← catalogue

Memoirs of James Robert Hope-Scott, Volume 2

by Robert Ornsby · English · Gutenberg #7975 · 555,429 chars · public domain (US)

The Project Gutenberg eBook of Memoirs of James Robert Hope-Scott, Volume 2
    
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.

Title: Memoirs of James Robert Hope-Scott, Volume 2

Author: Robert Ornsby


        
Release date: April 1, 2005 [eBook #7975]
                Most recently updated: December 31, 2020

Language: English

Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/7975

Credits: Charles Aldarondo, Tiffany Vergon, Jerry Fairbanks, Charles Franks, and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team


*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK MEMOIRS OF JAMES ROBERT HOPE-SCOTT, VOLUME 2 ***




Charles Aldarondo, Tiffany Vergon, Jerry Fairbanks, Charles Franks, and the
Online Distributed Proofreading Team.



MEMOIRS OF JAMES ROBERT HOPE-SCOTT, VOLUME II



MEMOIRS OF

JAMES ROBERT HOPE-SCOTT

OF ABBOTSFORD, D.C.L., Q.C.

LATE FELLOW OF MERTON COLLEGE, OXFORD

_WITH SELECTIONS FROM HIS CORRESPONDENCE_


BY ROBERT ORNSBY, M.A.

PROFESSOR OF GREEK AND LATIN LITERATURE IN THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF
IRELAND; FELLOW OF THE ROYAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND; LATE FELLOW OF TRIN.
COLL. OXFORD

IN TWO VOLUMES VOL. II.



CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME.

CHAPTER XVIII. 1841, 1842.

Mr. Hope's Pamphlet on the Jerusalem Bishopric--His Value for the Canon
Law--Continued Correspondence of Mr. Hope and Mr. Newman on the Jerusalem
Bishopric--Mr. Newman's Idea of a Monastery--Mr. Newman writes from
Littlemore, April 22,1842--Dr. Pusey consults Mr. Hope on his Letter to the
Archbishop of Canterbury--Dr. Pusey and the Jerusalem Bishopric--Letters of
Archdeacon Manning, Mr. W. Palmer, Sir John T. Coleridge, Sir F. Palgrave,
Bishop Philpotts, and Count Senfft, on Mr. Hope's Pamphlet

CHAPTER XIX. 1842, 1843.

Oxford Commotions of 1842-43--Mr. Newman's Retractation--Correspondence of
Mr. Newman and J. R. Hope on the Subject--Mr. Hope pleads for Mr.
Macmullen--Dr. Pusey suspended for his Sermon on the Holy Eucharist--Seeks
Advice from Mr. Hope--Mr. Newman resigns St. Mary's--Correspondence of Mr.
Newman and Mr. Hope on the 'Lives of the English Saints'--Mr. Ward's
Condemnation--Mr. Hope sees the 'Shadow of the Cross' through the Press--
Engaged with 'Scripture Prints,' 'Pupilla Oculi,' &c.--Lady G. Fullerton's
Recollections of J. R. Hope--He proposes to make a Retreat at Littlemore

CHAPTER XX. 1844, 1845.

Mr. Hope's Tour on the Continent in 1844--Visit to Munich--Dr. Pusey's
'Library of Roman Catholic Works'--Dr. Pusey and the Spiritual Exercises--
His Opinion of the Discipline--Mr. Hope's Visit to Tetschen in 1844--Count
Leo Thun and his Friends--Mr. Hope's Interview with Prince Metternich--The
Hon. Sir R. Gordon, Ambassador at Vienna--Visit to Prince Palffy and to
Prince Liechtenstein--The Hungarian Diet at Presburg--Letter of Manzoni to
J. R. Hope--Visit to Rome--Bishop Grant and Mr. Hope--Mr. Hope resigns
Chancellorship of Salisbury--Dr. Pusey and the Stone Altar Case--Mr.
Oakeley and Mr. Hope--Scottish Episcopalian Church and its Office--Mr.
Gladstone endeavours to hold Mr. Hope back--Proposes Tour in Ireland--
Conversion of Mr. Newman--Mr. Hope on the Essay on Development--Letter of
Mr. Newman to J. R. Hope from Rome--Reopening of Correspondence with Mr.
Newman

CHAPTER XXI. 1845-1851.

Mr. Hope's Doubts of Anglicanism--Correspondence with Mr. Gladstone--
Correspondence of J. R. Hope and Mr. Gladstone continued--Mr. Gladstone
advises Active Works of Charity--Bishop Philpotts advises Mr. Hope to go
into Parliament--Mr. Hope and Mr. Gladstone in Society--Mr. Hope on the
Church Affairs of Canada--Dr. Hampden, Bishop of Hereford--The Troubles at
Leeds--Mr. Hope on the Jewish Question, &c.--The Gorham Case--The Curzon
Street Resolutions--The 'Papal Aggression' Commotion--Correspondence of Mr.
Hope and Mr. Manning--Their Conversion--Opinions of Friends on Mr. Hope's
Conversion--Mr. Gladstone--Father Roothaan, F.G. Soc. Jes., to Count
Senfft--Dr. Dollinger--Mr. Hope to Mr. Badeley--Conversion of Mr. W.
Palmer

CHAPTER XXII. 1839-1869.

Review of Mr. Hope's Professional Career--His View of Secular Pursuits--
Advice from Archdeacon Manning against Overwork--Early Professional
Services to Government--J. R. Hope adopts the Parliamentary Bar--His
Elements of Success--Is made Q.C.--Difficulty about Supremacy Oath--Mr.
Venables on Mr. Hope-Scott as a Pleader--Recollections of Mr. Cameron--Mr.
Hope-Scott on his own Profession--Mr. Hope-Scott's Professional Day--
Regular History of Practice not Feasible--Specimens of Cases: 1. The
Caledonian Railway interposing a Tunnel. 2. Award by Mr. Hope-Scott and R,
Stephenson. 3. Mersey Conservancy and Docks Bill, 'Parliamentary Hunting-
day,' Liverpool and Manchester compared. 4. London, Brighton, and South
Coast and the Beckenham Line. 5. Scottish Railways--an Amalgamation Case--
Mr. Hope-Scott and Mr. Denison; Honourable Conduct of Mr. Hope-Scott as a
Pleader. 6. Dublin Trunk Connecting Railway. 7. Professional Services of
Mr. Hope-Scott to Eton--Claims of Clients on Time--Value of Ten Minutes--
Conscientiousness--Professional Income--Extra Occupations--Affection of Mr.
Hope-Scott for Father Newman--Spirit in which he laboured

CHAPTER XXIII. 1847-1858.

Mr. Hope's Engagement to Charlotte Lockhart--Memorial of Charlotte
Lockhart--Their Marriage--Mr. Lockhart's Letter to Mr. J. R. Hope on his
Conversion--Filial Piety of Mr. Hope--Conversion of Lord and Lady Henry
Kerr--Domestic Life at Abbotsford--Visit of Dr. Newman to Abbotsford in
1852--Birth of Mary Monica Hope-Scott--Bishop Grant on Early Education--Mr.
Lockhart's Home Correspondence--Death of Walter Lockhart Scott--Mr. Hope
takes the Name of Hope-Scott--Last Illness and Death of Mr. Lockhart--
Death of Lady Hope--Letter of Lord Dalhousie--Mr. Hope-Scott purchases a
Highland Estate--Death of Mrs. Hope-Scott and her Two Infants--Letters of
Mr. Hope-Scott, in his Affliction, to Dr. Newman and Mr. Gladstone--Verses
in 1858--Letter of Dr. Newman on receiving them

CHAPTER XXIV. 1859-1870.

Mr. Hope-Scott's Return to his Profession--Second Marriage--Lady Victoria
Howard--Mr. Hope-Scott at Hyeres--Portraits of Mr. Hope-Scott--
Miscellaneous Recollections--Mr. Hope-Scott in the Highlands--Ways of
Building--Story of Second-sight at Lochshiel

CHAPTER XXV. 1867-1869.

Visit of Queen Victoria to Abbotsford in 1867--Mr. Hope-Scott's
Improvements at Abbotsford--Mr. Hope-Scott's Polities--Toryism in Early
Life--Constitutional Conservatism--Mr. Hope-Scott as an Irish and a
Highland Proprietor--Correspondence on Politics with Mr. Gladstone, and
with Lord Henry Kerr in 1868--Speech at Arundel in 1869

CHAPTER XXVI. 1851-1873.

Religious Life of Mr. Hope-Scott--Motives of Conversion--Acceptance of the
Dogma of Infallibility--The 'Angelus' on the Committee-room Stairs--Faith
in the Real Presence--Books of Devotion--The Society of Jesus--Letter of
Mrs. Bellasis--Mr. Hope-Scott's Manners--His Generosity--Courage in
admonishing--Habits of Prayer--Services to Catholicity--Remark of Lord
Blachford--The Catholic University of Ireland--Cardinal Newman's Dedication
of his 'University Sketches' to Mr. Hope-Scott--Aid in the Achilli Trial--
Mr. Badeley's Speech--Charitable Bequests--Westminster Missions--Repeal of
Titles Act--Statement of Mr. Hope-Scott--Letter to Right Hon. S. Walpole--
Correspondence with the Duke of Norfolk--Scottish Education Bill, 1869--
Parliamentary Committee on Convents--Services of Mr. Hope-Scott to
Catholicity in Legal Advice to Priests and Convents--Other Charities in
Advice, &c.--Private Charities, their General Character--Probable Amount of
them--Missions on the Border--Galashiels--Abbotsford--Letter of Pere de
Ravignan, S.J.--Kelso--Letter of Father Taggart--Burning of the Church at
Kelso--Charge of the Lord Justice-Clerk--Article from the 'Scotsman '--
Missions in the Western Highlands--Moidart--Mr. Hope-Scott's Purchase of
Lochshiel--'Road-making'--Dr. Newman's 'Grammar of Assent'--Mr. Hope-
Scott's Kindness to his Highland Tenants--Builds School and Church at
Mingarry--Church at Glenuig--Sells Dorlin to Lord Howard of Glossop--Other
Scottish Missions aided by Mr. Hope-Scott--His Irish Tenantry--His
Charities at Hyeres

CHAPTER XXVII. 1868-1873.

Mr. Hope-Scott's Speech on Termination of Guardianship to the Duke of
Norfolk--Failure in Mr. Hope-Scott's Health--Exhaustion after a Day's
Pleading--His Neglect of Exercise--Death of Mr. Badeley--Letter of Dr.
Newman--Last Correspondence of Mr. Hope and the Bishop of Salisbury
(Hamilton)--Dr. Newman's Friendship for Mr. Hope-Scott and Serjeant
Bellasis--Mr. Hope-Scott proposes to retire--Birth of James Fitzalan Hope--
Death of Lady Victoria Hope-Scott--Mr. Hope-Scott retires from his
Profession--Edits Abridgment of Lockhart, which he dedicates to Mr.
Gladstone--Dr. Newman on Sir Walter Scott--Visit of Dr. Newman to
Abbotsford in 1872--Mr. Hope-Scott's Last Illness--His Faith and
Resignation--His Death--Benediction of the Holy Father--Requiem Mass for
Mr. Hope-Scott at the Jesuit Church, Farm Street--Funeral Ceremonies at St.
Margaret's, Edinburgh--Cardinal Newman and Mr. Gladstone on Mr. Hope-Scott

APPENDIX I.

Funeral Sermon by his Eminence Cardinal Newman, preached at the Requiem
Mass for Mr. Hope-Scott, at the Church of the Immaculate Conception, Farm
Street, May 5, 1873

APPENDIX II.

Words spoken in the Chapel of the Ursulines of Jesus, St. Margaret's
Convent, Edinburgh, on the 7th day of May, 1873, at the Funeral of James
Robert Hope-Scott, Q.C. By the Rev. William J. Amherst, S.J.

APPENDIX III.

The Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, M.P., to Miss Hope-Scott [now the Hon. Mrs.
Maxwell Scott]

APPENDIX IV.

Verses by J. R. Hope-Scott

TABLE OF LETTERS, ETC.

       *       *       *       *       *

MEMOIRS

OF

JAMES ROBERT HOPE-SCOTT.


       *       *       *       *       *




CHAPTER XVIII.

1841-1842.

Mr. Hope's Pamphlet on the Jerusalem Bishopric--His Value for the Canon
Law--Continued Correspondence of Mr. Hope and Mr. Newman on the Jerusalem
Bishopric--Mr. Newman's Idea of a Monastery--Mr. Newman writes from
Littlemore, April 22, 1842--Dr. Pusey consults Mr. Hope on his Letter to
the Archbishop of Canterbury--Dr. Pusey and the Jerusalem Bishopric--
Letters of Archdeacon Manning, Mr. W. Palmer, Sir John T. Coleridge, Sir F.
Palgrave, Bishop Philpotts, and Count Senfft, on Mr. Hope's Pamphlet.


Two days after the date of the letter to Lady Henry Kerr, given in the
preceding chapter (Dec. 20, 1841), took place the publication of Mr. Hope's
pamphlet on the Anglo-Prussian Bishopric of Jerusalem. It may be described
as a learned and very closely reasoned argument against the measure; and a
dry (even if correct) analysis of it would be of little biographical
interest, especially as Mr. Hope's views on the question have already been
abundantly illustrated from unpublished materials. I therefore refer those
of my readers who wish for more extended information to the pamphlet
itself, but shall quote from the Postscript to the second edition
[Footnote: _The Bishopric of the United Church of England and Ireland at
Jerusalem_, considered in a Letter to a Friend, by James R. Hope,
B.C.L., Scholar of Merton, and Chancellor of the Diocese of Salisbury.
Second edition, revised, with a Postscript. London: C.J. Stewart. 1842.] an
eloquent passage on Canon Law, which is as characteristic of the writer as
anything I have yet been able to produce, and exhibits, I think, in a
striking manner how singularly this austere subject constituted at the time
the poetry of his life, and how largely the conflict between the principles
of Catholic jurisprudence and Anglicanism must have influenced the
reflections which ended in his conversion. Mr. Hope here refers to some
remarks on his pamphlet which had appeared in one by the Rev. Frederick
Denison Maurice, entitled 'Three Letters to the Rev. W. Palmer, &c.'
(Rivington: 1842).

_Value of the Science of Canon Law._

[Mr. Maurice] sets all lawyers at nought, and canonists he utterly
despises. Hastily, indeed, I think, and for the purpose of the moment only,
can he have given way to such feelings, for he needs not that I should tell
him that the Church of Christ rests not upon speculative truth alone, but
upon the positive institutions of our Lord and His Apostles. Surely, then,
to trace those institutions from the lowest point at which they come into
contact with human existence, up to the highest to which our eye can follow
them, the point of union with the unseen world in which they take their
rise, and from which they are the channels of grace and truth and authority
to the souls of men--to trace, I say, the outward and the visible signs of
sacraments, of polity, of discipline, up to the inward spiritual realities
upon which they depend, which they impart and represent to faith, or
shelter from profanation; to study the workings of the hidden life of the
Church by those developments which, in all ages and countries, have been
its necessary modes of access to human feeling and apprehension; to
systematise the end gained; to learn what is universal, what partial, what
temporary, what eternal, what presently obligatory, and wherefore; surely a
science such as this, so noble in its object, so important in its practical
bearings upon the unity and purity of the Church, and upon her relations to
the temporal power, is not one of which Mr. Maurice would deliberately
speak evil. Yet this is the science of the canonist. [Footnote: Mr. Hope's
pamphlet on the _Jerusalem Bishopric_, 2nd ed., p. 55.]

There are still portions of his correspondence with Mr. Newman, belonging
to the same period and subject, which must not be withheld:--


_J. R. Hope, Esq. to the Rev. J. H. Newman._

6 Stone Buildings, Lincoln's Inn: December 21, 1841.


Dear Newman,--Your speedy reply and return of my proofs was very kind. The
_hard_ passages I did not know how to make easy, as they are pure law,
so have left them.... I hear that the Bishop of London refused a man orders
last week on three points--Eucharistic sacrifice in _any sense_, real
presence in elements, grace in orders. The second point (being also the
Bishop of Winchester's) I have illustrated in a note to my pamphlet (very
briefly) by reference to Augsburg Confession.

You see the young Prince is to have a R. Catholic sponsor on one hand, and
the King of Prussia on the other. This is a good balance, though the Canon
tolerates neither....

Ever yours,

J. K. HOPE.


_The Rev. J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq._


My dear Hope,--... You take the canons of 1603 as _legal authority_, I
see. This has been a bone in my throat. I _wish_ them to show the
animus of our Church, but directly you make them authority, the unhappy
Ward is _ipso facto_ excommunicate for having been to Oscott, until he
repent of his wicked error. But there is no resisting law.

Palmer's 'Aids to Reflection' contain some very valuable documents.

What the Bishops are doing is most serious, as well as unjustifiable, as I
think. Really one does not know but they may meet in council and bring out
some tests which will have the effect forthwith of precipitating us, and
leaving the Church clean Protestant. Pray, does a _majority_ bind in
such a council? I mean in the way of canons. Can a majority determine the
doctrine of the Church? If so, we had need look out for cheap lodgings....

Ever yours,

John H. Newman.

Oriel College: December 23, 1841.

_J. R. Hope, Esq. to the Rev. J. H. Newman._

Palace, Salisbury: December 31, 1841.

Dear Newman,--I am again settled here for ten days or so.... As to the
Bishops meeting and making tests, they can _in law_ do nothing, except
in Convocation, with the Presbyters and under licence of the Crown. They
may, however, as heads of dioceses, agree to enforce particular things, but
there is not, I think, sufficient unity amongst them at present to allow of
this. The Jerusalem business I hope is yet to be of good service to us, by
rallying men of various shades against it, and by making the Bishops stand
up against what cannot be called otherwise than usurpation of their rights
by the Archbishop and the Bishop of London. The Bishop of Exeter, in
acknowledging (to Badeley) the receipt of my pamphlet, says:--

'Would that those who direct proceedings of this hazardous and most
questionable character may take warning from the effects of their
inconsiderateness on this occasion! I doubt whether any three Bishops were
consulted, or even informed, before the measure was completed.' This looks,
I think, like action....

When I publish again, I should like to bring out more fully the bearing of
the Augsburg Confession on the Thirty-nine Articles. I perhaps overrate the
importance of this point, but it seems to me to put Tract 90 in great
measure under the sanction of the Archbishop and Bishop of London. If you
think of doing anything more about Tract 90, perhaps (which would be far
better) you would take this up. If not, do you think you could get any one
to collect for me the sense of Luther, Melanchthon, &c., as to the meaning
of the chief articles of the Aug. Conf. I have always understood
consubstantiation to be properly held under that document, and, if so, the
admission of it with our Articles will appear to many people very awkward.
You must not think me unreasonable for thinking that you can get this done
for me (as you did the search about canons) at Oxford. Were our colleges
what they ought to be, there would be in each a concurrence of labour
whenever required, and I believe that you have men about you who have the
feeling from which this (if ever it does) must spring.

I am not without hope that some public move may be made about the
bishopric. What say you to an address to the Crown, praying it to license
the discussion of it in Convocation? I think some Bishops and many clergy
would join in this, and it would, I suppose, be very 'constitutional.' I
have not, however, looked up the formal part yet. Tell me what you think of
the thing, and I will consider it further....

(Signed) J. R. Hope.


_The Rev. J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq._

January 3, 1842.

My dear Hope,--A happy new year to you and all of us--and, what is even
more needed, to the English Church. I am afraid of moving about
Convocation. Not that we should not be in safer hands than in those of the
Bishops, but, though it restrained their acts, it would abridge our
liberty. Or it might formally recognise our Protestantism. What can we hope
from a body, the best members of which, as Hook and Palmer [of Worcester
Coll.], defend and subscribe to the Jerusalem Fund...? Therefore I do not
like to be _responsible_ for helping to call into existence a body
which may embarrass us more than we are at present.

I think your [Greek: topos] about the Augsburg Confession a very important
one, and directly more men come back will set a friend to work upon it.

I am almost in despair of keeping men together. The only possible way is a
monastery. Men want an outlet for their devotional and penitential
feelings, and if we do not grant it, to a dead certainty they will go where
they can find it. This is the beginning and the end of the matter. Yet the
clamour is so great, and will be so much greater, that if I persist, I
expect (though I am not speaking from anything that has _occurred_)
that I shall be stopped. Not that I have any intention of doing more at
present than laying the foundation of what may be.

... Are we really to be beaten in this election [for the Poetry
Professorship]? I will tell you a secret (if you care to know it) which not
above three or four persons know. We have 480 promises. Is it then
hopeless? ... I don't think our enemies would beat 600; at least, it would
be no triumph....

The Bishop of Exeter has for these eight years, ever since the commencement
of the Ecclesiastical Commission, been biding his time, and the Duke of
Wellington last spring disgusted him much. This both makes it likely that
he will now move, and also diminishes the force of the very words you
quote, for peradventure they are ordinary with him. I have good hopes that
he will.

Ever yours,

John H. Newman.

The experiment of offering to minds which had lost all sympathy with
Protestantism, yet were unable to close with Rome, an imitation of the
monastic life by way of shelter from the rude checks which their
aspirations sustained in the world without, seems to have answered for a
time, and possibly retarded for about three years that rush of conversion
which made 1845 such an epoch in the history even of the Church. This may
be inferred from the next letter, written shortly after Mr. Newman and his
disciples were regularly settled at Littlemore. I am not aware what the
report was which he so emphatically denies.

