sion of his face would be sombre were it not for the striking
eye, which has a remarkable fascination. His triumphs as a debater are
achieved not by the aid of the passions, as with Sir James Graham, or
with Mr. Sheil; not of prejudice and fallacy, as with Robert Peel; not
with imagination and high seductive colouring, as with Mr. Macaulay:
but--of pure reason. He prevails by that subdued earnestness which
results from deep religious feelings, and is not fitted for the more
usual and more stormy functions of a public speaker.'[119]

III

ACTION HIS FIELD

We are not to think of him as prophet, seer, poet, founder of a system,
or great born man of letters like Gibbon, Macaulay, Carlyle. Of these
characters he was none, though he had warmth and height of genius to
comprehend the value of them all, and--what was more curious--his
oratory and his acts touched them and their work in such a way that men
were always tempted to apply to him standards that belonged to them. His
calling was a different one, and he was wont to appraise it lower. His
field lay 'in working the institutions of his country.' Whether he would
have played a part as splendid in the position of a high ruling
ecclesiastic, if the times had allowed such a personage, we cannot tell;
perhaps he had not 'imperious immobility' enough. Nor whether he would
have made a judge of the loftier order; perhaps his mind was too
addicted to subtle distinctions, and not likely to give a solid
adherence to broad principles of law. A superb advocate? An evangelist,
as irresistible as Wesley or as Whitefield? What matters it? All agree
that more magnificent power of mind was never placed at the service of
the British Senate.

His letters to his father from 1832 onwards show all the interest of a
keen young member in his calling, though they contain few anecdotes, or
tales, or vivid social traits. 'Of political gossip,' he admits to his
father (1843), 'you always find me barren enough.' What comes out in all
his letters to his kinsfolk is his unbounded willingness to take trouble
in order to spare others. Even in prolonged and intricate money
transactions, of which we shall see something latertransactions of all
others the most apt to produce irritation--not an accent of impatience
or dispute escapes him, though the guarded firmness of his language
marks the steadfast self-control. We may say of Mr. Gladstone tha