[77] made him doubt about their own; and he wished me to communicate to him exactly what you had written me. This I did; and I have his answer, written from the bench, which is among the letters I have sent to Hillard. He said the Queen's Bench decided as they did simply in the absence of authority. I did not mention to Lord D. your opinion about his judgment in the Parliamentary libel case,1 because it is still sub judice. I have often been spoken with by the judges here about cases still sub judice; but you will appreciate the feeling which made me hesitate to introduce the subject myself. I have, however, communicated it to the Attorney-General. Ellis, the reporter, and a very able man, is gratified by your opinion in De Vaux v. Salvador. He says he always thought the court wrong; and, as reporter, he attended to the case very closely. Lord Lyndhurst was at Lord Brougham's dinner. You may understand that he does not keep the run of the law, from his remark that he did not know who the present reporters are. I now leave England; and do you wonder it is with a beating heart? I have seen so much, enjoyed such great kindness, and formed so many friendships. The extent of my acquaintance you will appreciate from my letters. Farewell, dear England! I wish you more peace than I fear you can have.2 And now for Italy! As ever, affectionately yours,
To George S. Hillard.
Saturday, March 9, 1839.3 my dear Hillard,—I have just got to my lodgings, after what I intend shall be my last evening in London,—that is, my last evening of society; and my heart is full almost to bursting. I am truly sad; for I have parted with so many kind and affectionate friends, and received so many hearty ‘God-bless yous!’ that I must be of flint not to feel them. This morning
This text is part of:
1 Stockdale v. Hansard, ante, Vol. II. p. 13.
2 A postscript of this letter contains an extended review of English politics, in which Sumner expressed the conviction that radical changes would soon be insisted upon by the people; particularly the abolition of primogeniture, the reduction of the great estates of the aristocracy, and the reform of representation in the House of Commons: resistance to such changes, he thought, would involve great social and political disturbances. ‘Lord Morpeth,’ he said, ‘once asked me where I should find myself, if I were an Englishman. I unhesitatingly replied: “A moderate Radical,—much like the ‘Examiner’ newspaper.” ’ The letter also refers to interviews with Leader, Sir William Molesworth, and George Grote, 1794-1871,—the last being described as ‘a most remarkable man, a scholar of great acquirements.’ Both Sir William and Mr. Grote entertained Sumner at dinner. The former gave him a book which had belonged to Dr. Parr.
3 This is a continuation of the letter of Feb. 16 and March 1, ante, Vol. II. pp. 59, 66.
Cambridge, MA. Press of John Wilson and Son. 1877.
Tufts University provided support for entering this text.
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.