text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 25.djvu/413

H HENDLEY, WILLIAM (1691?–1724), divine, born about 1691 at Bearstead, Kent, was the second son of William Hendley of Otham, in the same county, and Elizabeth his wife (, County Genealogies, Kent, p. 175). On 26 May 1708 he was admitted a sizar of Pembroke College, Cambridge, and graduated B.A. in 1711 (College Register). He was ordained to the curacy of Aylesford, Kent, but in October 1716 was elected to the lectureship of St. James, Clerkenwell (, Clerkenwell, ed. Wood, 2nd edit., p. 621). He took part in the Bangorian controversy by issuing ‘An Appeal to the Consciences and Common Sense of the Christian Laity, whether the Bishop of Bangor in his Preservative, &c., hath not given up the Rights of the Church and the Powers of the Christian Priesthood,’ 8vo, London, 1717. A warm advocate of charity schools, Hendley preached a sermon at Chislehurst, Kent, on 24 Aug. 1718 for the benefit of the poor children belonging to St. Anne-within-Aldersgate, London. The local justices of the peace suspected that the funds for which Hendley appealed were really intended for the Pretender, and attempted by force to prevent him and the rector of Chislehurst from making a collection. Hendley and the rector persisted, and with the three trustees, who had acted as collectors, were brought to trial on 15 July 1719, on the charge of intending to procure to themselves unlawful gains under the pretence of collecting charities for the sustenance of boys and girls. A fine of 6s. 8d. each was imposed by the judge. Defoe published a brilliant account of the trial, entitled ‘Charity still a Christian Virtue’ (, Life, &c., of Defoe, i. 312–14). A curious frontispiece, by S. Nichols, depicts the scene in the church. Hendley printed his sermon in 1720, with the title ‘The Rich Man's proper Barns.’ Meanwhile in October 1718 he had been appointed lecturer of St. Mary, Islington, Middlesex (, Islington, p. 115), and was also chaplain to Charles, lord Fitzwalter. Hendley died in the autumn of 1724, for his will, dated 25 Aug. of that year, was proved on 5 Oct. following (P. C. C. 226, Bolton). He desired to be buried in Islington churchyard, near the grave of Archdeacon Cornelius Yeate, his former vicar. By his wife Bithiah, daughter of John Honeycott, clerk and master of the charity school of St. James, Clerkenwell, he left a daughter, Mary, to whom he left property which he derived from his father at Herne and Faversham, Kent.

Hendley wrote, in addition to the works already noticed: 1. ‘Loimologia Sacra, or a Discourse shewing that the Plague … is sent immediately from God … With an appendix, wherein the case of flying from a pestilence is briefly consider'd,’ 8vo, London, 1721. 2. ‘The Great Blessedness of Communicating. Being an earnest exhortation to the Holy Communion … With a brief explanation of the nature of the Lord's Supper. … Second edition … enlarged,’ 8vo, London, 1723. 3. ‘A Defence of the Charity-Schools. Wherein the many … Objections of … the Author of the Fable of the Bees [Bernard de Mandeville] and Cato's Letter in the British Journal … are … answer'd. … To which is added … the Presentment of the Grand Jury of the British Journal,’ 4to, London, 1725; published by subscription after his death.

 HENEAGE, THOMAS (d. 1595), vice-chamberlain of Queen Elizabeth's household, was eldest son of Robert Heneage of Lincoln, auditor of the duchy of Lancaster, and surveyor of the queen's woods beyond Trent, by his first wife, Lucy, daughter and coheiress of Ralph Buckton of Hemswell, Lincolnshire.

The father, who was fourth son of John Heneage of Hainton, near Wragby, Lincolnshire, died in 1556, and was buried in St. Katherine Cree Church, London (, Diary, Camd. Soc., iii. 403). He had three brothers, Thomas, George, and John, who were thus uncles of the vice-chamberlain. The eldest, the elder (d. 1553), with whom the vice-chamberlain is often confused, was in early life gentleman usher to Wolsey, became gentleman of the king's privy chamber after Wolsey's fall, and actively supported Cromwell's ecclesiastical policy. While engaged in suppressing the Cistercian abbey near Louth, Lincolnshire, in October 1536, he was severely attacked by an angry mob, and the émeute proved the prelude to the great rebellion known as the Pilgrimage of Grace. Heneage was knighted by Henry VIII on 18 Oct. 1537, and received many grants of lands belonging to the dissolved monasteries. He died on 21 Aug. 1553, and was buried in Hainton Church, where a monument with effigies in brass of himself and his wife still remains. His extant letters to Wolsey and others are full of entertaining court gossip. He married Katharine, daughter of Sir John Skipwith, and had an only daughter, Elizabeth, who was the first wife of Sir William Willoughby, first lord Willoughby of Parham. The next brother, (d. 1549), dean and archdeacon of Lincoln, graduated LL.B.


text:
Page:The varieties of religious experience, a study in human nature.djvu/472

456 all the manners, whether negative or positive, by which hypotheses are ever tested. She can reduce their number, as some are found more open to objection. She can perhaps become the champion of one which she picks out as being the most closely verified or verifiable. She can refine upon the definition of this hypothesis, distinguishing between what is innocent over-belief and symbolism in the expression of it, and what is to be literally taken. As a result, she can offer mediation between different believers, and help to bring about consensus of opinion. She can do this the more successfully, the better she discriminates the common and essential from the individual and local elements of the religious beliefs which she compares.

I do not see why a critical Science of Religions of this sort might not eventually command as general a public adhesion as is commanded by a physical science. Even the personally non-religious might accept its conclusions on trust, much as blind persons now accept the facts of optics—it might appear as foolish to refuse them. Yet as the science of optics has to be fed in the first instance, and continually verified later, by facts experienced by seeing persons; so the science of religions would depend for its original material on facts of personal experience, and would have to square itself with personal experience through all its critical reconstructions. It could never get away from concrete life, or work in a conceptual vacuum. It would forever have to confess, as every science confesses, that the subtlety of nature flies beyond it, and that its formulas are but approximations. Philosophy lives in words, but truth and fact well up into our lives in ways that exceed verbal formulation. There is in the living act of perception always something that glimmers and twinkles and will not be caught, and for which reflection

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 25.djvu/414

H at Cambridge in 1510, and was incorporated at Oxford in 1522; was chaplain to Wolsey and to John Longland, bishop of Lincoln; held prebends in Lincoln, Salisbury, and York Cathedrals; became treasurer of Lincoln in 1521, archdeacon of Oxford in 1522, dean of Lincoln in 1528, archdeacon of Taunton in 1533, rector of Sutton Coldfield, Warwickshire, and custos of the college of Tattersall in 1534, and archdeacon of Lincoln in 1542. He resigned the deanery of Lincoln for a pension before 1544, but remained archdeacon of Lincoln till his death, about September 1549. He was buried in Lincoln Cathedral (cf., Athenæ Cantabr. i. 95, 537; , Fasti, ed. Bliss, i. 61, 63, 124; , Fasti). The third brother, John Heneage, had two sons, George (d. 1595) and William (d. 1610), both of whom acted as sheriffs of Lincolnshire, and both of whom were knighted. The latter's son Thomas was also knighted in 1603.

Heneage, the vice-chamberlain, matriculated from Queens' College, Cambridge, in May 1549, and was elected M.P. for Stamford in 1553. On the death of his father, 27 July 1556, he succeeded to his estates. Queen Elizabeth appointed him a gentleman of the privy chamber soon after her accession, and he sat in the parliament of 1562–3 as M.P. for Boston. When attending the queen on her visit to Cambridge in August 1564, he was created M.A. In 1565 he was admitted to Gray's Inn, and about January 1569–70 was appointed treasurer of the queen's chamber. He was M.P. for Lincolnshire in the parliaments of 1571 and 1572, and for Essex from 1585 until his death. He was knighted at Windsor on 1 Dec. 1577, and was appointed by Sir William Cordell master of the rolls, with his brother Michael (see below) keeper of the records in the Tower about the same time. Some dispute as to the fees due to them as ‘members and ministers’ of the court of chancery arose in 1582 (cf. Egerton Papers, Camd. Soc., p. 91). Heneage sat on the special commissions for the trials of Dr. William Parry, 25 Feb. 1584–5; of Sir John Perrot, 22 March 1591–2; of Patrick O'Cullen, 21 Feb. 1593–4; and of Roderigo Lopez, 25 Feb. 1593–4. In May 1585 he and Sir Walter Ralegh were appointed to inquire into a dispute about the ransom of English captives in Barbary, and their report is printed in Edwards's ‘Life of Ralegh,’ ii. 29–32.

Elizabeth trusted Heneage. It was reported in 1565 that he was in such good favour with her as to excite the jealousy of Leicester (, Elizabeth, i. 209). He and his wife constantly exchanged New-year's gifts with her, and she made him many valuable grants of land, chiefly in Essex. On 13 Aug. 1564 the queen granted him the reversion of the estate of Copthall, Essex, where he subsequently erected an elaborate mansion from the designs of John Thorpe. In November 1570 she induced the town of Colchester to make Kingswood Heath over to him; in 1573 she gave him the manor and rectory of Epping; in 1576 the manor of Bretts in Westham-Burnels, and a share in the manor of Brightlingsea. He received in later life the manors of Ravenston and Stoke Goldington, Buckinghamshire, with other lands in Northamptonshire (about 1588); the manor and hospital of Horning, Norfolk, formerly belonging to the see of Norwich (November 1588). John, lord Lumley, also made over to him the manor of Helfholme, Yorkshire, which Edward Carlton also claimed. In 1566 he was granted the office of receiver and treasurer of the tenths of the profits of salt manufacture, under the patent granted to Francis Bertie of Antwerp. In 1581 Heneage subscribed 200l. for Edward Fenton's expedition to Cathay (Cal. State Papers, Colonial, 1513–1616, Nos. 182, 183).

