Chapter XIV

_Retirement of Sir Henry Ellis; Selection of Principal Librarian;
Securities; Mr. Kenyon; Appointment; Proceedings in the House of
Commons._

An important phase in the life of Panizzi has now been entered upon; but before detailing the facts, we premise that the high position then within his grasp was not achieved without considerable pain and heartburning, owing to the ungenerous statements of the Press.

Sir Henry Ellis having attained, in 1856, his seventy-ninth year, it was not a matter of surprise that his failing energies became inadequate to the duties entailed upon him as head of the British Museum; indeed, he must himself have felt the necessity of retiring. He was, however, forestalled in this intention by a private request, delicately conveyed to him with liberal terms attached. The understanding was that he should voluntarily resign, and should receive the full amount of his salary and emoluments as a superannuation allowance. Complying with this offer, he accordingly tendered his resignation, and, on the 9th of February, 1856, the Trustees passed a resolution thanking him for his long services. No sooner had this decision been made public than a certain newspaper, having received information of his probable successor, was guilty of publishing the annexed ungenerous paragraph, eminently calculated to wound, as it did, the susceptible feelings of Panizzi:—

“February 25th, 1856.

“We understand that Sir Henry Ellis has resigned the situation of
Principal Librarian. The majority of persons employed in that
Institution, and of the public who frequent it, would be delighted at
an event that ought to have occurred many years ago, if it were not
that an extraordinary influence is likely to obtain the appointment
for a foreigner. It is of the highest importance that this affront to
British genius and character be avoided, and that the right man be put
in the right place. When the Marquis of Lansdowne, from the best
motives, made the previous unfortunate selection, there was a
regulator that no longer exists; the vigilant interference of the
lamented Joseph Hume often prevented official tyranny and petty
vexation.”

In accordance with the Act of Parliament 26 Geo. II. cap. 22, the Principal Librarian of the British Museum is selected by the Sovereign from two persons recommended by the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Lord Chancellor, and the Speaker of the House of Commons, who are (as has already been remarked) the “Principal Trustees.”

Up to the year 1850, it will be remembered that the offices of Principal Librarian and of Secretary were distinct appointments. The Secretary, whose duties and position were at first simply clerical, gradually assumed such importance that, though still nominally second to the Principal Librarian, he was practically the Chief Officer of the Museum, not always acting in unison with his superior in rank; it was found, therefore, to be more desirable for the welfare of the Museum, as well as more economical that the two offices should be blended, and they were united in the person of Sir Henry Ellis.

In reference to this subject we invite the attention of our readers to the following letter from that gentleman:—

“British Museum,
February 14th, 1856.

“My dear Panizzi,

You seem to doubt whether, in the event of my resignation of
office, you would be likely to succeed me in it. I cannot help
thinking that you must be mistaken, although I have certainly heard
that a candidate or two are either in the field, or intending to apply
when the resignation becomes a reality. At the same time I must tell
you I have heard no names.

I think it quite impossible that anybody who has not had experience in
the Institution should be appointed.

Yours is, most unquestionably, the portion of the Museum which is not
only the largest, but the most useful and extensive for public
instruction; the time of life, the toil, and the power of mind which
you have brought to bear upon it and upon its improvement convince me
that no stranger, especially without the knowledge which the
experience of a quarter of a century has given you in the view of
general management of the place, ought to be allowed to compete with
you on this occasion.

I myself felt all which you now feel in 1827, at the time my
predecessor was approaching his end. I had aided him with all my power
for some years; and I can show you various letters which are still
precious to me, expressing his continuous gratitude.

A week or two before he died he said to me, ‘Well, Sir, I shall soon
depart, and you will be my successor.’ I said, ‘O! My dear Sir, I
doubt.’ He raised his voice and said, ‘Who are they to have but you?’

A stranger, you know, was put first, when the two names were presented
to Lord Lansdowne to lay before the King. Mine was put second. Lord
Lansdowne, from his own knowledge of the experience I had had in the
Institution, powerfully seconded by the then Earl Spencer’s
recommendation to the same effect, gave the palm to the second
candidate; stating in his subsequent letter to me, that without any
derogation to the _merits_ of Mr. Clinton, His Majesty had been
pleased to appoint me ‘Principal Librarian.’

