[73] not been in the habit of expressing himself about the bench with any respect. He has said that he always took porter previous to an argument, ‘in order to bring his understanding down to a level with the judges.’ Still he has in him a great deal of good. His brother failed; and he generously gave up his two horses and groom, in order to devote his superfluous income to free his brother from his pecuniary liabilities,—a sacrifice which in England was not slight. One consideration which influenced the ministers in nominating Maule was that they felt secure of his seat in Parliament,—Carlow; but here they reckoned without their host: they have been defeated at Carlow, though I am assured that, on petition, they will eventually get the seat. I should add that in politics Maule is a Radical, or very near one. Let me now finish what I have to say of the lawyers. I have already spoken of the Attorney-General, Follett, Wilde, and Charles Austin. In the next rank to these, but differing of course among themselves in talents and in business, are Sir Frederick Pollock, Talfourd, Alexander, Cresswell, Kelly, J. Jervis, Crowder, Erle, Bompas, Wightman, and perhaps some others. Pollock1 is deemed a great failure. He was the Tory Attorney-General, and must be provided for in some way if the Tories come into power. He has not succeeded in the House of Commons; and is dull, heavy, and, they say, often obtuse at the bar.2 He has a smooth solemn voice, and on the Northern Circuit enjoyed, as you well know, great repute and business. In manners he is a gentleman, and I am indebted to him for much kindness. Talfourd is a good declaimer, with a great deal of rhetoric and feeling. I cannot disguise that I have been disappointed in him. I know him very well, and have seen him at dinners, at clubs, in Parliament, and in courts. Alexander and Cresswell are the two leaders of the Northern Circuit,— the former, a married man; the latter, a bachelor. Alexander has a good deal of business, which he manages very well, showing attention and fidelity. Lord Brougham once sneered at him, when talking with me, as ‘little Alexander.’ He is a thoroughly moral and conscientious person, and will not take a seat in Parliament, because it would be inconsistent with the performance of his professional duties. I think he inclines to Toryism; though he is very moderate. I have had much instructive conversation with him about professional conduct, with regard to which his notions are of the most elevated character. Cresswell3 is a very quiet and agreeable person, and is
This text is part of:
1 Frederick Pollock, 1783-1870. He became the leader of the Northern Circuit; was appointed Attorney-General in 1834; was superseded with a change of administration, and reappointed in 1841: became Lord Chief-Baron of the Exchequer in 1844, and resigned in 1866. He represented Huntingdon in Parliament from 1831 to 1844; was twice married, and was the father of twenty-five children.
2 Lord Denman, in a letter written on the bench while Pollock was arguing, said of him: ‘He bestows tediousness in a spirit of lavish prodigality.’—‘Life of Lord Denman,’ Vol. II. p. 11.
3 Cresswell Cresswell, 1793-1863. He was called to the bar in 1819; became leader of the Northern Circuit; was a reporter, in association with Richard V. Barnewall, of cases in the King's Bench; represented Liverpool in Parliament; and was appointed a judge of the Common Pleas in 1842. Sumner dined with him at Fleming House, Old Brompton.
Cambridge, MA. Press of John Wilson and Son. 1877.
Tufts University provided support for entering this text.
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.