When Leicester offended the queen by accepting the governorship of the Low Countries in February 1586, Heneage was sent to bear expressions of the queen's displeasure. He was instructed to inform the States General that Elizabeth would not permit Leicester to hold the office to which they had appointed him. In the course of the negotiations he somewhat strained his directions by telling the States General that the queen would not make peace with Spain without consulting them. Elizabeth hotly resented this admission, and wrote fiercely to Heneage, repudiating his words. Finally, in May he succeeded in reconciling for the time the conflicting parties, and on his return to England in June was received with favour by the queen (cf. Leycester, Correspondence, Camd. Soc., passim). In September 1589 he succeeded Sir Christopher Hatton [q. v.] as vice-chamberlain of the royal household, and became a privy councillor. He was paymaster of the forces raised in July 1588 to resist the Spanish Armada. Writing to Leicester on 17 July he informs him of a conference at which he was present respecting the best means of meeting a possible attack by the enemy on London. He became chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, and high steward of Hull in 1590, and seems to have removed from his private residence, known as Heneage House, in Bevis Marks, to the official mansion in the Savoy connected with the duchy of Lancaster. There he entertained the queen on 7 Dec. 1594, although in the early months of the year he had, like Essex, been out of favour with her, and there


text:
Page:The varieties of religious experience, a study in human nature.djvu/471

Rh surely abstract reasoning cannot give them the support they are in need of. Conceptual processes can class facts, define them, interpret them; but they do not produce them, nor can they reproduce their individuality. There is always a plus, a thisness, which feeling alone can answer for. Philosophy in this sphere is thus a secondary function, unable to warrant faith's veracity, and so I revert to the thesis which I announced at the beginning of this lecture.

In all sad sincerity I think we must conclude that the attempt to demonstrate by purely intellectual processes the truth of the deliverances of direct religious experience is absolutely hopeless.

It would be unfair to philosophy, however, to leave her under this negative sentence. Let me close, then, by briefly enumerating what she can do for religion. If she will abandon metaphysics and deduction for criticism and induction, and frankly transform herself from theology into science of religions, she can make herself enormously useful.

The spontaneous intellect of man always defines the divine which it feels in ways that harmonize with its temporary intellectual prepossessions. Philosophy can by comparison eliminate the local and the accidental from these definitions. Both from dogma and from worship she can remove historic incrustations. By confronting the spontaneous religious constructions with the results of natural science, philosophy can also eliminate doctrines that are now known to be scientifically absurd or incongruous.

Sifting out in this way unworthy formulations, she can leave a residuum of conceptions that at least are possible. With these she can deal as hypotheses, testing them in


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 25.djvu/415

H he died on 17 Oct. 1595. He was buried on 20 Nov. in the chapel of the Virgin behind the choir in St. Paul's Cathedral, and an elaborate monument, with recumbent figures of himself and his first wife, and an inscription, ascribed to Camden, was placed above his grave.

Heneage's friends included Sir William Pickering, of whose will he was an executor, and the expenses of whose monument in St. Helen's Church, Bishopsgate, he helped to defray; Sir Christopher Hatton, with whom he was in repeated correspondence, both officially and privately; Sir Philip Sidney, who bequeathed to him a jewel worth 20l.; and Leicester, who left him jewels or plate worth 40l., and speaks of him in his will as his good old friend. William Fleetwood (1535?–1594) [q. v.] often saw him in London, and regarded him as a ‘gentleman of reputation’ (, Elizabeth, ii. 19–20). Heneage and his first wife were also friendly with John Foxe [q. v.], the martyrologist, while the latter lived at Waltham, in the neighbourhood of Heneage's mansion of Copthall. Foxe dedicated to Heneage an appendix to his ‘De Oliva Evangelica,’ 1577. Tobie or Tobias Mathew was another protégé, and Heneage urged his promotion to the deanery of Durham in 1581. In 1594 he promised Essex to assist in the promotion of Bacon to the vacant solicitor-generalship.

Heneage's first wife was Anne, daughter of Sir Nicholas Poyntz of Iron Acton, Gloucestershire, who died at Modsey, Surrey, on 19 Nov. 1593 (cf. Visitation of Gloucestershire, Harl. Soc., xxi. 134). A portrait of her, belonging to Charles Butler, esq., was exhibited at the Tudor Exhibition in 1890. By her he had a daughter, Elizabeth, born on 9 July 1556 in London, who married in 1572 Moyle, eldest son of Sir Thomas Finch, and was ancestress of the Finches and Finch-Hattons, earls of Winchilsea [see under, ad fin.] Heneage's second wife (whom he married on 2 May 1594) was Mary, eldest daughter of Anthony Browne, first viscount Montagu, K.G., and widow of Henry Wriothesley, second earl of Southampton [q. v.] She afterwards married Sir William Hervey, and died about 1607.

Many of Heneage's letters are at the Record Office and among the Harleian, Lansdowne, and Cottonian manuscripts at the British Museum. Two are printed in Wright's ‘Elizabeth,’ ii. 378, 409, and one is in ‘Letters of Eminent Literary Men,’ Camd. Soc., p. 48. Fourteen of his letters to Hatton appear in Nicolas's ‘Life of Sir Christopher Hatton.’

(1540–1600), antiquary, Sir Thomas's younger brother, elected fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge, in 1563 (B.A. 1562–3, M.A. 1566), was chosen M.P. for Arundel in 1571, for East Grinstead in 1572, for Tavistock in February 1588–9, and for Wigan in February 1592–3. With his brother Thomas, Michael was appointed a keeper of the records in the Tower about 1578, and applied himself energetically to the duties of his office. He was a member of the Society of Antiquaries, founded in 1572, and two papers by him read before the society—‘of the Antiquity of Arms in England,’ and ‘of Sterling Money’—were printed in Hearne's ‘Curious Discourses,’ 2nd edit. i. 172, ii. 321. A manuscript by him, ‘Collections out of various Charters, &c., relating to the Noble Families in England,’ is in the Cottonian Library (Claudius C.I.). The university of Cambridge thanked him for the assistance he rendered to Robert Hare [q. v.], the compiler of the university records, and Thomas Milles acknowledges his aid in his ‘Catalogue of Honor.’ He lived for many years in the parish of St. Catharine Coleman, London, but possessed some landed property, chiefly in Essex. He died on 30 Dec. 1600, having married, on 12 Aug. 1577, Grace, daughter of Robert Honeywood of Charing, Kent. She survived him, and by her he had a family of ten children (, Athenæ Cantabr. ii. 293).

 HENFREY, ARTHUR (1819–1859), botanist, was born of English parents at Aberdeen on 1 Nov. 1819. He studied medicine and surgery at St. Bartholomew's Hospital, London, and was admitted a member of the College of Surgeons in 1843. Weak health and a tendency to asthma rendering medical practice impossible, he took to scientific pursuits, especially botany.

In 1847 he lectured on plants at the medical school, St. George's Hospital; succeeded Edward Forbes [q. v.] in the botanical chair at King's College in 1853; and was examiner in natural history to the Royal Military Academy and also to the Society of Arts. He was elected an associate of the Linnean Society in 1843, and a fellow in the next


text:
Page:The varieties of religious experience, a study in human nature.djvu/469

Rh possession. The whole future of the religious life is given in its beginning, but it is given implicitly. The position of the man who has entered on the religious life is that evil, error, imperfection, do not really belong to him: they are excrescences which have no organic relation to his true nature: they are already virtually, as they will be actually, suppressed and annulled, and in the very process of being annulled they become the means of spiritual progress. Though he is not exempt from temptation and conflict, [yet] in that inner sphere in which his true life lies, the struggle is over, the victory already achieved. It is not a finite but an infinite life which the spirit lives. Every pulse-beat of its [existence] is the expression and realization of the life of God."

You will readily admit that no description of the phenomena of the religious consciousness could be better than these words of your lamented preacher and philosopher. They reproduce the very rapture of those crises of conversion of which we have been hearing; they utter what the mystic felt but was unable to communicate; and the saint, in hearing them, recognizes his own experience. It is indeed gratifying to find the content of religion reported so unanimously. But when all is said and done, has Principal Caird—and I only use him as an example of that whole mode of thinking—transcended the sphere of feeling and of the direct experience of the individual, and laid the foundations of religion in impartial reason? Has he made religion universal by coercive reasoning, transformed it from a private faith into a public certainty? Has he rescued its affirmations from obscurity and mystery?

I believe that he has done nothing of the kind, but that he has simply reaffirmed the individual's experiences in a more generalized vocabulary. And again, I can be


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 25.djvu/416

H year. Henfrey was greatly esteemed by his contemporaries for his sympathetic disposition, genial manners, and never-failing readiness to oblige and help his colleagues. He died at Turnham Green on 7 Sept. 1859. He married Elizabeth Anne, eldest daughter of the Hon. Jabez Henfrey. Henry William Henfrey [q. v.], the numismatist, was his son.

Henfrey wrote: 1. ‘Anatomical Manipulations,’ 1844, in conjunction with A. Tulk. 2. ‘Outlines of Structural and Physiological Botany,’ 1847. 3. ‘Reports and Papers on Botany,’ Ray Society, 1849. 4. ‘The Rudiments of Botany,’ 1849; 2nd edit. 1859. 5. ‘The Vegetation of Europe, its Conditions and Causes,’ 1852. 6. ‘The Relations of Botanical Science to other Branches of Knowledge,’ 1854. 7. ‘Introductory Address, King's College, London,’ 1856. 8. ‘An Elementary Course of Botany,’ 1857; fourth ed. 1884. 9. ‘On the Educational Claims of Botanical Science,’ 1857. He also translated: 1. ‘On Vegetable Cells,’ by C. Nägelli; for the Ray Society, 1846. 2. ‘Chemical Field Lectures,’ by J. A. Stöckhardt, 1847. 3. ‘The Earth, Plants, and Man,’ by J. F. Schouw, 1847. 4. ‘The Plant,’ by M. J. Schleiden, 1848. 5. ‘Principles of the Anatomy of the Vegetable Cell,’ by H. von Mohl, 1851. He edited: 1. ‘Scientific Memoirs (New Series, Natural History),’ 1837, in conjunction with Professor Huxley. 2. ‘The Botanical Gazette,’ 1849. 3. ‘Journal of the Photographic Society,’ vols. i. and ii., 1853. 4. ‘Micrographic Dictionary,’ 1854, in conjunction with J. W. Griffith. 5. A revised and enlarged edition of G. W. Francis's [q. v.] ‘Anatomy of the British Ferns,’ 1855.

The genus Henfreya of Lindley, a handsome genus of ‘Acanthaceæ,’ is merged in Asystasia of Blume.

HENFREY, HENRY WILLIAM (1852–1881), numismatist, born in London on 5 July 1852, was eldest son of Arthur Henfrey the botanist [q. v.], and was educated at Brighton College, but was prevented by an accident from proceeding to Oxford. He was encouraged in his natural bent for archæological and numismatic studies by Peter Cunningham (1816–1869) [q. v.], Joseph Bonomi (1796–1878) [q. v.], and Admiral Smyth. One of his first numismatic writings was a paper in the ‘English Mechanic’ on the Queen Anne's farthings. He joined the Numismatic Society of London in 1868, became a member of the council, and contributed to its proceedings twelve papers, chiefly on English coins and medals, which were printed in the ‘Numismatic Chronicle.’ He was a foreign member of the Belgian and French numismatic societies, and of several American societies. He was elected a member of the British Archæological Association in 1870, and contributed papers to its proceedings, especially on the medals of Cromwell, and on the coins of Bristol and Norwich. At the time of his death he was arranging for the press a history of English country mints, for which he had been for many years collecting material. This, however, has not been published. In 1870 he published ‘A Guide to the Study of English Coins,’ London, 8vo (2nd edit. by C. F. Keary, London, 1885, 8vo), a well-known and useful little handbook; and in 1877 his principal work, the ‘Numismata Cromwelliana,’ London, 4to, giving a full account of the coins, medals, and seals of the protectorate. Henfrey died, after returning from a visit to Italy, on 31 July 1881 at Widmore Cottage, his mother's house at Bromley, Kent.

