MAJOR THOMPSON'S MOTHER.
THE Earl of Malmesbury brought a case before the House of Lords on Thursday, upon which there can be only one opinion, from the Throne to the humblest hovel in the country. The public already knows something about it, but not all. While Sir William Wil- liams was defending Kars, he was supported by three British offi- cers—Major Teesdale, Colonel Lake, and Captain Thompson. It would not be so much invidious as difficult to draw any distinc- tion between the various merits of the three. They all of them belong to the highest class of chivalry, and their names will sur- vive as long as the history of these times lasts. If there was one who had been peculiarly distinguished for heroism it was Thompson. He performed the same duties as the others, en- countered the same incessant combat, displayed the same forti- tude, the same never-failing hopefulness ; but he maintained that admirable spirit when mortal disease should have sent him to his bed. He shared the victories of his brother officers ; he shared their hardships, their surrender, their journey home, their wel- come in their own land: but scarcely had he once more returned to his mother's roof, when he died..
The Queen, the Government, the Country, must desire to ex- press a true estimate of that representative of our nation, by be- stowing on him the proper rewards. Vain desire ! the tomb has defeated us. But we have not stated the hardest part of the ease. There was one person who took the deepest interest in Thompson —who shared all his sufferings although divided by distance— who entered into the spirit of his fortitude. It was his mother; a widowed woman, whose best hopes were centred in this gallant son. Through all his danger, hardship, and. pain, she was sus- tained by the sense of glory, by the conviction that he was serv- ing his country and that his services would be appreciated. He has gone, and she, deprived of her stay, is handed over to the pettier miseries of life, aggravated by the impaired health into which grief has thrown her. Lord Malmesbury _read on Thurs- day night part of a letter from an intimate friend of the family, containing these words-- "I feel convinced, knowing the straitened circumstances of his widowed mother, that at least one quarter of her annual income will be swallowed up in meeting the charges attendant upon the illness and funeral of her lamented son; and I can assure your Lordship, that so fixed is her income, and so partitioned out to meet the yearly expenses of a large family, that it is with the utmost difficulty that funds can be provided to enable her to go to the seaside immediately. after her son's funeral, on the physician's re- commendation, who Bays he will not answer for her life, so plunged in grief is she, if she do not get change of air and scene."
Lord Malmesbury, who touched the subject with admirable taste, did not ask for charity on behalf of Mrs. Thompson. It is, indeed, a slur upon the country that such a case should have to be brought before Parliament at all, or that Lord Malmesbury should feel it necessary to deprecate "charity." The country has, in some way or other, to do justice to itself as well as to Mrs. Thomp- son. One of the special functions for which Royalty is maintained is to represent the nation as a person, and to do what is right and just and kind. In case of any immediate emergency, there is the Royal Bounty; but a more permanent provision is eminently de- manded in this case ; and what is the use of the fund, called. the Civil List if it is not to meet claims of this kind ? It is true, in- deed, that the amount is absurdly restricted; it is possible that the authorized sum has been consumed in meeting permanent claims far less national than this : but if so, Parliament holds in its own hands the means of supplying the defect.
Previous page
