This distinguished individual, son of Mr. George
Jeffrey, a Depute-Clerk of Session, was born in "Windmill Street, or
Charles Street, near George Square. His early years were marked by
vivacity and quickness of apprehension; and his progress at the High
School was rapid and decided. After studying for several years, from
1788, at the University of Glasgow, he repaired to Queen's College,
Oxford, and there passed the greater portion of 1792-8. Towards the
close of the latter year, he returned to Scotland, and attended, for a
short time, the University of his native city. Here he became a member
of the Speculative Society; and, entering keenly and warmly into the
spirit of the association, acquired that facility in debate for which he
was subsequently remarkable.
Mr. Jeffrey was admitted a member of the faculty of
advocates in 1794, but for several years his practice was limited.
Talent, alone is not always the certain or most rapid pass to success at
the Scottish bar; and he found ample leisure for the indulgence of his
taste for literature. Along with the Rev. Sydney Smith, the late
Professor Thomas Brown, Francis Horner, and Henry (now Lord) Brougham,
he was one of the original projectors of the Edinburgh Review,
begun in 1802, and was for many years the editor, as well as a chief
contributor, to that celebrated work.
While thus wielding the editorial wand of criticism
with a felicity and power that astonished and subdued, Mr. Jeffrey daily
rose in eminence at the bar. Brief poured in on brief; and amid so much
business, of a description requiring the exercise of all the faculties,
it was matter of astonishment how he found convenience for the
prosecution of his literary pursuits. The following lively sketch of the
Scottish advocate, in the hey-day of his career, is from Peter's
Letters to his Kinsfolk:—
"When not pleading in one or other of the Courts, or
before the Ordinary, he may commonly be seen standing in some corner,
entertaining or entertained by such wit as suits the atmosphere of the
place; but it is seldom that his occupations permit him to remain long
in any such position. Ever and anon his lively conversation is
interrupted by some undertaker-faced solicitor, or perhaps by some hot,
bustling, exquisite clerk, who comes to announce the opening of some new
debate, at which the presence of Mr. Jeffrey is necessary; and away he
darts, like lightning, to the indicated region, clearing his way through
the surrounding crowd with irresistible alacrity—the more clumsy, or
more grave doer, that had set him in motion, vainly puffing and
elbowing to keep close in his wake. A few seconds have scarcely elapsed,
till you hear the sharp, shrill, but deep-toned trumpet of his voice,
lifting itself in some far-off corner, high over the discordant Babel
that intervenes —period following period in one unbroken chain of sound,
as if its links had no beginning, and were to have no end.
"It is impossible to conceive the existence of a more
fertile, teeming intellect. The flood of his illustration seems to be at
all times rioting up to the very brim; yet he commands and restrains
with equal strength and skill; or if it does boil over for a moment, it
spreads such a richness around, that it is impossible to find fault with
its extravagance. Surely never was such a luxuriant ' copia fundi'
united with so much terseness of thought and brilliancy of imagination,
and managed with so much unconscious, almost instinctive ease. If he be
not the most delightful, he is by far the most wonderful of speakers."
In 1821, Mr. Jeffrey was elected Lord Rector of the
University of Glasgow, an honour the more gratifying that it was
obtained in opposition to powerful political interest. In 1829, he was
unanimously chosen Dean of the Faculty of Advocates, on which occasion,
we understand, he gave up all charge of the Edinburgh Revieiv.
In December, 1830, Mr. Jeffrey was appointed Lord
Advocate for Scotland, and returned to Parliament, in January following,
for the Forfar district of burghs. In the course of his canvass he was
well received, especially by the inhabitants of Dundee, four hundred uf
whom sat down to a public dinner given to the Lord Advocate and his
friends, Sir James Gibson-Craig, Mr. Murray of Henderland, etc. ; but at
Forfar, where his opponent, Captain Ogilvy of Airley, was a favourite,
he was so roughly handled by the mob as to have been in danger of his
life. At the general election in 1831, he stood candidate for the city
of Edinburgh, in opposition to Robert Adam Dundas, Esq. Great excitement
prevailed on this occasion. Besides memorials from most of the Trades'
Incorporations, a petition, to which were appended seventeen thousand
signatures, was presented to the Town Council in favour of Mr. Jeffrey;
and so nearly balanced were the parties that the latter lost the
election by only three votes, there being seventeen for the one, and
fourteen for the other. The result was by no means satisfactory to the
immense crowds who thronged the streets. The carriage of the Lord
Advocate, from which the horses were unyoked, was drawn by the populace
to his own house, with every demonstration of respect; but it required a
strong military force to prevent the most serious consequences to his
opponents. Disappointed in the metropolis, Mr. Jeffrey was again elected
by his former constituents. In 1833, the right of electing having been
transferred from the Town Council to the citizens of Edinburgh, by the
passing of the Reform Bill, he had the satisfaction, along with Mr.
Abercromby (late Speaker in the House of Commons, now Lord Dunfermline),
of being triumphantly returned for his native city.