 HENGHAM or HINGHAM, RALPH (d. 1311), judge, son of Sir Andrew de Hengham or Hingham, was born at St. Andrew's Manor, Hengham or Hingham, Norfolk, during the second quarter of the thirteenth century. Like most of the great lawyers of his time he was an ecclesiastic. On 29 Oct. 1274 he was preferred to the prebend of Moreton-cum-Whaddon in the church of Hereford; on 19 Oct. 1275 he was appointed to the chancellorship of the diocese of Exeter, which he resigned in 1279. In 1280 he received the prebendal stall of Cadington Major in the church of St. Paul's, which he held until his death. On 16 Nov. 1287 he was appointed to the archdeaconry of Worcester, but resigned the office in the following year (, Fasti, i. 417, 512, ii. 369, iii. 74). His rise as a lawyer must have been rapid. In 1270 he was appointed justice of the king's bench, with a salary of 40l. per annum. In November 1272 he was transferred by Edward I to the common pleas. In Michaelmas term 1273, or soon afterwards, he returned to the king's bench, of which he was chief justice in November 1274, with a salary of sixty marks per annum. In the parliament of 1289–90 he was accused of false judgment and false imprisonment, convicted, dismissed from office, and sent to the Tower, but was released on payment of a fine which contemporary chroniclers represent as of the enormous amount of 8,000l. The case is mentioned as a precedent in the year-book of the second year


text:
Page:The varieties of religious experience, a study in human nature.djvu/468

452 being absolutely divine. Social morality, love, and self-sacrifice even, merge our Self only in some other finite self or selves. They do not quite identify it with the Infinite. Man's ideal destiny, infinite in abstract logic, might thus seem in practice forever unrealizable.

"Is there, then," our author continues, "no solution of the contradiction between the ideal and the actual? We answer, There is such a solution, but in order to reach it we are carried beyond the sphere of morality into that of religion. It may be said to be the essential characteristic of religion as contrasted with morality, that it changes aspiration into fruition, anticipation into realization; that instead of leaving man in the interminable pursuit of a vanishing ideal, it makes him the actual partaker of a divine or infinite life. Whether we view religion from the human side or the divine—as the surrender of the soul to God, or as the life of God in the soul—in either aspect it is of its very essence that the Infinite has ceased to be a far-off vision, and has become a present reality. The very first pulsation of the spiritual life, when we rightly apprehend its significance, is the indication that the division between the Spirit and its object has vanished, that the ideal has become real, that the finite has reached its goal and become suffused with the presence and life of the Infinite.

"Oneness of mind and will with the divine mind and will is not the future hope and aim of religion, but its very beginning and birth in the soul. To enter on the religious life is to terminate the struggle. In that act which constitutes the beginning of the religious life—call it faith, or trust, or self-surrender, or by whatever name you will—there is involved the identification of the finite with a life which is eternally realized. It is true indeed that the religious life is progressive; but understood in the light of the foregoing idea, religious progress is not progress towards, but within the sphere of the Infinite. It is not the vain attempt by endless finite additions or increments to become possessed of infinite wealth, but it is the endeavor, by the constant exercise of spiritual activity, to appropriate that infinite inheritance of which we are already in


text:
Page:The varieties of religious experience, a study in human nature.djvu/467

Rh and absoluteness, or, in other words, an Absolute Thought or Self-Consciousness."

Here, you see, Principal Caird makes the transition which Kant did not make: he converts the omnipresence of consciousness in general as a condition of 'truth' being anywhere possible, into an omnipresent universal consciousness, which he identifies with God in his concreteness. He next proceeds to use the principle that to acknowledge your limits is in essence to be beyond them; and makes the transition to the religious experience of individuals in the following words:—

Nevertheless, Principal Caird goes on to say, so far as we are able outwardly to realize this doctrine, the balm it offers remains incomplete. Whatever we may be in posse, the very best of us in actu falls very short of


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 25.djvu/417

H of Richard III (Mich. f. 22), but the offence is there stated to have consisted in the falsification of a record, in order to reduce a fine imposed on a poor man from 13s. 4d. to 6s. 8d. Nothing is said of the committal to the Tower, and the amount of the fine is given as eight hundred marks. According to a tradition which first makes its appearance in Coke's ‘Institutes’ (pt. iv. 255), the fine was applied to building a tower in Palace Yard, opposite the entrance to Westminster Hall, with a clock which struck the hours so as to be heard within the hall. There appears to be no reason to doubt that a clock-tower which stood on the spot indicated, and was not pulled down until 1715, was erected towards the close of the thirteenth century. In the time of Elizabeth the tradition was so well known that Justice Southcote, in refusing to alter a record, observed that he did not mean to build a clock-tower (, Survey of Westminster, ed. Strype, vi. 55; Archæologia, v. 427, xxxiii. 10). The same formula was used by Chief-justice Holt on a similar occasion. After the demolition of the tower its site was marked by a sundial, with the motto ‘Discite justitiam moniti,’ until the present century (, Antiq. Westm. p. 28). Notwithstanding his disgrace, Hengham was summoned to the parliament of March 1300 among the justices and others of the council; was commissioned to perambulate the forests in the counties of Essex, Buckingham, and Oxford in the following April (Archæologia, xxxvii. 435); and on 14 Sept. 1301 was appointed chief justice of the common pleas. He was degraded, however, on the accession of Edward II, to the post of puisne judge of the same court. His last summons to parliament is dated 27 April 1309. He died on 18 May 1311, and was buried on the 27th in St. Paul's Cathedral (Chron. Edw. I and II, Rolls Ser., i. 270). His tomb was in the north aisle facing the choir, and bore the following inscription:— Per versus patet hos Anglorum quod jacet hic flos; Legum qui tuta dictavit vera statuta, Ex Hengham dictus Radulphus vir benedictus. (, St. Paul's, ed. Ellis, pp. 33, 68). Hengham is the reputed author of a register of writs, which perhaps formed the basis of the great compilation entitled ‘Registrum Cancellariæ,’ or ‘Registrum omnium Brevium,’ first printed in 1531, and styled by Coke ‘the most ancient book of the law’ (Inst. pt. iv.); also of two manuals of practice, entitled ‘Hengham Magna’ and ‘Hengham Parva,’ written in barbarous Latin, and edited by Selden in 1616. The antiquity and repute of these treatises is established by the fact that Selden mentions an English translation of them as extant in a manuscript of the time of Edward II or Edward III (, Chron. Ser. 56;, De Laudibus Legum Angliæ). Tanner (Bibl. Brit.-Hib.) mentions two other Hengham manuscripts, namely, ‘Summa Judicandi essonia,’ and ‘Cum sit necessarium,’ the first of which seems by its title to be merely a fragment of the ‘Hengham Magna.’ There are also some treatises ascribed to Hengham in the manuscript collection in the possession of Lord Tollemache, of Helmingham Hall, Suffolk (Hist. MSS. Comm. 1st Rep. App. 61).

HENGIST (d. 488), joint-founder with his brother Horsa (d. 455) of the English kingdom of Kent, belonged to a leading family of the Jutes, settled in the peninsula of Jutland, where they held land as far south as the river Sley, which runs into the sea near Schleswig. In early traditions their ancestry is traced back to the gods. Witta, who is described as their grandfather, and, according to Beowulf, ‘ruled Sueves,’ is supposed by Sir James Simpson to be the Vetta, son of Victi, whose burial is commemorated by the inscription on the Catstane at Kirkliston, between six and seven miles from Edinburgh. The suggestion is ingenious, and it is clear from Ammianus Marcellinus that Saxons, a name that might fairly be taken to include Jutes or Angles, were in Scotland, leagued with the Picts and Scots, about 364, a date at which it is quite possible for the grandfather of Hengist to have been alive. Kemble suggested, on the other hand, that not only their ancestors, who are traced back to Teutonic divinities, but Hengist and Horsa themselves, were mythical. The word ‘Hengist’ means a horse, and in the names of the hero's family ‘names of horses’ form a distinguishing part of the royal appellatives. Thus the whole story, it is suggested, may spring out of some prehistoric worship of horses. But there is sufficient contemporary evidence of the existence of Hengist and Horsa as human beings to make this theory untenable. The absence, however, of any contemporary accounts of their careers in


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 25.djvu/418

H Britain makes their biography largely matter of conjecture.

According to the best authority, the ‘Anglo-Saxon Chronicle,’ Hengist and Horsa arrived in 449 at Ebbsfleet in the parish of Minster in the Isle of Thanet ‘in aid of the Britons,’ with a few followers in three ships. Bede, who wrote nearly three centuries after the event, following a vague hint of Gildas, asserts that they came by invitation of Vortigern, king of South Britain, to aid in repelling the invasion of the Picts and Scots. Like the ‘Chronicle,’ Bede gives the year of their coming as 449. Nennius, the reputed author of the ‘Historia Britonum,’ who collected the legends on the subject current among the Welsh in the latter part of the eighth century, would seem with less probability to fix the arrival of Hengist and Horsa in 428, and says that they and their followers were exiles from their own country. Vortigern, according to all the early accounts, received the strangers hospitably, and assigned to them the Isle of Thanet for a habitation. Bede and Nennius agree in stating that when the news of their reception reached their original home very many others came to join them, until the whole of Kent was occupied. The story, as elaborated from Welsh sources in the ‘Historia Britonum,’ and by Geoffrey of Monmouth, represents that Hengist sent for his daughter and gave her to Vortigern in marriage in exchange for the whole of Kent, and that Hengist's son Aesc or Oisc, and Horsa's son Abisa, afterwards arrived with a fleet of forty galleys. But it is probable that the whole legend of Vortigern's relations with Hengist, even including the original invitation, is a myth concocted and kept alive by the Welsh to account with least discredit to themselves for the beginnings of their extermination at the hands of the Teutonic invaders. It is almost certain that there were settlements of Jutes, or of tribes nearly akin, in Kent before 449, but it is possible that on Hengist's arrival about that date Vortigern recognised their settlement, and gave it something like formal sanction (cf., Historical Essays, 1st ser. 36 sq., and his Norman Conquest, i. 9 sq.)

