CHAPTER XXXI.

Accident to Sir Robert Peel--Triumphant Success of Lord

Palmerston--Death of Sir Robert Peel--Sir James Graham's

Position--Lord Palmerston's Policy--Lord Palmerston's

Ovation--Death of Mr. Arbuthnot--Death of King Louis

Philippe--The Papal Hierarchy in England--German Affairs--Papal

Aggression--General Radowitz invited to Windsor--Papal

Aggression--Conversation with Lord John Russell--And with

Lord Palmerston--Mr. Green's Lecture--Visit to Brocket--Bear

Ellice--Lord Melbourne's Papers.

_London, July 1st, 1850._--The day before yesterday Sir Robert Peel had

a fall from his horse and hurt himself seriously. Last night he was in

imminent danger. His accident has excited the greatest interest, and his

doors are beset with enquirers of all parties without distinction. He

was in high spirits that day, for he was pleased with the division which

saved the Government, and with his own speech, which for his purpose was

very dexterous and successful.

I rode with Lord Grey yesterday in the Park, when we talked over the

debate and present state of affairs. He said that it was remarkable that

this discussion, which was intended to damage Palmerston, had left him

the most popular man in the country; that of this there could be no

doubt. Bright had said that his vote had given great offence at

Manchester, and that Cobden's vote and speech would probably cost him

the West Riding at the next election; that amongst all the middle

classes Palmerston was immensely popular. He spoke of Palmerston's

speech as having been not only one of consummate ability, but quite

successful as a reply, and he insisted that their side had much the best

of the argument. I denied this, but acknowledged the ability of

Palmerston, and his success, though his speech was very answerable, if

either Peel or Disraeli had chosen to reply to it, which neither of them

would. It is beyond all contestation that this great battle, fought on

two fields, has left the Government much stronger than before, and

demonstrated the impossibility of any change, and it has as

incontestably immensely strengthened and improved Palmerston's position;

in short, he is triumphant, and nothing can overthrow him but some fresh

acts of violence and folly, of insolent interference, of arrogant

dictation or underhand intrigue, which may be so flagrant that his

colleagues or some of them will not stand it, and so a quarrel may

ensue. But he has achieved such a success, and has made himself so great

in the Cabinet, and so popular in the country, and made the Government

itself so strong, that if he turns over a new leaf, takes a lesson from

all that has happened, and renounces his offensive manners and changes

his mode of proceeding abroad, he may consider his tenure of office

perfectly secure. Even the 'Times' is prepared to abandon its opposition

to him, and is seeking for a decent pretext to do so. I expect they have

found out that they have gone too far, and that their violent and

sustained vituperation of Palmerston who is liked, and of his policy

which is not understood, is not favourably received, and instead of

carrying public opinion with them, they have produced a good deal of

resentment and disgust.

[Sidenote: DEATH OF SIR ROBERT PEEL.]

[Sidenote: CHARACTER OF SIR ROBERT PEEL.]

_July 6th._--The death of Sir Robert Peel, which took place on Tuesday

night, has absorbed every other subject of interest. The suddenness of

such an accident took the world by surprise, and in consequence of the

mystery in which great people's illnesses are always shrouded, the

majority of the public were not aware of his danger till they heard of

his death. The sympathy, the feeling, and the regret which have been

displayed on every side and in all quarters, are to the last degree

striking. Every imaginable honour has been lavished on his memory. The

Sovereign, both Houses of Parliament, the press and the people, from the

highest to the lowest, have all joined in acts of homage to his

character, and in magnifying the loss which the nation has sustained.

When we remember that Peel was an object of bitter hatred to one great

party, that he was never liked by the other party, and that he had no

popular and ingratiating qualities, and very few intimate friends, it is

surprising to see the warm and universal feeling which his death has

elicited. It is a prodigious testimony to the greatness of his capacity,

to the profound conviction of his public usefulness and importance, and

of the purity of the motives by which his public conduct has been

guided. I need not record details with which every newspaper teems.

