due to fear of invasion had become greater with the progress of extravagance. In 'Kin beyond Sea' Gladstone compares the British and American constitutions, and insists that the cabinet, which constitutional historians ignore, is an essential element in the working of the constitution. The best portrait of Gladstone was painted by Millais in 1879, and hangs in the National Gallery. It was sold by the first Duke of Westminster to Sir Charles Tennant, who gave it to the nation. Millais painted in 1885 a second portrait which is at Christ Church, Oxford. Other portraits and busts are very numerous. In 1833 he was painted by (Sir) George Hayter; in 1837 by W. Bradley; in 1840 by Joseph Severn; in 1843 by George Richmond (chalk drawing); in 1857 by Mr. G. F. Watts, R.A.; in 1880 by (Sir) W. B. Richmond; in 1887 by Frank Holl; in 1893 by Colin Forbes, a Canadian artist. A marble bust by Onslow Ford is in the National Liberal Club, as well as a bronze statuette by Bruce Joy. A portrait and a bust are at the Reform Club, London. A statue in Carrara marble, by Mr. F. W. Pomeroy, is in the central hall of the Houses of Parliament. Another statue was erected in 1900 in University Square, Athens. Shortly after Gladstone's death a committee was formed to commemorate him by the erection of other statues of him in London, Edinburgh, and Dublin. The corporation of Dublin declined to accept the committee's offer. Gladstone, though not tall, was above the middle height, broad-shouldered, but otherwise slight in figure, and muscular, with no superfluous flesh. He was gifted with an abundance of physical strength, and enjoyed throughout his life remarkably good health. His hair, in his youth and the prime of his manhood, was black. His complexion was pale, almost pallid, and an artist compared it to alabaster. His eyes were large, lustrous, and piercing; not quite black, but resembling agate in colour. His face, always handsome, acquired in old age an expression of singular dignity, majesty, and power. His Voice, naturally musical and melodious, gained by practice an almost unexampled range of compass and variety. His manners were courteous, even ceremonious, and to women habitually deferential. He was punctilious on the matter of social precedence, and would not go out of the room before a peer of his own creation. Bishops, and indeed all clergymen, he treated with peculiar respect. His temper, though quick, and as he himself said 'vulnerable,' was in private life almost invariably under perfect control. In parliament he sometimes gave way to indignation, for his wrath was kindled by public causes, and not by anything petty or personal. His talk was copious, lucid, and full of phrases which stamped themselves upon the memory. He was earnest and eager in argument, tenacious of his proposition, but ready to hear anything which could be said against it. Hard to convince at the time, he often came round afterwards to the view of an opponent, and would then make the admission with the utmost candour. He was a good listener as well as a good talker, and he had the instantaneous rapidity of perception supposed to be characteristic of great lawyers. His range of study, though it excluded physical science, was very wide, and his acquaintance with a subject was hardly ever superficial. He used to say that he had not a good verbal memory; but he was seldom guilty of a misquotation, and he retained in his mind with accuracy an enormous number of facts. No scholar in Europe had a more thorough knowledge of Homer, and few, even of Italians, were so well versed in Dante. He was an acute and learned theologian. The defect of his conversation was that he could not help being earnest on all subjects, and failed to see that his views on the making of violins were less interesting than his experience of government by cabinet. In combined breadth and subtlety of intellect no statesman of his own age surpassed him. He was equally at home in drawing up a great measure like the Irish Land Act of 1881, and in refining upon the point whether the retention of the Irish members with home rule was a principle or anorganic detail.' Sometimes his subtlety led him to draw sophistical distinctions. His minute and punctilious scrupulosity in the smallest things often led to charges of equivocation, and the very completeness with which he defended himself against them produced a vague sense of distrust. Though he was himself the best abused man in England, his own judgments were uniformly charitable, and he was seldom heard to say anything harsh of a political opponent in private. It has sometimes been alleged that Gladstone had no humour. Such a broad and unqualified statement is certainly false. Irony is a form of humour, and of irony he was a master. But it is true that his sense of humour was fitful