State of England after the War--Prussia and Neufchâtel--Sir Robert
Peel's Account of the Russian Coronation--An Historical Puzzle--The
Death of Princess Lieven--Mr. Spurgeon's Preaching--Mr. Gladstone
in Opposition--Tit for Tat--Difficult Relations with France--Lord
John in Opposition--The Liddell _v._ Westerton Case--Death of
Lord Ellesmere--Violent Opposition to the Government on the
China Question--Languid Defence of the Government--Impending
Dissolution--Popularity of Lord Palmerston--Despotism of
Ministers--Parliament dissolved--Judgement on Liddell _v._
Westerton--Lord Palmerston's Address--The Elections--Defeat of the
Manchester Leaders--Fear of Radical Tendencies--The Country approves
the Chinese Policy--Death of Lady Keith.
_January 9th, 1857._--The old year ended and the new year began
strangely. After three years of expensive war the balance-sheet
exhibited such a state of wealth and prosperity as may well make us
'the envy of surrounding nations;' but while we have recovered the
great blessing of peace, we have to look back upon a year stained
beyond all precedent with frightful crimes of every sort and kind:
horrible murders, enormous frauds, and scandalous robberies and
defalcations. The whole attention of the country is now drawn to the
social questions which press upon us with appalling urgency, and
the next session of Parliament, which is rapidly advancing, must be
principally engaged in the endeavour to find remedies for the evils
and dangers incident to our corrupted population, and our erroneous
and inadequate penal system, the evils and dangers of which threaten
to become greater and more difficult to remedy every day. From this
question it is impossible to dissever that of education, for at least
we ought to make the experiment whether the diffusion of education will
or will not be conducive to the diminution of crime, and we shall see
whether the sectarian prejudices, the strength and obstinacy of which
have hitherto erected impassable barriers to the progress of educating
the people, will retain all their obstinacy in the face of the existing
evil, or whether the bodily fear and the universal persuasion of the
magnitude and imminence of the danger will not operate upon bigotry
itself and render the masses more reasonable. Besides these important
questions the new year opens with a most unpleasant prospect abroad,
where everything seems to go wrong and our foreign relations, be the
cause what, or the fault whose it may, to be in a very unhappy state.
[Sidenote: PRUSSIA AND NEUFCHATEL.]
The quarrel between Prussia and Switzerland[1] is one in which we
appear to have no immediate interest, except that it is always our
interest to prevent any infraction of the general peace, but of course
we could not think of not interfering in some way or other in the
matter. The King of Prussia has behaved as ill and as foolishly as
possible, and our Government entirely disapprove of his conduct and
have given the Swiss to understand that all our sympathies are with
them, and that we think they have right on their side. If France
and England were now on really good terms, and would act together
with cordiality and authority, nothing would be so easy as to put a
prompt extinguisher on the Swiss affair; but as we cannot agree upon
a common course of action, there is danger of the dispute drifting
into a war, though it is evidently so much the interest and the desire
of the Emperor Napoleon to allow no shots to be fired, that I still
expect, even at this almost the eleventh hour, to be in a complete
fix. The Swiss will not release the prisoners unless the King will at
the same time abandon his claims on Neufchâtel, or unless England and
France will guarantee that he will do so. The King will do nothing and
agree to nothing unless the Swiss will previously and unconditionally
release the prisoners, and moreover he repudiates our intervention,
as he thinks us unfairly disposed to himself. The simplest course
would be for England and France to declare that a Prussian invasion of
Switzerland should be a _casus belli_, and I think we should have no
objection to this, but France won't go along with us. Then if the Swiss
should deliver over the prisoners to France, and she would accept the
_depôt_, all might be settled. As it is, we have backed up Switzerland
to resist, and if war ensues we shall leave her to her fate--a very
inglorious course to pursue; and although I have a horror of war, and
am alive to the policy of keeping well with France, I am inclined to
think that having encouraged the Swiss to a certain point it would
better become us to take our own independent line and to threaten
Prussia with war if she does not leave Switzerland alone, than to sit
tamely by and see her, unimpeded, execute her threats. The Government
are evidently much embarrassed by this question, which is still further
complicated by the matrimonial engagement between the two Royal
families.
Footnote 1: [The Prussian Crown retained, by the Treaty of Vienna,
rights of sovereignty over the Swiss Canton of Neufchâtel, and
appointed a Governor there. In other respects the Neufchâtelese enjoyed
all the rights and liberties of Swiss citizens. This anomalous state
of things naturally gave rise to friction. The King of Prussia derived
no sort of advantage from his nominal sovereignty; but as a matter of
dignity he declined to renounce it, and even threatened a military
occupation of the Canton, which the Swiss Confederation would have
resisted.]
_January 13th._--The Swiss affair seems settled, so far at least that
there will be no war. The prisoners will be released, but I dare
say the King of Prussia will _chicaner_ about the abdication of his
rights over Neufchâtel. All the world is occupied with Sir Robert
Peel's speech, or lecture as he terms it, at Birmingham, where he
gave an account, meant to be witty, of his _séjour_ in Russia and its
incidents. It was received with shouts of applause by a congenial
Brummagem audience, and by deep disapprobation in every decent society
and by all reasonable people.
_January 14th._--I met Clarendon last night, who told me the Swiss
question was still in doubt, for the King was shuffling and would
probably play them a trick, and though he knew the prisoners were going
to be liberated, he would not engage positively to give up his claim.
The Emperor Napoleon has behaved very ill and ungratefully to the
Swiss, who in consequence were more irritated against him than against
the King of Prussia himself. Nothing could equal the fawning flattery
and servility of the King to the Emperor, who was at the same time
tickled by it and disgusted.
[Sidenote: LORD ABERDEEN AND LORD JOHN RUSSELL.]
_January 20th._--At Woburn for two days. I found the Duke entirely
occupied with a question (on which he had of course a various
correspondence), whether when Aberdeen's Government was formed,
Aberdeen had _at the time_ imparted to John Russell his wish and
intention to retire as soon as possible, so that John might take his
place as Premier. To ascertain this fact, he had applied to Lord John
and Aberdeen, to Lansdowne and to Clarendon, all of whom he invited
to send him their recollections and impressions, which they did. The
matter now is not of much importance, but is worth noticing from
the evidence it affords of the difficulty of arriving at truth, and
therefore of the fallibility of all history. Though this circumstance
is so recent, and at the time was so important, not one of the parties,
neither Lord John nor Aberdeen nor the other two, can recollect what
did pass, but as they all concur in their impressions that no such
engagement was given when the Government was formed, it may safely be
concluded that this is the truth. I know I heard all that passed, and
certainly I never heard of any such intention, though I did hear some
time afterwards that such had been Aberdeen's expressed wish and Lord
John's expectation. I read Aberdeen's letters, in which he entered
into other matters connected with his Government, and I must say more
creditable, gentlemanlike, and amiable letters I never read.
_January 28th._--At Stoke from Saturday to Monday. On returning to
town, we heard that the Persian war was over, Palmerston's usual luck
bringing a settlement of the only question that could be embarrassing
on the eve of the meeting of Parliament. But the news only comes
telegraphically, so unless confirmed must be doubtful, and cannot be
named in the Speech.[1]
[Sidenote: DEATH OF PRINCESS LIEVEN.]