Those who were opposed to him do not venture or are not inclined to try

and stem the current of grief and praise which is bursting forth in all

directions, and most assuredly no man who in life was so hated and

reviled was ever so lamented and honoured at his death. I am not capable

of describing him with any certainty of doing justice to his character

and delineating it correctly; but as there are several notices of him

not very favourable in preceding pages, at such a moment it becomes a

duty to qualify what may have been misrepresented or exaggerated on the

information of others, by expressing my own doubts as to the perfect

accuracy of the statements that were formerly made to me. The Duke of

Wellington pronounced in the House of Lords a few nights ago a panegyric

on his love of truth, and declared that during his long connexion with

him he had never known him to deviate from the strictest veracity. This

praise would be undeserved if he had ever been guilty of any underhand,

clandestine, and insincere conduct in political matters, and it leads me

to suspect that resentment and disappointment may have caused an unfair

and unwarrantable interpretation to be put upon his motives and his

behaviour on some important occasions. My acquaintance with Peel was

slight and superficial. I never associated with him, and never was in

his house except on two or three occasions at rare intervals. He

scarcely lived at all in society; he was reserved but cordial in his

manner, had few intimate friends, and it may be doubted whether there

was any one person, except his wife, to whom he was in the habit of

disclosing his thoughts, feelings, and intentions with entire frankness

and freedom. In his private relations he was not merely irreproachable,

but good, kind, and amiable. The remarkable decorum of his life, the

domestic harmony and happiness he enjoyed, and the simplicity of his

habits and demeanour, contributed largely without doubt to the

estimation in which he was held. He was easy of access, courteous and

patient, and those who approached him generally left him gratified by

his affability and edified and astonished at the extensive and accurate

knowledge, as well as the sound practical sense and judgement, which he

displayed on all subjects. It was by the continual exhibition of these

qualities that he gained such a mastery over the public mind, and such

prodigious influence in the House of Commons; but it is only now

manifested to the world how great his influence was by the effect which

his death has produced, and by the universal sentiment that the country

has to deplore an irreparable loss. Nothing but a careful and accurate

survey of his career, an intimate knowledge of the secret transactions

of his political life, and a minute analysis of his character, can

enable any one to form a correct judgement concerning him. He might

easily be made the subject of a studied panegyric, or as easily of a

studied invective; but either the one or the other would of necessity be

exaggerated and untrue. The sacrifices which he made upon two memorable

occasions, upon both of which he unquestionably acted solely with

reference to the public good, forbid us to believe that he was ever

influenced by any considerations but such as were honest and

conscientious. Notwithstanding his great sagacity, it may, however, be

doubted whether his judgement was not often faulty, and whether in the

perplexity of conflicting objects and incompatible purposes, he was not

led to erroneous conclusions as to the obligations imposed upon him, and

the course which it was his duty to pursue. It is very difficult to

account satisfactorily for his conduct on the Catholic question. We must

indeed make great allowance for the position in which he was placed by

his birth, education, and connexions. His father was a Tory, imbued

with all the old Tory prejudices, one of those followers of Mr. Pitt

who could not comprehend and never embraced his liberal sentiments, and

who clung to the bigoted and narrow-minded opinions of Addington and

George III. It is no wonder then that Peel was originally an

anti-Catholic, and probably at first, and for a long time, he was an

undoubting believer in that creed. The death of Perceval left the

Protestant party without a head, and not long after his entrance into

public life, and while the convictions of his youth were still unshaken,

he became their elected chief. For about fourteen years he continued to

fight their battle in opposition to a host of able men, and in spite of

a course of events which might have satisfied a far less sagacious man

that this contest must end in defeat, and that the obstinate

prolongation of it would inevitably render that defeat more dangerous

and disastrous. Nevertheless, the man who eventually proved himself to

be one of the wisest and most liberal of statesmen maintained for years

a struggle against religious liberty, a struggle by which he was

involved in inconsistencies injurious to his own character, and which

brought the kingdom to the brink of a civil war. It is now impossible to

fathom the depths of Peel's mind, and to ascertain whether during that

long period he had any doubts and misgivings as to the cause in which he

was embarked, or whether he really and sincerely believed that Catholic

Emancipation could be resisted and prevented. It is strange that he did

not perceive the contest to be hopeless, and that such a contest was

more perilous than any concession could possibly be. But he declared

that up to the period of Lord Liverpool's death his opinions were

unchanged and that he thought the prolongation of this contest was not

unreasonable. I do not see how he can be acquitted of insincerity save

at the expense of his sagacity and foresight. His mind was not

enthralled by the old-fashioned and obsolete maxims which were so deeply

rooted in the minds of Eldon and Perceval; his spirit was more congenial

to that of Pitt; and if he had let his excellent understanding act with

perfect freedom, and his opinions take their natural course, it is

impossible to doubt that he would have concurred and cooperated with the

able men of different parties who were advocates of Emancipation,

instead of continuing to encourage and lead on those masses of bigotry

and prejudice whose resistance produced so much direct and indirect

mischief. The truth is that he was hampered and perverted by his

antecedents, and by the seductive circumstances of his position; and

having become pledged and committed in the cause, it was a matter of

infinite difficulty for him to back out of it, to recant his opinions,

and change his course; although any one who watched the signs of the

times (and no man watched or studied them more carefully than Peel),

might have seen that Catholic Emancipation was steadily but surely

progressing towards its consummation. For a long time no events occurred

so striking and important as to produce a new state of things, and to

scare by their disturbing force those theories and principles, with

which the anti-Catholics blindly imagined they could plod on for ever.

To change the whole mind of Peel, and bring about an abandonment of his

long-continued policy, something more was required than the accustomed

signs of agitation, parliamentary debates chequered by alternate victory

and defeat, and the accumulated power of eloquent speeches and able

writings. At length the crash came by which the moral revolution was

effected. The Clare election did what reason, and eloquence, and

authority had failed to do. The Duke of Wellington and Peel

simultaneously determined to strike their colours, to abandon a cause

which they had sustained at great risks and by enormous sacrifices, and

to carry out the measure which their whole lives had been spent in

opposing, and which they had denounced as incompatible with the safety

of the country. Historical justice demands that a large deduction should

be made from Peel's reputation as a statesman and a patriot on account

of his conduct through the last twelve years of the Catholic contest. It

may be doubtful in what respect he erred the most; but whatever his

motives may have been, it is indisputable that he was the principal

instrument in maintaining this contest, which terminated in a manner so

discreditable to the character, and so injurious to the interests, of

the country. For his share in this great controversy from first to last,

he must be held responsible to future generations. But whatever his

errors may have been, he made a noble atonement for them, and having

once changed his mind, he flung himself into his new career with a

gallantry and devotion deserving of the highest praise. It would be easy

to show that if Peel had been actuated by selfish motives, by regard for

his own political interests and views of personal ambition, other

courses were open to him far better calculated to promote such objects,

and which he might have adopted without any inconsistency; but he cast

aside all personal considerations and thought of nothing but how he

could most effectually serve the State. He encountered without flinching

the storm which he knew would burst upon him, and bravely exposed his

character and reputation to suspicions, resentments, and reproaches,

which might for aught he knew be fatal to his future prospects. Upon

this occasion indeed, he shared the obloquy with the Duke of Wellington,

upon whom as Prime Minister the responsibility principally rested. But

the indignation and resentment of the Tories fell, though unjustly, much

more upon Peel than upon the Duke. Peel was more emphatically the chief

of the anti-Catholic party, and in him it appeared a far greater

dereliction of principle. The authority of the Duke was so great, and

his followers were accustomed to look up to him with such profound

deference and submission, that they could not bring themselves to attack

him as the prime mover in this obnoxious measure, and they therefore

made Peel the scapegoat, and vented upon him all the exuberance of their

wrath.

[Sidenote: PEEL'S OPPOSITION TO THE CATHOLIC CLAIMS.]

Their ill-humour and resentment led to the destruction of the Duke's

Government, and the change of Ministry brought about the Reform Bill and

the overthrow of the Tory party. It is difficult to discern any proofs

of sound judgement and foresight in Peel's conduct in regard to

Parliamentary Reform. If he had adopted the same course as Huskisson on

the East Retford question, and manifested a disposition to concede some

moderate and reasonable reforms as fit occasions presented themselves,

it is by no means improbable that the country might have been satisfied;

