Page:English Historical Review Volume 35.djvu/465

 1920 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 457 depredations, Afghan invasions, Pindari raids, involved whole districts and whole generations in universal ruin and unspeakable misery. The aggregate wealth of Mogul times only went round, so to speak, because the natural restraints on population were allowed to work their will unchecked. The British Raj, by its well-defended frontiers and humani- tarian administration, creates for itself new social and economic problems. The measure of its difficulties is in one sense the measure of its claim to greatness. No one has put this more effectively than Mr. Moreland himself, when he says truly and epigrammatically, ' a famine is now a period when distress is such as to require the intervention of the state, but if we were to rely upon the chroniclers of the sixteenth century, we should define it as a period when men and women were driven by hunger to eat human flesh '. P. E. Egberts. Lord Grey of the Reform Bill. By George Macaulay Trevelyan, with illustrations. (London : Longmans, 1920.) It is strange that no complete biography of a statesman who played so conspicuous a part in a great crisis in our national history as the second Earl Grey should have appeared before this, for his Life and Opinions by his son. General Grey (1861), virtually begins at 1792 and ends at 1817, when Grey broke ofE his alliance with Grenville. In this book, then, we have for the first time a record of Grey's life as a whole given us in a single volume, valuable for the knowledge it displays and adorned by the author's literary talent. Mr. Trevelyan's treatment is excellent : when dealing with many events in themselves historically important, he passes lightly over details, but exhibits clearly and fully their bearing on Grey's political career and the light they throw on his character and opinions. As a bio- grapher, though not concealing Grey's failings, he is in sympathy with his subject, while as regards politics his zealous advocacy of the virtues of the whigs and his condemnation of their opponents occasionally, and especially in the earlier part of his work, outrun his discretion. For example, after quoting from Pitt's speech of 30 May 1792 on Grey's motion for parliamentary reform, he expresses great indignation that it should have accused Grey of seeking to overthrow the constitution. If he will look again at his quotation he will see that Pitt made no such accusa- tion ; he regretted that Grey and other members of the house of commons by their association styled the ' Friends of the People ' had connected them- selves with men of revolutionary opinions, and this connexion made him suspect that the proposal for reform might be a * preliminary to the overthrow of the whole system of government '. He seeks to strengthen his case against Pitt for refusing to countenance Grey's proposal by urging that war with France was not then contemplated. His remark is entirely beside the question ; Pitt's objection was based on the propagation in this kingdom of opinions favourable to the revolutionary ' madness ' prevalent in France. Mr. Trevelyan goes so far as to maintain that our late experience shows that Pitt might safely have embarked on reform during the war with France. He must for the moment have forgotten the enormous difference in the position of the nation with respect to parlia-