_The Rev. J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq._

April 22, 1842. _Dabam è Domo S. M. V. apud Littlemore._

My dear Hope,--Does not this portentous date promise to outweigh any
negative I can give to your question in the mind of the inquirer? for any
one who could ask such a question would think such a dating equivalent to
the answer. However, if I must answer in form, I believe it to be one great
absurdity and untruth from beginning to end, though it is hard I must
answer for _every_ hundred men in the _whole_ kingdom. Negatives
are dangerous: all I can say, however, is that I don't believe, or suspect,
or fear any such occurrence, and look upon it as neither probable nor
improbable, but simply untrue.

We are all much quieter and more resigned than we were, and are remarkably
desirous of building up a position, and proving that the English theory is
tenable, or rather, the English state of things. If the Bishops let us
alone, the fever will subside.

[After a few words on business] I wish you would say how you are.

Ever yours,

JOHN H. NEWMAN.

Early in 1842 came out Dr. Pusey's 'Letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury
on some Circumstances connected with the Present Crisis in the Church.' In
the preparation of this important pamphlet Dr. Pusey sought the advice of
Mr. Hope, and the letter in which he asked it must be placed before the
reader as an evidence of the value attached to Mr. Hope's opinion in the
counsels of the party.

_The Rev. Dr. Pusey to J. E. Hope, Esq._

My dear Hope,--You will be surprised that I should consult you as a layman
and a younger man as to a work on the religious state of things, but I do
it on N.'s suggestion, as seeing and being able to judge of men's minds;
and ye question is not as to _what_ is said, but whether it is
expedient to say it, and for me; what will be its probable effect.

The origin of it was my visit to Addington last autumn: after my return
Harrison wrote me some long letters, recommending that one shd take
occasion of ye Bishops' charges, under wh people writhed so much, to make
one's defence, show that one was not so unsound as one seemed, and plead
for sympathy. [Footnote: This fondness for the use of the indefinite
pronoun very much characterised the Puseyite dialect, as I have somewhere
read that it did the Jansenist. The _phase_ which it marked may he
seen fully developed in the tract 'On Reserve,' by Isaac Williams.] I was
unwilling to leave what I was doing and put myself forward; but as H. told
me that he had spoken on ye subject with ye Abp, it seemed to come with his
authority, so I set myself to it. It has been delayed until now, waiting in
part for unpublished charges, and for ye documents about ye Jerus. Bpric.
It is now about finished, and wd occupy about ten sheets; what I send is,
then, not half. The object of ye analysis of the Bishops' charges is to
show that some do not object to our main principles, but to matters of
detail; that others (as the Bps of Chester, Winchester, Calcutta) do not
object to our principles at all, but to certain principles which they
conceive to be ours. The effect of both, I hoped, wd be that our friends,
who were fretted by these charges, wd see that neither we nor (wh alone
signifies) Catholic truth is condemned, that others mt be better disposed
towards us, and that the hint mt be taken in some charges this year.
Anyhow, that there wd seem less of a consent of Bishops agst us, I was
rather sanguine about this part. Then there follows something about the
Jerusalem Bishopric and the East and Lutheranism, my object being to say
that things are safe so long as the Bishops do not make any organic changes
in our Church, or she be committed to any wrong principle. I conclude with
some pages meant incidentally to reassure persons about ourselves, and of
our good hopes and confidence and love for our Church. This I have been
urged to do in some way or other by several, _e.g._ E. Churton,
confidence having been terribly shaken by Golightly's wild sayings, and by
the version put upon my own visits to ye convents. This I could do by
implication without any formal profession.

[Illustration: Private]

Newman was against it from the first; he thought H. wanted to commit me to
say things which N. thought I could not say; in a word, to express H.'s own
views. About this I did not feel any difficulty, for having put forth
doctrinal statements in my two last letters, I did not feel called upon to
do it again, and so I went on. N. now likes it much in itself; indeed, he
tells me he likes it the best of anything which I have written, but does
not feel his former opinion removed; but he wished me to take another
opinion. People seem to like the notion. The only part about which I have
any misgiving is in these first slips, lest the picture of the temptations
to Romanism should seem too strong; and yet, unless our Bishops realise
that this tendency has some deeper foundation than any writings of ours,
what they will do will be in a wrong direction.

For myself, of course, I do not care what people think of me; and, on the
other hand, one does not like to waste what one has employed time upon; but
I am quite willing to give it up and be still, if it seems best; of course,
one should be very sorry to add to our confusions.

No one has suggested the mere omission of ye Romanist part. Jelf only (who
had seen that part only without some additions which I have since made,
that I might not seem gratuitously to exalt Rome to the disparagement of
our own Church) suggested that it be printed only to send to ye Bishops. N.
thinks this of no use. I have no other opinions. But I am entangling you
with the opinions of others, when I meant to ask you yours simply. I know
you will not mind ye trouble.

Yours affectionately, E. B. PUSEY.

Christ Church: September 27.

The Romanist part, of course, has not ye Abp's sanction, and it must be so
expressed.

In the date of the above letter 'September' is struck out; 'January'
substituted, and '42' added in Mr. Hope-Scott's hand, I think. How this
is to be explained I do not know, but Dr. Pusey can hardly have made such a
clerical error. Mr. Hope-Scott has endorsed the letter: 'I recommended
publication, with some alterations and additions.--J. R. H.'

Whatever influence Dr. Pusey may at an earlier period have exercised on the
religious views of Mr. Hope must have been a good deal shaken by his
inclination in the first instance to favour the Jerusalem Bishopric,
followed, indeed, by a disapproval, but one far short of the energy with
which Mr. Hope himself combated the measure.

_The Rev. E.B. Pusey to J.R. Hope, Esq._

My dear Hope,--I thank you much for your 'letter,' which I had been looking
for anxiously, but which by some mistake was not forwarded to me, so that I
only saw it two days ago. It is very satisfactory to me; it seems quite to
settle the point as to the duty of Bp A. I was also very much cheered to
see yr own more hopeful view of things in our Church.

I am a good deal discomforted by this visit of ye Kg. of Pr. It seems so
natural for persons to wish that Episcopacy shd be bestowed upon those who
desire to receive; and people for ye most part have very little or no
notion as to ye unsoundness even of the sounder part of ye G. Divines. As
far as I have heard of ye progress of truth there, the restoration of Xty
in some shape has been far more rapid than I anticipated or dared hope, the
soundness of the restoration far less.

Yours affectionately,

E. B. PUSEY.

116 Marine Parade, Brighton: January 7, 1842.

In another letter, dated Sexagesima Sunday [January 30], 1842, Dr. Pusey
says:--


I do not know your [Greek: topos] about ye Augsburg Conf. I have very
little, next to nothing, about it. Do not leave anything for me. Each can
do best what he feels most. I should be very sorry to take anything out of
your hands; and altogether I can say ye less about this because, wretched
as it would be that we should appear in ye E. connected with Lutherans, I
do not feel that it would introduce any organic change in us, and so cannot
anticipate that it would.

I see that the Conf. of Augs. does not express consubstantiation. Art. X.
may express Catholic doctrine.


I subjoin a few more letters from Mr. Hope's correspondence relating to his
pamphlet on the Jerusalem Bishopric question, interesting as it is in
itself, and forming so great a crisis in his religious history.

_The Ven. Archdeacon Manning [since Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster]
to J. R. Hope, Esq._

December 30, 1841.

My dear Hope,--I have this moment ended your pamphlet, and will not wait
for a cooler moment to thank you. I do so heartily. God grant we may be
true and manly in affirming the broad rule of Catholic order. I add my
thanks to you in another shape. In your last three or four pages you and I
were nearing each other's thoughts. It is refreshing to find an answer at a
distance. Forgive my long neglect of the enclosed paper, which after all
bears only my name, and probably too late for use.

Ever yours, dear Hope, most sincerely,

H. E. MANNING.


_The Rev. William Palmer (of Magdalen College, Oxford) to J. R. Hope,
Esq._

Mixbury, near Brackley: December 29, 1841.

Dear Hope,--I am much obliged to you for sending me a copy of your letter,
which I have read with the greatest pleasure.... I see that in the
statement just published by authority, _no Prussian_ documents are
given. I think your letter will be a puzzling one; but the spirit of
practical Protestantism is subtle and versatile, and able to set aside
everything--laws, principles, rubrics, and canons. Else I do not see how
the mischief which I apprehend could be realised.

Ever yours sincerely,

W. Palmer

P.S.--I am glad you think my pamphlet may be useful. We have taken entirely
different sides of the same subject; I the theoretical (as it seemed to
me), and you the practical view of the question.

_Sir John Taylor Coleridge to J. R. Hope, Esq._

My dear Hope,--Many thanks for your letter, which I have read through with,
I may say, a painful interest. Of course, in a matter so difficult in
itself, and so new, I must confess, to me, I do not take on me at once to
pronounce that you are right, but I cannot at present find out where you
are wrong; and I am the more inclined to think that you may be right
because I see in the Act just words enough to satisfy people rather
precipitate that the Prussian scheme might be carried through safely on
them. 'Spiritual jurisdiction,' 'over other Protestant congregations,'
would seem to ordinary minds enough--till it was further considered
_how_ the English Bishop was to work out the scheme by virtue of these
words, and yet be consistent with his own engagements.

I shall not be sorry, however, to find that you are answered; not that I
wish to accomplish, or seem rather to accomplish _any_ end by a
disorderly and indigested attempt at union; nor do I think _this_
thing of itself so important as many do: still it is one which very much
arrests the imagination, and excites strong devotional feeling; and I
rather looked on it as leading to more important matters with Prussia
itself. I cannot, too, help a little more personal feeling for the Bishop
than it fell within our plan to express--a good and pious man, I believe,
but not by intellect or previous habits fitted to meet such emergencies as
you place before him.

Very truly yours,

J. T. Coleridge.

December 30,1841.

Montague Place.

_Sir Francis Palgrave, K.H. to J. R. Hope, Esq._

Rolls House: January 4, 1842.

My dear Sir,--I ought before this to have thanked you for your kindness in
sending me your most able letter, but I did not like to do so until I had
read it with that attention which it deserves.

It is difficult to understand how your arguments can possibly be shaken.
The statute 25 Hen. VIII. c. 21 evidently relates only to such
dispensations upon the suit or for the benefit of individuals as had been
theretofore usually issued by the Roman Chancery, and to wrest it into the
power of establishing an _uncanonical_ see appears a most bold
attempt.

Nothing would more clearly show the true relation of the Church of England
to 'other Protestant churches' than a reprint of the _whole_
proceedings of the Convocations from William and Mary to their extinction--
adding proper notes.

Yours ever truly,

Francis Palgrave.

_The Right Rev. Dr. Philpotts, Bishop of Exeter, to J. R. Hope, Esq._

Bishopstowe, Torquay: November 10, 1842.

My dear Sir,--Permit me to ask you whether you can receive and answer a
case of ecclesiastical law? That you can answer it better than any other
man I have no doubt; but can you receive the case _professionally_, so
as to enable a Bishop to show your opinion as his authority for action?

I have never thanked you for your kindness in sending me a copy of the
second edition of 'The Bishopric of the U. C., &c., at Jerusalem,' for I am
ashamed to own I have never, till this day, read the new matter which it
gives to us. Accept now my hearty thanks for your kindness to me in sending
to me a copy, and my still heartier acknowledgments of your invaluable
service to the Church in furnishing it with such a lesson.

You have, of course, seen the 'Alterius orbis Papa's' letter of June 18 to
the King of Prussia, and have, with me, wondered at the mixture of temerity
and cowardice (which latter quality, by the way, is the rashest of all
feelings) indicated in such a mode of escaping from the difficulties by
which he was pressed.

I grieve for this marvellous indiscretion. But I am amused by the bolder
defiance of all consistency which is exhibited by his prime Adviser, who,
while he prompts his Chief to trample Rubrics, Canons, Statutes, under his
feet, commands His own Clergy to observe them 'with Chinese exactness.'

I went to your second edition, in order that I might find your promised
remarks on the need in which the Church stands of a Church Legislature. I
have read them with great gratification, and implore your close attention
to the subject. My Clergy are, I believe, about to meet and to address me
to urge on the Archbishop their earnest desire of leave from the Crown for
Convocation to consider the best means of altering its own constitution, or
otherwise devising a new Body empowered and fitted to act synodically.

This is, at present, somewhat of a secret, but it will in a few days, I
believe, transpire.

From other quarters, I hear, similar proceedings may be expected. The
Bishop of Llandaff tells me that he makes the necessity of a Church
Legislature one topic in his Charge.

Yours, my dear Sir,

Most faithfully,

H. EXETER.

[P.S.] Pray tell me whether you think the argument in my Charge on Escott
_v_. Mastin is now tolerably effective?

What 'oath of obedience' is the ordained German to take to the Bishop? Not
Canonical--that is plain. What oath can it be? Of course, it will hardly be
an absolute promise on oath to obey all commands. All _lawful_
commands would involve a question--what are lawful commands? Who is to
judge? What law is to be the rule?

Somebody named by the King is to attest for the Candidates their
qualification for the _Pastoral Office_; but the Bishop is 'to
convince himself of their qualifications for the _especial_ duties of
their office, of the purity of their faith, and of their _desire to
receive ordination_ at his hands!'

What is meant by the Clergyman's preparing Candidates for Confirmation in
the _usual_ manner? Usual _where_? in Prussia or in England?

Have they baptised Godfathers in Prussia? If they have not, how can they be
confirmed according to the Liturgy of the U. C. of E. and I.?

To these letters from such distinguished co-religionists of Mr. Hope's, all
belonging, with various shades of difference, to his own religious party, I
add a portion of one, bearing on the same subject, from a Catholic and
foreign friend of his who has been mentioned in a previous
chapter,[Footnote: Vol. i. chap. xiii. p. 246.] Count Senfft-Pilsach. The
contrast will be interesting; and it is also interesting to record a
specimen of an influence, no doubt beginning to be more and more felt,
though years had to pass before the result was visible in action. Count
Senfft, though an active diplomatist, a friend of Metternich's, and quite
in the great European world, was an example of the union, so often found in
the lives of the saints, of deep retirement and devotion in the very thick
of affairs; and we may be sure that his prayers for Mr. Hope were
faithfully applied to assist his arguments.

_Count Senfft-Pilsach to J. R. Hope, Esq_.

La Haye: 21 Janvier, 1842

Mon cher Hope,-- ... J'ai lu avec un vif intérêt vos réflexions sur ce
nouvel Evêché de Jérusalem, dont on paraît vouloir faire un lien entre
l'Église anglicane et le Protestantisme Evangélique de Prusse, en cherchant
à vivifier les ossemens arides de celui-ci par une sorte de greffe de votre
Episcopat auquel nous contestons encore, comme question, la continuité de
la succession Apostolique. Si on réussiroit dans ce projet, une partie de
vos objections pourroient se résoudre. Mais M. Bunsen, l'artisan de la
complication de Cologne, n'a pas la main heureuse, et la fécondité de son
génie, secondant son ardeur de courtisan, pourroit bien, en prétendant
servir les tendances vagues de piété de son maître, embarquer celui-ci dans
les plus graves difficultés en provoquant l'opposition des vieux protestans
réunis aux rationalistes allemands. 'Quid foditis vobis cisternas
dissipatas?' O mon ami! Comment s'arrêter à quelques abus plus apparens
peut-être que réels, que l'Église supporte çà et là sans les autoriser, et
ne pas reconnoître cette admirable unité de doctrine, cette continuité de
la Tradition, qui caractérise la cité bâtie sure la montagne, figure de la
véritable Église selon l'Évangile. Certes ce n'est pas sous la domination
de César qu'on pourroit aller chercher l'Épouse légitime de J. C. Mais
doit-on espérer la trouver dans la création combinée de la volonté
tyrannique de Henri VIII. et de la politique d'Elisabeth, tandis que la
Doctrine comme la Discipline du Concile de Trente ne vous laisse rien à
désirer, et conquiert déjà vos suffrages?...

J'ose compter partant sur votre intérêt amical, et vous connoissez les
sentimens sincères d'attachement et de respect avec lesquels je suis à
jamais

Tout à vous, SENFFT.




CHAPTER XIX.

1842-3.

Oxford Commotions of 1842-3--Mr. Newman's Retractation--Correspondence of
Mr. Newman and J. R. Hope on the Subject--Mr. Hope pleads for Mr.
Macmullen--Dr. Pusey suspended for his Sermon on the Holy Eucharist--Seeks
Advice from Mr. Hope--Mr. Newman resigns St. Mary's--Correspondence of Mr.
Newman and Mr. Hope on the 'Lives of the English Saints'--Mr. Ward's
Condemnation--Mr. Hope sees the 'Shadow of the Cross' through the Press--
Engaged with 'Scripture Prints,' 'Pupilla Oculi,' &c.--Lady G. Fullerton's
Recollections of J. R. Hope--He proposes to make a Retreat at Littlemore.


It results in general from the documents furnished in the preceding
chapter, that Mr. Hope's confidence in the Anglican Church had sustained a
severe shock by the Jerusalem Bishopric movement; and from about the year
1842 he seems to have thrown himself with increasing energy into his
professional occupations, not certainly as becoming less religious (for his
was a mind never tempted to the loss of faith), but as being deprived of
that scope which his convictions had formerly presented to him in the
pursuit of ecclesiastical objects. It seems probable, also, that the same
cause was not unconnected with his entering, some years later, into the
married life; the news of which step is known to have fallen like a knell
on the minds of those who looked up to him and shared his religious
feelings, as it appeared a sign that he no longer thought the ideal
perfection presented by the celibate life--which he certainly contemplated
in 1840-1--was congenial with the spirit of the Church of England. That
communion was now losing her hold upon him, though he still could not make
up his mind to leave her, and might conceivably never have done so but for
events which forced the change upon him at last. His professional career
and his habits in domestic life will require to be separately described;
for, though of course they proceeded simultaneously with a large part of
that phase of his existence which is now before us, it would only confuse
the reader to pass continually from one to the other. I propose, therefore,
without any interruption that can be avoided, to go on with the history of
his religious development up to the period of his conversion.

The year 1842, commencing, as we have seen, with the storms of the
Jerusalem Bishopric movement and the Poetry Professorship contest, agitated
also, towards the end of May, by a movement for the repeal of the Statute
of Censure against Dr. Hampden, passed off, for the rest, quietly enough--
at least, Mr. Hope's correspondence shows little to the contrary; but 1843
was marked by much disturbance, commencing early with Mr. Newman's
'Retractation,' which the great leader announced to Mr. Hope in the
following letter a few days before that document appeared in the
'Conservative Journal:'--


_The Rev. J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq._

Littlemore: In fest. Conv. S. Pauli, 1843.


My dear Hope,--In return for your announcement of some change of purpose, I
must tell you of one of my own, in a matter where I told you I was going to
be very quiet.

My conscience goaded me some two months since to an act which comes into
effect, I believe, in the _Conservative Journal_ next Saturday, viz.
to eat a few dirty words of mine. I had intended it for a time of peace,
the beginning of December, but against my will and power the operation has
been delayed, and now, unluckily, falls upon the state of irritation and
suspicion in good Anglicans, which Bernard Smith's step [Footnote: The
conversion of the Rev. Bernard Smith, Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford.]
has occasioned. I had committed myself when all was quiet. The meeting of
Parliament will, I hope, divert attention.


Ever yrs,

JOHN H. NEWMAN.


P.S.--I am publishing my Univ. Sermons. You got a headache for _one_--
it would be an act of gratitude to send you _all_. Shall I do so?


_J. R. Hope, Esq. to the Rev. J. H. Newman._

6 Stone Buildings, Linc. Inn: Feast of Purification [Feb. 2], '43.

Dear Newman,--You will think me ungracious for having so long delayed my
answer to your last, but I did not get hold of the _Conservative
Journal_ till Monday, and have been very busy since.

Perhaps you will like to know what effect your article has produced on me.
Simply this: it has convinced me that you are clearing your position of
some popular protections which still surrounded it. Beyond this I do not
see. I mean it does not show me that, esoterically, you have made any great
move, nor yet that, to the world at large, you are disposed to do more than
say, 'Do not cry me up as a champion against Popery; for the rest, you may
judge of me as you please.' People whom I have heard speak of it (few,
perhaps, but fair samples) are rather puzzled than anything else.

I give you this merely as gossip, and not as asking whether my construction
is right, though if you think it material or useful to tell me, of course I
shall be glad.

I need not say that I shall be very thankful for a copy of your sermons--
that is, if you will write my name in it yourself; otherwise I will buy the
book, for Rivington's 'from the author' does not fix the stamp which I
chiefly value.

Do you observe in the papers that Sir R. P. is designing _great_
things for the Church? It gives me some hopes that they will also be
_good_, to see that Gladstone is in his councils. We shall have much
ado about the Eccl. Courts Bill, which, I believe, is certainly to come on.
I am in some hopes we may make it an instrument for drawing a line between
us and the Dissenters, but must not be sanguine.

Believe me, dear Newman, ever yrs truly,

JAMES R. HOPE.

Rev. J. H. Newman.

Mr. Newman wrote in explanation as follows:--

_The Rev. J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq._

Littlemore: February 3, 1843.