but his opposition to the transfer of the East Retford franchise to

Birmingham, together with the Duke's celebrated declaration that the

representative system could not be improved, and that as long as he was

in office he would oppose any measure of Parliamentary Reform, convinced

the Reformers that they were resolved to make no concessions, however

slight, and not to suffer any change to be made in the existing

representative system. Peel evidently made an incorrect estimate of the

state of the public mind upon the question of Parliamentary Reform. He

could not indeed foresee the French Revolution or its contagious effects

here; but unless the country had been already combustible, it would not

have been so inflamed as it was; and if he had been aware of its temper

and disposition, he never would have opposed the general sentiment so

pertinaciously as he did. I think, therefore, that his course in respect

to Reform exhibits a deficiency in sagacity and foresight, and must be

accounted one of the blemishes of his political career. He fought the

Reform battle with extraordinary energy, and the skill and perseverance

with which he afterwards rallied the broken forces and restored the

fallen spirits of his party were admirable. In 1835 the rash and

abortive attempt of William IV. to get rid of the Whigs made Peel the

Minister of a hundred days. This was the most brilliant period of his

life, and it was during that magnificent campaign that he established

the vast reputation which, while clouds of suspicion and distrust, of

enmity and dislike, were all the while gathering about him, made him for

nearly twenty years by far the most conspicuous, important, and powerful

of English statesmen. He not only reorganised his party, but he revived

its political influence, and laid the foundation for regaining its

former power. His policy was as successful as it was wise. He flung

himself cheerfully and confidently into the new order of things,

associated himself with the sentiments and the wants of the nation, and

day by day saw his reputation increasing both in Parliament and

throughout the country. The Tories abandoned themselves to his guidance

with a mixture of passive reliance and admiration and of lurking

resentment for the past with distrust and suspicion for the future. They

rejoiced in the chief who made them once more powerful, and led them on

to victory; but they felt that there were no real sympathies between

themselves and him. While he was boldly advancing with the spirit of the

age, they were lagging behind, gloomily regarding his manifestation of

Liberal principles, in which they did not participate, and lingering on

those traditions of the past which they saw that he had entirely

forsaken.

[Sidenote: PEEL'S CONVERSION TO FREE TRADE.]

At length, ten years after the Reform Bill, the Whig Government was

overthrown, and Peel became Minister. At this time the great bulk of his

supporters coveted power principally for the sake of Protection. They

believed that it was the duty, the inclination, and the intention of

Peel to maintain the Corn Laws, and they had a right to think so. He had

been the vigorous and ingenious advocate of the protective system, not,

however, without some qualifications and reservations, which, though

they were enough to excite the jealousy and mistrust of the most

suspicious, were still insufficient to neutralise the effect of his

general professions. It is almost impossible to discover what the

process was by which he was gradually led to embrace the whole doctrine

of Free Trade. We cannot distinguish what effect was made upon his mind

by the reasoning, and what by the organisation and agitation, of the

Anti-Corn Law League. It would be interesting, if it were possible, to

sum up periodically the exact state of Peel's opinions upon commercial

and fiscal questions, and to know how he combined them with other

political as well as party considerations, which he was obliged

constantly to keep in view. No man but himself could explain and

vindicate the whole course of his conduct. It may safely be assumed that

when he began to reorganise the Conservative party, he did not

contemplate a repeal of the Corn Laws, and that it was by a severely

inductive process of study and meditation that he was gradually led to

the conception and elaboration of the commercial system which the last

years of his life were spent in carrying out. The modification, and

possibly the ultimate repeal, of the Corn Laws must have formed a part

of that system, but what he hoped and intended probably was to bring

round the minds of his party by degrees to the doctrines of Free Trade,

and to conquer their repugnance to a great alteration of the Corn Laws,

both by showing the imprudence of endeavouring to maintain them, and by

the gradual development of those countervailing advantages with which

Free Trade was fraught. That, I believe, was his secret desire, hope,

and expectation; and if the Irish famine had not deranged his plans and

precipitated his measures, if more time had been afforded him, it is not

impossible that his projects might have been realised. He has been

bitterly accused of deceiving and betraying his party, of 'close

designs, and crooked counsels,' and there is no term of reproach and

invective which rage and fear, mortification and resentment, have not

heaped upon him. He has been unjustly reviled; but, on the other hand,

it must be acknowledged that, wise as his views, and pure as his motives

may have been, his manner of dealing with his party in reference to the

changes he contemplated, could not fail to excite their indignation. If

they were convinced that the Corn Laws were essential, not merely to the

prosperity, but to the existence, of the landed interest, he had been

mainly instrumental in confirming this conviction. It was indeed a

matter of extraordinary difficulty and nicety to determine at what

precise period he should begin to disclose to his supporters the extent

of the plans which he meditated. His reserve may have been prudent,

possibly indispensable; but although they were not unsuspicious of his

intentions, and distrusted and disliked him accordingly, they were

wholly unprepared for the great revolution which he suddenly proclaimed;

and at such a moment of terror and dismay it was not unnatural that

despair and rage should supersede every other sentiment, and that they

should loudly complain of having been deceived, betrayed, and abandoned.

[Sidenote: PEEL'S DIFFERENCES WITH HIS PARTY.]

The misfortune of Peel all along was, that there was no real community

of sentiment between him and his party, except in respect to certain

great principles, which had ceased to be in jeopardy, and which

therefore required no united efforts to defend them. There was no longer

any danger of organic reforms; the House of Lords and the Church were

not threatened; the great purposes for which Peel had rallied the

Conservative interest had been accomplished; almost from the first

moment of his advent to power in 1841 he and his party stood in a false

position towards each other. He was the liberal chief of a party in

which the old anti-liberal spirit was still rife; they regarded with

jealousy and fear the middle classes, those formidable masses, occupying

the vast space between aristocracy and democracy, with whom Peel was

evidently anxious to ingratiate himself, and whose support he considered

his best reliance. His treatment of both the Catholics and Dissenters

was reluctantly submitted to by his followers, and above all his fiscal

and commercial measures kept them in a state of constant uncertainty and

alarm. There was an unexpressed but complete difference in their

understanding and his of the obligations by which the Government and the

party were mutually connected. They considered Peel to be not only the

Minister, but the creature, of the Conservative party, bound above all

things to support and protect their especial interests according to

their own views and opinions. He considered himself the Minister of the

Nation, whose mission it was to redress the balance which mistaken

maxims or partial legislation had deranged, and to combine the interest

of all classes in one homogeneous system, by which the prosperity and

happiness of the whole commonwealth would be promoted. They thought of

nothing but the present sacrifices which this system would entail on the

proprietors of land, while he thought only of the great benefits which

it would ultimately confer upon the people at large. Whether in 1847 he

was prepared for the unappeasable wrath and the general insurrection of

the Protectionists, I know not; but even if he viewed it as a possible

alternative, involving the loss of political power and a second

dissolution of the Conservative party, I believe he would have

nevertheless encountered the danger and accepted the sacrifice. If his

party were disgusted with him, he was no less disgusted with them, and

it is easy to conceive that he must have been sickened by their

ignorance and presumption, their obstinacy and ingratitude. He turned to

the nation for that justice which his old associates denied him, and

from the day of his resignation till the day of his death he seemed to

live only for the purpose of watching over the progress of his own

measures, in undiminished confidence that time and the hour would prove

their wisdom, and vindicate his character to the world. Though he was

little beholden to the Whigs in his last struggle in office, he gave

John Russell's Government a constant, and at the same time

unostentatious support. That Government alone could preserve the

integrity of his commercial system, and to that object every other was

subordinate in his mind. He occupied a great and dignified position, and

every hour added something to his fame and to the consideration he

enjoyed; while the spite and rancour of the Protectionists seemed to be

embittered by the respect and reverence by which they saw that he was

universally regarded. His abstinence from political conflicts, his rare

appearance in debate, and the remarkable moderation of his speeches made

some fancy that the vigour of his faculties was impaired; but if this

was at all the case, it was only by negative symptoms that it appeared,

and was by no means suspected by the community. Nevertheless, though his

death was so sudden and premature, and he was cut off in the vigour of

life, he could not have died at a moment and in circumstances more

opportune for his own fame; for time and political events might perhaps

have diminished, but could not have increased, his great reputation.