I cannot help thinking your fears groundless. I cannot believe that
any stranger, did he know the toil of mind to be encountered before
experience can be obtained, would wish for such an appointment.

Ever truly yours,
HENRY ELLIS.”

Four days after the receipt of the above, Panizzi addressed the Archbishop of Canterbury and the other Principal Trustees, _>mutatis mutandis_, as follows:—

“British Museum, February 18th, 1856.

“My Lord Archbishop,

Having just been informed by Sir Henry Ellis that he has
resigned his situation of Principal Librarian, I trust I may be
permitted to draw the attention of your Grace and of the other
Principal Trustees to my services, as giving me some ground to hope
that I may not be deemed unworthy of having my name submitted to the
Sovereign as being a fit person to succeed Sir Henry. The efficacy and
importance of those services have doubtless been noticed by the
Trustees at large, as they were by the Commissioners of Inquiry into
the British Museum, as expressed in their report. I shall not,
therefore, presume to do more than refer with respectful confidence to
the opinion which both the Trustees and the Commissioner entertain of
them.

I have the honour to be, my Lord Archbishop, &c.,

A. PANIZZI.”

From the Lord-Chancellor he received the appended reply, which needs no comment, nor could Panizzi have expected his Lordship to act otherwise:—

“40, Upper Brook-street,
Feb. 18th, 1856.

“My dear Sir,

In answer to your application, I can say no more than that I
feel it my bounden duty to consult exclusively the interests of the
Museum.

You will, I am sure, feel that till I know who are the candidates for
the office, I should do very wrong to say more.

Believe me, &c.,
CRANWORTH.”

The Home Secretary, at that time Sir George Grey, received, without Panizzi’s knowledge, several letters from eminent personages, strongly recommending him for the vacant post; to quote one of these will be sufficient evidence of their tendency:—

“Bridgewater House,
February 18th, 1856.

“My dear Sir George,

Having served as Chairman of the British Museum Commission, I
have thought myself justified in writing to the Archbishop of
Canterbury on the subject of the selection of a successor to Sir Henry
Ellis. His Grace, who has received this intrusion with indulgence,
seems to desire that I should repeat to you and Sir G. Lewis what I
have ventured to state to him. Without troubling you at length, I may
briefly state that, on the assumption that Mr. Panizzi’s
qualifications for the vacant post would not fail to receive His
Grace’s consideration, should that consideration be favourable, my
voice would be at His Grace’s disposal to defend, if need were, Mr.
Panizzi’s appointment, as, in my opinion, the best that could be made.
I also adverted to some knowledge I happen to possess of the
considerate and benevolent character of Mr. Panizzi’s dealings with a
very interesting class of men, his subordinates in the library. This
feature in his merits being necessarily less under public notice than
others which are too notorious to require my testimony, I considered
it deserving of mention, co-existing, as I believe it does, with an
assiduous exaction of duty, and an energetic exercise of authority.

Ever yours,
EGERTON ELLESMERE.”

This letter was sent, together with others, to Panizzi, on the 26th of February, 1870, by Sir George Grey himself:—

“37, Eaton Place.

“Dear Sir A. Panizzi,

I have been employing my leisure in looking over many letters
and papers which accumulated during my tenure of the Home Office.
Among them are some relating to your appointment as Principal
Librarian to the Museum in 1856. I send you three letters which I
think you may like to possess. When your life comes to be written,
which I hope will not be for a long time it is right that letters such
as those should be among the papers which will form materials for it.
Of the appointments with which I had anything to do while in office,
there is none which I can look back upon with greater satisfaction
than yours.

Believe me, very truly yours,
G. GREY.”

Another letter, from Lord Ellesmere to Dr. Cureton, written whilst the appointment was pending, may be added:—

“Bridgewater House, February 19th, 1856.

“Dear Mr. Cureton,

If you know anything of Mr. Panizzi’s prospects, pray inform
me.

I have written to Sir George Grey as well as to the Archbishop. Is
there any formidable rival in the field? I have not heard of any, nor
indeed have I heard anything on the subject; and my only fear is that
some of the Trustees may dread the influence of knowledge and
capacity, on Talleyrand’s principle of avoiding zeal.

Ever faithfully yours,
EGERTON ELLESMERE.”

