. Chan. 
 
 Charles, 
 Ld. Chan. 
 
 James, 
 Bishop of Ely. 
 
 O 
 
 Philip, 3d Earl, 
 Lord Lieut. Ireland. 
 
 Chas. Philip, 
 1st Lord Adm. 
 
 F. J. Robinson, 
 1st Earl Ripon, Premier. 
 
 Yorke, Hon. Charles ; Lord Chancellor. (Geo. III.) 
 F. ist Earl of Hardwicke, Lord Chancellor. (Geo. IL) 
 S. Philip, 3d Earl, Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland. 
 S. Rt. Hon. Charles Philip, F.R S., First Lord of the Admi- 
 ralty. 
 E. Hon. James, Bishop of Ely. 
 gh. 1st Earl Somers, Lord Chancellor. (Will. III.) 
 iVS. Lord Goderich and Earl of Ripon, Premier. 
 
STATESMEN 
 
 STATESMEN 
 
 I PEOPOSE in this chapter to discuss the relationships of 
 modern EngHsh Statesmen. It is my earnest desire, 
 throughout this book, to steer safely between two dangers : 
 on the one hand, of accepting mere official position or 
 notoriety, as identical with a more discriminative reputa- 
 tion, and on the other, of an unconscious bias towards 
 facts most favourable to my argument. In order to guard 
 against the latter danger, I employ groups of names 
 selected by others; and, to guard against the former, 
 I adopt selections that command general confidence. It 
 is especially important in dealing with statesmen, whose 
 eminence, as such, is largely affected by the accident of 
 social position, to be cautious in both these respects. It 
 would not be a judicious plan to take for otir select list 
 the names of privy councillors, or even of Cabinet 
 ministers; for though some of them are illustriously 
 gifted, and many are eminently so, yet others belong to a 
 decidedly lower natural grade. For instance, it seemed 
 in late years to have become a mere incident to the 
 position of a great territorial duke to have a seat in the 
 Cabinet, as a minister of the Crown. No doubt some few 
 of the dukes are highly gifted, but it may be affirmed, 
 with equal assurance, that the abilities of the large 
 majority are very far indeed from justifying such an 
 appointment. 
 
 Again, the exceptional position of a Cabinet minister 
 
STATESMEN 99 
 
 cannot possibly be a just criterion of a correspondingly 
 exceptional share of natural gifts, because statesmanship 
 is not an open profession. It was much more so in the 
 days of pocket-boroughs, when young men of really high 
 promise were eagerly looked for by territorial magnates, 
 and brought into Parliament, and kept there to do gladia- 
 torial battle for one or other of the great contending 
 parties of the State. With those exceptions, parliamen- 
 tary life was not, even then, an open career, for only 
 favoured youths were admitted to compete. But, as is 
 the case in every other profession, none, except those who 
 are extraordinarily and peculiarly gifted, are likely to 
 succeed in parliamentary life, unless engaged in it from 
 their ea.rly manhood onwards. Dudley North, of whom I 
 spoke in the chapter on Judges, was certainly a great 
 success ; so, in recent times, was Lord George Bentinck ; 
 so in one way or another, was the Duke of Wellington; 
 and other cases could easily be quoted of men beginning 
 their active parliamentary life in advanced manhood and 
 nevertheless achieving success ; but, as a rule, to which 
 there are very few exceptions, statesmen consist of men 
 who had obtained — it little matters how — the privilege of 
 entering Parliament in early life, and of being kept there. 
 Every Cabinet is necessarily selected from a limited field. 
 No doubt it always contains some few persons of very 
 high natural gifts, who would have found their way to the 
 front under any reasonably fair political rdgime, but it also 
 invariably contains others who would have fallen far 
 behind in the struggle for place and influence, if all 
 England had been admitted on equal terms to the 
 struggle. 
 
 Two selections of men occurred to me as being, on the 
 whole, well worthy of confidence. One, that of the 
 Premiers, begun, for convenience' sake, with the reign of 
 George III. ; their number is 25, and the proportion of 
 them who cannot claim to be much more than " emi- 
 nently " gifted, such as Addington, — 
 
 "Pitt is to Addington as London to Paddingtou,"— 
 
 is very small. The other selection is Lord Brougham's 
 
 h2 
 
loo STATESMEN 
 
 " Statesmen of the Reign of George III." It consists of 
 no more than 53 men, selected as the foremost statesmen 
 in that long reign. Now of these, 11 are judges and, I 
 may add, 7 of those judges were described in the ap- 
 pendix to the last chapter, viz. Lords Camden, Eldon, 
 Erskine, Ellenborough, King, Mansfield, and Thurlow. 
 The remaining 4 are Chief Justices Burke and Gibbs, 
 Sir William Grant, and Lord Loughborough. Lord 
 Brougham's list also contains the name of Lord Nelson, 
 which will be more properly included among the 
 Commanders ; and that of Earl St. Vincent, which may 
 remain in this chapter, for he was a very able adminis- 
 trator in peace as well as a naval commander. In addition 
 to these, are the names of 9 Premiers, of whom one is 
 the Duke of Wellington, whom I count here, and again 
 among the Commanders, leaving a net balance, in the 
 selection made by Lord Brougham, of 31 new names to 
 discuss. The total of the two selections, omitting the 
 judges, is 57. 
 
 The average natural ability of these men may very 
 justly be stated as superior to class F. Canning, Fox, 
 the two Pitts, Romilly, Sir Robert Walpole (whom 
 Lord Brougham imports into his list), the Marquess 
 Wellesley, and the Duke of Wellington, probably exceed 
 G. It wiU be seen how extraordinary are the relationships 
 of these families. The kinship of the two Pitts, father 
 and son, is often spoken of as a rare, if not a sole, instance 
 of high genius being hereditary; but the remarkable 
 kinships of William Pitt were yet more widely diffused. 
 He was not only son of a premier, but nephew of 
 another, George Grenville, and cousin of a third. Lord 
 Grenville. Besides this, he had the Temple blood. His 
 pedigree, which is given in the appendix to this chapter, 
 does scant justice to his breed. The Fox pedigree is also 
 very remarkable in its connexion with the Lords Holland 
 and the Napier family. But one of the most conspicuous 
 is that of the Marquess Wellesley, a most illustrious 
 statesman, both in India and at home, and his younger 
 bi-other, the great Duke of Wellington. It is also curious, 
 from the fact of the Marquess possessing very remarkable 
 
STATESMEN 101 
 
 gifts as a scholar and critic. They distinguished him in 
 early life and descended to his son, the late Principal of 
 New Inn Hall, at Oxford, but they were not shared by his 
 brother. Yet, although the great Duke had nothing of the 
 scholar or art-critic in him, he had qualities akin to both. 
 His writings are terse and nervous, and eminently effective. 
 His furniture, equipages, and the like were characterised 
 by unostentatious completeness and efficiency under a 
 pleasing form. 
 
 I do not intend to go seriatim through the many names 
 mentioned in my appendix. The reader must do that for 
 himself, and he will find it well worth his while to do 
 so ; but I shall content myself here with throwing results 
 into the same convenient statistical form that I have 
 already employed for the Judges, and arguing on the 
 same bases that the relationships of the Statesmen abun- 
 dantly prove the hereditary character of their genius. 
 
 In addition to the English statesmen of whom I have 
 been speaking, I thought it well to swell their scanty 
 numbers by adding a small supplementary list, taken from 
 various periods and other countries. I cannot precisely 
 say how large was the area of selection from which this 
 list was taken. I can only assure the reader that it contains 
 a considerable proportion of the names, that seemed to me 
 the most conspicuous among those that I found described 
 at length, in ordinary small biographical dictionaries. 
 