[Sidenote: EFFECTS OF PEEL'S DEATH.]

It is impossible to foresee the political effects of Peel's death. To

John Russell and to his Government it is a great loss, and the time may

come when his absence will be severely felt. Standing aloof from

parties, known to have no views of personal ambition, and giving them

the benefit of his influence and countenance, he would have been able to

afford them efficacious aid in the event of any Radical pressure, and as

long as he had lived he would have proved a powerful coadjutor in

resisting any attempts to assail or undermine the Monarchy or the

Constitution, It is against the Radical supporters of the Government,

and not against the Protectionist Opposition, that he would have been

mainly serviceable. So far as these are concerned his death is more

likely to remove than to create difficulties in the way of Lord John,

inasmuch as he becomes more indispensable than ever; and the certainty

that there is no alternative between him and Stanley--no Peel who in a

great emergency might have been called in--will certainly prolong his

term of office. Peel is a great loss to the Queen, who felt a security

in knowing that he was at hand in any case of danger or difficulty, and

that she could always rely upon his devotion to her person and upon the

good counsel he would give her. But his relations with the Court at

different periods are amongst the most curious passages of his political

history. In 1838, when the Bedchamber quarrel prevented his forming a

Government, there was probably no man in her dominions whom the Queen so

cordially detested as Sir Robert Peel. Two years afterwards he became

her Prime Minister, and in a very short time he found means to remove

all her former prejudice against him, and to establish himself high in

her favour. His influence continued to increase during the whole period

of his administration, and when he resigned in 1846 the Queen evinced a

personal regard for him scarcely inferior to that which she had

manifested to Lord Melbourne, while her political reliance on him was

infinitely greater. To have produced such a total change of sentiment is

no small proof of the tact and adroitness of Peel; but it was an immense

object to him to ingratiate himself with his Royal Mistress; he spared

no pains for that end, and his success was complete.

He appears to have suffered dreadful pain during the three days which

elapsed between his accident and his death. He was sensible, but

scarcely ever spoke. He had arranged all his affairs so carefully that

he had no dispositions to make or orders to give. Sir Benjamin Brodie

says that he never saw any human frame so susceptible of pain, for his

moral and physical organisation was one of exquisite sensibility. He was

naturally a man of violent passions, over which he had learnt to

exercise an habitual restraint by vigorous efforts of reason and

self-control. He was certainly a good, and in some respects a great man;

he had a true English spirit, and was an ardent lover of his country;

and he served the public with fidelity, zeal, and great ability. But

when future historians shall describe his career and sum up his

character, they will pass a more sober and qualified judgement than that

of his admiring and sorrowing contemporaries. It is impossible to forget

that there never was a statesman who so often embraced erroneous

opinions himself, and contributed so much to mislead the opinions of

others. The energy and skill with which he endeavoured to make the worse

appear the better cause were productive of enormous mischief; and if on

several occasions his patriotism and his ability were equally

conspicuous, and he rendered important public service, his efforts were

in great measure directed to repair the evils and dangers which he had

been himself principally instrumental in creating.

[Sidenote: LORD CLARENDON ON THE LATE DIVISION.]

_July 16th._--I have seen Graham once or twice lately, when we have

talked over his own position and the state of affairs. He told me he had

had very friendly communication with John Russell, who had intimated to

him that Peel's death would necessarily place him in a position more

important and responsible. Graham, however, repudiated the notion of his

accepting any such position, and declared that he was quite unfit to

influence the opinions and regulate the conduct of other men. He thought

Peel was not unconscious of the power he possessed in the country, and

he had not long ago announced with great energy that if any attempt was

made in any shape to reimpose a duty on Corn, there was nothing he

would not do to oppose it; and he thinks that he would not have shrunk

from any means he might have deemed conducive to that object; that he

would have taken office if necessary, or have allied himself with any

person or party; in short, shrunk from _nothing_ in the most extensive

sense of the term. Graham is much alarmed at the reckless course Stanley

is taking in the House of Lords, especially with reference to the Irish

Franchise Bill, and augurs some very serious consequences from it.

_July 19th._--Clarendon arrived from Ireland a few days ago. He told me

he had only seen John Russell for a few minutes, in a great hurry as he

was going to the Cabinet, when these few words passed about foreign

affairs. Clarendon said 'they had got well out of their difficulties on

that score.'

_Lord John._--Yes, I think it did--very well.

_Lord Clarendon._--Yes; but don't misunderstand me. If what has passed

serves as a lesson to Palmerston, and induces him to begin another

course of conduct, I shall think you got very well indeed out of it; but

if he only regards what has happened as a triumph, and as sanctioning

and approving all his previous proceedings, then I shall think you got

very ill out of it, and that your success was a misfortune; but I hope

the former alternative is the truth.

_Lord John._--I hope so, too; but it is very difficult to get any man

who has long pursued any particular course to change that course, more

especially when that man is Palmerston.

From this Clarendon inferred that Palmerston means to go on just as

before and will not take a lesson from what has occurred, and he is

confirmed in this idea by something Charles Wood said to him in the same

strain.

Yesterday Normanby came to take leave of me before returning to Paris.

He has been very much dissatisfied and annoyed at Palmerston's goings

on, and at the _rÙle_ which was imposed on him, and he told me he did

not like Palmerston's tone, which was much too triumphant, and he was

very much afraid he would not change his ways of proceeding. His best

hope was that no case would occur to elicit any fresh conduct or

language of his of a questionable nature.