That in 455 a vigorous attempt was made to expel them by Vortigern, which was partially successful, is confirmed by the ‘Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.’ One victory was certainly gained by the natives at Aylesford, where Horsa was killed, but the victors (according to Nennius) lost one of their leaders, Catigern, a son of Vortigern, to whose memory it is supposed that Kits Coty House was erected, while Horsa is said to have been buried about four miles further north at Horsted, where there are still a number of large stones which may have once formed part of the ‘monumentum insigne’ spoken of by Bede. Some antiquaries, influenced by Bede's statement that the monument was in the eastern part of Kent, locate it at Stonor, but Bede was a north-country man, and not likely to be accurately informed in the matter.

Two other victories by the Britons, viz. on the river Darenth and at Folkestone, or more probably Stonor in Thanet, are reported in the Welsh legends, with the result that Hengist returned home and founded (according to Frisian legend) the town of Leyden. Shortly after (the Welsh legends continue) Vortemir, Vortigern's eldest son and Hengist's chief foe, died; whereupon Hengist, trusting to his influence over Vortigern, came back, and succeeded in making a permanent settlement, which was rendered more secure by the treacherous murder of three hundred British at a meeting to discuss terms of peace, and by the capture of Vortigern at the same time, for whose ransom Essex, Sussex, and Middlesex were surrendered. But these events are not mentioned in the ‘Anglo-Saxon Chronicle,’ and are doubtless legendary fabrications. All that seems positively known of Hengist after the battle of Aylesford is that he gained three decisive victories, with the aid of his son Aesc or Oisc, over the Britons, namely: at Crayford in 457, when the Britons forsook Kent; at ‘Wippedesfleote,’ so called from the death of one of the Jutish thanes, Wipped, in 465; and at another unnamed place, probably in south-east Kent, in 473, when ‘the Welsh fled from the English as from fire.’

In 488 Hengist died, and was succeeded by his son Aesc or Oisc, but little is known of the kingdom of Kent or its rulers till the arrival in 597 of Augustine, who found Ethelbert [q. v.] king. Ethelbert is said to have been son of Eormenric, grandson of Oisc, and great-grandson of Hengist.


text:
Page:The varieties of religious experience, a study in human nature.djvu/486

470 when we thus anticipate God by going our own way? We certainly weaken faith instead of increasing it; and each time we work thus a deliverance of our own we find it more and more difficult to trust in God, till at last we give way entirely to our natural fallen reason and unbelief prevails. How different if one is enabled to wait God's own time, and to look alone to him for help and deliverance! When at last help comes, after many seasons of prayer it may be, how sweet it is, and what a present recompense! Dear Christian reader, if you have never walked in this path of obedience before, do so now, and you will then know experimentally the sweetness of the joy which results from it."

When the supplies came in but slowly, Müller always considered that this was for the trial of his faith and patience. When his faith and patience had been sufficiently tried, the Lord would send more means. "And thus it has proved,"—I quote from his diary,—"for to-day was given me the sum of 2050 pounds, of which 2000 are for the building fund [of a certain house], and 50 for present necessities. It is impossible to describe my joy in God when I received this donation. I was neither excited nor surprised; for I look out for answers to my prayers. I believe that God hears me. Yet my heart was so full of joy that I could only sit before God, and admire him, like David in 2 Samuel vii. At last I cast myself flat down upon my face and burst forth in thanksgiving to God and in surrendering my heart afresh to him for his blessed service."

George Müller's is a case extreme in every respect, and in no respect more so than in the extraordinary narrowness of the man's intellectual horizon. His God was, as he often said, his business partner. He seems to have been for Müller little more than a sort of supernatural clergyman interested in the congregation of tradesmen and others in Bristol who were his saints, and in the orphanages and other enterprises, but unpossessed of


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 25.djvu/419

H HENGLER, FREDERICK CHARLES (1820–1887), circus proprietor, was born at Cambridge in 1820. His father, Henry Hengler, was a well-known tight-rope dancer at Vauxhall Gardens. In 1807 he was at the Olympic Theatre, and afterwards had an engagement with Ducrow, in whose service he remained for several years, during which period he taught the circus business to his three sons, Edward Henry, John Milton, and Frederick Charles. After leaving Ducrow, he joined Price and Powell's circus. In 1841 Frederick Charles was a violin and trumpet player in Mrs. James Wild's theatre at Bradford. He afterwards attended to the business department of Price and Powell's travelling circus; but when they became embarrassed they sold their circus to him and his brother Edward, who for some years carried on the business with varied success. About 1856 Edward retired, and with his brother John kept a riding school at Liverpool, where he died on 8 Jan. 1865, aged 45. Frederick Charles, now sole proprietor, on 15 March 1857 established a circus in Liverpool, and erected buildings at Glasgow and Dublin in 1863, at Hull in 1866, at Bristol in 1867, and at Birmingham in 1868. During the summer of 1865 he gave a series of performances at the Stereorama in Cremorne Gardens, Chelsea. In 1871 he purchased the Palais Royal, Argyll Street, Regent Street, London, and converted it into a circus. Here, in addition to the usual equestrian scenes of the ring, he introduced spectacular pieces played by children. ‘Cinderella,’ brought out at Christmas 1871, was very popular. In 1884 Hengler rebuilt his London circus, and reopened it on 14 Jan. 1885. He himself never attempted any character parts, but was a great horse-tamer, and frequently exhibited his trained animals. He died suddenly at his residence, Cambridge House, 27 Fitzjohn's Avenue, Hampstead, Middlesex, on 28 Sept. 1887, and was buried at West Hampstead cemetery. By his wife, Mary Ann Frances Hengler, he left three sons and six daughters. His personalty was sworn to be 59,665l. 2s. 5d. The management of the circuses was left to his two younger sons. A daughter, Jenny Louise, obtained a wide reputation as an accomplished equestrienne.

HENLEY,. [See, first , 1752–1830, diplomatist; , second , 1789–1841.]

HENLEY, ANTHONY (d. 1711), wit and politician, was son of Sir Robert Henley of the Grange, near Arlesford, Hampshire, M.P. for Andover in 1679, who married Barbara, daughter of Sir Edward Hungerford. Sir Robert Henley, master of the court of king's bench, on the pleas side, a place then worth 4,000l. a year, was his grandfather. Out of the profits of this post Anthony inherited a fortune of more than 3,000l. a year, part of which arose from the ground-rents of the houses in Lincoln's Inn Fields, London. He was a candidate for a demyship at Magdalen College, Oxford, when Dr. Thomas Goodwin [q. v.] was its president under the protectorate, and he gave Addison an account, which was afterwards inserted in the ‘Spectator, No. 494, Sept. 26, 1712,’ of his interview with that grim divine, when he was so alarmed by the only question put to him, whether he was prepared for death, that he could not be induced to present himself again for examination. At Oxford he studied carefully the classical writers, particularly the poets, and when he came to London with a good income and an ample store of classical quotations, he was welcomed by the wits, and was very friendly with Lord Dorset and Lord Sunderland. For some time he was devoted to pleasure, and as his generosity to poor authors became known, he was fed with soft dedications. But after he had recruited his resources with the sum of 30,000l., through his marriage with Mary, daughter and coheiress of Peregrine Bertie (second son of Montagu, earl of Lindsey), by Susan, daughter and coheiress of Sir Edward Monins of Waldershare, Kent, he plunged into politics. He sat for Andover from 1698 to 1700, and for the conjoint borough of Weymouth and Melcombe Regis from 5 Feb. 1702.

As Henley consistently adhered to the whigs, his opponents made strenuous endeavours, but without success, to displace him at Weymouth, and in 1710 they unsuccessfully petitioned against his return. In 1701 he and his friend, Richard Norton of Southwick, Hampshire, also a strong whig, presented an address from the grand jury of that county, praying for the king's return. On 14 Dec. 1709 he moved the address to Queen Anne, urging the bestowal on Hoadly of ‘some dignity in the church’ for his frequent justification of revolution principles. Henley was one of the foremost wits among the whigs who welcomed Swift's appearance in London life after the publication of the ‘Tale of a Tub.’ He once said of Swift that


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 25.djvu/420

H he would be ‘a beast for ever, after the order of Melchisedeck,’ and Swift reported the witticism in the ‘Journal to Stella,’ which contains many other notices of Henley. Three letters from him to Swift in 1708–10 are in the latter's ‘Works,’ xv. 294–6, 339–44. Henley died of apoplexy in August 1711, and it appears from a letter written in 1733 that Swift continued his friendship to the sons. The widow afterwards married, as his second wife, her relative, Henry Bertie, third son of James, first earl of Abingdon. Henley left three sons, of whom the eldest, Anthony, M.P. for Southampton from 1727 to 1734, was a jester like his father, as appears from his letter to his constituents in the excitement over the excise bill, which is printed in ‘Notes and Queries,’ 2nd ser. xii. 107; and the younger sons were Robert Henley, earl of Northington [q. v.], and Bertie, a prebendary of Bristol (d. 1760). One of his sisters married Sir Theodore Jansen [q. v.], the other was the wife of Henry Cornish, M.P. The royal assent was given on 22 May 1712 to a bill arranging for the payment of the portions of his younger children (Journals of House of Commons, April and May 1712).

An anecdote on ‘Honest Ned,’ which originally came from Henley, is introduced into No. 11 of the ‘Tatler,’ and Nichols in a note thereto states that he was understood ‘on good authority’ to be the author of some papers in that periodical. The first letter in No. 26 was probably one of his communications, and so was the letter in No. 193, under the character of Downes, the prompter, in which Harley's administration, then just formed, was ridiculed under the disguise of a change of managers at the theatre. When the whig ‘Medley’ was started by Maynwaring as a counterblast to the tory ‘Examiner,’ one of the papers was written by Henley, and he is said to have aided William Harrison (1685–1713) [q. v.] in his continuation of the ‘Tatler.’ An anecdote told by him respecting the death of Charles II is inserted in Burnet's ‘History of his own Time,’ and was severely criticised by Bevil Higgons in his volume of ‘Remarks’ on that work (pp. 280–2). Pope said of the ‘Memoirs of Scriblerus’ that Henley contributed ‘the life of his music-master, Tom D'Urfey,’ and added ‘a chapter by way of episode.’ It is noted that his strength lay in describing the manners and foibles of servants, and possibly some of the pretended communications from them in the ‘Spectator’ came from his pen. He sang well, and played several instruments with skill, and was a recognised authority in musical matters. The Purcells shared in his patronage. The songs composed by Daniel Purcell for the opera of ‘Brutus of Alba’ were dedicated on their publication in 1696 to Norton and Henley, and the music written by that master for Oldmixon's opera of ‘The Grove, or Love's Paradise,’ was worked out on a visit to Henley and other friends in Hampshire. He himself wrote several pieces for music, and almost finished Daniel Purcell's opera of ‘Alexander.’ Garth dedicated to him his ‘Dispensary,’ and he was a member of the Kit-Cat Club. His portrait by Kneller was engraved by John Smith in 1694.