My dear Hope,--It is amusing in me to talk of being tired of giving
explanations, when I have neither given nor mean to give any; but so it is,
whether my hand aches, or I am sick of the subject, I feel as if I have
given a hundred. Since you ask me, I will say, as far as I can collect my
thoughts on an instant, that my reason for writing and publishing that
notice was (but first I will observe that I do not wish it talked about,
though it is not worth while going into the reasons why I did it in the way
I have. I did it thus after a good deal of thought and fidget, and not
seeing any better way, _i.e._ clearer of objections)--but my reason
for the _thing_ was my long-continued feeling of the great
inconsistency I was in of letting things stand in print against me which I
did not hold, and which I could not but be contradicting by my acting every
day of my life. And more especially (_i.e._ it came home to me most
vividly in that particular way) I felt that I was _taking people_ in;
that they thought me what I was not, and were trusting me when they should
not, and this has been at times a very painful feeling indeed. I don't want
to be trusted (perhaps you may think my fear, even before this affair,
somewhat amusing); but so it was and is; people _won't_ believe I go
as far as I do--they will cling to their hopes. And then, again, intimate
friends have almost reproached me with 'paltering with them in a double
sense, keeping the word of promise to their ear, to break it to their
hope.' They have said that my words against Rome often, when narrowly
examined, were only what _I_ meant, but that the effect of them was
what _others_ meant. I am not aware that I have any great motive for
this paper beyond this--setting myself right, and wishing to be seen in my
proper colours, and not unwilling to do such penance for wrong words as
lies in the necessary criticism which such a retractation will involve on
the part of friends and enemies; though, since nothing one does is without
a meaning [that is, higher than one's own], things may come from it beyond
my own meaning.

Thanks for ... the information from newspapers, which you give me, of our
hopes from Sir R. P., which I had not seen in them.

By-the-bye, in the paper, for 'person's respect' near the end, read
'persons I respect;' and 'to the editor' is fudge.

Ever yours,

J. H. NEWMAN.

P.S.--Thanks for your flattering answers about my book. It must go,
however, from Rivington's with 'from the author,' and I will add my own
writing when we meet. Since you have had a specimen of the book (dose?), I
may add, in opposition to you, that it will be the best, not the most
perfect, book I have done. I mean there is more to develop in it, though it
is _im_perfect. [Footnote: A week later (February 10, 1843) he writes
to Mr. Hope: 'My University Sermons are the least theological book I have
published.']

The famous case of Macmullen _versus_ Hampden was disturbing the
University for most of the latter half of the same year 1843. I can only
give a mere chronological outline of it, which may assist such readers as
wish to pursue the subject in consulting other sources of information. The
Regius Professor of Divinity, Dr. Hampden, had refused to act as Moderator
in the Schools, to enable the Rev. E. G. Macmullen, Fellow of Corpus
Christi College, to make his exercises for the degree of B.D. [Mr.
Macmullen, it should be remarked, was a strong opponent of the project at
that time before the University, mentioned a few pages back, to reverse the
condemnation which had been passed on Dr. Hampden when he was first
appointed Regius Professor of Divinity.] Mr. Macmullen, on this refusal,
brought an action into the Vice-Chancellor's Court on May 26, 1843, where,
on June 2, Dr. Kenyon of All Souls' presiding, Mr. Hope appeared for Mr.
Macmullen, Dr. Twiss on the other side. Dr. Kenyon pronounced in his favour
on certain amended articles. Dr. Twiss appealed to the Delegates of
Congregation (none of them lawyers), who heard the appeal on November 29,
sitting from ten in the morning till seven at night. Mr. Erle and Dr. Twiss
both spoke against the articles, and were replied to by Mr. Hope. The Court
ultimately gave judgment against the articles, reversing Dr. Kenyon's
decision, and gave costs against Mr. Macmullen. [Footnote: For this outline
of the proceedings in Macmullen _v_. Hampden, I am indebted to
accurate memoranda kindly furnished me by Mr. David Lewis, late Fellow of
Jesus College, Oxford.] Mr. Badeley's bitter comment will amuse the reader:
'Mischievous idiots! and so all the conclusive arguments you put before
them, are set at nought, and the battle is to be fought again!' [Footnote:
Mr. Badeley to Mr. Hope, January 6, 1844] However, there was no further
litigation, and in the end Mr. Macmullen succeeded in obtaining his degree,
the old form of disputations for that purpose being restored, which has
ever since been in force. It should be added that Mr. Hope's services in
this case, undertaken amidst all the pressure of his ordinary legal work,
were gratuitous.

In the summer of 1843 took place another critical moment of the strife in
Dr. Pusey's suspension from preaching, by sentence of the Vice-Chancellor's
Court, for his sermon 'On the Holy Eucharist a Comfort to the Penitent.' In
the question of his appeal against this, which was matter of anxiety for
more than a twelvemonth, it is almost needless to say that he sought the
advice of Mr. Hope. The Everett affair, on Commemoration Day (June 28),
will have its place in every chronicle of the movement. This was a protest
on the part of members of the Tractarian party against an honorary degree
conferred in the teeth of a demand for scrutiny (which, however, it was
asserted had not been heard in the din), on the American Envoy, Mr.
Everett, who was a Unitarian. Mr. Hope, however, was not present; and I
mention this only as one of the many signs of the times which were then
rapidly accumulating. Nor did he take any part in the opposition made in
the following year to Dr. Symonds' election as Vice-Chancellor, though he
was consulted, in the law of the case, with Mr. Badeley and Dr. Bayford. It
ended in a crushing defeat of the Tractarians, who were beaten by a
majority of 882 against 183.

In September 1843 Mr. Newman resigned the vicarage of St. Mary's. On this
step Mr. Hope, writing to him on September 28, says that he had not
differed from him about it, but, 'as to the general tendency of which you
described the increase [Mr. Newman's expression (September 5) was: 'The
movement is going on so fast that some of the wheels are catching fire'],
all I can do is to sit still and wait the issue.'

The 'Lives of the English Saints' were at this time in preparation, the
importance of which in the history of the movement is too well known from
Cardinal Newman's 'Apologia' and from other sources to require me to
enlarge upon it. At length there was no disguise or reservation, but
sympathy was openly avowed by members of the Anglican Church for the whole
spirit hitherto associated with the idea of 'the corruptions of Popery'--as
monasticism, the continued exercise of miraculous power in the Church,
finally, the supremacy of the Holy See. From a copious correspondence which
followed between the two friends, I extract, as usual, such portions as
will throw most light on the progressive change in Mr. Hope's religious
convictions. His sense of prudence, and the bias derived from his
particular legal studies, restrain, rather curiously, the inclination which
his feelings in other directions show; but it is best to let him speak for
himself:--_The Rev. J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq_.

Littlemore: Nov. 2, '43.

My dear Hope,--[After stating the perplexity he felt on the question of
stopping the 'Lives,' which appeared to present itself in consequence of an
objection expressed by Dr. Pusey, in conversation with Mr. Hope, against
the Roman tone which had been manifested, Mr. Newman continues:] I did not
explain to you sufficiently the state of mind of those who are in danger. I
only spoke of those who are convinced that our Church was external to the
Church Catholic, though they felt it unsafe to trust their own private
convictions. And you seemed to put the dilemma, 'Either men are in doubt or
not: if in doubt, they ought to be quiet; if not in doubt, how is it that
they stay with us?' But there are two other states of mind which might be
mentioned. 1. Those who are unconsciously near Rome, and whose
_despair_ about our Church, if anyhow caused, would at once develop
into a state of conscious approximation and _quasi_-resolution to go
over. 2. Those who feel they can with a safe conscience remain with us,
_while_ they are allowed to testify in behalf of Catholicism, and to
promote its interests; _i.e_. as if by such acts they were putting our
Church, or at least a portion of it, in which they are included, in the
position of catechumens. They think they may stay, while they are moving
themselves, others, nay, say the whole Church, towards Rome. Is not this an
intelligible ground? I should like your opinion of it....

Ever yours sincerely,

JOHN H. NEWMAN.

_J. R. Hope, Esq. to the Rev. J. H. Newman_.

6 Stone Buildings, Linc. Inn: Nov. 4, '43.

Dear Newman,--... As to the Roman leaning, no doubt your 'Lives,' at least
many of them, must evince it; no doubt also that, unless carefully managed,
it will give offence. But may not caution obviate the latter? Is it not
possible to _commence_ by lives which will not at once bring the whole
set into popular disrepute? the less palatable ones being kept for a more
advanced stage. May it not also be provided that in an historical work, a
purely historical character shall be given to what as matter of fact cannot
be denied, and which can only be objected to when it is adopted by the
writers as a matter of principle in which they themselves concur? To the
asceticism, devotion, and anti-secular spirit of the English saints we are,
under every point of view, entitled to refer; and if any part of these
virtues was displayed in necessary relation to Rome, or to Roman
institutions, this in a portraiture of their lives cannot be omitted, but
certainly need not be canonised as amongst their merits. It seems to me
possible simply to take the Church of their times as _the_ Church,
without entering into the question whether any of the conditions under
which it then existed are necessary for its existence now. And so their
acts done in relation to the Church of their day may be dwelt upon, while
the further question whether the Church of our day is capable of eliciting
such acts may be left to the judgment of the reader.

I am not sure that I have made myself intelligible in this, and still less
whether it is worth your reading, but I fancied that you wished an opinion,
and I give it, _valeat quantum_....

Yrs ever truly,

JAMES R. HOPE.

Rev. J. H. Newman.

_The Rev. J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq._

Littlemore: Nov. 6, 1843.

My dear Hope,-- ... You have not gone to the bottom of the difficulty. It
is very easy to say, Give facts without comment; but in the first place,
what can be so dry as mere facts? the book won't sell, nor deserve to sell.
It must be ethical; but to be ethical is merely to colour a narrative with
one's own mind, and to give a _tone_ to it. Now this is the
difficulty, altering this or that passage, leaving out this or that
expression, will not alter the case. I will not answer for being aware of
the tone in myself. Pusey put his finger on passages which I had not
thought about. Is he to be ever marking passages? if so, he has the real
trouble of being editor, not I.

_Naturam expellas furca_, &c. Is the Pope's supremacy the only point
on which no opinion is to be expressed? if so, why? It is not more against
the Articles to _desire_ it than to desire monachism. Will it offend
more than others? I will not limit certainly the degree of disgust which
some people will feel towards it, but do they feel less towards the notion
of monks, or, again, of miracles? Now Church history is made up of these
three elements--miracles, monkery, Popery. If any sympathetic feeling is
expressed on behalf of the persons and events of Church history, it is a
feeling in favour of miracles, or monkery, or Popery, one or all. It is
quite a theory to talk of being ethical, yet not concur in these elements
of the narrative--unless, indeed, one adopts Milner's or Neander's device
of dropping part of the history, praising what one has a fancy for, and
thus putting a theory and dream in the place of facts. But it is bad enough
to be eclectic in _doctrine._

Next it must be recollected how very much depends on the disposition,
relative prominence, &c., of facts; it is quite impossible that a leaning
to Rome, a strong offensive leaning, should be hidden.

And then still more it must be recollected that a _vast_ number of
questions, and most important ones, are decided this way or that on
antecedent probabilities, according to a person's views, _e.g._ the
question between St. Augustine and the British Bishops--of Easter--of King
Lucius, &c. &c. Opinion comes in at every step of the history.

From what I have said you will see that I consider it impossible to choose
_easy_ 'Lives' for the first of the series; there are none such, or if
there be a few, when can I promise to have them ready? I suppose Bede must
be pretty easy. Keble has it. I do not expect him to send it to me for
several years, with his engagements. Take missions, take Bishops, the Pope
comes in everywhere. Go to Aldhelm and his schools; you have most strange
miracles. Try to retire into the country, you do but meet with hermits. No;
miracles, monkery, Popery, are too much for you, if you have any
stomach....

The life P. looked at, St. Stephen's, was taken as having hardly, if at
all, any miracle in it. If he thinks it will give offence, doubtless the
others will still more.

You see, in saying all this I am not deciding the question whether the work
is to be done _at all._ On that point I have had great doubt since
P.'s objection. Only to do it without offence is impossible, and the more
so because, in parts at least, it is likely to be a very taking work....

And then so many 'Lives' are in progress or preparation, that it is most
unlikely the work will be stopped; others will conduct it instead of me who
will go further; and though this is a bad reason for doing oneself what one
feels a misgiving in doing, it is a good reason when one feels none at
all....

If the plan is abandoned, this significant question will be, nay, is
already asked--'What, then, cannot the Anglican Church bear the Lives of
her Saints?'

Ever yrs,

JOHN H. NEWMAN.

_J.R. Hope, Esq. to the Rev. J.H. Newman._

6 Stone Bdgs, Linc. Inn: Nov. 8, '43.

Dear Newman,--Your last shows me plainly what I had not before understood,
that the question of the 'Lives' depends immediately upon that larger one
which your previous letter had mooted, and that to solve it one must know
more than I do of the conclusions at which you have arrived as to the
claims of Rome, and as to the mode, time, and circumstances in and under
which those claims ought to be recognised. I feel therefore very
incompetent to offer any further suggestion. When I last wrote I thought
the questions separable, and meant that the Roman parts of your histories
should be treated dramatically (if I may so say), being represented really
and faithfully, but only as the scenery in which the actors stood. Your
letter shows me that this cannot be, unless your writers have more self-
command, and more disposition to exercise it than men in earnest can be
expected to have. I must therefore ask, what is your general view as to
Rome? Is union with it immediately _necessary_? or is it only
_desirable_--under new circumstances and at some distant period? If
the former, then one would think that the question should be openly and
professedly discussed, the arguments given and the authorities stated. If
the latter, I should imagine that much remains to be done, in the way of
raising the general tone of our Church in matters of faith and practice,
before it can be fit to deal with such a question; and though you think
monachism, miracles, and Popery inseparably allied, yet I feel convinced
that there are many minds prepared to consider the two former
which have no disposition to the latter.

On either view, then, I think that a work which is addressed only or
principally to men's feelings would be mistimed--it would not convince of
the necessity, and it would find but a small number of men disposed at
present to give it their sympathy.

There are, indeed, those other considerations which you mention respecting
the minds which would find relief in being allowed to dwell upon the
subject, and so might be the better persuaded to remain within our
communion; but, on the other hand, there is the risk of provoking such
conduct on the part of the Bishops and others as would drive some out, and
render the position of those who remained more difficult than ever. And
surely it would be most unfair to take the measure of what the Church of
England allows on this or any other difficult point in theology from what
might happen to be the view of men such as our present rulers, upon whom
the whole question has come unawares, and whose prejudices upon this point
in particular, backed by the secular policy of the State for 300 years,
would be pretty sure to lead them to some active, and probably united
censure. I wish therefore, much, that minds of this class could be
persuaded that it is not the Church of England which they are testing, but
a disorderly body which ten years ago did not know what it was, and is now
only gradually becoming conscious; and that if they can satisfy themselves
that the views they entertain are compatible with what they deem the true
theory of the Church of England, they would be content to hold them quietly
for the present, and not risk themselves and others upon so doubtful a
venture.

This, I think, is all that I can say--being confessedly in the dark upon
the most material points; but if you should think it useful either to
myself or to others to give me a full statement you shall have my best
judgment. Your confidence I have no other claim upon than that which arises
from my disposition to put confidence in you--to think that you know better
than any one else the real difficulties of our present position, and that
you can look at the remedy, however painful, firmly and practically.
Whatever, therefore, approves itself to you, I am anxious to know, as
furnishing for myself, if not the best conclusion, yet the best hope of a
conclusion--the best track into which to let my thoughts run. But beyond
what you may think good for me in these respects I have no right to ask,
and I do not ask for your thoughts. They probably would be above and beyond
me, and the responsibility of knowing them would outweigh the use which I
should be able to make of them. [Footnote: To this letter of Mr. Hope's I
do not find a reply of Mr. Newman's until November 26, when he apologises
for having kept him in suspense, adding: 'So far from your not having
written to the purpose, you laid down one proposition in which I quite
acquiesce; that the subject of the supremacy of Rome should be moved
_argumentatively_, if at all. I felt I had gained something here, and
rested upon it, and gave up answering you, as it turns out, selfishly.' At
the end of the letter he says: 'As to myself, I don't like talking; when we
meet we shall see how we feel about it.' His reserve may, I think, be
safely accounted for by his great unwillingness that such a man as Mr. Hope
should be swayed by him to an act to which, as yet, he himself did not feel
himself called.]

Yrs ever truly,

JAMES R. HOPE.

Rev. J. H. Newman.

In a letter to Mr. Newman dated the following day, November 9, Mr. Hope
criticises, on the side of caution, various passages in the 'Life of St.
Stephen Harding' (by Mr. J. D. Dalgairns, afterwards so well known as
Father Dalgairns, of the London Oratory), the first and most celebrated of
the series, proofs of which Mr. Newman had sent to him for his opinion.
These criticisms chiefly relate to expressions which might offend ordinary
Anglican readers, and which Mr. Hope proposed to soften. Mr. Newman in the
end noted against almost all these expressions _stet_. He remarks to
Mr. Hope (December 11): 'It seemed to me that, considering the _tone_
of the whole composition, an alteration of the word (_e.g._) "merit"
was like giving milk and water for a fit of the gout, while it destroyed
its integrity, vigour--in a word, its go.' Again: 'I am convinced that
those passages are _not_ flying in people's faces, but are parts of a
whole, and express ideas which cannot _otherwise_ be expressed.'

These points were rather matter of prudence as viewed by Mr. Hope; on two
others, touching the questions of 'exemptions' and 'impropriations,' Mr.
Hope appears to have been himself unable to go along with the view of the
writer of the 'Life of St. Stephen,' whom he considered to defend the
_principles_ of exemption too far. Mr. Newman here conceded some
alterations, which, however, I am unable to state, not having the proof
before me, which Mr. Hope does not quote, but, as finally given, the
passages referred to may be found in the 'Life of St. Stephen Harding,' pp.
47-49 and 65.

In the same letter of December 11 Mr. Newman informs Mr. Hope that he had
resolved on giving up the 'Lives' as a series, and publishing such as were
in type, or were written, as separate works. His comment on the motives
which had led him to this decision is of great interest:--

I assure you, to find that the English Church cannot bear the Lives of her
Saints (for so I will maintain, in spite of Gladstone, is the fact) does
not tend to increase my faith and confidence in her. Nor am I abandoning
_publication_ because I abandon this particular measure. Rather, I
consider I have been silent now for several years on subjects of the day,
and need not fear now to speak.... If these ['Lives,' as separate works]
gradually mount up to the fulness of such an idea as the 'Lives of the
Saints' contemplated in process of time, well and good.

He had said in a letter to Mr. Hope of December 5: 'G.'s remarks have shown
me the _hopelessness_, by delay or any other means, of escaping the
disapprobation of a number of persons whom I very much respect.' This was
in reply to a letter of Mr. Hope's of the same day, which I found it
difficult to introduce in its chronological order, and which may
conveniently be placed here, as Mr. Hope in it clearly shows that his
sympathies, notwithstanding his difficulties, went with the 'Lives,' and,
like himself, backs his moral support with open-handed liberality:--

_J. R. Hope, Esq. to the Rev. J. H. Newman._

Dec. 5, '43.

Dear Newman,--I enclose the proofs and Gladstone's remarks. The great point
made by him here, as elsewhere, at present, is non-estrangement from the
existing Ch. of E.; and in this many who are disposed to quarrel with the
Reformation are yet heartily disposed to join. In fact, I suppose it will
shortly become, if it be not already, the symbol of a party. To that party
I do not feel myself at all strongly drawn, and therefore do not sympathise
in G.'s views about the _Life_; but if his views be a fair
representative of the best class of opinions such as I allude to, you may
conclude that the high Anglicans will be against you. Of the middle and low
there never, I suppose, was a doubt.

For my own part, I read the sheets greedily, and felt that they took me
back to subjects which were once much in my thoughts, and ought never to
have got so far out of them as they have. Nor was I at all put out by the
general tone which seems to me inseparable from the subject; but here and
there are passages which I think needlessly direct and pointed, so much so
indeed as to appear, merely in point of composition, abrupt and wilful.
These I think I could point out. G., you see, thinks his objections
separable from the main design, which seems to me hardly possible--perhaps
you will think the same of mine, but they relate only to isolated passages,
and rather to giving them obliqueness than to changing them altogether.

However, I do not mean to say that I could suggest anything which would
obviate G[ladstone]'s difficulties, and these are, after all, your main
subjects for consideration. What effect they will have upon you I cannot
certainly conclude, but in case they should incline you either to delay or
to total giving up, I have only to say that I shall be glad to contribute
one or two hundred pounds towards defraying the expenses.... In fact, if
upon any public eccl. grounds the work is to be delayed or not to go on, I
cannot see that my money could be more fitly bestowed than in facilitating
the arrangement.

Yours ever truly,

JAMES R. HOPE.

Rev. J. H. Newman.


No need was eventually found for the liberal offer with which the above
letter concludes. The following letter, though rather a long one, is
certainly not likely to fatigue the reader, and seems almost necessary to
be given, in order to complete this part of my subject:--

_The Rev. J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq._

Oriel College: Dec. 16, 1843.

My dear Hope,--You have not understood me about Gladstone, doubtless
through my own fault. The truth is, I am making a great concession--not to
him, but to my respectful feelings towards him. I thought you could see it,
and only feared you would think it greater than it really was. So I tried
to put you on your guard.

1. I withdraw _my name_ from _any plan_. This is no slight thing.
I have frequent letters from people I do not know on the subject of the
Lives of the Saints, and doubt not it is raising much talk and interest. A
name always gives point to an undertaking--considering my connection with
the Tracts of the Times, it would especially to this. You yourself and
Badeley (whom, please, thank for some kind trouble he has been at about a
book for me) said, 'Delay the plan, _for_ you will be putting
_yourself_ at the head of the extreme party--the B[ritish] C[ritic]
having stopped:' now, I am more than _delaying_, I am withdrawing my
name. I am sure this is a great thing, even though my initials occurred to
this or that life.

2. I have given up continuity, and that certain and promised. 128 pp. were
to come out every month, and the work was to go on to the end, except as
unforeseen accidents interfered (as they have). Now we know how difficult
it is to keep people up to their work. The work is now left to the
unpledged zeal of individuals. And there will be nothing methodical or
periodical in it to force itself upon people.