Dr. Cureton again wrote as follows:—

“Cloisters, Feb. 19th, 1856.

“My dear Panizzi,

I have just seen the Archbishop, and I think there can be no
doubt that all is right in that quarter. He asked me to let him have
Parry’s letter again, which I shall. I told him that, as far as I
knew, the Lord Chancellor and Speaker were quite in your favour; and
he told me that, according to the Act, they must send in _two_ names,
from which I certainly conclude that he means yours for _one_. He was
very kind. I have also had a letter from Lord Ellesmere enquiring how
you get on, and wanting to know who else was spoken of. He said that
he had written to Sir George Grey on your behalf—should you not write
a word of thanks to him? He seems, as you will see from his letter,
much interested in your success.

Yours always,
W. CURETON.”

Other communications followed, amongst which was one from Mr. Richard Ford:—

“February 26th, 1856; 123, Park street.

“Dear Panizzi,

I shall be most anxious until I hear that you have succeeded
to the office in the B. M., for which of all men you are _the best
suited_. Indeed, if you take the place of Sir Henry Ellis, it will be
the most fortunate event for the Museum that has ever happened. Pray,
as soon as anything definitively is known, give us the great pleasure
of writing me a line. I hear, also, that your bust is to be made by
Marocchetti; he will model a fine thing from your _massy_ forehead,
into which so much brain and intelligence are stored away. Is the
subscription confined to the employés in the Museum? I should indeed
delight in adding my name to a memorial destined to do honour to so
old and valued a friend. The new Reading-Room would indeed be
incomplete if the effigy of him who projected the scheme, and who has
carried it out, did not occupy the niche of honour.

Ever yours truly,
RICH. FORD.”

Before the announcement of the appointment reached Panizzi, he received two epistles, one from Lord Lansdowne, and the other from Sir George Grey:—

“Dear Panizzi,

Though I believe your appointment to succeed Sir H. Ellis at
the Museum has been mentioned in the newspapers before it was
made,—for it was only yesterday afternoon that Sir George Grey brought
it under the notice finally of the Cabinet,—it is now certain, and I
cannot refrain from wishing you joy.

I had before felt it difficult to speak to you about it with the
confidence I felt, lest your expectations and mine might not be
realized by some untoward chance; but I am sure you will believe that
there are none of the Trustees to whom it gives greater pleasure than
myself.

I remain,
Very faithfully yours,
LANSDOWNE.”

Sunday morning,
March 2nd”

“Home Office, March 5th, 1856.”

“Dear Mr. Panizzi,

I have much satisfaction in informing you that Her Majesty has
been pleased to appoint you to the office of Principal Librarian of
the Museum.

You will receive an official letter intimating to you your
appointment, which, at the suggestion of the three Principal Trustees,
in which Her Majesty’s Government concur, will be made subject to any
changes in the duties or emoluments of the Office which Parliament may
think fit to make.

Believe me, yours very faithfully,
G. GREY.”

Close upon these followed the official letter from the Home Office:—

“Whitehall, March 5th, 1856.

“Sir,

I am directed by Secretary Sir George Grey to inform you that
the three Principal Trustees of the British Museum have recommended to
Her Majesty two persons (of whom you are one) whom they judge fit to
execute the office of Principal Librarian, and that Her Majesty has
been pleased to appoint you to execute the said office of Principal
Librarian of the British Museum.

I am to add that, in accordance with the suggestion of the three
Principal Trustees, made with reference to various changes in the
duties of this office, recommended by the Royal Commission in 1850,
Her Majesty has been pleased to direct that your appointment shall be
made subject to any change in the duties or emoluments of the office
which Parliament may think fit to make.

I am, Sir, your obedient servant,
H. WADDINGTON.”

The actual appointment, under Her Majesty’s sign manual, bears the date of the next day, viz., the 6th of March, 1856.

Panizzi had been privately informed of the intended resignation of Sir Henry Ellis at least a month before, for, on the 2nd of January, he wrote to Sir George Grey, recommending himself to H.R.H. the Prince Consort, under whose instructions the Hon. C. Grey wrote the following letter:—

“Buckingham Palace,
January 3rd, 1856.

“My dear Mr. Panizzi,

Pray let me know what Act of Parliament it is that regulates
your appointment. The Prince will not lose sight of this matter till a
decision is come to, but he would wish to be thoroughly acquainted
with all the circumstances of the case.