Two remarkable deaths have occurred, one of which touches me nearly,
that of Madame de Lieven; the other is that of the Duke of Rutland.
Madame de Lieven died, after a short illness, of a severe attack of
bronchitis, the Duke having lingered for many months. Very different
characters. Madame de Lieven came to this country at the end of 1812 or
beginning of 1813 on the war breaking out between Russia and France.
Pozzo di Borgo had preceded the Lievens to renew diplomatic relations
and make arrangements with us. She was at that time young, at least
in the prime of life, and though without any pretensions to beauty,
and indeed with some personal defects, she had so fine an air and
manner, and a countenance so pretty and so full of intelligence, as to
be on the whole a very striking and attractive person, quite enough
so to have lovers, several of whom she engaged in succession without
seriously attaching herself to any. Those who were most notoriously her
slaves at different times were the present Lord Willoughby, the Duke of
Sutherland (then Lord Gower), the Duke of Cannizzaro (then Count St.
Antonio), and the Duke of Palmella, who was particularly clever and
agreeable. Madame de Lieven was a _très grande dame_, with abilities
of a very fine order, great tact and _finesse_, and taking a boundless
pleasure in the society of the great world and in political affairs of
every sort. People here were not slow to acknowledge her merits and
social excellence, and she almost immediately took her place in the
cream of the cream of English society, forming close intimacies with
the most conspicuous women in it, and assiduously cultivating relations
with the most remarkable men of all parties. These personal _liaisons_
sometimes led her into political partisanship not always prudent and
rather inconsistent with her position, character, and functions here.
But I do not believe she was ever mixed up in any intrigues, nor even,
at a later period, that she was justly obnoxious to the charge of
caballing and mischief-making which has been so lavishly cast upon her.
She had an insatiable curiosity for political information, and a not
unnatural desire to make herself useful and agreeable to her own Court
by imparting to her Imperial masters and mistresses all the information
she acquired and the anecdotes she picked up. Accordingly while she
was in England, which was from 1812 to 1834, she devoted herself to
society, not without selection, but without exclusion, except that
she sought and habitually confined herself to the highest and best.
The Regent, afterwards George IV., delighted in her company, and she
was a frequent guest at the Pavilion, and on very intimate terms with
Lady Conyngham, for although Madame de Lieven was not very tolerant
of mediocrity, and social and colloquial superiority was necessary to
her existence, she always made great allowances for Royalty and those
immediately connected with it. She used to be a great deal at Oatlands,
and was one of the few intimate friends of the Duchess of York,
herself very intelligent, and who therefore had in the eyes of Madame
de Lieven the double charm of her position and her agreeableness. It
was her duty as well as her inclination to cultivate the members of
all the successive Cabinets which passed before her, and she became
the friend of Lord Castlereagh, of Canning, the Duke of Wellington,
Lord Grey, Lord Palmerston, John Russell, Aberdeen, and many others of
inferior note, and she was likewise one of the _habitués_ of Holland
House, which was always more or less neutral ground, even when Lord
Holland was himself a member of the government. When Talleyrand came
over here as Ambassador, there was for some time a sort of antagonism
between the two embassies, and particularly between the ladies of
each, but Madame de Dino (now Duchesse de Sagan) was so clever, and
old Talleyrand himself so remarkable and so agreeable, that Madame de
Lieven was irresistibly drawn towards them, and for the last year or
two of their being in England they became extremely intimate; but her
greatest friend in England was Lady Cowper, afterwards Lady Palmerston,
and through her she was also the friend of Palmerston, who was also
well affected towards Russia, till his jealous and suspicious mind was
inflamed by his absurd notion of her intention to attack us in India,
a crotchet which led us into the folly and disaster of the Afghan war.
In 1834 the Lievens were recalled, and she was established at St.
Petersburg in high favour about the Empress, but her _séjour_ there was
odious to her, and she was inconsolable at leaving England, where after
a residence of above twenty years she had become rooted in habits and
affections, although she never really and completely understood the
country. She remained at St. Petersburg for several months, until her
two youngest children were taken ill, and died almost at the same time.
This dreadful blow, and the danger of the severe climate to her own
health, gave her a valid excuse for desiring leave of absence, and she
left Russia never to return. She went to Italy, where M. de Lieven died
about the year 1836 or 1837, after which she established herself in
Paris, where her salon became the rendezvous of the best society, and
particularly the neutral ground on which eminent men and politicians
of all colours could meet, and where her tact and adroitness made them
congregate in a sort of social truce.
I do not know at what exact period it was that she made the
acquaintance of M. Guizot, but their intimacy no doubt was established
after he had begun to play a great political part, for his literary and
philosophical celebrity would not alone have had much charm for her.
They were, however, already great friends at the time of his embassy to
England, and she took that opportunity of coming here to pay a visit to
her old friends. The fall of Thiers' Government and Guizot's becoming
Minister for Foreign Affairs of course drew Madame de Lieven still
more closely to him, and during the whole of his administration their
alliance continued to be of the closest and most intimate character. It
was an immense object to her to possess the entire confidence of the
French Minister for Foreign Affairs, who kept her _au courant_ of all
that was going on in the political world, while it is not surprising
that he should be irresistibly attracted by a woman immensely superior
to any other of his acquaintance, who was fully able to comprehend and
willing to interest herself about all the grand and important subjects
which he had to handle and manage, and who associated herself with a
complete sympathy in all his political interests. Their _liaison_,
which some people consider mysterious, but which I believe to have been
entirely social and political, grew constantly more close, and every
moment that Guizot could snatch from the Foreign Office and the Chamber
he devoted to Madame de Lieven. He used to go there regularly three
times a day on his way to and his way from the Chamber, when it was
sitting, and in the evening; but while he was by far her first object,
she cultivated the society of all the most conspicuous and remarkable
people whom she could collect about her, and she was at one time very
intimate with Thiers, though his rivalry with Guizot and their intense
hatred of each other eventually produced a complete estrangement
between her and Thiers.
[Sidenote: CHARACTER OF PRINCESS LIEVEN.]