I do consider, then, I have given up a very great deal. But what I have not
given up is the _wish_ that the work should be done; only I have put
it under great disadvantages--so great that I do not think it ever will be
done--at the utmost fragments will be done--and that without method,
precision, unity, and a name.

And why have I done this? 1. Sincerely because I thought both by heading it
and by giving it system I should be administering a continual blister to
the kind feelings towards me, and the conscientious views of persons I
respect as I do G. I assure you it is no pleasant thing to me to lose their
good opinion, tho' I can't expect much to keep it. 2. I fear to put up
something the Bishops may aim at. I may be charged at, as the Tracts have
been. Then J. should be in a very false position. I must move forward or
backward, and I dread compulsory moves. 3. What is the most immediate and
practical point, I don't think I could get a publisher to take on him the
_expense_ of a _series_, but few people would dread the risk of a
single life of one or two hundred pages. Accordingly, I think I shall
publish the one of which you saw a bit at once, to see whether it sells.
That I shall to a certain extent be connected with it, and that I shall aim
at making it a series, is certain; and this, as I said, was my reason for
warning you that I was not giving way to G. so fully as I appeared to be.

Ever yrs affly,

J. H. NEWMAN.

P.S.--... What set me most urgently on my present notice was that _I
could not help it_. Though I gave up my series, which I wished to do,
_Lives remained_, written or printed, or promised, _which would
appear anyhow_, or scarcely could not.

The great event connected with the movement in 1844 was the publication of
Ward's 'Ideal of a Christian Church,' which at first caused less excitement
than might have been expected, at least in London. Thus Mr. Badeley writes
to Mr. Hope (October 26), 'Ward's book passes very quietly here at
present;' and again (November 8), 'The book here makes very little noise.'
But meanwhile the heads of Houses were moving at Oxford, and on February
13, 1845, a memorable day, the book was condemned, and its author deprived
of his degrees by the House of Convocation. Mr. Hope was absent on the
Continent at the beginning of the strife, to which his letters do not
contain much allusion. Perhaps the same motives of caution upon which he
objected to the 'strong meat' of the 'Lives of the English Saints' would
have led him to similar views as to the extreme unreserve of the 'Ideal.'
When, however, the question of Mr. Ward's condemnation came on, he voted
against it, as he was sure to have done if he voted at all. It is hardly
necessary to remind the reader that on the same occasion it was proposed to
pass a censure on No. 90; but this was vetoed by the proctors, and
consequently never came to the vote. I find the following draft of an
address of thanks to the proctors in Mr. Gladstone's hand, and with the
subjoined signatures and date in Mr. Hope's, among the Hope-Scott papers:--

We the u.s. M. of C., understanding that you have resolved to put your
negative upon the Proposal relating to the Ninetieth Tract in Convocation
on Thursday, the 13th instant, beg leave to tender to you our cordial
thanks for a determination which we consider to have been demanded by the
principles of our Academical Constit^n.

W. E. G.

Manning and self. Feby. 11, '45.             J. R. H.

As far as regards Mr. Gladstone, this ought to be compared with a
correspondence in the Oakeley case, which will be found cited _infra_,
p. 58.

To the earlier part of the period now before us belongs some very kind
service rendered by Mr. Hope to his dear friend the Rev. W. Adams, Fellow
of Merton, and Perpetual Curate of St. Peter's-in-the-East, Oxford, in
seeing through the press his celebrated allegory, 'The Shadow of the
Cross,' on which there is a rather full correspondence extant (1842-43),
but of more special interest as connected with Mr. Adams' biography than
his own, except so far as it proves the affectionate intimacy which
subsisted between them. One letter of later date (December 15, 1846)
is endorsed in Mr. Hope-Scott's handwriting:--'William Adams, R. I. P.
sub 'umbra crucis.' J. R. H. S. 1871.' The work was published for the
Christian Knowledge Society, of the committee of which Mr. Hope at the
time was still a member. In connection with the same society Mr. Hope
undertook a serial work, already alluded to (which was in course of
publication in 1844), consisting of engravings from Scripture subjects,
in a high style of art, from the cartoons of Raphael in the Loggia of the
Vatican. Mr. Hope was strongly impressed with the utility of such a work
for directing and elevating the taste of the humbler classes and of
schools generally, and he expended large sums of money in bringing this
out. It was published in numbers containing six plates each, under the
superintendence of Professor Gruner, afterwards Director of the Department
of Engravings at the Royal Museum at Dresden, and prepared by Signor
Corsini, a distinguished Roman draughtsman. Mr. Hope-Scott, indeed,
did not carry on the work after the first five numbers (a large and
costly business, however), and it was completed by Mr. Gruner alone,
who published it under the title of 'Scripture Prints from the Frescoes
of Raphael in the Vatican,' edited by Louis Gruner, &c. (London:
Houlston and Wright, 1866). Mr. Hope-Scott continued his benefactions
to the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel for several years later
than the time now before us. I find a donation of 210_l_. under his
name in the year 1847. He had given 200_l_. in November 1846 to the
College Chapel at Harrow Weald.

Another undertaking of some importance in which he took great interest in
those days, relating both to literature and religion, was the 'Anglia
Christiana,' a series of the monuments of English history, which was
publishing in 1844-45. Only three volumes of it came out--'Chronicon
Monasterii de Bello' (Battle Abbey), Giraldus Cambrensis 'de Institutione
Principis,' and 'Liber Eliensis.' Mr. Hope much wished to have had included
in the list the work called 'Pupilla Oculi,' a treatise on moral theology
by John de Burgh, Chancellor of the University of Cambridge about the year
1385, which was much in use among the clergy before the Reformation. Mr.
David Lewis, of Jesus College (as a Catholic so well known for his
admirable translations of the works of St. John of the Cross and of St.
Teresa), collated the text for him, but I believe it was never published. I
find in the Badeley correspondence a very interesting letter of Mr. Hope's
dated February 28, 1843, about the 'Pupilla Oculi,' its history and
authority. The book had been cited by Mr. Badeley in the Court of Queen's
Bench, and by others in the House of Lords, in the case of the Queen v.
Willis. Lord Lyndhurst and some of the judges objected to its value as
evidence on the ground of its contradicting the common law on the question
of legitimation by subsequent marriage. Mr. Hope discusses the subject in a
masterly style: I must refrain from quoting such merely antiquarian or
legal matter for its own sake, yet will subjoin some paragraphs of the
letter which illustrate the line taken by him as a lawyer at that time on
the important point of the relations of Church and State:--

There can be, I think, little doubt that in old times the distinction
between Church and State was one of jurisdictions rather than of laws. I
mean that each was supposed to have its proper subject-matter of
legislation as well as of judicial inquiry. Where the subject-matter was
conceded to the Church altogether, there the Church law prevailed
absolutely; where the subject-matter was of mixed cognizance, there the
Church law was modified by the common or the statute law; where the subject
was altogether lay, there both the laws and the tribunals of the Church
were silenced. When, therefore, we would ascertain whether the law of the
Church is to govern a given subject, we must first ascertain how far it was
of the exclusive cognizance of the Church; and, if we find that it was
principally but not exclusively of ecclesiastical cognizance, how far the
common law interfered to modify the ecclesiastical laws by which it was to
be determined.

Now, in the case before us, this much, I think, must be admitted, viz. that
marriage, as a sacrament, was exclusively subject to the ecclesiastical
jurisdiction; and, therefore, that whatever view the common law might
entertain as to the consequence to be attached to this or that form of it,
the essence of the sacrament itself was determinable by the doctrine of the
Church, and by that alone.

But if this was so, then whatever was accepted by the Church of England as
to the essence of marriage must necessarily be allowed to have been the
common law upon that point, i.e. there could be no other law by which it
could be decided.

Granting, therefore, that J. de Burgh, or any other ecclesiastical writer,
has laid down rules upon subjects of mixed jurisdiction which the common
law disallows, it by no means follows that his authority is to be slighted
where he speaks of matters that were exclusively ecclesiastical. Indeed,
the opposition of the common law upon given points, e.g. the legitimation
by subsequent marriage, gives a pregnant meaning to its silence upon
others.

I find that in the autumn of that year (1843) Mr. Hope spent some time in
making researches into the records at York connected with the law of
marriage. In a letter to Mr. Badeley (September 28) he says, 'At York I was
successful in finding a variety of matrimonial causes, from A.D. 1301
downwards, which I think illustrate the right view of the question. The
records there abound in well-preserved forms of proceeding, and it was with
regret that I gave up further investigations. The labour, however, of
reading and transcribing extracts was occasionally harder than suits
holiday work.' In the same letter he speaks with much pleasure of a day
spent at Burton Agnes with Archdeacons E. Wilberforce, Manning, &c., and as
particularly indebted to the Archbishop of York and his family for the
reception they gave him. The correspondence, indeed, affords a gracious
epistle from the Archbishop himself (then nearly eighty-six years of age)
to Mr. Hope, dated Trentham, September 30, 1843, in which, after expressing
his high satisfaction at some legal advice which he had received from him,
he goes on to say:--

I have only to add that nothing could gratify us more than your having
occasion--and the sooner the better--to refer again to the York archives
for any purpose whatever; 'provided always, and be it hereby enacted, that
such reference be had during the period of the Archbishop's annual
residence at Bishopthorpe.'

Ever truly yrs,

E. EBOR.

It may here be permitted me to quote a few lines from memoranda about Mr.
Hope, kindly written at the request of one of his nearest relatives by a
lady whose genius as well as catholic feeling especially fitted her to
preserve those traces which I am sure no reader would wish should be
allowed to fade away. They afford at once a proof that when doubts as to
his religious position were approaching their most painful stage, he never
allowed them to interfere with those duties of religion which are binding
on all intellectual states alike, and they present a glimpse both of his
appearance and manner at that date which will greatly assist the reader in
forming an idea of him.

I think it was in 1843 that I first saw your dear brother in Margaret
Street Chapel, the favourite place of worship of the Puseyites in those
days, and noticed him and his friend Mr. Badeley walking away together, and
was more struck with his appearance than with that of any other person I
have ever seen before or since.... It is only in pictures that I have ever
seen anything equalling, and never anything surpassing, what was, at the
time I am speaking of, the ideal beauty of his face and figure.

During the next two years I used often to see him at Margaret Street
Chapel, and I may say that his recollection in prayer and unaffected
devotion made a strong impression upon me. Having been very little in
England since my childhood, it was quite a new thing to me to see a layman
in the Anglican Church so devout, but without a tinge of fanaticism or
apparent excitement. In 1844 I made acquaintance with Mr. Hope, and met him
occasionally in society. He was all that his appearance would have led one
to expect; the charm of his manner enhanced the effect of his
conversational powers. [Footnote: Lady Georgiana Fullerton to Lady Henry
Kerr, May 5 [1881].]

I have not found any record of Mr. Hope's personal religious state about
that time, like the diaries of his earlier manhood. He writes, however, to
Mr. Newman on March 1, 1844 (from Lincoln's Inn): 'If I can manage it, I
should much like to spend Passion Week at or near Oxford. Could you let me
into the guest-chamber at Littlemore?' Mr. Newman (March 14) writes in
reply that the guest-chamber was quite at his service, but adds: 'Pray do
not fancy us in such a state that we can profess a retreat, or any one here
able to conduct one.' In another letter Mr. Newman acknowledges 'a splendid
benefaction' of Mr. Hope's to the house of Littlemore.




CHAPTER XX.

1844-1845.

Mr. Hope's Tour on the Continent in 1844--Visit to Munich--Dr. Pusey's
'Library of Roman Catholic Works'--Dr. Pusey and the Spiritual Exercises--
His Opinion of the Discipline--Mr. Hope's Visit to Tetschen in 1844--Count
Leo Thun and his Friends--Mr. Hope's Interview with Prince Metternich--The
Hon. Sir R. Gordon, Ambassador at Vienna--Visit to Prince Palffy and to
Prince Lichtenstein--The Hungarian Diet at Presburg--Letter of Manzoni to
J. R. Hope--Visit to Rome--Bishop Grant and Mr. Hope--Mr. Hope resigns
Chancellorship of Salisbury--Dr. Pusey and the Stone Altar Case--Mr.
Oakeley and Mr. Hope--Scottish Episcopalian Church and its Office--Mr.
Gladstone endeavours to hold Mr. Hope back--Proposes Tour in Ireland--
Conversion of Mr. Newman--Mr. Hope on the Essay on Development--Letter of
Mr. Newman to J. R. Hope from Rome--Reopening of Correspondence with Mr.
Newman.


At the end of August or beginning of September 1844 Mr. Hope set out for a
tour on the Continent, accompanied by Mr. Badeley. Of the earlier days of
it I have no information, but they parted at Heidelberg about September 12,
Mr. Badeley for the Rhine country and Belgium, Mr. Hope for Munich. By this
time, as has already been evident, he was deeply engaged in professional
pursuits, and his health had begun to suffer from his unremitting labours.
Several passages might be quoted from the letters of his intimate friends,
showing the anxiety they felt on the subject. Some real relaxation,
however, had at last become necessary; and it would appear that he rather
wished to leave the turmoil of the movement, as well as business, behind
him. In a letter of Mr. Badeley's to him, dated Brussels, September 22, the
following sentence occurs:--'If you like to see what is going on in this
[the affair of opposing Dr. Symonds' election as Vice-Chancellor at
Oxford] and in Church matters, I will send you the "English Churchman;"
but as you said "No," when we parted, I forbear to forward any papers till
further orders.' Afterwards, however, 'after all,' he asks Mr. Badeley to
send it. On his way to Munich, Mr. Hope stopped at Augsburg, where 'of
course he visited Butsch the bookseller,' buys a copy of the 'Summa Divi
Thomae Aquinatis,' and sees _some_ good books which he did not want.
At Munich, where he arrived on September 14, rooms were provided for him at
the Austrian Legation by the kindness of his friend Count Senfft. These
particulars I take from a letter of his to Mr. Badeley, dated Munich,
September 22, and subjoin some further details in full:--

D[öllinger] is, I think, remarkably well, and I am more struck with him
than ever. I found him already deep in Ward's book, with which he is much
struck. I have already had some interesting conversation with him, and
anticipate more. He is rector elect of the University, and highly spoken of
by all I see. My new acquaintances consist of the Papal Nuntius Viale, a
very striking person, Professor Walther, the canonist, and some intelligent
Bavarians. I am to visit Görres this evening.... There is an English
service here very decently and nicely performed by Mr. de Coetlogon, a man
in Scotch orders, and the chapel is a modest but respectable room.... I ask
hard questions upon marriage, and receive very doubtful answers; but I am
resolved, if possible, to get some definite information from the best
sources in Germany.

The following letter, connected with this tour of Mr. Hope's, is also very
instructive as to a particular phase of the movement:--

_The Rev. Dr. Pusey to J. R. Hope, Esq._

My dear Hope,--I have no news as yet to communicate to you, except that
some few are taking up ye matter of ye V. C. in rt earnest, and so I
suppose it will be a pitched battle, and we shall win at last, even if but
a handful as yet.

I have 2 or 3 commissions for you, wh will not occupy your time, and wh
will, I hope, be a subject of interest to you. It is for my little library
of R. C. works. The perplexity is to find out ye best books upon difft
subjects, for I cannot read all. The general class is, as you know, ascetic
books, books of guidance, wh shall give people knowledge of self, enable us
to guide consciences, build people up in ye higher life, force them to
mental prayer, or give them subjects of meditation in it, the spiritual
life, Xtian perfection, holy performance of ordinary actions, love of God,
or any Xtian graces in detail, devotions, books on holy seasons--in a word,
anything in practical theology in its widest range, or, again, cases of
conscience.

I have learnt more or less as to French & Spanish, & some Latin works, but
of Italian I know those only of Scupoli, and of German absolutely nothing.
The only books I have seen are some sermons by Sailer, wh, altho' clear and
energetic, contain nothing wh one did not know before; they have nothing to
build people up with.

I shd be glad also of any information on a subject wh I know drew yr
thoughts when you were last abroad--the system as to retreats. I saw a
book,' Manuale dell' Esercitatori,' but I shd be very glad of any
information or any guidance.

If it wd not occupy you too much, I shd be much obliged to you to procure
on my account any practical works wh mt be recommended.

Perhaps also Dr. Döllinger could give you some information as to S.
Ignatius Loyola, 'Exercitia Spiritualia,' for they seem to have been so
often re-moulded, that there is some difficulty to ascertain (1) what is ye
genuine form, or at least to obtain a copy, (2) whether any other re-
casting of it be found easier to use.

I trust these inquiries will not be so much an encumbrance to you, as lead
you to happy subjects and more acquaintance with happy-making books. God
bless you ever.

Yrs affectionately,

E. B. PUSEY.

Christ Church: September 9, 1844.

[P.S.] There is yet a subject on wh I shd like to know more, if you fall in
with persons who have ye guidance of consciences,--what penances they
employ for persons whose temptations are almost entirely spiritual, of
delicate frames often, and who wish to be led on to perfection. I see in a
spiritual writer that even for such, corporal severities are not to be
neglected, but so many of them are unsafe. I suspect ye 'discipline' to be
one of ye safest, and with internal humiliation the best.... Cd you procure
and send me one by B.? What was described to me was of a very sacred
character; 5 cords, each with 5 knots, in memory of ye 5 wounds of our
Lord.... I shd be glad to know also whether there were any cases in wh it
is unsafe, e.g. in a nervous person.

On October 1 Mr. Hope left Munich to pay a visit at Tetschen, the seat of
his friends the Thun family (described vol. i. p. 42), taking Ratisbon and
other places in his way. At Tetschen, where he stayed from October 5 to 12,
he found a sad blank in the recent death of the Countess Thun. From an
interesting letter to Lady Hope (dated Vienna, October 26, 1844) which
furnishes these dates, I transcribe also the following particulars:--

Countess Anna is still in very uncertain health.... The Count himself seems
to have rallied lately, but it will be long before he gets over his loss.
The second daughter, Countess Inza, seems to be now the stay of the family.
Of the sons, only Francis, the eldest, was at home. He is devoted to art,
and has besides abundance of business in the management of the estates
which his father has made over to him, and with various charitable
societies at Prague, in which he and his family are interested. From
Tetschen I went to Prague, with Count Joseph Thun, a cousin, with his wife
and two sons. At Prague I spent Sunday, Monday, and Tuesday, in constant
admiration of the town, to which I did not do justice when I was last
there. It is really beautiful, and, out of Italy, I think Edinburgh alone
equal to it, of all the towns which I have seen. With Tetschen for summer,
and Prague for winter, I think the Thuns have two as charming residences as
could be found.

On Tuesday evening [Oct. 15] I left for Königsgrätz, a provincial town,
where Leo Thun, the youngest, is officially employed. He is a noble fellow,
and has devoted himself for years to the details of business, with a view
to becoming useful to Bohemia, to which he is very much attached. He is
also prominent among the revivers of the Bohemian language and literature,
which is Sclavonic, and has thus become well known in Germany, as well as
in Hungary and other countries where there are Sclavonic tribes. The
movement is in a political sense important, as well as influential upon
manners and modes of thinking, and it has already excited a good deal of
discussion and some animosity. It would take too much time, however, to
explain what I have learnt of its bearings. With Leo I spent two very
agreeable days, and have had much to talk about, as I had not seen him
since I was last in Bohemia. I was introduced to the _notables_ of the
place, his _chef_ and the commander of the garrison (an old Irish
officer of the name of Fitzgerald), and saw his mode of life, which to a
man with plenty of employment must be convenient, though not very amusing.

From Königsgrätz I started on Thursday night, and arrived here [Vienna] on
Saturday week, the 19th [Oct.], and took up my abode at the same inn with
Fritz Thun, the diplomat, who was here on his way from Turin, which he has
now left for Prague. You will remember how pleasant a person he is, and
will be glad to hear that his professional prospects are excellent, as he
is in high favour with Prince Metternich, to whom he was strongly
recommended by Schwartzenberg, his last _chef_. One of my first acts
was to call on Sir R. Gordon [the British Ambassador], who has been
_most_ kind, giving me dinner as often as I can go to him, and
assisting me in everything. On the evening of my arrival he took me to
Prince Metternich, when I had the honour of a conversation with the great
man. George was remembered by him and his daughter, and by the Countess
Zichy, the Princess's mother, and I was very kindly received by them all.
Palmerston was expected here, and the Prince told Sir R. Gordon that, if he
came, I should be invited to meet him at dinner; but unluckily he has
changed his plans, so that I shall not see him and Metternich together,
which would have been a great sight. I gave Sir Robert your good account of
Lady Alicia,[Footnote: Sister of the Earl of Aberdeen and of Sir R. Gordon,
died 1847.] and beg that you will in return tell her that Sir R. is very
flourishing, and that in my opinion he is a very magnificent ambassador,
and, what is better, a very kind one. His establishment is admirably
_monté_, and I found in François a friend of the Hope family in
general. George's letters of introduction I duly received. Schwartzenberg
is not here, but I have seen Esterhazy, who has asked me to his country
place, about three hours' drive from Vienna.... Besides the people I have
named, I have seen others, to whom I get access through Count Senfft, among
whom is the Dowager Duchess of Anhalt-Cöthen, a natural sister of the King
of Prussia, and a clever woman....

Your affect. Son,

JAMES R. HOPE.

Mr. Hope was unable to accept the invitation of Prince Esterhazy, in
consequence of an engagement to visit another Hungarian magnate, Prince
Palffy. The latter visit, with various other interesting details, is
recorded in the following letter:--

_J. R. Hope, Esq., to Edward L. Badeley, Esq._ Vienna: Nov. 7, 1844.

