text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 27.djvu/315

 [see, fourth ], travelled on the continent in charge of their tutor, Dr. John Gillies (1747–1836) [q. v.]. In 1786 he was appointed ensign in the 63rd foot, became lieutenant in the 64th foot two years later, and in 1791 raised an independent company, which was drafted. On 20 July in the same year Hope was appointed a lieutenant and captain 1st foot-guards. He was one of the officers selected for the light companies when light infantry companies were first added to the regiment in 1793. He served in Flanders in 1794 as brigade-major of the guards, under Major-general Gerard Lake [q. v.], and afterwards as aide-de-camp to Major-general Sir Ralph Abercromby [q. v.]. In the same year he became major in the 81st foot, and lieutenant-colonel in the 2nd battalion of the 90th foot, whence he exchanged in December to the 14th foot. He was still with the retreating army in Holland, and having joined the 14th, commanded it in the attack from Buren on Gueldermasen on 8 Jan. 1795. He was dangerously wounded there, a ball, deep lodged in the shoulder, destroying the arm and causing permanent lameness, and he received a pension. He was appointed lieutenant-governor of Tynemouth and Cliff Fort in 1797, and lieutenant-governor of Edinburgh Castle in 1798. He was brigade-major and assistant adjutant-general of the eastern district in 1798–9. He became a brigadier-general in 1807, and major-general in 1808. When General Le Marchant went out to the Peninsula in 1812, Hope, who was then deputy quartermaster-general at the horse guards, under Sir Robert Brownrigg [q. v.], was appointed governor of the Royal Military College, Sandhurst, in Le Marchant's place. In January 1813 he was despatched on a special mission to Sweden, to report on the military force available for co-operation in Germany (, Napoleon at St. Helena, i. 104). His letters to Hudson Lowe, who was sent to the north of Europe at the same time, are in Brit. Mus. Add. MSS. 20111, f. 15, and 20191, ff. 210, 217. In 1819 Hope exchanged back from the Royal Military College to the lieutenant-governorship of Edinburgh Castle. He became lieutenant-governor of Chelsea Hospital in 1826, and after being colonel in succession of the 5th West India and 74th regiments, became colonel of the 14th foot in 1835.

Hope, who was a staunch supporter of Pitt, sat in parliament for Dumfries in 1796, and for Linlithgowshire from 1802 to 1834. He died a full general and G.C.B. on 19 May 1837. He married, on 23 Oct. 1805, Georgina Alicia, daughter of George Brown of Ellistown, by whom he had five sons and a daughter. On 30 June 1824 the university of Oxford conferred on him the honorary degree of D.C.L. on the same day that his eldest son, John Thomas Hope, of Christ Church (who died lieutenant-colonel of the Fifeshire militia in 1835), recited his Newdigate prize poem on the ‘Arch of Titus.’ James Robert Hope-Scott of Abbotsford [q. v.] was his third son.

It has been stated that Hope held rank in the Austrian army (, Life of J. R. Hope-Scott, 1884, i. 6–8, 59–60). No register of the personnel of the Austrian army (Army List) was kept at the Austrian war office before 1820; but the archives of the financial department contain no mention of any officer of the name as serving between 1773 and 1840. A portrait of Hope by Sir Thomas Lawrence is in the Royal Military College, Sandhurst.

 HOPE (afterwards BERESFORD-HOPE), ALEXANDER JAMES BERESFORD (1820–1887), politician and author, youngest son of Thomas Hope (1770?–1831) [q. v.], writer and patron of art, was born on 25 Jan. 1820. On inheriting the English estates of his step-father, Field-marshal Viscount Beresford [see ], he took the additional surname of Beresford before that of Hope (30 May 1854). Hope was educated at Harrow, where he obtained a scholarship and prizes. At Trinity College, Cambridge, he gained the English and Latin declamation prizes in 1841, and obtained the B.A. university prize for Latin verse in 1841. He proceeded M.A. in 1844, and D.C.L. on 5 July 1848. He entered parliament on 29 June 1841, as conservative member for Maidstone, having defeated at the poll Alderman David Salomons [q. v.]. For Maidstone he sat until the dissolution, 1 July 1852, when he was out of parliament for some years; but he was re-elected by his old constituency in 1857. He contested unsuccessfully the seat for the university of Cambridge in 1859, and that for Stoke-upon-Trent in September 1862. On 12 July 1865 he was returned for Stoke. On 24 Feb. 1868 he was elected M.P. for the university of Cambridge, and represented the university till his death. He commenced his parliamentary career as an independent conservative, and retained that character to the last. His party could not always depend on his vote, but in all matters


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 27.djvu/316

 relating to the church he was the unswerving defender of its rights in its relation to the state. In the session of 1859 he gave his ‘undying, undeviating, and unmitigated opposition’ to the marriage with a deceased wife's sister bill, a proposal which he opposed in many subsequent sessions. In the same year he made an important speech against Sir John Trelawny's bill for the abolition of church rates, a measure which he regarded as destructive of church property. At the time of the American civil war (1861) he gave three lectures upon its leading issues, which he afterwards printed. He was an uncompromising opponent of the conservative Reform Bill of 1867. When the bill was in committee (12 April 1867) he taunted Disraeli with outbidding liberals in a liberal market, denounced the bill as a two-faced measure, and nicknamed Disraeli ‘the Asian mystery.’ Disraeli in reply sarcastically alluded to his opponent's ‘Batavian graces,’ a reference to Hope's Dutch descent and awkward delivery (, Speeches of Earl of Beaconsfield, 1882, i. 600). Hope took a prominent part in the debate on Mr. Gladstone's Irish Church Bill in 1869, and in the session of 1873 moved the rejection of Mr. Osborne Morgan's Burials Bill. During the last ten years of his life he took little part in the debates in parliament. He was created a privy councillor in April 1880. The honorary degree of LL.D. was conferred on him by the university of Cambridge in 1864, that of LL.D. by the universities of Washington and Tennessee on 22 April 1879, and that of LL.D. of Dublin University in 1881.

Hope's devotion to the church of England was the leading feature of his life. Possessed of great wealth, he purchased in 1844 the ancient buildings of St. Augustine's Abbey, Canterbury, as a college for missionary clergy. In 1843 he published a volume of poems, and in the following year he translated the Hymns of the Church for popular use. Accepting the idea of the catholic church, he set himself to work out how the outward aspect of English public worship might be made most reasonably and intelligently to correspond to the ideals and to the best traditions of the ancient and historic church. He built at his own expense All Saints' Church, Margaret Street, London. He also rebuilt and endowed the parish church of Sheen, Staffordshire, in 1852, and kept up the daily service at his own cost.

In 1851, at the time of ‘the papal aggression,’ Hope, under the signature of D. C. L., wrote a series of letters to the ‘Morning Chronicle’ in vindication of religious liberty. In consequence he became closely connected with that paper and its editor, John Douglas Cook [q. v.]. On the ‘Chronicle’ passing to new proprietors, Hope, in partnership with Cook, in 1855 commenced ‘The Saturday Review of Politics, Literature, Science, and Art.’ This paper, the first number of which appeared on 3 Nov., was an advocate of independent principles in politics, chiefly noticeable for original and smartly-written leading articles, reviews, and criticisms on the topics of the day. It was successful from the first, and its success was chiefly due to the first editor, John Douglas Cook [q. v.].

At an early age Hope evinced deep interest in archæology and ecclesiastical history. Artistic and architectural subjects also occupied much of his attention. He was a firm advocate of Gothic principles in art, and frequently lectured on artistic subjects. He was president of the Royal Institute of British Architects, 1865–7, became a trustee of the British Museum on 19 March 1879, was president of the Ecclesiological Society and of the Architectural Museum, a trustee of the National Portrait Gallery, and a fellow of numerous learned societies. Late in life he wrote a successful novel, ‘Strictly Tied Up.’

Beresford-Hope died at his seat, Bedgebury Park, Cranbrook, Kent, on 20 Oct. 1887, and was buried at Kilndown, Kent, on 26 Oct. He married, on 7 July 1842, Lady Mildred Arabella Charlotte Henrietta Cecil, eldest daughter of James, second marquis of Salisbury, by Frances Mary, daughter and heiress of Bamber Gascoyne, esq., and sister of Robert, third marquis of Salisbury, prime minister. She was born on 24 Oct. 1822, was well known for many years as a leader of London society, and died at Nice on 18 March 1881. By her Hope had three sons and seven daughters. Beresford Hope was the author of: 1. ‘Oratio Latina, aureo numismate R. Peel recitata Scholæ Harrowviensis,’ 1837. 2. ‘Poems,’ 1843. 3. ‘Essays,’ 1844. 4. ‘Hymns of the Church, literally translated,’ 1844. 5. ‘The New Government Scheme of Academical Education for Ireland,’ 1845. 6. ‘The Reports on the Laws relative to Marriage with Deceased Wife's Sister,’ 1849; fourth edition, 1850. 7. ‘The Celebrated Greek and Roman Writers,’ 1856. 8. ‘Public Offices and Metropolitan Improvements,’ 1857; third edition, 1857. 9. ‘The Common Sense of Art,’ 1858. 10. ‘The Church Cause and the Church Party,’ 1860. 11. ‘The Hop Grower's Policy,’ 1860. 12. ‘The English Cathedral of the Nineteenth Century,’ 1861. 13. ‘A Popular View of the American Civil War,’ 1861; third edition, 1861. 14. ‘The Results of the American Disrup-

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


text:
Talk:Hours of Idleness

Reworking
I am in the process of reworking Byron's works hosted here at WS. Most of the poems listed on the Mainspace page (Hours of Idleness) are included in WS's indexed Works. There may be discrepancies, which I will eventually work out, and this page may end up becoming a versions page. Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:35, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Source:

 * Brought over from Main page: Preface

title: Talk:Hours of Idleness


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 27.djvu/317

 tion,’ 1862; third edition, 1862. 15. ‘Two Years of Church Progress,’ 1862. 16. ‘The American Disruption,’ sixth edition, 1862. 17. ‘England, the North and the South,’ 1862; fourth edition, 1862. 18. ‘The American Church in the Disruption,’ 1863. 19. ‘The Condition and Prospects of Architectural Art,’ 1863. 20. ‘The Social and Political Bearings of the American Disruption,’ 1863; third edition, 1863. 21. ‘The Social Influence of the Prayer-book,’ 1863. 22. ‘The World's Debt to Art,’ 1863. 23. ‘The Art Workman's Position,’ 1864. 24. ‘Church Politics and Church Prospects,’ 1865. 25. ‘The Irish Church and its Formularies,’ 1870. 26. ‘Hints towards Peace in Ceremonial Matters,’ 1874. 27. ‘The Place and Influence in the Church Movement of Church Congresses,’ 1874. 28. ‘Worship in the Church of England,’ 1874; second edition, 1875. 29. ‘Strictly Tied Up,’ a novel, 1880; third edition, 1881; reprinted 1886. 30. ‘The Brandreths,’ 1882, 3 vols., a novel. 31. ‘Worship and Order,’ 1883.

