ribes as often, when he is most theoretical,
really describing what a first-rate man of business would do and think in
actual transactions. The observation, of course, is that of a type of
business man in the city to which Ricardo as well as Bagehot belonged,
though Ricardo could hardly look at it from the outside as Bagehot was able
to do.

Bagehot had great city, political and literary influence, to which all his
activities contributed, and much of his influence was lasting. In politics
and economics especially his habit of scientific observation affected the
tone of discussion, and both the English constitution and the money market
have been better understood generally because he wrote and talked and
diffused his ideas in every possible way. He was unsuccessful in two or
three attempts to enter parliament, but he had the influence of far more
than an ordinary member, as director of the _Economist_ and as the adviser
behind the scenes of the ministers and permanent heads of departments who
consulted him. His death, on the 24th of March 1877, occurred at Langport
very suddenly, when he was in the fullest mental vigour and might have
looked forward to the accomplishment of much additional work and the
exercise of even wider influence.

It is impossible to give a full idea of the brightness and life of
Bagehot's conversation, although the conversational style of his writing
may help those who did not know him personally to understand it. With
winged words he would transfix a fallacy or stamp a true idea so that it
could not be forgotten. He was certainly greater than his books and always
full of ideas. The present writer recalls two notions he had, not for
writing new books himself, but as something that might be done. One was
that there might be a history of recent politics with new lights if some
one were to do it who knew the family connexions and history of English
politicians. This was _apropos_ of the passage of a certain bill through
parliament, when the head of the department in the House of Commons failed
and the management of the measure was taken by the chancellor of the
exchequer himself, a relative of the permanent head of the department
concerned, who was thus able to carry his own ideas in legislation
notwithstanding the failure of his political chief. Another book he wished
to see written was an account of the differences in the administrative
systems of England and Scotland, by which he had been greatly