From the known talents and popularity of the Lord
Advocate, great expectations were entertained of his appearance in the
House of Commons; but in this the public felt somewhat disappointed. He
spoke seldom, and, save on one or two occasions, apparently without any
effort to distinguish himself. He was constant in his attendance,
however; and had the honour, in his official capacity, of framing and
carrying through two important measures, the Parliamentary and Burgh
Reform Bills for Scotland. It is rare that men of purely legal or
literary reputation gain by entering the arena of active political life.
Erskine and Horn Tooke are signal instances. In the case of Jeffrey,
besides advanced years, various causes may have contributed to render
him careless of Parliamentary popularity. He was no doubt identified as
a leading advocate of Reform, and the Edinburgh Review had long
been considered the organ of the Whigs; but there was a third party to
be satisfied, with whose ultra views he had probably little synapathj',
and still less inclination to become their champion. In the estimation
of this class of politicians, the Lord Advocate failed to realise the
expectations that had been formed of him ; and some of the journals of
the period indulged with considerable freedom of remark on his political
sins, at least those of omission, for they were after all, on
their own showing, chiefly of a negative description.
The short Parliamentary career of Mr. Jeffrey
terminated on his elevation to the Scottish bench in 183-4. On quitting
his political position, even the ultra portion of the press was
constrained to acknowledge that he returned "to his native city with
perfectly clean hands, for his upright and honourable nature scorned
jobbing on his own account;" yet a more direct and truly gratifying
approval of his public conduct awaited him. Before leaving London, he
had the singular honour of being invited to a public dinner, given him
by a majority of the members for Scotland.
But it is not in reference to politics alone, however
great may have been the influence of his political writings, that the
character of Lord Jeffrey is to be estimated. Even apart from the
eminence he attained as a barrister, his connection with the
Edinburgh Review, and the literature of the last forty years, must
carry his name down to posterity in honourable association with the most
distinguished of his time. As a Reviewer he maintained the
reputation of an impartial and unbiassed guardian of public opinion. "He
is a Scotsman," says a Cockney writer, "without one particle of
hypocrisy, of cant, or servility, or selfishness in his composition
[!!]. He has not been spoiled by fortune —has not been tempted by
power—is firm without violence, friendly without weakness—a critic and
even-tempered—a casuist and an honest man ; and, amidst the toils of his
profession, and the distractions of the world, retains the gaiety, the
unpretending carelessness and simplicity of youth."
The strictures of the Review, however, were in
many instances too severe, or too honest and candid, to be palatable.
Moore was provoked to demand the "satisfaction of a gentleman" and
Byron, smarting under the castigation inflicted on his "Hours of
Idleness," produced the well-known tirade entitled "English Bards and
Scotch Beviewers ;" while, among the many pasquinades by offended
authors of less degree, the following epigrammatic description of the
Editor has no little merit :—
''Witty as Horatius Flaccus;
As great a democrat as Gracchus;
As short, but not so fat as Bacchus—
Here rides Jeffrey oil his jack-ass!"
"On Monday morning, August 11 [1806], two gentlemen
met at Chalk Farm, near London, with an intention to fight a duel, when
they were immediately seized by three Bow Street officers, disarmed, and
carried before Justice Bead, at the Police Office, who admitted them to
bail to keep the peace, themselves in £400 each, and two sureties in
£200 each. The parties were Francis Jeffrey, Esq., advocate, of
Edinburgh, and Thomas Moore, Esq., known by the appellation of
Anaereon Moore.'1''
The cause of this meeting originated in a critique of
the "Epistles, Odes, and other Poems," by Thomas Moore; in which the
Reviewer commented with much severity on the corrupt tendency of the
author's writings. "There is nothing, it will be allowed, more
indefensible," says the article, "than a cold-blooded attempt to corrupt
the purity of an innocent heart; and we can scarcely conceive any being
more truly despicable than he who, without the apology of unruly
passion, or tumultuous desires, sits down to ransack the impure place of
his memory for inflammatory images and expressions, and commits them
laboriously to writing, for the purpose of insinuating pollution
into the minds of unknown and unsuspecting readers. It seems to be his
(Mr. Moore's) aim to impose corruption upon his readers, by concealing
it under the mask of refinement. It is doubly necessary to put the law
in force against this delinquent, since he has not only indicated
a disposition to do mischief, but seems unfortunately to have
found an opportunity.....Such are the demerits of this work, that we
wish to see it consigned to universal reprobation." Mr. Moore, greatly
offended, sought the author of the article, and Mr. Jeffrey, then in
London, came forward boldly, and avowed himself the writer.
Sir Walter Scott was at the outset a contributor to
the Review, but he gradually became estranged on account of its
politics. In 1809, he was among the first to lend his aid in
establishing the London Quarterly, a journal of avowed
Conservative principles ; and, though still continuing friendly with
Jeffrey, their intimacy was on more than one occasion disturbed by the
critical remarks of the latter.
The bitterness of offended authorship may now, in as
far as regards Lord Jeffrey, be said to belong to the past. Byron read
his recantation ; Moore has been for many years a particular friend; and
even Southey and Wordsworth may have outlived the more recent
remembrance of the lash.