The revolution of 1848 dispersed her friends, broke up her salon,
and terrified her into making a rather ludicrous, but as it turned
out wholly unnecessary, escape. She came to England, where she
remained till affairs appeared to be settled in France and all danger
of disturbance at an end. She then returned to Paris, where she
remained, not without fear and trembling, during the period of peril
and vicissitude which at length ended, much to her satisfaction,
with the _coup d'état_ and the Empire. Guizot had returned to Paris,
but constantly refused to take any part in political affairs, either
under the Republic or with the new government of Louis Napoleon. This,
however, did not prevent Madame de Lieven (though their friendship
continued the same) from showing her sympathy and goodwill to the
Imperial _régime_, and her salon, which had been decimated by previous
events, was soon replenished by some of the ministers or adherents
of the Empire, who, though they did not amalgamate very well with
her old _habitués_, supplied her with interesting information, and
subsequently, when the war broke out, rendered her very essential
service. When the rupture took place all the Russian subjects were
ordered to quit Paris. She was advised by some of her friends to
disobey the order, for as she was equally precluded from going to
England, the circumstances in which this order placed her were
indescribably painful and even dangerous, but she said that however
great the sacrifice, and though she was entirely independent, she was
under so many obligations and felt so much attachment to the Imperial
family that, cost her what it might, she would obey the order, and
accordingly she repaired to Brussels, where for a year and a half or
two years she took up her melancholy and uncomfortable abode. At last
this banishment from her home and her friends, with all the privations
it entailed, became insupportable, and she endeavoured, through the
intervention of some of her Imperialist friends, to obtain leave of the
French Government to return to Paris, either with or without (for it
is not clear which) the consent of her own Court. The Emperor Napoleon
seems to have been easily moved to compassion, and signified his
consent to her return. No sooner did this become known to Cowley and
the English Government than they resolved to interpose for the purpose
of preventing her return to Paris, and Cowley went to Walewski and
insisted that the Emperor's permission should be revoked. The _entente
cordiale_ was then in full force, nothing could be refused to the
English Ambassador, and Madame de Lieven was informed that she must not
come back to Paris. She bore this sad disappointment with resignation,
made no complaints, and resolved to bide her time. Some months later
she caused a representation to be made to the French Government that
the state of her health made it impossible for her to pass another
winter at Brussels, and that she was going to Nice, but as it was of
vital importance to her to consult her medical adviser at Paris, she
craved permission to proceed to Nice _viâ_ Paris, where she would only
stay long enough for that purpose. The permission was granted. She
wrote me word that she was going to Paris to remain there a few days. I
replied that I was much mistaken in her if once there she ever quitted
it again. She arrived and was told by her doctor that it would be
dangerous in her state to continue her journey. She never did proceed
further, and never did quit Paris again. The Government winked at her
stay, and never molested or interfered with her. She resumed her social
habits, but with great caution and reserve, and did all she could to
avoid giving umbrage or exciting suspicion. It was a proof of the
greatness of her mind, as well as of her prudence and good temper, that
she not only testified no resentment at the conduct of Cowley towards
her, but did all she could to renew amicable relations with him, and
few things annoyed her more than his perseverance in keeping aloof
from her. From the time of her last departure from England up to the
death of Frederic Lamb (Lord Beauvale and Melbourne) she maintained a
constant correspondence with him. After his death she proposed to me to
succeed him as her correspondent, and for the last two or three years
our epistolary commerce was intimate and unbroken. She knew a vast deal
of the world and its history during the half century she had lived
and played a part in it, but she was not a woman of much reading, and
probably at no time had been very highly or extremely educated, but her
excessive cleverness and her _finesse d'esprit_ supplied the want of
education, and there was one book with which her mind was perpetually
nourished by reading it over and over again. This was the 'Letters
of Madame de Sévigné,' and to the constant study of those unrivalled
letters she was no doubt considerably indebted for her own epistolary
eminence, and for her admirable style of writing, not, however, that
her style and Madame de Sévigné's were at all alike. She had not (in
her letters at least) the variety, the abundance, or the _abandon_ of
the great Frenchwoman, but she was more terse and epigrammatic, and she
had the same graphic power and faculty of conveying much matter in few
words.
[Sidenote: PRINCESS LIEVEN.]
Nothing could exceed the charm of her conversation or her grace, ease,
and tact in society. She had a nice and accurate judgement, and an
exquisite taste in the choice of her associates and friends; but though
taking an ardent pleasure in agreeableness, and peculiarly susceptible
of being bored, she was not fastidious, full of politeness and good
breeding, and possessed the faculty of turning every one to account,
and eliciting something either of entertainment or information from
the least important of her acquaintance. It has been the fashion here,
and the habit of the vulgar and ignorant press, to stigmatise Madame
de Lieven as a mischievous intriguer, who was constantly occupied in
schemes and designs hostile to the interests of our country. I firmly
believe such charges to be utterly unfounded. She had resided for
above twenty years, the happiest of her life, in England, and had
imbibed a deep attachment to the country, where she had formed many
more intimacies and friendships than she possessed anywhere else, and
to the last day of her life she continued to cherish the remembrance
of her past connexion, to cultivate the society of English people,
and to evince without disguise her predilection for their country.
She had never lived much in Russia, her connexion with it had been
completely dissolved, and all she retained of it was a respectful
attachment to the Imperial family, together with certain sympathies
and feelings of loyalty for her native country and her Sovereign
which it would have been unnatural and discreditable to disavow. Her
well-known correspondence with the Imperial Court was only caused by
the natural anxiety of those great persons to be kept _au courant_ of
social and political affairs by such an accomplished correspondent,
but I do not believe she was ever employed by them in any business or
any political design; on the contrary, she was rather distrusted and
out of favour with them, on account of her being so denaturalised and
for her ardent affection for England and the English. Russia was the
country of her birth, France the country of her adopted abode, but
England was the country of her predilection. With this cosmopolite
character she dreaded everything which might produce hostile collision
between any two of these countries. She was greatly annoyed when the
question of the Spanish marriages embittered the relations between
France and England, but infinitely more so at the Turkish quarrel, and
the war which it produced. Those who fulminated against her intrigues
were, as I believe, provoked at the efforts she made, so far as she
had any power or influence, to bring about the restoration of peace,
an unpardonable offence in the eyes of all who were bent on the
continuation of the war. She lived to see peace restored, and closed
her eyes almost at the moment that the last seal was put to it by the
Conference of Paris. Her last illness was sudden and short. Her health
had always been delicate, and she was very nervous about herself; an
attack of bronchitis brought on fever, which rapidly consumed her
strength, and brought her, fully conscious, within sight of death;
that consummation, which at a distance she had always dreaded, she saw
arrive with perfect calmness and resignation, and all the virtues and
qualities for which the smallest credit was given her seem to have
shone forth with unexpected lustre on her deathbed. Her faculties were
bright and unclouded to the last, her courage and presence of mind were
unshaken, she evinced a tender consideration for the feelings of those
who were lamenting around her bed, and she complied with the religious
obligations prescribed by the Church of which she was a member with
a devotion the sincerity of which we have no right to question. She
made her son Paul and Guizot leave her room a few hours before she
died, that they might be spared the agony of witnessing her actual
dissolution, and only three or four hours before the supreme moment,
she mustered strength to write a note in pencil to Guizot with these
words: _'Merci pour vingt années d'amitié et de bonheur. Ne m'oubliez
pas, adieu, adieu!'_ It was given to him after her death.
Footnote 1: [Differences had arisen in the spring of 1856 between
Great Britain and the Court of Persia, in consequence of which the
British Minister was withdrawn from Teheran. In October 1856 Herat was
attacked and taken by the Persians, which led to war. A detachment of
British troops under General Outram landed at Bushire on January 27,
1857, and the Persians were defeated at Kooshab on February 8. Peace
was signed in Paris between Her Majesty and the Shah on March 4, the
Persians engaging to abstain from all interference in the internal
affairs of Afghanistan, and to respect the independence of Herat. If
these dates are correct, as given in Irving's _Annals of our Time_, the
intelligence of the peace cannot have reached London so soon as Mr.