 TABLE I. 
 
 SUMMARY OF RELATIONSHIPS OF 35 ENGLISH STATESMEN, 
 GROUPED INTO 30 FAMILIES. 
 
 One relation (or tioo in the family). 
 
 Bolingbroke (Visct. St. John) g. 
 Disraeli ... F- 
 
 Francis, Sir P. F. 
 
 Grattau . . • g- 
 
 Horner . . B. 
 
 Perceval ... . . n. 
 
 Eomilly, Sir S S. 
 
 Scott (Lord Stowell) . . B. 
 
 Wilberforce S. 
 
102 STATESMEN 
 
 Two or three relations (or three or fm,r irk flie family). 
 
 Bedford, Duke of, and gr. -gr. -grandson, Earl Eussell . GF. Gf. PP. 
 
 Bentinck (Duke of Portland) . . . . S. P. 
 
 Canning ... , . . . US. S. 
 
 Jenkinson (Earl of Liverpool) F. U. US. 
 
 Jervis (Earl St. Vincent) . . u. UP. UPS. 
 
 Lamb (Viscount Melbourne) . . . 2 B. 6. ^. 
 
 Petty (Marquess of Lansdowne) ffF. S. 
 Russell {see Bedford). 
 
 Stanley (Earl of Derby) . F. uS. S. 
 
 Stewart (Marquess of Londonderry) ... F. uS. B. 
 
 Four or more relations (or five or more in the family). 
 
 Dundas (Viscount Melville) . G. F. B. N. S. P. 
 
 2. Fox and Lord Holland . . . G. u. F. B. N. iVS. 2«S. 
 
 3. Grenville, Lord ; his father, George Gren- 
 
 ville ; also his cousin, William Pitt B. F. g. ttS. U. 
 
 Grey, Earl . . . . F. B. 2 S. 
 
 Holland, Lord (sea Fox). 
 
 Peel F. g. 2 B. 3 S. 
 
 2. Pitt, viz. Earl Chatham and bis son, "VVm. 
 
 Pitt (also, see Grenville) . F. N. u. uS. n. 
 
 Kobinson (Earl Ripon) G. F. gB. gF. S. 
 
 Sheridan . F. /. g. G. S. P. PS. 
 
 Temple (Viscount Palmerston) , B. GGB. GG. GGF. 
 
 Stuart (Marquess of Bute) . (?F. G. GU. GB. n. B. 2 R. 
 
 Walpole (Earl of Orford) . . . . G. B. 2S. iiG. 
 
 2. Wellesley, viz. the Marquess and his brother, 
 
 the Duke of Wellington . B. N. S. g(?F. 
 
 SUPPLEMENTARY LIST of 13 GREAT STATESMEN of VARIOUS 
 PERIODS AND COUNTRIES GROUPED into 9 FAMILIES. 
 
 2. Arteveldt, James, and son John . S. 
 
 Mirabeau . F. 
 
 More, Sir Thomas ... . . F. 
 
 2. De "Witt, John, and brother Cornelius . . B. 
 Adams , . S. P. 
 
 3. Cecil, Robt. ; father, Lord Burleigh ; and 
 
 cousin. Lord Bacon . F. mS. 
 
 Colbert . U. B. 2 S.. 2 N. 
 
 Guise, Duo de . B. 2 S. P. PS. 
 
 Richelieu F. B. BP. BPS. nS. 
 
STATESMEN 
 
 103 
 
 TABLE II.i 
 
 Degrees of Kinship. 
 
 A. 
 
 B. 
 
 C. 
 
 D. 
 
 Name of the clegi-ee. 
 
 Corresponding letters. 
 
 Father . 
 Brother 
 Son 
 
 Grandfather 
 
 Uncle . 
 
 Nephew 
 
 Grandson . ... 
 
 Great-gi'andfather . . 
 Great-uncle . 
 First cousin 
 Great-nephew . . . 
 Great-grandson . . 
 
 All more remote . 
 
 13 F. 
 1.0 B. 
 19 S. 
 
 6 G. 
 3U. 
 6N. 
 4 P. 
 
 1 GF. 
 1GB. 
 
 3 US. 
 NH. 
 OPS. 
 
 14 
 
 5g. 
 4u. 
 1 n. 
 Op. 
 
 IgP. 
 IgB. 
 .■iuS. 
 1 nS. 
 
 OpS. 
 
 ... 
 
 lOF. 
 OB. 
 
 VH. 
 
 1 NS. 
 OPS. 
 
 O9F. 
 Oi7B. 
 .3 i(S. 
 OnS. 
 0])S. 
 
 13 
 15 
 19 
 
 11 
 7 
 7 
 4 
 
 3 
 2 
 8 
 2 
 
 
 14 
 
 33 
 39 
 49 
 
 28 
 18 
 18 
 10 
 
 ■0 
 21 
 .5 
 
 
 37 
 
 100 
 1.50 
 lOO 
 
 200 
 400 
 400 
 200 
 
 400 
 800 
 800 
 800 
 400 
 
 83-0 
 26-0 
 49-0 
 
 140 
 4-5 
 4-6 
 6-0 
 
 2-0 
 0-8 
 2-6 
 0-0 
 0-0 
 
 First, have the ablest statesmen the largest number of 
 able relatives ? Table I. answers this in the affirmative. 
 There can be no doubt, that its third section contains more 
 illustrious names than the first ; and the more the reader 
 will take the pains of analysing and " weighing " the 
 relationships, the more, I am sure, will he find this truth 
 to become apparent. Again, the Statesmen, as a whole, 
 are far more eminently gifted than the Judges ; accordingly 
 it will be seen in Table II., by a comparison of its column 
 B with the corresponding column in p. 5-5, that their rela- 
 tions are more rich in ability. 
 
 To proceed to the next test ; we see, that the third 
 section is actually longer than either the first or the second, 
 showing that ability is not distributed at haphazard, but, 
 that it affects certain families. 
 
 Thirdly, the statesman's type of ability is largely trans- 
 mitted or inherited. It would be tedious to count the 
 instances in favour. Those to the contrary are Disraeli, 
 Sir P. Francis (who was hardly a statesman, but rather 
 a bitter controversialist), and Horner. In all the other 
 
 ' For explanation refer to the similar table in p. 55. 
 
104 STATESMEN 
 
 35 or 36 cases in my appendix, one or more statesmen 
 will be found among their eminent relations. In other 
 wordSj the combination of high intellectual gifts, tact in 
 dealing with men, power of expression in debate, and 
 ability to endure exceedingly hard work, is hereditary. 
 
 Table II. proves, just as distinctly as it did in the case 
 of the Judges, that the nearer kinsmen of the eminent 
 Statesmen are far more rich in ability than the more 
 remote. It will be seen, that the law of distribution, as 
 gathered from these instances, is very similar to what we 
 had previously found it to be. I shall not stop here to 
 compare that law, in respect to the Statesmen and the 
 Judges, for I propose to treat all the groups of eminent 
 men, who form the subjects of my several chapters, in a 
 precisely similar manner, and to collate the results, once 
 for all, at the end of the book. 
 
STATESMEN 105 
 
 APPENDIX TO STATESMEN 
 STATESMEN OF THE REIGN OF GEORGE III. 
 
 AS SELECTED BY LOKD BEOUGHAM IN HIS WELL-KNOWN 
 WOKK BEAKINO THAT TITLE. 
 