Dear Badeley,--[After giving some account of his visit at Tetschen, Mr.
Hope goes on to mention his interview with Prince Metternich.] Prince
Metternich honoured me with a conversation of some ten minutes or so, and
which would probably have been both longer and more interesting but for the
intrusion of a German who chose to thrust himself upon us. He spoke of some
points of commercial and manufacturing interest, and pleased me very much
by the simplicity of his manner. By means of letters which Count Senfft
gave me I have also become acquainted with several of the persons who are
known as active friends of the R. C. _High_ Church party; but I do not
know very much of them, and of the Vienna clergy nothing at all....

On Sunday, the 28th [Oct.], I started for my promised visit to Prince
Palffy at Malatzka, and arrived there in a few hours. The house resembles
most of those one sees abroad, built round a court, with long passages,
white exterior, &c., and, as the country round it is very flat and sandy,
it cannot be called a very interesting place. It was, however, my first
resting-place in Hungary, and as such, an object of curiosity to me.
Besides which, I found in it a hearty welcome, and a large family party,
which gave me a good idea of the society of the upper class. The Prince is
an extensive landowner, holding it all in his own hands (as is generally if
not universally the case, both in Bohemia and Hungary), and working it by
the tributary labour of the peasants, who, besides a small money payment,
contribute labour for a certain number of days in each year. With the
obligation of this quittance, the latter class hold in fee the cottages and
plots of land which they occupy, and appear to be a thriving and
comfortable race. They are, however, exclusively the tax-payers, as the
nobles are still free from all imposts. An effort has indeed been made
lately, which has partially succeeded, to tax the nobles; and it is
probable that amid the numerous reforms of the Hungarian Diet, this
will eventually be fully carried out. Our mode of life at Malatzka was
to rise when we chose, breakfast in our own rooms, to meet at half-past
twelve for luncheon, then to go out, and to dine at six, and to spend
the evening in the drawing-room. Coursing, a badger-hunt, and an
expedition to a property of the Prince's at the foot of the Carpathians,
constituted my out-of-door amusements; and of these, the last at least was
very interesting. I saw an immense tract of wood and pasture, a herd of
wild oxen, sheep innumerable, a curious stalactite grotto, and an Hungarian
farmhouse.

From Malatzka I went, furnished with letters, to the seat of Prince
Liechtenstein in Moravia--Eisgrüb. He is one of the richest men in the
Austrian dominions, having possessions in Moravia, Bohemia, and Hungary,
and several houses in Vienna. A great sportsman, and in this point, at
least, a great imitator of English manners. The house at which I was is a
summer residence, with very fine pleasure-grounds, park, &c.; but he has an
autumn château not far off, which I also visited, and which is a fine
specimen of foreign country architecture. Everything about him seemed to
teem with expense and luxury, which, although probably not greater than
what is to be found in the residences of English noblemen, appears greater
from its contrast with the rudeness and simplicity of the general condition
of the country. These great nobles seem, in fact, to combine the most
striking points of barbarism and civilisation, and to turn them both to
their enjoyment. I stayed only one day at Eisgrüb, though I had pressing
invitations to remain longer; but I was anxious to go to Presburg to see
the Diet, and so returned to Malatzka, which I left again the next morning,
Saturday, 2nd Nov., for the seat of the Hungarian Parliament.

At Presburg I spent four days. The place itself is uninteresting, though
there are points of beauty about it; but it contains at this moment some of
the most turbulent politicians in the world; and their movements are of
considerable importance as well to the twelve million souls who constitute
the population of Hungary, as to the integrity of the Austrian Empire.

I should write a book were I to tell you all I have heard from different
quarters upon this question; but this much seems certain--that Hungary is
in a state of violent transition, and that in a few years its internal
condition and perhaps its relations to the Austrian monarchy will have
undergone a complete revolution. Sir R. Gordon gave me a letter to an
Englishman who is employed by the British Embassy to attend the sittings of
the Diet; and by his kindness I was enabled to make acquaintance with many
of the most distinguished men. I was also present at several debates in the
two Chambers of the Diet, and though (the language being Hungarian) I could
not understand a word, yet it was most interesting to watch the proceedings
of this Magyar Parliament, in which freedom of speech exists as fully as in
any assembly in the world. The members all attend in Hungarian costume,
which, on common occasions, consists of a laced surtout coat, a cap, and a
sword. They speak from their places and without notes. Each member may
speak as often as he pleases, and some take advantage of the privilege to a
somewhat formidable extent. There seemed to be much fluency and not a
little action; but the management of the voice was bad, and energy seemed
to pass at once into violence. Though party runs high, organisation is very
little understood, and business is transacted both slowly and with very
uncertain results. They have the misfortune of all foreign constitutional
states, that of desiring to imitate England, i.e. to do in a few years, and
designedly, what the accidents of centuries have produced with us. There
is, however, no lack either of talent or courage, and one governing mind
might make Hungary a nation. It is immensely rich in natural productions,
and wants only a market to have a great trade. This they are well disposed
to establish with England, and I hope they may succeed; but Austria has
interests which I fear may render this difficult. In both Chambers the
clergy are represented: in that of the magnates by the Bishops; in the
Lower House by deputies of the chapters. To the Primate I was introduced at
one of his public entertainments. He is said to have 40 or 60,000_l_.
per ann., and his personal carriage as well as his establishment are quite
becoming his station. I made acquaintance also with the Archbishop of
Erlau, a poet and a man of taste and learning, but victim to the tic
douloureux. Lastly, with the Bishop of Csanad (Mgr. Lonowics), who has
charmed me. He is well read, in English as well as other literature and
history, and is as kind-hearted and Christian a man as I ever met with.
Indeed, I shall be tempted to visit Hungary again, if it is only to spend a
day or two with him. In the meantime we have established a mutual book-
relation. He is to send me works on Hungarian Ecclesiastical Law, addressed
to Stewart, and I have promised to send him some things which I beg you
will at once see to. [Mr. Hope mentions Winkle's 'Cathedrals;' Ward's
'Ideal;' Newman's last vol. of 'Sermons;' the 'Life of St. Stephen;'
Oakeley's 'Life of St. Austin;' and his own pamphlet 'On the Jerusalem
Bishopric.']

Yours ever truly,

James R. Hope.

On November 25 we find Mr. Hope at Milan, where he mentions having seen his
old acquaintances, Manzoni and Vitali. The following letter will show how
much he had impressed the former, brief as their communications had been:--


_Alessandro Manzoni to J. R. Hope, Esq._

Milan: 8 Mai, 1845.

Monsieur et respectable ami,--Je profite de l'occasion que me présente mon
ancien et intime ami, M. le Baron Trechi, pour me rappeler à votre bon
souvenir....

Agréez mes remercîments bien vifs et bien sincères pour les _Scripture
Prints_ que Mr. Lewis Gruner a bien voulu me remettre de votre part. Si
le nom du peintre n'y était pas, je suis sûr qu'en les voyant, je me serais
écrié: Ah! Raphael. C'est tout ce qu'un homme n'ayant, malheureusement,
aucune connaissance de l'art, peut vous dire pour vous rendre compte de
l'impression que lui a faite la copie. Je ne vous charge de rien pour M.
Gladstone, parce que je me donne la satisfaction de lui écrire par cette
même occasion. J'espère que nous le reverrons bientôt au ministère. N'allez
pas me demander si je suis anglais pour dire: nous; car je vous répondrais
que _homo sum; humani nihil a me alienum puto_; et qu'il n'y a rien
d'_humanius_ que d'aimer à voir le pouvoir uni à la confiance; je ne
dis pas: à de hautes facultés; car, malheureusement, le cas est moins rare.
[After giving his friend an account of a great family affliction he had
sustained in the loss of a beloved daughter, the writer goes on to say:]

Je ne crains pas de vous importuner en vous parlant ainsi de ce qui me
touche si profondément: je sais la part que vous prenez à tout ce qui est
douleur et confiance en Dieu, par Jésus Christ. Je n'ai pas craint non plus
de vous choquer en vous écrivant avec un ton si familier, et comme il
conviendrait à une ancienne connaissance; car il me semble que nous le
sommes; l'affection et l'estime de ma part et une grande bonté de la vôtre,
ont bien pu suppléer le temps. Permettez-moi d'espérer que le bonheur que
j'ai de vous connaître n'aura pas été un accident dans une vie, et que des
causes plus heureuses que d'autrefois vous ramèneront bientôt encore dans
ce pays; et, en attendant, veuillez me garder une petite place dans votre
faveur, comme vous êtes toujours vivant dans le mien. Je suis, avec la plus
affectueuse considération,

Votre dévoué serviteur et ami,

ALEXANDRE MANZONI.

Mr. Hope proceeded from Milan to Florence and Rome. Almost the only letter
referring to this visit to Rome that has come before me is one written to
Mr. Badeley on December 19. It contains very little of importance. Much of
it is taken up with an account of Sir William Follett, then at Rome, and
verging towards his end, of whom Mr. Hope had seen a great deal. Other
friends named are Mr. and Mrs. Vivian, and Mr. Waterton. From the latter,
Mr. Hope had 'an interesting account of Tickell's reception into the Church
of Rome at Bruges. He was himself present, and very much struck by T.'s
devout and humble behaviour.'

'Of the Roman clergy,' Mr. Hope remarks, 'I have seen little, and have
indeed almost given up my inquiries among them.' He mentions in the same
letter that he intended leaving Rome on January 1 or 2, 'and to speed
homewards _viâ_ Leghorn, Genoa, Marseilles, and Paris.' Amidst all
this apparent coldness, and in spite of all the expressions of
disappointment with Rome that have appeared thus far, [Footnote: On the
cause of this dissatisfaction an intimate friend of his has observed: 'For
myself I think the real and sufficient reason of his disappointment with
Rome was, that the Roman authorities naturally and reasonably would not
open to a Protestant. They would fear their information would be used
against them. They could not know his honesty of purpose.'] it is clear
that the secret influence and spirit of the place were working their effect
on his mind. A great proof of this will be given further on, in a letter of
the Père Roothaan's to a friend relative to Mr. Hope's conversion.

A sentence from a letter of Mr. Hope's about two years afterwards is here
in point. 'Your impression of Rome (he writes to Mr. Badeley, October 16,
1847) appears to be similar to that of most who see it for the first time;
but it grows upon one, and the recollection will be deeper than the present
feeling.'

There is a pleasing note to Mr. Hope, dated December 20, 1844, from Mgr.
Grant, then Rector of the English College at Rome, and afterwards the well-
known Bishop of Southwark, one of the most beloved and venerated friends of
his Catholic period. It merely gives information to assist him in visiting
St. John Lateran's, and promises to send an order for St. Peter's. It
concludes characteristically: 'I shall be too happy to serve you whenever I
can be useful. Although you do not think so, you will find that _little
people_ are not without some use; and, in the hope that you will allow
me an opportunity of proving that I am in the right, I remain, with many
thanks for your kindness, &c.,--THOMAS GRANT.' I may here also give a short
letter of Bishop Grant's, of later date, illustrating their friendship, and
including some traces of its beginning at Rome:--

_The Right Rev. Dr. Grant, Bishop of Southwark, to J. R. Hope-Scott,
Esq., Q.C._

June 23, 1853.

My dear Mr. Hope-Scott,--The _frescoes_ have arrived, and I hasten to
thank you for a gift, valuable in itself, but most dear to me, because it
will ever remind me of the beginning of that friendship which has always
been so pleasing to me, and which forms one of the consolations that are
allowed to me in the midst of the weighty duties of my present state--
duties which I little expected when we quarrelled peacefully about Swiss
guards and troops of soldiers lining St. Peter's on grand days.

When you next visit the churches and antiquities of Rome, Mary Monica will
catch up the ardour that will then probably have gone by for you and
myself, and will wonder why you care so little for them; and if I am with
you I fear I shall be more tempted to tell her of the quiet rooms in Via
della Croce, when I first knew her father, than of the Arch of Drusus, or
other pagan monuments that once entertained our attention.

Yours very sincerely,

† THOMAS GRANT.

Mr. Hope-Scott had a high admiration for this saintly Bishop, and used to
speak of him as '_the_ Bishop,' always meaning by that Bishop Grant.

Early in 1845, and not many weeks after his return to England, Mr. Hope
resigned his chancellorship of Salisbury. It can scarcely be doubted that
misgivings as to his religious position, more apparent perhaps to us now
than they then were even to himself, were among his leading motives for
taking this important step; although the immense accumulation of his
business before the Parliamentary committees must have rendered it
difficult for him, even with his talents, to hold with it an appointment
like that in such times; and feelings of friendship for his successor, the
present Sir Robert Phillimore, may also have influenced him. The date of
the resignation was Feb. 10.

The judgment of Sir Herbert Jenner Fust in the celebrated 'Stone Altar
Case,' by which wooden altars only were permitted, was a severe
discouragement to the Tractarian party, being felt to interfere with the
idea of sacrifice. From the following passage of a letter (undated) of Dr.
Pusey's to Mr. Hope, it appears that he (Mr. Hope) had endeavoured to take
a more favourable view. The letter probably belongs to Feb. or March 1845.

I do not know whether the opinion you give is as to law previous to Sir H.
J. F.'s decision, and as a ground of appeal against it, or as to what would
still be allowed. Would his judgment preclude our having a stone slab,
either upon stone pedestals or a wooden panelled altar? I have comforted
others with the same topic you mention, that wooden tables are altars by
virtue of ye sacrifice, and so that this decision really alters nothing.
Still, it does seemingly, and was intended to discountenance the
doctrine.... It must be confessed, too, that this decision of Sir H. J. F.
is a defeat--only an outward one, and availing nothing while truth spreads
within. Still it is well to neutralise the sentence as much as we can.

Ever yrs affectly,

E. B. PUSEY.

Notwithstanding this, Mr. Hope is remembered, after the adverse decision,
to have despondingly asked, 'Where is the use of fighting for the shell
when we have lost the kernel?'

Among the other agitations of that time was the prosecution instituted in
the Court of Arches by Dr. Blomfield, Bishop of London, against the Rev.
Frederick Oakeley (the late Canon) for views which he had expressed about
the Blessed Sacrament. Canon Oakeley, in a conversation I had with him in
1878, gave me the following information as to the part taken by Mr. Hope as
his friend and adviser in this case, and general recollections of him. He
had resolved to let the case go by default, partly because he felt
convinced that it was sure to be decided in favour of the Bishop, as those
cases always were; partly because he disliked a subject like the Blessed
Sacrament to be bandied about by the lawyers in that way. Mr. Hope, on the
other hand, urged him to place himself in the hands of counsel, and thought
a good case might be made by reference to books on canon law and Roman
writers of the moderate school (Gallican), showing that, in point of fact,
the holding of 'all Roman doctrine' (thus interpreted) was compatible with
the doctrine of the Church of England. [Footnote: _Thus interpreted_,
observe. Mr. Newman himself, in a letter to Mr. Hope, dated Littlemore, May
14, 1845, says: 'You are quite right in saying I do not take Ward and
Oakeley's grounds that all Roman doctrine may be held in our Church, and
that _as_ Roman I have always and everywhere resisted it.'] The
principle on which he went was the approximation made out by Sancta Clara
and in Tract 90. Mr. Hope had more hopes of the House of Lords than of the
Court of Arches, and wished Mr. Oakeley to appeal to the former. If he was
afraid of the expenses, he said they would manage all that for him.
[Footnote: Mr. Hope had formed a committee (in conjunction with Serjeant
Bellasis, Mr. Badeley, and Mr. J. D. Chambers) in order to raise
contributions to meet Mr. Oakeley's expenses. I find an exchange of notes
dated March 10, 1845, between Mr. Hope and Mr. Gladstone on this matter.
Mr. Hope encloses a circular, and invites Mr. Gladstone to contribute,
remarking 'As the process must throw light upon many collateral points, I
amongst others am much interested in its being well conducted. I am,
moreover, as a friend of O.'s, anxious that he should have fair
play....This looks like the beginning of the end.' Mr. Gladstone, in reply,
alludes to doubts he had had whether he could subscribe _in re_ Ward.
'Although I am far from having (upon a slight consideration as yet, for I
have been very busy with other matters) found them conclusive; for I think
we are going to try questions of academical right, and even of general
justice.' He therefore declines subscribing in Mr. Oakeley's case,
promising to give Mr. Hope his reasons whenever they should meet.]He added,
however, 'But I think you are inclined to go over to the Church of Rome;
and if that is the case, it is useless to proceed.' Mr. Hope at that time
(said the Canon) was a staunch Anglican. He did not, however, see more of
him than of any other member of his congregation perhaps once in three
months. After Mr. Oakeley had become a Catholic, Mr. Hope once asked him to
breakfast, which he accepted rather hesitatingly. At that time he (Mr.
Oakeley) thought less favourably of Protestants than he did now, and hinted
that he must take a line in conversation that might not be acceptable. Mr.
Hope said they need not talk of that, let him come. At this breakfast Mr.
Hope mentioned that he had been lately at Rome (he could allude to no other
visit than that of 1844-5), where he had seen a procession of the Pope in
the _sedia gestatoria_, and thought how much better it would have been
if he had walked in the procession like any other Bishop--that was the line
he took. [I ought to add that, later in my conversation with him, Canon
Oakeley seemed rather to hesitate whether it was Mr. Hope or some one else
who made this observation about the Pope's procession, but in the end he
appeared to feel satisfied that it was Mr. Hope.]

In the same troubled spring of 1845 a movement was going on to assimilate
the office of the Scottish Episcopalian Church to that of the English. Dean
Ramsay of Edinburgh had asked Mr. Hope for a legal opinion on a case in
which he was concerned bearing on this. Mr. Hope, in a letter to him dated
April 8, declines to meddle with the question, and adds:--

I can hardly tell you how much I deprecate any steps which may tend to
diminish the authority of the _native_ office; how entirely I dissent
from any plans of further assimilation to the foreign English Church.
Indeed, the consequences of such schemes at this moment would in my opinion
be most disastrous.

Some letters of great interest with reference to Mr. Hope's religious
position at this period occur in the Gladstone correspondence. Mr.
Gladstone, being now thoroughly aware that his friend was entertaining
serious doubts as to the Catholicity of the Church of England, writes him a
very long and deeply considered letter, appealing in the first place to a
promise of co-operation which Mr. Hope had made him in the earlier days of
their friendship, and placing before him, with all the power and eloquence
of which he is so great a master, what he regarded as the most unanswerable
arguments for remaining in the Anglican communion. From this letter I quote
the following passages as strictly biographical:--

_The Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, M.P. to J. M. Hope, Esq._

13 Carlton House Terrace: Thursday night, May 15, '45.

_Private._

My dear Hope,--In 1838 you lent me that generous and powerful aid in the
preparation of my book for the press, to which I owe it that the defects
and faults of the work fell short of absolutely disqualifying it for its
purpose. From that time I began to form not only high but definite
anticipations of the services which you would render to the Church in the
deep and searching processes through which she has passed and yet has to
pass. These anticipations, however, did not rest only upon my own wishes,
or on the hopes which benefits already received might have led me to form.
In the commencement of 1840, in the very room where we talked to-night, you
voluntarily and somewhat solemnly tendered to me the assurance that you
would at all times be ready to co-operate with me in furtherance of the
welfare of the Church, and you placed no limit upon the extent of such co-
operation. I had no title to expect and had not expected a promise so
heart-stirring, but I set upon it a value scarcely to be described, and it
ever after entered as an element of the first importance into all my views
of the future course of public affairs in their bearing upon religion.
[Footnote: With this may be compared Mr. Hope's letter to Mr. Gladstone of
October 11, 1838, given in chapter ix. (vol. i.).]

       *       *        *       *        *

If the time shall ever come (which I look upon as extremely uncertain, but
I think if it comes at all it will be before the lapse of many years) when
I am called upon to use any of those opportunities [the writer had just
spoken of 'the great opportunities, the gigantic opportunities of good or
evil to the Church which the course of events seems (humanly speaking)
certain to open up'], it would be my duty to look to you for aid, under the
promise to which I have referred, unless in the meantime you shall as
deliberately and solemnly withdraw that promise as you first made it. I
will not describe at length how your withdrawal of it would increase that
sense of desolation which, as matters now stand, often approaches to being
intolerable. I only speak of it as a matter of fact, and I am anxious you
should know that I look to it as one of the very weightiest kind, under a
title which you have given me. You would of course cancel it upon the
conviction that it involved sin upon your part: with anything less than
that conviction I do not expect that you will cancel it; and I am, on the
contrary, persuaded that you will struggle against pain, depression,
disgust, and even against doubt touching the very root of our position, for
the fulfilment of any actual _duties_ which the post you actually
occupy in the Church of God, taken in connection with your faculties and
attainments, may assign to you.

You have given me lessons that I have taken thankfully. Believe I do it in
the payment of a debt, if I tell you that your mind and intellect, to which
I look up with reverence under a consciousness of immense inferiority, are
much under the dominion, whether it be known or not known to yourself, of
an agency lower than their own, more blind, more variable, more difficult
to call inwardly to account and make to answer for itself--the agency, I
mean, of painful and disheartening impressions--impressions which have an
unhappy and powerful tendency to realise the very worst of what they
picture. Of this fact I have repeatedly noted the signs in you.

I should have been glad to have got your advice on some points connected
with the Maynooth question on Monday next, but I will not introduce here
any demand upon your kindness; the claims of this letter on your attention,
be they great or small, and you are their only judge, rest upon wholly
different grounds.

God bless and guide you, and prosper the work of your hands.

Ever your aff'te friend, W. E. GLADSTONE.