and capricious. Many forms of it did not appeal to him. With all his love of poetry he had a literal mind, and was too apt to assume that people meant exactly what they said. Two of Gladstone's speeches may be mentioned which, read in cold blood at a great distance of time, would make anybody laugh. One is accused of being an opportunist,' or, in attitude to reform in 1859. The other is his cusation is inconsistent with his character, reply to Mr. Chaplin's personal attack in except on the hypothesis that he was a con1877. Gladstone's favourite form of re-scious and deliberate hypocrite. It has been creation was turning from one kind of mental employment to another. He was an omnivorous reader of ancient and modern languages, prose and poetry, history and biography, sermons and novels. In the Temple of Peace,' as he called his ample library at Hawarden, he was always happy. As a young man he rode and shot, though he never became a sportsman. He cared little for games. Chess he thought too serious for an amusement, but he sometimes played whist with concentration. His favourite pastime of cutting down trees was begun in the woods of Clumber, which he inspected as the Duke of Newcastle's trustee. Till after seventy he was a great walker, and no stretch, however long, seemed to tire him. Wordsworth's plain living and high thinking was Gladstone's standard. His father left him a sufficient fortune, which exempted him from the necessity of adopting any other profession than politics. Hawarden Castle, his Welsh home, belonged to his wife's brother, Sir Stephen Richard Glynne, and, after Sir Stephen died unmarried in 1874, to Mrs. Gladstone for her life. His habits were simple and domestic. He was a regular church-goer, even on weekdays, and on Sundays he usually read the lessons. He was frugal without being abstemious, but against luxury and ostentation he set his face. He spent a large proportion of his income on books, and gave away a still larger one in charity. But he had enough of the commercial spirit to drive a good bargain, and was in all respects an excellent man of business. He was not, however, in the ordinary sense, a man of the world. He approached moral questions rather as a clergyman than as a layman, and in dealing with individuals he wanted the tact which he displayed in dealing with assemblies. He had a bad memory for faces, and he did not always pay the personal attention which political followers of the less elevated kind expect. His power was over masses; and no one quite knows what he was who has not heard him address a great public meeting. Even in the House of Commons, though he almost always delighted it, and at times roused it to such enthusiasm as no one else could elicit, he often provoked antagonism which he might have avoided. He could not, as Disraeli said that Peel could, play upon the house like an old fiddle. Having entered public life a tory, and left it a radical, Gladstone was naturally rather more plausibly contended that he had no fixed principles in politics. But, independently of other considerations, this theory ignores economy and finance, in which he never substantially changed. He was always in favour of peace and retrenchment. He had to be converted to reform. The great plunge of his life, the sudden, or seemingly sudden, adoption of home rule, he himself explained. By arguments which to him were satisfactory, but which drew upon him the shaft of Lowell's wit (lifelong convictions to extemporise'), he showed that his opinions forced him to become a home-ruler when five-sixths of the Irish people were so, and home rule could be given to Ireland without endangering the unity of the empire. Whether it would endanger that unity was the great question, and there can be no doubt that Gladstone sincerely held it would not. The charge of precipitation is, from his point of view, not a charge at all. Lord Randolph Churchill's phrase, an old man in a hurry,' was rough and rude in form, but in substance it was neither unfair nor untrue. Gladstone himself confessed that he had been in a hurry for forty years. Gladstone thought that a great national emergency calling for prompt action had arisen, and that he at seventy-six must cope with it. He could not have expected that he would live to be eighty-eight. There was at least one sphere in which Gladstone's mind did not fluctuate. From the straight line of orthodox Christianity he never swerved by the breadth of a hair. The Christian religion guided every day and every act of his life. He was, as Lord Salisbury said after his death, 'a great Christian man.' As an orator Gladstone's only contemporary rival was John Bright. But it is difficult to compare them. Gladstone was always speaking, and usually had to speak, whether he liked it or not. Bright could choose his own