BOOKS OF THE MOMENT.

THE TEMPLE.

[COPYRIGHT IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BY THE

New York Times.]

The History of the Temple, London. By J. Bruce Williamson. (John Murray. 21s. net.) The Story of Our Inns of Court. By D. Phmket Barton. Charles Benham, Francis Watt. (Foulis. 10s. 6d. net.) Quiet Hours in the Temple. By Stephen Coleridge. (Mills & Boon. 4s. net.)

THE fascination of the Temple for all men who speak the English tongue, who love these islands as the home of their race, and who, whether they are citizens of the British Empire or of the American Republic, are subjects of King Shakes- peare, is a thing unique and apart, a thing which no foreigner understands in its full intensity. I remember once as a

young man talking with Lowell about the Temple. He had just been dining with the Benchers of my own Inn, the Inner Temple, on a Grand Night, and he spoke with a kind of awed enthusiasm of the ceremony, of the institution and of its habitat. I can remember the thrill in. his voice as he described how after dinner the Treasurer pointed out to him that there were only two predecessors in title between the Inn and the Romans. The kings of the West Saxons, who took over the land by conquest from Imperial Rome, held it for several centuries. Then the Crown granted it to the Order of the Knights Templars, the- guardians of the most sacred spot in the most sacred city of the world, Jerusalem. When the Templars fell, the King resumed his grant, and regranted it to the Lawyers. These facts, and the Round Church in which to this day the Templars lie in sculptured magnificence, would alone make the Temple famous in arms and arts.

But to the Temple is added every form of fascination known to men who live in communities. These fascinations are physical, moral, intellectual, historical and literary.

The Temple and its buildings lie in a green garden, with trees and lawns that slope down to the embanked Thames—

one of the greatest, perhaps the greatest, of the rivers of history. Twice a day the tides, obeyingtheir divine impulse and sacred duty, lave the feet of the Templars' demesne. From that garden when you look upstream and to the right you see the towers of the Palace of Westminster—towers that in dignity, splendour and originality of grouping and design rival, perhaps excel, any group of mediaeval buildings in the world. In detail, in the scholarship of the heart, and in inner beauty they may no doubt have to yield to the true Mediaeval structures, but as a piece of architectural pageantry they are unrivalled when seen against an autumn sunset or at the full moon. Look down the river and the skyline is cut by the spires and domes of the great city. The outline of Wren's glorious and successful challenge to St. Peter's takes the aerial stage. In front and across the agitated waters of the river, always in motion with tide or traffic, is one of the stateliest of bridges. For the possession of it the river and the engineers are at this very moment contending in

what we hope and pray may not be a death grip for the. bridge. All this poignant and tantalizing view, the drop-

screen to the greatest city in the world, is let down for the delight of those who walk in the Temple or look out of the windows of its quiet and dignified chambers.

One has only to think of the history of the Temple to show how great the influence of its Society of Lawyers has been upon our politics and on our law and administration.

Truly did Ben Jonson say in his dedication of Every Man in His Humour to the Inns of Court that they were " the

noblest nurseries of humanity and liberty in the Kingdom." Think of their association with Coke and Bacon, Holt and Mansfield, and with judgments such as that in the case of " James Sommersett, a negro slave," or of decisions in such matters as the Writ of Habeas Corpus and General Warrants.

If we put aside the purely legal tradition of the Temple, how crowded it is with literary associations and great men 'of letters. Its -courts and lawns are haunted by such shades as those of Congreve and Jonson as much as by its famous judges and advocates. Shakespeare himself knew and loved the Temple. as did Dickens and. Thackeray, and indeed the whole of the Victorian School.

A volume might be written in regard to. the Temple and the Stage. Shakespeare made the Temple garden the scene of one of his most poignant as well as most picturesque and. historical pieces. of dramatic history. What a, beginning to the conflict of passionate political disputation are the lines :—

" Within the Temple Hall we were too loud, ; The garden here is more convenient."

Then comes the most fascinating challenge in history or in literature. Richard Plantagenet throws down, not a- mailed gauntlet; but a white rose. His battle-cry of " A moi ! " is characteristic of the flower-loving race, for such we English- speakers are. He tells each man near him :— " If he suppose that I have pleaded truth,

From off this brier pluck a white rose with me."

So much for the glove. This is how Somerset, takes it up.. He nails on his supporters by saying that those who share his views will

" Pluck a red rose from off this thorn with me."

