they deserve the
most careful reading by the student of Ruskin.

[Footnote 13: During February, March and April, 1867, and published in
the _Manchester Examiner_ and _Leeds Mercury_.]

Before this work was ended, Carlyle had come back from Mentone to
Chelsea, and was begging his friend, in the warmest terms, to come and
see him. Shortly afterward, a passage which Ruskin would not retract
gave offence to Carlyle. But the difference was healed, and later years
reveal the sage of Chelsea as kindly and affectionate as ever. This
friendship between the two greatest writers of their age, between two
men of vigorous individuality, outspoken opinions, and widely different
tastes and sympathies, is a fine episode in the history of both.

In May, Ruskin was invited to Cambridge to receive the honorary degree
of LL.D., and to deliver the Rede Lecture. The _Cambridge Chronicle_ of
May 24th, 1867, says: "The body of the Senate House was quite filled
with M.A.'s and ladies, principally the latter, whilst there was a large
attendance of undergraduates in the galleries, who gave the lecturer a
most enthusiastic reception." A brief report of the lecture was printed
in the newspaper; but it was not otherwise published, and the manuscript
seems to have been mislaid for thirty years. I take the liberty of
copying the opening sentences as a specimen of that Academical oratory
which Mr. Ruskin then adopted, and used habitually in his earlier
lectures at Oxford.

The title of the discourse was "The Relation of National Ethics to
National Arts."

"In entering on the duty to-day entrusted to me, I should hold it
little respectful to my audience if I disturbed them by expression
of the diffidence which they know that I must feel in first
speaking in this Senate House; diffidence which might well have
prevented me from accepting such duty, but ought not to interfere
with my endeavour simply to fulfil it. Nevertheless, lest the
direction which I have been led to give to my discourse, and the
narrow limits within which I am compelled to confine the treatment
of its subject may seem in anywise inconsistent with the purpose of
the founder of this Lecture--or with the expectations of those by
whose authority I am appointed to deliver it, let me at once say
that I obeyed their command, not thinking myself able to teach any
dogma in the philosophy of the arts, which could be of any