 The list consists of the followiug 53 persons, of whom 33, whose names 
 are printed in italics, find a place m my dictionary of kinships. It often 
 happens in this list that the same person is noticed under his title, as 
 well as surname; as, " Dundas (Viscount Melville) ; " — "Melville, Lord 
 (Dundas)." 
 
 AUen. *Beclford, Uh Ditke. Bolinglyi-oke. Bushe, Ld. Ch. Just. 
 Camden, Earl [Pratt). *Canning. Carroll. Castlereagh, Lord 
 (Londonderry) ; see Stewart. *Chatham, Lord (Pitt). Cuiran. Dundas 
 ( Visd. Melville). Eldon, Lord (Scott). Erskinc, Lord. Ellenborough, 
 Lord [Laio). Fox. Francis, Sir Philip. Gibbs, Ld. Ch. Just. Grant, 
 Sir Wm. Grattan. *Grenville, George. *GrenviUe, Lord. Holland, 
 Lord. Horner. Jefferson. *Jenkinson (Earl Liverpool). Jervis (Earl 
 St. Vincent). King, Lord. Law (Lord Ellenborough). Lawrence, Dr. 
 * Liverpool, Earl (Jenkinson). Loughborough, Lord (Wedderbum). 
 Londonderry, Lord (Castlereagh ; see Stewart). Mansfield, Lord 
 (Murray). Melville, Lord (Dundas). Murray (Lord Mansfield). 
 Melson, Lord. *Nor(h, Lord. *Perceval. *Pitt (Earl of Chatham). 
 *Pitt, William. Pratt (Earl Camden). Ricardo. Bomilly.' St. Vincent 
 Earl (Jervis). Scott (Lord Eldon). Scott (Lord Stowell). StowcU, Lord 
 (Scott). Stewart (Lord Castlereagh, Marquess of Londonderry). Thurlow, 
 Lord. Tierney. Tooke, Home. Walpolc. Wedderburn (Lord 
 Loughborough). TFellesley, Marquess. JVilberforce. Wilkes, John. 
 "Windham. 
 
 PREMIERS SINCE ACCESSION OF GEORGE III. 
 
 There have been 25 Premiers during this period, as shown in the following 
 list, of whom 17, whose names are printed in italics, find a place in my 
 dictionary of kinships. 
 
 Nine of these have already appeared under the title of ' ' Statesmen of 
 George IIL" They are distinguished by a t. 
 
 It occasionally happens that the same individual is noticed under his 
 .surname as well as his title ; as "Chatham, Earl (Pitt) ;" — "Pitt (Earl 
 Chatham)." 
 
 Aberdeen, Earl. Addington (Sidmouth). fJBedford, ith Duke. Bute, 
 Marquess. Canning. ^Chatham. Earl (Pitt). Derby, Earl. Disraeli. 
 Gladstone. Goderich. Grafton, Duke. Grenville, George. Grenvillc, 
 Lord. Grey, Earl. Lansdowne (Shelburne). ^Liverpool, Earl. 
 Melbourne, Visct. Newcastle, Duke. iNorth, Lord. Palmerston 
 Ijord. Peel, Sir Robert. fPerceval. Pitt (Earl Chatham). fPitt, 
 William. Rockingham, Marquess. Uussell, Earl. SJielburne, Earl 
 (Lansdowne). Sidmouth, Lord (Addington). Wellington. 
 
 * Premier. t Included also in Brougham's list of Statesmen of Geo. III. 
 
106 STATESMEN 
 
 Bedford, John, 4th Duke. 
 
 GP. "William, Lord Russell; patriot; executed 1683. 
 
 Gf. Lady Rachel W. Russell, her husband's secretary. 
 " Letters." 
 
 PP. 1st Earl Russell : Reform leader as Lord John Russell, 
 and three times Premier. 
 Bentinck, William H. Cavendish ; 3d Duke of Portland ; 
 Premier, 1783-4 and 1807-10. 
 
 S. Lord Wm. Henry Bentinck ; Governor-General of India, 
 who abolished Suttee, and established the liberty of 
 the Indian press. 
 
 P. Lord George Bentinck, M.P. ; became an eminent finan- 
 cier and a leading statesman in middle age, after a life 
 previously devoted to racing interests. 
 Bolingbroke, Henry ; created Viscount St. John ; the cele- 
 brated Secretary of State to Queen Anne. (His name 
 is appended to Brougham's list of Statesmen of Geo. 
 
 g. Sir Oliver St. John, Ch. Just. C. P. under the Protectorate 
 (and who himself was cousin to another judge, S. 
 Brown (see), under Charles II.). 
 Bute, Earl. ,S'ee Stuart. 
 
 Camden, Earl ; Lord Chancellor. »See under Judges. 
 P. and S. 
 Canning, George; created Lord Canning; Premier, 1827. 
 Not precocious as a child, but remarkable as a school- 
 boy. ("Microcosm," set. 15, and "Anti-Jacobin.') 
 Scholar, orator, and most able statesman. The Canning 
 family had sensitive and irritable temperaments. 
 A man of considerable literary acquirements. 
 Had great beau.ty and accomplishments. She took to 
 the stage after her husband's death without much 
 success ; they had both been separated from the rest 
 of the Canning family. 
 US. Stratford Canning ; created Lord Stratford de Redcliffe ; 
 
 ambassador at the Porte ; the " great Elchi." 
 [US.] George Canning, F.R.S., F.S.A., created Lord Garvagh. 
 S. Charles ; created Earl Canning ; was Governor-General 
 of India during the continuance and suppression of the 
 Indian Mutiny. 
 Castlereagh. See Stewart. 
 
 Disraeli, Rt. Hon. Benjamin; Premier, 1868. Precocious ; 
 began life in aix attorney's office ; became, when quite 
 
 Rl 
 
STATESMEN 107 
 
 young, a novel-writer of repute, and, after one noted 
 failure, an eminent parliamentary debater and orator. 
 F. Isaac Disraeli ; author of " Curiosities of Literature." 
 Dund^as, Henry; created Viscount Melville; friend and 
 coadjutor of Wm. Pitt, and a leading member of his 
 administration in various capacities. 
 
 F. Robert Dundas, of Arniston ; Lord President of the 
 
 Court of Session in Scotland. 
 
 Gr. Robert Dundas ; Lord Arniston, eminent lawyer ; Judge 
 of Court of Session. 
 
 [GrF.] Sir James Dundas, M.P. for Edinburgh, Senator of 
 the College of Justice. 
 
 B. (A half-brother.) Robert Dundas ; Lord President of 
 the Court of Session, as his father had been before 
 him. 
 
 N. (A half-nephew.) Robert Dnndas (son of above) ; Lord 
 Chief Baron to the Court of Exchequer in Scotland. 
 
 S. Robert ; 2d Viscount ; Lord Privy Seal in Scotland. 
 
 P. Richard Saunders Dundas ; twice Secretary to the Ad- 
 miralty ; succeeded Sir C. Napier in chief command of 
 the Baltic fleet in the Russian War, 1855, and captvired 
 Sweaborg. (Mem. He was no relation to Sir James 
 W. D. Dundas, who was in chief command of the 
 Black Sea fleet during the same war.) 
 Eldon, Eaxl of ; Lord Chancellor. See in Judges, mider 
 
 Scott. 
 Ellenborough, Lord ; Chief Justice King's Bench. See in 
 
 Judges. 
 Erskine, Lord ; Lord Chancellor. See in Judges. 
 Fox, Rt. Hon. Charles James ; statesman and orator ; the 
 great rival of Pitt. At Eton he was left much to 
 himself, and was studious, but at the same time a 
 dissipated dandy, He was there considered of extra- 
 ordinary promise, ^t. 25, he had become a man of 
 mark in the House of Commons, and also a prodigious 
 gambler. 
 
