“Too infamous to have a friend,
  Too bad for bad men to commend
  Or good to name; beneath whose weight
  Earth groans; who hath been spared by fate
  Only to show on mercy’s plan
  How far and long God bears with man”—­

and this superb piece of truculence was received with applause by all that was upright and noble in England.  This indescribable villain presented himself as worthy to preside over the place where the flower of English youth were educated.  A pleasing example he offered to young and ardent souls!  Worst of all, he was elected.  He adroitly gained the votes of country clergymen; he begged his friends to solicit the votes of their private chaplains; he dodged and manoeuvred until he gained his position.  One voter came from a lunatic asylum, another was brought from the Isle of Man, others were bribed in lavish fashion—­and Sandwich presided over Cambridge.  The students rose in a body and walked out when he came among them; but that mattered little to the brazen fellow.  To complete the ghastly comedy, it happened that four years later the Chancellorship fell vacant, and the Duke of Grafton, who was only second to “Jemmy Twitcher” in wickedness, was chosen for the high office.

Now I ask plainly, “Can the croakers declare that England was better under Grafton and ‘Jemmy Twitcher’ than she now is?” It is nonsense!  The crew of bacchanals and blackguards who then flaunted in high places would not now be tolerated for a day.  I look on our governing class now,[3] and I may safely declare that not more than one Cabinet Minister during the past twenty years has been regarded as otherwise than stainless in character.  What is the meaning of this transformation?  It means that good, pure women have gained their rightful influence, that men have grown purer, and that the elevation of the general body of society has been reflected in the character of the men chosen to rule.  Vice is all too powerful, and the dark corners of our cities are awful to see; but the worst of the “fast” men in modern England are not so bad as were the governors of a mighty empire when George III. was king.

    [3] 1886.

If we look at the society that diced and drank and squandered health and fortune in the times which we mention, we are more than ever struck with the advance made.  It is a literal fact that the correspondence of the young men mainly refers to drink and gaming, the correspondence of the middle-aged men to gout.  There were few of the educated classes who reached middle age, and a country squire was reckoned quite a remarkable person if he could still walk and ride when he attained to fifty years.  The quiet, steady middle-class certainly lived more temperately; but the intemperance of the aristocracy was indescribable.  The leader of the House of Lords imbibed until six every morning, was carried to bed, and came down about two in the afternoon; two noblemen declared that they