Greville supposed, and rumour anticipated the event.]
[Sidenote: A SERMON BY MR. SPURGEON.]
_February 8th._--I am just come from hearing the celebrated Mr.
Spurgeon preach in the Music Hall of the Surrey Gardens. It was quite
full; he told us from the pulpit that 9,000 people were present. The
service was like the Presbyterian: Psalms, prayers, expounding a Psalm,
and a sermon. He is certainly very remarkable, and undeniably a very
fine character; not remarkable in person, in face rather resembling
a smaller Macaulay, a very clear and powerful voice, which was heard
through the whole hall; a manner natural, impassioned, and without
affectation or extravagance; wonderful fluency and command of language,
abounding in illustration, and very often of a very familiar kind,
but without anything either ridiculous or irreverent. He gave me an
impression of his earnestness and his sincerity; speaking without book
or notes, yet his discourse was evidently very carefully prepared.
The text was 'Cleanse me from my secret sins,' and he divided it into
heads, the misery, the folly, the danger (and a fourth which I have
forgotten) of secret sins, on all of which he was very eloquent and
impressive. He preached for about three-quarters of an hour, and, to
judge of the handkerchiefs and the audible sobs, with great effect.
We have had a week of Parliament, and though nothing important has
occurred, the discussions do not seem to have raised the reputation
of the Government or to promise them an easy session, though nobody
seems to expect that their stability is likely to be shaken. Disraeli
and Gladstone seem verging towards each other in opposition, but there
is no appearance of a coalition between them; the only striking fact
is that the Opposition, of whose disunion we have heard so much, and
of the internal repulsion supposed to prevail among them, seems to
be as united as ever it has been, and the usual people appeared at
Derby's and Disraeli's gatherings. I take it that any appearance of
vulnerability of the Government silences all manifestations of their
mutual antipathies, and puts them on the _qui vive_ to turn out their
opponents.
Gladstone seems bent on leading Sir George Lewis a weary life, but
Lewis is just the man to encounter and baffle such an opponent,
for he is cold-blooded as a fish, totally devoid of sensibility or
nervousness, of an imperturbable temper, calm and resolute, laborious
and indefatigable, and exceedingly popular in the House of Commons from
his general good humour and civility, and the credit given him for
honour, sincerity, plain dealing, and good intentions.
_February 11th._--The Duke of Bedford told me yesterday that Clarendon
had complained to him bitterly of John Russell's speech the first night
of the session, of the hostility it manifested, and particularly of
what he said about Naples. On looking at the report of the speech, the
Neapolitan part was certainly strong, but it was not stronger than was
warranted by the circumstances of the case, and there seems no reason
why Lord John should abstain from speaking out his opinions fairly on
any important point of foreign policy. His speech, on the whole, was
not regarded as hostile or acrimonious. Disraeli has got into a scrape
by blurting out an accusation which he has entirely failed in making
good, and he has afforded Palmerston an occasion for a triumph over him
not a little damaging. I am told the effect in the House was very bad
for Disraeli. Palmerston is said to be beginning to show some symptoms
of physical weakness, which if it be so, is very serious at the
beginning of a long and arduous session. He is rising seventy-three,
and at that age, and loaded with the weight of public affairs, it is
not wonderful if the beginning of the end should be discernible.
[Sidenote: TREATY BETWEEN FRANCE AND AUSTRIA.]
_February 14th._--The defeat which Disraeli sustained the other night
was turned the night before last into something like a triumph, and
Palmerston found himself in a disagreeable position. Disraeli had
asserted that a Treaty had been concluded between France and Austria
for certain ends and at a certain time. Palmerston flatly contradicted
him, and with great insolence of manner, especially insisting that it
was nothing but a Convention, and that conditional, which _never had
been signed_. Two nights after Palmerston came down to the House, and
in a very jaunty way said he must correct his former statement, and
inform the House he had just discovered that the Convention _had been
signed_. Great triumph naturally on the part of Disraeli, who poured
forth a rather violent invective. Then Palmerston lost his temper and
retorted that Disraeli was trying to cover an ignominious retreat by
vapouring. This language, under the circumstances of the case, was very
imprudent and very improper, and (unlike what he had ever experienced
before) he sat down without a single cheer, his own people even not
venturing to challenge the approbation of the House in a matter in
which, though Disraeli was not right, Palmerston was so clearly wrong.
What business had he to make such a mistake? for he ought to have
been perfectly and accurately informed of every detail connected with
foreign affairs. He certainly is not _qualis erat_, and I am disposed
to believe that he is about to begin breaking, and that he will not be
able to go through a long and arduous session with the same vigour and
success which he has hitherto manifested. Every sign and symptom of
weakness and failing strength which he may show will raise the hopes
and stimulate the exertions of the Opposition, and we may expect to see
not a coalition, but such a concurrence between Gladstone, Disraeli,
and Lord Stanley as will prevent the possibility of an alternative
Government. Gladstone and Disraeli are already on friendly terms, and
Gladstone and Stanley seem to be still more intimate. The present
Government only exists by Palmerston's personal popularity, and it
would not require much to pull that down.
_February 17th._--I called on Lyndhurst on Sunday. He was in high
force, with the Blue Book before him, getting up the China case, on
which he means to have a day in the House of Lords. He told me that
Gladstone says the Budget is the worst that was ever produced, and he
stakes his credit on proving that it is full of errors from beginning
to end, that, instead of a present surplus of nearly a million, there
is a present deficit of four millions, and that there will be one of
nine millions in 1860. I don't believe he will make his words good.
[Sidenote: DIFFICULT RELATIONS WITH FRANCE.]
I saw Clarendon yesterday morning, and found him low, worn, and out
of sorts; said he wished to Heaven he could be delivered from office;
everything went wrong, the labour, anxiety, and responsibility were
overwhelming, and the difficult state of our relations with France more
than could be endured. He could not depend on the French Government,
and never knew from one day to another what the consequences of their
conduct might be. He believed the Emperor sincerely desired to keep
well with us, but his Government were constantly doing things which
rendered our acting together and cordially almost impossible; that his
excessive levity and carelessness perpetually made him the dupe of
other people, and led him into saying things and committing himself,
and then he did not know how to get out of the engagements to which he
stood committed. Clarendon added that it was impossible such a state
of things should not produce first coolness and then quarrels, and
then God knows what consequences, and he was obliged to pick his way
through the embarrassments that spring up around him with the utmost
care and circumspection. Palmerston, who never saw difficulties, took
it with his usual easy way, and said we were not tied to France like
Siamese Twins, and why should we care so much what she did, and why
might she not take her way, and we ours; but Clarendon feels that it
is impossible for him, on whom the responsibility is more immediately
thrown, to take a matter fraught with such consequences in so easy
a style; that if any serious dispute arose, France and Russia would
probably become allied against us, and that America would join them.