Yours very faithfully,
C. GREY.”

However, notwithstanding the tone of this letter, and whilst many others kept pouring in, there were not a few persons who tried their utmost to oppose the promotion which had been so well earned, and which, it may honestly be said, proved afterwards to have been so wise a step in the National interest.

The earliest protest is one which, though insignificant at first sight, is here placed before the reader, because it was sent to Panizzi by Lord Palmerston, who wrote on the 13th of March (1856):—

“My dear Panizzi,

The enclosed, which has been sent to me, will interest you.

Yours very sincerely,
PALMERSTON.”

“THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

I protest against the advancement of Mr. Antonio Panizzi to the office
of Principal Librarian of the British Museum, vacant by the retirement
of Sir Henry Ellis, K.H.

1. Because the appointment, the said Antonio Panizzi being a
foreigner, is an act of injustice towards English candidates; a satire
on the character of the Nation; and a discouragement to the pursuit of
its antiquities and literature.

2. Because as the office involves the chief “care and custody” of a
National repository of objects of inestimable value, the appointment
is a manifest incongruity, and a most inauspicious precedent.

3. Because the office confers the power of granting admission to the
Reading-Room of the Museum, or of refusing it; and it is not fit that
National favours, or the refusal thereof, should be received at
foreign hands.

4. Because the said Antonio Panizzi has had the audacity to propose
the dismemberment of the Museum, in opposition to the express
provision of the Act of the twenty-sixth year of George II.—a
provision which received the approval of more than fifty members of
various scientific societies in 1847.

5. Because the said Antonio Panizzi, on account of the failure of his
engagements with regard to the Catalogue of printed books, and the
fictions and absurdities of the only fragment thereof hitherto
published, appears to have deserved reprehension rather than
promotion.

6. Because it removes the said Antonio Panizzi from an office in
which, under the guidance of common sense, his erudition, energy, and
activity might have been serviceable, to a station for which he
appears to be unfitted by his arrogance and irritability, as patent in
certain blue books, and by the notorious verbosity of his composition.

&c., &c., &c.,
BOLTON CORNEY.

The Terrace, Barnes.”

Can any protest be more short-sighted or ungenerous than this of “Bolton Corney’s?” The concise note of Lord Palmerston speaks volumes to the discerning mind as to his opinion of such vulgar and insulting trash. But for his Lordship’s discriminating kindness in forwarding the document for Panizzi’s reflection and information, the matter would be scarcely worth dwelling on for a single instant.

Again reference must be made to Mr. Francis Haywood, who, it will be remembered, was Panizzi’s earliest friend at Liverpool, and who, it can well be imagined, was delighted to see his _>quondam_ Italian and penurious friend of 1824 now at the head of the greatest institution of its kind in the universe. Appended are Panizzi’s letters previous to receiving his appointment as Principal librarian:—

“B. M., February 20th, 1856.

“My dear Haywood,

All my friends have always laughed at my doubting to succeed;
I alone have hitherto been mistrusting. If I am now to believe what I
hear and see in writing, I cannot have any doubts. It seems, even to
me, that the thing is as safe as it can be. The Archbishop is as sure
as the Chancellor and the Speaker, and so is Sir G. Grey, from what I
hear on authority that I cannot possibly doubt. But the thing is not
done, and there is, therefore, the _possibility_ of a miscarriage.
What pleases me is that in this house _all_—excepting, of course,
Madden and Hawkins, who looked to the promotion themselves—are
strongly for me.

Yours ever,
A. PANIZZI.”

“March 4th, 1856.

“My dear Haywood,

I have information on the perfect accuracy of which I may
rely, that at Saturday’s Cabinet my appointment was decided on. You
may rest assured—there is no doubt.

Of course you must be one of my securities for £2,500, I believe; I
have informed Booth, who is now my other security for £750, of what is
likely to happen. Ellice wishes to be my other security. The Master of
the Rolls too offered, and so did Cureton, my old colleague, who
_cried_ when he learnt how the matter had been decided. You have no
idea how many friends have spontaneously come to my assistance. But of
the Government, Ellesmere has taken it up as a personal matter.

Yours ever,
A. PANIZZI.”