HENLEY, JOHN (1692–1756), generally known as, an eccentric London preacher, was born 3 Aug. 1692 at Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire, where his father, the Rev. Simon Henley, had succeeded John Dowell, his grandfather by his mother's side, as vicar of the parish. Henley was educated at Melton Mowbray grammar school, and privately at Oakham, Rutlandshire, where he devoted special attention to Greek and Hebrew. He entered St. John's College, Cambridge, in 1709, graduated B.A. in 1712, and M.A. in 1716. The method of teaching prevalent in the university he found to be unduly restrictive. He was ‘uneasy that the art of thinking regularly on all subjects and for all functions was not the prevailing instruction.’ Owing to his impatience of the systems ‘ready carved out for him’ he ‘incurred the danger of losing interest in his studies, as well as incurring the scandal of heterodoxy and ill principle.’ From an early period he seems to have recognised that he had a special vocation for introducing new methods of conveying both secular and religious knowledge. He did not profess to be a reformer, except as regards methods, and was destitute of the intellectual ability necessary to enable him to distinguish himself as an opponent of current creeds. His chief gift, apart from his pompous but effective elocution, was a ready wit which gained much of its piquancy from contrast with the otherwise grave and solemn character of his


text:
Page:The varieties of religious experience, a study in human nature.djvu/488

472 with such answers, and books are devoted to the subject, but for us Müller's case will suffice.

A less sturdy beggar-like fashion of leading the prayerful life is followed by innumerable other Christians. Persistence in leaning on the Almighty for support and guidance will, such persons say, bring with it proofs, palpable but much more subtle, of his presence and active influence. The following description of a 'led' life, by a German writer whom I have already quoted, would no doubt appear to countless Christians in every country as if transcribed from their own personal experience. One finds in this guided sort of life, says Dr. Hilty,—

"That books and words (and sometimes people) come to one's cognizance just at the very moment in which one needs them; that one glides over great dangers as if with shut eyes, remaining ignorant of what would have terrified one or led one astray, until the peril is past—this being especially the case with temptations to vanity and sensuality; that paths on which one ought not to wander are, as it were, hedged off with thorns; but that on the other side great obstacles are suddenly removed; that when the time has come for something, one suddenly receives a courage that formerly failed, or perceives the root of a matter that until then was concealed, or discovers thoughts, talents, yea, even pieces of knowledge and insight, in one's self, of which it is impossible to say whence they come; finally, that persons help us or decline to help us, favor us or refuse us, as if they had to do so against their will, so that often those indifferent or even unfriendly to us yield us the greatest service and furtherance. (God takes often their worldly goods, from those whom he leads, at just the right


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 25.djvu/421

H prelections. On 3 Feb. 1712, while an undergraduate at Cambridge, he wrote, under the name of ‘Dr. Quir,’ a witty letter to the ‘Spectator’ on Cambridge matters. In the same year he was appointed assistant in the free school of Melton Mowbray, and shortly afterwards he succeeded as head-master. Here he established the practice of ‘improving elocution by the public speaking of passages in the classics morning and afternoon, as well as orations.’ Shortly after graduating M.A. in 1716 he was ordained, and for some years held a curacy in his native town, but in 1721 he came to London, where he was reader at the church of St. George the Martyr. He also obtained a lectureship in the city, where, according to his own account, he ‘preached more charity sermons, was more numerously attended, and raised more money for the poor children than any other preacher.’ But his eccentricities were too patent to permit him to retain his posts in London. Much against his inclination he was compelled to retire, about 1724, to the living of Chelmondiston in Suffolk. ‘His popularity and his enterprising spirit, and introducing regular actions into the pulpits were the true causes,’ he asserted, ‘why some obstructed his rising in town from envy, jealousy, and a disrelish of those who are not equal for becoming complete spaniels.’

Recognising that his gifts were not properly appreciated within the church, Henley resolved to break off his connection with it. In 1726 he rented rooms in Newport Market above the market-house. Here every Sunday he preached a sermon in the morning, and in the evening delivered an oration on some special theological theme; and lectured on Wednesdays on ‘some other science.’ He struck medals to distribute as tickets to subscribers, engraved with a star rising to the meridian, with the motto ‘Ad summa,’ and below ‘Inveniam viam aut faciam.’ He advertised on Saturdays the subject of his next oration in mysterious terms to arouse curiosity and draw a crowd. On one occasion a large audience of shoemakers assembled, enticed by the promise that he would show them a new and speedy method of making shoes. This, he explained in the course of his oration, was by cutting the tops off boots. On another occasion he delivered a ‘butchers' lecture,’ lauding the trade extravagantly. Henley claimed to be the ‘restorer of eloquence to the church.’ Pope writes of him in the ‘Dunciad,’ iii. 205–6:— Oh great Restorer of the good old Stage, Preacher at once, and Zany of thy age! Henley's ritual was gaudy and elaborate. He preached in a pulpit, ridiculed by Pope as ‘Henley's guilt tub’ (Dunciad, ii. 2), which blazed in gold and velvet. In his service book he sometimes printed his creeds and doxologies in red letters. His methods of oratory are described in his own writings on the subject.

Henley did not confine himself to ecclesiastical duties. As early as 1724 he had joined Curll, the pirate publisher, in a correspondence with Sir Robert Walpole offering to suppress a libellous attack on the ministers by Mrs. Manley. He wrote to Walpole arranging an interview, 4 March 1723–4, and added, ‘my intentions are both honourable and sincere, and I doubt not but they will meet with a suitable return’ (Notes and Queries, 2nd ser. ii. 443). In behalf of Walpole he was, in 1730, employed, at a salary of 100l., to ridicule the arguments of the ‘Craftsman,’ the opposition journal, in a new periodical called the ‘Hyp Doctor,’ which appeared at intervals from 15 Dec. 1730 to 2 Dec. 1739. Here he assumed many pseudonyms, such as Sir Isaac Ratcliffe of Elbow Lane, Alexander Ratcliffe, Jonadab Swift, Bryan Bayonet, &c. On 4 Dec. 1746 he was apprehended on a charge of ‘endeavouring to alienate the minds of his Majesty's subjects from their allegiance by his Sunday harangues at his Oratory Chapel,’ but in a few days was admitted to bail, and never underwent a trial. In 1747 he engaged in a public controversy with Foote on the stage of the Haymarket Theatre, displaying remarkable proficiency in low buffoonery. Since 1729 he had been established in Lincoln's Inn Fields near Clare Market. He died on 14 Oct. 1756.

Henley published: 1. ‘Esther, Queen of Persia, an Historical Poem in four books,’ 1714; there is much tame or turgid writing in this poem, but it is in parts oratorically effective. 2. ‘The Complete Linguist with a Preface to every Grammar,’ London, 1719–21; seven numbers only appeared, on Spanish, French, Italian, Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and Chaldee. 3. ‘Apotheosis, a Funeral Oration sacred to the Memory of John, Duke of Marlborough,’ London, 1722. 4. ‘The History and Advantages of Divine Revelation, with the honour that is due to the Word of God, especially in regard to the most perfect manner of delivering it, formed on the Ancient Laws of Speaking and Action, being an Essay to restore them,’ 1725. 5. ‘An Introduction to an English Grammar,’ 1726. 6. ‘The Primitive Liturgy for the Use of the Oratory,’ 1726; 4th edit., 1727. 7. ‘Letters and Advertisements,’ 1727. 8. ‘The Appeal of the Oratory and the First Ages of Christianity,’ 1727. 9. ‘The Art of Speaking in Public,’ 1727. 10. ‘Oratory Transactions, No. 1,’


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 25.djvu/422

H 1728; containing, in addition to a ‘general preface,’ a ‘Biography of Mr. Henley,’ professedly by A. Welstede, but evidently by Henley himself, ‘A Defence of the Oratory against Objections,’ an ‘Idea of what is taught in the Weekday Academy,’ and ‘Plans and Rules of the Conferences and Disputations,’ and other papers. 11. ‘Oratory Transactions, No. 2,’ 1729. 12. ‘Conflicts of the Deathbed,’ 1729. 13. ‘Cato Condemned,’ 1730. 14. ‘Light in a Candlestick,’ 1730. 15. ‘Samuel Sleeping in the Tabernacle,’ a pamphlet against Dr. S. Chandler, 1730. 16. ‘The Orators' Miscellany,’ 1731. 17. ‘Deism Defeated and Christianity Defended,’ 1731. 18. ‘The Origin of Pain and Evil,’ 1731. 19. ‘A Course of Academical Lectures,’ 1731. 20. ‘Select Discourses on Several Subjects,’ 1737. 21. ‘The Orators' Magazine,’ 1748. 22. ‘Law and Arguments in Vindication of the University of Oxford,’ 1750. 23. ‘Second St. Paul and Equity Hall,’ 1755. He wrote two ‘Spectator’ papers—Nos. 94 and 578. He also edited ‘The Works of John Sheffield, Duke of Buckingham,’ 1722; and translated 1. Aubert de Vertot's ‘Critical History of the Establishment of the Bretons among the Gauls,’ 1722. 2. Pliny's ‘Epistles and Panegyrics,’ 1724. 3. Montfaucon's ‘Travels in Italy,’ 1725. His original manuscripts and manuscript collections were sold by auction, 11–15 June 1759. About fifty volumes of his lectures, in his own hand, are now in Brit. Mus. MSS. Addit. 10346–9, 11768–801, 12199, 12200, 19920–4. Other volumes by him are in the Guildhall Library, London. Henley is the subject of two well-known humorous plates by Hogarth—one, ‘The Christening of the Child,’ the other ‘The Oratory.’

