another fortnight glided away, and he was still at the castle, still the constant and almost sole companion of may dacre. it is breakfast; the servant is delivering the letter-bag to mr. dacre. interesting moment! when you extend your hand for the billet of a mistress, and receive your tailor’s bill! how provokingly slow are most domestic chieftains in this anxious operation! they turn the letters over and over, and upside and down; arrange, confuse, mistake, assort; pretend, like champollion, to decipher illegible franks, and deliver with a slight remark, which is intended as a friendly admonition, the documents of the unlucky wight who encourages unprivileged correspondents.

a letter was delivered to miss dacre. she started, exclaimed, blushed, and tore it open.

‘only you, only you,’ she said, extending her hand to the young duke, ‘only you were capable of this!’

it was a letter from arundel dacre, not only written but franked by him.

it explained everything that the duke of st. james might have told them before; but he preferred hearing all himself, from the delighted and delightful lips of miss dacre, who read to her father her cousin’s letter.

the duke of st. james had returned him for one of his cornish boroughs. it appeared that lord st. maurice was the previous member, who had accepted the chiltern hundreds in his favour.

‘you were determined to surprise, as well as delight us,’ said mr. dacre.

‘i am no admirer of mysteries,’ said the duke; ‘but the fact is, in the present case, it was not in my power to give you any positive information, and i had no desire to provide you, after your late disappointment, with new sources of anxiety. the only person i could take the liberty with, at so short a notice, was st. maurice. he, you know, is a liberal; but he cannot forget that he is the son of a tory, and has no great ambition to take any active part in affairs at present. i anticipated less difficulty with him than with his father. st. maurice can command me again when it suits him; but, i confess to you, i have been surprised at my uncle’s kindness in this affair. i really have not done justice to his character before, and regret it. he has behaved in the most kind-hearted and the most liberal manner, and put me under obligations which i never shall forget. he seems as desirous of serving my friend as myself; and i assure you, sir, it would give you pleasure to know in what terms of respect he speaks of your family, and particularly of arundel.’

‘arundel says he shall take his seat the morning of the debate. how very near! how admirably managed! oh! i never shall recover my surprise and delight! how good you are!’

‘he takes his seat, then, tomorrow,’ said mr. dacre, in a musing tone. ‘my letters give a rather nervous account of affairs. we are to win it, they hope, but by two only. as for the lords, the majority against us will, it is said, be somewhat smaller than usual. we shall never triumph, george, till may is m.p. for the county. cannot you return her for pen bronnock too?’

they talked, as you may suppose, of nothing else. at last mr. dacre remembered an appointment with his bailiff, and proposed to the duke to join him, who acceded.

‘and i to be left alone this morning, then!’ said miss dacre. ‘i am sure, as they say of children, i can set to nothing.’

‘come and ride with us, then!’

‘an excellent idea! let us canter over to hauteville! i am just in the humour for a gallop up the avenue, and feel half emancipated already with a dacre in the house! oh! tomorrow, how nervous i shall be!’

‘i will despatch barrington, then,’ said mr. dacre, ‘and join you in ten minutes.’

‘how good you are!’ said miss dacre to the duke. ‘how can we thank you enough? what can we do for you?’

‘you have thanked me enough. what have i done after all? my opportunity to serve my friends is brief. is it wonderful that i seize the opportunity?’

‘brief! brief! why do you always say so? why do you talk so of leaving us?’

‘my visit to you has been already too long. it must soon end, and i remain not in england when it ceases.’

‘come and live at hauteville, and be near us?’

he faintly smiled as he said, ‘no, no; my doom is fixed. hauteville is the last place that i should choose for my residence, even if i remained in england. but i hear the horses.’

the important night at length arrived, or rather the important messenger, who brought down, express, a report of its proceedings to castle dacre.

nothing is more singular than the various success of men in the house of commons. fellows who have been the oracles of coteries from their birth; who have gone through the regular process of gold medals, senior wranglerships, and double firsts, who have nightly sat down amid tumultuous cheering in debating societies, and can harangue with unruffled foreheads and unfaltering voice, from one end of a dinner-table to the other, who, on all occasions, have something to say, and can speak with fluency on what they know nothing about, no sooner rise in the house than their spells desert them. all their effrontery vanishes. commonplace ideas are rendered even more uninteresting by monotonous delivery; and keenly alive as even boobies are in those sacred walls to the ridiculous, no one appears more thoroughly aware of his unexpected and astounding deficiencies than the orator himself. he regains his seat hot and hard, sultry and stiff, with a burning cheek and an icy hand, repressing his breath lest it should give evidence of an existence of which he is ashamed, and clenching his fist, that the pressure may secretly convince him that he has not as completely annihilated his stupid body as his false reputation.

on the other hand, persons whom the women have long deplored, and the men long pitied, as having ‘no manner,’ who blush when you speak to them, and blunder when they speak to you, suddenly jump up in the house with a self-confidence, which is only equalled by their consummate ability. and so it was with arundel dacre. he rose the first night that he took his seat (a great disadvantage, of which no one was more sensible than himself), and for an hour and a half he addressed the fullest house that had long been assembled, with the self-possession of an habitual debater. his clenching argument, and his luminous detail, might have been expected from one who had the reputation of having been a student. what was more surprising was, the withering sarcasm that blasted like the simoom, the brilliant sallies of wit that flashed like a sabre, the gushing eddies of humour that drowned all opposition and overwhelmed those ponderous and unwieldy arguments which the producers announced as rocks, but which he proved to be porpoises. never was there such a triumphant début; and a peroration of genuine eloquence, because of genuine feeling, concluded amid the long and renewed cheers of all parties.