_July 28th._--This day week the Radicals gave Palmerston a dinner at the

Reform Club. It was a sorry affair--a rabble of men, not ten out of two

hundred whom I know by sight. They asked John Russell who would not go,

and then they thought it better to ask no more of Palmerston's

colleagues. Neither Lord John nor any of them liked it, but of course

they said nothing. Palmerston would have done better to repose on his

House of Commons laurels, and find some pretext for declining this

compliment. The Court are just as much disgusted with him as ever, and

provoked at his success in the House of Commons.[123]

[Footnote 123: [In spite of the triumph Lord Palmerston had obtained

in the House of Commons, the evils of his arbitrary mode of

conducting-foreign affairs continued to excite the anxiety of his

colleagues and something more than the distrust of the Court, and an

attempt was made, with the concurrence of Lord John Russell, the Duke of

Bedford, Lord Lansdowne, and Lord Clarendon, to induce him to take some

other office in the Government, which, of course, he declined to do. The

details of this negotiation cannot now be published, but they were the

premonitory symptoms of the storm which wrested the Foreign Office from

the hands of Lord Palmerston in the following year.]]

_Brighton, August 26th._--I have been here for a week past. On Sunday

last the death of Arbuthnot took place at Apsley House, where he had

been gradually sinking for some time. He is a great and irreparable loss

to the Duke of Wellington, who is now left alone in the world. Arbuthnot

was almost always with him, he had his entire confidence. The Duke told

him, and talked to him, about everything, and on the other hand, all who

wanted to approach the Duke for whatever purpose, communicated through

Arbuthnot. The Duke, who has for a long time been growing gradually more

solitary and unsocial, more irritable and unapproachable, is now left

without any friend and companion with whom he can talk over past events,

and to whom he can confide present grievances and complaints. He will

feel it as acutely as at his age and with his character he can feel

anything.

[Sidenote: DEATH OF MR. ARBUTHNOT.]

Arbuthnot's career has been remarkable. He had no shining parts, and

never could have been conspicuous in public life; but in a subordinate

and unostentatious character he was more largely mixed up with the

principal people and events of his time than any other man. He might

have written very curious and interesting memoirs if he had only noted

down all that passed under his observation, and the results of his

political information and connexions, for few men ever enjoyed so

entirely the intimacy and unreserved confidence of so many statesmen and

ministers, and therefore few have been so well acquainted with the

details of secret history. He was successively the trusted adherent and

intimate friend of Lord Liverpool, Lord Castlereagh, and the Duke of

Wellington, and more or less of almost all their colleagues, besides

being on very good terms with many others with whom he had no political

opinions in common. He had in fact a somewhat singular and exceptional

position; much liked, much trusted, continually consulted and employed,

with no enemies and innumerable friends. This was owing to his

character, which was exactly calculated to win this position for him.

Without brilliant talents, he had a good sound understanding and

dispassionate judgement, liberality in his ideas, and no violent

prejudices. He was mild, modest, and sincere; he was single-minded,

zealous, serviceable, and sympathetic (_simpatico_), and he was moreover

both honourable and discreet. The consequence was that everybody relied

upon him and trusted him, and he passed his whole life in an atmosphere

of political transactions and secrets. After the death of his wife he

lived at Apsley House when in London, and during a great part of the

rest of the year with the Duke at Walmer and Strathfieldsaye, and he

went hardly at all into the world; but he rather extended than

contracted the list of his personal and political friends, for as the

Whig Ministers had often business to transact with the Duke, they

generally found it convenient to communicate with Arbuthnot too; and, as

he was always ready to render any service, public or private, in his

power, he made many acquaintances and acquired friends in that party,

specially the Duke of Bedford, with whom he had long been intimate, and

who was in the habit of communicating with him very unreservedly on

political matters. The preceding pages exhibit many proofs of

Arbuthnot's familiarity with the political history of his time, as well

as of his good sense and liberality. He was buried at Kensal Green, and

the Duke is said to have been very much affected at the funeral.

_Brighton, August 27th._[124]--Yesterday morning Louis Philippe expired

at Claremont quite unexpectedly, for though he had been ill for a long

time, it was supposed he might still live many months. Not long ago his

life was the most important in the world, and his death would have

produced a profound sensation and general consternation. Now hardly more

importance attaches to the event than there would to the death of one of

the old bathing-women opposite my window. It will not produce the

slightest political effect, nor even give rise to any speculation. He

had long been politically defunct. The effect that presents itself as

most likely is its paving the way to a reconciliation between the two

branches of the Bourbons, and a fusion of their interests; but as the

late King had consented to this fusion and desired it, while the Duchess

of Orleans was opposed to it, this consummation is more likely to be

prevented than brought about by his death. His character has been often

described with more or less of truth and justice, and of course there

will be many fresh descriptions of it now. I cannot attempt it, for I

never knew anything of him except at second-hand. He had certainly many

good qualities and an amiable disposition, and probably no vices but

selfishness and insincerity. These were, however, universally ascribed

to him, and consequently out of the limited circle of his own family and

a few friends and old servants, who were warmly attached to him, he

inspired neither affection nor respect. The worst kings have seldom been

destitute of many devoted adherents; but in his day of tribulation,

although he may rather be accounted amongst the best than the worst, he

was abandoned by all France, and his fall was not only unresisted, but

suffered to take place with scarcely a manifestation of sympathy and

regret.

[Footnote 124: [It may here be noted that the Minute of the Queen, in

which Her Majesty laid down the rules which ought to govern the conduct

of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and intimated that a

departure from them 'must be considered as failing in sincerity towards

the Crown, and justly to be visited by the exercise of her

constitutional right of dismissing that Minister,' bore date August 12,

1850, and was communicated to Lord Palmerston by Lord John Russell at

this time, within a few weeks of the termination of the debate on the

foreign policy of the Government.]]

_November 10th_.--After a lapse of nearly three months I resume my

notices of past and present events, these three months having furnished

very little matter worth recording nearly up to the present time. For

the last month, however, the world has been sufficiently agitated, on

different accounts and in different places, to afford ample opportunity

for either description or comment even to the most superficial observer.

I might, however, I have very little doubt, write that which would be

acceptable to one person or another by recording my own personal

experiences and the communications that I have with different people on

different matters, which certainly are ludicrously miscellaneous. Some

people like politics, some gossip, and almost all like political gossip.

I have had within these few weeks consultations and communications on

the most opposite subjects: men coming to be helped out of scrapes with

other men's wives, adjustments of domestic squabbles, a grand bother

about the Duke of Cambridge's _status_ in the House of Lords, a fresh

correspondence with Lady Palmerston about the 'Times' attacking her

husband, communication from Cardinal Wiseman about the troubled state of

ecclesiastical affairs, and so forth; odds and ends not altogether

uninteresting, and making a strange miscellany in my mind. It is

needless to attempt to say anything about the solution of the German

question, touching which I have no private information whatever.[125] It

is a drama, at which all the world is audience, and I have not been

behind the scenes. I think we have played a very paltry part in it, and

Palmerston's policy and conduct are so unintelligible to me that I shall

say nothing about them. I agree in all that the 'Times' has written

thereon, and its strictures have hit hard, as is evident by the

resentment expressed by Lady Palmerston.