And then comes the recruiting of the combatants.. The fierce lords and soldiers pluck in turn the roses which are to cover the English soil with the red blood and blanched faces of the slain :- " And here I prophesy : this brawl to-day, Grown to this faction in the Temple-garden. Shall send between the red rose and the white A thousand souls to death. and deadly night."

But this connexion between the. Stage and the Temple was no thing of paper and ink. The poets were there in person as well as in thought—for the. Templars and lawyers generally proved the best of amateur actors and impresarios. " The, master of the revels " in the Inner Temple called himself " The Prince of Sophie," while his colleague of the Middle Temple was: " Prince d'Amour." The Inns of Court stood nobly by the actors and dramatists when Prynne attacked• them in his " Histrio-mastix." The " Triumph of Peace," was organized at a cost of more than £20,000 by the four Inns of Court as a protest against the Puritanical spoilsport, and as an expression of " love and duty " to Charles I. and his. Queen. Bacon. organized " The Masque of Flowers " for the fatal marriage of the Somersets, and within two years "the. producer," as Attorney-General, was hounding the Earl and Countess to their down in their trial for the murder of Sir. Thomas. Overbury. Inigo Jones planned scenery and decora- tions for a play by the lawyers, and Davenant did the same for the Middle Temple. The poets, indeed, might almost be said to have been partners with the lawyers in the Inns of Court. There is a touch of real intimacy when Shakespeare makes Justice Shallow boast to Falstaff how in his mad student days he fought " Simon Stockfish, a fruiterer," behind Gray's Inn. When we recall this we may exclaim with Sir Plunket Barton, " Would that some Shakespearean investigator could bring to light the fruiterer's version of that encounter ! " But the crowning glory of this connexion. between the Temple and the Stage was the enacting of Twelfth Night in the Middle Temple Hall in 1602. The Templars, as. usual, got " London's best." Here was the perfect play with the perfect setting, and, who can doubt, a perfect audience ? What would we not give to recall the raising of that curtain. to the immortal words :— .• If music be the food- of love, play on," But the Temple and the Inns of Court generally must not be regarded as mere museum pieces or mediaeval survivals like, theCity Companies. The Temple is alive to this day with the spirit of the English law. The Middle and Inner Temples may be described without injury to the other Inns of Court, as the better half of the great Law University of London, and indeed, of all those who acknowledge the supremacy of the Common Law of England in their Courts. Some sixty or seventy years ago it looked as if the Inns of Court might have to be swept away, for they had become atrophied, if not indeed petrified. Happily, however, they were reformed instead of abolished. How far the atrophy had gone may be illustrated . by a family story told to my father's first cousin, Charles

Buller, the young Marcellus of the 'Wing Party. In those days there •was no examination for entrance to the Inns of Court. You merely ate your dinners, or if you were a young man of fashion like Charles Buller, you did not eat, but dawdled in your place in Hall, and perhaps sipped a little of the Inn's claret, which by a special dispensation was imported free of duty. When you were called on Call Night there did remain, however, a vestige of 'the mediaeval examination. That examination took the form of a fictitious trial in which the student before he was admitted had to.show his knowledge and learning by pleading an A.B. case set him by the Benchers.

The ceremony, however, had degenerated by 1830 into one line of nonsense. When you went up to the Bench to be admitted you murmured over the hand of the Treasurer, who admitted you, " I hold that A. shall have the widow's estate."

That over, you were " called " without further parley, drank a glass of wine, if I remember rightly, and passed from the

status of student to that of Barrister-at-Law. Charles Buller, who was a great votary of opera, instead of muttering as above, as he did his homage to the Treasurer, whispered, " I hold that Malibran sings better than Sontag," for that was the epoch in which the two great divas divided London as much as had the Red and White Roses. " Later," said Charles Buller, " I met the Treasurer in Society and told him what I had substituted for the widow's estate." " Ah ! " he replied, if I had heard you, I would have plucked you straight off, for Sontag sings ten times better than her rival."

But I must turn to the charming books which form my subject. The most learned and full of documents and historical knowledge is Mr. Bruce Williamson's volume, The History of the Temple, London. It is packed with good things of every sort and kind, and is to be recommended to the lawyers from the Overseas Dominions and America who come to do their " suit and service " on the banks of the Thames. The pictures, mostly taken from old prints, are often exceed- ingly attractive, and many of the documents, as is right, are quoted in full, and in several cases there are facsimile examples of the manuscript.

