More noteworthy still, because of the absence of relationship between them, is the likeness of the present Postmaster-General, the Duke of Norfolk, and the veteran novelist, Mr. George Manville Fenn. Looking upon the two portraits, it is not easy to believe that Mr. Fenn is sixteen years the senior of the head of the great house of Howard. Another curious feature in connection with the two cases before us is the fact that, although the Duke of Norfolk is almost as much like Mr. George Manville Fenn as one pea resembles another, his resemblance to certain portraits of the great Charles Dickens is rather remote, whereas Mr. Fenn's is very close.

In regard to the adjoining portraits of Mr. Austen Chamberlain and that of his scarcely less distinguished father, it is noticeable that in addition to the striking facial resemblance, there is the same defect in the sight of the right eye occasioning the use of the monocle. Even if we take it for granted that Mr. Joseph Chamberlain has indulged in the harmless foible of dressing his hair and arranging the cast of his countenance to accentuate his likeness to the member for East Worcestershire, it cannot be gainsaid that the similarity between the son and the father is real enough to merit illustration in this gallery of "doubles."

Jesting apart, those who have studied Mr. Austen Chamberlain in the House and on the platform, prophesy for him a very remarkable career. He has much of the readiness and all the imperturbability that have made his father the ablest "parliamentary hand" since the retirement of Mr. Gladstone. It is interesting to note that the disbelief of Mr. Chamberlain pÈre in exercise, as a means of recruiting the health, is not shared by Mr. C. fils, who is an enthusiastic cyclist.

The late Mr. Du Maurier was of French extraction, while Mr. Alma-Tadema was born at Dronryp, in Holland, yet they might have been twin brothers, so strangely alike were they. If Mr. Du Maurier had worn his hair a little longer and parted it in the middle, the most intimate mutual friends of the two distinguished artists must have found it difficult to tell which was which. An amusing story is told illustrating this point. Mr. Du Maurier, dining at a friend's house one evening, was placed next to a lady whom he did not recollect to have met before. A brief dialogue, something to this purpose, ensued:

Lady: "You know, Mr. Alma-Tadema, that you are supposed to resemble Mr. du Maurier very closely. For my part, I do not see how the most superficial observer could be deceived in the matter!"

Mr. Du Maurier: "Pardon me, but I am Mr. Du Maurier!"

Most of us have forgotten that Mr. Anthony Hope contested a seat in Parliament in 1892, but few of us are sorry that the gifted author failed to get in. Mr. Anthony Hope Hawkins, to give him his full name, is an excellent speaker, but even that gift is not so useful in Parliament as consistent and unquestioning voting-power, and until members are allowed to read their speeches the gift of authorship will remain at a discount there. A good many of us, perhaps, could cut tolerable figures at Westminster, but our Anthony Hopes and Stanley Weymans are few and far between, and we would wish to keep them to their proper work of literature. Mr. Edward German, Mr. Anthony Hope's double, is a young composer who has done very well already, and may be expected to do better in the future.

There is a distinct style of theatrical face that we all recognise directly we see it. For instance, the heavy tragedian with the blue chin and luxuriant hair, À la Sir Henry Irving, is known wherever he is seen, and quite a number of pages of our Magazine might be filled with his doubles. But Mr. John Hare and Mr. Arthur Roberts whose portraits we give side by side are comedians (of widely different styles), and are not particularly theatrical in appearance. Off the stage Mr. Hare might be taken for an eminent Q.C., while "Arthur" might be supposed to move exclusively in turf circles. Mr. Hare, whose real name is Fairs, is, of course, the best "old man" actor we have. In connection with this fact he himself tells a rather good story. He was in a carriage on the Underground Railway when he met an old school-fellow. Gradually the conversation turned to theatres. "Are you fond of the stage?" Mr. Hare was asked by his friend. When the reply was "Yes," he presumed that Mr. Hare had seen a certain play at the Prince of Wales's.

"No," said Mr. Hare, "I can't say I have seen it!"

"Then you should go at once," said his friend. "It's a capital play, and a devilish clever old man acts in it—a fellow named Hare!"

Two youthful baronets and Members of Parliament now claim our attention. Sir Edward Grey is almost as distinguished in Parliament as he is in the world of athletics—he is once more tennis (not lawn-tennis) champion for England. As Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs in the last Government, he was a pronounced success—his manner being voted only less superior than that of the extremely superior person, the Hon. George Curzon, who ornaments the same office at the present time. Sir Thomas Esmonde, born in the same year (1862) as Sir Edward Grey, should have a splendid parliamentary future before him, for he is a descendant of no less a celebrity than the great Henry Grattan.

Lord Rosebery has at least two doubles among public men. This is not to be wondered at when one considers how popular a man is the last Liberal Prime Minister.

When the Duke of Wellington was living, it was the pride of many a private citizen to be thought like the great Duke; and Disraeli had many doubles, the late Sir James Stansfeld being one of them. In Germany, at the present moment, we may meet passable duplicates of Bismarck in every town. Who does not recollect the perfect army of Randolph Churchills that invaded society when that brilliant young statesman's fame was at its greatest? It is surely a harmless conceit that causes an inoffensive private person, if he in any way resembles a great man of whom everybody is talking, to accentuate the likeness by every means in his power.

But in the case of Lord Rosebery's doubles it is somewhat different. Both Mr. Arnold Morley and Mr. Philip Stanhope are distinguished men themselves, and we may be quite sure that they do not spend much of their time dressing up to the likeness of their political leader. Mr. Philip Stanhope is a near relative of Lord Rosebery's, and is of exactly the same age. Mr. Arnold Morley is two years younger than Lord Rosebery (having been born in 1849), was Postmaster-General in the last Liberal Administration, and may some day be Prime Minister.

Mr. H. O. Arnold Forster and Mr. E. F. G. Hatch, M.P. for the Gorton Division of South-West Lancs, for instance, it is said grow more like one another every day.

The difficulty experienced by the Speaker in attaching the right name to these gentlemen when they rise to "catch his eye" must be very considerable.

Lord George Hamilton, who, with Mr. J. Roche, M.P., makes up the last pair of our doubles, is an excellent example of the immense disadvantage attaching to a public man whose features do not lend themselves to caricature. Had Lord George overcome his natural deficiencies in this respect by the adoption of an eyeglass, an orchid, or an eccentric brand of waistcoat, he might ere now have been ranked among our Prime Ministers, for it is an undoubted fact that these details are better remembered by the public at large than years of devoted hard work.

Disraeli's cork-screw curl on the forehead is less likely to be forgotten than his splendid services to the Empire, while it may be asserted with confidence that Mr. Chamberlain's eyeglass and orchid will linger in the public mind long after his personal sacrifices for the principle of Unionism are familiar to none but the student of history.

When at the General Election of 1868 Lord George captured the seat for the County of Middlesex—then regarded as an impregnable Liberal stronghold—a dazzling future was prophesied for him. If these prophecies have not been realised to the full extent it is not, as we believe, because Lord George has not lived up to his earlier reputation, but simply because Nature has not gifted him with a remarkable personal appearance, nor art with a satisfactory substitute. However, a Statesman even of the first rank who has occupied with distinction such important offices as First Lord of the Admiralty and Secretary of State for India, has no reason to be dissatisfied with himself. No doubt each reader of this article will be able to add considerably to our gallery of "doubles," but we have done enough if we have opened up an amusing and interesting train of ideas.