own lips that he was not rich, and would employ neither paid agent nor canvasser. Was there ever such a madman? Howbeit, the great ability and striking gallantry of the blind candidate soon began to tell with the constituency; and there is no saying what might have happened if Mr. Fawcett had not been over-persuaded to retire before the poll to avoid the charge of creating a division in the Liberal ranks. The experience he had gained, however, was of the most valuable kind. It went to prove, incredible as it may appear, that the portals of the "rich man's club" at Westminster may be successfully forced at the cost of a few hundreds by candidates at once poor and honest, if only they have the requisite faith and ability to make the venture. In 1863 Mr. Fawcett contested the borough of Cambridge on the same principles that he had found to answer so unexpectedly well in Southwark. He was defeated, but by an insignificant majority. He next contested Brighton in 1864, warmly espousing the cause of the North in its struggle with the slaveholding States of the American Union. Again he was unsuccessful; but the following year, nothing daunted, he returned to the charge, and was elected by a large majority. In 1868 he was once more victorious; but at the general election of 1874—the annus mirabilis of Tory re-action—both he and his Liberal colleagues in the representation were thrown out, and replaced by Conservative nobodies.
It was impossible, however, that such a man should long be excluded from the legislature. In two months' time a vacancy occurred in the representation of the vast metropolitan constituency of Hackney, and the eyes of the Liberal electors were at once turned with one accord towards Mr. Fawcett. He was elected
