imacy, was always ready to take up the Tory
cudgels. The two friends "would walk up and down the room, crossing
each other for hours, shouting one another down with a continuous
simultaneous storm of words, until George at length yielded to arguments
and lungs combined. Never, so far as I remember, was there any loss of
temper. It was a fair, good-humoured battle in not very mannerly lists."

Even as a very young man nine people out of ten liked nothing better
than to listen to him, which was fortunate; because in his early days
he had scanty respect of persons, either as regarded the choice of his
topics, or the quantity of his words. But with his excellent temper,
and entire absence of conceit, he soon began to learn consideration for
others in small things as well as in great. By the time he was fairly
launched in London he was agreeable in company, as well as forcible and
amusing. Wilberforce speaks of his "unruffled good-humour." Sir Robert
Inglis, a good observer with ample opportunity of forming a judgment,
pronounced that he conversed and did not dictate, and that he was loud
but never overbearing. As far back as the year 1826 Crabb Robinson gave
a very favourable account of his demeanour in society, which deserves
credence as the testimony of one who liked his share of talk, and was
not willing to be put in the background for anybody. "I went to James
Stephen, and drove with him to his house at Hendon. A dinner party.
I had a most interesting companion in young Macaulay, one of the most
promising of the rising generation I have seen for a long time. He has
a good face,--not the delicate features of a man of genius and
sensibility, but the strong lines and well-knit limbs of a man sturdy in
body and mind. Very eloquent and cheerful. Overflowing with words, and
not poor in thought. Liberal in opinion, but no radical. He seems a
correct as well as a full man. He showed a minute knowledge of subjects
not introduced by himself."

So loyal and sincere was Macaulay's nature that he was unwilling to live
upon terms of even apparent intimacy with people whom he did not like,
or could not esteem; and, as far as civility allowed, he avoided their
advances, and especially their hospitality. He did not choose, he said,
to eat salt with a man for whom he could not say a good word in all
companies. He was true throughout life to those who had once acquired
his regard and respect. Moultrie says of him

"His heart was pure a