 HENLEY, JOSEPH WARNER (1793–1884), president of the board of trade, born at Putney in 1793, was the only son of Joseph Henley, an eminent London merchant. His father having purchased the estate of Waterperry in Oxfordshire of Mr. Curzon in 1814 removed thither, and served the office of high sheriff in 1817. Joseph Warner Henley entered Magdalen College, Oxford, as a gentleman-commoner 27 April 1812, and graduated B.A. 1815 and M.A. 1834. He spent two years (1815–17) in his father's office in London, and in after life often referred to the advantage this training proved to him. He succeeded in due course to the position of a country gentleman at Waterperry, soon taking a leading part in county and magisterial business. In 1846 he became chairman of the quarter sessions. In 1841 he was elected M.P. for Oxfordshire in the conservative interest, and held the seat till his retirement from public life in 1878. Henley was nearly fifty years of age when he entered parliament, but his plain common sense and clear insight into business soon made him conspicuous. In 1852, when Lord Derby formed a government, Henley took office as president of the board of trade, and became a privy councillor. His tenure of office was brief, for the government lasted only nine months. In 1854 the university of Oxford conferred on him the honorary degree of D.C.L. When Lord Derby and Mr. Disraeli in March 1858 formed a second conservative ministry, Henley once more joined the cabinet as president of the board of trade; but in the following February, differing from his colleagues on their policy of parliamentary reform, especially as regarded the county franchise, he, together with Mr. Spencer Walpole, resigned his office and his seat in the cabinet. He never held office again, though in July 1866 he was offered by Lord Derby the seals of the home office, which he declined on account of partial deafness. Henley frequently sat on royal commissions. As a member of that for the reform of the court of chancery he displayed much knowledge and sagacity. In January 1878, owing to increasing infirmity, he retired from parliament at the age of eighty-five. His uprightness, consistency, and prudence, as well as the shrewdness of his homely sayings, gained him the esteem of all parties. Henley died 9 Dec. 1884, when nearly ninety-two years old. He married, on 9 Dec. 1817, Georgiana, fourth daughter of John Fane, esq., M.P., of Wormsley. She died 15 June 1864. Henley left a large family. His eldest son, Joseph John Henley, C.B., of Waterperry House, J.P. and D.L. for Oxfordshire, was general inspector of the local government board from 1867 to 1892.

 HENLEY, PHOCION (1728–1764), musical composer, nephew of Sir Robert Henley, earl of Northington, lord chancellor [q. v.], was born at Wootton Abbots in Dorsetshire in 1728. He matriculated at Wadham College, Oxford, 7 May 1746, and graduated B.A. on 14 Feb. 1749. As an undergraduate he spent much time in the


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 25.djvu/423

H study of music. From 1759 until his death, 29 Aug. 1764, he was rector of St. Andrew-by-the-Wardrobe and St. Anne's, Blackfriars.

He was the composer of several chants—one of which is still occasionally heard—and anthems. He also published a set of six hymns, under the title of ‘The Cure of Saul,’ and, in collaboration with Thomas Sharp, ‘Divine Harmony, being a Collection of Psalm and Hymn Tunes in Score, &c.,’ London, 1798.

HENLEY, ROBERT, first (1708?–1772), lord chancellor, was the second son of Anthony Henley [q. v.] Henley was educated at Westminster School. He matriculated at St. John's College, Oxford, on 19 Nov. 1724, aged 16, was elected a fellow of All Souls, and graduated B.A. on 10 March 1728–9, and M.A. on 5 July 1733. He was admitted a student of the Inner Temple on 1 Feb. 1728, and having been called to the bar on 23 June 1732, joined the western circuit. In his youth he was a hard drinker, and when suffering in later life from a severe fit of gout was overheard in the House of Lords muttering to himself, ‘If I had known that these legs were one day to carry a chancellor, I'd have taken better care of them when I was a lad’ (Memoir, p. 13). His rough and boisterous manners at the bar not unfrequently involved him in altercations with witnesses, and Bishop Newton records a curious anecdote of his being compelled to apologise at Bristol to a pugnacious quaker for the liberties which he had taken with him in cross-examination (Works, vol. i.; Life, pp. 16, 17). Henley spent most of his leisure time at Bath, where he made the acquaintance of Jane, daughter and coheiress of Sir John Huband, bart., of Ipsley, Warwickshire, whom he married on 1 Dec. 1743. His elder brother Anthony (whose marriage to Elizabeth, elder daughter of James, third earl of Berkeley, is amusingly referred to in Autobiography, 1st ser. i. 156–7) dying in 1745, Henley came into possession of the paternal estates in Hampshire and Dorsetshire, together with the town house on the south side of Lincoln's Inn Fields, in which he resided when lord chancellor. On 23 April 1745 he was admitted a member of Lincoln's Inn, for the purpose of holding chambers in that inn. At the general election in the summer of 1747 he was returned to parliament for the city of Bath, which constituency he continued to represent until June 1757. He joined the Leicester House party, and soon after the death of Frederick, prince of Wales (March 1751), was appointed solicitor-general to the young prince, afterwards George III. On 12 July 1751 he became a king's counsel, and in Michaelmas term was elected a bencher of the Inner Temple. In this year he was also appointed recorder of Bath. Henley was a very successful leader, not only on the western circuit, but at Westminster, both in banc and at nisi prius. In 1754 he was promoted to the post of attorney-general to the Prince of Wales, and on 6 Nov. 1756 was appointed attorney-general in the Devonshire and Pitt administration, being knighted the same day. In accordance with the practice at that time he left the court of king's bench on receiving this appointment, and removed to the court of chancery. On the formation of the coalition ministry by the Duke of Newcastle and Pitt, in the following year Henley, on Pitt's recommendation, received the appointment of lord keeper of the great seal. He was sworn into office and admitted to the privy council on 30 June 1757, and was duly installed in the court of chancery on the first day of Michaelmas term. Henley took his seat as speaker of the House of Lords on 1 July 1757 (Journals of the House of Lords, xxix. 189). He presided over the house as a commoner for nearly three years, but on 27 March 1760 was created Lord Henley, Baron of Grainge in the county of Southampton, in anticipation of the trial of Lord Ferrers for the murder of his steward, John Johnson, it being thought right that the first law officer of the crown should preside. He sat as lord high steward on that occasion on 16 April 1760 and the two following days (, State Trials, 1813, xix. 885–973). Horace Walpole, in a letter to George Montagu, dated 19 April 1760, ridicules his undignified manners (Letters, Cunningham's edit. iii. 299), but his judgment seems to have been both grave and appropriate (, State Trials, xix. 958–959). On 16 Jan. 1761, having delivered up the seal to George III, Henley received it back with the title of lord chancellor (London Gazette, 1761, No. 10070). As a further reward for his steadfast allegiance to the king, he was created Viscount Henley and Earl of Northington on 19 May 1764, and on 21 Aug. in the same year was appointed lord-lieutenant of Hampshire. On 16 April 1765 and the following day he presided as lord high steward at the trial of William, fifth lord Byron, for killing William Chaworth in a duel (, State Trials, xix. 1177–1236). Though frequently incapacitated from his duties by repeated attacks of gout, Northington continued to act as lord chancellor during


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 25.djvu/424

H the successive administrations of Bute, Grenville, and Rockingham. Northington was undoubtedly the cause of Rockingham's dismissal. He had already differed with his colleagues on the commercial treaty with Russia, which had been negotiated by Sir George Macartney, when at the cabinet meeting held at his house in Lincoln's Inn Fields on 4 July 1766 he expressed in the strongest terms his disapprobation of the report which had been drawn up for the civil government of Canada. He subsequently declared that he would not attend any more cabinet meetings, and in an audience with the king advised him to send for Pitt. After some negotiations between Pitt and Temple, in which he took part, Northington was appointed lord president of the council on 30 July 1766 (Camden becoming lord chancellor), in the administration of Grafton and Chatham. A pension and the reversion of the hanaper for two lives upon the death of the second Duke of Chandos were granted to him (see letters between Northington and Pitt in the Chatham Correspondence, 1838, vol. ii.) Owing to increasing infirmities Northington was prevented from taking any important part in the new administration. In May or June 1767 he expressed his wish to retire, but consented to remain in office for some months longer at the king's desire. He resigned on 23 Dec. 1767, and was succeeded as lord president by Granville Leveson, earl Gower. In the course of the following year Northington was offered the post of lord privy seal; but though his health had much improved he declined the offer. He died at the Grange (‘that sweet house of my lord keeper's’) (, Letters, iii. 162) on 14 Jan. 1772, aged 64, and was buried in Northington Church, where a monument was erected to his memory by his daughters.

In Lord Eldon's judgment Northington was ‘a great lawyer, and very firm in delivering his opinion.’ It has, however, been truly remarked that his boldness in delivering his opinions was not quite equalled by his care and caution in forming them. He was a thoroughly upright judge. When Fox consulted him whether the king could not revoke the patents granted in former reigns, and whether the case might not be laid before the twelve judges for their opinion, Northington is said to have replied, ‘Yes, they might lay the idea before the judges, and then refer Magna Charta to them afterwards to decide on that too’ (, Memoirs of the Reign of George III, i. 240). His judgments were clear and simple in style, and, according to his biographer, during the nine years in which Northington held the seals, ‘six only of his decrees were ever reversed or materially varied upon appeal’ (Memoir, p. 56). He left behind him a large number of manuscript notes, taken by himself while presiding over the court of chancery. These were subsequently collected and arranged by his grandson, the Hon. Robert Henley Eden, afterwards second Baron Henley, and published in 1818 under the title of ‘Reports of Cases argued and determined in the High Court of Chancery from 1757 to 1766, from the original Manuscripts of Lord Chancellor Northington,’ &c., London, 8vo, 2 vols. A second edition of these reports, ‘with considerable additions,’ was published in 1827, London, 8vo, 2 vols. Several of Northington's judgments dealing with subjects of general interest are appended to his memoir. He was a consistent supporter first of the Leicester House party, and afterwards of ‘the king's friends.’ Although a reckless debater, he did not often speak. He was a great favourite with George III, who declared in a letter to Pitt, dated 7 July 1766, that ‘there is no man in my service on whom I so thoroughly rely’ (Chatham Correspondence, ii. 436). Northington asked the king permission to discontinue the evening sittings in the court of chancery on Wednesdays and Fridays, in order that he might finish his bottle of port comfortably after dinner, a reason which his majesty's solicitude for the happiness of his subjects would, he hoped, make sufficient. Many anecdotes are told of his habit of hard swearing. He was familiarly known by the nicknames of ‘Tom Tilbury’ and ‘Surly Bob.’

