HILL, Matthew Davenport (1792-1872), was born August 6, 1792, at Birmingham, where his father, T. W. Hill, was at that time assistant in a charity school. He made such rapid progress in his education that in his thirteenth year he rendered his father efficient assistance in conducting a private school in Birmingham, and in his seventeenth year became the principal teacher. Resolving, however, to adopt the legal profession, he in 1814, while still continuing his scholastic duties, became a student of Lincoln’s Inn, and in 1816 began to devote his uninterrupted attention to legal studies. He was called to the bar in 1819, and went upon the Midland circuit, where his ability was soon generally recognized, although for various reasons his acquisition of a profitable practice was not so rapid. In 1832 he was elected one of the Liberal members for Kingston-upon-Hull, but he lost his seat at the next election in 1834. On the incorporation of Birmingham in 1839 he was chosen recorder; and in 1851 he was appointed commissioner in bankruptcy for the Bristol district. Having in the course of his professional duties had his interest excited in questions relating to the treatment of criminal offenders, he in his charges to the grand juries, as well as in special pamphlets, ventilated opinions which have been the means of introducing many important reforms in the methods of dealing with crime. One of his principal coadjutors in these reforms was his brother Frederick Hill, whose Amount, Causes, and Remedies of Crime, the result of his experience as inspector of prisons for Scotland, may be said to mark an era in the methods of prison discipline. Hill was one of the chief promoters of the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge, and the originator of the Penny Magazine. He died 7th June 1872.

His principal works are Practical Suggestions to the Founders of Reformatory Schools, 1855; Suggestions for the Repression of Crime, 1857, consisting of charges addressed to the grand juries of Birmingham; Mcttray, 1855; Papers on the Penal. Servitude Acts, 1864; Journal of a Third Visit to the Convict Gao r s, Refuges, and Reformatories of Dublin, 1865; Addresses delivered at the Birmingham and Midland InstUnιte, 1867. See Memoir of Matthew Davenport Hill, by his daughters Rosamond and Florence Davenport Hill, 1878.

HILL, Rowland (1744-1833), an eccentric and popular English preacher, sixth son of Sir Rowland Hill of Hawkstone, was born there 23d August 1744. After receiving his early education at the grammar school of Shrewsbury and at Eton, he in 1764 entered St John’s College, Cambridge. While at the university he made the acquaintance of the Methodist preacher Whitfield, and stimulated by his example he somewhat scandalized the university authorities and his own friends by preaching, before he had obtained holy orders, in the surrounding villages, and conducting religious services in the houses of the sick and poor. After graduating with distinction he took orders, and in 1773 was appointed to the parish of Kingston, Somersetshire, where he began to indulge his favourite taste for open air preaching, and soon attracted great crowds to the services which he held nearly every day of the week. Having on the death of his father in 1780 inherited considerable property, he built for his own use Surrey Chapel, in the Blackfriars Road, London. The chapel was opened on the 8th June 1783. Though now practically occupying the ecclesiastical position of a dissenter, Hill conducted his services in accordance with the forms of the Church of England, in whose communion he always remained. From the beginning his success was complete, and his chapel soon came to be filled with an audience such as no other preacher in London could boast. During the summer months he made what he called “gospel-tours” into all parts of the country, sometimes extending them to Scotland and Ireland, and attracted wherever he went audiences as numerous and as interested as those which had crowded to hear Whitfield. After these tours he always returned with increased enthusiasm to his duties at Surrey Chapel, where he continued to officiate almost to the day of his death, 11th April 1833. The oratory of Rowland Hill, like that of Whitfield, was specially adapted for rude and uncultivated audiences, and it was equally effective although by more varied means. He possessed a voice of great power, and, according to Southey, “his manner” was “that of a performer as great in his own line as Kean or Kemble.” Not unfrequently he violated the laws of good taste in the eccentricities of his wit and humour, but the intensity and purity of the purpose by which he was actuated enabled him always to retain uninjured his moral influence over his audience. Among the various publications of Rowland Hill the best known is his Village Dialogues, which first appeared in 1810, and reached a 34th edition in 1839.

See Life by Rev. Edwin Sidney, 1833; Memοirs^ ∖ ry Rev. William Jones, 1834; and Memorials by Rev. James Sherman, 1857.