[Footnote 125: [The German question relates to the proceedings which had

arisen out of the Frankfort Convention, the Schleswig-Holstein quarrel,

and the dispute in Hesse, which nearly led to war. Lord Palmerston was

strongly opposed to the views taken by the Court on these German

questions.]]

The Duke of Cambridge and his family have been, and still are, excited

about the place he is entitled to occupy in the House of Lords,[126] and

they are very angry with me because I said, in my pamphlet on Prince

Albert's precedence ten years ago, that he was only entitled to sit as

Duke of Cambridge according to the date of his peerage, and this I

adhere to now. It is incredible what importance they attach to this

nonsense. The Duchess of Gloucester sent to me to beg a copy of that old

pamphlet, and afterwards the Chancellor did the same. I have had a

correspondence with Lord Redesdale about it, who has taken up the Duke's

cause, and sustained it by some very bad arguments and very inapplicable

precedents. I have stuck to my original opinion, but nevertheless am now

endeavouring to help the Duke to attain his purpose, and have furnished

him with a better precedent than he and his advisers have been able to

find for themselves.

[Footnote 126: [H.R.H. Adolphus, Duke of Cambridge, youngest surviving

son of George III., died in July 1850, and was succeeded by his son,

Prince George of Cambridge. A question arose as to his precedence; but

H.R.H. sits in the House of Lords as fourth Peer of the Blood Royal, the

Duke of Cumberland not having taken the seat to which he has an

hereditary right.]]

[Sidenote: THE PAPAL AGGRESSION.]

But such trifles as these, and such serious matters as an impending

German war, are uninteresting in comparison with the 'No Popery' hubbub

which has been raised, and which is now running its course furiously

over the length and breadth of the land. I view the whole of this from

beginning to end, and the conduct of all parties with unmixed

dissatisfaction and regret. The Pope has been ill-advised and very

impolitic, the whole proceeding on the part of the Papal Government has

been mischievous and impertinent, and deserves the severest censure.

Wiseman, who ought to have known better, aggravated the case by his

imprudent manifesto. On the other hand, the Protestant demonstration is

to the last degree exaggerated and absurd. The danger is ludicrously

exaggerated, the intention misunderstood, and the offence unduly

magnified. A 'No Popery' cry has been raised, and the depths of

theological hatred stirred up very foolishly and for a most inadequate

cause. John Russell, who acted prudently in declaring his Protestant

sympathies, joining the public voice in condemnation of the Pope's

proceedings, and clearing himself and his Government from any suspicion

of being indifferent to them, nevertheless writes a very imprudent,

undignified, and, in his station, unbecoming letter. He might have said

all that it was necessary to say without giving any offence; he might

have taken the movement into his own hands, and satisfied the

Protestants, and at the same time not dissatisfied the Catholics,

pouring oil on the waters, and moderating the prevailing effervescence.

But his letter has had a contrary effect. On one hand it has filled with

stupid and fanatical enthusiasm all the Protestant bigots, and

stimulated their rage; and on the other it has irritated to madness all

the zealous Catholics, and grieved, shocked, and offended even the most

moderate and reasonable. All wise and prudent men perceive this, and

strongly disapprove of his letter; all his colleagues with whom I have

spoken, and I have no doubt all the rest, do so; and Clarendon writes me

word that the effect it has produced in Ireland is not to be told. I

have already had a practical proof of the mischief it has done. Two days

ago Bowyer came to me from Cardinal Wiseman, who was just arrived, to

ask my opinion whether anything could be done, and what. I said if he

had sent to me some time ago, and told me what was contemplated, I might

have done him some service by telling him what the consequences would

be; but that now it was too late to do anything, John Bull had got the

bit in his mouth, and the Devil could not stop him. He told me the

Cardinal was drawing up a loyal address to be signed by ecclesiastics

and laymen, and asked me to look at it. I agreed, and he brought it the

next day. I said it was very well as far as it went, and only suggested

that the new Bishops should take care to sign their names only, and omit

all allusion to their sees. This he engaged for. I then talked over the

case, and what might be done. I said of course we could not expect the

Pope to retract; but that if he was really desirous of doing what could

be done to allay the prevailing irritation, he had better do that which

he still could consistently; that he had not yet pronounced any decision

as to the Irish Colleges, and he might either give one in their favour,

or at least abstain from giving any at all, and the Cardinal would do

well to urge this at Rome. Bowyer replied that this might have been

possible before, but Lord John's letter had made it impossible now, and

that this letter would be regarded as so insulting at Rome, and such a

proof of the hostility of the British Government to the Roman Catholic

religion, that they would put no trust in the writer of it, and it would

be impossible to ask the Pope, nor would he be induced, to do anything

in deference to the objects or wishes of this Government.

This odious agitation will continue till it is superseded by something

else, or expires from want of aliment more solid than fanatical

denunciations. Already sensible people, even those who are indignant at

the 'Papal aggressions' as they are termed, begin to think the clamour

exaggerated, that we are going too far, and raising a spirit of

theological and sectarian hatred and enmity, which is dangerous and will

be very troublesome. They begin to reflect that a great movement without

a definite and attainable object is a very foolish thing, and as it is

quite certain that the Pope will not retract what he has done, and that

we can neither punish him nor frighten him, that his ecclesiastical

arrangements will be carried into execution here whether we like it or

not, and that as we shall take nothing by all our agitation and clamour,

we shall probably end by looking very foolish. At present everybody,

Protestants, Puseyites, and Catholics, are all angry, excited, and

hostile. Some affect to be very angry and make a great noise because

they think it answers an end. John Russell is somewhat in this way, for

I don't believe he _really_ cares much; the 'Times' newspaper does the

same, and blows up the coals for the sake of popularity; but Delane, who

begged me not to write, as I was inclined to do, something in mitigation

of the movement, told me he thought the whole thing gross humbug and a

pack of nonsense.

[Sidenote: ANTI-PAPAL AGITATION.]

