I likewise once met Macaulay at Lord Stanhope's (the historian's) house, and as there was only one other man at dinner, I had a grand opportunity of hearing him converse, and he was very agreeable.He did not talk at all too much; nor indeed could such a man talk too much, as long as he allowed others to turn the stream of his conversation, and this he did allow.
Lord Stanhope once gave me a curious little proof of the accuracy and fulness of Macaulay's memory: many historians used often to meet at Lord Stanhope's house, and in discussing various subjects they would sometimes differ from Macaulay, and formerly they often referred to some book to see who was right; but latterly, as Lord Stanhope noticed, no historian ever took this trouble, and whatever Macaulay said was final.
On another occasion I met at Lord Stanhope's house, one of his parties of historians and other literary men, and amongst them were Motley and Grote.After luncheon I walked about Chevening Park for nearly an hour with Grote, and was much interested by his conversation and pleased by the simplicity and absence of all pretension in his manners.
Long ago I dined occasionally with the old Earl, the father of the historian; he was a strange man, but what little I knew of him I liked much.He was frank, genial, and pleasant.He had strongly marked features, with a brown complexion, and his clothes, when I saw him, were all brown.He seemed to believe in everything which was to others utterly incredible.He said one day to me, "Why don't you give up your fiddle- faddle of geology and zoology, and turn to the occult sciences!" The historian, then Lord Mahon, seemed shocked at such a speech to me, and his charming wife much amused.
The last man whom I will mention is Carlyle, seen by me several timesat my brother's house, and two or three times at my own house.His talk was very racy and interesting, just like his writings, but he sometimes went on too long on the same subject.I remember a funny dinner at my brother's, where, amongst a few others, were Babbage and Lyell, both of whom liked to talk.Carlyle, however, silenced every one by haranguing during the whole dinner on the advantages of silence.After dinner Babbage, in his grimmest manner, thanked Carlyle for his very interesting lecture on silence.
Carlyle sneered at almost every one: one day in my house he called Grote's 'History' "a fetid quagmire, with nothing spiritual about it." I always thought, until his 'Reminiscences' appeared, that his sneers were partly jokes, but this now seems rather doubtful.His expression was that of a depressed, almost despondent yet benevolent man; and it is notorious how heartily he laughed.I believe that his benevolence was real, though stained by not a little jealousy.No one can doubt about his extraordinary power of drawing pictures of things and men--far more vivid, as it appears to me, than any drawn by Macaulay.Whether his pictures of men were true ones is another question.
He has been all-powerful in impressing some grand moral truths on the minds of men.On the other hand, his views about slavery were revolting.In his eyes might was right.His mind seemed to me a very narrow one; even if all branches of science, which he despised, are excluded.It is astonishing to me that Kingsley should have spoken of him as a man well fitted to advance science.He laughed to scorn the idea that a mathematician, such as Whewell, could judge, as I maintained he could, of Goethe's views on light.He thought it a most ridiculous thing that any one should care whether a glacier moved a little quicker or a little slower, or moved at all.As far as I could judge, I never met a man with a mind so ill adapted for scientific research.
Whilst living in London, I attended as regularly as I could the meetings of several scientific societies, and acted as secretary to the Geological Society.But such attendance, and ordinary society, suited my health so badly that we resolved to live in the country, which we both preferred and have never repented of.
