57
influence; as he had done when we lived together in one home.
The history of the contract—in the dispute about which, after my mother's death, this state of things was broken up—I have given separately; but before I conclude those pages which treat of the past instead of the present, I think it is fit to show, by the evidence of Lord Melbourne's own letters, the opinion he entertained of those affairs, in which his name has been once more introduced by Mr Norton as an opportunity for falsehood.
The first letter I shall quote of Lord Melbourne's, is one written only three months after he had given Mr Norton his magistracy; when already he was disturbed at the conduct of his nominee. Mr Norton inaugurated his appointment by quarrelling with his colleague. I endeavoured to justify my husband; and blamed the other magistrate. Lord Melbourne replied thus; in a letter dated July 19, 1831; and I print it, because it is a curious prophetic comment on Mr Norton's late letters in the 'Times.'
"T. W., as you say, does what he has not the least right to do; and the worst is, he is not only foolish himself, but is the cause of folly in others. I had the greatest difficulty in preventing Norton from replying to him in the 'Times.' I was much alarmed at the notion of his doing this, especially as I found him thoroughly impressed with the opinion that he could do it with great cleverness and dexterity. Now I know very well that a man of that description who is fully persuaded that he is about to do a thing extremely well, is on the very point of committing some irretrievable error, or falling into some most ridiculous absurdity … I hate the magistrates writing to the newspapers … besides, 'people will be sure to say to me,—if the magistrates get
