and he
hardly feels inclined to make it the great aim of his life. He had,
however, risen to a distinctly higher position on his circuit; and just
at this time he was engaged in one of the cases which, as usual, brought
more in the way of glory than of gain.

X. GOVERNOR EYRE

The troubles in Jamaica had taken place in October 1865. The severity of
the repressive measures excited indignation in England; and discussions
arose conducted with a bitterness not often paralleled. The Gordon case
was the chief topic of controversy. Governor Eyre had arrested Gordon,
whom he considered to be the mainspring of the insurrection, and sent
him to the district in which martial law had been proclaimed. There he
was tried by a court-martial ordered by General Nelson, and speedily
hanged. The controversy which followed is a curious illustration of the
modes of reasoning of philosophers and statesmen. Nobody could deny the
general proposition that the authorities are bound to take energetic
measures to prevent the horrors of a servile insurrection. Nor could
anyone deny that they are equally bound to avoid the needless severities
which the fear of such horrors is likely to produce. Which principle
should apply was a question of fact; but in practice the facts were
taken for granted. One party assumed unanimously that Governor Eyre had
been doing no more than his duty; and the other, with equal confidence,
assumed that he was guilty of extreme severity. A commission, consisting
of Sir Henry Storks, Mr. Russell Gurney, and Mr. Maule, the recorder of
Leeds, was sent out at the end of 1865 to inquire into the facts.
Meanwhile the Jamaica Committee was formed, of which J. S. Mill was
chairman, with Mr. P. A. Taylor, the Radical leader, as
vice-chairman.[99] The committee (in January 1866) took the opinions of
Fitzjames and Mr. Edward James as to the proper mode of invoking the
law. Fitzjames drew the opinion, which was signed by Mr. James and
himself.[100] After the report of the Commission (April 1866), which
showed that excesses had been committed, the committee acted upon this
opinion.

From Fitzjames's letters written at the time, I find that his study of
the papers published by the Commission convinced him that Governor Eyre
had gone beyond the proper limits in his behaviour towards Gordon. The
governor, he thought, had been guilty of an 'outrageous stretch of
power,' and had hanged Gordon, not because it was necessary to keep the