By his wife, who survived him many years, and died in Grosvenor Square on 12 Sept. 1787, Northington had eight children, three sons, viz. Robert [q. v.], who succeeded him as the second earl, and Robert and Henry, both of whom died in infancy; and five daughters, viz. (1) Bridget, who married, firstly, on 29 June 1761, the Hon. Robert Lane, only son of George, lord Bingley; and secondly, in 1773, the Hon. John Tollemache, fourth son of Lionel, third earl of Dysart, who was killed in a duel at New York on 25 Sept. 1777. She inherited much of her father's wit and love of jocularity, and was a great favourite at court. Frequent references to her occur in the literature of the day. She died without leaving issue on 13 March 1796. (2) Jane, who married on 26 Dec. 1772 Sir Willoughby Aston, bart., and died without issue. (3) Mary, who married, firstly, on 14 Dec. 1773, Edward, earl Ligonier; and secondly, on 4 Feb. 1778, Thomas, second viscount Wentworth. She died without issue on 29 June 1814. (4) Catherine, who married on 18 March 1777 George, viscount Deer-


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 25.djvu/425

H hurst, afterwards seventh earl of Coventry, and died without issue on 9 Jan. 1779. (5) Elizabeth, who married on 7 Aug. 1783 Morton Eden [q. v.] (created an Irish peer by the title of Baron Henley of Chardstock on 9 Nov. 1799), and died on 20 Aug. 1821. Her grandson, the third and present Baron Henley, was created a peer of the United Kingdom by the title of Baron Northington of Watford in the county of Northampton, on 28 June 1885.

Northington was a handsome man, of middle height, rather thin, and with a bright fresh-coloured complexion. His portrait, painted by Thomas Hudson, was lent by Lord Henley to the Loan Collection of National Portraits at South Kensington in 1867 (Catalogue, No. 446). It has been engraved by J. McArdell and W. C. Edwards, and the latter engraving forms the frontispiece to the memoir. Henley was the last person who held the title of lord keeper.

HENLEY, ROBERT, second (1747–1786), the second and only surviving son of Robert Henley, first earl of Northington [q. v.], was born on 3 Jan. 1747. He was educated at Westminster School and Christ Church, Oxford, where he matriculated on 24 Oct. 1763, and was created M.A. on 30 April 1766. In April 1763 he was appointed a teller of the exchequer, and at the general election in March 1768 was returned to parliament for Hampshire. Henley was created LL.D. of Cambridge on 3 July 1769, and became master of the hanaper office in chancery on 28 Nov. 1771. He succeeded his father as second earl of Northington on 14 Jan. 1772, and took his seat in the House of Lords on 17 Feb. following (Journals of the House of Lords, xxxiii. 249). On 18 Aug. 1773 he was elected and invested a knight of the Thistle, and on 6 March 1777 was elected F.S.A. Upon the formation of the coalition ministry, and after the refusal of the post by the Duke of Devonshire, Lord Fitzwilliam, and Lord Althorp, Northington, who was an intimate friend of Fox, was appointed lord-lieutenant of Ireland in the place of Lord Temple (30 April 1783), and was admitted to the privy council on the same day (London Gazette, 1783, No. 12436). He was sworn in at Dublin on 3 June 1783 (ib. No. 12447), and on 14 Oct. 1783 opened the first session of the new Irish parliament. The chief event of Northington's administration was the volunteer convention at Dublin in November 1783. In a long letter to Northington, dated 1 Nov. 1783, Fox explained at length his views of the Irish question and begged him to show firmness, deprecating Northington's opinion that at the outset of his government it was absolutely necessary ‘to do something that may appear to be obtaining boons, however trifling, for Ireland’ (Fox's Correspondence, ii. 163–71). In his reply of 17 Nov. 1783 Northington skilfully defended his proposed policy, and argued that it was a great mistake to select as lords-lieutenant ‘gentlemen taken wild from Brookes's to make their dénouement in public life’ (ib. p. 183). In spite of his want of training Northington made a very fair lord-lieutenant. He did his best to promote Irish manufactures and to encourage the growth of flax and tobacco. He advocated the system of annual instead of biennial sessions of parliament in the face of Lord North's remonstrances, and he urged that the office of chancellor of the exchequer should be granted to a resident instead of an absentee politician. When the salary of the lord-lieutenant was increased from 16,000l. to 20,000l. Northington honourably declared himself ‘perfectly satisfied’ and anxious not to be the occasion of any additional charge on the Irish revenue (Grattan's Life, iii. 174).

Northington resigned with the coalition ministry, and, after awaiting the arrival of his successor, left Dublin on 26 Feb. 1784 (London Gazette, 1784, No. 12523). He died at Paris, on his return from Italy, on 5 July 1786, and was buried in Northington Church, Hampshire. As Northington never married, his titles became extinct upon his death. The Grange, his residence near Alresford in Hampshire, which was originally built by Inigo Jones for Sir Robert Henley, was sold to Henry


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 25.djvu/427

H to be best represented in two manuscripts in the Cambridge University Library (Dd. vii. 6, f. 526, and Dd. vii. 14, f. 228). They appear to date from the time of Edward I or Edward II, and Dr. Cunningham is mistaken in putting them later. A French work, very similar to Henley's, is preserved in manuscript in the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, under the title of ‘Enseignements Agricoles’ (, Manuscrits de la Bibliothèque du Roi, iii. 359), and has been printed in the ‘Bibliothèque de l'École des Chartes’ (4eme série, tome ii. pp. 123–41, 367–81). Henley's French text appears to have been translated into Latin more than once (Digby 147, f. 1), and more than one English translation survives (Brit. Mus. Sloane, 686, f. 1, and Bodleian, Rawlinson, B. 471, f. 16). There was also a translation into Welsh (Brit. Mus. Addit. 15056). One of the English versions was printed by Wynkyn de Worde, and there is a unique copy in the Cambridge University Library. It is called ‘Boke of Husbandry, whiche Mayster Groshede sõtyme Bysshop of Lyncoln made and translated it out of Frensshe into Englysshe.’ It concludes: ‘Here endeth the Boke of Husbondry and of plantynge and graffynge of Trees and Vynes.’ The ascription of this translation to Bishop Grosseteste is incorrect. Henley's work has been much confused with several other thirteenth-century treatises, such as the anonymous work on husbandry in Brit. Mus. Addit. MS. 6159 and the Senescalcia, and it was largely drawn upon by the compiler of ‘Fleta.’ An edition of Henley's work, together with the anonymous work on husbandry, the Senescalcia, and Grosseteste's ‘Reules Seynt Robert,’ is published by the Royal Historical Society; the transcript, translation, and glossary are by Miss E. Lamond, and the introduction is by the Rev. W. Cunningham, D.D.

 HENLEY or HENLY, WILLIAM (fl. 1775), electrician, was elected to the Royal Society on 20 May 1773, and admitted fellow 10 June. On 16 Dec. of that year he read a paper before the society, which in 1774 appeared in pamphlet form, under the title ‘Experiments concerning the Different Efficacy of Pointed and Blunted Rods in securing Buildings against the strike of Lightning.’ The details of seven experiments are given, with diagrams and certain evidence supposed to confirm Henley's theory, that a sharp point is greatly preferable as a conductor to a knob. This and other papers of Henley's on various electrical subjects and on a machine for perpetual motion are printed in the ‘Philosophical Transactions’ for 1772, 1774, 1776, and 1778. According to Thomson, Henley was a linendraper.

 HENLEY, WILLIAM THOMAS (1813?–1882), telegraphic engineer, was born in humble circumstances at Midhurst, Sussex, about 1813. Abandoning the leather trade, to which he was brought up, he became about 1829 a light porter at a silk mercer's in Cheapside, and afterwards worked in the docks as a labourer. Meanwhile he taught himself the trade of a philosophical instrument maker, and about 1838 started in business, exhibiting during the same year an electro-magnet motive power machine at the London Institution. When Wheatstone brought out his first electric telegraph, Henley was employed to make the apparatus and assist in experiments. He made instruments for the first Electric Telegraph Company, formed in 1846, and afterwards, in conjunction with Mr. Forster, invented the magnetic needle telegraph. In 1852 he formed a powerful company, called the British and Irish Magnetic Telegraph Company, who purchased the patent for 68,000l. in cash and shares. The Electric Telegraph Company had possession of all the railways, and ridiculed the idea of his connecting the principal towns of the kingdom; but Henley laid his wires underground, digging a trench from London to Carlisle, and from Dublin to Belfast.

Henley was an exhibitor, and obtained a council medal for electricity and magnetism at the Great Exhibition of 1851. He was early in the field as a maker of electric light apparatus, having constructed machines for the Alliance Company of France in 1849, and was the patentee of improved methods of electric lighting.

In 1857 Henley began making submarine cables at Enderby's Wharf, East Greenwich, constructing in that year thirty miles for the straits between Ceylon and the mainland, and nine miles for Egypt, and in 1858 he made 240 miles at the same works for Bass Straits, between Tasmania and Australia. In 1859 he built a cable factory at North Woolwich, and in 1860 made the


text:
Page:EB1911 - Volume 02.djvu/444

 with its corner towers and the great dome, all form an exceedingly picturesque group, and it is only when one begins to examine the work in detail that its poverty in design reveals itself. Instead of accentuating the windows of the principal storeys and giving them appropriate dressings, the fronts are pierced with innumerable windows, which give the appearance of a factory, and the angle towers, nine storeys high, look like ordinary “sky-scrapers,” without any of the dignity and importance which the architectural design of a palace requires. The same applies to the great entrance courts five storeys high with an attic, all of the most commonplace design. Internally the church is fine, but it is dwarfed by the immense size of the Doric pilasters, 62 ft. high, all in plain stone masonry, the coldness of which is emphasized by the rich colouring of the vaulted ceilings and the elaboration of the pavement, all in coloured marbles. The palace is regarded by the Spaniards as the Versailles of Spain, and if it had been possible to have interchanged some of the features, to transfer to Versailles some of the towers, and to break up the wall surface of the Escorial with the superimposed order of pilasters, which became monotonous by their repetition at Versailles, both palaces would have gained.

The palace at Madrid is the last of the series, and although it was begun at a much later period, by Philip V. in 1737, from the designs of the Italian architect Sachetti, it is a fine and simple composition, consisting of a lofty ground storey with coursed masonry, carrying semi-detached columns of the Ionic order, rising through three storeys, the whole crowned by an entablature and a bold balustrade. The slightly projecting wings at each end of the main front and the central frontispiece give that variety and play of light and shade of which one regrets the absence in the Cancellaria palace at Rome.