It is incumbent on the gentlemen holding higher appointments in the British Museum to name two securities; these, in Panizzi’s case, were Mr. Francis Haywood and Mr. James Booth, both of whom, of course, were accepted. In order to commemorate the great event, the new Principal Librarian invited some of his intimate friends to dinner at Blackwall, amongst these should be mentioned Mr. John Kenyon, the philanthropist, philosopher, and poet. This gentleman died on the 3rd of December, 1856, and as a practical proof of the esteem in which he held Panizzi, left him a legacy of £500 and all his wines.

Lord Macaulay, who had been a Trustee of the British Museum since February, 1847 (an office which he highly esteemed, and to which he attended with much assiduity and greatly to the public advantage), showed, as we gather from his life by Trevelyan, no small anxiety as to the impending appointment. In writing (February, 1856) to Lord Lansdowne, he said:—“I am glad of this, both on public and private grounds. Yet I fear that the appointment will be unpopular both within and without the walls of the Museum. There is a growing jealousy among men of science, which, between ourselves, appears even at the Board of Trustees. There is a notion that the Department of Natural History is neglected, and that the Library and Sculpture Gallery are unduly favoured. This feeling will certainly not be allayed by the appointment of Panizzi, whose great object, during many years, has been to make our Library the best in Europe, and who would at any time give three Mammoths for an Aldus.“

With all due deference to Lord Macaulay’s statement, we do not hesitate to say that the appointment was _not_ unpopular, and shall, therefore, begin first by giving Panizzi’s letters, addressed to the Keepers of the various Departments, some replies to these letters, and afterwards a selection of other correspondence from subordinate officers, summing up with sundry quotations from the numerous letters of congratulation from persons in various positions.

In relinquishing the Keepership of the Department of Printed Books, the new Principal Librarian thus wrote to Mr. Winter Jones, his successor:—

“British Museum, March 24th, 1856.

“My dear Jones,

I cannot quit the important Department, which for the last
nineteen years I have had the honour to direct, without expressing to
you and to those who have so much contributed to augmenting it and
raising it to its present state, my heartfelt thanks for the zealous,
intelligent, and unfailing assistance which I have received from all
in the performance of my various duties.

It is not for me to say whether this Library can challenge comparison;
but this I can truly say, that having been so nobly seconded, it is
not surprising if I have succeeded beyond what I ever ventured to hope
in July, 1837.

I leave my old Department in your hands, confident that its future
head will continue to receive from all my late fellow-labourers the
support of which I feel so proud—that by your united efforts its
usefulness will increase with its extent and its renown, and that you
will all receive that meed of approbation which will be due to your
untiring and intelligent exertions in the service of the public.

Please, my dear Jones, to make these sentiments of mine known to the
whole Department, and believe me, ever yours truly,

A. PANIZZI.”

The answer ran thus:—

“British Museum,
March 24th, 1856.

“My Dear Sir,

I have communicated to this Department the most kind and
flattering letter you have addressed to us, and I am desired to convey
to you the expression of the pleasure all have experienced from its
perusal. The gratification we feel in your promotion to the important
post of Principal Librarian is much alloyed by our regret at your
separation from us. All have been indebted to you for acts of kindness
and consideration—not a few for substantial benefits. It is our pride
that we have been enabled to take part in the labours of the
Department; but the _result_ is due to the firm and able guidance
those labours have at all times received from yourself. The approval
and ready acknowledgment with which you have always met the exertions
of others have proved no slight incentive to continued zeal and
application.

The energy and enlarged views which have raised the Library to its
present state of efficiency will now be employed in promoting the
advancement of the Institution generally; and supported and seconded
as you doubtless will be by the Trustees and Officers, we look forward
with confidence to the time when the British Museum shall take its
proper rank as one of the most powerful engines for the promotion of
education and intelligence.

Believe me, my dear Sir, most truly yours,
J. WINTER JONES.”

On the assumption of the office of Principal Librarian, Panizzi wrote a circular letter to the officers of the Museum, to which are appended a few of the answers received, in the order of dates.

“British Museum,
March 24th, 1856.

“Dear Sir,

Her Majesty having been graciously pleased to appoint me to
the office of Principal Librarian, I beg to inform you that the
Trustees, on Saturday last, put me in possession of that office.