 G. Sir Stephen Fox ; statesman ; Paymaster of the Forces. 
 
 Chelsea Hospital is mainly due to him; he projected it, 
 
 and contributed £1.3,000 towards it. 
 u. Charles ; 3d Duke of Richmond ; principal Secretary of 
 
 State in 1766. 
 F. Henry ; created Lord Holland ; Secretary at "War. 
 B. Stephen ; 2d Lord Holland ; statesman and social leader. 
 
108 STATESMEN" 
 
 Fox, Rt. Hon. Charles James, continued — 
 
 N. Henry K, 3d Lord Holland; P.R.S., F.S.A., Recorder 
 of Nottingham. {See Lord Brougham's panegyric of 
 these men in his " Statesmen of George III.") 
 His aunt, Lady Sarah, sister of the Duke of Richmond, 
 married Colonel Napier, and was mother of the famous 
 Napier family. Colonel Napier was himself cast in the 
 true heroic mould. He had uncommon powers, mental 
 and bodily ; he had also scientific tastes. He was 
 Superintendent of Woolwich Laboratory, and Comp- 
 troller of Army Accounts. 
 
 mS. General Sir Charles James Napier, G.C.B. ; Commander- 
 in-Chief in India ; Conqueror of Scinde. 
 
 ?iS. General Sir "William Napier ; historian of the Peninsular 
 War. 
 
 [3 mS.] There were three other Napiers, brothers, who were 
 considered remarkable men, namely. General Sir George, 
 Governor of the Cape ; Richard, Q. C ; and Henry, 
 Captain, and author of " History of Florence." 
 
 iVS. H. Bunbury, senior classic of his year (1833) at Cam- 
 bridge. 
 Francis, Sir Philip ; reputed author of " Jvmius ; " violent 
 antagonist of Hastings in India. 
 
 r. Rev. Philip ; poet and dramatic writer ; translator of 
 " Horace " and other classics. Had a school where 
 Gibbon was a pupil. He was also a political contro- 
 versialist. 
 Goderich, Viscount. See Robinson. 
 Grattan, Henry ; orator and statesman. 
 
 [GB.] Sir Richard Grattan, Lord Mayor of DubUn. 
 
 g. Thomas Marley, Chief Justice of Ireland. 
 
 [F.l James Grattan, Recorder of, and M P. for, Dublin. 
 
 [S.J Right Honourable James Grattan. 
 Grenville, George, Premier, 1763. 
 
 The very remarkable relationships of the Grenville family, 
 and the results of the mixture of the Temple race with 
 that of the 1st Earl of Chatham on the one hand, and 
 of the Wyndham on the other, is best understood by 
 the annexed table. 
 
 g. Sir Richard Temple; a leading member of the House of 
 Commons. 
 
 Ti. General Sir Richard Temple ; created "Viscount Cobham, 
 served under Marlborough. 
 
STATESMEN 
 
 109 
 
 ■< 
 
 B 
 3 
 
 ffl 
 
 
 pS 
 
 P4 
 
 T-t 
 
 O^ 
 
 q 
 
 S 
 
 -s 
 
 
 
 
 ,d 
 
 fl 
 
 ^ 
 
 ■^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 a:> 
 
 !>= 
 
 
 +j 
 
 is 
 
 c3 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 pj 
 
 C5 
 
 o 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 fl 
 
 .1-1 
 
 
 o 
 
 rJ 
 
 -rt 
 
 o. 
 
 
 
 C5 
 
 <■! 
 
 r-! 
 
 1=! 
 
 
 
 n1 
 
 
 CJ 
 
 Cl, 
 
 S 
 
 S 
 
 a 
 
 O 
 
 a 
 
 ■M-2 
 
 a 
 
 -S B 
 
 H 
 
 a 
 
 03 O 
 
 H 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 KO 
 
 Qj 
 
 
 -4-= 
 
 H 
 
 (4-1 
 
 m 
 
 „ o 
 
 i-H 
 
 [E< 
 
 r^ <D 
 
 
 O 
 
 Pig 
 
 
 V? 
 
 S o 
 
 
 B 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 -^ 03 
 
 
 
 T' ^ 
 
 
 ti 
 
 g^_ 
 
 
 
 5 ^ 
 
 
 -^ 
 
 ^ ? 
 
 
 
 
 
 H 
 H 
 
 1— 1 
 
 f3 's 
 
 CO g 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 .« 
 
 
 
 
 '3 a 
 
 
 g 
 
 
 
 .!h o — 
 
 
 <s 
 
 sneral.Sir K 
 reated Vise 
 
 
 H 
 
 CD g. 
 
 03 CD 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 
 ffi 
 
 rt <li C3 t/3 
 
 a 3 ^ 
 
 .a pi > 
 « 3 
 
 ^ r^ 'rt 
 
 -o^-fe — » 
 
 M 
 
 ^..3 1 
 
 2 ^-a 
 
 -^ «rg a — = 
 
 
 
 SB 
 
 L 7-K t^ pi t^^-^'^ r- 
 
 ^ ^ c5 o -*^ -l^ 
 3 SS 
 
 OJ rrj ^ P- 
 
 C5<mS aj 
 
 "35 i 
 
 rPH g 
 
 -5 ^ 
 
 g CO 
 
 ^w 
 
 0.3 
 
 ^ cS 
 ,—1 03 
 
 
 •t;"5 t; 
 ce o g 
 
 ^;3 
 
 o 
 
 O rH 03 
 
 tH 1h nd 
 
 tiD : 03 
 P3 R ^ - 
 
 -S.I 
 
 W-^ 
 
110 STATESMEN 
 
 Grenville, George, continued — 
 B. Richard, succeeded his mother the Countess, as 1st Earl 
 
 Temple ; statesman ; Lord Privy Seal. 
 S. William Wyndham Grenville ; created Lord Grenville ; 
 
 Premier, 1806. 
 S. George, 2d Earl Temple ; created Marquis Buckingham ; 
 
 twice Viceroy of Ireland. 
 S. Thomas, who bequeathed his library to the British Museum. 
 Grenville, William Wyndham; created Lord Grenville; 
 
 Premier, 1806 ; Chancellor of Oxford University. 
 B. Marquess Buckingham, twice Viceroy of Ireland. 
 
 E. George Grenville, Premier, 1763. 
 
 g. Sir William Wyndham, Bart., Secretary at War and 
 
 Chancellor of the Exchequer. 
 ttS. William Pitt, Premier. 
 
 U. Richard Grenville, created Earl Temple ; statesman. 
 Grey, Charles, 2d Earl; Premier, 1830-1834. 
 
 F. General in America, and early part of French War ; 
 
 created Earl Grey for his services. 
 B. Edward, Bishop of Hertford. 
 
 S. Henry G., 3d Earl; statesman; writer on Colonial govern- 
 ment, and on Reform. 
 S. Sir Charles Grey, Private Secretary to the Queen. 
 Holland, Lord. /See Fox, 
 
 Horner, Francis ; statesman, financier. One of the founders 
 of the Edinburgh lievieiv ; afterwards he rapidly rose to 
 great note in Parliament. His career was ended by 
 early death, a^t. 39. 
 B. Leonard Horner, geologist, for very many years a vene- 
 rated member of the scientific world. 
 Jenkinson, Robert Banks ; 2d Earl of Liverpool ; Premier, 
 1812-27. 
 F. Right Hon. Charles Jenkinson, created Earl Liverpool ; 
 See. of State ; a confidential friend and adviser of 
 Geo. III. 
 U.l John Jenkinson, colonel ; Joint Secretary for Ireland. 
 US.] John Banks Jenkinson, D.D., Bishop of St. David's. 
 Jervis, John, admiral ; created Earl St. Vincent; 1st Lord of 
 the Admiralty. 
 u. Right Hon. Sir Thomas Parker ; Ch. B.B. 
 