 HOPE, ANNE (1809–1887), authoress, was born in 1809 at Calcutta, where her father, John Williamson Fulton, esq. (1769–1830), was at the time a prosperous merchant. Her mother was Anne, daughter of Robert Robertson, esq., and widow of Captain John Hunt of the Bengal army. Anne was the second of four daughters. At an early age she was sent from India to Lisburn, co. Antrim, where her father's family resided, and on her parents' return home, settled with them in Upper Harley Street, London. She was well educated, accomplished, and serious-minded; and appreciated the society of her father's friends, O'Connell, Lawless, and other Irish parliamentary leaders. In 1831 she married James Hope, M.D. [q. v.], and assisted him in some of his publications. After his death in 1841 she prepared a memoir of him, which Dr. Klein Grant edited (1844); it passed through four editions. Mrs. Hope zealously devoted herself to the education of her only son, Theodore (now Sir Theodore Cracraft Hope, K.C.S.I., C.I.E.), who joined the Bombay civil service in 1853. A series of letters on self-education which she addressed to him was published in 1842 and reissued in 1846. Her health compelled her to spend much time in Madeira between 1842 and 1850. There she studied church history, reading books in many languages, and she completed in 1850, but did not publish, a work on the church in the first three centuries. Her researches changed her religious views, and in November 1850 she became a Roman catholic. She made the acquaintance of W. G. Ward and John Dobree Dalgairns [q. v.], and lived for a time at Edgbaston, so as to be near the latter and Dr. (afterwards Cardinal) Newman at the Birmingham Oratory. Pursuing her studies in a spirit of devotion to her adopted church, she published in 1855 ‘The Acts of the Early Martyrs,’ a popular volume drawn from Fr. P. de Ribadeneira's ‘Flores Sanctorum,’ and intended for the use of the schools connected with the Birmingham Oratory. It passed through five editions. In 1859 appeared her life of St. Philip Neri, which soon reached a third edition. Mrs. Hope afterwards settled at Torquay, and, although permanently crippled by a spinal complaint, completed a life of St. Thomas à Becket in 1868, and a learned work on the ‘Conversion of the Teutonic Race,’ 1872 (2 vols.). To both works Dalgairns, Mrs. Hope's chief literary adviser, contributed a preface. Mrs. Hope wrote many articles in the ‘Dublin Review’ between 1872 and 1879, replying there to Mr. J. A. Froude's attack on St. Thomas à Becket in 1876. Her ‘Franciscan Martyrs in England’ appeared in 1878. Mrs. Hope died at St. Mary-church, Torquay, on 2 Feb. 1887. In 1894 Abbot Gasquet edited from Mrs. Hope's manuscript her ‘First Divorce of Henry VIII.’

 HOPE, CHARLES,, first (1681–1742), only son of John Hope of Hopetoun, by his wife Lady Margaret Hamilton, eldest daughter of John, fourth earl of Haddington, was born in 1681. As soon as he came of age he was (in 1702) elected a member in the Scots parliament for the county of Linlithgow. The following year he was elected a privy councillor, and created on 5 April a peer of Scotland by the titles of Earl of Hopetoun, Viscount Aithrie, and Lord Hope. He was a zealous supporter of the union. In 1715 he was constituted lord-lieutenant of the county of Linlithgow, and in 1723 was appointed lord high commissioner to the general assembly of the church of Scotland. He was chosen a representative Scottish peer in 1722, and at


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 27.djvu/318

 subsequent elections till his death. In 1738 he was invested with the order of the Thistle. He built as his chief residence Hopetoun House, Linlithgowshire, and died there on 26 Feb. 1742. By his wife Lady Henrietta Johnstone, only daughter of the first Marquis of Annandale, he had four sons and nine daughters, and he was succeeded by his second son, John.

HOPE, CHARLES, (1763–1851), lord president of the court of session, born on 29 June 1763, was the eldest son of John Hope (1739–1785) [q. v.], M.P. for Linlithgowshire (a grandson of Charles Hope, 1st earl of Hopetoun [q. v.]), by his wife Mary, only daughter of Eliab Breton of Forty Hill, Enfield (a granddaughter of Sir William Wolstenholme, bart.) He was educated at Enfield grammar school, and afterwards at the high school of Edinburgh, where in 1777 he became the Latin dux. After studying law at Edinburgh University he was admitted an advocate on 11 Dec. 1784, and on 25 March 1786 was appointed a depute advocate. Though not conspicuous as a lawyer he was an accomplished public speaker, and in this capacity made himself useful at the tory political meetings. On 5 June 1792 he became sheriff of Orkney, and in June 1801 was appointed lord advocate in the Addington administration in the room of Robert Dundas of Arniston [see under, of Arniston, the younger]. Shortly afterwards he was presented with the freedom of the city of Edinburgh, together with a piece of plate, for his assistance to the magistrates in obtaining a poor's bill for the city. At the general election in July 1802 he was returned to the House of Commons for Dumfries district, but resigned his seat upon Henry Dundas's elevation to the upper house, and was returned unopposed for the city of Edinburgh (January 1803). While lord advocate, Hope conducted through the House of Commons the Scotch Parochial Schoolmasters' Act (43 Geo. III, c. 54), by which heritors were compelled to erect houses with two rooms for the schoolmasters. The only speech of his reported in the ‘Parliamentary Debates’ was one delivered in his own defence in the debate on Whitbread's motion for the production of papers relating to Hope's censure of a Banffshire farmer named Morison, who had discharged his servant for attending drills of a volunteer regiment. Hope made an ingenious defence, and gave a lively description of the multitudinous duties of his office but though the case against him was strong, the motion, after a great party debate in which both Pitt and Fox took part, was defeated by 159 to 82. On 20 Nov. 1804 Hope was appointed an ordinary lord of session and lord justice clerk in the place of Sir David Rae, lord Eskgrove, and assuming the title of Lord Granton took his seat on the bench on 6 Dec. 1804. On 12 Nov. 1811 he succeeded Robert Blair of Avontoun [q. v.] as lord president of the court of session, being succeeded as lord justice clerk by David Boyle [q. v.]. In 1820 he presided at the special commission for the trial of high treason at Glasgow (Reports of State Trials, 1888, new ser. i. 609), and on 17 Aug. 1822 was admitted to the privy council at Holyrood House. On 29 July 1823 Hope was appointed, together with his eldest son John, on the commission of inquiry into the forms of process and the course of appeals in Scotland (Parl. Papers, 1824, vol. x.). Upon the death of James Graham, third duke of Montrose, in December 1836, Hope became lord justice general, by virtue of 11 Geo. IV and 1 Wm. IV, cap. 69, sec. 18, by which it was enacted that ‘after the termination of the present existing interest’ that office should ‘devolve upon and remain united with the office of lord president of the court of session.’ Hope retired from the bench in the autumn of 1841, and was succeeded as lord president by David Boyle. He died in Moray Place, Edinburgh, on 30 Oct. 1851, in his eighty-ninth year, and was buried in the mausoleum at Hopetoun House on 4 Nov.

Hope was a man of imposing presence, with a magnificent voice, which, according to Lord Cockburn, ‘was surpassed by that of the great Mrs. Siddons alone’ (Memorials, p. 160), and a wonderful gift of declamation. Though a violent political partisan, and greatly wanting in tact and judgment, ‘his integrity, candour, kindness, and gentlemanlike manners and feelings gained him almost unanimous esteem’ (, Journal, i. 308–9). His charges to juries were singularly persuasive and impressive. Lockhart gives a graphic account of Hope's majestic bearing on the bench in ‘Peter's Letters to his Kinsfolk’ (1819, ii. 102–8), while recording what he describes ‘as without exception the finest piece of judicial eloquence, delivered in the finest possible way by the Lord-president Hope.’ When the volunteer movement began, owing to the French war, Hope enlisted as a private in the first regiment of royal Edinburgh volunteers. He was afterwards appointed lieutenant-colonel of the corps, and performed the duties of that office with enthusiasm for several years, until the regiment


text:
Page:Pentagon-Papers-Part IV. A. 2.djvu/5

Declassified per Executive Order 13526, Section 3.3 NND Project Number: NND 63316. By: NWD Date: 2011 TOP SECRET – Sensitive Joint Chiefs' belief that "attainment of United States objectives in Asia can only be achieved by ultimate success in China."

Results of the decision were mixed. Although implementation of the decision was partially successful in that it enabled the French to continue the military campaign in Indochina to the time of the Geneva Accords, military assistance was by and large a failure as an instrument of U.S. policy: the U.S. neither assured the French a military success, influenced the political situation to advantage, nor prevented the loss of North Vietnam to the communists at Geneva.

The U.S. MAAG Indochina was unable to perform even the limited functions assigned it. The French, never eager for U.S. advice, succeeded in limiting the function of MAAG to order-taking in the commercial sense.

Contributing to the initial U.S. decision to aid the French, and to limiting the effectiveness of the U.S. program of assistance, were (1) setting impracticable preconditions for assistance upon the French, (2) the U.S. proclivity to accept a slender chance of success without weighing alternatives, (3) the suppression of alternatives leading to decisional circularity and reinforcement of existing policies, (4) repeated failures of the U.S. to bargain effectively with the French, and (5) the vulnerability of the U.S. policy-making machinery to spoofing, particularly as regards U.S. credulity in accepting French information at face value and in being susceptible to "red" scares.

The decision to provide assistance to France and the Associated States is the focus of this discussion; it was but one issue among hundreds preoccupying the United States Government in the time period under consideration — the fall of China and the Korean War — and it was probably not regarded by those who made policy as among their critical decisions. There is no evidence of any high U.S. official arguing that any significant commitment threshold was being crossed. There were, however, those who maintained that the important anti-colonial stand of the U.S. was being undermined. These voices (and they were basically from the public domain) were drowned out by those who advocated immediate security needs. The importance of the decision was that when the U.S. was faced with an unambiguous choice between a policy of anti-colonialism and a policy of anti-communism, it chose the latter. And, although the decision was not perceived as getting the U.S. more deeply "involved" in Indochina, it did mark a tangible first step in that direction. Rh


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 27.djvu/319

 was disbanded for the second time in 1814. In December 1819, when the ‘old blues’ were once more summoned together, he made them ‘one of the most eloquent addresses that ever was heard’ (, Life of Scott, 1845, p. 415), and daily inspected the volunteers on duty at Edinburgh Castle while the regular troops were despatched to the western counties. Hope's famous regimental orders of 18 Oct. 1803, containing most curious and minute details, are given at length in Cockburn's ‘Memorials’ (pp. 187–94).