I rely on receiving from you, and all those under you, that efficient
assistance which is absolutely necessary for the good of the service,
and which from your well known zeal and ability in the fulfilment of
the duties of your office must prove eminently useful to this
Institution.

You may reckon on your part on my endeavouring to do the utmost for
the advantage of your Department, and of those employed in it, for the
support of your authority, and for facilitating not only the execution
of the orders of the Trustees, but a hearty compliance with their
wishes.

I flatter myself that, by our united and harmonious exertions, by the
utmost punctuality, and by steady attention in the performance of our
duties, we shall eventually secure for the British Museum a still
larger share of that ready support with which Parliament has hitherto
generously encouraged our efforts.

I shall be highly gratified to learn that you concur in these views
and sentiments, and

I remain, my dear Sir, yours faithfully,
A. PANIZZI.”

“British Museum,
March 24th, 1856.

“My dear Sir,

I hasten to congratulate you on your appointment to the office
of Principal Librarian, and to wish that you may long enjoy the honour
so conferred on you.

Knowing the energy you have always evinced in the Department over
which you have hitherto presided, the great attention you have paid to
the interest of those confided to your care, I look forward with
pleasure to the advantages we may all derive from the enlargement of
your sphere of action.

I beg to assure you that it will be my earnest endeavour to assist you
by every means in my power to carry out the orders of the Trustees,
and to produce those united and harmonious exertions which cannot fail
to be so beneficial to the interest, efficiency, and utility of the
Institution, and so beneficial to the officers.

I remain, my dear Sir, yours very faithfully,
JOHN EDW. GRAY.”

“British Museum,
March 25th, 1856.

“Dear Sir,

I have the greatest satisfaction in your appointment to the
office of Principal Librarian, and offer you my warmest
congratulations on the attainment of a post in which your abilities
will be exercised so advantageously.

You cannot doubt that I concur most entirely in the sentiments of your
letter—that I shall always consider it my first duty to devote myself
to the interests of this Institution, and to satisfy the Trustees by
punctuality, diligence, and general zeal in their service.

Without harmony of action and due subordination, all must be confusion
in such an establishment as ours. I shall therefore be at all times
eager to support your authority, and to follow your directions as the
Principal Officer of the Trustees, and the proper interpreter of their
wishes and instructions.

While endeavouring to satisfy you and them by my best personal
exertions, I shall feel full assurance of your concern for the
interests of the Department, and shall confide in your protection and
assistance, as well as in your lenient consideration of such
shortcomings as want of ability may render unavoidable.

Believe me, dear Sir, very faithfully yours,
EDWD. A. BOND.”

“British Museum,
March 25th, 1856.

“My dear Sir,

I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 24th
inst., by which you acquaint me that the Trustees had, on Saturday
last, put you in possession of the office of Principal Librarian, to
which Her Majesty had been pleased to appoint you.

You do me but justice, and I speak with equal confidence of all those
engaged with me in the Department of Printed Books, when you say that
you rely on receiving from us that assistance which is absolutely
necessary for the good of the service.

That I may reckon on your endeavouring to do the utmost for the
advantage of this Department, and of those employed in it, for the
support of authority and for facilitating the due execution of the
orders, and a hearty compliance with the wishes of the Trustees, is no
more than was to be expected from the vigour of your administration
while at the head of this Department, and the generous earnestness
with which you have at all times advocated the claims and supported
the interests of all those placed under your orders.

I most fully concur in the views and sentiments enunciated in your
letter, and particularly in the portion where you urge united and
harmonious exertion and the utmost punctuality and steady attention in
the performance of our duties; and I beg to assure you that my best
exertions shall be directed towards carrying out your views on these
as well as on all other points.

Believe me, my dear Sir, most truly yours,
J. WINTER JONES.”

Other letters, in the same congratulatory strain, were received from Dr. Birch, Mr. W. H. Carpenter, Mr. E. Hawkins, Mr. Robert Brown, Mr. G. R. Waterhouse, and Mr. J. J. Bennett.

Sir Frederick Madden, as it will be noticed, did not write at the time; but, after some correspondence between Panizzi and the Archbishop of Canterbury, he wrote on the 3rd of April.

Much interest will be attached, also, to the opinions of those not officially connected with the British Museum:—

“Orleans House, Mercredi soir,
5 Mars.