A delightful and very little known incident here described is the great squabble during the •time of Charles II. over the organ put up in the Temple Church. The battle of the organ arose, as in similar instances in our history, over the question whether the organ should be home-made or foreign. Theoretically, of course, everybody wanted the best organ ; but some people said that obviously the best organ must be a British organ, while others took a more international view of the case. The Benchers, trying to be impartial, gave both makers permission to .set up their organs in the church, and so fight it out, so to speak, by wind blows. In the contest which followed Smith's organ was played by Blow and Purcell, and Harris's by the organist of Queen Catherine, Giovanni Battista Draghi—no doubt an abandoned Papist, at any rate a Dago and an alien ! Then began dark charges of dirty tricks and 'sabotage. Harris complained bitterly of the " extraordinary charges for watchmen " which had reduced him to great straits and inconveniences--the said watchmen being, of course, employed to prevent his organ being got at by the rival musicians. At last the Masters of the Bench in the Middle Temple passed a unanimous resolution of enormous length in which they declared that Smith's organ was "beyond comparison " preferable to his rival's organ. They ended up not only by praising the organ they favoured, but by saying some very surly and bitter things about the other competitor, and ended by deciding that their opinion should be communicated to the other Inn. The Inner Temple was, of course, furious at having the matter rushed in this way, and retorted that the thing must be committed to " impartial judges," such as " the best masters of music, one to be nominated by each Inn." Ultimately, however, the matter was referred to the Lord Chancellor, Lord Jeffreys, who decided, much to his credit, against his own Inn and in favour of Bernard Smith. The whole story is most amusing. Smith's instrument still makes sweet music for us all in the Temple Church.

The next book is The Story of Our Inns of Court, by Sir D. Plunket Barton, Mr. Charles Benham and Mr. Francis Watt, and is a really delightful book and full of historical learning. It is, however, about a quarter of the size of the ,former •book and yet takes in two other things—Gray's Inn

and Lincoln's Inn. Therefore, the amount devoted to the Temple is a great deal less. At the same time, the book is so well written andthe selection so well done that it provides a scholar's short guide to theInns of Court. It is, however, much more than a guide book and distinctly a piece of literature.

After these two books comes Mr. Stephen Coleridge's charming little volume, Quiet Hours in the Temple. Mr. Coleridge is one of those people who, to use the legal phrase ,

has a right, per stirpes et per capita, to write of the literary and human associations of the Temple. His book is dedicated to the poet, " the greatest of my kinsmen, the ornament of my 'house." So much for the literary side. In the legal side of the account, it will be remembered that he is the son of a Lord Chief Justice of England and that he himself has held important legal office. What I find most interesting in the present volume is the essay entitled, " Henry Crabb Robinson keeps a diary in the Temple." It is a reminder of what an admirable observer Crabb Robinson was and what an eye he had for the best things said by the great men with whom he largely consorted. He describes Coleridge's talks in the Temple in Charles Lamb's room with enthusiasm. One of his remarks is so curious that, though it is not quite relevant to this review, I must record it. Coleridge declared " that Genoa fell by becoming a people of money-lenders instead of merchants. In money loans one party is in sorrow ; in the traffic of merchandise both parties gain and rejoice." That is a very profound saying and, though it requires some important modilleation to make it just, still it may be said to have the root of the matter in it. It recognizes the essential fact that all trade is barter. Though money lenders (bankers) are wanted, and greatly wanted, for providing the media of exchange—i.e., the rolling-stock of commerce—we must never confuse the truck with the precious things it contains. The other Temple remark of Coleridge's is very different, but equally poignant : " Coleridge ingeniously observed that persons who are themselves very pure, are sometimes on that account blunt in their moral feelings."

I have said, perhaps, too little about these books 'and too much -about the Temple on my own account. But how could I do otherwise ?

Et ego in Arcadia viii.

I, too, once had a room in the Temple with my name over

the door. I read for a year and a half in the Chambers of the last of the special pleaders, Mr. Baugh Allen, a most delightful and earnest lawyer, and a man of the best type of legal culture. I, too, trod those lawns, ate my dinners—i.e., kept my terms in the dining-hall, and pored over the law books in the library. I never slept in the Temple, but my days were spent, if not my 'nights, in its courts and gardens. I was as happy at'the Temple as I was even at Oxford.

J. ST. Lou STRACHEY.