Russia pays the most unceasing and the most abject court to Louis
Napoleon, and not without success. He (Clarendon) said nothing could
be worse than the conduct of the French Government about the affair
of the Principalities, which was of vital importance to Austria, who
threatened (though she would not keep her resolution) to make it a
_casus belli_ if it is insisted on. He said Austria had behaved very
well about the amnesty in Italy, and was going to do the same thing in
Hungary. We were interrupted as usual in our conversation, and I had
not time to ask him about many things I wanted to hear of. I told him I
thought the China case was a very bad one.
John Russell seems to me to be drifting into hostility to the
Government more and more. He made a strong, but very just, speech on
Naples the first night, which irritated Clarendon very much. A few
nights ago he said something in the House about China, and backed up
the Government against Roebuck, at which Clarendon expressed great
satisfaction, and evinced a disposition to seize that pretext to put
himself on good terms with Lord John, but Lord John showed no readiness
to meet the overture, and when the Duke of Bedford wrote to him what
Clarendon had said, he replied that Clarendon owed him nothing, for
he had said what he thought right and not what he thought would be
agreeable to him, and that it was very probable he should say something
he would not at all like before long.
Yesterday morning the Judicial Committee finished the case of Liddell
and Westerton, after eight days of elaborate argument, and a powerful
case was made in appeal against Lushington's judgement, which I expect
to see reversed, and I hope it will, for I detest the proceedings of
the people who back up Mr. Westerton, who would drag down the Church to
a puritanical level, and strip it of its splendour.
[Sidenote: DEATH OF LORD ELLESMERE.]
_February 19th._--Yesterday morning, at half-past twelve o'clock, my
brother-in-law Lord Ellesmere, expired at Bridgewater House, after
an illness of three months. He was surrounded by all his family, and
died most peacefully, and without any suffering, and in possession of
his mental powers till within a few hours of his death. Few men have
quitted this world more beloved, respected, and lamented than this
excellent person. He had just completed the fifty-seventh year of his
age, so might naturally have been expected to live many years, and
till he was taken ill, little more than three months ago, he appeared
to be in his usual state of health and likely to have a long and
enjoyable existence before him. It is no exaggeration to say that he
was most estimable in every relation of life, and as such he enjoyed
universal respect and regard. He never at any time played a conspicuous
part in politics, for which he had neither ambition nor the necessary
qualifications, but in such part as he was occasionally called upon
to take, he acted with propriety and general approbation. But he had
no taste for the turmoil of political life, and his temper was too
serene and his love of repose too great to allow him to plunge deeply
in political warfare. His abilities were not of a very high order, but
he had a good understanding, a cultivated mind, and an inquisitive
disposition, and though not profound in any branch of literature or
science, he loved to wander over the vast fields of knowledge, so that
he was stored with much superficial information on a great variety of
subjects. His taste was good both in literature and art; he was an
elegant poet, and a fair writer of his own tongue; he was naturally
kind-hearted and charitable, more particularly to meritorious artists
who stood in need of assistance, by whom his loss will be severely
felt. All his tastes and pursuits were of the most refined character,
and he delighted in the society of all who were remarkable for ability
in any walk of life, and from whom he could derive information of any
description. In political opinions he was the very type and model of
a Liberal Conservative, and the statesman to whom he gave all his
allegiance, together with a boundless admiration, was the Duke of
Wellington. But he was always much more of a patriot than a political
partisan, and he was oftener to be found giving an independent support
to different Governments than fighting in the ranks of Opposition.
He will, I have no doubt, be regarded as a loss to the country, even
a greater loss than if he had been more actively and conspicuously
engaged in politics, for he stood nearly alone in the station he
occupied, with vast wealth, unblemished character, esteemed by people
of all parties, without an enemy in the world, and having no personal
objects to pursue; and though never thrusting himself forward, alike
fitted for either active or contemplative life, he was at all times
ready to exert his best energies in the public service or to promote
the benefit and happiness of his fellow creatures. He was sincerely
religious, without intolerance and austerity, or the slightest particle
of ostentatious or spiritual pride. It was not, however, in the annals
of political history or in the modest and unambitious incidents of his
public career that his best panegyric is to be found, but in the more
placid walk of private life, in the strict and conscientious discharge
of his domestic and social duties, which was at the same time congenial
to his sense of moral obligation, and to the benevolent impulses of his
heart.
[Sidenote: CHARACTER OF LORD ELLESMERE.]
Lord Francis Leveson Gower, upon the death of his father the late
Duke of Sutherland, succeeded to the immense fortune entailed upon
him by his great-uncle, the Duke of Bridgewater, in the shape of the
Bridgewater Canal, and found himself the possessor of vast wealth,
and surrounded by a population sunk in ignorance and vice. From the
first moment of his succession he considered himself in the light
of a trustee for working out the moral and spiritual improvement of
the people who were in a great measure committed to his charge. He
accepted the obligation in a spirit of cheerfulness and resolution,
and the due discharge of it continued to be the principal object of
his interest and care for the remainder of his life. He employed his
wealth liberally in promoting the material comfort and raising the
moral condition of those by whose labour that wealth was produced.
Churches, schools, and reading-rooms rose around Worsley Hall. His
benevolent efforts were crowned with success, and he reaped his reward
in the blessings of the surrounding multitudes and in the contemplation
of their enjoyment of all the good which his active bounty had bestowed
upon them. Such qualities as were here displayed, and a life thus
devoted to works of duty and beneficence, made Lord Ellesmere an object
of general veneration and attachment; but those alone who belonged
to his family, or who had familiar access to the sanctuary of his
domestic life, could appreciate fully the excellence and the charm of
his character, and comprehend the immensity of the loss which those
who were nearest and dearest to him have sustained by his death. He
regarded with indifference the ordinary objects of worldly ambition;
he lived in and for his family, and he was their joy, their delight,
and their pride, fulfilling in the most exemplary manner all the duties
of his station, political, social, literary, and artistic; unsurpassed
as a husband, father, brother, or friend. He cultivated unremittingly
the society of the best and wisest of his fellow-creatures, and it
may be as truly said of him as it was of certain sages of antiquity,
that 'his excellent understanding was adorned by study, ... and his
days were spent in the pursuit of truth and the practice of virtue.'
The length of these precious days was not permitted by the Divine Will
to be extended to the ordinary duration of human life. In the three
last months, while death was gradually but surely, and with his full
consciousness, advancing, his courage was never shaken and the serenity
of his temper was never disturbed; he always seemed to have more
consideration for others than himself, and he met his approaching end
with the firmness of a philosopher and the resignation of a Christian.
To witness such an end free from bodily pain, with the mental faculties
remaining unclouded till the last, full of peace and charity and
love, was the best consolation that was possible to the family which
surrounded his deathbed; to them he has left a memory which will be
long reverenced by all who honour virtue and patriotism, and which they
will cherish with never-ending sentiments of duty and affection. He has
left them an example how to live and how to die, and the world in which
he had no enemy will ungrudgingly acknowledge
That to the realms of bliss was ne'er conveyed
A purer spirit or more welcome shade.
_February 27th._--The political war is raging furiously, and personal
animosities are becoming bitterer than ever. Confusion, disorder, and
doubt rage in both the great camps. Derby made a grand onslaught in
the beginning of last week on the China question, and there was (an
unusual thing in the Lords) an adjourned debate. Granville was very
apprehensive of being beaten, but Bessborough, his able whipper-in,
made such exertions that they ended by getting a very good majority.
