Sir James Paget, Bart. 1 39 



did his wits fail him, either as regards what ought to be said or the 

 best words in which to say it. His handwriting might perhaps be 

 quoted in illustration of his unfailing balance. It was always, whether 

 written in haste or at leisure and regardless of varying qualities in 

 pen and paper, exactly the same. Eeadiness of reply and aptness at 

 repartee may probably be taken as good evidence of this most enviable 

 presence of mind. Many good things might be related of Paget in this 

 direction. 



It is perhaps in some place between John Hunter and Sir Benjamin 

 Brodie that we should find a niche for Paget. His enthusiasm for 

 Hunter and his methods of thought and work was unbounded ; and 

 although not a great collector himself, it was because the need for that 

 kind of work had to some extent passed, rather than from want of 

 zeal. His industry as a museum expounder was proved by the produc- 

 tion of his opus magnum, the Catalogue of the Pathological Part of the 

 Hunterian Collection. Until his time was absorbed by private practice 

 and public committees he was indefatigable in microscopic research. 

 Yet in his relations to the profession and the public, as, having been 

 for a long series of years the acknowledged head of the surgical calling 

 in Great Britain and Ireland, he more nearly trod in the steps of 

 Brodie than of Hunter, and between these two a very interesting 

 parallel might be drawn. 



As some proof of his success as an observer it may be noted that no 

 fewer than three different maladies have become known by his name. 

 Leaving aside the Trichina spiralis, we have Paget's Osteitis deformans 

 and Paget's nipple cancer. 



It would be unpardonable in any sketch of Sir James Paget's 

 character and attainments not to make special mention of his skill as 

 an orator. At the same time it must be insisted that his success in 

 this direction was in the main due to the fact that he had always 

 something to say which was worth saying, and that he always knew 

 exactly what it was that he wished to say. It was no mere skill in 

 the arrangement of words which gave a charm to all that he uttered 

 in public. The manner was, it is true, something, but the matter was 

 far more* His renown as an after-dinner speaker was probably second 

 to that of no one during the years of his prime. Nor were his more 

 formal public addresses less successful. The latter were, it is believed, 

 always very carefully prepared, but many were the occasions on which 

 an impromptu speech gave proof that such preparation was by no 

 means essential. His sentences were always remarkable for their 

 clearness, and they were never laboured or ornate. He paid no 

 fulsome compliments, he told no anecdotes, he never indulged in 

 quotations. His language was always his own, 'and it was its singular 

 appropriateness to the subject, together with an inimitable air of 



B 2 



