The portraits of Henry, Lord Wilmot,' drawn by Lloyd in his Memoirs, and by Clarendon in his History of the Rebellion, vary considerably. Lloyd describes him as a great scholar, capable of giving the best advice, and as a soldier more fitted to follow such advice than any other man in England: quick in avenging a private affront-"he gave a box on the ear to one of the most eminent men in this nation"--but very patient in enduring disgrace or insult for the public good, and exceedingly courageous.

Clarendon, on the contrary, considered him haughty and ambitious, "of a pleasant wit and an ill understanding". While Clarendon admits that Wilmot excelled in good-fellowship, he accuses him of being on occasion sullen and perverse, a hard drinker, exceedingly vicious in temperament, faithless to his promises and faithless to his friends. As to his valour, Wilmot "saw danger in the distance with great courage," but he " " but he "looked upon it less resolutely when it was nearer"; a not very rare method of regarding it. Yet Clarendon gives him full credit for his brilliant successes as a soldier; and, indeed, it would have been difficult to deny it to one of the most distinguished officers in the army of Charles I. If Clarendon is to be believed, Henry

1 Henry, second Lord Wilmot, was the son of Sir Charles, first Viscount Wilmot, Lord President of Connaught, and Privy Councillor to James I. He received considerable grants of land in Ireland in return for his services to Queen Elizabeth and King James.

Wilmot's drunkenness, vice, and uncertain courage should be remembered in studying the character of his son John, who, as will be seen, inherited every one of these three unfortunate characteristics.

In the House of Commons Henry Wilmot resolutely and ably espoused the cause of the king and of his troops, but not invariably with tact or judgment; and his attitude in Parliament probably did much to exasperate the Roundheads against the monarchy. Having been of considerable service to the king in his flight, as well as in other matters, he was eventually created Earl of Rochester. He did not long enjoy his earldom, which passed to his little son, the most prominent character among our literary rakes.

John Wilmot, second Earl of Rochester, of whom Wood writes as "this noble and beautiful count," was born at Ditchley, near Woodstock, in April, 1648. Of this year St. Evremond says: "The year 1648 was distinguished from others by two extraordinary events, the martyrdom of King Charles I. . . . and the birth of my Lord Rochester, as eminent for wit and gallantry as that unfortunate king was for piety and religion. All I have to say is that the king was fitter for that world to which he went from the scaffold, and my lord for that he entered at the same time."

1 Miscel. Works of the late Earls of Rochester and Roscommon. With Memoir in a letter to the Duchess of Mazarine, by Monsieur St. Evremond, 1707.

John Wilmot's mother, whom the same writer describes as "a lady of equal parts and beauty," was a daughter of Sir John St. John, of Lyddiard Tregoz, Co. Wilts. When Lord Rochester married her she was the widow of Sir Henry Lee of Ditchley, Oxford. She was related to the notorious Lady Castlemaine whom Charles II. made Duchess of Cleveland, a lady with whom her cousin, the leading subject of this sketch, was a good deal associated. John Wilmot was the only surviving son of the marriage of Lord Rochester to the widow of Sir Henry Lee, and he succeeded his father when only nine years old.

Rochester terribly belied his future character by being a very good little boy. This probably means that he was delicate. No little boy thoroughly healthy in mind and body is good, as all truthful parents will, or ought to, testify. St. Evremond states that Rochester was exceptionally docile and that he made rapid progress in his lessons. The nearest grammar school was the Eton of those days and "Rochester, Dominus," was sent to the Free School at Burford, a place associated with the name of a literary courtier of a very different stamp, namely, Lucius Cary, Lord Falkland.

Boys then went to a university at an earlier age than now finds them going to a public school, and young Rochester became an undergraduate at Wadham College, Oxford, when he was eleven.1

1 Rochester's "Funeral Sermon," by the Rev. Robert Parsons. It may be found in Burnet's Lives of Hale and Rochester.

"There," says one who knew him well, "he first sucked from the breast of his mother, the University, those perfections of wit, eloquence and poetry, which afterwards by his own corrupt stomach were turned into poison by himself and others."

In the middle of his college career the monarchy was re-established in England, whereby the prospects of the scion of such a Royalist family as that of the Wilmots were immeasurably improved: at the same time it might have been for Rochester's moral and even perhaps for his material advantage if the court of Charles II. had not been installed in England till many years later; for it is probable that the extravagance of his vices, an extravagance that led to his early death, was to a large extent attributable to his entrance as a mere boy into that sink of depravity.

At the age of thirteen, Rochester took his degree as Master of Arts. The question then arose what was to be done with the boy; and it was decided to enlarge his mind by foreign travel. A tutor was engaged to act as his companion and protector, and to add what little educational gloss it might still be possible to add to an M.A. Oxon. Young Rochester also took with him the introductions proper to a nobleman travelling abroad, with a view to learning the ways of the world. In other words, having learnt what was good at Oxford, he was sent to learn what was bad at the dissolute continental courts of the seventeenth century,

After passing a novitiate at the court of Louis XIV., young Rochester must afterwards have been surprised at nothing that he saw at the court of Charles II. The French ladies of the court at Versailles and Paris would pet and pamper the good-looking English boy in a manner more calculated to gratify his vanity and excite his passions than to increase his virtue or promote his modesty.

St. Evremond informs us that Rochester showed no disposition to continue his studies. He had already had enough of schools and colleges, establishments to which he subsequently referred with scant respect in the lines:

This busy puzzling stirrer up of doubt,

That frames deep mysteries, then finds 'em out.
Filling with frantic crowds of thinking fools,

The reverend Bedlams, Colleges and Schools.
-Satyr against Mankind.

His tutor, however, endeavoured to induce him to turn his attention to literature, not as a study but as a pleasure. This worthy pedagogue made him perfectly in love with knowledge, by engaging him in books suitable to his inclinations". So far as can be ascertained, the works of the aforesaid Ovid would appear to have been the books to which those inclinations were most suited: and it may be doubted whether the reading of such works increased his love of virtue as much as his admiration for the classics. Poor much-abused classics, which have been made responsible both for the "Greek-particle