J. R. Hope, Esq.

The friends both being in London at the time, the correspondence gives no
further light at this point. In July Mr. Gladstone proposed to Mr. Hope
that they two should go on a tour in Ireland together. The invitation must
be given in his own words:--

_The Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, M.P. to J. R. Hope, Esq._

13 C. H. Terrace: July 23, 1845.

My dear Hope,--Ireland is likely to find this country and Parliament so
much employment for years to come, that I feel rather oppressively an
obligation to try and see it with my own eyes instead of using those of
other people, according to the limited measure of my means.

Now your company would be so very valuable as well as agreeable to me, that
I am desirous to know whether you are at all inclined to entertain the idea
of devoting the month of September, after the meeting in Edinburgh, to a
working tour in Ireland with me--eschewing all grandeur, and taking little
account even of scenery, compared with the purpose of looking from close
quarters at the institutions for religion and education of the country, and
at the character of the people. It seems ridiculous to talk of supplying
the defects of second-hand information by so short a trip; but though a
longer time would be much better, yet even a very contracted one does much
when it is added to an habitual though indirect knowledge.

Believe me Your attached friend, W. E. GLADSTONE.

It is much to be regretted that this tour was not accomplished, but various
engagements prevented Mr. Hope's accepting the invitation: he spent that
part of the vacation in Scotland, and Mr. Gladstone on the Continent.
Shortly after the date of the preceding letter Mr. Gladstone appears to
have suggested to Mr. Hope the idea of his joining some association for
active charity, which is partly illustrated by a correspondence which I
shall presently quote; but Mr. Hope (August 6) writes:--

As to the guild or confraternity, I am not at this moment prepared to join
it. My reasons are various, but I have not had leisure to think them out.
When I have revolved the matter further, perhaps I may trouble you again
upon it.

On October 9, 1845, Mr. Newman was received into the Catholic Church, and
Mr. Hope writes to him on the 20th:--

I was so fully prepared that the event fell lightly on my mind, but the
feeling of separation has since grown upon me painfully. The effect which,
I think I told you, it would have upon my conduct, is that of forcing me to
a deliberate inquiry; but I feel most unfit for it, and look with anxiety
to your book as my guide. I hope to be at Oxford early next week, and trust
to see you. Meantime, if it be anything to you to know that all my personal
feelings towards you remain unaltered, or rather, are deepened, that much I
can sincerely say.

On December 1 he speaks of his own joining the Roman Catholic Church as
'what may eventually happen,' adding: 'But I feel that I have yet much
before me, both in moral and intellectual exertion, ere I can hope for a
conclusion. Meantime I beg your prayers.'

On December 22 he gives his impressions of Newman's 'Essay on Development,'
so eagerly expected:--

I have read your book _once_ through. To apprehend it fully will
require one, if not two more perusals. The effect produced upon me as yet
is that of perplexity at seeing how wide a range of thought appears to be
required for the discussion. I had thought that the principles which I
already acknowledge would, upon a careful application, suffice for the
solution of the difficulties; but you have taken me into a region less
familiar to me, and the extent of which makes me feel helpless and
discouraged.

It may be worth mentioning that soon after the 'Essay on Development' came
out, Mr. Hope asked a friend at dinner across the table (the anecdote was
given me by the latter), 'Have you read the "Extravagant of John"?' To
understand this, the unlearned reader must be told that certain celebrated
constitutions, decreed by Pope John XXII., are called by canonists the
'Extravagantes Joannis.' The play on the word was one which would be
relished by Mr. Hope's friend, who was almost as great a student of the
canon law as himself. His meaning, however, may have been that he thought
Mr. Newman had taken up a view outside of the received system.

In the two letters I have just quoted Mr. Hope enters, like a kind friend
and adviser, into Mr. Newman's plans in the early days of his conversion,
but an interruption of the correspondence seems to have followed on Mr.
Newman's going to Rome, where he was from autumn, 1846, to the beginning of
1848. It is probable, indeed, that it was the consciousness of his own
affection for Mr. Newman, and of Mr. Newman's influence over him, that led
Mr. Hope to abstain, during that long interval, from intercourse with a
friend whom he regarded with such deep respect and admiration. There is,
however, a letter of Mr. Newman's from Rome in the interval, which will be
read with great interest, both for his own history and for the light, yet
thrilling touch of spiritual kindness which it conveys towards the end. It
contains, too, a line explaining his own silence.

_The Rev. J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq_.

(Private.) Collegio di Prop.: Feb. 23, '47.

My dear Hope,--I have been writing so very, very much lately, that now that
I want to tell you something my hand is so tired that I can hardly write a
word. We are to be Oratorians. Mgr. Brunelli went to the Pope about it the
day before yesterday, my birthday. The Pope took up the plan most warmly,
as had Mgr. B., to whom we had mentioned it a month back. Mgr. had returned
my paper, in which I drew out my plan, saying, 'Mi piace immensamente,' and
repeated several times that the plan was 'ben ideata.' They have from the
first been as kind to us as possible, and are ever willing to do anything
for us. I have ever been thinking of you, and you must have thought my
silence almost unkind, but I waited to tell you something which would be
real news. It is _no_ secret that we are to be Oratorians, but matters
of detail being uncertain, you had better keep it to yourself. The Pope
wishes us to come here, as many as can, form a house under an experienced
Oratorian Father, go through a novitiate, and return. Of course they will
hasten us back as soon as [they] can, but that will depend on our progress.
I _suppose_ we shall set up in Birmingham... You are not likely to
know the very Jesuits of Propaganda. We are very fortunate in them. The
Rector (Padre Bresciani) is a man of great delicacy and real kindness; our
confessor, Father Ripetti, is one of the most excellent persons we have
fallen in with, tho' I can't describe him to you in a few words. Another
person we got on uncommonly with was Ghianda at Milan. Bellasis will have
told you about him. We owed a great deal to you there, and did not forget
you, my dear Hope. Let me say it, O that God would give you the gift of
faith! Forgive me for this. I know you will. It is of no use my plaguing
you with many words. I want you for the Church in England, and the Church
for you. But I must do my own work in my own place, and leave everything
else to that inscrutable Will which we can but adore;... Well, our lot is
fixed. What will come to it I know not. Don't think me ambitious. I am not.
I have no views. It will be enough for me if I get into some active work,
and save my own soul.... My affectionate remembrances to Badeley....

Ever y'rs affectionately, John H. Newman.

I find, towards the end of 1850, a very interesting exchange of letters
between Dr. Newman and Mr. Hope, which may conveniently be given here,
though chronologically they ought to come later. I first give a letter
needed to explain them:--

_J. R. Hope, Esq., Q.C. to the Rev. Stuart Bathurst._

Abbotsford: Nov. 4, '50.

Dear Bathurst,--Your kind letter needed no apologies; and for your prayers
and good thoughts for me I thank you much. May they of God be blessed to me
in clearer light as well as in a purer conscience! As yet I do not see my
way as you have done yours, but I pray that I may not long remain in such
doubt as I now have.

From our address I conclude that you are with Newman. Tell him with my kind
regards that I hope he has not forgotten me. I have very often thought of
him, and have sometimes been near writing to him, but have had nothing
definite to say. I have read his last lectures, and wish they were extended
to a review of doctrine, and the difficulties which beset it to an
Anglican.

Let me hear from you when you have time, and believe me, my dear Bathurst,

Yours ever aff'tly,

James R. Hope.

The Rev. S. Bathurst.

_The Very Rev. Dr. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq., Q.C._

Oratory, Birmingham: Nov. 20, 1850.

My dear Hope,--It is with the greatest pleasure I have just read the letter
which you wrote to Bathurst, and which he has forwarded to me.... I now
fully see ... that your silence has arisen merely from the difficulty of
writing to one in another communion, and the irksomeness and indolence (if
you will let me so speak) we all feel in doing what is difficult, what may
be misconceived, and what can scarcely have object or use.

I know perfectly well, my dear Hope, your great moral and intellectual
qualities, and will not cease to pray that the grace of God may give you
the obedience of faith, and use them as His instruments. For myself, I say
it from my heart, I have not had a single doubt, or temptation to doubt,
ever since I became a Catholic. I believe this to be the case with most
men--it certainly is so with those with whom I am in habits of intimacy. My
great temptation is to be at _peace_, and let things go on as they
will, and not trouble myself about others. This being the case, your
recommendation that I should 'take a review of doctrine, and of the
difficulties which beset it to an Anglican,' is anything but welcome, and
makes me smile. Surely, enough has been written--all the writing in the
world would not destroy the necessity of faith. If all were now made clear
to reason, where would be the exercise of faith? The single question is,
whether _enough_ has not been done to _reduce_ the difficulties
so far as to hinder them absolutely blocking up the way, or excluding those
direct and large arguments on which the reasonableness of faith is built.

Ever yours affectionately,

John H. Newman.

_J. R. Hope, Esq., Q.C. to the Very Rev. Dr. Newman._

Abbotsford: Nov. 27, '50.

Dear Newman,--The receipt of your letter gave me sincere pleasure. It
renews a correspondence which I value very highly, and which my own
stupidity had interrupted. Offence I had never taken, but causes such as
you describe much better than I could have done were the occasion of my
silence.

You may now find that you have brought more trouble on yourself, for there
are many things on which I should like to ask you questions, and I know
that your time is already much engaged. However, at present my chief object
is to assure you how very glad I am again to write to you, as the friend
whom I almost fear I had thrown away. Whatever occurs, do not let us be
again estranged. It is not easy, as one gets older, to form new friendships
of any kind, and least of all such as I have always considered yours....

Ever, dear Newman,

Yours affectionately

JAMES R. HOPE.

_The Very Rev. Dr. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq., Q.C._

Oratory, Birmingham: November 29, 1850.

My dear Hope,--I write a line to thank you for your letter, and to say how
glad I shall be to hear from you, as you half propose, whether or not I am
able to say anything to your satisfaction, which would be a greater and
different pleasure.

It makes me smile to hear you talk of getting older. What must I feel,
whose life is gone ere it is well begun?

Ever yours affectionately,

JOHN H. NEWMAN,

Congr. Orat.




CHAPTER XXI.

1845-1851.

Mr. Hope's Doubts of Anglicanism--Correspondence with Mr. Gladstone--
Correspondence of J. R. Hope and Mr. Gladstone continued--Mr. Gladstone
advises Active Works of Charity--Bishop Philpotts advises Mr. Hope to go
into Parliament--Mr. Hope and Mr. Gladstone in Society--Mr. Hope on the
Church Affairs of Canada--Dr. Hampden, Bishop of Hereford--The Troubles at
Leeds--Mr. Hope on the Jewish Question, &c.--The Gorham Case--The Curzon
Street Resolutions--The 'Papal Aggression' Commotion--Correspondence of Mr.
Hope and Mr. Manning--Their Conversion--Opinions of Friends on Mr. Hope's
Conversion--Mr. Gladstone--Father Roothaan, F.G. Soc. Jes., to Count
Senfft--Dr. Döllinger--Mr. Hope to Mr. Badeley--Conversion of Mr. W.
Palmer.


To return to the Gladstone correspondence which we quitted some pages back.
In a letter dated Baden-Baden, October 30, 1845, Mr. Gladstone, after
mentioning his having been at Munich, where, through an introduction from
Mr. Hope, he had made the acquaintance of Dr. Döllinger, criticises at some
length Möhler's 'Symbolik,' which he had been reading on Mr. Hope's
recommendation. I must quote the conclusion of the letter in his own
words:--

No religion and no politics until we meet, and that more than ever
uncertain. Hard terms, my dear Hope; do not complain if I devote to them
the scraps or ends of my fourth page. But now let me rebuke myself, and
say, no levity about great and solemn things. There are degrees of pressure
from within that it is impossible to resist. The Church in which our lot
has been cast has come to the birth, and the question is, will she have
strength to bring forth? I am persuaded it is written in God's decrees that
she shall; and that after deep repentance and deep suffering a high and
peculiar part remains for her in healing the wounds of Christendom. [Nor]
is there any man, I cannot be silent, whose portion in her work is more
clearly marked out for him than yours. But you have, if not your revenge,
your security. I must keep my word. God bless and guide you.

Yours affectionately,

W. E. G.

The following letter is deeply interesting:--

_J. R. Hope, Esq. to the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, M.P._

35 Charles Street, Mayfair:

December 5, 1845.

Dear Gladstone,--I return Döllinger's letter, which I had intended to give
you last night.

The debate has cost me a headache, besides the regrets I almost always feel
after having engaged in theological discussions. A sense of my own
ignorance and prejudices should teach me to be more moderate in expressing,
as well as more cautious in forming opinions; but it is my nature to
require some broad view for my guidance, and since Anglicanism has lost
this aspect to me, I am restless and ill at ease.

I know well, however, that I have not deserved by my life that I should be
without great struggle in my belief, and this ought to teach me to do more
and say less.

I must therefore try more and more to be fit for the truth, wherever it may
lie, and in this I hope for your prayers.

Yours affectionately,

JAMES R. HOPE.

_The Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, M.P. to J. R. Hope, Esq._

13 C. H. Terrace:

Dec. 7, 2nd Sunday in Advent, 1845.

My dear Hope,--I need hardly tell you I am deeply moved by your note, and
your asking my prayers. I trust you give what you ask. As for them you have
long had them; in private and in public, and in the hour of Holy Communion.
But you must not look for anything from them; only they cannot do any harm.
Under the merciful dispensation of the Gospel, while the prayer of the
righteous availeth much, the petition of the unworthy does not return in
evils on the head of those for whom it is offered.

Your speaking of yourself in low terms is the greatest kindness to me. It
is with such things before my eyes that I learn in some measure by
comparison my own true position.... [Mr. Gladstone goes on to controvert
his friend's desire for 'broad views,' on the principles of Butler, and
proceeds] Now let me use a friend's liberty on a point of practice. Do you
not so far place yourself in rather a false position by withdrawing in so
considerable a degree from those active external duties in which you were
so conspicuous? Is rest in that department really favourable to religious
inquiry? You said to me you preferred at this time selecting temporal
works: are we not in this difficulty, that temporal works, so far as mere
money is concerned, are nowadays relatively overdone? But if you mean
temporal works otherwise than in money, I would to God we could join hands
upon a subject of the kind which interested you much two years ago. And now
I am going to speak of what concerns myself more than you, as needing it
more.

The desire we then both felt passed off, as far as I am concerned, into a
plan of asking only a donation and subscription. Now it is very difficult
to satisfy the demands of duty to the poor by money alone. On the other
hand, it is extremely hard for me (and I suppose possibly for you) to give
them much in the shape of time and thought, for both with me are already
tasked up to and beyond their powers, and by matters which I cannot
displace. I much wish we could execute some plan which, without demanding
much time, would entail the discharge of some humble and humbling
offices.... If you thought with me--and I do not see why you should not,
except that to assume the reverse is paying myself a compliment--let us go
to work, as in the young days of the college plan, but with a more direct
and less ambitious purpose.... In answer give me advice and help if you
can; and when we meet to talk of these things, it will be more refreshing
than metaphysical or semi-metaphysical argument. All that part of my note
which refers to questions internal to yourself is not meant to be answered
except in your own breast.

And now may the Lord grant that, as heretofore, so ever we may walk in His
holy house as friends, and know how good a thing it is to dwell together in
unity! But at all events may He, as He surely will, compass you about with
His presence and by His holy angels, and cause you to awake up after His
likeness, and to be satisfied with it! ...

Ever your affectionate friend,

W. E. GLADSTONE.

J. R. Hope, Esq.

The above letter appears to throw a light upon Mr. Hope's views of action
at that time (it was a year of approaching the acme of his professional
energies) which I have not met with elsewhere. Those views he did not see
his way to give up, notwithstanding the representations so kindly urged by
his friend. It will have been remarked that Mr. Gladstone did not expect
any answer, in the ordinary sense of the word, to the most serious part of
his letter, and in his reply (December 8), which is merely a note, Mr. Hope
simply says:--

Many, many thanks for your letter, which I received this morning. I will
think it over, and particularly as regards the engagement in some temporal
almsdeed. I see, however, many obstacles in my own way, both from health
and occupation.

After this, though the two friends continued still to correspond, yet the
letters are of comparatively little moment, the subject nearest to the
hearts of both being of necessity suppressed, or almost so; topics once of
common interest, such as Trinity College (now near its opening) [Footnote:
See vol. i. (ch. xiv. p. 278).] and Church legislation, having of course
lost their attractions for Mr. Hope. In the autumn of 1846 there was an
interchange of visits between Rankeillour [Footnote: Rankeillour, a family
seat near Cupar, in Fifeshire, which Mr. Hope with his sister-in-law, Lady
Frances Hope, had rented the previous year, 1845, from his brother, Mr. G.
W. Hope, of Luffness, and which was theirs and Lady Hope's joint home when
in Scotland, until Mr. Hope's marriage in 1847.] and Fasque, and kind and
friendly offices and family sympathies went on as of old. Yet, if the
_idem sentire de republicâ_ was long ago recognised as a condition of
intimate friendship, how much more is the observation true of the _idem
sentire de ecclesiâ_! The following letter, addressed to Mr, Hope early
in 1846 by Dr. Philpotts, will show what powerful influences were still at
work to gain or recover Mr. Hope's services to Anglicanism in political
life:--

_The Right Rev. Dr. Philpotts, Bishop of Exeter, to J. R. Hope, Esq._

Bishopstowe: 16 Feb., 1846.

My dear Sir,--... The miserable state of political matters makes me
earnestly wish (which I fear you do not) that you may soon be in
Parliament. It is manifest that we are approaching a most important crisis.
To give any rational ground of hope (humanly speaking) of a favourable
issue, it is most necessary that there should be an accession of high-
principled talent and power of speaking to the honest party. You would
carry this, and, forgive my adding, _ought_ to carry it if a fit
opportunity be presented to you.

I say not this with any imagination that the objects of political ambition
have any attraction to you, but because I think you would (with God's
blessing) be a tower of strength to all the best institutions and interests
of the country.

_Hactenùs hæc._

Yours most faithfully,

H. EXETER.

'Henry of Exeter,' in a conversation with Lady Henry Kerr in those days,
once said that he considered three men as those to whom the country had
chiefly to look in the coming time: Manning in the Church, Gladstone in the
State, and Mr. Hope in the Law. The Bishop was, I believe, thought rather
apt to indulge in what were called 'Philpottic flourishes,' but the above
letter shows his deliberate opinion of Mr. Hope, which is quite borne out
by the rest of his correspondence. He constantly asks his counsel on Church
affairs and Church legislation, till his conversion was approaching; and
even long after it, I find him in 1862, when about to appeal to the House
of Lords from a decision in the courts below, asking Mr. Hope's assistance
in these terms: 'I venture to have recourse to you--as one whose skill and
ability, knowledge--as well as your kindness often experienced--makes me
estimate more highly than any other.... I am _very anxious_ to obtain
your powerful advocacy before the Lords. Is this contrary to your usage?
[Footnote: Right Rev. Dr. Philpotts to J. R. Hope-Scott, February 22,
1862.] In a letter, now before me, from a member of the legal profession
and a Protestant, the writer, referring to some occasion in early days on
which he had met Mr. Hope and Mr. Gladstone together in society, remarks:
'They were constantly discussing important questions. I am sure that, if a
stranger had come in, and heard that one of them would be Premier, he would
have selected [Mr. Hope] as the superior of the two. And I always thought
that his abilities and character fitted him for the highest positions in
the country. But his aims were for eminence in a still higher sphere, and
he readily abandoned the road to worldly distinctions when he thought that
his duty towards God required the sacrifice.' Of course I only quote this
as evidence of the impression which Mr. Hope had made on an individual
observer, [Footnote: It is perfectly just.--_W. E. G._] not as
instituting any comparison, which would be wholly out of place.

The following letter is more of ecclesiastical and legal than personal
interest. It is in reply to a line from Mr. Gladstone, asking his advice:--

_J. R. Hope, Esq. to the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, M.P._

35 Charles Street:

Wednesday evening, March 18, '46.

Dear Gladstone,--I had some hopes of being able to call on you this
morning, but was disappointed.

With regard to the Canadian Archbishopric, if you have seen what I wrote
about a bishopric in the same colony you will have got the historical view
which I was then induced to take. I am convinced that the parties to the
Treaty of Paris and the framers of the first Act contemplated a Roman
Church with an Anglican supremacy of the Crown. Their successors did not
understand this, and proceeded upon the theory of toleration--thereby at
once yielding the power of direct interference and refusing direct
establishment. But in fact the R. C. Church is established, and
consequently Rome has the advantage both of establishment and complete
independence. I am not the man to say that the latter ought to be
infringed, but I think it right to draw your attention to the departure
from the original idea of the position of the R. C. Church in Canada. As
matters now stand I think Lord Stanley had no option, and could only be
neutral; but the original theory of royal supremacy having failed (as was
natural), a concordat alone can decide the relations of Church and State in
that quarter. The question of precedence is certainly not in itself
sufficient to decide the conduct of Government, but it presents a
difficulty; and the more difficulties there are, the more needs of a
complete solution.

It seems to me, therefore, that you must either follow Lord Stanley in his
neutrality, and leave the consequences to chance, or at once originate a
communication with the Holy See; and for the latter purposes I think Canada
affords as fair an occasion as it is possible to find.

Yours ever truly,

JAMES R. HOPE.

Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, M.P.

In the same year, 1846, the appointment of Dr. Hampden to the see of
Hereford was 'a heavy blow and great discouragement' to the Tractarian
party; but the correspondence does not throw much light on the subject as
far as regards Mr. Hope. He must have felt his profession sucking him in
like a vortex, from which it is wonderful how he could grasp the Catholic
faith in the end. Many of his friends were now doing so, but he still held
back. The following sentences from a letter he wrote to Father Newman, then
(April 23, 1846) contemplating his departure for Rome, will show something
of Mr. Hope's then position--Anglican ideas not so vanished that they might
not possibly have been, at least in imagination, renewed--Catholic ideas
not yet distinctly written in their place.

