that they belonged to that class of
oratory which aims at convincing the reason rather than at persuading the
emotions. Lord John had, however, one quality likely to make him widely
popular--his pluck; at bay he was formidable. If there was a trace of
injustice or unreasonableness in his adversaries, though their case might
be overwhelmingly plausible, it was ten to one he routed them in confusion.
He was ready in retort. One example of this readiness Gladstone was fond of
quoting: Sir Francis Burdett had made a speech against the Whigs, in which
he spoke of the "cant of patriotism." "There is one thing worse than the
cant of patriotism," retorted Lord John, "and that is the recant of
patriotism." Again, when the Queen once asked him, "Is it true, Lord John,
that you hold that a subject is justified, in certain circumstances, in
disobeying his sovereign?" his answer to this difficult question could not
have been better: "Well, speaking to a sovereign of the House of Hanover, I
can only say that I suppose he is."

One more characteristic must be mentioned. Like most men scrupulous and
slow in determining what to do, his confidences often were withheld from
others till the last moment, and sometimes beyond the moment, when it would
have been wisest to admit his colleagues to his own counsel. In consequence
he often appeared disconcertingly abrupt in decision.

In 1808 he accompanied Lord and Lady Holland to Spain and Portugal, and on
his return he was sent by his father to Edinburgh University, the Duke
having little confidence in the education then procurable at either Oxford
or Cambridge. At Edinburgh he took part in the proceedings of the
Speculative Society, read essays to them and debated; and he left the
University still tending more towards literature than politics. There is no
doubt that Edinburgh helped to form him. His mind was one naturally open to
influences which are summed up as "the academic spirit"; dislike of
exaggeration, impatience with brilliancy which does not illuminate, and
distrust of enthusiasm which is not prepared to show its credentials at
every step. His own style is marked by these qualities, and in addition by
a reminiscence of eighteenth-century formality, more likely to please
perhaps future than present readers; accurate, a little distant, it pleases
because it conveys a sense of modesty and dignity. When he speaks of
himself he does it to perfection.

After leaving the University he se