Hope married, on 8 Aug. 1793, his cousin, Lady Charlotte Hope, second daughter of John, second earl of Hopetoun, by his third wife, Lady Elizabeth Leslie, second daughter of Alexander, fifth earl of Leven and Melville, by whom he had four sons, of whom the eldest, John (1794–1858), is separately noticed, and eight daughters. His wife died at Edinburgh on 22 Jan. 1834, aged 62. His portrait in the robes of lord justice general, painted by Sir John Watson Gordon for the Society of the Writers to the Signet, hangs on the staircase of their library at Edinburgh. Two portraits of Hope and one of his wife were exhibited at the loan collection of the works of Sir Henry Raeburn at Edinburgh in 1876 (Catalogue, Nos. 22, 154, 261). Three portraits will be found in the second volume of Kay's ‘Original Portraits’ (Nos. 253, 254, 300). There is also a mezzotint engraving by Dawe after one of Raeburn's portraits.

Hope was the author of two pamphlets: 1. ‘Charge delivered to the Grand Jury of the County of Stirling on 23 June 1820,’ Edinburgh [1820], 4to. 2. ‘Notes by the Lord President on the Subject of hearing Counsel in the Inner House,’ Edinburgh, 1826, 8vo.

HOPE, FREDERICK WILLIAM (1797–1862), entomologist and collector, son of John Thomas Hope and Ellen, only child of Sir Thomas Edwardes, bart., was born in London on 3 Jan. 1797. He graduated B.A. at Christ Church, Oxford, in 1820, M.A. in 1823, and took holy orders, becoming for a time curate of Frodesley in Shropshire. He devoted himself to the study of entomology, and, having large means, accumulated a great collection of insects, which he gave to the university of Oxford in 1849. At the same time he founded a professorship of zoology, and nominated Mr. J. O. Westwood to that office, as well as to the curatorship of his collection. For many years he added to the Oxford collections both entomological and general zoological specimens. He also collected engraved portraits of naturalists, and extended his collection of prints till he had amassed 140,000 portraits, 70,000 topographical engravings, and more than 20,000 engravings in natural history. These were all given to Oxford University. He was early elected a fellow of the Royal and Linnean Societies, and took an active part in founding the Zoological and Entomological Societies. He was president of the Entomological Society in 1835 and in 1846. His correspondence with naturalists was extensive, and he rendered valuable assistance to the works of Gravenhorst, Schonherr, Gory, Kirby, Yarrell, and others. Of somewhat weak constitution, he was compelled to reside during a great part of each year from 1849 onwards on the Mediterranean, where he paid much attention to fishes and crustacea. In 1855 the university of Oxford conferred on him the honorary degree of D.C.L. He died in London 15 April 1862, aged 65. His widow, in pursuance of his intentions, gave an additional endowment to the professorship which he had founded, and a stipend for a keeper of his collection of engraved portraits. In addition to about sixty separate papers on entomological subjects, chiefly in the Entomological Society's ‘Transactions,’ Hope wrote the ‘Coleopterist's Manual,’ in 3 pts., London, 1837–40.

HOPE, GEORGE (1811–1876), agriculturist, second son of Robert Hope, tenant farmer, East Lothian, was born at Fenton in that county, 2 Jan. 1811. He was educated at Dirleton parish school, spent four years in a ‘writer's’ office at Haddington, and then began to assist his father in farming. He spent all but the last three years of his life as a farmer in his native county, and did much by his skill as a practical agriculturist to improve the agricultural position of East Lothian. Hope's holding, Fenton Barns, was known in agricultural circles in America and on the continent as a model of what a farm should be. In 1875 Hope's landlord refused


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 27.djvu/320

 to renew his lease, and he left Fenton Barns, which had been occupied by his family for three generations, for Broadlands, a small estate which he had purchased in Berwickshire.

Hope was an ardent unitarian and a great supporter of that body in Scotland. He was much opposed to the corn laws, gaining a prize of 30l. offered by the Anti-Cornlaw League for an essay on the subject (published with two others in 1842), was a personal friend of Cobden and Bright, and did much to help the abolition movement in Scotland. He was also opposed to the law of hypothec and the game laws. He stood twice for parliament, in 1865 for Haddingtonshire, and in 1875 for East Aberdeenshire. In both cases he was defeated by decided majorities, a fact partly attributed to the strong local influence of his opponent in the first case, and to his heterodox religious opinions (which he did not attempt to hide) in the second. He died at Broadlands, 1 Dec. 1876, and was buried at Dirleton, near Fenton Barns. Hope was married and had a family. Besides the essay mentioned he contributed ‘Hindrances to Agriculture from a Tenant Farmer's point of view’ to ‘Recess Studies,’ edited by Sir A. Grant (Edinburgh, 1870).

HOPE, HENRY (1787–1863), admiral, eldest son of Captain Charles Hope of the navy, who died commissioner at Chatham in 1808, cousin of Sir William Johnstone Hope [q. v.], and great grandson of Charles, first earl of Hopetoun [q. v.], was born in 1787, and entered the navy in 1800, on board the Kent, commanded by his cousin, W. J. Hope. After serving in her on the coast of Egypt, he was moved into the Swiftsure with Captain Hallowell [see ], and was made prisoner when she was captured on 24 June 1801. He afterwards served in the Leda on the Mediterranean and home stations, and in 1804 in the Atlas again with his cousin, W. J. Hope. On 3 May 1804 he was promoted to be lieutenant of the Adamant; in 1805, in the Narcissus, was present at the reduction of the Cape of Good Hope; and on 22 Jan. 1806 was made commander and appointed to the Espoir sloop in the Mediterranean. On 24 May 1808 he was posted to the Glatton, and afterwards commanded the Leonidas, Topaze, and Salsette frigates, all in the Mediterranean, cruising successfully against the French privateers. During the latter half of 1811, in the Salsette, he was senior officer in the Archipelago, and at the request of Stratford Canning, the ambassador at Constantinople, drove on shore at Nauplia a French privateer which had taken refuge under the guns of the Turkish batteries, 29 Nov. 1811 (, Life of Lord Stratford de Redcliffe, i. 100; Log of the Salsette).

In May 1813 Hope was appointed to the Endymion, one of the few English frigates carrying 24-pounders, and which it was thought might contend on somewhat equal terms with the large 44-gun frigates of the United States. After eighteen months on the North American station, on the morning of 15 Jan. 1815 she was, in company with a small squadron under Captain John Hayes [q. v.], off Sandy Hook, when they sighted the American frigate President. The accident of position and her superior sailing enabled the Endymion to bring her to action, while the other English ships were some distance astern. It was already dusk, and it seemed possible enough that the President might escape in the dark. The Endymion, however, stuck closely to the flying enemy, and though her own rigging was so cut that about nine o'clock she was obliged to drop astern to repair damages, the President had also received such damage that, on the Pomone and Tenedos coming up an hour later, she at once struck her colours. To say, as is often said, that the Endymion took the President single-handed is an absurd exaggeration, for though her consorts had a very small share in the action, their close proximity, especially that of the Majestic, a cut-down 74-gun ship, terribly hampered the President's manœuvres, and by compelling her to defend herself in a running fight, enabled the Endymion to take up a deadly position on her quarter. Otherwise the result might have been different; for the Endymion was the smaller ship, less heavily armed, with a weaker crew; and, gallant officer and fine seaman as Hope was, Commodore Decatur, who commanded the President, had also a high reputation in the United States navy. In popular opinion the whole credit of the engagement was given to Hope. The admiralty gave him the gold medal, and the war medal to the Endymion alone. The merchants of Bermuda presented Hope with a complimentary letter and a silver cup, and the officers with a second cup, ‘to be considered as attached to that or any future ship which might bear the gallant name of Endymion.’ The cup ultimately lapsed to Greenwich Hospital, and now belongs to the officers' mess of the Royal Naval College. In June 1815 Hope was nominated a C.B., but he had no further service. In 1831 he was appointed naval


text:
Page:China- Its State and Prospects.djvu/150

126 their lives. The highest minister of state, being the creature of imperial power, can be degraded, bambooed, banished, and beheaded; subject to the whim of the only one, who claims and exercises irresponsible authority in China. Hence the Chinese have a proverb, that 'tis safer sleeping in a tiger's den, than basking in the sunshine of imperial favour.

The prime ministers of state, are called the "inner chamber," or cabinet; the first is a Mantchou Tartar, to which race the present royal family belongs; the second is a Chinese, who is likewise president of the imperial college; the third is a Mongul Tartar, also superintendent of the colonial office; and the fourth is a Chinese. This mixture of Chinese and Tartars in the great offices of state, with the latter always taking the precedence, is a specimen of the general system pursued by the Chinese, of setting the two races to watch over, and be responsible for, each other. They admit native Chinese to high and important stations, in order to satisfy the people, but they take care to have them associated with, or superintended by, Tartars; so that the former cannot devise schemes of rebellion, without being instantly discovered, and betrayed by the latter.

Under the cabinet they have the six tribunals, which take cognizance of their several departments, and report to the emperor for his decision and approval. The first is the tribunal of civil office, the presidents of which enquire into and report on the conduct of all magistrates, recommend persons to vacant stations, and suggest the propriety of promoting or degrading deserving or undeserving individuals. A vast amount of patronage, and power necessarily falls into the hands of a chamber


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 27.djvu/321

 aide-de-camp to the king, became rear-admiral in 1846, vice-admiral 2 April 1853, K.C.B. 5 July 1855, and admiral 20 Jan. 1858. He died on 23 Sept. 1863.

Hope married, in 1828, his first cousin, Jane Sophia, daughter of his mother's brother, Admiral Sir Herbert Sawyer, K.C.B. She died without issue in August 1829. Hope left a large part of his property—30,000l. was named—to religious or charitable societies.