 UP. Thomas Jervis, M.P., Ch. Justice of Chester. 
 UPS. Sir John Jervis, M.P., Attorney-General; Ch. C. P. 
 (Vict.) 
 
STATESMEN 111 
 
 King, Lord. See Judges. 
 
 Lamb, William, 2d Visct. Melbourne; Premier, 1834 and 
 1835-41. 
 B. Frederick, diplomatist, ambassador to Vienna; created 
 
 Lord Beauvale. 
 B. George, M.P., Under-Sec. of State for Home Department. 
 6. Lady Palmerston, 
 
 p. Et. Hon. Wm. F. Cowper, President of the Board of 
 Works, &c. 
 Larisdowne, Marquis. See Petty. 
 Liverpool, Lord. See Jbnkinson. 
 Londonderry. See Stewaet. 
 
 Nelson, Admiral ; created Earl Nelson. See Commanders. 
 North, Lord; created Earl Guilford; Premier, 1770-82. 
 [G.F.] Francis, 1st Baron Guilford. Lord Keeper. (James 
 II.) Whose three brothers and other eminent relations 
 are described in Judges. {See also Genealogical Table.) 
 Palmerston. See Temple. 
 
 Peel, Sir Robert; Premier, 1834-5, 1841-5, 1845-6. 
 F. Sir Robert Peel, M.P. ; created a Bart. A very wealthy 
 cotton manufacturer and of great mercantile ability, who 
 founded the fortunes of the family. He was Vice-Pre- 
 sident of the Literary Society. 
 g. Sir John Floyd, General, created a Bart, for services in 
 
 India. 
 B. Eight Hon. General Peel, Secretary of State for War. 
 B. Right Hon. Lawrence Peel, Chief Justice of Supreme 
 Court of Calcutta. 
 
 There were also other brothers of more than average 
 ability. 
 S. Rt. Hon. Sir Robert, 2d Bart. ; Chief Secretary for 
 
 Ireland. 
 S. Eight Hon. Frederick, Under Secretary of State for War. 
 S. Captain Sir William Peel, E.N., distinguished at Sebas- 
 topol and in India. 
 Perceval, Spencer; Premier, 1810-12. 
 n. 2d Lord Eedesdale, Chairman of Committees of House of 
 Lords. (He was son of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland.) 
 n. Right Hon. Spencer Walpole, Secretary of State for Home 
 Department. 
 Petty, William Petty ; 2d Earl Shelburne ; created Marquis 
 Lansdowne ; Premier, 1782-3. An ardent supporter 
 of the Earl of Chatham ; in early life he distinguished 
 himself in the army, at Minden. 
 
112 STATESME^r 
 
 Petty, William Petty, continued — 
 
 CF. Sir William Petty, pliysician, politician, and author ; 
 Surveyor-General of Ireland ; a man of singular ver- 
 satility, and successful in everything, including money- 
 making. 
 
 S. 3d Marquis Lansdowne, statesman and man of letters. 
 In youth, as Lord Henry Petty, he was one of the set 
 who founded the Edinhurgh Review. He then became 
 prominent as a Whig, in Parliament, and was Secretary 
 of State more than once. Was Chancellor of the 
 Exchequer, set. 26. 
 Pitt, William; created Earl of Chatham; Premier, 176fi. 
 Originally in the army, which he left set. 28 ; then the 
 vigorous opponent of Walpole in Parliament, "the 
 terrible cornet of Dragoons;" afterwards, set. 49, he 
 became one cf the ablest of statesmen, most brilliant 
 of orators, and the prime mover of the policy of England. 
 Married a Grenville. {See GeenvillE for genealogical 
 tree.) 
 
 [G.] Thomas Pitt, Governor of Eort George, who somehow or 
 other amassed a large fortune in India. 
 
 S. William Pitt, Premier. 
 
 p. Lady Hester Stanhope. 
 
 Pitt, William; 2d son of the 1st Earl of Chatham. Illustrious 
 statesman; Premier, 1783-1801 ; and 1804-6. Preco- 
 cious and of eminent talent ; frequent ill-health in 
 boyhood ; ast. 14 an excellent scholar. Never boyish 
 in his ways ; became a healthy youth set. 18. He was 
 Chancellor of the Exchequer set. 24, and Prime Minister 
 set. 25 : which latter office he held for seventeen years 
 consecutively. His constitution was early broken by 
 gout ; died set. 47. 
 
 F. Earl of Chatham, Premier. 
 
 N. Lady Hester Stanhope. 
 
 u. George Grenville, Premier. 
 
 uS. Lord Grenville, Premier. 
 
 n. Lady Hester Stanhope, who did the honours of his house, 
 and occasionally acted as his secretai'y ; she was highly 
 accomplished, tut most eccentric and more than half 
 mad. After Pitt's death, she lived in Syria, dressed as 
 a male native, and professed supernatural powers. 
 Portland, Duke of. See Bentinck. 
 Ripon, Earl of. See Robinson. 
 
STATESMEN us 
 
 Robinson, Frederick John; 1st Viscount Godericli and Earl 
 of Ripon; Premier, 1827-8. 
 
 G. Thomas Eobinson, created Baron Grantham, diplomatist ; 
 afterwards Secretary of State. 
 
 F. Thomas Robinson, 2d Baron, also diplomatist, and after- 
 wards Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. 
 
 gB. Charles Yorke, Lord Chancellor. See Judges. 
 
 gF. Philip Yorke, 1st Lord Hardwicke, Ld. Chan. See 
 Judges. 
 
 S. George F. (inherited) Earl de Grey and Ripon, Secretary 
 of State for War. 
 Romilly, Sir Samuel ; eminent lawyer and statesman. His 
 parents were French refugees. He was of a serious dis- 
 position in youth, and almost educated and supported 
 himself. Entered the bar, and attracted notice by a 
 pamphlet. He rose rapidly in his profession, and became 
 Solicitor-General and M.P. Eminent reformer of 
 criminal laws ; committed suicide set. 61. 
 
 S. Right Hon. Sir John Romilly, created Lord Romilly ; 
 Attorney-General and Master of the Rolls. See 
 Judges. 
 Russell, 1st Earl ; Premier. See Bedford. 
 Scott, "William ; cr. Lord Stowell, Judge of the Admiralty 
 Court. 
 
 B. Lord Eldon, Lord Chancellor. See Judges. 
 
 Lord Stowell and Eldon were each of them twins, each 
 having been born with a sister. 
 Shelburne, Earl of. jSfee Petty. 
 