Je n’ai pas voulu vous offrir mes félicitations plus tôt, mon cher
monsieur, parceque je voulais en même temps pouvoir vous dire que
j’avais parlé à la Reine. Je savais que ma démarche arriverait comme
la moutarde après dîner; mais enfin je voulais l’avoir faite pour
l’acquit de ma conscience et surtout pour la satisfaction de mon
cœur. Or donc j’arrive de Buckingham Palace; j’avais porté mon
manuscript, et, tandis qu’on l’admirait, j’ai prononcé votre nom. ‘Oh!
a aussitôt dit Sa Majesté, Monsieur Panizzi, il remplace Sir Henry
Ellis. Cela m’a paru suffisant, et, bien que vous sachiez déjà à quoi
vous en tenir, je n’ai pas voulu perdre un moment à vous le répéter,
en y joignant mes plus vives félicitations et l’assurance, déjà
vieille, de tous les sentiments avec lesquels je demeure,

Votre bien affectionné,
H. D’ORLEANS.”

“Stover, Newton Abbot,
Thursday, March 13th.

“Dear Mr. Panizzi,

I congratulate you sincerely on your appointment, and hope
that you may have health long to enjoy this honourable position, and
to devote to it the energy which you have so efficiently devoted to
the Department over which you presided.

I shall come to Wimbledon directly after Easter, and shall then, I
hope, be there during the next five months, so that I shall be able to
attend at the Museum, whenever I can be of use.

There are, no doubt, a great many improvements to be made in the
system and conduct of the British Museum; but they still require much
judgment for their introduction, that we may carry with us, as far as
possible, the co-operation of the heads of Departments and the general
concurrence of the Establishment. The question of first appointments
was, as I remember, postponed, and requires to be clearly understood
and settled. I am not aware of any other point requiring immediate
attention, but shall come to the Museum as soon as I come up to
London.

Yours very faithfully,
SOMERSET.”

“Hatchford, Cobham, Surrey, March 7th, 1856.

“Dear Mr. Panizzi,

I am much relieved to find that your position is secured,
though I had not much ground for apprehension as to the result. I
shall not be in London, except casually, till after Easter. I had
intended to be there to-day for Lord Stanhope’s Motion, but am too
lame. Perhaps before Easter is over you may find a holiday or
holinight to run down here, in which case I should be glad to
congratulate you in person, but I am not _sure_ that I could do so
before the end of next week.

Ever yours, faithfully,
EGERTON ELLESMERE.”

“March 10th, 1856; 58, Lincoln’s Inn Fields.

“My dear Panizzi,

I hope that this which I hear is true; and that you have
obtained that which you have the best claim to, and are the worthiest
to hold. If this be so—as I trust heartily it is—I beg to wish you
long and happy years to enjoy what you have so well earned.

Ever truly yours,
JOHN FOSTER.”

To the foregoing, other distinguished personages added their congratulatory expressions. Testimonials signed by attendants—even the bookbinder might be adduced—poured in, and might be put forward, did space permit, to prove incontestably that the appointment was thoroughly stamped with public approval.

Our documentary evidence has been copious, in order to establish, beyond doubt, the fact that Panizzi’s succession to the high trust to which he was appointed met with general approval, and once for all to extinguish the croaking of his few detractors and calumniators.

So far everything was satisfactory. We cannot, however, conclude this chapter without referring, briefly, to the proceedings in the House of Commons, on the 21st of April, 1856, when Lord John Russell, in Committee of Supply, moved the vote for the British Museum; confining ourselves to those parts of the proceedings which related to the appointment. Mr. Monckton Milnes (now Lord Houghton) appeared to object on the old ground of foreign birth; yet, this very objector had signed, with others, the Report of 1850, wherein it was stated that Panizzi’s appointment as Keeper of the Printed Books did _credit to the Principal Trustees of that day_; that he had answered all accusations brought against him _with a success that they_ (the Commissioners) _could hardly have anticipated_; that it was owing to his Report of 1845 that the extensive grants for the purchase of books were procured from Parliament; and that he had managed the affairs of the Library, for a long period, with _great ability and with universal approbation_.