the truth is, eloquence is the child of knowledge. when a mind is full, like a wholesome river, it is also clear. confusion and obscurity are much oftener the results of ignorance than of inefficiency. few are the men who cannot express their meaning, when the occasion demands the energy; as the lowest will defend their lives with acuteness, and sometimes even with eloquence. they are masters of their subject. knowledge must be gained by ourselves. mankind may supply us with facts; but the results, even if they agree with previous ones, must be the work of our own mind. to make others feel, we must feel ourselves; and to feel ourselves, we must be natural. this we can never be, when we are vomiting forth the dogmas of the schools. knowledge is not a mere collection of words; and it is a delusion to suppose that thought can be obtained by the aid of any other intellect than our own. what is repetition, by a curious mystery ceases to be truth, even if it were truth when it was first heard; as the shadow in a mirror, though it move and mimic all the actions of vitality, is not life. when a man is not speaking, or writing, from his own mind, he is as insipid company as a looking-glass.

before a man can address a popular assembly with command, he must know something of mankind; and he can know nothing of mankind without knowing something of himself. self-knowledge is the property of that man whose passions have their play, but who ponders over their results. such a man sympathises by inspiration with his kind. he has a key to every heart. he can divine, in the flash of a single thought, all that they require, all that they wish. such a man speaks to their very core. all feel that a master-hand tears off the veil of cant, with which, from necessity, they have enveloped their souls; for cant is nothing more than the sophistry which results from attempting to account for what is unintelligible, or to defend what is improper.

perhaps, although we use the term, we never have had oratory in england. there is an essential difference between oratory and debating. oratory seems an accomplishment confined to the ancients, unless the french preachers may put in their claim, and some of the irish lawyers. mr. shiel’s speech in kent was a fine oration; and the boobies who taunted him for having got it by rote, were not aware that in doing so he only wisely followed the example of pericles, demosthenes, lysias, isocrates, hortensius, cicero, c?sar, and every great orator of antiquity. oratory is essentially the accomplishment of antiquity: it was their most efficient mode of communicating thought; it was their substitute for printing.

i like a good debate; and, when a stripling, used sometimes to be stifled in the gallery, or enjoy the easier privileges of a member’s son. i like, i say, a good debate, and have no objection to a due mixture of bores, which are a relief. i remember none of the giants of former days; but i have heard canning. he was a consummate rhetorician; but there seemed to me a dash of commonplace in all that he said, and frequent indications of the absence of an original mind. to the last, he never got clear of ‘good god, sir!’ and all the other hackneyed ejaculations of his youthful debating clubs. the most commanding speaker that i ever listened to is, i think, sir francis burdett. i never heard him in the house; but at an election. he was full of music, grace? and dignity, even amid all the vulgar tumult; and, unlike all mob orators, raised the taste of the populace to him, instead of lowering his own to theirs. his colleague, mr. hobhouse, seemed to me ill qualified for a demagogue, though he spoke with power. he is rather too elaborate, and a little heavy, but fluent, and never weak. his thoughtful and highly-cultivated mind maintains him under all circumstances; and his breeding never deserts him. sound sense comes recommended from his lips by the language of a scholar and the urbanity of a gentleman.

mr. brougham, at present, reigns paramount in the house of commons. i think the lawyer has spoiled the statesman. he is said to have great powers of sarcasm. from what i have observed there, i should think very little ones would be quite sufficient. many a sneer withers in those walls, which would scarcely, i think, blight a currant-bush out of them; and i have seen the house convulsed with raillery which, in other society, would infallibly settle the rallier to be a bore beyond all tolerance. even an idiot can raise a smile. they are so good-natured, or find it so dull. mr. canning’s badinage was the most successful, though i confess i have listened to few things more calculated to make a man gloomy. but the house always ran riot, taking everything for granted, and cracked their universal sides before he opened his mouth. the fault of mr. brougham is, that he holds no intellect at present in great dread, and, consequently, allows himself on all occasions to run wild. few men hazard more unphilosophical observations; but he is safe, because there is no one to notice them. on all great occasions, mr. brougham has come up to the mark; an infallible test of a man of genius.

i hear that mr. macaulay is to be returned. if he speaks half as well as he writes, the house will be in fashion again. i fear that he is one of those who, like the individual whom he has most studied, will ‘give up to party what was meant for mankind.’

at any rate, he must get rid of his rabidity. he writes now on all subjects, as if he certainly intended to be a renegade, and was determined to make the contrast complete.

mr. peel is the model of a minister, and improves as a speaker; though, like most of the rest, he is fluent without the least style. he should not get so often in a passion either, or, if he do, should not get out of one so easily. his sweet apologies are cloying. his candour — he will do well to get rid of that. he can make a present of it to mr. huskisson, who is a memorable instance of the value of knowledge, which maintains a man under all circumstances and all disadvantages, and will.

in the lords, i admire the duke. the readiness with which he has adopted the air of a debater, shows the man of genius. there is a gruff, husky sort of a downright montaignish na?veté about him, which is quaint, unusual, and tells. you plainly perceive that he is determined to be a civilian; and he is as offended if you drop a hint that he occasionally wears an uniform, as a servant on a holiday if you mention the word livery.

lord grey speaks with feeling, and is better to hear than to read, though ever strong and impressive. lord holland’s speeches are like a refacimento of all the suppressed passages in clarendon, and the notes in the new edition of bishop burnet’s memoirs: but taste throws a delicate hue over the curious medley, and the candour of a philosophic mind shows that in the library of holland house he can sometimes cease to be a partisan.

one thing is clear, that a man may speak very well in the house of commons, and fail very completely in the house of lords. there are two distinct styles requisite: i intend, in the course of my career, if i have time, to give a specimen of both. in the lower house don juan may perhaps be our model; in the upper house, paradise lost.