HOPE, JAMES (1614–1661), of Hopetoun, lawyer and lead-worker, sixth son of Sir Thomas Hope [q. v.] of Craighall, Fifeshire, by his wife Elizabeth, daughter of John Binning or Bennet of Wallyford, Haddingtonshire, was born on 12 July 1614. From February 1636 to October 1637 he studied law in France (Diary of Sir Thomas Hope, pp. 38, 68). After his first marriage in 1638 he devoted himself to the working of the lead mines of the estate. In 1642 he was appointed general of the cunzie-house, an office to which there then attached both a civil and a criminal jurisdiction. On the death of his brother, Sir Thomas Hope of Kerse [q. v.], a lord of session, on 23 Aug. 1643, his friends made a fruitless endeavour to get him named his successor. After, however, the enactment of the Act of Classes, disqualifying for office all persons directly or indirectly accessory to the ‘Engagement’ with England, he was, on 1 June 1649, chosen an ordinary lord of session. In this year and also in 1650 he sat in parliament as commissioner for the county of Stirling. He was also one of the committee of estates, and a commissioner both of public accounts and for the revision of the laws. He was one of those sent to receive any statement Montrose might be disposed to make on his arrival as a prisoner in Edinburgh (, Annals, iv. 14). On 20 May 1650 he was appointed president of the committee for the examining of prisoners taken during the civil war (ib. p. 22). When the Scottish people, after the execution of Charles I, were bent on restoring the monarchy, Hope suggested a compromise. He voted at Perth on 20 June 1650 against levying an army to resist the advance of Cromwell, and was in consequence denounced by the Marquis of Argyll as ‘not only a main enemy to king and kingdom, but a main plotter and contriver, assister and abetter of all the mischief that has befallen the kingdom ever since’ (ib. p. 173). On 7 Jan. of the following year he was refused a passport to go out of the country (ib. p. 235). For inciting his brother, Sir Alexander Hope, to suggest to Charles II the advisability of surrendering England, Ireland, and even a part of Scotland to Cromwell to save the rest, he was shortly afterwards sent to prison, but on 20 Jan. was ordered to confine himself within his country estate. The triumph of Cromwell delivered him, however, from his disabilities, and in 1652 he was appointed one of the commissioners for the administration of justice in Scotland. On 14 June 1653 he joined the council of state of England, and he frequently served on important committees. He represented Scotland in the parliament of 1653. In 1654 he was made a commissioner for the sale of forfeited estates, but in July of the same year he was omitted in the new commission of justice, on the ground that his conduct at the dissolution of the Little parliament had been unsatisfactory to Cromwell. His exclusion from the commission was, according to Robert Nicoll, unpopular, for ‘he was a good and upright judge’ (, Diary, p. 132). He was, however, reappointed in March 1660 (ib. p. 278). On a visit to Holland in the following year, in connection with his lead business, he caught a disease known as Flanders fever, of which he died, two days after landing in Scotland, at his brother's house of Granton, Linlithgowshire, on 23 Nov. 1661. He is described by Nicoll as ‘a man full of virtue, who kept many poor and indigent people at labour in the lead mines and Leith, and virtuous exercises, and by his means had a liveliehood’ (ib. p. 352). He was buried in the church of Cramond, Linlithgowshire, where a monument was erected to his memory with the following inscription: ‘Sperando superavi. Vera effigies Dni. Jac. Hoppæi Hoptoniæ militis celeberrimi ætat. suæ 47, A.D. 1661.’ By his first wife (Anna, daughter and heiress of Robert Foulis of Leadhills, Lanarkshire) he had seven sons and four daughters. His second wife was Lady Mary, eldest daughter and one of the coheiresses of William Keith, seventh earl Marischal, by whom he had two sons and a daughter. His widow afterwards married Sir Archibald Murray of Blackbarony, bart. Hope was succeeded by his seventh child and only sur-


text:
Page:China- Its State and Prospects.djvu/151

Rh which has the general superintendence of several thousand civil officers, from the viceroy of a province, down to the magistrate of the smallest district.

The second tribunal is that of revenue, appointed to take cognizance of the amount of the population, which the government is very careful to ascertain, in order to know what income may be expected from the various provinces, and what supplies should be transmitted to different parts of the empire, in case of famine. This tribunal also sees to the due collection and transmission of the land tax, which is paid partly in money and partly in grain; the coin of the realm is under their inspection, to see that it be not adulterated, and to "take care that the silver does not leak out of the country." Salt, on which a heavy duty is levied, and over which special officers are placed, is under the care of this board. The expenditure, as well as the income of the country, comes under their control; and the payment of the various officers, with the maintenance of the state sacrifices, is arranged and provided for by them.

The third tribunal is that of rites, taking cognizance of all religious ceremonies, court etiquette, and astrological predictions. For though there be no established religion, or paid hierarchy in China, the rulers think it necessary to perform certain ceremonies, in order to propitiate the gods and overawe the people, of which this board has the superintendence. According to Chinese notions, the supreme in heaven can only be worshipped by the supreme on earth; and in doing this, the emperor is his own priest, presiding at the sacrifice and announcing his prayers, while the people look on in silent awe. At the accession of a monarch, at each of the four seasons, and in times of felicitation,


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 27.djvu/322

 viving son, John, who lost his life by the wreck of the Gloucester frigate in 1682.

 HOPE, JAMES, afterwards, third (1741–1816), born in 1741, was second son and fourth child of John, second earl, by his first wife, Anne Ogilvy (d. 1759), second daughter of James, fifth earl of Findlater and Seafield. He became ensign in the 3rd regiment of foot-guards 9 May 1758, served with his regiment at Minden, and quitted the army in 1764 in order to travel with his elder brother, Lord Hope, who was in declining health. In 1781 he succeeded to the earldom on the death of his father, in 1784 was chosen a representative peer of Scotland, and in 1790 took part in a disputed election for representative peers, he claiming unsuccessfully that he and the Earl of Selkirk had been lawfully chosen (see The Petition of Douglas, Earl of Selkirk, and James, Earl of Hopetoun). In 1794 he was again elected. Meanwhile, in 1792, he had succeeded, on the death of his grand-uncle (of the half-blood), the lunatic George Johnstone, third marquis of Annandale, to the earldoms of Annandale and Hartfell, in addition to very large estates in Scotland. But he never assumed the titles, merely adding Johnstone to his family name. In 1793 he raised and commanded the corps of Hopetoun fencibles, and in recognition of this service he was, on 3 Feb. 1809, created Baron Hopetoun in the peerage of the United Kingdom. For many years he was lord-lieutenant of Linlithgowshire and hereditary keeper of the castle of Lochmaben. Hope died at Hopetoun House, Linlithgowshire, on 29 May 1816, and, in default of male issue of his own, was succeeded in the barony as well as the earldom by his half-brother, Sir John Hope of Rankeillour [q. v.], then Lord Niddry, the barony having been limited to the heirs male of the second Earl of Hopetoun. Hope married, 25 Aug. 1766, Elizabeth Carnegie (d. 1793), daughter of George, sixth earl of Northesk, by whom he had six daughters, of whom Anne Johnstone (d. 1818) married in 1792 Admiral Sir William Johnstone Hope [q. v.]; Georgiana (d. 1797), married in 1793 the Hon. Andrew Cochrane; and Jemima, married in 1803 Rear-admiral Sir George Johnstone Hope.

 HOPE, JAMES (1801–1841), physician, was born at Stockport in Cheshire 23 Feb. 1801. His father, Thomas, belonged to a branch of the Scottish Hopes, long settled in Lancashire. Having realised a handsome fortune as a merchant and manufacturer, he retired from business and settled at Prestbury Hall, near Macclesfield in Cheshire. After four years (1815–18) at the Macclesfield grammar school, James resided for about eighteen months at Oxford, where his elder brother was then an undergraduate, but never became a member of the university. In October 1820 he went as a medical student to Edinburgh, where he highly distinguished himself, and passed five years. The subject of his inaugural medical dissertation (August 1825) was aneurism of the aorta, and he then began to collect drawings (executed by himself) of pathological specimens coming under his notice. He was one of the presidents of the Royal Medical Society of Edinburgh, he held the offices of house-physician and house-surgeon at the Royal Infirmary, and he and his intimate friend Dr. George Julius passed the two best examinations of the year. On leaving Edinburgh in December 1825 he became a student at St. Bartholomew's Hospital, London, and in the spring of 1826 obtained the diploma of the Royal College of Surgeons. Though he restricted himself rigidly in after life to the practice of medicine, his knowledge of surgery gave him a confidence which he could never otherwise have enjoyed. In the summer of the same year he left England for the continent, and stayed a year at Paris as one of the clinical clerks of M. Chomel at La Charité. He then visited Switzerland, Italy, Germany, and the Netherlands, and reached England in June 1828. In September he passed the College of Physicians as a licentiate. With a fixed determination to become one of the chief London physicians, he established himself in December 1828 in Lower Seymour Street, Portman Square, and entered himself as a pupil at St. George's Hospital in order to attend the physicians in their visits to the wards. There he was one of the early champions of auscultation. He had had opportunities of testing the value of Laennec's discovery while in Paris, and he was himself especially fitted for practising it with advantage, having very acute hearing and a very delicate ear for musical tones and rhythm. In 1829 he began to publish a series of papers


text:
Page:China- Its State and Prospects.djvu/152

128 or calamity, the ruler of China appears as the high-priest of the people, and constitutes himself the chief medium of intercourse between earth and heaven. At the same periods, throughout the provinces, the various officers and magistrates pay their adorations to the presiding divinities of their several districts, the gods of the land and grain, the god of war, of literature, &c. all of which rites are determined by the board in question. The ceremonies to be observed on court occasions; the introduction and arrangement of nobles at the levees; the number of prostrations each is to make, and when; the clothes, caps, and boots they are to wear; the paths by which they are to come and go, to and from the imperial presence; and all other such like important minutiæ, are gravely and accurately specified by this board. The imperial astronomers are also placed under its superintendence ; for as these gentlemen have to calculate celestial phenomena, as well as to prognosticate terrestrial affairs; as they have to fix the lucky and unlucky days for the performance of civil and religious ceremonies; their labours come necessarily under the cognizance of the board of rites.

The fourth tribunal is that of war; taking the superintendence of the army, navy, and ordnance; appointing the number of troops assigned to each province; and inspecting the state of the forts, and other defences of the country. The army of China is rated at 700,000; who may rather be termed militia, being employed part of the year in cultivating the ground, and contributing to their own support. These generally clothe and arm themselves, according to their own fancy; and are distinguished by the character "robust," being stitched on to their jackets in front, and the word "brave," behind!


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 27.djvu/323

  to a projected work on the heart. Four papers on ‘Aneurisms of the Aorta, based on Observations as House Physician and House Surgeon to the Royal Infirmary, Edinburgh,’ appeared in the ‘London Medical Gazette,’ 1829 (iv. 353, &c.), and in 1830 he sent to the same journal (vi. 680, &c.) four papers relating especially to the sounds of the heart and the physiology of its action. He also wrote for the ‘Cyclopædia of Practical Medicine’ about the same time the articles ‘Aorta, Aneurism of,’ ‘Arteritis,’ ‘Dilatation of the Heart,’ ‘Heart, Diseases of,’ ‘Heart, Degeneration of,’ ‘Heart, Hypertrophy of,’ ‘Palpitation,’ ‘Pericarditis and Carditis,’ ‘Valves of the Heart, Diseases of,’ but these were not published till 1833–1835. His great work came out at the end of 1831 (1832) with the title ‘A Treatise on the Diseases of the Heart and Great Vessels; comprising a new view of the Physiology of the Heart's Action, according to which the physical signs are explained.’ The book was received with approbation in this country, in America, and on the continent, where it was translated into German by an old Edinburgh friend, Dr. Becker of Berlin. A third edition appeared in 1839, corrected and greatly enlarged, and with the addition of plates; and a fourth edition in 1849, after his death, with his latest additions and corrections, but without the plates, and in a cheaper form. Hope's final conclusions about the sounds of the heart are on the whole justified by modern experiments, and adopted, with certain additions, by teachers in the existing physiological schools. Hope's investigations as to the causes of the sounds necessarily involved experiments on living animals, the last series of which, in February 1835, led to a controversy with Dr. C. J. B. Williams [q. v.] (see Hope's work, 3rd ed. pp. 32–4, 4th ed. preface; Memoir of Hope, 4th ed. pp. 156–66; and, Memoirs, 1884, chaps. xiii. xvi.)

In 1831 Hope was elected physician to the Marylebone Infirmary, where he had charge of ninety beds. In 1829 he had established a private dispensary in connection with the Portman Square and Harley Street district visiting societies, and in the autumn of 1832 he delivered at his own house a course of about five-and-twenty lectures (intended for practitioners only) on diseases of the chest. He afterwards lectured at St. George's Hospital (where he had been elected assistant physician in 1834) and at the Aldersgate Street School of Medicine, and was very successful with the students.