HILL, Sir Rowland (1795-1879), author of the penny postal system, a younger brother of Matthew Davenport Hill, and third son of T. W. Hill, who named him after Rowland Hill, the preacher, was born December 3, 1795, at Kidderminster, to which town his father had lately removed from Birmingham. For some years of his childhood his health was very feeble, and as, on account of an affection of the spine, he had to maintain a recumbent position, his principal method of relieving the irksomeness of his situation was by repeating figures aloud consecutively until he had reached very high totals. A similar bent of mind was manifested when he entered school in 1802, his aptitude for arithmetic and mathematics being quite exceptional. But if he owed his subsequent eminence to a peculiar natural talent for figures, he was indebted for the direction of his abilities in no small degree to the guidance of his father, a man of great force of character and of advanced political and social views, which were qualified and balanced by the strong practical tendency of his mind. At the age of twelve Rowland began to assist in teaching arithmetic and mathematics in his father’s school at Hilltop, Birmingham, and latterly he had the chief management of the school. On his suggestion the establishment was removed in 1819 to Hazel wood, a more commodious building in the Hagley Road, in order to have the advantages of a large body of boys, for the purpose of properly carrying out an improved system of education. That system, which was devised principally by Rowland, was expounded in a pamphlet entitled Plans for the Government and Education of Boys in large numbers, the first edition of which appeared in 1822, and a second with additions in 1827. The principal feature of the system was “to leave as much as possible all power in the hands of the boys themselves;” and it was so successful that, in a circular issued six years after the experiment had been in operation, it was announced that “the head master had never once exercised his right of veto on their proceedings.” This doubtless was in no small degree due to the powerful personality of Rowland Hill, which made itself felt whether he was present or not. The system, it must be admitted, had several features of too utopian a character for the present constitution of society; but on the whole Rowland Hill, as an educationist, is entitled to a place side by side with Arnold of Rugby, and was equally successful with him in making moral influence of the highest kind the predominant power in school discipline. After his marriage in 1827 Hill removed to a new school at Bruce Castle, Tottenham, which he conducted until failing health compelled him to retire in 1833. About this time he became secretary of Gibbon Wakefield’s scheme for colonizing South Australia, the objects of which he explained in 1832 in a pamphlet on Home Colonies, afterwards partly reprinted during the Irish famine under the title Home Colonies for Ireland. It was in 1835 that his zeal as an administrative reformer was first directed to the postal system. The discovery which resulted from these investigations is when stated so easy of comprehension that there is great danger of its originality and thoroughness, and its greatness as an element in human progress, being lost sight of. A fact which also enhances its merit was that he was not a post-office official, and possessed no practical experience of the details of the old system. After a laborious collection of statistics he succeeded in satisfying himself and in demonstrating to the world that the principal expense of letter carriage was in receiving and distributing, and that the cost of conveyance differed so little with the distance that a uniform rate of postage was in reality the fairest to all parties that could be adopted. Trusting also that the deficiency in the postal rate would be made up by the immense increase of correspondence, and by the saving which would be obtained from prepayment, from improved methods of keeping accounts, and from lessening the expense of distribution, he in his famous pamphlet published in 1837 recommended that within the United Kingdom the rate for letters not exceeding half an ounce in weight should be only one penny. The employment of postage stamps is mentioned only as a suggestion, and in the following words :—“Perhaps the difficulties might be obviated by using a bit of paper just large enough to bear the stamp, and covered at the back with a glutinous wash which by applying a little moisture might be attached to the back of the letter.” Proposals so striking and novel in regard to a subject in which every one had a special personal interest could not fail to command general attention, and perhaps no pamphlet that ever issued from the press has caused so much and such widespread discussion, or been so speedily effective in promoting reforms in any degree so beneficial to the human race. So great became the pressure of public opinion against the opposition offered to the measure by official prepossessions and prejudices that in 1838 the House of Commons appointed a committee to examine the subject. The committee having reported favourably, a bill to carry out Hill’s recommendations was brought in by the Government. The Act received the royal assent in 1839, and after an intermediate rate of fourpence had been in operation from December 5th of that year, the penny rate commenced January 10, 1840. Hill received an appointment in the Treasury in order to superintend the introduction of his reforms, but he was compelled to retire when the Liberal Government resigned office in 1841. In consideration of the loss he thus sustained, and to mark the public appreciation of his services, he was in 1846 presented with the sum of <£13,360. On the Liberals returning to office in the same year he was appointed secretary to the postmaster-general, and in 1854 he was made chief secretary. In these positions, his ability as a practical administrator made itself felt in every department of the postal system, and enabled him to supplement his original discovery by practical expedients realizing its benefits in a degree commensurate with continually improving facilities of communication, and in a manner best combining cheapness with efficiency. In 1860 his services were rewarded with the honour of knighthood; and when failing health compelled him to resign his office in 1864, he received from parliament a grant of £20,000, and was also allowed to retain his full salary of £2000 a year as retiring pension. In 1864 the university of Oxford conferred on him the degree of D.C.L., and on the 6th June 1879 he was presented with the freedom of the city of London. The presentation, on account of his infirm health, took place at his residence at Hampstead, and he survived the ceremony only a few weeks, dying on the 27th August following. He was buried in Westminster Abbey.