I can construe the obscure wish with which your letter concludes. I join
heartily in desiring _some_ termination to my present doubts; but
whether in the direction you would think right, or by a return to
Anglicanism, is the question. I am astonished to find how resolute Keble is
in maintaining his present position. Others, also, of more earnestness and
better knowledge than myself, are recoiling--and this troubles me, for I
cannot but look around for authority.

To his own family he became more and more reserved on the subject, and
showed unwillingness that difficulties should be touched; for, great as was
his wish that the Church of England should assert herself Catholic, he
dreaded, on good grounds, that if awakened from her slumbers, the only
effect would be that she would use her giant strength against her friends
as well as enemies, hit them knocks, and then relapse into repose. Unable
even yet to make up his mind whether those of his friends who had joined
the Church of Rome had done right or wrong, materially, at all events, he
remained an Anglican. Such a state of mind necessarily varied, if not from
day to day, at least at longer intervals. At the close of 1846 came the
troubles at St. Saviour's, Leeds, a stronghold of the section peculiarly
under Dr. Pusey's influence, which encountered the opposition of the old
Tractarianism, or rather Church-of-Englandism of Dr. Hook. They ended in
some important conversions, but, as affecting Mr. Hope, seem scarcely to
require to be dwelt on. In May 1847 I find him exerting himself in favour
of Mr. Gladstone's candidature for the University of Oxford. On December 9
he writes (from Rankeillour) to Mr. Gladstone on the question of Jewish
emancipation as follows:--

On the Jewish question my bigotry makes me liberal. To symbolise the
Christianity of the House of Commons in its present form is to substitute a
new Church and creed for the old Catholic one; and as this is delusive, I
would do nothing to countenance it. Better have the Legislature declared
what it really is--not professedly Christian, and then let the Church claim
those rights and that independence which nothing but the pretence of
Christianity can entitle the Legislature to withhold from it. In this view
the emancipation of the Jews must tend to that of the Church, and at any
rate a 'sham' will be discarded. However, I am not disposed to press my
views on this or similar points. I have withdrawn from Church politics, and
never had to do with any others. How long this peaceful disposition may
last I know not, but my station in life does not seem to me to require that
I should meddle. For this reason, if for no other, you may be sure I do not
regret having lost the honour of being armour-bearer to the Bishop of
Exeter in the Hampden strife. That appointment, however, is certainly bad
enough.

Mr. Hope was now, in the ordinary sense of the word, 'settled in life' (he
married in August of that year, 1847); but the great happiness he found in
this change of condition was no talisman that could ward off the question
which still imperiously demanded a solution; and perhaps scarce a month
passed in these times without some new event arising to bring it more
forcibly upon minds that had once been fairly within its influence. Mr.
Hope's style in writing to Mr. Badeley on the Hampden affair, under date
January 16, 1848, shows in some degree a renewed interest, but with
symptoms, like the passage last quoted, of passing off into Liberalism.

I am right glad that you have got your Rule, and have good hopes that you
will make it absolute.... When the argument is resumed pray remember my
favourite plan of establishing the old Ecclesiastical Law as the Common Law
of England before the Reformation, and requiring evidence of a direct
statutory repeal. Reid writes me that there is a fund for the expense of
the opposition. If so I shall be happy to contribute, for I feel very
strongly (not about Dr. Hampden, though I do feel as to him, but) about
this violent piece of Erastianism, such as no Christian community ought to
endure.

Following this, for about two years, the Church of England was convulsed
with the Gorham case. This, too, has passed into the history of
Anglicanism. It will be sufficient to remind the reader that Dr. Philpotts,
the Bishop of Exeter, had refused to institute the Rev. G. C. Gorham to the
vicarage of Brampford Speke, because he denied the doctrine of baptismal
regeneration, Mr. Gorham sued the Bishop in the Court of Arches, but
judgment was given by Sir H. J. Fust against the plaintiff, who then
appealed to the Crown, and the result was that the Judicial Committee of
the Privy Council, on March 8, 1850, reversed Sir H. J. Fust's judgment,
and held that Mr. Gorham's doctrine was not repugnant to that of the Church
of England. On March 12 a meeting was held at Mr. Hope's house in Curzon
Street by several leading men of the Tractarian party--the number, I
believe, was fourteen--including Mr. Hope himself, Archdeacon Manning,
Archdeacon Kobert Wilberforce, and Mr. Badeley--to consider the effect of
this sentence on the Church of England. Certain resolutions were passed and
signed, and afterwards circulated in a somewhat modified form. The
document, as finally issued, is to be found in more publications than one,
and may be referred to in Mr. Kirwan Browne's 'Annals of the Tractarian
Movement,' 3rd edition, p. 191. Its main significance is contained in
Resolutions 5 and 6, which are given as follows, in a printed copy now
before me:--

5. That inasmuch as the Faith is one, and rests upon one principle of
authority, the conscious, wilful, and deliberate abandonment of the
essential meaning of an Article of the Creed destroys the Divine Foundation
upon which alone the entire Faith is propounded by the Church.

6. That any portion of the Church which does so abandon the essential
meaning of an Article of the Creed, forfeits not only the Catholic doctrine
in that Article, but also the office and authority to witness and teach as
a Member of the Universal Church.

It is easy to see that these apparently strong declarations afforded a
loophole for the escape of moderates; but Mr. Manning and his friends, as
the result proved, were prepared to act upon them in their original and
unqualified form; for all the four I have named, with two others,
eventually became Catholics. The rest of those present at the Curzon Street
meeting remained Protestants. As for Mr. Hope, the year rolled round, and
he was still externally where he was; but the following allusion, in a
letter of his to Mr. Gladstone, dated Abbotsford, September 6, 1850, to
some recent conversions, must have made it evident that his own was drawing
very near:--

I have heard a good deal on the ----'s: it is attributed more immediately
to her--but however brought about, I cannot think hardly of it. Rather, I
feel as if those were to be congratulated who have already done that which
_intellectually_, and to a great extent _morally_, I feel
persuaded should be done.

Yrs. ever affectionately,

JAMES R. HOPE.

The memorable 'Papal Aggression' excitement, which arose in England in
November 1850, is believed to have been what finally brought Mr. Hope to
the conclusion, or rather, to action upon the conclusion, to which he had
been so long tending. Some time after this, when, in conversation, Mr.
Lockhart asked him how it was possible he could have attributed such weight
to so slight a reason, Mr. Hope replied to the effect that Mr. Lockhart
would easily understand that the last link in a chain of argument on which
action depends, needs not in appearance be the strongest. He spoke of his
conversion as of a veil falling from his eyes. [Footnote: A correspondence
of this period of Mr. Hope's with the present Cardinal Newman (very
important as far as it goes) has been given in some previous pages (pp. 65-
68).] The same influence is visible in the letter in which Mr. Manning
(since the Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster) announced to Mr. Hope his
resignation of the Archdeaconry of Chichester.

_The Rev. H. E. Manning to J. R. Hope, Esq., Q.C._

Lavington: Nov. 23, 1850.

My dear Hope,--Your last letter was a help to me, for I began to feel as if
every man had gone to his own house and left the matter.... Since then
events have driven me to a decision. This anti-Popery cry has seized my
brethren, and they asked me to be convened. I must either resign at once,
or convene them ministerially and express my dissent, the reasons of which
would involve my resignation. I went to the Bishop and said this, and
tendered my resignation. He was very kind, and wished me to take time, but
I have written and made it final.... I should be glad if we might keep
together; and whatever must be done, do it with a calm and deliberateness
which shall give testimony that it is not done in lightness.

Ever affectionately yours,

H. E. M.

Mr. Manning was considerably Mr. Hope's senior, [Footnote: Four years
exactly. He was born July 15, 1808. The same also was Mr. Hope's birthday.]
but they had been brother-Fellows of Merton College, and were now intimate
friends, passing through the same stages of conversion, each having great
confidence in the logical powers and in the earnestness of the other in
applying them. Either at that time, or very soon afterwards, Mr. Manning
became the guest of Mr. Hope at his house in Curzon Street; and here he
used to receive the many converts and half-converts who flocked to consult
him in their difficulties during that period of transition, when such an
unexampled rush seemed to be making into the net of the fisherman. Mr.
Hope's letters to Cardinal Manning were unfortunately destroyed about three
years ago, but the other side of the correspondence is still represented by
a small collection of letters of great interest. Mr. Hope, I think, had
made up his mind at Abbotsford, and on his arrival in London announced it
to his mother; but it is certain that immediately before taking the final
step he and Mr. Manning went over the whole ground again together, to
satisfy themselves that there was no flaw or mistake in the argument and
conclusion.

_The Rev. Henry E. Manning to J. R. Hope, Esq., Q.C._

_Private_. 44 Cadogan Place: December 11, 1850.

My dear Hope,--I feel with you that the argument is complete. For a long
time I nevertheless felt a fear lest I should be doing an act morally
wrong.

This fear has passed away, because the Church of England has revealed
itself in a way to make me fear more on the other side. It remains,
therefore, as an act of the will. But this I suppose it must be. And in
making it I am helped by the fact that to remain under our changed or
revealed circumstances would also be an act of the will, and that not in
conformity with, but in opposition to intellectual real conviction; and the
intellect is God's gift, and our instrument in attaining knowledge of His
will.... It would be to me a very great happiness if we could act together,
and our names go together in the first publication of the fact.... The
subject which has brought me to my present convictions is the perpetual
office of the Church, under Divine guidance, in expounding the truth and
deciding controversies. And the book which forced this on me was Melchior
Canus' 'Loci Theologici.' It is a long book, but so orderly that you may
get the whole outline with ease. Möhler's _Symbolik_ you know.

But, after all, Holy Scripture comes to me in a new light, as Ephes. iv. 4-
17, which seems to preclude the notion of a divisible unity: which is, in
fact, Arianism in the matter of the Church.

I entirely feel what you say of the alternative. It is either Rome or
licence of thought and will....

Believe me always affectionately yours,

H. E. MANNING.

The following extract from a letter of Mr. Hope's to the Rev. Robert
Campbell [since also a Catholic], dated 'Abbotsford, September 15, 1851,'
affords additional and important light on the motives of his own
conversion:--

You seem to think that the present condition of the Church of England has
been the cause of my conversion. That it has contributed thereto I am far
from denying, but it has done so by way of evidence only; of evidence, the
chain of which reaches up to the Reformation, and confirms by outward
proofs those conclusions which H. Scripture and reason forced upon me as to
the character of the original act of separation. This distinction I am
anxious should be observed, for the neglect of it has led some to suppose
that recent converts have, from disgust or other causes, deserted a true
Church in her time of need, whereas, for one, I can safely say that I left
her because I was convinced that she never, from the Reformation downwards,
had been a true Church. Pray excuse this digression, which I do not mean by
way of controversy, but merely of explanation.

J. R. H.

On _Passion Sunday_, April 6, 1851, Mr. Hope, and at the same time
with him Mr. Manning, were received into the Catholic Church at Farm Street
by the Rev. Father J. Brownbill, S.J.

I must not withhold from the reader a note, written the next day, and one
or two passages from later letters of Mr. Manning's referring to the same
subject.

_The Rev. Henry E. Manning to J. R. Hope, Esq., Q.C._

14 Queen Street: April 7, 1851.

My dear Hope,--Will you accept this copy of the book you saw in my room
yesterday [the 'Paradisus Animae'], in memory of Passion Sunday, and its
gift of grace to us? It is the most perfect book of devotion I know. Let me
ask one thing. I read it through, one page at least a day, between Jan. 26
and Aug. 22, 1846, marking where I left off with the dates. It seemed to
give me a new science, with order and harmony and details as of devotion
issuing from and returning into dogma. Could you burden yourself with the
same resolution? If so, do it for my sake, and remember me when you do
it.... I feel as if I had no desire unfulfilled, but to persevere in what
God has given me for His Son's sake.

Believe me, my dear Hope,

Always affectionately yours,

H. E. M.

14 _Queen St.: Oct._ 21, 1851.--... I am once more in my old quarters.
They bring back strange remembrances. What revolutions have passed since we
started from this room that Saturday morning! And how blessed an end! as
the soul said to Dante. 'E da martirio venni a questa pace.'... You do not
need that I should say how sensibly I remember all your sympathy, which was
the only human help in the time when we two went together through the
trial, which to be known must be endured.

_Rome: March_ 17, 1852...--How this time reminds me of last year! On
Passion Sunday I shall be in Retreat. 'Stantes erant pedes nostri,'
[Footnote: These words were written in a copy of the _Speculum Vitae
Sacerdotalis_, given by J. R. Hope to H. E. Manning in April 1851. [Note
by his Eminence Cardinal Manning.]] and we made no mistake in our long
reckoning, though we feared it up to the last opening of Fr. B.'s door.

H. E. M.

The superficial impression which many of his friends had of Mr. Hope's
conversion at the time will be illustrated by the following remarks, one of
them made to me in conversation with a view to this memoir: 'Mr. Hope was a
man with two lives: one, that of a lawyer; the other, that of a pious
Christian, who said his prayers, and did not give much thought to
controversy. He would be rather influenced by patent facts. He was not at
all moving with the stream, and rather laughed at X. with his "narrow
views." He was a strong Anglican, an adherent of _learned_
Anglicanism. His conversion took _Catholics_ by surprise, who were not
aware how far he went.' The feeling in society as to his change was marked
by a tone of much greater consideration than was commonly displayed in such
cases, of which proof is given in an interesting letter which I have quoted
in a former page. 'As far as I know' (writes Lady Georgiana Fullerton)
'there was no attempt made, in Mr. Hope's case, to trace that act to any of
the causes which, in almost every other instance, were supposed to account
for conversions to Catholicism. The frankness of his nature, his well-known
good sense, the sound clearness of his judgment, so unmistakably evinced in
his profession, precluded the possibility of attributing his adoption of
the Catholic faith to weakness of mind, duplicity, sentiment, eccentricity,
or excitability.'

I reserve what may be called the domestic side of this crowning event of
Mr. Hope's religious life to a future chapter. The following is the letter
alluded to by Mr. Gladstone in his letter to Miss Hope-Scott, given in
Appendix III., and on which he wrote the words '_Quis desiderio_.'
[Footnote: Let me balance Mr. Gladstone's _Quis desiderio_ with a note
written by Père Roothaan, Father-General of the Jesuits, to Count Senfft,
on hearing of Mr. Hope's conversion:--

'Plurimam salutem nostro C. de Senfft, qui procul dubio maxima cum
congratulatione accepit notitiam de conversione ad rel. cath. praeclari
Dni. Hope, Anglicani, quem ipse comes Monachio Romam venientem mihi
commendaverat. Ipsum tunc et iterum et tertio Romam intra hos tres annos
venientem videram saepius, et semper vicinior mihi visus fuerat regno Dei.
Nuper tandem cessit gratiae. Alleluja!'--Given in a letter of Count
Senfft's to Mr. Hope-Scott, dated Innsbruck: 1 Juin, 1851.]

_J. R. Hope, Esq., Q.C. to the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, M.P._

14 Curzon Street: June 18, '51.

My dear Gladstone,--I am very much obliged for the book which you have sent
me, but still more for the few words and figures which you have placed upon
the title-page. The day of the month in your own handwriting will be a
record between us that the words of affection which you have written were
used by you after the period at which the great change of my life took
place. To grudge any sacrifice which that change entails would be to
undervalue its paramount blessedness, but, as far as regrets are compatible
with extreme thankfulness, I do and must regret any estrangement from you--
you with whom I have trod so large a portion of the way which has led me to
peace; you, who are 'ex voto' at least in that Catholic Church which to me
has become a practical reality, admitting of no doubt; you, who have so
many better claims to the merciful guidance of Almighty God than myself.

It is most comforting, then, to me to know by your own hand that on the
17th June, 1851, the personal feelings so long cherished have been, not
only acknowledged by yourself, but expressed to me--I do not ask more just
now--it would be painful to you; nay, it would be hardly possible for
either of us to attempt (except under one condition, for which I daily
pray) the restoration of entire intimacy at present; but neither do I
despair under any circumstances that it will yet be restored. Remember me
most kindly to Mrs. Gladstone, and believe me,

Yours as ever most affectionately,

JAMES R. HOPE.

The Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, &c. &c.

The subjoined reply of Mr. Gladstone to this beautiful letter, which he has
mournfully called 'the epitaph of our friendship,' is certainly a noble and
a tender one. The very depth of feeling which he shows at his friend's
refusal of what he considers 'the high vocation' before him, is, however,
only a proof of that spiritual chasm which Mr. Hope more unflinchingly
surveyed. After this date the correspondence soon flags, and at length
sustains an interruption of years. It was practically resumed towards the
close of Mr. Hope's life, and affords one more letter of great interest, in
which Mr. Hope explains his own political views. This I shall give as we
proceed.

_The Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, M.P. to J. R. Hope, Esq., Q.C._

6 Carlton Gardens: June 22, 1851.

My dear Hope,--Upon the point most prominently put in your welcome letter I
will only say you have not misconstrued me. Affection which is fed by
intercourse, and above all by co-operation for sacred ends, has little need
of verbal expression, but such expression is deeply ennobling when active
relations have changed. It is no matter of merit to me to feel strongly on
the subject of that change. It may be little better than pure selfishness.
I have too good reason to know what this year has cost me; and so little
hope have I that the places now vacant can be filled up for me, that the
marked character of these events in reference to myself rather teaches me
this lesson--the work to which I had aspired is reserved for other and
better men. And if that be the Divine will, I so entirely recognise its
fitness that the grief would so far be small to me were I alone concerned.
The pain, the wonder, and the mystery is this--that you should have refused
the higher vocation you had before you. The same words, and all the same
words, I should use of Manning too. Forgive me for giving utterance to what
I believe myself to see and know; I will not proceed a step further in that
direction.

There is one word, and one only in your letter that I do not interpret
closely. Separated we are, but I hope and think not yet estranged. Were I
more estranged I should bear the separation better. If estrangement is to
come I know not, but it will only be, I think, from causes the operation of
which is still in its infancy--causes not affecting me. Why should I be
estranged from you? I honour you even in what I think your error; why,
then, should my feelings to you alter in anything else? It seems to me as
though, in these fearful times, events were more and more growing too large
for our puny grasp, and that we should the more look for and trust the
Divine purpose in them when we find they have wholly passed beyond the
reach and measure of our own. 'The Lord is in His holy temple: let all the
earth keep silence before Him.' The very afflictions of the present time
are a sign of joy to follow. Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done, is still
our prayer in common: the same prayer, in the same sense; and a prayer
which absorbs every other. That is for the future: for the present we have
to endure, to trust, and to pray that each day may bring its strength with
its burden, and its lamp for its gloom.

Ever yours with unaltered affection,

W. E. GLADSTONE.

J. R. Hope, Esq.

The following letter, written on the same occasion by another celebrated
person, will be read with a very painful interest:--

_The Rev. Dr. Döllinger to J. R. Hope, Esq., Q.C._

Munich: April 22, 1851.

My dear Sir,--Allow me to express the sincere delight which I have felt and
am still feeling at the intelligence which has reached me of your having
entered the pale of the Church. This is indeed 'a consummation devoutly
wished' ever since I had the good luck of making your acquaintance. How
often when with you did the words rise to my lips: _Talis cum sis, utinam
noster esses!_ I knew well enough that in voto you belonged already to
the one true Church, but I could not but feel some anxiety in reflecting
that in a matter of such paramount importance those who don't move forward
must needs after a certain time go backward. Then came the news of your
marriage, and I don't know what put the foolish idea into my head that you
would probably get connected with the 'Quarterly Review' and its
principles, and that thereby a new barrier would interpose itself between
you and the Church, and that perhaps your feelings for your friends in
Germany would not remain the same. Happily these _umbrae pallentes_
have now vanished, and I trust we will make the ties of friendship closer
and stronger by establishing between us a community and exchange of
prayers.

I can but too well imagine how severe the trials must be to which you are
now exposed--especially in the present ferment, when a vein of bitterness
has been opened in England which will not close so soon, and when the
hoarse voice of religious acrimony is filling the atmosphere with its
dismal sounds. With the peculiar gentleness of your disposition you will
have to encounter the fierce attacks of the [Greek: Ellaenes], as well as
of the [Greek: Hioudaioi], I mean of those to whom the Church is a [Greek:
skandalon], as well as of those to whom it is [Greek: moria]. I can only
pray for you, and trust that He who has given you the first victory of
faith will also give you _robur et aes triplex circa pectus_, for less
will scarcely do....

Yours entirely and unalterably,

J. DOELLINGER.

Mr. James R. Hope, Queen's Counsel.

I have not met with any later correspondence of Dr. Döllinger's with Mr.
Hope-Scott than this, excepting a mere note. He visited Abbotsford in 1852.
There is a letter of Count Leo Thun's to Mr. Hope (dated Wien, den 7. Juli
1851), in which, after expressing the joy he had felt at the news of his
having become a Catholic, he remarks, 'I know how slowly, and on what sure
foundations the decision came to maturity in your soul.' Two letters of Mr.
Hope's to Mr. Badeley, though not coincident in point of time with the
event before us, contain passages so closely connected with it as to find
their place here. Though Mr. Badeley's Anglicanism was scarce hanging by a
thread, he held out for a time, but became a Catholic previously to July
15, 1852.

_J. R. Hope, Esq., Q.C. to E. Badeley, Esq._

Abbotsford: Oct. 25, '51.