Hope now turned to the publication of his work on morbid anatomy, the drawings for which, both made and coloured from nature with his own hand, had occupied him since the commencement of his medical education in Edinburgh. The first part appeared at the beginning of 1833, and the last at the end of the following year, in large 8vo. The value of the work was fully recognised, but, owing to the expense of the plates, Hope's profits were very small. In July 1839, on the resignation of Dr. W. F. Chambers [q. v.], he was appointed full physician at St. George's Hospital, after brief opposition from Dr. Williams. The excitement of this election brought on a spitting of blood, and his health, which had hitherto been good, thenceforth declined. In July 1840 he was elected a fellow of the London College of Physicians. Towards the following Christmas he became unequal to his regular duties, but he continued to see a few patients till he removed in March 1841 to Hampstead, where he died on 12 May of pulmonary consumption. He was buried in the cemetery at Highgate. He was elected a fellow of the Royal Society in June 1832, and was a corresponding member of several foreign societies. He contracted a most happy marriage, 10 March 1831, with Miss Anne Fulton [see ], by whom he had one child, the present Sir Theodore C. Hope, K.C.S.I. Considering the early age at which he died, Hope may be regarded as one of the most eminent and successful physicians of his day. When he retired his professional income was 4,000l. per annum. He was a member of the anglican church, and had strong religious convictions.

Besides the writings mentioned above and numerous articles in the medical periodicals, Hope contributed the article on ‘Inflammation of the Brain’ to Tweedie's ‘Library of Medicine,’ and some ‘Notes on the Treatment of Chronic Pleurisy,’ finished only four days before his death (see Medico-Chirurgical Review, vol. xxxv. 1841).

 HOPE, JAMES (1764–1846?), United Irishman, son of a fugitive covenanter who had settled in the north of Ireland as a linen-weaver, was born in the parish of Templepatrick, co. Antrim, on 25 Aug. 1764. He left school at the age of ten, and was apprenticed to linen-weaving. In due time he became a journeyman weaver. The commercial distress prevalent in the north, consequent on the war with the American colo-


text:
Page:EB1911 - Volume 02.djvu/319

 which would be recognized at once as true scorpions by a child or a savage. The Silurian scorpion Palaeophonus, differs, so far as obvious points are concerned, from a modern scorpion only in the thickness of its legs and in their terminating in strong spike-like joints, instead of being slight and provided with a pair of terminal claws. The legs of the modern scorpion (fig. 10; fig. 51) are those of a terrestrial Arthropod, such as a beetle; whilst those of the Silurian scorpion are the legs of an aquatic Arthropod, such as a crab or lobster. It is probable that the Silurian scorpion was an aquatic animal, and that its respiratory lamellae were still projecting from the surface of the body to serve as branchiae. No trace of “stigmata,” the orifices of the lung-chambers of modern scorpions, can be found in the Scottish specimen of Palaeophonus, which presents the ventral surface of the animal to view. On the other hand, no trace of respiratory appendages excepting the pectens can be detected in the specimen (see fig. 49).

Fossil scorpions of the modern type are found in the Coal Measures. At the present day scorpions of various genera are found in all the warm regions of the world. In Europe they occur as far north as Bavaria and the south of France. The largest species measure 9 in. from the front of the head to the end of the sting, and occur in tropical India and Africa. Between 200 and 300 species are known. The scorpions use their large chelae for seizing prey and for fighting with one another. They never use the sting when (as frequently happens) they attack another scorpion, because, as was ascertained by A. G. Bourne (24), the poison exuded by the sting has no injurious effect on another scorpion nor on the scorpion itself. The stories of a scorpion stinging itself to death when placed in a circle of burning coals are due to erroneous observation. When placed in such a position the scorpion faints and becomes inert. It is found (Bourne, 24) that some species of scorpion faint at a temperature of 40° Cent. They recover on being removed to cooler conditions. A scorpion having seized its prey (usually a large insect, or small reptile or mammal) with the large chelae brings its tail over its head, and deliberately punctures the struggling victim twice with its sting (fig. 52). The poison of the sting is similar to snake-poison (Calmette), and rapidly paralyses animals which are not immune to it. It is probably only sickly adults or young children of the human race who can be actually killed by a scorpion’s sting. When the scorpion has paralysed its prey in this way, the two short chelicerae are brought into play (fig. 53). By the crushing action of their pincers, and an alternate backward and forward movement, they bring the soft blood-holding tissues of the victim close to the minute pin-hole aperture which is the scorpion’s mouth. The muscles acting on the bulb-like pharynx now set up a pumping action (see Huxley, 26); and the juices—but no solid matter, excepting such as is reduced to powder—are sucked into the scorpion’s alimentary canal. A scorpion appears to prefer for its food another scorpion, and will suck out the juices of an individual as large as itself. When this has taken place, the gorged scorpion becomes distended and tense in the mesosomatic region. It is certain that the absorbed juices do not occupy the alimentary canal alone, but pass also into its caecal off-sets which are the ducts of the gastric glands (see fig. 33).

All Arachnida, including Limulus, feed by suctorial action in essentially the same way as Scorpio.

Scorpions of various species have been observed to make a hissing noise when disturbed, or even when not disturbed. The sound is produced by stridulating organs developed on the basal joints of the limbs, which differ in position and character in different genera (see Pocock, 27). Scorpions copulate with the ventral surfaces in contact. The eggs are fertilized, practically in the ovary, and develop in situ. The young are born fully formed and are carried by the mother on her back. As many as thirty have been counted in a brood. For information as to the embryology of scorpions, the reader is referred to the works named in the bibliography below. Scorpions do not possess spinning organs nor form either snares or nests, so far as is known. But some species inhabiting sandy deserts form extensive burrows. The fifth pair of prosomatic appendages is used by these scorpions when burrowing, to kick back the sand as the burrow is excavated by the great chelae.

References to works dealing with the taxonomy and geographical distribution of scorpions are given at the end of this article (28).

Section. Epectinata.—The primitive distinction between the mesosoma and the metasoma wholly or almost wholly obliterated, the two regions uniting to form an opisthosoma, which never consists of more than twelve somites and never bears appendages or breathing-organs behind the 4th somite. The breathing-organs of the opisthosoma, when present, represented by two pairs of stigmata, opening either upon the 1st and 2nd (Pedipalpi) or the 2nd and 3rd somites (Solifugae, Pseudo-scorpiones), or by a single pair upon the 3rd (? 2nd) somite (Opiliones) of the opisthosoma, there being rarely an additional stigma on the 4th (some Solifugae). The appendages of the 2nd somite of the opisthosoma absent, rarely minute and bud-like (some Amblypygi), never pectiniform. A prae-genital somite is often present either in a reduced condition forming a waist (Pedipalpi, Araneae, Palpigradi) or as a full-sized tergal plate (Pseudo-scorpiones); in some it is entirely atrophied (Solifugae, Holosomata, and Rhynchostomi). Lateral eyes when present diplostichous.

Remarks.—The Epectinate Arachnids do not stand so close to the aquatic ancestors of the Embolobranchia as do the Pectiniferous scorpions. At the same time we are not justified in supposing that the scorpions stand in any way as an intermediate grade between any of the existing Epectinata and the Delobranchia. It is probable that the Pedipalpi, Araneae, and Podogona have been separately evolved as distinct lines of descent from the ancient aquatic Arachnida. The Holosomata and Rhynchostomi are probably offshoots from the stem of the Araneae, and it is not unlikely (in view of the structure of the prosomatic somites of the Tartarides) that the Solifugae are connected in origin with the Pedipalpi. The appearance of tracheae in place of lung-sacs cannot be regarded as a starting-point for a new line of descent comprising all the tracheate forms;

title: Page:EB1911 - Volume 02.djvu/319


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 27.djvu/324

 nies, convinced Hope that the fundamental question of the time was social rather than political, and only to be solved by restoring to the people ‘their natural right of deriving a subsistence from the soil on which their labour was expended.’ But it was the religious feuds between the Peep-o'-Day Boys and the Defenders, nowhere more bitter than in his own neighbourhood, that first seriously attracted his attention to politics. He threw himself with enthusiasm into the movement for a union between the Roman catholics and presbyterians, which should be directed mainly to an extension of civil and religious freedom among all classes of the community, and he became a member of the Roughford volunteer corps, and at a later period a member of the Molusk Society of United Irishmen. On the reconstruction of the United Irish Society in 1795, he consented, though reluctantly, to take the oath of secrecy and fidelity, and was appointed a delegate to the upper baronial committee of Belfast. In the spring of 1796 he was sent to Dublin to extend the principles of the society among the operatives of the capital. For a time he resided at Balbriggan, working as a silk-weaver; but his object being suspected by the Orangemen in the factory, he removed to Dublin, working in the liberties as a cotton-weaver. Here he managed to found a branch society, but again becoming suspected he narrowly escaped assassination, and was obliged to return to Belfast. On the outbreak of the rebellion in Ulster in 1798 he remained true to his principles, and took part in the battle of Ballinahinch (13 June). After lurking about in the neighbourhood of Ballymena and Belfast for four months, he made his way undetected to Dublin in November 1798. Here he was joined in the following summer by his family; but for four years he lived in continual expectation of being arrested. While in Dublin he became acquainted with Robert Emmet in 1803, and assisted him in his plot, but he took no part in the insurrection, being at the time engaged in organising a rising in co. Down. After the failure of Emmet's rebellion he avoided arrest, and on the political amnesty that followed the death of Pitt and the accession to office of Fox and Grenville in 1806, he returned to Belfast, and resumed his work as a linen-weaver. In 1843 he wrote his memoirs at the request of R. R. Madden, and was apparently alive at the time of their publication in 1846. He was of medium height, slightly but firmly built, and of a modest and retiring disposition.

Hope married the daughter of his first master, Rose Mullen, who died in 1831, after bearing him four children.

HOPE, JAMES (1808–1881), admiral of the fleet, born 3 March, 1808, was son of Rear-admiral Sir George Johnstone Hope, K.C.B. (1767–1818), who as a captain commanded the Defence at Trafalgar. Admiral Sir Henry Hope, K.C.B. (1787–1863) [q. v.], was Sir James's first cousin. In 1820 he was entered at the Royal Naval College at Portsmouth, and in June 1822 was appointed to the Forte frigate going out to the West Indies; afterwards he served in the Cambrian in the Mediterranean, and was promoted to be lieutenant on 9 March 1827. On 16 Sept. he was appointed to the Maidstone, but a fortnight later was transferred to the Undaunted, which carried Lord William Bentinck out to India as governor-general. In August 1829 Hope was appointed flag-lieutenant to the Earl of Northesk, then commander-in-chief at Plymouth, and on 26 Feb. 1830 he was promoted to commander's rank. From 1833 to 1838 he commanded the Racer on the North American and West Indian station, and was posted on 28 June 1838. In December 1844 he commissioned the Firebrand steam frigate for service on the South American station, and on 20 Nov. 1845 had a prominent share in the engagement with the batteries at Obligado on the Parana [see ], where he distinguished himself by pulling up in his gig to a heavy chain moored across the river, and there waiting under a continuous fire while the chain was cut by a young engineer, Mr. George Tuck, who, many years later, was instructor in steam at the Royal Naval College at Greenwich. Hope was nominated a C.B. on 3 April 1846. During the Russian war from 1854 to 1856 he commanded the Majestic in the Baltic, but without any opportunity of personal distinction. On 19 Nov. 1857 he attained the rank of rear-admiral. In March 1859 he was appointed commander-in-chief in China, and reached Singapore on 16 April, where he relieved his predecessor, Sir Michael Seymour (1802–1887) [q. v.]

