John Stuart Mill: A Criticism with Personal Recollections

SUCCESSES IN THE REVIEW. 59
took over the Review, and worked it on the plan of making it
pay its own expenses, he giving his labour gratis.*
Readers of the Autobiography remember the account Mill
gives of his two most brilliant successes achieved by the
Review ; the saving of Lord Durham, and the rescuing of Car-
lyle s French Revolution from probable failure. In an
interesting letter written soon after the Review ceased, he
insists with even greater empressement on these two feats, but
adds
"
My third success is that I have dinned into people s
ears that Guizot is a great thinker and writer, till they are,
* I was well acquainted with Mill s sub-editor. John Robertson, now dead.
He was a fellow-townsman, and was the medium of my introduction to Mill.
I had. for several years, abundant opportunities of conversing with him, and
learnt a great deal about Mill during our intercourse. But he was very reticent
about his own relations with Mill ; he never told me at least, what was his
pecuniary allowance as sub-editor ; nor did he explain how they worked
together in the matter of editing ;
his habit was to style himself Editor, and to
seem to take the sole management. He has not left behind him any record of
the connexion between him and Mill ; while I know enough of his history to
make me doubt whether it commenced in 1836. Those that knew Robertson
A were not a little taken aback by Mill s character of him :
young Scotch
man, who had some ability and information, much industry, and an active
scheming head, full of devices for making the Review more saleable, &c. I
remember on one occasion when Mr. Disraeli, in the House of Commons,
quoted Mill as an authority on some economical view, Lord John Russell, in
reply, spoke of him as a learned author ; the next time I met him, he accosted
me with his humorous twinkle you see what I am now, according to Lord
here was not even so bad. Robertson s
John Russell . The malapropos
attainments were of the slenderest description, and his industry very fitful ;
he could make a vigorous and brilliant display both in composition and in
conversation. He contributed striking articles to the Review, the best being
his Cromwell. He was also a very good writer of newspaper articles. His
impetus and suggestiveness in conversation drew out Mill, who never talked
better than he did with him. But although he made friends in London circles
and in the clubs, he was very distasteful to many of Mill s associates and
increased the difficulties of carrying on the Review ; being in fact, for a
novus homo, as Henry Mill styled him, somewhat arrogant. He took much
interest in the Scotch Non-Intrusion controversy, and coached the Melbourne
Government upon the question. About 1844, he disappeared from London,
and was afterwards rarely heard of. Mill scarcely ever mentioned his name in
later years. His widow has gathered together the extant indications of his
career but he left few or no reminiscences of his more interesting connexions.
but