All the speaking was on the side of the Opposition, but it is quite
curious how afraid people are of seriously shaking the Government. The
day the debate in the Lords ended, that in the Commons began on the
same question, _duce_ Cobden.[1] The great event of the first night
was John Russell's speech and powerful attack on the Government. It
was one of his very best efforts and extremely successful with the
House, but it was exceedingly bitter and displayed without stint or
reason his hostile _animus_. It did all the mischief he wished to
do, and everybody admits that if a division had then taken place
Government would have been beaten by a great majority; but they have
since adjourned twice, and the debate stands over till Monday, and the
aspect of affairs appears to be very much altered. Whether it be that
the effect of Lord John's speech has evaporated, that a rally has taken
place among the Liberals, or that the aversion of the stiff Tories
to the union between Gladstone and their leaders, the approaching
consummation of which seems not to be denied, the general opinion
has veered round, and now it is expected that Government will have
a majority. Here again, as in the Lords, the speaking was all with
the Opposition. Palmerston's speech is looked for with interest and
curiosity. The remarkable incidents connected with these transactions
have been the parliamentary conduct of Gladstone and John Russell and
their respective positions. Gladstone seems to have been so inflamed
by spite and ill humour that all prudence and discretion forsook him;
he appears ready to say and do anything and to act with everybody if
he can only contribute to upset the Government, though it is not easy
to discover the cause of his bitterness, or what scheme of future
conduct he has devised for himself. Lord John came over in a state of
ill-humour which at first he appears to have kept under to a certain
degree, and to have wished to have the appearance of acting with
perfect independence, but still fairly and impartially speaking out
what he thought the truth without caring whom he offended or whom he
pleased by so doing. Thus he shocked Clarendon by what he said on the
affair of Naples, and then pleased him very much by his next speech on
foreign affairs. Then on the Budget he came to the aid of Lewis with
great effect and bowled over Gladstone and Disraeli, yet even then
evincing a certain spirit of hostility about the tea duties; but on the
China question he gave way to all the bitter feeling that is in him,
and cast all moderation to the winds. It is impossible to conjecture
what he promises to himself, and what purpose he has in view by this
conduct, for it is quite extraordinary to what absolute nothingness
his political power has fallen. Here is a man who has been leader with
occasional intervals of Whig Governments and of the Whig party since
1834, and with great and admitted abilities, and yet he is so entirely
without following in the House of Commons that three insignificant
votes are the most he can command. His speech the other night was very
well received because it was a very good one, and because he spoke the
opinions of the greater number of his hearers.
[Sidenote: DISPUTE WITH CHINA.]
There is, in fact, a strong feeling, both in Parliament and the
country, against all that has been done at Canton, and this is the more
remarkable because the press has, upon the whole, taken the opposite
side. I never could understand why Palmerston and Clarendon were in
such a hurry to identify themselves with Bowring's proceedings, and
to send out without delay a full approbation of all he had done, till
Granville told me that both of them had been under the extraordinary
delusion that the Canton affair had been very well done and would be
received with great applause and satisfaction here; in point of fact,
that it was a great _hit_, from which the Government would derive
considerable advantage, he (Granville) himself showing his good sense
by taking exactly the opposite view. He tells me that George Lewis
does so likewise, and I dare say, if the truth were known, that the
majority of the Cabinet coincide with them. It is remarkable that the
defence of the Government in the Lords should have fallen on a man
who was speaking all the time against his own opinion, and I should
think Labouchere, who took up the defence in the House of Commons, was
the most unlikely man in the world to approve of such proceedings.
Political necessities which compel men to act thus insincerely, and
to strive to make the worse appear the better cause, with the full
consciousness that they are fighting against truth, appear to me
frightfully demoralising, a sad sealing of the political conscience,
the spectacle of which is enough to scare honourable minds from
entering into an arena where the contest is to be carried on in such a
manner.
If the Government should be beaten on the pending question, they
will dissolve, at least if the state of their financial affairs will
allow them; but at all events they will not resign without an appeal
to the country, and this appeal they will make not on this or that
question, but on the great one of all, whether the country desires
that Palmerston should continue to be its minister, and on this it
is impossible to doubt what will be the reply. His popularity is a
fact beyond all doubt or cavil, and it is the more decisive, because
not only is there no rival popularity, but every one of the other
public men who have been, are, or might be his rivals are absolutely
unpopular. Nobody cares any longer for John Russell; everybody detests
Gladstone; Disraeli has no influence in the country, and a very
doubtful position with his own party. He and Derby have made up their
minds to coalesce with Gladstone on the first good opportunity, but
it seems not unlikely that they will make such a split among their
own followers by so doing as to lose more than they will gain by the
junction. Palmerston's popularity does not extend to his colleagues,
for not one of whom does anybody care a straw. It is purely personal,
and I do not think he would strengthen himself by any other alliance he
could form. This fact of his popularity just at the end of his strange
and chequered career is most remarkable and not a little unaccountable;
but innumerable circumstances prove this to be the undoubted truth,
and that it is manifested more decidedly out of the House than in it,
for in the House of Commons it does not amount to a certainty of his
having always a majority. It is curious that a session which not long
ago looked like being a very quiet one, in which there would be ample
leisure for consideration of legal and other practical reforms, should
in the first weeks be a scene of tremendous conflict, in which the very
existence of the Government is trembling in the balance.
Footnote 1: [A motion was made by Mr. Cobden condemning the violent
measures resorted to by the British authorities in the Canton river in
consequence of the seizure of the lorcha 'Arrow' by the Chinese when
she had hoisted the British flag. The debate was carried on with great
acrimony, and ended by the adoption of Mr. Cobden's motion by 263 to
247, a majority of 16 against the Government.]
_March 2nd._--Derby has announced to his assembled party that he is
ready to join with Gladstone, though he has not done so yet, and
that as they are a minority in the House of Commons, they ought to
form any junction that would make them strong enough to oust the
present Government and form a Conservative one. He finds it, however,
a difficult matter to reconcile them all to any alliance with the
detested Gladstone. Great exertions have been made to secure a majority
to the Government, and John Russell's friends (the Duke of Bedford
especially) are bestirring themselves to take away some of the odium
that attaches to Lord John by securing his two or three followers for
the division.
_March 3rd._--Nothing can equal the excitement and curiosity here about
the division. All sorts of efforts have been made all ways to influence
votes. George Byng and others who meant to vote with John Russell have
been obliged to promise to vote with the Government. Palmerston has
had a meeting and harangued them cheerily, but in spite of everything
Hayter does not think he will have a majority, but everybody expects it
to be so near that there are as many opinions as men. Much is expected
to depend on Palmerston's speech, and unluckily for him he is ill with
both gout and cold. If they are beaten they will dissolve as speedily
as possible.
[Sidenote: DEFEAT OF THE GOVERNMENT.]