We must, however, retrace our steps to the beginning of the 16th century, to take up the early buildings of the style; the palace of the Conde de Monterey at Salamanca, built in 1530 from the designs of Alonso de Covarrubias, is a fine example. The masonry of the ground and first floors is of the simplest character, the decoration being confined to the entrance doorways and to the windows of the important rooms. It is on the second floor that the design becomes enriched with an open arcade and entablature above, crowned with a rich cresting. In the wings at the angles, and in the central block, the buildings are carried up an additional storey, the plain masonry of which gives value to the open galleries between. On these wings and the central block are other galleries crowned with entablature and cresting. These features therefore form towers, which break the sky-line. There is still another treatment peculiar to the Spanish Renaissance, in which the example of the Moorish palaces would seem to have been followed, viz. the elaborate carving of the pilasters and their capitals, of the panelling and the horizontal friezes, which is extremely minute and finished in the lower storeys, but increases in scale and projection towards the upper storeys. This is very notable in the entrance gateway of the university of Salamanca (Plate V., fig. 73), where the carved arabesque in the panelling above the doors is of the finest description, equal to what might be found in cabinet work, whilst that of the upper portion immediately under the cornice is at least twice the scale of that below and is in bold relief.

The principal buildings characteristic of the Spanish Renaissance, in chronological order, are:—the hospital of Santa Cruz at Toledo, built in 1504–1514, and the Hospicio de los Reyes at Santiago (1504), both from the designs of Enrique de Egas, the former with a magnificent portal rising through two storeys and a gallery with an open arcade above; the Irish college at Salamanca, built (1521) from the designs of Pedro de Ibarra, Alonso de Covarrubias, and Berruguete; the convent of San Marcos, Leon, by Juan de Badajoz (1514–1545)—here, however, the whole façade is panelled out in imitation of late Gothic work, Renaissance pilasters and devices taking the place of the buttresses set angle-wise and flamboyant panelling; the Colegio de San Ildefonso at Alcalá de Henares (formerly the seat of the university), built in 1557–1584 by Rodrigo Gil de Ontañon.

Of municipal buildings the Lonja or exchange at Toledo (1551), built in brick-work, is somewhat Florentine in style.

The town hall of Seville (1527–1532), by Diego de Riaño and Martin Garuza, may be taken as the most gorgeous example in Spain (Plate V., fig. 74). The front facing the square is very simple, compared with the façade in the street at the rear, and here again we find, in the ornamental carving of the windows and door mouldings on the ground floor, a different scale from that adopted on the first floor, where the shafts are enriched with a superabundance of carved ornament in strong relief. There is still one other feature of great importance in Spain, the magnificent galleries of the patios or courts found in all the important buildings. It is from these galleries that access is obtained to the rooms on the first floor. They have sometimes arcades on the first floor, and columns with bracket-capitals on the upper storey. There is an infinite variety of design in these capitals, the brackets on each side of which lessen the bearing of the architrave.

The earliest Renaissance example of these patios (1525) is in the Irish college at Salamanca; it was carved by Berruguete, Alonso de Covarrubias being the architect. In the same town is the Casa de la Salinas, another example with fine sculpture. In the Casa Polentina (1550) at Avila, and the Casa de Miranda at Burgos, columns with bracket-capitals are employed on both storeys. Rich examples are found in the Casa de la Infanta and Casa Zaporta (1580), both at Saragossa. Of late examples the patio of the Lonja at Seville by Juan de Herrera resembles in its style the courtyard of the Farnese palace at Rome; and the same style obtains in the court of the Escorial, built at a time when the purer Italian style was introduced into Spain. These courts, though cold in design, compared with the earlier Renaissance type, are of fine proportion. Two other examples are found in the bishop’s palace at Alcalá de Henares, one of which has a magnificent staircase.

In England, as in France, the influence of the Classic Revival was first seen in connexion with tombs and church work, though not nearly to the same extent as in France, where throughout the country the work of the Italian sculptor is to be found not only in churches but in country mansions. On the other hand, two if not three of the Italian artists who came over to England were men of some reputation, such as Pietro Torrigiano, a Florentine sculptor who was invited over by Henry VIII. and entrusted with the tomb of Henry VII. in Westminster Abbey (1512–1518), and executed the tomb of John Young (in terra-cotta) in the Rolls chapel (1516). Another Italian was Giovanni da Maiano, who was also a Florentine, who modelled the busts of the emperors in the terra-cotta medallions over the entrance gates at Hampton Court, and probably the panel flanked by Corinthian pilasters, in which are modelled the arms of Cardinal Wolsey, also in terra-cotta. Benedetto da Rovezzano (1478–c. 1552), and Toto del Nunziata, Italian artists of note, were also employed in England, the first on the tomb of Cardinal Wolsey (now destroyed), and the second on the palace of Nonsuch, built by Henry VIII., which was pulled down in 1670. Other early Renaissance work is found at Christchurch Priory, in the Salisbury Chantry (1529), the design of which is Gothic and some of the details Italian, and in the tombs of the countess of Richmond in Westminster Abbey (1519), of the earl of Arundel in Arundel church, Sussex, of Henry, Lord Marney, at Layer Marney (1525), of the duke of Richmond (1537) and the duchess of Norfolk (1572) in Framlingham church; and of Queen Anne of Cleves (1557) in Westminster Abbey, attributed to Haveus of Cleves. The sedilia (in terra-cotta) of Wymondham church, Norfolk, the choir screen at St Cross, and Bishop Gardiner’s chantry, Winchester, and the vaulted roof of Bishop West’s chapel at Ely, all show the direct influence of the Italian cinque-cento style. The most beautiful example in England of Italian woodwork is the organ screen in King’s College chapel, Cambridge (1534–1539), which, except for the coats of arms, the roses, portcullis and other English emblems, might be in some Italian church, so perfect is its design and execution. Of early domestic work, Sutton Place (1523–1525), near Guildford, Surrey, is a good example of transition work. The design is Tudor, but the window mullions and panels inserted throughout the structure, which is built in brick, are all enriched with cinque-cento details in terra-cotta, and probably executed by Italian craftsmen. Similar enrichments in the same material are found decorating the entrance tower (1522–1525) at Layer Marney, Essex.

Nearly all the examples above mentioned come within the first half of the 16th century. Passing into the second half and dealing with domestic architecture, we find the history of the introduction of classic work into England more complicated than in other countries, because in addition to the Italian, we have French, Flemish and German influences to reckon with, and it is sometimes difficult to decide from which source the features are borrowed. There were, however, two still more important considerations to be taken into account—firstly, the extremely conservative character of the English people, who were satisfied with the traditional work of the country, and the methods by which it was carried out, and secondly, the great progress in design which was made during the Elizabethan period, resulting in a phase which was peculiarly English and did not lend itself easily to classic embellishment.

Already in the last phase of Gothic work, to which the title of Tudor is generally given, important changes were being made in the planning of the larger country mansions, and features

title: Page:EB1911 - Volume 02.djvu/444


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 25.djvu/428

H 365 miles of line for joining the Balearic Islands with Spain. He made several cables of shorter length in 1861, and in 1863 made 1,651 miles of heavy cable to the order of the Indian government for submergence in the Persian Gulf. From a very early date at these works he commenced to galvanise wire and other ironware, and soon after set up machinery for drawing his own wire. Later on he began rolling his own iron and making steel wire, and covered copper wire with indiarubber. Altogether he manufactured here close upon fourteen thousand miles of submarine cable. Besides these establishments, which covered some eighteen acres of ground, and where he at one time employed as many as two thousand men, Henley had ironworks in Wales and collieries. In the height of this work he employed three ships, all fitted for cable laying. For some six years he was making profits of 80,000l. a year. The Welsh ironworks were the beginning of misfortunes, and in 1874 Henley failed for about 500,000l. In 1876 a limited liability company was formed to carry on the work in London, under the title of W. T. Henley & Co. (Lim.), of which Henley was managing director, but this eventually was wound up, the bulk of the ground and works becoming the property of the Telegraph Construction Company. A portion of the works was reopened in 1880 as W. T. Henley's Telegraph Works Company (Limited), of which Henley was a director up to the time of his death. At these works he manufactured his ozokerited indiarubber core, which was one of his latest patents.

Henley died at Chesterton House, Plaistow, Essex, on 13 Dec. 1882, in the sixty-ninth year of his age (Times, 15 Dec. 1882, obit. col. and p. 5), and was buried on the 18th at Kensal Green cemetery. His early struggles enabled him to thoroughly understand his workmen, who were devoted to him. Even when making large profits he lived in great simplicity, and was constantly at his works. As soon as he made money he spent it on increase of plant.

HENN, THOMAS RICE (1849–1880), lieutenant royal engineers, third son of Thomas Rice Henn of Paradise Hill, co. Clare, esq., J.P. and D.L., recorder of Galway, by Jane Isabella, daughter of the Right Hon. Francis Blackburne, lord chancellor of Ireland, was born in Dublin on 2 Nov. 1849. He was educated at Windermere College, and entered the Royal Military Academy, Woolwich, second in the list of successful candidates, at the age of seventeen. On 7 July 1869 he obtained a commission in the royal engineers, and after the usual course of study at Chatham was sent to India. He was posted to the Bombay sappers and miners at Kirkee, the second company of which he commanded in the Afghan war of 1880. He was present in the Bolan Pass, and also at Kandahar, when he was appointed brigade major of royal engineers. In July 1880 he took part in the advance of the brigade under General Burrows to the Helmund, and fell in the disastrous battle of Maiwand. When the battle became a rout Henn and his sappers were alongside the battery of horse artillery. Its commander, Major Blackwood, had been mortally wounded, and Captain Slade, who succeeded him, ordered the battery to limber up and retire. Henn, already wounded in the arm, successfully covered the operation with his handful of men, firing volleys upon the crowd of Ghazis pouring down upon them. Henn then fell steadily back, carrying the wounded Blackwood, and following the line of retreat of the 66th regiment across the nullah to a garden on the other side. Behind the wall of the garden Henn and the remnant of his company of sappers, supported by a gallant party of the 66th and some native grenadiers, took up their stand. Here they held the enemy at bay, fighting till every man was killed to cover the retreat of their comrades. Around the spot were afterwards found, lightly buried, the bodies of Henn and fourteen sappers, forty-six men of the 66th regiment, and twenty-three native grenadiers. In General Primrose's despatch of 1 Oct. 1880 he describes, on the authority of an eye-witness—an artillery colonel of Ayub Khan's army—the gallant stand made by this little party. A stained-glass window in Henn's memory has been placed in Rochester Cathedral by the corps of royal engineers.

HENNEDY, ROGER (1809–1877), botanist, was born in August 1809 at Carrickfergus, near Belfast, but was of Scottish extraction, his father being descended from the Kennedys of Ailsa Craig, Ayrshire, who changed their name to Hennedy in Ireland. His mother was born at Paisley. On leaving school he was apprenticed to cutting blocks for a firm of calico-printers. His master was of a tyrannical disposition. Hennedy ran away before his time was out, and somehow managed to get employment in a firm of calico-printers at Rutherglen, close to Glasgow, where he finished his time. In 1832