 Sheridan, Richard Brinsley ; orator, extraordinary wit, and 
 dramatist. Was stupid as a boy of 7. When set. 1 1 
 was idle and careless, but engaging, and showed gleams 
 of superior intellect, as testified by Dr. Parr. On 
 leaving school he wrote what he afterwards developed 
 into the "Critic." Wrote the "Rivals" set. 24. 
 Died worn out in body and spirits set. 65. 
 He eloped in youth with Miss Linley, a popular singer of 
 great personal charms and exquisite musical talents. 
 Tom Sheridan was the son of that marriage. Miss 
 Linley's father was a musical composer and manager of 
 Drury Lane Theatre. The Linley family was " a nest 
 of nightingales : " all had genius, beauty, and voice. 
 Mrs. Tickel was one of them. The name of Sheridan 
 is peculiarly associated with a clearly marked order of 
 
 I 
 
114 STATESMEN 
 
 brilliant and engaging but " ne'er-do-weel " qualities. 
 Richard Brinsley's genius worked in flashes, and left 
 results that were disproportionate to its remarkable 
 power. His oratorical power and winning address 
 made him a brilliant speaker and a star in society ; 
 but he was neither a sterling statesman nor a true 
 friend. He was an excellent boon companion, but 
 unhappy in his domestic relations. Reckless prodi- 
 gality, gambling, and wild living, brought on debts and 
 duns and a premature break of his constitution. These 
 qualities are found in a greater or less degree among 
 numerous members of the Sheridan family, as well as 
 in those whose biographies have been published. It is 
 exceedingly instructive to observe how strongly here- 
 ditary they have proved to be. 
 
 F. Thomas Sheridan, author of the Dictionary. Taught 
 
 oratory, connected himself with theatres, became, set. 25, 
 manager of Drury Lane. He was a whimsical but not 
 an opinionated man. 
 
 y. Frances Chamberlain, most accomplished and amiable. 
 Her father would not allow her to learn writing ; her 
 brothers taught her secretly : set. 15, her talent for 
 literary composition showed itself. She wrote some 
 comedies, one of which was as highly eulogized by 
 Garrick, as her novel " Sydney Biddulph " was pane- 
 gyrized by Fox and Lord North. 
 
 g. Rev. Dr. Philip Chamberlain, an admired preacher, but 
 a humorist and full of crotchets. (I know nothing of 
 the character of his wife. Miss Lydia Whyte.) 
 
 G. Rev. Dr. Thomas Sheridan, friend and correspondent of 
 
 Dean Swift. A social, punning, fiddling man, careless 
 
 and indolent ; high animal spirits. " His pen and his 
 
 fiddle-stick were in continual motion." 
 S. Tom Sheridan ; a thorough scapegrace, and a Sheridan all 
 
 over. (He had the Linley blood in him — see above) ; 
 
 married and died young, leaving a large family, of whom 
 
 one is — 
 F. Caroline, Mrs. Norton ; poetess and novelist. 
 PS. Lord Dufferin, late Secretary for Ireland, is the son of 
 
 another daughter. 
 Stanley, Edward Geoffrey; 14th Earl of Derby; Premier, 
 
 1852, 1858-9, 1866-8 ; scholar ; translator of " Homer " 
 
 into English verse, as well as orator and statesman. 
 
STATESMEN 115 
 
 Stanley, Edward Geoffrey, continued — 
 
 F. Naturalist ; President of Linnrean and Zoological Socie- 
 ties ; known by his endeavours to acclimatize animals. 
 
 uS. Rev. J. J. Hornby, Head Master of Eton ; scholar and 
 athlete. 
 
 S. Edward, Lord Stanley, Secretary of State for Foreign 
 Affairs. 
 Stewart, Robert; the famous Yiscount Castlereagh, and 
 2d Marquess Londonderrj'. Great hopes were enter- 
 tained of him when he entered Parliament, barely of 
 age, but he disappointed them at first, for lie was 
 a very unequal speaker. However, he became leader 
 of the House of Commons set. 29. Committed suicide. 
 
 F. Was M.P. for county Down, and raised through success- 
 
 ive peerages to the Marquisate. 
 uS. Sir George Hamilton Seymour, G.C.B. ; diplomatist, 
 
 especially in Russia and Austria, 
 B. (Half brother, grandson of Lord Chancellor Camden.) 
 
 Charles William ; created Earl Vane ; Adjutant-General 
 
 under Wellington in Spain set. 30. 
 [p.] (And P. to Duke of Grafton, Premier 1767.) Admiral 
 
 Fitzroy ; eminent navigator ("Voyage of the Beagle "). 
 
 Superintendent of the Meteorological Department of 
 
 the Board of Trade. 
 Stuart, John ; 3d Earl of Bute ; Premier, 1762-3. 
 u. 2d Duke of Argyll ; created Duke of Greenwich ; states- 
 man and general. In command at Sheriffmuir : — 
 
 "Argyll, tho State's whole thunder horn to wield, 
 And shake alike the senate and the field." — Pope. 
 
 G^F. Sir George Mackenzie, Lord Advocate ; eminent lawyer. 
 
 G. Sir James Stuart, 1st Earl of Bute ; Privy Councillor to 
 
 Queen Anne. 
 GU. Robert Stuart, 1st Baronet ; a Lord of Session, as Lord 
 
 Tillicoultry. 
 GB. Dugald Stuart, also a Lord of Session. 
 B. Right Hon. James Stuart, who assumed the additional 
 
 name of Mackenzie ; Keeper of Privy Seal of Scotland. 
 S. General Sir Charles Stuart ; reduced Minorca. 
 S. William, D.D. ; Archbishop of Armagh. 
 P. Charles ; ambassador to France ; created Baron Stuart 
 
 do Rothesay. His great-grandmother {Gf .) was Lady 
 
 Mary Wortley Montagu ; charming letter- writer ; 
 
 introducer of inoculation from the East. 
 
116 STATESMEN 
 
 Temple, Henry J. ; Lord Palmerston ; octogenarian Premier, 
 1855-8, 1859-65. Was singularly slow in showing his 
 great powers, though he was always considered an able 
 man, and was generally successful in his undertakings. 
 He had an excellent constitution, • and high animal 
 spirits, but was not ambitious in the ordinary sense of 
 the word, and did not care to go out of his way to do 
 work. He was fully 45 years old before his states- 
 manlike powers were clearly displayed. 
 His father is described as a model of conjugal affection ; 
 he wrote a most pathetic and natural epitaph on his 
 wife. He was fond of literature and of pictures. 
 B. Sir William Temple; Minister Plenipotentiary to the 
 Court of Naples ; founder of the " Temple Collection " 
 of Italian antiquities, and works of art in the British 
 Museum. 
 GGrB. Sir William Temple, Swift's patron. 
 GGr. Sir John Temple, Attorney-General, and Speaker of the 
 
 House of Commons in Ireland. 
 GGF. Sir John Temple, Master of the Rolls in Ireland ; even 
 he was not the first of this family that showed ability. 
 Thurlow, Lord ; Lord Chancellor. See under Judges. 
 St. Vincent, Earl. See Jeevis. 
 
 Walpole, Sir Eoberi ; created Earl of Orford ; Premier 
 1721-42 (under Geo. I. and II., but included in 
 Brougham's volumes of the Statesmen of Geo. III.). 
 In private life hearty, good-natured, and social. Had a 
 happy art of making friends. Great powers of per- 
 suasion. For business of all kinds he had an extra- 
 ordinary capacity, and did his work with the greatest 
 ease and tranquillity 
 G. Sir Edward Walpole, M.P. ; distinguished member of the 
 
 Parliament that restored Charles II. 
 B. Horatio ; diplomatist of a high order ; created Baron 
 
 Walpole. 
 S. Sir Edward ; Chief Secretary for Ireland. 
 S. Horace ; famous in literature and art. Strawberry Hill. 
 Excellent letter-writer : Byron speaks of his letters as 
 incomparable. Gouty. Died set. 80. 
 wp. Admiral Lord Nelson. 
 
 A grandson [G.] of Horatio was minister at Munich, and 
 another was minister in Portugal. One of (he sons of the 
 former is Et. Hon. Spencer Walpole, Secretary of State. 
 