_March 4th._--A majority of 16 against Government, more than any of
them expected. A magnificent speech of Gladstone; Palmerston's speech
is said to have been very dull in the first part, and very bow-wow in
the second; not very judicious, on the whole bad, and it certainly
failed to decide any doubtful votes in his favour. I rejoice that the
House of Commons has condemned this iniquitous case for the honour of
the country. I do not believe it will make any difference as to the
Government. When Palmerston appeals to the country it will not be on
the merits of the Canton case, but on his own political existence,
whether they will have him for minister or no. It is not, however, yet
by any means clear what the real opinion of the country is upon the
question itself, and whether they will be for the right or for the
expedient, or that which the Government thinks to be the expedient.
[Sidenote: DISSOLUTION OF PARLIAMENT.]
_Hatchford, March 10th._--The intention of Government to dissolve
Parliament was announced on Friday last, and as far as one can judge at
present, Palmerston seems likely to have it all his own way. The press
generally espouses his cause, and the 'Times' particularly takes up
the cudgels for him vehemently, and cries out 'Coalition,' and abuses
the majority and all who voted in it. At present, public opinion seems
to be running in his favour, and there is every appearance of his
having a triumphant election. But the cry of 'coalition and faction'
is perfectly absurd, and nothing more than the mere jargon which
all parties employ as their battle cry. There has been no coalition
whatever, and that those who clamour against it very well know. The
only coalition of which there has been any question has been one
between Gladstone (with or without the other Peelites) and Disraeli and
Derby, but that has hitherto been _in posse_ rather than _in esse_, and
it would have been much more plausible to raise the cry on the Budget
than on the Canton question. Nobody can read the list of the division
without seeing that the majority comprised the names of people who have
never dreamt of any coalition with anybody, and who voted entirely
with reference to the merits of the particular case, and though some
(including Disraeli and Gladstone) wished to damage the Government,
many others were either friendly to them generally, or at least
neutral. To say that the majority was made up of a factious coalition
of men who sought to turn the Government out and to take their places,
is a wilful and deliberate lie, but it suits the Government to raise
the cry, and they find plenty of people to re-echo and to believe it.
As to the question itself, I am sure that some of the Cabinet, and
probably more than I know of, were in their hearts and consciences
as much against the question as any of their opponents. Palmerston's
popularity, and the manner in which he is encouraged and supported by
the country, and the sympathy he finds are really most extraordinary.
It provokes me, because I think his great success unmerited, but I
have no wish to see him defeated at the election, because I see no
prospect of any better Government being formed. The pretension of the
Government and of their noisy supporters to find fault with the House
of Commons for expressing its independent opinion upon the conduct of
the officials in China is most preposterous and arrogant. Everybody
admits that the Government was not morally responsible for what was
done, but because they chose, without any necessity, to approve
those acts and to accept the political responsibility of them, it is
pretended that the House of Commons ought not to have taken the liberty
to express any adverse opinion on the matter, and that it was factious
to do so. The scrape, if it was one, the Government got themselves
into by their precipitate approval of Bowring, and there was nothing
in the resolution and the vote which ought to have been considered as
implying any general want of confidence on the part of the House of
Commons, more particularly when the Government had just before carried
their Budget by large majorities, and had not met with any difficulty
or rebuff on any point. If, indeed, matters are come to such a pass,
and such divinity hedges in the Palmerston Government that the House
of Commons is to be precluded from censuring any transaction, wherever
and by whomsoever done, which the Government thinks fit to sanction and
approve of, and if the fact of many men of very different opinions and
opposite parties concurring in such a vote is to expose the majority
by which the vote is carried to a charge of faction, coalition, and
all sorts of base motives, then indeed, instead of asking the Duke of
Wellington's celebrated question, 'How is the King's Government to be
carried on?' it will be time to ask whether the Queen's Government is
to be considered despotic and infallible, and the functions of the
House of Commons reduced to the very humble ones of registering their
acts and re-echoing their approbation.
It seems to be entirely forgotten that in times when the Royal and
ministerial authority were much stronger than they are supposed to be
now, and before the Reform Bill had effected a sort of revolution in
favour of the democratic principle, all governments, however powerful
or popular, sustained occasional defeats and were obliged to submit
to them, it being of course perfectly understood that defeats which
conveyed want of confidence and the withdrawal of the general support
of the House of Commons were to be deemed fatal and conclusive.
Every case of this kind must be determined according to the especial
circumstances of it, but it is a mere pretence to treat the Canton
question as one of this description, and the truth is that it is
a dodge on their part, and a pretext for going to the country and
obtaining a majority, as they think they have an opportunity of doing,
on false pretences and by means of a vast deal of humbug. The worst is,
that after the immediate purpose has been answered, there is certain
to be some dangerous reaction, and as the cry of 'Palmerston' will be
the only one got up for the occasion, and everybody will be acceptable
who will declare for him, whatever crotchets or cries he may join to
his partisanship, we shall probably have a House of Commons full of
all sorts of mischievous people stirring every variety of mischievous
question.
_March 14th._--I returned yesterday from Hatchford and find the current
still running strong, but some think a reaction in favour of John
Russell has already begun. He stands for the City and is in very good
spirits, though his chances of success do not look bright; but he is
a gallant little fellow, likes to face danger, and comes out well in
times of difficulty.
_March 24th._--The dissolution took place on Saturday, and all the
world is busy about the elections; many places are without candidates,
or with very bad ones, and unable to find good ones. The dinner at the
Mansion House the other day to the Ministers was a sort of triumph to
Palmerston, who was rapturously received and cheered. He made a very
bad speech, but which did very well for such an audience. It was full
of claptraps and reiterations of the exploded charges of coalitions,
&c., which he is not ashamed to harp upon, and in his address to
Tiverton he talks of the 'combination only formed last session' to turn
him out. I find myself, _malgré moi_, thrown back into my old state of
antagonism towards Palmerston, and what is very paradoxical, I am so
without any hostility to his Government or any desire for its being
overthrown, for I cannot descry any chance of a better, or, indeed,
any possibility of forming another able to carry on affairs at all;
but I am inexpressibly disgusted at the egregious folly of the country
at his being made such an idol in this ridiculous way, and at the
false and hypocritical pretences upon which this dissolution has been
founded, and the enormous and shameful lying with which the country is
deluged. I long to write, print, and publish the truth, and to expose
this miserable delusion; but I repress the desire, because I cannot do
so without exciting bitter personal animosities, probably quarrels,
and I can see no reasonable hope of producing any effects which would
sufficiently repay me for such consequences.
[Sidenote: THE LIDDELL _v._ WESTERTON CASE.]
The day before yesterday Pemberton Leigh gave judgement in the Privy
Council in the case of Liddell and Westerton; the Judicial Committee
reversed in great measure the judgements in the Courts below of Dr.
Lushington and Sir John Dodson, but not entirely. It was a very able
judgement, and prepared with great care and research, and so moderately
and fairly framed that it was accepted unanimously by the Committee,
and even by the Bishops of Canterbury and London, both Low Churchmen.