_November 21st_.--The Protestant agitation has been going on at a

prodigious pace, and the whole country is up: meetings everywhere,

addresses to Bishops and their replies, addresses to the Queen;

speeches, letters, articles, all pouring forth from the press day after

day with a vehemence and a universality such as I never saw before. The

Dissenters have I think generally kept aloof and shown no disposition to

take an active part. A more disgusting and humiliating manifestation has

never been exhibited; it is founded on prejudice and gross ignorance. As

usual the most empty make the greatest noise, and the declaimers vie

with each other in coarseness, violence, and stupidity. Nevertheless,

the hubbub is not the less mischievous for being so senseless and

ridiculous. The religious passions and animosities that have been

excited will not speedily die away, nor will the Roman Catholics forget

the insults that have been heaped on their religion, nor the Vatican all

the vulgar abuse that has been lavished on the Pope. In the midst of all

this Wiseman has put forth a very able manifesto, in which he proves

unanswerably that what has been done is perfectly legal, and a matter of

ecclesiastical discipline, with which we have no concern whatever. He

lashes John Russell with great severity, and endeavours to enlist the

sympathies of the Dissenters by contrasting the splendour and wealth of

the Anglican clergy with the contented poverty of the Romanists, and

thus appeals to all the advocates of the voluntary system. His paper is

uncommonly well done, and must produce a considerable effect, though of

course none capable of quieting the storm that is now raging. Wiseman

does not evince any intention of receding in the slightest degree, but

on the contrary there appears to lurk throughout his paper a

consciousness of an impregnable position, round which the tempest of

public rage and fury may blow ever so violently without producing the

slightest effect.

Meanwhile the Government are, I suspect, in a great fix. They are all

disconcerted and perplexed by Lord John's letter. When the Cabinet met

and this letter was shown to them, Lord Lansdowne asked whether the

letter had been already sent, and when informed that it had, he declined

saying anything. As it was sent and published they thought it necessary

to do something, and the law officers were accordingly desired to look

into the law on the subject. There can be little doubt that the law will

not touch the case, and they will hardly have the egregious folly to

propose fresh laws which would be quite inoperative. Violence, menaces,

and abuse never made any people flinch from their religious opinions or

abandon any line of conduct they might have adopted in relation to them.

The Catholics know very well that in these days any serious persecution

is not to be apprehended, and, even if it were, the Roman Catholic

clergy, to do them justice, have never shrunk from enduring any

sufferings or privations to which they were exposed. They would probably

rather like than not to see some attempt made here to revive penal laws,

and to be exhibited to the civilised world in the character of martyrs.

From the beginning I foresaw that we should cut a poor figure in this

affair, and this is sure to be the result, whether we do anything or

nothing. There is great difference of opinion whether this agitation

will prove favourable or the reverse to the Roman Catholic religion in

England, that is, to its extension. The Roman Catholics themselves

evidently think we have by our violence been playing their game and that

it will promote their proselytising views. Time alone can show how this

will be. The Queen takes a great interest in the matter, but she is much

more against the Puseyites than the Catholics. She disapproves of Lord

John's letter.

[Sidenote: THE SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN QUESTION.]

_November 26th_.--At Brocket from Saturday till Monday. Nobody there; I

found Lord Beauvale[127] in good humour with Palmerston, who, he

assured me, had acted a very proper and a very spirited part in

reference to German affairs, having had to fight against the violent and

inveterate prejudices of the Court, to which some of his colleagues were

not disinclined to defer. He said that although the Court were quite

powerless in such matters as the Greek or the Sicilian questions, they

could do a great deal of mischief in Germany, for being in constant

communication with their relations and connexions there, they could

exercise a good deal of indirect influence, and he thinks they have not

scrupled to encourage the King of Prussia in his absurd conduct. A

letter was sent to Palmerston, doubtless written by Prince Albert, in

which they talked of Denmark wresting Schleswig from Germany, and that

the triumph of Austria would be fatal to the constitutional cause.

Palmerston replied that he had never heard that Schleswig belonged to

Germany, and as to the constitutional cause it was more in danger from

the King of Prussia, whose conduct was putting all thrones in jeopardy.

Beauvale also showed me a letter from Berlin in which the writer said

that nothing was more important there than the English press; and he

begged me, as Palmerston was now really doing all he could in the right

direction, to get him any support I could. Nobody knows whether this

will end in war or peace. Palmerston, always sanguine, says _peace_; and

Beauvale thinks, when Russia, France and England are all trying to avert

war, that it cannot ensue.

[Footnote 127: [Upon the death of William Lamb, Viscount Melbourne, his

brother, Frederic Lamb, previously created Lord Beauvale, succeeded to

the Melbourne title and to the Brocket and other estates. Lord Beauvale

had married at Vienna, where he was British Minister, Mdlle. de

Maltzahn, daughter of the Prussian Minister at that Court. Mr. Greville

was much more intimate with Frederic, than he had ever been with

William, Lamb, and he continued, during the remainder of Lord Beauvale's

life, to be a frequent guest at Brocket. He generally called his friend

by his former name or title, though he was, in fact, Viscount Melbourne

after his brother's death.]]

The Protestant movement goes on with unabated fury, and the quantity of

nonsense that has been talked and written, and the amount of ignorance

and intolerance displayed, exceed all belief, and only show of what sort

of metal the mass of society is composed. Of all that has been written

and spoken there has been nothing tolerable but the Bishop of Oxford's

speech, which was very clever; the letter of Page Wood in the 'Times' in

answer to Wiseman; and everything without exception which has emanated

from the Archbishop of Canterbury. He has displayed a very proper and

becoming spirit with great dignity, moderation, and good sense. All the

rest is a mass of impotent fury and revolting vulgarity and

impertinence, without genius or argument or end and object--mere abuse

in the coarsest and stupidest shape. It is not a little remarkable what

a strong anti-Papist Clarendon is. He writes to me in that sense, but

not so vehemently as he does to others; and I see how his mind is

inflamed, which is odd in so practical a man. But this is obviously the

result of the bitter hostility he has had to encounter in Ireland from

the Roman Catholic clergy, notwithstanding the efforts he made to

conciliate them.

_December 1st_.--I went to Brocket again on Wednesday, and returned on

Thursday. Palmerston and Lady Palmerston were there, but I had no talk

with her. Beauvale told me that Palmerston was acting with good faith,

and doing what he could to avert war. Cowley had written from Frankfort

that it was reported there that in the event of war we should support

Prussia. Palmerston wrote back that we certainly should not, and desired

him to contradict any such report. He sent his letter to the Queen by

way of an intimation of his course. Meanwhile Radowitz arrived, and had

hardly set foot in England before he was invited to Windsor, the pretext

being that he brought over a letter from the King. Palmerston was not

there, and John Russell left the Castle the day he arrived.

[Sidenote: THE LETTER OF CAROLUS.]

