Walpole continued, "told his tale in the plainest language. But the tale which he had to tell required no extraordinary language to adorn it. The Radicals had not dared to expect, the Tories, in their wildest fears, had not apprehended, so complete a measure. Enthusiasm was visible on one side of the House; consternation and dismay on the other. At last, when Russell read the list of boroughs which were doomed to extinction, the Tories hoped that the completeness of the measure would ensure its defeat. Forgetting their fears, they began to be amused and burst into peals of derisive laughter" (Vol. III. p. 208).

Walpole's next book was the "Life of Lord John Russell," two volumes published in 1889. This was undertaken at the request of Lady Russell, who placed at his disposal a mass of private and official papers and "diaries and letters of a much more private nature." She also acceded to his request that she was not to see the biography until it was ready for publication, so that the whole responsibility of it would be Walpole's alone. The Queen gave him access to three bound volumes of Russell's letters to herself, and sanctioned the publication of certain letters of King William IV. Walpole wrote the biography in about two years and a half; and this, considering that at the time he held an active office, displayed unusual industry. If I may judge the work by a careful study of the chapter on "The American Civil War," it is a valuable contribution to political history.

Passing over three minor publications, we come to Walpole's "History of Twenty-five Years," two volumes of which were published in 1904. A brief extract from his preface is noteworthy, written as it is by a man of large intelligence, with great power of investigation and continuous labor and possessed of a sound judgment. After a reference to his "History of England" from 1815, he said: "The time has consequently arrived when it ought to be as possible to write the History of England from 1857 to 1880, as it was twenty years ago to bring down the narrative of that History to 1856 or 1857.

So far as I am able to judge, most of the material which is likely to be available for British history in the period with which these two volumes are concerned [1856-1870] is already accessible. It is not probable that much which is wholly new remains unavailable." I read carefully these two volumes.

when they first appeared and found them exceedingly fascinating. Palmerston and Russell, Gladstone and Disraeli, are made so real that we follow their contests as if we ourselves had a hand in them. A half dozen or more years ago an Englishman told me that Palmerston and Russell were no longer considered of account in England. But I do not believe one can rise from reading these volumes without being glad of a knowledge of these two men whose patriotism was of a high order. Walpole's several characterizations, in a summing up of Palmerston, display his knowledge of men. "Men pronounced Lord Melbourne indifferent," he wrote, "Sir Robert Peel cold, Lord John Russell uncertain, Lord Aberdeen weak, Lord Derby haughty, Mr. Gladstone subtle, Lord Beaconsfield unscrupulous. But they had no such epithet for Lord Palmerston. He was as earnest as Lord Melbourne was indifferent, as strong as Lord Aberdeen was weak, as honest as Lord Beaconsfield was unscrupulous. Sir Robert Peel repelled men by his temper; Lord John Russell by his coldness; Lord Derby offended them by his pride; Mr. Gladstone distracted them by his subtlety. But Lord Palmerston drew both friends and foes together by the warmth of his manners and the excellence of his heart" (Vol. I. p. 525).

Walpole's knowledge of continental politics was apparently thorough. At all events, if one desires two entrancing tales, let him read the chapter on "The Union of Italy," of which Cavour and Napoleon III. are the heroes; and the two chapters entitled "The Growth of Prussia and the Decline of France" and "The Fall of the Second Empire." In these two chapters Napoleon III. again appears, but Bismarck is the hero. Walpole's chapter on "The American Civil War" is the writing of a broad-minded, intelligent man, who could look on two sides.

Of Walpole's last book, "Studies in Biography," published in 1907, I have left myself no time to speak. If any one is interested in it, let him read the review of it in "The Nation" early this year, which awards it high and unusual commendation.

The readers of Walpole's histories may easily detect in them a treatment not possible from a mere closet student of books and manuscripts. A knowledge of the science of government and of practical politics is there. For Walpole was of a political family. He was of the same house as the great Whig

Prime Minister Sir Robert; and his father was Home Secretary in the Lord Derby ministry of 1858, and again in 1866, when he had to deal with the famous Hyde Park meeting of July 23. On his mother's side he was a grandson of Spencer Perceval, the Prime Minister who in 1812 was assassinated in the lobby of the House of Commons. Walpole's earliest publication was a biography of Perceval.

And Spencer Walpole himself was a man of affairs. A clerk in the War Office in 1858, private secretary to his father in 1866, next year Inspector of Fisheries, later Lieutenant-Governor of the Isle of Man, and from 1893 to 1899 Secretary to the Post-Office. In spite of all this administrative work his books show that he was a wide, general reader, apart from his special historical studies. He wrote in an agreeable literary style, with Macaulay undoubtedly as his model, although he was by no means a slavish imitator. His "History of Twentyfive Years" seems to me written with a freer hand than the earlier history. He is animated by the spirit rather than the letter of Macaulay. I no longer noticed certain tricks of expression which one catches so easily in a study of the great historian, and which seem to fit so well Macaulay's own work, but that of nobody else.

