Florence. When the When the posthumous edition of his poems was published in 1862, a short memoir of him was added to the book by F. T. Palgrave, corrected from a paper which he wrote for 'Fraser's Magazine.' To Sir Alexander Grant 29 Welbeck Street, London: Feb. 22, 1862. My dear Alexander,-. . . Before now I hope you will have got my little Anthology. It seems to have pleased people here, and has revealed an ignorance of poetry and an interest in it-both of which rather surprised me. That it should be of any real use is exactly what I wish.. Tennyson's remarks on the different poems as he went over them and selected were admirable-a kind of school of fine judgment. I hope you liked the arrangement and my notes &c. In this sort of paste-and-scissors authorship these trifles are all one can call one's own. . . . You will see, I suppose, in the next (March) 'Fraser' a little memoir of our dear A. H. Clough by me. It was difficult enough to do, but I could not find any one else who would try. . . . I have tried hard for severe Art in my paper; I should like to know if you think me at all successful— although I think your genius and mine (bless the mark!) have not always been accordant on these matters. I see you kindly inquire where I live-where and how are now little matters to me-but the ἄοικος εἰσοίκησις, as I think Philoctetes calls it, is a little humanised by my living with Woolner the sculptor, who is a man of a great honesty and keenness of mind. . . . Now, as I write, I remember you have met him at Farringford. Your memory lives there as vividly as ever with those good souls and true. . . . Ever your affect. F. T. PALGRAVE. The Handbook to the Fine Art Collections of the Exhibition of 1862, that my father was commissioned to write, gave him the first public opportunity of openly declaring his views on contemporary artists. Although these opinions were generally recognised as revealing the finest taste and knowledge of his subject, they failed to be so useful and convincing as they might have been from their vigorous and vehement criticism and condemnation of the work of certain artists, more particularly of Marochetti's sculpture. The study of sculpture engrossed him, and was one to which he devoted much leisure time, and he could never understand why this the usually admitted noblest of the fine arts -has so little hold on the minds of many otherwise art-loving people. The sole melancholy reason he could suggest was the deplorably forlorn state to which sculpture had sunk. A well-known artist remarked of the Handbook that 'he had come to regard it as most admirable, and not containing an opinion from which he dissented-in fact it seemed to him quite wonderful that any one but a severely trained artist could have such sound and clear opinions.' The following comments on criticism by Mr. Ruskin on receiving the Handbook, my father afterwards marked as 'Very true': I looked at your book-it is very nice but I have come to feel profoundly how right Turner was in always telling me that criticism was useless. If the public don't know music when they hear it-nor painting when they see it-nor sculpture when they feel it—no talk will teach them. It seems to do good-but in truth does none -or more harm than good. (Art is an emanation of national character: not a taught accomplishment.) This is not a cheerful or very kind acknowledgment of your memory of me: but I am glad of it for all that. . . . From Sir Alexander Grant Bombay July 11, 1862. My dear Frank,-You appear of late to have been the most famous man in England. In every newspaper I have seen something about you and your 'Catalogue.' But as yet I haven't seen the Catalogue itself, so I hope you'll send me a copy per post. It will be read in a sympathetic spirit by Hughlings and myself. I suppose you had a great sale for it, and have made a perfect fortune in twopences. And so now you live with Woolner. I hope the time is not very distant when I may burn the tobacco of midnight in your artistic abode; but 'tis an expensive job coming to England, and the gold-mohur tree isn't what it used to be. . . . This is undoubtedly an interesting country to live in. The progress of education and politics is in both cases so full of backward and forward movements, that it is endlessly entertaining to watch what goes on. The Golden Treasury' is an immense comfort out here. Hughlings and I had been talking of it for some time, and were waiting to see if it would not be suitable as an English class-book for the higher native students. hope you won't think this a degradation. English poetry is to these people what Homer is to us. . . . God bless you, my dear Frank! Write, if you can, soon again. Ever thy affectionate A. GRANT. CHAPTER III MARRIAGE AND HOME LIFE It was while staying with Lord Houghton at Fryston during the summer of 1862 that my father first met Cecil Grenville Milnes, elder daughter of Mary and James Milnes-Gaskell. He was Member for Much Wenlock for thirty-six years, and was so able a politician that Mr. Gladstone said of him, 'He might have been Prime Minister had it not been for his indolence.' His wife has often been described as a typical Grande dame' of the old school; she was sister to Charlotte Williams-Wynn, one of the most brilliant women of her day. Cecil had been brought up partly in London and partly at their house in Yorkshire; for they never lived at Wenlock Abbey, the beautiful old home in Shropshire, until shortly before her marriage. A very few weeks after this meeting at Fryston, she became engaged to my father. Lord and Lady Houghton often spoke with pleasure to my father and mother of having brought them together. No more beautiful description of my mother can be given than that contained in the little poem my father wrote about this time: What pearl of price within her lay I could not know when first I met her: Almost she ask'd we should forget her: And yet we felt that something there I mark'd her goings through the day, Her eyes spoke peace; and voice and step And Faith on the fair forehead seated :- This engagement gave great satisfaction to his many friends, who felt that his was a nature too deeply affectionate to be wasted on a solitary life. From F. Temple (Archbishop of Canterbury) Rugby: Sept. 28, 1862. My dear Palgrave,-I really do not think I ever had a letter in my life which gave me such downright pleasure as |