HILL, Viscount (1772-1842). Rowland Hill, nephew of the Rev. Rowland Hill, was born at Frees, Shropshire, 11th August 1772. After receiving his early education at Ightfield and Chester, he was gazetted to the 38th regiment, obtaining permission at the same time to improve himself in the knowledge of his profession in a military academy at Strasburg, where he continued after removing into the 53d regiment with the rank of lieutenant. In the beginning of 1793 he raised an independent company, and was promoted to the rank of captain. The same year he distinguished himself at the siege of Toulon; and after serving for some time on the Continent he in 1797 set out as colonel of the 90th regiment with Sir Ralph Abercromby’s expedition to Egypt, where he acquired great distinction, and was wounded at the battle of Alexandria. Having in 1803 been gazetted brigadier-general, he in 1808 accompanied Sir Arthur Wellesley to Spain, and from Vimiera to Vittoria, in advance or retreat, he proved himself the most indefatigable coadjutor of the great captain. In 1809 he was gazetted lieutenant-general, and in the following year was appointed to the independent command of the second army corps of Wellington in Portugal; in 1811 he annihilated the French army under Girard at Arroyomolinos (Caceres), in recognition of which he received the order of the Bath; and for his capture of the forts of Almarez, which cut off the communication between the French armies on the north and south sides of the Tagus, he was in 1814 rewarded with the title of Baron Hill of Almarez. In 1813 he held temporarily the command of the English and Hanoverian troops in Belgium, and two years later crowned the glories of his noble career by his conduct at Waterloo, where he was at the head of the brigade which resisted and repulsed the last effort made in behalf of the French by the imperial guard. When Wellington became premier in 1828 Hill received the appointment of general commanding-in-chief, and on resigning this office in 1842 he was created a viscount. He died on the 10th December of the same year. Lord Hill was, next to Wellington, the most popular and able soldier of his time in the British service, and was so much beloved by the troops, especially those under his immediate command, that he gained from them the honourable title of “the soldier’s friend.” “With Hill,” they used to say, “both victory and life may be ours.” On the other hand, the strategic skill and military capacity he displayed in the Peninsula secured for him the not less honourable title of “the right arm of the duke of Wellington.” From the first day he entered the army he displayed the germs of those qualities that afterwards secured for him fame, rank, and power—boldness that amounted to daring and was yet always under the control of calm judgment, skill equal to independent commands of the most difficult kind, and a regard for the moral and physical welfare of the army such as had never before been shown by any commander-in-chief.

The Life of Lord Hill, G.C.B., by Rev. Edwin Sidney, A.Μ., appeared in 1845.