STATESMEN 117 
 
 Walpole, Sir Robert, continued — 
 iV. Mrs. Darner, sculptor, daughter of Field-Marshal Conway, 
 
 cousin to Horace "Walpole. 
 Wellesley, Richard; created Marquess of Wellesley ; 
 
 Governor-General of India; most eminent statesman 
 
 and scholar. 
 B. Arthur ; the great Duke of Wellington. 
 ■^B.] 1st Baron Cowley, diplomatist. 
 F.] 1st Earl of Mornington ; eminent musical tastes. He 
 
 inherited the estates and the name, but not the blood, 
 
 of the Wesleys, whose descendants were the famous 
 
 Dissenters, his father, Richard Colley, having obtained 
 
 them from his aunt's husband, who was a Wesley. 
 g(?F. The infamous judge. Sir John Trevor, M.R., the cousin 
 
 and the rival of the abler, but hardly more infamous. 
 
 Judge JefBreys. 
 IST. Henry Wellesley ; created Earl Cowley ; diplomatist ; 
 
 ambassador to France. 
 S. (Illegitimate.) Rev. Henry Wellesley, D.D. ; Principal 
 
 of New Inn Hall, Oxford ; a scholar and man of 
 
 extensive literary acquirements and remarkable taste 
 
 in art. 
 Wellesley, Arthur; created Duke of Wellington; Premier 
 
 See COMMANDEES. 
 
 B. Marquess Wellesley \ 
 
 F. Earl Mornington ( , 
 
 N. Earl Cowley V as above. 
 
 ]Sr. Rev. Henry Wellesley ) 
 Wilberforce, William; philanthropist and statesman; of 
 very weak constitution in infancy. Even set. 7 showed 
 a remarkable talent for elocution ; had a singularly 
 melodious voice, which has proved hereditary ; sang 
 well ; was very quick ; desultory at college. Entered 
 Parliament set. 21, and before set. 25 had gained high 
 reputation. 
 
 S. Samuel, Bishop of Oxford ; prelate, orator, and adminis- 
 trator. 
 
 [S.] Robert, Archdeacon ; Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford ; 
 subsequently became Roman Catholic. 
 
 [S.] Henry William ; scholar, Oxford, 1830. Subsequently 
 became Roman Catholic. 
 
118 STATESMEN 
 
 SUPPLEMENTARY LIST OF GREAT STATESMEN 
 OF VARIOUS PERIODS AND COUNTRIES. 
 
 Adams, John (1735-1826), the second President of the United 
 States. Educated for the law, where he soon gained 
 great reputation and practice ; was an active politician 
 set. 30 ; took a prominent part in effecting the inde- 
 pendence of his country. 
 S. John Quincey Adams, sixth President of the United States ; 
 
 previously minister in Berlin, Russia, and Vienna. 
 P. Charles Francis Adams, the recent and well-known 
 American minister in London ; author of " Life of John 
 Adams." 
 
 Arteveldt, James Van (1345?); brewer of Ghent; popular 
 leader in the revolt of Flanders ; exercised sovereign 
 power for nine years. 
 S. Philip Van Arteveldt. See below. 
 
 Arteveldt, Philip Van (1382 1) ; leader of the popular party, 
 long subsequently to his father's death. He wa^ well 
 educated and wealthy, and had kept aloof from politics 
 till ast. 42, when he was dragged into them by the 
 popular party, and hailed their captain by acclamation. 
 He led the Flemish bravely against the French, but 
 was finally defeated and slain. 
 F. James Van Arteveldt. See above. 
 
 Burleigh, Earl. See Cecil. 
 
 Cecil, William; created Lord Burleigh; statesman (Eliza- 
 beth) ; Lord Treasurer. " The ablest minister of an 
 able reign." "Was Secretary, or chief Minister, during 
 almost the whole of Queen Elizabeth's long reign of 
 forty-five years. He was distinguished at Cambridge 
 for his power of work and for his very regular habits. 
 Married for his second wife the daughter of Sir Anthony 
 Cooke, director of the studies of Edward VI., and sister 
 of Lady Bacon, the mother of the great Lord Bacon, 
 and had by her — • 
 S. Robert Cecil, who was created Earl of Salisbury the 
 same day that his elder brother was created Earl of 
 Exeter. He was of weakly constitution and de- 
 formed. Succeeded his father as Prime Minister 
 under Elizabeth, and afterwards under James I. ; 
 was unquestionably the ablest minister of his time, 
 but cold-hearted and selfish. Lord Bacon was mS. to him. 
 
STATESMEN 119 
 
 Cecil, William, continued — 
 B.l 1st Earl of Exeter. 
 F.J Master of the Eobes to Henry VIII. 
 Colbert, Jean Baptiste; French statesman and financier 
 (Louis XIV.); eminent for the encouragement he 
 gave to public works and institutions, to commerce 
 and manufactures. He was fully appreciated in his 
 early life by Mazarin, who recommended him as his 
 successor. He became minister set. 49, and used to 
 work for sixteen hours a day. His family gave 
 many distinguished servants to France. 
 
 U. Odart ; a merchant who became a considerable financier. 
 
 B. Charles ; statesman and diplomatist. 
 
 S. Jean Baptiste ; statesman ; intelligent and firm of 
 purpose ; commanded, when still a mere youth, the 
 expedition against Genoa in 1684. 
 
 S. Jacques Nicholas, archbishop; member of the Academy 
 
 N. Jean Baptiste (son of Charles) ; diplomatist. 
 
 N. Charles Joachim ; prelate. 
 
 The family continued to show ability in the succeeding 
 generation. 
 Crom\A;'ell, Oliver ; Lord Protector of the Commonwealth. 
 
 Z7S. Hampden the patriot, whom Lord Clarendon speaks of 
 as having " a head to contrive, a tongue to persuade, 
 and a heart to execute any mischief ; " — this word " mis- 
 chief " meaning, of course, antagonism to the King. 
 
 Cp. Edmund Waller, the poet, a man of very considerable 
 abilities both in parliamentary eloquence and in poetry, 
 but he was not over-stedfast in principle. He was n. 
 to Hampden. 
 
 S. Henry ; behaved with gallantry in the army, and acted 
 with much distinction in Ireland as Lord Deputy. 
 He had one other son and four daughters, who married 
 
 able men, but their descendants were not remarkable. 
 The Cromwell breed has been of much less importance 
 than might have been expected from his own genius 
 and that of his collaterals, Hampden and Waller. 
 Besides his son Henry, there is no important name 
 in the numerous descendants of Oliver Cromwell. 
 Henry's sons were insignificant people, so were those 
 of Richard, and so also were those of Cromwell's 
 daughters, notwithstanding their marriage with such 
 eminent men as Ireton and Fleetwood. One of 
 
120 STATESMEN 
 
 Oliver's sisters married Archbishop Tillotson, and 
 had issue by him, but they proved nobodies. 
 Guise, Francis Balafre, Duke of. The most illustrious 
 among the generals and great political leaders of this 
 powerful French family. He had high military talent. 
 He greatly distinguished himself as a general set. 34, 
 and was then elevated to the dignity of Lieutenant- 
 General of the kingdom. 
 
 B. Charles, Cardinal of Lorraine. 
 
 S. Henry (Duke of Guise, also called Balafre). He was 
 less magnanimous and more factious than his father ; 
 was the adviser of the massacre of St. Bartholomew ; 
 and he caused Coligny to be murdered; was himself 
 murdered by order of Henri III., set. 38. 
 
 S. Cardinal, arrested and murdered in prison, on the same 
 day as his brother. 
 
 [S.] Due de Mayenne. 
 