subject and his own time. Bright's style was simpler, and his English purer, than Gladstone's; but his range was much narrower, he seldom argued, and he never debated. Gladstone was great in parliament, great on a platform, great even in those occasional addresses on miscellaneous topics which are apt to drive the most paradoxical into platitude. There was no audience which he could not charm, none to which he did not instinctively adapt himself. His fault as an orator was a tendency to diffusive ness, and in particular the employment of two words where one would do. But when he was pressed for time, no one could be terser, and his speeches of close reasoning or of pure exposition scarcely contain a superfluous syllable. His oratorical method and arrangement were borrowed from Peel. The fire, the energy, the enthusiasm, the fusion of reason and passion, the intense and glowing mind, were all his own. As a financier Gladstone can only be compared with Walpole, Pitt, and Peel. Walpole's great speech on the peerage bill and Gladstone's speech on the taxation of charities have been coupled as the best examples of abstract reasoning addressed to the House of Commons. Gladstone's first financial statement, made in 1853, shows that he had carefully studied the principles of Pitt's financial legislation. He was the pupil and disciple of Sir Robert Peel, whose labours in promoting the freedom of commerce he continued and completed. His intellectual supremacy was never more fully shown than in framing and carrying the budgets of 1853, 1860, and 1861. Gladstone's principal fault as a statesman was that, with the two exceptions of Italian independence and the rescue of eastern Christians from the rule of the Porte, he paid no continuous attention to foreign affairs. He trusted too much to his friend Lord Granville, who, though able and tactful, was dilatory and procrastinating. A critic, even a friendly critic, might say of Gladstone that he tried to do too many things at a time. From 1886 to 1894 home rule absorbed him, and he considered almost every subject as it affected that great issue. But at other times, even when he was prime minister, he occupied his scanty leisure with art, with theological speculations, with lite rature, with historical research, and with practical philanthropy. In his zeal to reclaim the fallen and to console the wretched he did what no man of the world would have dared to do without fear of misconstruction, or even of scandal. Indeed, he did not know what fear was. As Lord Rosebery said of him, he was the bravest of the brave. During his second government he was in serious danger of assassination. But the only thing which troubled and annoyed him was the discovery that he was under the special protection of the police. When his doctor told him, in 1894, that he had cataract, he desired him to operate then and there, that he might resume as soon as possible the great gift of working vision.' He loved popularity, having come to believe -more and more as he advanced in yearsthat the instincts of the people were, on broad questions, right, and their judgment in the long run sound. But in 1878 he set himself deliberately against a wave of public enthusiasm which he thought mistaken, with the result that he was hardly safe in the streets of London. No English statesman has been more fervently adored or more intensely hated than Gladstone. While his political admirers were extolling him to sympathetic crowds as equal or superior to the most illustrious of the human race, he was being accused in anonymous letters of the foulest crimes. Even his religion was set down in some quarters as the basest hypocrisy. But his personal enemies, as distinguished from his political opponents, were men who did not know him. Of his personal friends, at different periods of his life, the most conspicuous were Arthur Hallam, Alfred Tennyson, Samuel Wilberforce, and Mr. John Morley. Gladstone cannot be called happy in the occasion of his death.' The cause on which he bestowed the last years of his health and strength was submerged; the party which he had led was shattered in pieces. Peel broke up his party, but he carried free trade. Gladstone did not live to carry home rule. The list of his legislative achievements stops at 1885. He was a demagogue in the proper sense of the term, a true leader of the people. He exhorted them always to employ the political freedom which he had largely helped to give them, less for their own material advancement than for the best and highest interests of mankind. A full Life of Gladstone, by his friend Mr. John Morley, is in preparation. Gladstone made some contributions to an autobiography in A for his policy of Irish disestablishment), in Chapter of Autobiography, 1868 (an apologia the History of an Idea, 1886 (an