The history of the state relates to two distinct periods—the traditional period described in the Rαjmαld, or “Chronicles of the Kings of Tipperah," and the period since 1407 a.d. The Ràjmdlà is a history in Bengali verse, compiled by the Brahmans of the court of Tripura. In the early history of the state, the râjâs were in a state of chronic feud with all the neighbouring countries. The worship of the All-destroyer was here, as elsewhere in India, associated with the practice of human sacrifice, and in no part of India were more victims offered up. It was not until thebeginning of the 17th century that the Mughals obtained any footing in this country. By dint of constant invasions and continual intrigues, the Mahometans gradually established themselves, and Tipperah soon became a mere Mughal province under a Mussulman governor. The raja still remained in possession of the hilly tracts, but subject to the nawâb of Murshi<labad. When the East India Company obtained the diwdni of Bengal in 1765, so much of Tipperah as had been placed on the rent-roll came under British rule. Since 1808, each successive ruler has received investiture from the British Government, and has been required to pay the usual nαzαr or tribute on accession. The state has a chronological era of its own, adopted by Râjâ Bir-râj, from whom the present raja is 92d in descent. The year 1875 corresponded with 1285 of the Tipperah era.

Both as regards its constitution and its relations to the British Government, the state of Hill Tipperah differs alike from the independent native states of India and from those which are tributary and dependent. Besides being the ruler of Hill Tipperah, the raja holds an estate in the British district of Tipperah, called chaklâ Roshnâbâd, which is by far the most valuable of his possessions. The form of government is despotic and patriarchal. The raja’s word is law, without appeal. In 1871 an English officer was appointed as political agent to protect British interests and advise with the raja. The most important hill tribe is that of the Tipperahs, who were estimated in 1874-75 to number 34,727. There are no towns in Hill Tipperah. Agartala, the capital of the state and residence of the râjâ, is merely a moderate-sized village situated on the north bank of the Haurâ.

The principal crop and main food staple is rice. The other articles of produce are cotton, chillies, and vegetables. The chief exports are cotton, timber, til, bamboo canes, thatching-grass, and firewood. Occasionally small imports are required from the neighbouring districts. The total revenue in 1874-75 was £18,693. Besides this, the râjâ’s estates in Tipperah and Sylhet yield about £50,000 and £1400 respectively. His total annual income, therefore, is about £70,000. The police force (1874-75) consisted of 102 men, and the râjâ maintains a force of 277 officers and men. The state has only 2 schools, and only 103 boys are being educated. The climate of Hill Tipperah is generally pleasant; the annual rainfall is 60 inches. The chief endemic diseases are bowel complaints, remittent and intermittent fevers, and rheumatism; the principal epidemic is cholera.

There is evidently a good deal of what is incredible in the above Talmudic account; for example, it is now recognized on all hands that the Talmudic statement as to Hillel’s presidency over the sanhedrin is absolutely irreconcilable with what we learn from the New Testament writers and from Josephus, and must be regarded as wholly unhistorical. But after every reasonable deduction has been duly made, we still have ample traces of a strong personality, characterized by unusual sweetness and light, bent on supporting the claims of a right-minded and ethical religion against those of mere sacerdotal traditionalism. His “middoth,” so far as they go (but they do not go far), are based on sound principles of logic and hermeneutic; the so-called “prosbol,” by which he evaded the restrictions laid upon commerce through the law relating to the sabbatic year, showed that he possessed at least some power of adapting old institutions to the changing circumstances and wants of a progressive society; and if most of the questions which are alleged to have divided his school from that of Shammai cannot but strike the modern reader as having been infinitely small, the “golden rule” and some other sayings attributed to him show that he was not incapable of large and true views on the deepest problems of human life.

A remote descendant of the same name, who flourished about 350 A. D., is said to have sought to quiet his co-religionists, restive under foreign domination, with the novel doctrine that all the “Messianic” prophecies of the Old Testament had related to Hezekiah, and had been fulfilled in him.

Our only source of information with regard to Hillel “the old” is the Talmud, unless indeed the Pollion referred to once and again by Josephus be also Hillei under a Greek name. For the grounds on which this probable identification rests, and for a masterly sketch of Hillel and his place in the history of Israel, the great work of Ewald may be consulted (Gesch. d. V. Israel, vol. v.). See also Delitzsch, Jesus u. Hillel (3d ed^ 1879); Derenbourg, Histoire de la Palestine, pp. 176-92; and Schürer, Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte, sec. 25. All the recent works dealing with the life of Christ also touch upon this subject, especially with reference to the question regarding the “originality” of the two teachers. Renan, Keim, and Farrar (vol. ii. appendix) may be specially named.