CHAPTER XII.

The Duchess of Devonshire-Her Follies and Infirmities-Taste for Play at this Period-Charles Fox and the Jews-His Lines on the Gamingtable-The Duchess's Kindness of Heart-Her Enthusiasm―The Contest for Westminster in 1784—Anecdotes of and Squibs let off at this Election-The Duchess's Poem of" The Passage of the St. Gothard"-Her Knowledge of French and Italian-Her Translation of one of Petrarch's Sonnets.

In the short space of three years after her marriage, the Duchess of Devonshire's extravagance became the subject of public criticism, and several pamphlets were addressed to her, reflecting severely upon her conduct; the motto of one was, "" Pleased with a feather, tickled with a straw,"-alluding to Lord Carlisle's verses: that of another was also from Pope, " She sighs, and is no Duchess at her heart," and both of these were very severe. But long after this period, having been fifteen years devoted to pleasure, she was still foremost in every fashionable folly; and, in 1793, was at the head of the Lady Patronesses of the celebrated pic-nic parties. There is, however, every reason to fear, that her Grace's excessive extravagance was not her worst fault; not only from traditional report, but from the evidence that may be met with in every auto

graph collection, we learn that the Duchess was devoted to faro,1 the fashionable game of the day, and other games of chance, which brought her into positions greatly detrimental to her character, and the dignity of her high station. In this she certainly was not discouraged, either by her male or female friends, and gaming in private circles was then far more common than in the present day; though, unfortunately, the vice is not extinct, and fashionable women of rank might now be named, who play as deep as did then her Grace of Devonshire.

It was, indeed, one of the characteristic follies of "All the Talents;" the absorbing passion of several members of the party who were most intimate at Devonshire House. The devotion of Fox to play is notorious, and he seems to have been scarcely able to pass forty-eight hours without it. A gentleman, now living, informed me, that one evening, when he and two or three other friends of Mrs. Fox were drinking tea with her in South Street, the door opened, and Charles James came skipping into the room, in most unusual spirits; they were on the point of inquiring

1 Frao was a game of cards, in which one person held the bank, and an indefinite number of players staked their money on one of the fifty-two cards of the pack. The dealer dealt two cards for himself from another pack; one on the right for himself, and one on the left for the punters; and, of course, the highest was the winning card. Besides this, the dealer had certain advantages. The name Faro is said to have been derived from the name of the ancient Kings of Egypt, a representation of a Pharaoh having been depicted on one of the cards. It was first introduced into France by the Venetian Ambassador in the year 1674.

the cause, but he saved them the trouble, by exclaiming, as he continued his capers, which he cut all round the room, "Great run! great run! vingt-et-un; lucky dog; to-morrow morning pay the Jews-pay them all!" Unfortunately for him, and for them too, it was Friday night, which, in the excess of his honesty and happiness, he did not think of. Of course, the next day no Israelite would come for his cash; and that night the monies were carried to the Club, and there lost-the love of powerful excitement, and the insatiable cravings of the gamester's heart, overcoming that great man's better feelings, and good but transient resolutions.

But, though a slave to this dreadful passion, and therefore to its degrading consequences, he wrote the following curious description of the gaming-table, in which the political feelings of this constitutional statesman are singularly interwoven with the subject, and in terms that would scarcely be agreeable to, or in accordance with, the opinions of the Whigs, in these days of the march of opinion. The critical powers of Fox, however, on points relating either to history or historians, generally led him to just conclusions; and his denunciation of Cromwell, though on so trifling an occasion, is made in a spirit as liberal as that of his remark on the partiality of Hume and Gibbon, for their respective and favourite opinions: namely, "that one so loved a king, and the other so hated a priest, that neither of them could be depended upon, when either a priest or a king was concerned."