The war of the three previous years had been terminated in a treaty signed at Tientsin on 26 June 1858, the ratifications of which were to be exchanged at Pekin within


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 27.djvu/325

 a year. It was, however, rumoured at Shanghai that the English and French ministers would not be permitted to go to Pekin. On 17 June 1859 the Chesapeake, on board of which Hope's flag was flying, anchored in the Gulf of Pecheli, and Hope went at once in the Plover gunboat to the mouth of the Peiho, to acquaint the governor of the forts of the ambassadors' approach and to see for himself what the passage was like. He found that it was blocked not only by a strong boom, but by a series of timber rafts, and by rows of stakes and iron piles, the whole constituting a most formidable obstacle. The forts, too, had been rebuilt, enlarged, and strengthened, and though neither flags nor guns were to be seen, the English officer on landing with the admiral's message was met on the beach and not allowed to proceed further. On 19 June the allied ministers arrived off the bar of the Peiho, but as the obstructions prevented their passing up the river, and they were told to go to the Peh-tang, nine miles further north, contrary as they thought to the terms of the treaty, they formally requested Hope to clear the way for them. This accordingly Hope undertook to do, and on 25 June, at the top of high water, that is about 2, began to force the passage. He had with him eleven gunboats, large and small, and—including a reserve for landing—about eleven hundred men. As the gunboats approached the boom, the batteries opened on them with deadly effect. The Plover, in which Hope had hoisted his flag, was sunk; he himself was twice severely wounded, but refused to be conveyed out of action; he was carried to the Cormorant, where his flag was again hoisted. Later on the Cormorant was also sunk; so too was the Lee. All the others were severely damaged. The falling tide brought the vessels to a lower level, and gave the batteries a commanding fire to which it was impossible to reply. At the same time it exposed a wide extent of mud-flat, and when the storming parties were landed the men were caught in the mud. The enemy opened a deadly fire on them as they struggled to approach the fort. The greater number were killed or wounded, and when the last ditch was reached only fifty men were together. No reinforcements could be sent, and they were obliged to retreat, under the deadly hail, to the gunboats still afloat, which were then withdrawn out of range. Next day Hope reported to the ambassadors that his effort had failed and that it was not in his power to renew it. Of the eleven hundred men engaged, eighty-nine had been killed and 345 wounded, including the admiral himself and a large proportion of officers.

This repulse of our forces by the Chinese gave rise to the comment that we were treacherously attacked, and were taken at a disadvantage, and that the guns were manned by Europeans—Russians more especially—or Americans. Such statements were unfounded; for even admitting that the attack was a violation of the treaty, it was quite well understood by Hope that the treaty was to be violated; and he approached the boom knowing that he would have to fight his way. It had often been pointed out that to attack the Chinese forces twice in the same way on the same ground was likely to lead to serious fighting. The passage which Hope tried to force had been forced by Seymour only the year before. Despite the tactical error, however, the determined gallantry of Hope and his men roused great enthusiasm at home. It was resolved that the treaty must be ratified at Pekin, and on receipt of the intelligence that the Chinese government had approved of what had been done at Taku, a strong military expedition was sent out by both the allied powers. Hope had meantime gone to the neighbourhood of Ningpo, where he remained to recruit his health. In the following year (1860) the local transport arrangements were conducted by him, and by the end of June 1860 the troops were landed at the mouth of the Peh-tang. By 1 Aug. everything was ready for the advance. On 20 Sept. they attacked and stormed the fort on the north side of the Peiho. When that was captured the southern forts were at once evacuated, the obstacles were removed from the mouth of the river, and on the 23rd Hope went up to Tien-tsin, where he for the most part remained till the treaty was signed at Pekin on 24 Oct. On 9 Nov. 1860 he was nominated a K.C.B., and in the following year received the grand cross of the Legion of Honour. In the spring of 1862 he co-operated with the Chinese imperial troops under the American General Ward in driving back the Taepings from the neighbourhood of Shanghai and Ningpo. Several of their positions were taken by storm, and on different occasions there was severe though irregular fighting; on one, in the end of February, Hope, leading in person, was wounded by a musket-shot; on another the French admiral was killed by a cannon-ball. Things were still in a very unsettled state when, in the autumn, Hope was relieved by Rear-admiral Kuper.

Towards the end of 1863 he was appointed commander-in-chief in North America and


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 27.djvu/326

 the West Indies. His command was uneventful. He became vice-admiral on 16 Sept. 1864, was nominated a G.C.B. on 28 March 1865, and returned to England in the spring of 1867. From 1869 to 1872 he was commander-in-chief at Portsmouth, and was thus, in October 1870, called on to preside at the court-martial which inquired into the loss of the Captain [see ; ]. He became an admiral on 21 Jan. 1870; was appointed principal A.D.C. in February 1873; was placed on the retired list, on attaining the age of seventy, in March 1878; and on 15 June 1879 was advanced to the honorary rank of admiral of the fleet. During his later years his health was much broken, and he lived in comparative retirement. He died at Carriden House in Linlithgowshire on 9 June 1881. He was twice married, but left no issue. His portrait, a good likeness, by Sydney Hodges is in the Painted Hall at Greenwich.

HOPE, JAMES ARCHIBALD (1785–1871), general, son of Lieutenant-colonel Erskine Hope, 26th (Cameronians) regiment of foot, and great-grandson of Sir Thomas Hope, eighth baronet of Craighall, Fifeshire, was born in 1785, and in January 1800 was appointed ensign in the 26th Cameronians, then at Halifax, Nova Scotia, of which his father was junior major. He became lieutenant in the regiment in 1801, and captain in 1805. He served with his regiment in Hanover in 1805–6, was a deputy assistant adjutant-general under Lord Cathcart at Copenhagen in 1807, and on the staff of Sir, afterwards fourth earl of Hopetoun [q. v.], in Sweden in 1808, in Spain in 1808–9—including the actions at Lugo and Corunna—and in the Walcheren expedition. He was aide-de-camp to General Graham [see ] at Barossa, and brought home the despatches and the ‘eagle’ captured by the 87th regiment (, Well. Desp. iv. 698). He was afterwards with Graham at Ciudad Rodrigo and before Badajoz. When Graham went home on sick leave during Wellington's advance against the forts of Salamanca, Hope was appointed an assistant adjutant-general, in which capacity he was present at Salamanca, Burgos, Vittoria, St. Sebastian, and the passage of the Bidassoa. He was afterwards selected, while attached to the 7th division, to act as assistant adjutant-general and military secretary to Marshal Beresford, who was in command of an army corps of three divisions. With this army corps Hope made the concluding campaigns, including the actions of the Nivelle, Nive, Orthez, and Toulouse. He was made a brevet-major in March 1811, and lieutenant-colonel January 1813, and was promoted on 25 July 1814 from the Cameronians to be captain and lieutenant-colonel 3rd foot guards (now Scots Guards). In that regiment he served twenty-five years, retiring on half-pay unattached on 1 Nov. 1839. He became brevet-colonel in 1830, a major-general in 1841, was employed as major-general on the staff in Lower Canada 1841–7, was appointed colonel 9th foot in 1848, and became lieutenant-general in 1851, and general in 1859.

Hope was a G.C.B., and had the Peninsular gold cross and clasp for Vittoria, Nivelle, Nive, Orthes, and Toulouse, and the Peninsular medal with clasps for Corunna, Barossa, Ciudad Rodrigo, Badajoz, and Salamanca. He was married, and had three children. He died at his residence, Balgowan House, Cheltenham, on 30 Dec. 1871, aged 86.

HOPE, JOHN,, (1605?–1654), Scottish judge, born about 1605, was eldest son of Sir  of Craighall, first baronet [q. v.], by Elizabeth, daughter of John Bennet of Wallyford, Haddingtonshire; Sir (1614–1661) [q. v.] was his younger brother. He was educated for the law, and having been admitted advocate rapidly acquired practice, and in 1632 was knighted and appointed an ordinary lord of session, assuming the title of Lord Craighall, and taking his seat on 27 July. In September 1638 he refused to subscribe the king's covenant until it had been approved by the general assembly. In 1640 he was placed on the committee of estates appointed to provide for the defence of the kingdom against Charles I; was reappointed ordinary lord of session ‘ad vitam aut culpam’ in the following year; and in 1644 was made one of the commissioners for the visitation of St. Andrews, the plantation of kirks, the administration of the exchequer and the excise. In 1651 his brother, Sir Alexander Hope, underwent examination by the committee of estates for advising the king to surrender Scotland and Ireland to Cromwell, and quoted Lord Craighall to the effect that it would be wise in his


text: Page:China- Its State and Prospects.djvu/611


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 27.djvu/327

 majesty to ‘treat with Cromwell for one-half of his coat before he lost the whole.’ In May 1652 Craighall was appointed one of Cromwell's committee, consisting of five English and three Scotch judges, for the administration of justice. His brother, Sir James Hope (1614–1661) [q. v.], not himself, was a representative for Scotland in the English parliament in 1653. He died at Edinburgh on 28 April 1654, having married Margaret, daughter of Sir Archibald Murray of Blackbarony, bart., by whom he had two sons and six daughters. The elder son, Thomas, born on 11 Feb. 1633, was grandfather of Sir [q. v.], seventh baronet, with whom his line became extinct. The second son, (1639–1706), was lord of session in 1689, and lord of justiciary in 1690. He took the title of Lord Rankeillor, and was M.P. for Fifeshire from 25 April 1706 till his death on 10 Oct. following. (1725–1786) [q. v.] was his grandson.

HOPE, JOHN (d. 1766), lieutenant-general. [See .]

