I have this instant received your letter of yesterday with the enclosed proof-sheets.  Your criticism is to a certain extent just; but you have not considered the whole sentence together.  Depressed is in itself better than weighed down; but “the oppressive privileges which had depressed industry” would be a horrible cacophony.  I hope that word convinces you.  I have often observed that a fine Greek compound is an excellent substitute for a reason.

I met Rogers at the Athenaeum.  He begged me to breakfast with him, and name my day, and promised that he would procure me as agreeable a party as he could find in London.  Very kind of the old man, is it not? and, if you knew how Rogers is thought of, you would think it as great a compliment as could be paid to a Duke.  Have you seen what the author of the “Young Duke” says about me:  how rabid I am, and how certain I am to rat?

Ever yours

T. B. M.

Macaulay’s account of the allusion to himself in the “Young Duke” is perfectly accurate; and yet, when read as a whole, the passage in question does not appear to have been ill-naturedly meant. ["I hear that Mr. Babington Macaulay is to be returned.  If he speaks half as well as he writes, the House will be in fashion again.  I fear that he is one of those who, like the individual whom he has most studied, will give up to a party what was meant for mankind.  At any rate, he must get rid of his rabidity.  He writes now on all subjects as if he certainly intended to be a renegade, and was determined to make the contrast complete.”—­The Young Duke, book v chap. vi.] It is much what any young literary man outside the House of Commons might write of another who had only been inside that House for a few weeks; and it was probably forgotten by the author within twenty-four hours after the ink was dry.  It is to be hoped that the commentators of the future will not treat it as an authoritative record of Mr. Disraeli’s estimate of Lord Macaulay’s political character.

To Hannah M. Macaulay.

London:  June 25, 1831.

My dear Sister,—­There was, as you will see, no debate on Lord John Russell’s motion.  The Reform Bill is to be brought in, read once, and printed, without discussion.  The contest will be on the second reading, and will be protracted, I should think, through the whole of the week after next;—­next week it will be, when you read this letter.

I breakfasted with Rogers yesterday.  There was nobody there but Moore.  We were all on the most friendly and familiar terms possible; and Moore, who is, Rogers tells me, excessively pleased with my review of his book, showed me very marked attention.  I was forced to go away early on account of bankrupt business; but Rogers said that we must have the talk out so we are to meet at his house again to breakfast.  What a delightful house it is!  It looks out on the Green Park just at the most pleasant point.  The furniture has been selected with a delicacy of