CAMBRIDGE 69 



a valuable Report with that title, which attracted 

 much attention. He took in it an opposite position 

 to one previously occupied by Whewell. I beg to be 

 pardoned if my memory plays tricks, but my im- 

 pression is that Whewell's efforts to subdue his own 

 indignation at being bearded in this way by a mere 

 " Travelline Bachelor " were all the more amusing 

 because he was impotent to retort. Joseph Kay was 

 perfectly in order in asserting his rank ; he was 

 judged by competent outsiders to have written very 

 ably, and he was no longer a resident in Trinity 

 College within immediate reach of Whewell's wrath. 



E. Kay (1822-1897), afterwards Lord Justice of 

 Appeal, had rooms on the same staircase as myself, 

 and we wasted a great deal of time together, both in 

 term and in my second summer vacation. But 

 however idle he may have been at College, he richly 

 made up for it afterwards by hard and steady legal 

 work, out of which he finally emerged as a Judge 

 with a larcre fortune made at the Bar. 



Charles Buxton (1 823-1 871), son of the phil- 

 anthropist Sir T. Fowell Buxton (1786- 1845) and 

 father of the present Postmaster-General, was another 

 intimate friend. He was a far-off relative of my own, 

 and one of the most favourable examples of a Rugby 

 product under Dr. Arnold. Other similar examples 

 of highly favourable products occur at once to the 

 memory, such as Dean Stanley, Dean Lake, and 

 Walrond, but unquestionably the common opinion of 

 Cambridge undergraduates then assigned the epithet 

 of "prig" to most Rugby boys. I can exactly recall 

 the combination of qualities that occasioned the 

 offence ; they were partly an unconscious Phariseeism 