Those who defended the appointment were there: first of all, the Speaker (the Right Hon. C. Shaw Lefevre, afterwards Lord Eversley), who stated:—

“For my own part, I am quite prepared, and so, I am sure, are all my
colleagues, to accept the responsibility of selecting Mr. Panizzi,
because I do not believe a better choice could have been made. The
hon. gentleman has alluded to the fact of Mr. Panizzi being a
foreigner, but that has been no unusual case in the British Museum.”

_Mr._ (now Sir Austen H.) _Layard_, “... he was very much astonished
to hear his honourable friend object to Mr. Panizzi on the ground of
his being a foreigner, because that was an objection which ought not
to come from that, the Liberal, side of the House.”

_Mr. Disraeli_ (now Lord Beaconsfield), “... had no hesitation in
saying that, if the Trustees had not appointed Mr. Panizzi to the
vacancy when it occurred, as the reward for his long and meritorious
services, and of the intelligent qualities which he had displayed,
they would have acted with great injustice, they would have inflicted
a discouragement on the public service, and they would have been no
longer entitled to the commendation and confidence of that House.”

_Lord John Russell_, “... he really thought that we had become more
liberal than that.... He thought that the appointment of Mr. Panizzi
had been fully vindicated by the Speaker, and he trusted that there
would be no further opposition to the vote.”

_Mr. Monckton Milnes_ said, in conclusion, “he should be glad to hear
that the appointment was confirmed by public opinion, and justified by
the conduct of Mr. Panizzi himself.”

The documents already quoted, are, we trust, sufficient to fulfil the conditions required; but we surely ought to be more enlightened than to coincide with the opinions of the early Romans, who, as Cicero informs us, regarded the words _peregrinus_ and _inimicus_ as synonymous: (off. 1 xii. 38). _Hostis enim apud maiores nostros is dicebatur quem nunc ‘peregrinum’ dicimus._

Be this as it may, it is pleasing to record that those who knew Panizzi best did not regard or treat him as _inimicus_.

This chapter may be fitly concluded with the subjoined copy of a testimonial as satisfactory and as well-merited as any man ever received. It is in the handwriting and signed by Mr. W. R. Hamilton, a Trustee of the British Museum.

“The Standing Committee of the Trustees of the British Museum think it
their duty to address to the Government of Her Majesty, in the form of
a minute to be communicated to the First Lord Commissioner of Her
Majesty’s Treasury, the following representation in favour of Mr.
Antonio Panizzi, who for many years filled the office of Keeper of the
Printed Books in this Institution, and was lately selected Principal
Librarian in the same Establishment:—

‘The Trustees are fully aware that the exemplary activity, zeal, and
ability shewn by Mr. Panizzi, in the execution of his duties as Keeper
of the Printed Books, are well known to the greater part, if not to
all, the present members of Her Majesty’s Government; but they wish,
on the present occasion, to call the particular attention of Lord
Palmerston to the very remarkable proofs which this gentleman has
recently given of his devotion to the general service of the Museum,
by the extension of its means of contributing to the instruction and
accommodation of the public.

In the expression of their sentiments the Trustees are especially
influenced by the deep sense they entertain of the obligation they are
under to Mr. Panizzi for the suggestion of the building recently
erected in the Interior Quadrangle of the Museum for supplying
additional room for the books composing the Museum Library, and for
the better accommodation for an increased and increasing number of
visitors to the Reading-Room.

The success which has attended the erection of this Building, the
universal admiration which it has excited among the thousands who have
been admitted to view it since it was completed, the various excellent
and simple arrangements for the supply of books to the readers, the
ingenuity and invention displayed for the arrangement of a very large
library within a very limited space, and the facilities which it may
eventually afford for extending the available space for other
departments, the novelty of the design and the comparatively small
cost of the construction are all in a very great manner to be
attributed to the energy and inventive powers of Mr. Panizzi whose
views have been most efficiently carried out by the architect, Mr.
Sydney Smirke, in the material construction of a building which, the
Trustees believe, is without a rival on the Continent. All these facts
are, however, too well known to Lord Palmerston for it to be necessary
for the Trustees to dwell upon them further; but they confidently hope
that the circumstances of the case will be found sufficient to induce
Her Majesty’s Government to testify their appreciation of what Mr.
Panizzi has thus done for the public benefit in such manner as may
appear to them most expedient.’

(Signed) W. R. HAMILTON.”