An article by Walpole on my first four volumes, in the “Edinburgh Review" of January, 1901, led to a correspondence which resulted in an invitation last May to pass Sunday with him at Hartfield Grove, his Sussex country place. We were to meet at Victoria Station and take an early morning train. Seeing Mr. Frederic Harrison the day previous, I asked for a personal description of his friend Walpole in order that I might easily recognize the gentleman whom I had never met. "Well," says Harrison, "perhaps I can guide you. Awhile ago I sat next to a lady during a dinner who took me for Walpole and never discovered her mistake until addressing me as Sir Spencer I undeceived her just as the ladies were retiring from the table. Now I am eight years older, and I don't think I look like. Walpole, but that good lady had another opinion." Walpole and Harrison met that Saturday evening at the Academy dinner, and Walpole obtained a personal description of myself. This caution on both our parts was unnecessary. We were the only historians travelling down on the train and could not possibly have missed one another. I found him a thoroughly

genial man, and after fifteen minutes in the railway carriage we were well acquainted. The preface to his "History of Twentyfive Years" told that the two volumes were the work of five years. I asked him how he was getting on with the succeeding volumes. He replied that he had done a good deal of work on them, and now that he was no longer in an administrative position he could concentrate his efforts and he expected to have the work finished before long. I inquired if the prominence of his family in politics hampered him at all in writing so nearly contemporary history, and he said, "Not a bit." An hour of the railroad and a half-hour's drive brought us to his home. It was not an ancestral place, but a purchase not many years back. An old house had been remodelled with modern improvements, and comfort and ease were the predominant aspects. Sir Spencer proposed a "turn" before luncheon, which meant a short walk, and after luncheon we had a real walk. I am aware that the English mile and our own are alike 5280 feet, but I am always impressed with the fact that the English mile seems longer, and so I was on this Sunday. For after a good two hours' exertion over hills and meadows my host told me that we had gone only five miles. Only by direct question did I elicit the fact that had he been alone he would have done seven miles in the same time.

There were no other guests, and Lady Walpole, Sir Spencer, and I had all of the conversation at luncheon and dinner and during the evening. We talked about history and literature, English and American politics and public men. He was singularly well informed about our country, although he had only made one brief visit and then in an official capacity. English expressions of friendship are now so common that I will not quote even one of the many scattered through his volumes, but he displayed everywhere a candid appreciation of our good traits and creditable doings. I was struck with his knowledge and love of lyric poetry. Byron, Shelley, Keats, Tennyson, Longfellow, and Lowell were thoroughly familiar to him. He would repeat some favorite passage of Keats, and at once turn to a discussion of the administrative details of his work in the Post-Office. Of course the day and evening passed very quickly, it was one of the days to be marked with a white stone, and when I bade Walpole good-bye on the Monday morning I felt as if I were parting from a warm friend. I

found him broad-minded, intelligent, sympathetic, affable, and he seemed as strong physically as he was sound intellectually. His death on Sunday, July 7, of cerebral hemorrhage was alike a shock and a grief.

The President reported, for the Council, that Samuel S. Shaw had been appointed to write a memoir of Henry G. Denny; Morton Dexter, a memoir of John E. Sanford; John D. Long, a memoir of Solomon Lincoln; and Edward Stanwood, a memoir of Peleg W. Chandler.

The President called attention to a bust of George Bancroft by R. S. Greenough, which had been placed on the table to be presented at the next meeting of the Society; and he announced that M. A. De Wolfe Howe, through whose exertions it had been secured, would then give the curious history of its discovery. Edward Stanwood communicated for ALBERT MATTHEWS, who was absent, the following paper:

DOCUMENTS IN A FILE OF THE BOSTON NEWS-LETTER (17111715) IN THE BOSTON ATHENEUM.

Having recently had occasion to examine with some thoroughness Boston newspapers between 1704 and 1780, I found two volumes to which particular interest attaches. One, formerly owned by Judge Sewall and now owned by the New York Historical Society, contains an almost complete file of "The Boston News-Letter" from the first issue of April 24, 1704, to April 19, 1708. It was described by Dr. Green at the meeting of this Society held in November, 1890.1 The other, now owned by the Boston Athenæum, contains a file of the "News-Letter" almost complete from February 19, 1710-11, to October 17, 1715. It was given to the Boston Athenæum in 1819 by Marshall B. Spring. It contains notes in ink, all apparently in the same hand. The only note that throws any light on the possible writer is one at the bottom of the second page of the issue of October 6, 1712, which reads:

Samuel Green the Son of Barthol & Jane Green was born Satterday Octob! 4th [the 4 is blotted, evidently written over] about 4. p.m. Wakefield Midwife Was baptised Lords-Day Octob! 5. p. m.ye Reverd Mr. Ebenezer Pemberton in ye South-Meetinghouse. Laus Deo.

1 2 Proceedings, vi. 171-174.