It was drawn up by Pemberton Leigh himself, and its publication will
give the world in general some idea of his great ability, with the
extent of which few are acquainted. It is a very singular thing that in
such times as these, and when there is such a dearth of able men and
so great a demand for them, that he should voluntarily condemn himself
to a state of comparative obscurity, and refuse to take the station in
public life which it would be difficult to find any other man so well
qualified to fill.
_March 28th._--At Althorp the last two days. Palmerston's address to
Tiverton, following his speech, at the Mansion House, has excited great
indignation in all who are not thorough Palmerstonians. Both were full
of deception and falsehood. John Russell is particularly incensed,
and said these two productions were unworthy of a gentleman, and so
they were. Malmesbury has addressed to Palmerston a letter in the
newspapers on the subject, which though not well written is true, and
fully justified by what Palmerston said; but all this signifies very
little, the current is too strong to be opposed, and it is provoking to
see the Conservatives endeavouring to bolster up their pretensions by
saying they would have supported Palmerston on the China question, if
they had been in Parliament, or promising to support him if they are
elected. Yesterday, which was the first day of returns, does not give
much difference; to-day is the polling for the City, and nobody has an
idea how the election will go, whether Lord John will come in, and if
he does which of the four will go to the wall. He was enthusiastically
received yesterday, and the show of hands was unanimous in his favour,
but this proves very little, and his organisation is miserably
defective; had it been better and begun earlier, it is probable that
his success would have been certain; he is the favourite as it is.
Palmerston's speech at Tiverton yesterday was less objectionable than
his address and speech at the Mansion House, and he left himself
entirely unfettered on the subject of Reform, and rightly. The
Parliament promises to be a Radical one, and I fully expect that the
result of all this great commotion will be to give a stimulus to
organize Reform; nor will it surprise me if Palmerston should find it
conducive to his interest as minister to appear in the character of a
Reformer, if he were to fling overboard all his old opinions, and to
pay this price for a renewed lease of his own power. Wilkes used to say
he had never been a _Wilkite_, but Palmerston has never been anything
but a Palmerstonian, and I firmly believe that at seventy-three years
of age his single thought is how to secure for himself power for his
life, and that he will not scruple to accept measures which, so far
as he thinks about it, he believes to be constitutionally dangerous
and mischievous if by so doing he can maintain himself on the Treasury
Bench.
[Sidenote: RESULTS OF THE ELECTION.]
_March 29th._--Great excitement yesterday in the town, particularly at
Brooks's. The most interesting event was the City election, and the
return, which under the circumstances may be called triumphant, of John
Russell, which was made more agreeable to himself and his friends by
the defeat of Raikes Currie, who came from Northampton on purpose to
turn him out. Up to the last hour John Russell continued to lead at the
head of the poll, after which he fell off and only ended third, but
still he had 7,000 votes after having been assured by his old adherents
(J. Abel Smith in particular) that his success was hopeless, that he
would be beaten 'disgracefully,' and probably would have hardly any
votes at all.
After this the most interesting events were the defeats of the
Manchester men, and generally, though not universally, of the voters
for Cobden's motion, Bright and Milner Gibson, Cobden, Ricardo, Layard,
all defeated. It seems that Manchester and the other great towns had
got tired of their leaders, who had made themselves unpopular by
their opposition to the war. I am sorry for the loss of Bright and
Cobden, because such able men ought not to be ousted and replaced by
mediocrities.
Palmerston's speech at Tiverton was in the same style, but far less
offensive and objectionable than his address and his Mansion House
harangue. The most remarkable part of it was the total silence which
he observed as to his intention upon reforms and domestic questions
generally, or rather his positive refusal to say a word on the subject
or to pledge himself in any way; he evidently means to meet his
Parliament free to take any course his interests may dictate. There
was one remarkable speech yesterday, considering what the man is who
uttered it. Vernon Smith at Northampton spoke as follows: 'Mr. Disraeli
said Lord Palmerston was the Tory chief of a Radical Cabinet. I do not
admit the description as regards Lord Palmerston, but I accept the
designation as to the Cabinet of which I am a member. A great statesman
once said that parties were like fishes (it was snakes, I believe), and
their heads were propelled by their tails, and it will very likely be
found that the head of the Government will in like manner be propelled
by his tail.' The words are not exact, but the meaning is, and it
must be owned a remarkable declaration for a Cabinet Minister to make
as to his chief, and such a chief. I believe that it will turn out
to be the truth. The returns so far as they have gone are frightful,
and a deluge of Radicalism and violence will burst out in the House
of Commons. There will be a Radical majority prepared to support Lord
Palmerston and to keep him in power, but on the condition of his doing
their bidding, and consenting to their demands, nor will he be able to
help himself. He will no doubt try to do as little as possible, but
there will be no strong Conservative party to which he can appeal from
and against his own Radical supporters; the Conservatives will be too
weak to help him, and probably will not be inclined to help him out of
his difficulty if they could. At his age his only object will be to
grasp power while he lives. _Après moi le déluge_ will be his motto,
and my expectation is that he will never consent to sacrifice power
from scruples or upon principles, and will consent to anything that may
be necessary rather than allow himself to be outbid and to see power
torn from his hands. The prospect seems to me tremendous. The cry of
Palmerston, and nothing but Palmerston, has done very well to go to the
hustings on, but having accomplished its purpose, other cries much more
serious will soon take its place, and we shall see, as the Prince said,
Constitutional Government on its trial with a vengeance.
_March 31st._--The elections continue to be unfavourable to the
Conservatives, but the people at Brooks's, and the Government
generally, are too sanguine when they call everything gain to them
where a Conservative is replaced by a Liberal, for in many cases the
so-called Liberal is a violent Radical, very likely to give much more
trouble to the Government than the Conservative who was turned out. The
gains to Government up to this time (and the borough elections are all
over) are calculated at 20, making a difference of 40 votes; but the
Conservatives do not admit this, and will make other calculations with
different results.
[Sidenote: TRIUMPH OF LORD PALMERSTON.]
There is no denying the fact, however, that a strong sense has been
evinced of partiality for Palmerston and resentment against the China
vote. The news of the Emperor of China having ordered Yeo to make
peace on any terms comes very opportunely, but nothing can be so
absurd as the pretence that by so doing the Emperor himself condemns
his Viceroy and justifies our conduct at Canton. It only proves that
His Majesty is very much alarmed, and wishes to heal the breach as
quickly as possible, and on any terms he can. I am bound to say that
many people, not extravagant either, maintain that this promises to
be a very good Parliament, and by no means so dangerous as my fears
have pictured it to myself; still I cannot look upon it as a safe and
innocent Parliament. Cardwell's defeat at Oxford proves how low the
Peelites are. Frederic Peel's loss of his seat is a great inconvenience
to the Government, and one does not see how it is to be repaired, for
it is almost impossible in these days to treat any place (if one can be
found) as a nomination borough, turn the sitting member out, and put
him in instead. The serious part of it is that he has to move the Army
Estimates, and nobody else can do it now.
Old Lady Keith is dead, at some prodigious age. She was the 'Queeny'
of Dr. Johnson, Mrs. Hale's daughter, and was the last surviving link
between those times and our own, and probably the only person surviving
who could remember Johnson himself and his remarkable contemporaries,
or who had lived in intimacy with them.