er,"
frees the command from all harshness or severity. As the first
commoner in the land, and a truly estimable gentleman, he was entitled
to be well received * * *. The last person of note who arrived before
I departed was Sir Thomas Denman. The Chancellor was engaged with some
one at the moment, and nothing passed betwixt them but an exchange
of bows. It was nearly ten years since I had seen Brougham and Denman
together; the Queen's trial was then the all-engrossing topic of
public consideration. Who could then have foretold that these men
would have in so short a space won the confidence of a sovereign, whom
they attacked with a degree of virulence which, even in those days
of party violence, was generally condemned? The change in feeling is
creditable alike to all."

Of the eloquence and general character of Lord Brougham, we have the
following excellent portraiture by a master-hand:[6]--

"Mr. Brougham is from the North of England, but he was educated
in Edinburgh, and represents that school of politics and political
economy in the house. He differs from Sir James Mackintosh in this,
that he deals less in abstract principles, and more in individual
details. He makes less use of general topics, and more of immediate
facts. Sir James is better acquainted with the balance of an argument
in old authors; Mr. Brougham with the balance of power in Europe. If
the first is better versed in the progress of history, no man excels
the last in a knowledge of the course of exchange. He is apprized of
the exact state of our exports and imports, and scarce a ship clears
out its cargo at Liverpool or Hull, but he has notice of the bill
of lading. Our colonial policy, prison discipline, the state of the
hulks, agricultural distress, commerce and manufactures, the bullion
question, the Catholic Question, the Bourbons or the Inquisition,
'domestic treason, foreign levy,' nothing can come amiss to him--he
is at home in the crooked mazes of rotten boroughs, is not baffled
by Scotch law, and can follow the meaning of one of Mr. Canning's
speeches. With so many resources, with such variety and solidity of
information, Mr. Brougham is rather a powerful and alarming, than an
effectual debater. In so many details (which he himself goes through
with unwearied and unshrinking resolution) the spirit of the question
is lost to others who have not the same voluntary power of attention
or the same interest in hearing that he has in speaking; the