 P. Charles, who, together with his uncle, the Duo de 
 Mayenne, was leader of the league against Henri IV. 
 
 PS. Henry, conspired against Cardinal Eichelieu. 
 
 Thus there were four generations of notable men in the 
 Guise family. 
 Mirabeau, H. G. Riquetti, Comte de; French statesman, 
 " The Alcibiades of the French Revolution." A man 
 of violent passions, ardent imagination, and great 
 abilities. He had prodigious mental activity, and 
 hungered for every kind of knowledge. 
 
 F. Marquis de Mirabeau; author of " L'Ami des Hommes," 
 a leader of the school of the Economists ; a philanthro- 
 pist by profession, and a harsh despot in his own family. 
 
 [B and 6.] There were remarkable characters among the 
 brothers and sisters of Mirabeau, but I am unable 
 to state facts by which their merits may be distinctly 
 appraised. 
 It is said that among many generations of the Mirabeaus 
 — or more properly speaking, of the Riquettis, for 
 Mirabeau was an assumed name — were to be found 
 men of great mental vigour and character. Thus St. 
 Beuve says — and I give the extract in full and without 
 apology on account of the interest ever attacliing itself 
 to Mirabeau's characteristics — 
 "Les Correspondances du pere et de I'oncle du grand 
 tribun, la Notice sur son grand-pere, et en general 
 
STATESMEN 121 
 
 toutes les pieces qui font le tissu de ces tuit volumes, 
 ont revele une race a part des caracteres d'une origi- 
 nalite grandiose et haute, d'ou notre Mirabeau n'a eu. 
 qu'a descendre pour se repandre ensuite, pour se pre- 
 cipiter comme il Fa fait et se distribuer a tous, telle- 
 ment qu'on peut dire qu'il n'a et6 que 1' enfant perdu, 
 I'enfant prodigue et sublime de sa race." 
 
 He combined his paternal qualities with those of his 
 mother : — 
 
 " Ce n'etait suivant la definition de son pere qu'un male 
 monstreux au physique et au moral. 
 
 '' II tenait de sa mere la largeur du visage, les instincts, 
 les appetits prodigues et sensuels, mais probablement 
 aussi ce certain fond gaillard et gaulois, cette f aculte de se 
 familiariser et de s'humaniser que les Riquetti n'avaient 
 pas, et qui deviendra un des moyens de sa puissance. 
 
 " Une nature riche, ample, copieuse, genereuse, sou vent 
 grossiere et vicee, souvent fine aussi, noble, meme ele- 
 gante, et, en somme, pas du tout monstreuse, mais des 
 plus humaines." 
 More, Sir Thomas ; Lord Chancellor (Henry VIII.) ; eminent 
 statesman and writer ; singularly amiable, unaffectedly 
 pious, and resolute to death. When set. 13, the Dean 
 of St. Paul's used to say of him, "There was but one 
 wit in England, and that was young More." 
 P. Sir John More, Just. K. B. 
 
 [S. and 3 s.] Besides his three accomplished daughters, 
 Margaret Eoper, Elizabeth Dauncy, and Cecilia 
 Heron, Sir Thomas More had one son called John. 
 Too much has been said of the want of capacity of 
 this son. His father commended the purity of his 
 Latin more than that of his daughters, and Grynseus 
 {see under Divines) dedicated to him an edition of 
 Plato, while Erasmus inscribed to him the works of 
 Aristotle. He had enough strength of character to 
 deny the king's supremacy, and on that accovmt he 
 lay for some time in the Tower under sentence of 
 death. (''Life of More," by Eev. Joseph Hunter, 
 1828, Preface, p. xxxvi.) 
 Richelieu, Armand J. du Plessis, Cardinal Due de^ Ihe 
 great minister of France under Louis XIV. He was 
 educated for arms, but devoted himself to study, and 
 entered the Church at a very early age— earlier than 
 was legal— and became Doctor, ^t. 39 he was chief 
 
122 STATESMEN 
 
 minister, and thenceforward he absolutely reigned for 
 eighteen years. He was not a lovable man. He 
 pursued but one end — the establishment of a strong 
 despotism. Died set. 57. 
 
 F. rran9ois du Plessis, seigneur de Richelieu ; signalized 
 himself as a soldier and a diplomatist. Was promoted 
 to be " grand prev6t de France," and was highly 
 rewarded by Henri IV. 
 
 [B.] Henri ; became " marechal de camp," and was killed in 
 a duel just when he was about to be promoted to the 
 government of Angers. 
 
 B. Alphonse L. ; Cardinal of Lyons. Became a monk of 
 the Chartreuse, and practised great austerity. He 
 behaved nobly in Lyons at the time of the plague. 
 
 BP. (Grandson of Henri.) Louis F. Armand, Due de Eiche- 
 lieu. He was Marshal of France, and personified the 
 eighteenth century ; being frivolous, fond of intrigue, 
 immoral, without remorse, imperturbably good- 
 humoured, and courageous. He was a seven months' 
 child, and lived to set. 92. His children were — 
 
 BPS. The " trop celfebre " Due de Fronsac. 
 
 BP/S'. The witty and beautiful Countess of Egmont. 
 
 BPP. (Son of the Due de Fronsac.) Armand E., Due de 
 Richelieu; Prime Minister of France under Louis 
 XVIII. Died in 1822. 
 
 nS. Comte de Gramont, wit and courtier. See under 
 LiTEEAEY Men. 
 Witt, De, John. The younger brother of two of the ablest and 
 more honourable of Dutch statesmen. They were in- 
 separable in their careers, but difEerent in character ; 
 each, however, being among the finest specimens of his 
 peculiar type. John played the more prominent part, 
 on account of his genial, versatile, and aspiring 
 character. He rose through various offices, until, set. 27, 
 he became Grand Pensionary, virtually the chief magis- 
 trate, of Holland. He was savagely murdered, set. 47. 
 
 B. Cornelius De "Witt. See below. 
 
 [F.] A party leader of some importance. 
 Witt, De, Cornelius; had more solid, though less showy 
 parts, than his brother, but was in reality the more 
 efficient supporter of that power which his brother John 
 exercised. He, also, was savagely murdered, set. 49. 
 
 B. John De Witt. See above. 
 
 [F.] See above. 
 
ENGLISH PEERAGES, THEIR INFLUENCE UPON RACE 123 
 
 ENGLISH PEERAGES, 
 THEIR INFLUENCE UPON RACE 
 
 It is frequently, and justly, remarked, that the families of 
 great men are apt to die out ; and it is argued from that 
 fact, that men of ability are unprolific. If this were the 
 case, every attempt to produce a highly-gifted race of men 
 would eventually be defeated. Gifted individuals might 
 be reared, but they would be unable to maintain their 
 breed. I propose in a future chapter, after I have dis- 
 cussed the several groups of eminent men, to examine the 
 degree in which transcendent genius may be correlated 
 with sterility, but it will be convenient that I should now 
 say something about the causes of failure of issue of 
 Judges and Statesmen, and come to some conclusion 
 whether or no a breed of men gifted with the average 
 ability of those eminent men, could or could not maintain 
 itself during an indefinite number of consecutive genera- 
 tions. I will even go a little further a-field, and treat 
 of the extinct peerages generally. 
 
 First, as to the Judges : there is a peculiarity in their 
 domestic relations that interferes with a large average of 
 legitimate families. Lord Campbell states in a foot-note 
 to his life of Lord Chancellor Thurlow, in his " Lives of 
 the Chancellors," that when he (Lord Campbell) was first 
 acquainted with the English Bar, one half of the judges 
 had married their mistresses. He says it was then the