Many a guy, says Sancho, comes for wool and is going domestic shorn. ’ On Monday they duly got here. Complacent as ever, Macaulay defined the stopover at. ‘Then the Quakers, 5 in quantity. by no means used to be there any such rout. they'd completely not anything to say…’ As Sir Charles Firth says, if the Quakers ‘had completely not anything to claim’ it used to be possibly simply because they weren't allowed to talk. In an try and safe a public listening to, Forster’s preface used to be released individually, and in 1851 W. Hepworth Dixon released a brand new lifetime of Penn with an entire bankruptcy refuting Macaulay’s fees. Macaulay paid now not the slightest cognizance, and in 1856 a brand new variation of the 1st volumes of his background hopefully repeated the libels. This roused the indignation of a brand new critic, this time a powerful whig: John Paget. In 1858 Paget released a scholarly pamphlet entitled An Enquiry into the proof with regards to the costs introduced by means of Lord Macaulay opposed to William Penn. subsequent yr Paget equally uncovered Macaulay’s no much less obtrusive blunders about the Duke of Marlborough, the bloodbath of Glencoe, and the Scottish Highlands. these types of have been released in Macaulay’s lifetime. In 1860, after Macaulay’s loss of life, Paget confirmed that Macaulay had equally libelled Viscount Dundee. a lot of these essays Paget accumulated and released in 1861 because the New Examen. yet simply as Macaulay had neglected the feedback made in the course of his existence, so the whig institution neglected it after his dying. The Edinburgh evaluate brushed aside Paget’s booklet with contempt, infrequently deigning to note ‘so very erroneous a performance’12; Trevelyan, in his biography, by no means pointed out Paget or allowed it to seem that Macaulay was once in errors on any topic; and the hot Examen, having fallen stillborn from the clicking, used to be by no means reprinted until eventually 1936, whilst Sir Winston Churchill, listening to from Lord Rosebery of this infrequent and unknown e-book, prompted a brand new version in defence of his ancestor. How may possibly Macaulay be accountable of such gross mistakes, such surprising injustices? it truly is transparent from his personal language that he surely believed that he was once correct. And but the proof opposed to him, which was once proven to him, is admittedly unanswerable. Mere prejudice isn't really a enough reason behind this mental challenge. the main traditional clarification lies within the mixture of political prejudice with a unprecedented reminiscence. Macaulay’s reminiscence used to be certainly a prodigy – and a prodigy of which he was once certainly useless. a variety of tales are informed approximately it. He knew the full of Paradise misplaced and the full Pilgrim’s development through center. He may possibly soak up at a look, and keep in his brain, an entire revealed web page; and too frequently he discharged it back in his dialog. ‘He should still take table-spoonfuls of the waters of Lethe each morning’, stated Sydney Smith. yet this excellent gift had its dangers. Macaulay may take into accout the trend within which he had prepared the facts, and which he had imprinted on his brain, instead of the facts itself; and he may unconsciously refer again to not the proof yet basically to the trend.