459 
of Edinburgh, Session 1874-75. 
after midnight, deciphering old and almost illegible manuscripts, 
and trying at once to master their character and make sense of 
their contents. These very different capacities and functions 
existed harmoniously together in the same individual, and instead 
of interfering with each other, communicated, perhaps, a mutual 
zest, and enabled the change to he pleasantly or at least contentedly 
acquiesced in. The versatility thus existing and kept up fitted him 
for a very varied and interesting range of social acquaintances, and 
of these he was always glad to avail himself in moderation. Nor 
was any one a more agreeable companion. His perfect good humour 
and good temper, his strong affection for his family and for his old 
friends, his never-failing courtesy, which arose from and indicated 
the chivalrous feeling that was at the foundation of his character, 
his utter absence of envy, jealousy, presumption, or self-conceit ; 
and his sympathy with all innocent and gentlemanly relaxation 
and even merriment, endeared him to a very extensive and attached 
circle, and made his home the centre of much attraction and the 
scene of much social enjoyment. To these enjoyments his surviving 
friends still look back with un mixed pleasure and tender regard. 
His literary productions, apart from those which appeared in an 
official form, show the same diversity of character to which we have 
already alluded. As specimens of these I may mention two excel- 
lent but very different papers, which a careless reader would scarcely 
conceive to have proceeded from the same mind : the one of these, 
a contribution to the “ Quarterly Review” in 1843, upon the Eccle- 
siastical Antiquities of Scotland, and the other a paper inserted in 
the “North British Review” in 1864, on the Country Life of England. 
Each of these is well deserving of perusal, and the last mentioned 
is particularly interesting, as having first introduced into notice the 
achievements and writings of Charles St John, the well-known 
lover of sport, with whose tastes and habits those of Mr Innes were 
in full accordance, so far as circumstances would permit of their 
free indulgence. 
Mr Innes’s love for literature was strong and diversified. He was 
a fair Greek and Latin scholar. I hesitate to call him a good Greek 
scholar, as my old friend Archdeacon Williams denied that title 
to any one who did not know every good Greek author from Homer 
to Agathias. He was sufficiently at home in French and Italian 