_December 11th_.--I could no longer stand the torrent of nonsense,

violence and folly which the newspapers day after day poured forth, and

resolved to write a letter, which was published in the 'Times' the day

before yesterday, and signed 'Carolus,' for I did not venture to put my

own name to it.[128] Delane could not bear publishing it, because it

was in opposition to the strong line the paper has taken; and he told

me beforehand he must attack me. Accordingly they replied to the article

they published, but in very complimentary terms and with very feeble

arguments. Labouchere told me last night this letter must do good, and

make people think calmly. However, the agitation continues with unabated

violence, and it is no wonder the masses are so intemperate and absurd,

when we see how ignorant and senseless men are who ought to know better,

and who pass for being clever and well-informed; and hear the

unreflecting nonsense they talk, and the extravagant views they

entertain. Bear Ellice, who is by way of being wiser than anybody, and

thinks it is his vocation to advise everybody, told me on Monday that he

had advised Charles Wood what to do, and this notable scheme was to

place matters by legislation on the same footing here that they had been

placed on in Prussia by _Concordat_. I told him it was impossible; and

when he insisted, I asked him if he knew what the state of things was in

Prussia: to which he was obliged to admit that he knew nothing about it!

Then we see the Head-Master of Rugby School petitioning the

Postmaster-General to remove a letter-carrier because he is a Roman

Catholic! Clanricarde writes a very good answer, which is in the 'Times'

of yesterday. Graham came to town yesterday on his way to Windsor, where

he is asked to stay three nights, and he came and passed two hours with

me yesterday morning. His opinions are precisely like my own, and he has

written a letter to Howard of Greystock, exactly in the same spirit as

'Carolus;' he is not only very sensible but very bold on the subject,

and quite prepared to confront public opinion in defence of the

principles of religious liberty. We discussed the whole subject at great

length. He acknowledged that the difficulty of the Government was very

great. I enlightened his mind as to the part Palmerston has recently

been playing in German affairs, which he was by no means aware of, and I

hinted to him that his joining the Government would not be disagreeable.

He owned that Palmerston would no longer be an insuperable objection,

but that he could not be a party to any measures savouring of religious

persecution, or even restriction. The Queen's answers to the addresses

will have satisfied him, and all reasonable and moderate people; but I

expect the zealots will cry out. Nothing certainly ever was more

guarded.

[Footnote 128: [This letter is reprinted in the Appendix to the present

volume.]]

_December 13th_.--At Windsor yesterday for a Council. My letter

'Carolus' has made a decided hit. Delane told me yesterday that it had

certainly produced a considerable effect, as he could tell from the

innumerable letters he received about it, some for and some against. The

Ministers were for the most part shy of talking to me about it; but John

Russell came up to me and said, 'Well, I have derived a great deal of

information from your letter. I think it is very good.' I laughed, and

said, 'I'm glad you like it; you ought to be pleased, because I have

praised you up to the skies, and described your speech as a model of

wisdom.' He laughed too, and said, 'Yes, but that was not the part of it

I liked the best.'

[Sidenote: CONVERSATION WITH LORD PALMERSTON.]

I brought Palmerston from the station in my brougham; all very amicable.

We talked about Popery and Germany, and agreed very well; he mighty

reasonable. I asked him if he had had any conversation with Radowitz. He

said none, except of the most general kind. He thought Radowitz had been

advised to absent himself from Prussia, and that the King, for the

present at least, was entirely with Manteufel. I then asked him what

Prince Albert said to the turn affairs had taken. He said Prince Albert

was reasonable enough; that he condemned the King of Prussia as much as

anybody could; that he had been in favour of strengthening Prussia, and

against the old Federation, because he thought the influence of Austria

in it was too great, and that it was mischievously exercised; that the

condition that no organic change in the Diet could take place there,

without a unanimous vote, could not be endured; and that he thought,

while the influence of Austria remained paramount, the liberal cause,

and all advances in civilisation and general improvement, must be

paralysed; and this was to a certain degree true. I said no doubt it

was desirable to see changes and improvements, and for various reasons

that Prussia should be powerful, if her power was only acquired by fair

means, and without trampling on the rights of others, and on all

obligations human and divine. He said, 'Exactly, that is the real case;

but her conduct has been so wanting in prudence, in consistency, and in

good faith, that she has arrayed against her those who wish best to

her.' He told me the Pope had expressed great surprise at the effect of

his measures, and disclaimed any intention of affronting the Queen or

this country. The Pope said he had been induced to take the steps he had

done by advice from this country, and Palmerston thinks that Wiseman was

probably at the bottom of it all.

I went last night to the Royal Academy to hear an anatomical lecture by

a Mr. Green.[129] It was on _expression_, and very well done. I never

heard a man more fluent; he was very lucid in his expositions and

illustrations, and really very eloquent.

[Footnote 129: [Mr. Green was Professor of Anatomy in the Royal Academy

of Arts--a very eloquent and remarkable man, though but little known by

the public. He had been the most intimate friend of the poet Coleridge

in his later years, and published a work on the philosophical opinions

of Coleridge after his death.]]

_Bowood, December 26th_.--Went on Tuesday in last week to Panshanger, on

Saturday to Brocket, Monday to London, and Tuesday here; we were very

merry at Panshanger. The house and its Lord and Lady furiously

Protestant and anti-Papal; so we had a great deal of wrangling and

chaffing; all in good humour and amusing enough. At Brocket nobody but

the Bear (Ellice), who talked without ceasing, and told me innumerable

anecdotes about Lord Grey's Government, and different transactions in

all of which he had himself played a very important part, and set

everything and everybody to rights with his consummate wisdom. He is a

very good-natured fellow, entertaining and tiresome, with a prodigious

opinion of his own _savoir faire_, vain and conceited, though not

offensively so; clever, friendly, liberal, and very serviceable. They

put me at Brocket in Melbourne's room, and there I found a MS. book,

containing copies of letters written by him to Lord Anglesey, while

Lord Anglesey was Lord-Lieutenant and he was Chief Secretary--very

familiar and confidential. They were very frank, and giving Lord

Anglesey a good deal of advice, which on some occasions he seemed to

require. Their good sense struck me extremely. There was a detailed

account of the Huskisson quarrel, and the resignations thereupon, but it

contained nothing that was new to me. William Lamb (as he was then)

thought both the Duke and Huskisson were in the wrong; but he resigned

with the others, because, he said, 'he had always thought that it was

more necessary to stand by his friends when they were in the wrong, than

when they were in the right.' Poking about to see what else I could

find, I lit on two very different MS. One was a book which I suspect had

belonged to Pen Lamb, containing entries and pedigrees of hounds and

horses; and the other was a commonplace book of Melbourne's, which I had

not time to examine much, full of quotations, criticisms, comments and

translations, exhibiting various and extensive reading, especially of

Greek literature. The next time I go there, I will look at it again.

[Sidenote: DIFFICULTIES AHEAD.]

The Greville Memoirs, Part 2 (of 3), Volume 3 (of 3) A Journal of the Reign of Queen Victoria from 1837 to 1852 · 第 10 / 14 章