explanation of his policy of Home Rule), and in Personal Recollections of A. H. Hallan (a description of his schooldays), which appeared in the Daily Telegraph on 5 Jan. 1898. Useful compilations are Mr. A. F. Robbins's Early Public Life of Gladstone, 1894; Mr. G. Barnett-Smith's Life. 2 vols., 1879; and Mr. G. W. E. Russell's Life in the Queen's Prime Ministers Series, 1891 (4th edit. 1898). Sir Edward Hamilton's Mr. Gladstone, a monograph (1898), and Mr. Sydney Buxton's Mr. Gladstone as Chancellor of the Exchequer: a study (1901), are both of conSir Wemyss Reid in 1899. Slighter sketches are siderable value. A popular Life was edited by Mr. H. W. Lucy's Mr. Gladstone, a Study from Life, 1895, and Mr. Justin McCarthy's Story of Mr. Gladstone's Life, 1897. Mr. Lionel Tollemache's Talks with Mr. Gladstone, 1898, deals with the latest period of his career. Mr. H. W. Lucy supplies useful information in Diaries of Parliament from 1874 to 1895, especially in his Diary of the Home Rule Parliament 1892-5. Hostile comments on his career include Arch deacon Denison's Mr. Gladstone, 1885, and which Gladstone figured were reissued in three GLEICHEN, COUNT. 1833-1891.1 Robert Leslie Ellis [q. v.] (afterwards coeditor with Spedding of Bacon's works), who was senior wrangler that year. He was elected second Smith's prizeman, Ellis being first. In 1840 he won the Schuldham prize, and in 1844 delivered the Wortley speech. He graduated B.A. in 1840 and M.A. in 1843. Immediately after graduating B.A. he was appointed to a mathematical lectureship at Caius, and at Michaelmas 1841 became fellow of his college. In 1842 he was ordained deacon, and priest in 1844. His intimate friends at Cambridge, besides Leslie Ellis and Charles Frederick Mackenzie [q.v.], whose life he wrote in 1864, were Thorp (afterwards archdeacon), John Mason Neale [q. v.], Philip Freeman (archdeacon of Exeter), and Benjamin Webb [q. v.] With these he accepted advanced ecclesiological views, and in co-operation with Neale and Webb he set which afterwards developed into the Camon foot in 1848 the Ecclesiological Society, bridge Camden Society. In 1844 he took charge, as locum tenens, of the parish of St. Giles, Cambridge. In the same year he preached for the first time in the university pulpit, and in the year following was nominated select preacher. In 1845 he preached before the British Association, which met at Cambridge. After his marriage, in the same year, he continued, to reside at Cambridge, taking [See VICTOR, pupils and occupying himself with parish work, and he was mainly instrumental in establishing the industrial school at Chesterton. In 1848 he was appointed to the incumbency of St. Edward's, Cambridge. It was here that he made his mark as a preacher, and influenced by his sermons not merely his parishioners but still more many successive generations of undergraduates, who used to flock to hear him every Sunday evening during term time, in greater numbers than the comparatively small building could hold. He retained his hold over the undergraduates till his departure from Cambridge in 1858. Meanwhile he was offered the bishopric of Grahamstown in 1853, which he refused. GOODWIN, HARVEY (1818-1891), bishop of Carlisle, born at King's Lynn in 1818, was son of Charles Goodwin, a solicitor in King's Lynn, where the family had been settled for two generations. His mother was Frances Sawyer, a descendant, on her mother's side, of the Wycliffes of Wycliffe, of which family John Wycliffe, the reformer, was a scion. One of his brothers was Charles Wycliffe Goodwin [q.v.], the egyptologist. From 1825 to 1833 he was educated at a private school at High Wycombe. Before going into residence at Cambridge, he joined a party at Keswick and read with William Hepworth Thompson [q. v.], then a fellow, afterwards master, of Trinity College, Cambridge. He was admitted pensioner of Gonville and Caius College on 16 Nov. 1835, and soon gave evidence of his ability, especially in mathematics. From Lady-day 1837 to Michaelmas 1839 he was scholar of his college. In his second year he became a pupil of the well-known private tutor, William Hopkins [q. v.], and in the mathematical tripos of 1839 came out second to In November 1858 he was appointed by Lord Derby to the deanery of Ely, and in 1859 received from his university the degree of D.D., on which occasion the public orator, William George Clark [q. v.], spoke in the warmest terms of the important work he had done while resident at Cambridge. On 11 Dec. 1880 he was elected honorary fellow of Gonville and Caius, and in 1885 was created hon. D.C.L. of Oxford. As dean of Ely Goodwin continued the work of the restoration of the cathedral begun by Dean Peacock, under Professor Willis's guidance, and he saw completed the painting of the nave roof, which was executed in