Dear B.,-- ... As for you, I hold your intellect to be Catholic. You
cannot help it, but your habits of feeling will give you, as they gave me,
more trouble than your reason. How can it be otherwise, considering how
many years of training in one posture we both of us underwent? But I pray
and hope for you, and that speedily, that freedom of life and limb which
has been vouchsafed to me. Freedom indeed it is, for it is to breathe in
all its fulness the grace and mercy of God's kingdom, instead of tasting it
through the narrow lattices of texts and controversies. To believe Christ
present in the Eucharist, and not adore Him--not pray Him to tarry with us
and bless us. To hold the communion of saints, and yet refuse to call upon
all saints--living and departed, to intercede for us with the great Head of
the body in which we all are members. To accept a primacy in St. Peter, and
yet hold it immaterial to the organisation of the Church. To acknowledge
one Church, and then divide the unity into fragments. To attribute to the
Church the power of the keys, and then deny the force of her indulgences
while admitting her absolutions. To approve confession, and practically set
it aside. To do and hold these and many other contradictions--what is it
but to submit the mind to the fetters of a tradition which, if once made to
reason, must destroy itself?... Yrs ever affly,

JAMES R. HOPE.


Abbotsford: July 16, 1852.

Dear Badeley,--I received your most kind letter yesterday. I well knew that
I should hear from you, for you are an accurate observer of my birthdays--
not one for many years having escaped you. This one does indeed deserve
notice in one sense, as being the first on which you and I could salute
each other as Catholics. May God grant that this His great gift may be
fruitful to us both! Forty years of my life are already gone--of yours,
more. Let us try to make the best of what may still remain. We have now all
the helps which Christ's death provided for us, and all the
responsibilities which come with them. 'Deus, in adjutorium meum intende.
Domine, ad adjuvandum me festina!... Yrs most affly, JAMES R. HOPE.

E. Badeley, Esq.


To the above correspondence, the following scrap from a letter of Mr. David
Lewis, congratulating Mr. Hope on his conversion, may form an appropriate
_pendant_, as showing Mr. Hope's influence in the Catholic direction
previously to that event: 'I may add that I owe in part my own conversion
to conversation with you, which turned me to a course of reading the end of
which I did not expect. It is therefore no small joy to me to see you in
the same harbour of refuge' (May 15, 1851). Some years later (in spring,
1855) it was a subject of intense joy to Mr. Hope-Scott when the news came
from Rome that William Palmer had been received into the Church by Father
Passaglia.




CHAPTER XXII.

1839-1869.

Review of Mr. Hope's Professional Career--His View of Secular Pursuits--
Advice from Archdeacon Manning against Overwork--Early Professional
Services to Government--J. K. Hope adopts the Parliamentary Bar--His
Elements of Success--Is made Q.C.--Difficulty about Supremacy Oath--Mr.
Venables on Mr. Hope-Scott as a Pleader--Recollections of Mr. Cameron--Mr.
Hope-Scott on his own Profession--Mr. Hope-Scott's Professional Day--
Regular History of Practice not Feasible--Specimens of Cases: 1. The
Caledonian Railway interposing a Tunnel. 2. Award by Mr. Hope-Scott and R.
Stephenson. 3. Mersey Conservancy and Docks Bill, 'Parliamentary Hunting-
day,' Liverpool and Manchester compared. 4. London, Brighton, and South
Coast and the Beckenham Line. 5. Scottish Railways--An Amalgamation Case--
Mr. Hope-Scott and Mr. Denison; Honourable Conduct of Mr. Hope-Scott as a
Pleader. 6. Dublin Trunk Connecting Railway. 7. Professional Services of
Mr. Hope-Scott to Eton--Claims of Clients on Time--Value of Ten Minutes--
Conscientiousness--Professional Income--Extra Occupations--Affection of Mr.
Hope-Scott for Father Newman--Spirit in which he laboured.


On taking the step of which I have just related the history, Mr. Hope had
not to encounter the usual array of external ills that assail the convert's
life. Although he was now a Catholic, his eloquence had lost none of its
magic, and railway directors were not very likely to indulge their bigotry
at the expense of their dividends. He lost not, I suppose, a single
retainer, and his practice at the bar went on as before. His conversion,
however, affords us a convenient point at which to turn aside and review
his professional career, contrasting so singularly with what the ordinary
observer would have anticipated for him under such a condition. We are so
much accustomed to associate religious doubts or convictions with an
unworldliness which is rarely visible where great worldly success is
attained, that on leaving the cloisters of Oxford, and entering with him
the committee-rooms of the Houses of Parliament, we seem to behold the
curtain raised all at once, and the same actor appearing in a totally new
character, with hardly a feature left that can identify him with the
previous representation.

He was, indeed, himself not insensible to this contrast, and had early
marked off from purely secular pursuits that choice and precious portion of
his time which could be reserved for higher objects. An interesting passage
in a letter of his to Mr. Gladstone (dated from Lincoln's Inn, June 25,
1841) will illustrate this feeling by a phrase which I italicise, as I
believe he was fond of using it: 'My reason for staying in town is to read
ecclesiastical law, and to prepare (if so be) for election committees.
_The former branch I reckon my flower-garden, the latter my cabbage-
field.'_ [Footnote: See letter of Mr. Gladstone to Miss Hope-Scott,
Appendix III.] When Anglicanism and its institutions had broken down under
him, and others not as yet come in their place, he sought in the purely
temporal works of his calling perhaps a refuge from doubts, certainly a
means of sanctification; and either alternative explains the issue. A
religious mind could never succeed in silencing religious difficulty by
earthly pursuits, but in whatever measure it sought to sanctify the latter,
would be led onwards to the faith. The following passage from a letter of
the then Archdeacon Manning (now Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster) to Mr.
Hope (dated Dec. 9, 1842) will show that this ardent and restless
application to his profession was watched at the time by Mr. Hope's friends
with some degree of anxiety and surprise. The kind and wise admonitions it
conveys, only distantly indeed bearing on the religious side of the
question, many may read with much profit:--

As a bystander I see you working too much, and looking at times
overwrought; and I ask myself, what is this man's aim? It must needs be
something very high and far off to need all this unremitting tension of
mind. I do much wish to see you more relaxed, and with more play. I know it
is a more difficult attainment to be able both to work intensely and to
relax thoroughly. But without it a man deteriorates. He becomes a keen,
case-hardened tool, and no man. Our friends the Germans are not far wrong
when they talk about developing what is universal in man, i.e. his
humanity, which is a whole, and must be unfolded as a whole to be perfect,
or even to approximate perfection. You will burn this if I go on, so I will
leave you to Lancilotti.

Believe me ever yours affectly,

H. E. MANNING.

The field finally adopted by Mr. Hope was the _Parliamentary Bar_, at
which, as we have seen, he had practised to a certain extent from the
first, though with considerable interruption from the legal and financial
affairs of his college and the Sarum Chancery, as well as other weighty
business, including in 1839 services rendered as Counsel to the Government
in the preparation of the Foreign Marriages Bill; in 1843 of the Consular
Jurisdiction Bill, the report which he furnished on which, to be seen in
the Parliamentary Records, would alone have been sufficient to have made a
great reputation in that particular line; and in 1843-44 he was engaged by
Government in the matter of the Franco-Mexican arbitration to prepare a
report on some points in dispute between France and Mexico, which had been
submitted to the arbitration of Great Britain. I presume that his retainers
in these cases would be principally due to the fact that his brother, Mr.
George W. Hope, was now a member of the Government as Under Secretary of
State for the Colonies in Sir Robert Peel's administration. But the 'fame'
that had already gone abroad regarding him, particularly for his learning
in all matters that touched ecclesiastical law, would have been sure,
independently of private interest, to have brought him early into
prominence. The Ecclesiastical Courts Bill in 1843 engaged much of his
attention, and his share in the legal business connected with troubles of
that year at Oxford has been noticed in its place. On October 26, 1843, he
took his degree of D.C.L. at Oxford. In 1844, at the suggestion of the
Bishop of London (Right Rev. Dr. Blomfield), he was accepted by the Lord
Chancellor as one of the persons to consider the chapter on offences
against religion and the Church in the proposed Code of Criminal Law.

In a short, time, however, his practice seems to have merged in the
department with which his name is principally connected, that of railway
pleading. This branch of the profession, though affording little or no
scope for those powers of oratory which his first speech before the Lords
showed that he possessed, nor yet opening those avenues to power and fame
which usually tempt minds of his class, were undoubtedly highly lucrative,
and by this time Mr. Hope's charities must have nearly exhausted his modest
patrimony. It had also one great advantage, in its business being
principally confined to the Parliamentary session, thus leaving him free to
travel six months in the year. I have seen it stated that in conversation
with a friend he gave this as his chief reason for adopting it. He may have
said so half in jest; but there can, I believe, be little doubt that a far
deeper reason was that the Parliamentary bar was likely to present fewer
cases of difficulty in point of conscience than he would have had to
encounter in the Common Law courts.

It is needless to mention, except for the sake of the few persons who may
not happen to have even that superficial acquaintance with the subject
which newspaper reading can supply, that advocates practising at the
Parliamentary bar are engaged in pleading for or against the private bills
referred to committees of Parliament, relating, for example, to railways,
canals, docks, gas-works, and the like. These are each referred to a
committee of five, supposed to represent the whole House; witnesses of
course are examined, and counsel heard on behalf of the companies or
individuals concerned. To plead before a tribunal of such a nature and on
such interests evidently demands qualifications of a special kind. Mr. Hope
possessed some external ones which are by no means unimportant. His noble
presence, in the first place, gave him a great advantage; and a known name
and known antecedents like his were also additional recommendations of
great value. Then came his tact, clearness of intellect, memory for names
and details, his moral qualities, especially his perfect sense of honour,
which gained him the ear of the committees, and, what is still more
difficult, enabled him to keep it.

Mr. Hope then very early attained to the front rank in his profession, and
on the retirement of Mr. Charles Austin, Q.C. (1848), and the deaths of
Sergeant Wrangham (_d_. March 1869) and Mr. John C. Talbot, Q.C.
(_d_. 1852), may be said to have had no rival in reputation or
practice until the present Sir E. B. Denison 'gradually began to compete
with him on not unequal terms.' Mr. St. George Burke, Q.C., Mr. Merewether,
Q.C., and Mr. Rodwell, Q.C., were other contemporaries of his, who all had
a large practice and great reputation, but were, I believe, as seldom as
possible pitted against Mr. Hope-Scott.

Early in 1849 Mr. Hope received a patent of precedence, entitling him to
rank with her Majesty's counsel; and in April of that year attended the
levee as Q.C. It was at his own request that the dignity of the silk gown
was conferred upon him in this form; and his reason was a conscientious
difficulty about taking the oath of supremacy so far as it denied the papal
authority, ecclesiastical or civil, as existing _de facto et de jure_
in the realm. He states his difficulty in a letter to Mr. Badeley (February
23, 1849), as follows:--

That the Pope _does_ exercise jurisdiction in this country is
notorious; and that he ought to do so over R. Catholics seems to be
admitted by the present state of the law as to that church. The oath, then,
cannot be taken as it was originally meant, and the only sense in which I
think it can be accepted is, that the Pope has not, nor without consent of
the Legislature ought to have, an external coercive power over the Queen's
subjects.

But this compromise did not satisfy him, and he therefore refused the silk
gown, except under the conditions previously stated, which did not require
him to take the oath of supremacy at all. His request for the patent of
precedence, and his reasons for wishing it, were conveyed through a legal
friend to the then Lord Chancellor, Lord Cottenham, who made no difficulty
whatever in granting it. The following anecdote will amuse the reader. When
the Chancellor had to report to the Premier (Lord John Russell) the various
appointments he had made, Lord John asked Lord Cottenham why he had given
Mr. Hope-Scott a patent of precedence instead of making him a Q.C. On the
Chancellor's replying that he had done it because of Mr. Hope-Scott's
scruples about the oath, Lord John exclaimed, 'That's more than I would
have done.'

Such illustrations of Mr. Hope-Scott's professional success as I have been
able to collect, either from oral sources or correspondence, may fitly be
introduced by a valuable paper on his characteristics as an advocate by Mr.
G. S. Venables, Q.C. It is obviously drawn up with great care and
reflection by a skilled observer, who had the best opportunities for
arriving at a correct judgment. I omit the two opening paragraphs, the
principal facts contained in which have been given in a former page.
CRITICISM ON MR. HOPE-SCOTT'S CHARACTERISTICS AS A PLEADER. BY G. S.
VENABLES, ESQ., Q.C.

The Bar is exempt from envy of merited success, and Mr. Hope-Scott's
undisputed pre-eminence never provoked a feeling of personal jealousy.
Though he cultivated little intimacy with his professional associates, his
courtesy and good humour never failed; and he showed due appreciation of
the services a leader requires from his junior colleagues.

His singularly attractive appearance produced its natural effect in
conciliating those around him, and the pleasant and cheerful manner which
nevertheless repelled familiarity tended to make him generally popular.

The most remarkable forensic qualities of Mr. Hope-Scott were facility,
prudence, and grace of language and manner. The subtlety of his intellect,
if it had been ostentatiously displayed, might perhaps have impaired the
confidence which he had the art of inspiring. Inexperienced members of the
tribunals before which he practised were tempted to forget that he was an
advocate, while they listened to the perspicuous statements which led up
with apparent absence of design to a carefully premeditated conclusion. It
could never be suspected from his manner that he was constantly supporting
a paradox, or that he anticipated defeat.

When he had occasion in successive contests to maintain opposite
propositions, it seemed that the circumstances of the case, not the
position of the advocate, had been changed.

In Parliamentary practice there is no room for the more ambitious kinds of
eloquence, nor can it be known whether Mr. Hope-Scott would have been
capable of elevated declamation. [Footnote: Of the latter, however, two or
three specimens are given in this memoir. See vol. i. (pp. 199, 200), vol.
ii. (pp. 115-118).] In dealing with questions of fact, of expediency, of
equitable policy, and of complicated agreement, he has probably never been
excelled. His lucid arrangement of topics, his pure polished style, and his
appearance of dispassionate conviction secured the pleased attention of his
audience. The more tedious parts of his argument or narrative were from
time to time relieved by touches of the playfulness which is more popular
than humour; but the colleagues and opponents who thoroughly understood his
object, knew that it was pursued with undeviating constancy of purpose.

In the lightest of his speeches there was neither carelessness nor
vacillation. Less finished advocates turn aside to indulge themselves in
playing with an illustration or a favourite proposition, at the risk of
betraying the distinction between their own natural train of thought and
their immediate argument. Mr. Hope-Scott was too consummate an artist to be
tempted into irrelevance or digression.

His success would not have been less complete if his practice had required
him to trace the fine analogies and close deductions of law. His intellect
was admirably adapted to the comparison of precedents and to the
application of legal principles. His acuteness was at the same time
comprehensive and minute, and he delighted in finding appropriate
expression for the nicest distinctions. When he had sometimes occasion to
spend hours in contesting the clauses of a bill, he had a surprising
faculty of averting the weariness which is ordinarily inseparable from the
prolonged discussion of details. Professional associates, who willingly
recognised his general superiority, sometimes confessed that in the most
irksome of their contests they were placed at an exceptional disadvantage
in comparison of Mr. Hope-Scott's felicitous adroitness. He excelled in
dealing with skilled witnesses, who were themselves from the nature of the
case supplementary advocates. The object of cross-examination, where there
is little serious dispute as to the facts, is to draw from the mouth of a
hostile witness the other half of the story. An accurate memory, stored by
abundant experience, enabled Mr. Hope-Scott to recall the history of every
railway company, the expressed opinions of general managers, and the
characteristics and theories of engineers. The wariest veterans needed all
their caution to anticipate the design of the friendly conversation which
gradually tempted them to damaging admissions. He was slow to resort to
harder modes of attack, of which he was at the same time fully capable.
Every facility was offered to a candid and confiding witness, and there was
still greater satisfaction in baffling the vigilance of an adversary who
was on his guard against an attack from a different quarter. A hostile
witness, after an encounter with Mr. Hope-Scott, sometimes found that his
answers formed a plausible argument in favour of the proposition he had
intended to confute. His perplexity must have been increased when he
afterwards heard his own statements reproduced in the speech of the
opposing counsel. Almost the only point in which Mr. Hope-Scott could be
charged with a want of caution consisted in his frequent affirmation of
certain general opinions, such as the common and questionable doctrine that
competition cannot last where combination is possible. An advocate who is
changing his clients is ill-advised in hampering himself with the
enumeration of maxims which may from time to time be quoted against him. In
such cases Mr. Hope-Scott almost converted a self-imposed difficulty into
an additional resource. With marvellous ingenuity he proved that any
competition scheme which he happened to support formed an exception to the
rule which he carefully reasserted; and unsophisticated hearers admired the
consistency with general principles which was found not to be incompatible
with immediate expediency.

It is almost superfluous to say that Mr. Hope-Scott never exceeded the
legitimate bounds of forensic debate. All litigated questions, and
especially this species of private legislation, have two sides, and it is
the business of an advocate to present in the most favourable light the
cause which he is retained to defend. Deliberate sophistry is as culpable
as false relations of fact; but completeness or judicial impartiality
belongs to the tribunal, and not to the representative of the litigant.
When all moral scruples have been allowed their full weight, the
qualifications of a great advocate are almost exclusively intellectual. It
is to this part of Mr. Hope-Scott's character that I have strictly
endeavoured to confine myself. It is probable that an attempt to analyse a
distinct personal impression may have produced but a vague result. I have
little doubt that, although Mr. Hope-Scott was almost unequalled in
professional ability, his real life lay outside his occupation as an
advocate. The grounds of the affection and admiration with which he is
remembered by his family and his nearest friends have but a remote
connection with the faculties and accomplishments which I have endeavoured
to describe.

Another friend (Mr. H. L. Cameron), who had continual opportunities, from
about the year 1859, of observing Mr. Hope-Scott's character in its
professional aspect, furnishes some very interesting reminiscences, on a
part of which, however, it may be worth while to observe that the
versatility and pliability of intellect which the writer so well describes
in Mr. Hope-Scott is no doubt more or less common to every great barrister,
and is a habit to which all who are actively engaged in the profession are
obliged to train their minds as they can. Still, it is equally certain that
Mr. Hope-Scott possessed this faculty in an uncommon degree; and, in order
to form a complete idea of him as he appeared in the eyes of his
contemporaries, as well as to understand the relations of one part of his
character to another, it is necessary to draw these features in
considerable detail. After noticing particularly a very pleasing trait in
Mr. Hope-Scott's demeanour as a leading counsel, shown in the kindness and
tact with which, in consultation, he took care to prevent the inexperience
or ignorance of his juniors being made apparent, and sought rather to ask
them questions on points which they were likely to know something about,
Mr. Cameron continues as follows:--

RECOLLECTIONS OF MR. H.L. CAMERON.

What made Mr. Hope-Scott so much loved by all who were brought into contact
with him was his great amiability, thorough kindness of heart: his care was
always not to hurt or wound another's feelings; and even in the heat of
debate, and under great provocation, I never heard him utter an unkind
word, or put a harsh construction on the conduct of any one, even an
adversary.

As regards his talents, they are so universally known and admitted, that I
can say very little you have not heard already. Westminster has rarely--
never certainly in later years--heard such an advocate. The secret of his
great success at the bar, beyond his intellectual power, lay, I think, in a
peculiar charm and fascination of manner--a manner which could invest the
driest and most technical matters with interest, and compelled the
attention of the hearers to the subject under discussion. The melody of his
voice was, to me, one of his greatest attractions. Then, again, what a
noble presence! and that goes a long way at the Bar. I can look back, and
see now, as he used to walk into his room to attend some consultation, how
vigorous, handsome, and stately he always appeared, bringing the force of
his powerful intellect at once to bear upon the subject under
consideration, doing all in such a genial manner, without any attempt at
showing his mental superiority to those around him.

In those busy times he would perhaps be engaged in twenty different cases
on the same day; the competition to engage him was most keen: it was almost
the first thing one thought about when clients came to consult upon a new
scheme. He would go from one committee to another, by some extraordinary
means always being at the place where he was most needed. It was marvellous
how he kept all these matters distinct in his brain; he was never in
confusion or at fault. In one room he would open a case, say an Improvement
Bill, with a brilliant speech setting forth all its merits, a speech which
would probably immediately impress the committee and carry the case,
whatever after arguments might be urged against it, or speeches made by
other counsel. Then he would go into another room, and cross-examine a
skilled witness in a railway case, showing his intimate knowledge of
engineering, and beating the witness perhaps on his own ground. Then he
would take an Irish case, or a Gas and Water Bill, or landowner's case,
whose property was about to be intersected, a ratepayer's, a carrier's,
each case being thoroughly gone into, and thoroughly mastered and
understood. After all this, and late in the day, when any one else would
have felt fatigued and exhausted, in mind at any rate, if not in body, he
would go into a room where an inquiry had been going on perhaps for weeks,
and reply on the whole evidence. Those who know what labour this entails
can alone appreciate such a capability.

No one at the bar whom I have ever heard reasoned with such perfect
lucidity. He would explain a case which his client the solicitor would have
wrapped up in fifty or sixty brief sheets, and involved in as much
obscurity as it were well possible, to a committee in a few minutes; and I
have often thought his clients never understood their own cases until he
had explained them. It was wonderful how he could make a committee
(sometimes composed of by no means the highest specimens of mankind)
understand a case; and his persuasive power with those tribunals was also
marvellous.

One word more on his character in his business life, and that is as to his
entire conscientiousness. No case did he ever consider insignificant or
beneath his notice. He gave the same attention to the humblest client that
he would to a duke. He never left anything he had to do _half_ done:
his work was thorough, complete, good. Time, which he considered his
client's, was never wasted; and to enable him to get through his work he
would rise at four or five o'clo

Showing first 200,000 characters. Full text: gutenberg.org/ebooks/7975