HOPE, JOHN (1739–1785), miscellaneous writer, second son of Charles Hope (afterwards Hope-Vere) and grandson of, first earl of Hopetoun [q. v.], was born 7 April 1739. He was educated at the Rev. Andrew Kinross's academy at Enfield; engaged in mercantile pursuits in London, apparently with no great success; and in 1768 was chosen by the influence of his uncle, John Hope, second earl of Hopetoun [q. v.], M.P. for Linlithgowshire, in succession to his father. The earl allowed him an annuity of 400l. to defray his expenses (Letter to John Wilkes, Addit. MS. 30871, f. 132). In 1770 he was unseated on the petition of his opponent, James Dundas. He had lost favour, both with his patron and with the majority of the House of Commons, by voting for Wilkes on the question of the Middlesex election, and to this he attributed the loss of his seat. ‘It was chiefly in your cause I suffered,’ he wrote to Wilkes (manuscript letter, supra; see also, Letters, 1772). Hope died at Newcastle-on-Tyne, 21 May 1785 (Gent. Mag. 1785, ii. 665). He married, 2 June 1762, Mary, only daughter of Eliab Breton of Forty Hill, Middlesex. She committed suicide at Brockhall, Northamptonshire, 25 June 1767, and was buried at Norton. Her husband erected a monument with a rhyming epitaph to her memory in the south transept of Westminster Abbey (, Westminster Abbey, ii. 257). The three sons of this marriage, Charles (1763–1851); John, afterwards knighted (1765–1836); and William Johnstone, also afterwards knighted, are separately noticed.

Hope's writings were:
 * 1) ‘Occasional Attempts at Sentimental Poetry by a Man of Business,’ 1769.
 * 2) ‘The New Brighthelmston Guide, a sketch in miniature of the British Shore,’ 1770.
 * 3) ‘Letters on certain Proceedings in Parliament during the Sessions of the years 1769 and 1770,’ 1772.
 * 4) ‘Thoughts in Prose and Verse started in his walks,’ Stockton, 1780; published the same year at London and Edinburgh.
 * 5) ‘Letters on Credit,’ second edition, with a postscript and a short account of the bank at Amsterdam, 1784; originally contributed to the ‘Public Advertiser,’ ‘of very little value,’ observes  (Literature of Political Economy, p. 354).

In the ‘Public Advertiser,’ 16 Oct. 1771, there is a letter by Hope (one of a series of four) to Junius on the subject of pressing seamen. It is signed ‘An Advocate in the Cause of the People,’ and was answered by ‘Philo-Junius’ in letter lxii. of the collection. The ‘Gentleman's Magazine’ (supra) also credits Hope with the authorship of the ‘New Margate Guide’ (1780?).

HOPE, JOHN (1725–1786), professor of botany in Edinburgh University, son of Robert Hope, surgeon, whose father, Lord Rankeillor [see under ], was a Scotch lord of session, was born at Edinburgh on 10 May 1725. He was educated at Dalkeith school, at Edinburgh University, and in continental medical schools. He graduated M.D. at Glasgow in 1750, and, joining the College of Physicians at Edinburgh, entered upon practice there. He chiefly devoted himself to botanical science, which he had begun under Jussieu in Paris, and in 1761 he obtained, in succession to [q. v.], the professorship of botany and materia medica at Edinburgh, being also made king's botanist for Scotland and superintendent of the royal garden at Edinburgh. After lecturing in the summer session on botany, and in the winter on materia medica, for six years, he gave up the latter course, and in 1768 received a new


text:
Page:Sons and Lovers, 1913, Lawrence.djvu/17

Rh smelled the beer, and hurried a little, thinking her husband was probably in the bar.

At about half-past six her son came home, tired now, rather pale, and somewhat wretched. He was miserable, though he did not know it, because he had let her go alone. Since she had gone, he had not enjoyed his wakes.

“Has my dad been?” He asked.

“No,” said the mother.

“He’s helping to wait at the Moon and Stars. I seed him through that black tin stuff wi’ holes in, on the window, wi’ his sleeves rolled up.”

“Ha!” exclaimed the mother shortly. “He’s got no money. An’ he’ll be satisfied if he gets his ’lowance, whether they give him more or not.”

When the light was fading, and Mrs. Morel could see no more to sew, she rose and went to the door. Everywhere was the sound of excitement, the restlessness of the holiday, that at last infected her. She went out into the side garden. Women were coming home from the wakes, the children hugging a white lamb with green legs, or a wooden horse. Occasionally a man lurched past, almost as full as he could carry. Some-times a good husband came along with his family, peacefully. But usually the women and children were alone. The stay-at-home mothers stood gossiping at the corners of the alley, as the twilight sank, folding their arms under their white aprons.

Mrs. Morel was alone, but she was used to it. Her son and her little girl slept upstairs; so, it seemed, her home was there behind her, fixed and stable. But she felt wretched with the coming child. The world seemed a dreary place, where nothing else would happen for her—it least until William grew up. But for herself, nothing but this dreary endurance—till the children grew up. And the children! She could not afford to have this third. She did not want it. The father was serving beer in a public-house, swilling himself drunk. She despised him, and was tied to him. This coming child was too much for her. If it were not for William and Annie, she was sick of it, the struggle with poverty and ugliness and meanness.

She went into the front garden, feeling too heavy to take herself out, yet unable to stay indoors. The heat suffocated her. And looking ahead, the prospect of her life made her feel as if she were buried alive.

The front garden was a small square with a privet hedge.


text:
Page:Sons and Lovers, 1913, Lawrence.djvu/18

6 There she stood, trying to soothe herself with the scent of flowers and the fading, beautiful evening. Opposite her small gate was the stile that led uphill, under the tall hedge, between the burning glow of the cut pastures. The sky overhead throbbed and pulsed with light. The glow sank quickly off the field; the earth and the hedges smoked dusk. As it grew dark, a ruddy glare came out on the hilltop, and out of the glare the diminished commotion of the fair.

Sometimes, down the trough of darkness formed by the path under the hedges, men came lurching home. One young man lapsed into a run down the steep bit that ended the hill, and went with a crash into the stile. Mrs. Morel shuddered. He picked himself up, swearing viciously, rather pathetically, as if he thought the stile had wanted to hurt him.

She went indoors, wondering if things were never going to alter. She was beginning by now to realize that they would not. She seemed so far away from her girlhood, she wondered if it were the same person walking heavily up the back garden at the Bottoms as had run so lightly on the breakwater at Sheerness ten years before.

“What have I to do with it?” she said to herself. “What have I to do with all this? Even the child I am going to have! It doesn’t seem as if I were taken into account.”

Sometimes life takes hold of one, carries the body along, accomplishes one’s history, and yet is not real, but leaves oneself as it were slurred over.

“I wait,” Mrs. Morel said to herself—“I wait, and what I wait for can never come.”

Then she straightened the kitchen, lit the lamp, mended the fire, looked out the washing for the next day, and put it to soak. After which she sat down to her sewing. Through the long hours her needle flashed regularly through the stuff. Occasionally she sighed, moving to relieve herself. And all the time she was thinking how to make the most of what she had, for the children’s sakes.

At half-past eleven her husband came. His cheeks were very red and very shiny above his black moustache. His head nodded slightly. He was pleased with himself.

“Oh! Oh! waitin’ for me, lass? I’ve bin ’elp1n’ Anthony, an’ what’s think he’s gen me? Nowt b’r a lousy hae’f-crown, an’ that’s ivry penny——”

“He thinks you’ve made the rest up in beer,” she said shortly.


text:
Page:Sons and Lovers, 1913, Lawrence.djvu/19

7 “An’ I ’aven’t—that I ’aven’t. You b’lieve me, I’ve ’ad very little this day, I have an’ all.” His voice went tender. “Here, an’ I browt thee a bit o’ brandysnap, an’ a cocoanut for th’ children.” He laid the gingerbread and the cocoanut, a hairy object, on the table. “Nay, tha niver said thankyer for nowt i’ thy life, did ter?”

As a compromise, she picked up the cocoanut and shook it, to see if it had any milk.

“It’s a good ’un, you may back yer life o’ that. I got it fra’ Bill Hodgkisson. ‘Bill,’ I says, ‘tha non wants them three nuts, does ter? Arena ter for gi’ein’ me one for my bit of a lad an’ wench?’ ‘I ham, Walter, my lad,’ ’e says; ‘ta’e which on ’em ter’s a mind.’ An’ so I took one, an’ thanked ’im. I didn’t like ter shake it afore ’is eyes, but ’e says, ‘Tha’d better ma’e sure it’s a good un, Walt.’ An’ so, yer see, I knowed it was. He’s a nice chap, is Bill Hodgkisson, ’e’s a nice chap!”

“A man will part with anything so long as he’s drunk, and you’re drunk along with him,” said Mrs. Morel.

“Eh, tha mucky little ’ussy, who’s drunk, I sh’d like ter know?” said Morel. He was extraordinarily pleased with himself, because of his day’s helping to wait in the Moon and Stars. He chattered on.

Mrs. Morel, very tired, and sick of his babble, went to bed as quickly as possible, while he raked the fire.

Mrs. Morel came of a good old burgher family, famous independents who had fought with Colonel Hutchinson, and who remained stout Congregationalists. Her grandfather had gone bankrupt in the lace-market at a time when so many lace-manufacturers were ruined in Nottingham. Her father, George Coppard, was an engineer—a large, handsome, haughty man, proud of his fair skin and blue eyes, but more proud still of his integrity. Gertrude resembled her mother in her small build. But her temper, proud and unyielding, she had from the Coppards.

George Coppard was bitterly galled by his own poverty. He became foreman of the engineers in the dockyard at Sheerness. Mrs. Morel—Gertrude—was the second daughter. She favoured her mother, loved her mother best of all; but she had the Coppards’ clear, defiant blue eyes and their broad brow. She remembered to have hated her father’s overbearing manner towards her gentle, humorous, kindly-souled mother. She remembered running over the breakwater at Sheerness and finding the boat. She remembered to have been petted


text:
Page:Sons and Lovers, 1913, Lawrence.djvu/20

8 and flattered by all the men when she had gone to the dock-yard, for she was a delicate, rather proud child. She rememered the funny old mistress, whose assistant she had become, whom she had loved to help in the private school. And she still had the Bible that John Field had given her. She used to walk home from chapel with John Field when she was nineteen. He was the son of a well-to-do tradesman, had been to college in London, and was to devote himself to business.

She could always recall in detail a September Sunday afternoon, when they had sat under the vine at the back of her father’s house. The sun came through the chinks in the vine-leaves and made beautiful patterns, like a lace scarf, falling on her and on him. Some of the leaves were clean yellow, like yellow Hat flowers.

“Now sit still,” he had cried. “Now your hair, I don’t know what it is like! It’s as bright as copper and gold, as red as burnt copper, and it has gold threads where the sun shines on it. Fancy their saying it’s brown. Your mother calls it mouse-colour.”

She had met his brilliant eyes, but her clear face scarcely showed the elation which rose within her.

“But you say you don’t like business,” she pursued.

“I don’t. I hate it!” he cried hotly.

“And you would like to go into the ministry,” she half implored.

“I should. I should love it, if I thought I could make a first-rate preacher.”

“Then why don’t you—why don’t you?” Her voice rang with defiance. “If I were a man, nothing would stop me.”

She held her head erect. He was rather timid before her.

“But my father’s so stiff-necked. He means to put me into the business, and I know he’ll do it.”

“But if you’re a man?” she had cried.

“Being a man isn’t everything,” he replied, frowning with puzzled helplessness.

Now, as she moved about her work at the Bottoms, with some experience of what being a man meant, she knew that it was not everything.