part by Henry L'Estrange Styleman Le Strange [q.v.] of Hunstanton, and, after his death in 1862, completed by his friend, Thomas Gambier Parry [q.v.] The lantern also was rebuilt, the nave pavement relaid, the Galilee entrance restored, and a warming apparatus placed for the first time in the cathedral. While at Ely he served on two royal commissions, viz. those on clerical subscription and ritual. In October 1869 he accepted Gladstone's offer of the bishopric of Carlisle, which see he held till his death. At Carlisle the bishop brought to bear on the work of the diocese the energy and ability which had made him a man of mark from his early Cambridge days. He infused a new spirit and vitality into all the existing organisations within the diocese, and he also found time to preach frequently in London and to attend the meetings of the great church societies, where he was always a welcome speaker. For many years before his death he was chairman of the Universities' Mission to Central Africa. It was in large part owing to his strenuous advocacy of the scheme that the Church House was selected as the Church of England's Jubilee Memorial in 1887, and he lived to see the foundation stone laid by H.R.H. the Duke of Connaught. From his known interest in scientific subjects he was asked by the dean of Westminster to preach in the abbey on the Sunday after the funeral of Charles Darwin, 1 May 1882. He died on 25 Nov. 1891 at Bishopthorpe, while on a visit to Dr. Maclagan, archbishop of York, and was buried in the churchyard of Crosthwaite, Keswick. His monument in Carlisle Cathedral consists of a recumbent figure in bronze, executed by Mr. Hamo Thornycroft, R.A. There are extant two portraits of Goodwin by George Richmond, R.A.: one in crayons, taken when he was dean of Ely; a later one in oils, now in possession of his son, Harvey Goodwin, of Orton Hall, Westmoreland. An anonymous sketch portrait taken in 1839 is at Gonville and Caius College. Goodwin married on 13 Aug. 1845 Ellen, eldest daughter of George King of Bebington Hall, Cheshire, and by her had three sons and four daughters. Goodwin's literary activity was continuous throughout his career. Apart from numerous sermons and lectures and commentaries on the Gospels of St. Matthew (1857), St. Mark (1860), and St. Luke (1865), his principal publications were: 1. Elementary Course of Mathematics,' 1847; 5th edit. 1857; a popular educational manual. 2. Parish Sermons,' 1847-62, 5 vols. 3. Guide to the Parish Church,' Cambridge, 1855; new edition rewritten 1878. 4. Hulsean Lectures," 1855. 5. 'The Doctrines and Difficulties of the Christian Faith,' 1856. 6. A new translation of the 'De Imitatione,' 1860; new edit. 1869. 7. Essays on the Pentateuch,' 1867. 8. Walks in the Region of Science and Faith,' a collection of essays, 1883. 9. 'The Foundations of the Creed,' 1889; 3rd edit. 1899. He was also an occasional contributor to the Quarterly Review' and to the Contemporary Review' and the Nineteenth Century.' [Brit. Mus. Cat.; Venn's Biogr. Hist. of Gonville and Caius College; Foster's Alumni Oxon. 1715-1886; Burke's Peerage, 1890; Times, 26–30 Nov. 1891; Graduati Cantab.] H. M. S-R. GOODYER or GOODIER, SIR HENRY (1571-1627), friend of John Donne, was the eldest son of Sir William Goodyer, knt., of Monks Kirby, Warwickshire, who was knighted by James I in 1603. His grandfather, Francis Goodyer (d. 1547), had obtained an estate at Polesworth, in the Forest of Arden, Warwickshire, upon the dissolution of the abbey there in 1538. The eldest son of this Francis Goodyer, (Sir) HENRY GOODYER (1534-1595), was compromised in the Duke of Norfolk's intrigue on behalf of Mary Queen of Scots, in the summer of 1571, and was sent to the Tower in September 1571. But beyond the fact that he had once supplied the duke with a cipher, little could be made out clearly against him, and he was released in 1572. In 1585 he was serving under Leicester in the Low Countries, and appears to have completely recovered his reputation. In September 1586, at the time of the battle of Zutphen, he was captain of Leicester's guard; he was knighted by the general on 5 Oct. 1586, and in the following year was captain in command of one hundred and fifty men forming one of the foot bands' sent to the relief of Sluys. In July 1588 his name was down among the colonels appointed to lead the army assembled at Tilbury for the defence of the queen's person. He was the early friend and patron of Michael Drayton the poet, who was one of the witnesses of his will (for an abstract of this see Professor Elton's Introd. to Michael Drayton,' 1895), and he is said to have helped Drayton at the university. He died at Polesworth on 5 March 1595, leaving by his wife Frances, daughter of Hugh Lowther of Lowther, Westmoreland, two daughters-Frances, the heiress |