ould resume
it just where he had left off. But this habitual restlessness,
which was so fatal to conversation, served perhaps to exhibit the
vivacity of his mind and its shrewd and epigrammatic turn in a
more remarkable manner: few persons visited Petworth without
being struck with astonishment at the unimpaired vigour of his
intellectual powers. To have lived to a great age in the practice
of beneficence and the dispensation of happiness, and to die
without bodily suffering or mental decay, in the enjoyment of
existence up to the instant of its close, affords an example of
human prosperity, both in life and in death, which has fallen to
the lot of few, but which may well excite the envy and admiration
of all.[11]

[10] [See for descent of Lord Egremont, p. 337, vol. ii. of
the First Part of Mr. Greville's Journals.]

[11] The substance of this character of the Earl of Egremont
was inserted in the _Times_ newspaper of Saturday, 18th
November 1837.

November 3rd, 1837 {p.026}

At Court yesterday when the Queen received the Address of the
Commons. She conducts herself with surprising dignity: the
dignity which proceeds from self-possession and deliberation. The
smallness of her stature is quite forgotten in the majesty and
gracefulness of her demeanour.

[Page Head: RADICAL DISCONTENT.]

The Session has opened merrily with an angry squabble between
Lord John Russell and the Radicals, at which the Tories greatly
rejoice. Upon the Address, Wakley and others thought fit to
introduce the topic of the Ballot and other reforms, upon which
John Russell spoke out and declared he would never be a party to
the Ballot, and would not reform the Reform Bill. They were
indignant, and attacked him in no measured terms. The next night
Charles Buller returned to the charge with equal violence, when
Lord John made (by the agreement of all parties) an incomparable
speech vindicating his own consistency, explaining his motives
for making the declaration which he did the first night, and
repelling with great dignity the charges with which he was
assailed.[12] Of course opinions vary as to the expediency and
propriety of his conduct on this occasion, but I do not see that
he could have acted otherwise, and it is much more manly,
straightforward, and honourable to declare at once what his
sentiments and intentions are than to endeavour to evade the
subject for a time, and to raise hopes and e