At twenty, owing to her health, she had left Sheerness. Her father had retired home to Nottingham. John Field’s father had been ruined; the son had gone as a teacher in Norwood She did not hear of him until, two years later, she made determined inquiry. He had married his landlady, a woman of forty, a widow with property.


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 27.djvu/332

 Elizabeth, daughter of John Bennett of Wallingford, Berkshire, was born on 6 Aug. 1606, and was admitted advocate on 17 July 1631. On 16 July 1633 he was knighted by Charles I at Innerwick (, Annals, iii. 367), and was commissioner in the Scottish parliament for the county of Clackmannan in 1639, 1640, and 1641. In 1639, and again in 1640, he was colonel of the troop raised by the College of Justice to attend General Leslie as his bodyguard; but in the latter year, on the march into England, at the crossing of the Tyne, ‘Sir Thomas and his troop were scarce well entered the ford before they wheeled about and retired with discredit.’ In September 1641 he proposed in parliament, on behalf of the barons, that the estates should appoint officers of state and privy councillors by ballot, but the proposal was lost. He was prominent in opposing Charles's demand for a public inquiry into ‘The Incident,’ and was the author of the compromise effected between the king and the estates with reference to the appointment of Loudoun as chancellor. On 13 Nov. 1641 the estates appointed him an ordinary lord of session and lord justice-general, and he was also a commissioner to treat with the English parliament for the suppression of the Irish rebellion. In the parliament of 1643 he was member for Stirlingshire, but on 23 Aug. of that year he died at Edinburgh, leaving a son, Alexander, the first baronet of Kerse. He wrote ‘The Law Repertorie,’ and left a manuscript commentary on books 18–24 of the ‘Digest,’ now in the Advocates' Library at Edinburgh.

HOPE, THOMAS (d. 1646), lord advocate of Scotland, was son of Henry Hope, a merchant of Scotland with business connections in France, by his wife Jaqueline de Tott. His great grandfather, John de Hope, is said to have come from France to Scotland in the retinue of Magdalen, queen of James V, in 1537. His younger brother Henry seems to have settled in early life in Amsterdam, and was ancestor of the rich family of merchants long connected with that city (cf., and 1770?–1831). Thomas was bred to the law in Scotland, and was admitted advocate on 7 Feb. 1605. He defended John Forbes (1568?–1634) [q. v.] and five other ministers tried at Linlithgow in 1606 upon a charge of having committed treason in declining to acknowledge the jurisdiction claimed by the privy council over the general assembly. He, like his leaders, Thomas Craig, William Oliphant, and Thomas Gray, counselled submission, but when the two former declined to appear at the trial on 10 Jan., Hope made so vigorous a defence that, although his clients were convicted, he speedily ranked among the foremost men at the bar. Two years afterwards Lord-advocate Hamilton spoke of him as ‘one of the most learned and best experienced’ of Scotch advocates, and the privy council desired his opinion on a point of law in the case of Margaret Hartsyde, one of the queen's chamberwomen, whom, however, he was retained to defend (Melros Papers, i. 50, 344;, Annals, ii. 26; , Criminal Trials, ii. 544–57). Till the end of the reign he had a lucrative practice. His public life began under Charles I. In 1625 he prepared the deed revoking James's grants of church property to laymen. On 29 May 1626 he was appointed lord advocate jointly with Oliphant, then an old man (, Hist. of his own Time, i. 30; Registrum Secreti Sigilli, xcviii. 444), and thereupon addressed the king in a long Latin poem, published in the same year. With regard to the resumption of ecclesiastical property his policy was to threaten boldly and act moderately to those who begged for terms. On his advice in August an action was commenced to have the various grants of church property declared null and void (see Connell on Tithes, Append. xxxix.) The action, however, was abandoned, and a commission, of which he was a member, was appointed to report upon the whole subject. In February 1628 his services to the crown on this commission were rewarded with a Nova Scotia baronetcy. On 19 Nov., in pursuance of an old claim and privilege of lord advocates, he was sworn to secrecy, and admitted to sit with the judges in cases in which he was not himself employed (Acts of Sederunt, 19 Nov. 1628). In parliament he was entrusted with the royal letters of prorogation on each occasion from 1629 to 1633. He prepared the summons for leasing-making served on John Elphinstone, lord Balmerino [q. v.], on 14 Nov. 1634, and conducted the trial on behalf of the crown. Though he exerted himself zealously against the prisoner he does not appear to have lost the favour of the presbyterians. He was a party to the act of the privy council commanding the use of the service-book on 20 Dec. 1636 (, Letters and Journals, vol. i. App. 440), but he probably absented himself from the first reading in St. Giles's, and is charged by Bishop Guthrie with having been


text:
Page:Sons and Lovers, 1913, Lawrence.djvu/21

Rh And still Mrs. Morel preserved John Field’s Bible. She did not now believe him to be—— Well, she understood pretty well what he might or might not have been. So she preserved his Bible, and kept his memory intact in her heart, for her own sake. To her dying day, for thirty-five years, she did not speak of him.

When she was twenty-three years old, she met, at a Christmas party, a young man from the Erewash Valley. Morel was then twenty-seven years old. He was well set-up, erect, and very smart. He had wavy black hair that shone again, and a vigorous black beard that had never been shaved. His cheeks were ruddy, and his red, moist mouth was noticeable because he laughed so often and so heartily. He had that rare thing, a rich, ringing laugh. Gertrude Coppard had watched him, fascinated. He was so full of colour and animation, his voice ran so easily into comic grotesque, he was so ready and so pleasant with everybody. Her own father had a rich fund of humour, but it was satiric. This man’s was different: soft, non-intellectual, warm, a kind of gambolling.

She herself was opposite. She had a curious, receptive mind, which found much pleasure and amusement in listening to other folk. She was clever in leading folk on to talk. She loved ideas, and was considered very intellectual. What she liked most of all was an argument on religion or philosophy or politics with some educated man. This she did not often enjoy. So she always had people tell her about themselves, finding her pleasure so.

In her person she was rather small and delicate, with a large brow, and dropping bunches of brown silk curls. Her blue eyes were very straight, honest, and searching. She had the beautiful hands of the Coppards. Her dress was always subdued. She wore dark blue silk, with a peculiar silver chain of silver scallops. This, and a heavy brooch of twisted gold, was her only ornament. She was still perfectly intact, deeply religious, and full of beautiful candour.

Walter Morel seemed melted away before her. She was to the miner that thing of mystery and fascination, a lady. When she spoke to him, it was with a southern pronunciation and a purity of English which thrilled him to hear. She watched him. He danced well, as if it were natural and joyous in him to dance. His grandfather was a French refugee who had married an English barmaid—if it had been a marriage. Gertrude Coppard watched the young miner as he danced, a certain subtle exultation like glamour in his movement and his face


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 27.djvu/333

Hope privy to the rioting which then took place (, Memoirs, p. 20). Delicate as his position was he contrived still to retain the favour of both sides. In the autumn, however, he became an open supporter of the supplicants, or popular party, and alone among the privy councillors refused to sign the approval of Lord High-treasurer Traquair's proclamation, 20 Feb. 1638, condemning the opposition to the service-book (, Relation of Affairs, p. 66). He avoided any prominent share in the preparation of the national covenant, and did not sign it, though he pronounced an opinion in favour of its legality; and, writing privately to the Earl of Morton, he called the covenanters ‘a number of the most loyal and faithful subjects that ever a prince had.’ Charles's royal commissioner, the Marquis of Hamilton, found him, according to Burnet, one of his greatest troubles, and yet dared not dismiss him. He could not induce him to declare the action of the covenanters to be illegal, or to defend episcopacy at the assembly in Glasgow in November (, Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton, p. 92). His son, Sir Thomas Hope of Kerse [q. v.], served with the army of the covenanters, and Hope's own position became more and more precarious till on 14 Jan. 1640 the king ordered him to remain at his country house, Craighall, Fifeshire, during pleasure. There he remained till the end of May, when he was summoned to Edinburgh to carry out the prorogation of parliament. When parliament rose on 11 June he returned to Craighall, but again appeared in parliament officially to prorogue it on 14 Jan. 1641. When the committee of estates required his official signature to writs of summons against the ‘incendiaries,’ or opponents of the covenant, he refused it without the king's authority, and declined also to prosecute them in spite of the direction of the estates (see, Annals, iii. 1–3; Acts Scots Parl. v. 307). Later in the session his right to appear in parliament as lord advocate without representing a constituency was contested, and in spite of his arguments he was only permitted to be present as an officer of state, and to speak if called upon by the house. In 1643 he opposed the proposal to summon parliament without any warrant from the king, and though unsuccessful he re-established himself by his efforts in the confidence of Charles's partisans (, Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton, p. 218), and he abstained from attending the convention when it sat. He was lord high commissioner at the meeting of the general assembly on 2 Aug., the only instance of the appointment of a commoner to that office, and maintained the king's policy—of which, however, he did not entirely approve—with much discretion. In spite of his requests for delay and communication with the king, the assembly adopted the solemn league and covenant. From this time he discharged only the formal duties of law officer, and even these were much limited by the jealousy of the estates. He appeared in parliament only if specially summoned. His health failed, and on 1 Oct. 1646 he died.

His success as a lawyer was very great, and with the profits of his practice he purchased estates in Fifeshire, Stirlingshire, Midlothian, Haddington, and Berwickshire. He wrote a legal treatise called ‘Minor Practicks,’ subsequently published by Bayne in 1726, and possibly wrote a manuscript treatise called ‘Major Practicks’ (see, Law of Parent and Child), and some reports of decisions of the court of session, 1610–19. Besides his ‘Carmen Sæculare’ in Charles I's honour, published at Edinburgh in 1626, he wrote a Latin translation of the Psalms and Song of Solomon. He married Elizabeth, daughter of John Binning or Bennet of Wallyford, co. Haddington, by whom he had four sons who survived infancy; of these three reached the bench: John, lord Craighall (1605?–1654) [q. v.], Thomas, lord Kerse (1606–1643) [q. v.], and Sir James Hope of Hopetoun (1614–1661) [q. v.]; Alexander was cupbearer to Charles I. Of his two daughters who survived infancy, Mary was wife of Sir Charles Erskine of Alva, and Anne married David, lord Cardross.

 HOPE, THOMAS (1770?–1831), author and virtuoso, born about 1770, was the eldest of the three sons of John Hope of Amsterdam by his wife P. B. Vander Hoeven. He belonged to the rich family of Amsterdam merchants founded by Henry Hope, brother of Sir Thomas Hope of Kerse (d. 1646) [q. v.], lord advocate. His father is said to have been an intimate friend of the Prince of Orange, whom he powerfully aided in the crisis of 1788. The elder Hope built a magnificent country house near Haarlem, at a cost of 50,000l., and placed in it a rare collection of pictures. There the Prince of Orange was a frequent guest. A good drawing of the mansion by Samuel Ireland appears in Ireland's ‘Picturesque Tour … made in 1789’ (London, 1796, i. 112). From