CHAPTER XXXII.

Difficulties ahead--Lord John Russell resigns--Conduct of

the Opposition--Lord Stanley waits on the Queen--Sir James

Graham's Views--Ministerial Negotiations--Lord Stanley attempts

to form a Ministry--Lord Stanley fails--The Whig Ministry

returns to Office--Sir James Graham stands aloof--Dislocation

of Parties--Embarrassments arising from the Papal Aggression

Bill--Weakness of the Government--Relations of Sir James Graham

and the Whigs--Debate on the Papal Aggression Bill--A Measure

of Chancery Reform--Lord Stanley at Newmarket--Hostility of

the Peelites--Opening of the Great Exhibition--Defeats of the

Ministry--The Exhibition saves the Government--M. Thiers in

London--Close of the Season--The Jew Bill--Overture to Sir James

Graham--Which is declined--Autumn Visits and Agitation--Lord

John Russell's Reform Bill--The Creed of a Capuchin--Kossuth's

Reception in England--The Kossuth Agitation in England--Mr.

Disraeli on Lord George Bentinck--Sir James Graham's Fears of

Reform--Dangers from Lord Palmerston's arbitrary Conduct--Case of

Greece--Case of Sicily--The _Coup d'…tat_ of the 2nd December.

_London, February 20th_, 1851.--I broke off what I was writing two

months ago, having been attacked by a severe fit of the gout, which has

tormented me on and off ever since, partly deterring and partly

disabling me from writing anything whatever. Indeed I have been in a

hundred minds whether I should not here and now close my journalising,

for I don't feel as if I had, or was likely to have, anything more to

say worth writing about. It is perhaps no loss to have omitted any

notice of the meeting of Parliament, and what has taken place with

reference to the Anti-Papal Bill, and other matters. Are not these

things amply narrated in all the newspapers of the day?--and I do not

think I have acquired any knowledge or information besides, or at least

none of any importance. I shall therefore not attempt to go over the

ground or any part of it, that we have been travelling over for the last

two months; but I am induced to forego my purpose of shutting up my

books and abandoning this occupation, partly from reluctance to quit it

entirely, and partly because I think we are in a very precarious and

difficult state, and that a crisis seems imminent, fraught with great

interest and great danger. In such circumstances I like to write what I

know and hear, and to record my own impressions and opinions.

[Sidenote: LORD JOHN RUSSELL RESIGNS.]

_Brocket, February 24th._--Events have come quickly on us. On Thursday

night Locke King brought on his annual motion for extension of the

suffrage, and moved for leave to bring in a bill. Lord John opposed it,

but pledged himself that he would bring in a measure next Session, if he

was still in office. Nevertheless he was beaten by two to one--100 to

52. The Conservatives went away, no trouble was taken, and this was the

result. The conduct of the Radicals was offensive. Locke King, after

Lord John's promise, wanted not to divide; but Hume, Bright, and their

faction insisted on dividing, and one of them (I think Bright)

insultingly said, 'If you don't divide and beat him, he will throw over

his promise and do nothing.' It must be owned that he gave some colour

to this suspicion by his conduct. A few nights before Hume asked him if

he was going to bring in any measure _this year_. He said he was not,

but that he still intended to do so, at what he should deem to be a fit

time for it: not a word of _next_ year. This looks very much as if his

promise on Thursday was an impromptu got up for the occasion. Still not

a creature in or out of the House expected he would regard such a defeat

as this as a matter of any importance, and great and general were the

surprise and consternation when Lord John got up, just when the Budget

was to have come on, and made an announcement which was tantamount to

resignation.[130] The House dispersed in a state of bewilderment, and

the town was electrified with the news. At night there was a party at

Lady Granville's, and there it became known that the Government was in

fact out. It seemed the more unaccountable because Stanley had sent them

word of what had been resolved at his meeting, which was neither more

nor less than a sham attack on the Income Tax, which the Tories did not

expect or intend to succeed. Lord John, however, had resolved to resign

after Friday's check, not on that account only, but on the cumulative

case of many unmistakeable symptoms of the hostility of the House of

Commons and the impossibility of his going on. So he thought he had

better 'do early and from foresight that which he should be obliged to

do from necessity at last,' as Mr. Burke said on a different occasion.

Nobody knew what he was going to do,--none of his followers and

subordinates. He saw the Queen in the morning, to whom he no doubt

imparted his intention; then he assembled the Cabinet, where it must

have been settled, and then he saw the Queen again. Lord Lansdowne was

at Bowood, and ignorant of this decision. Carlisle was engaged in the

City, not at the Cabinet, and heard from Grey when he came into the

House of Lords that they were out. In the evening I was at home and

upstairs, and many of the men came up to talk it all over. Ellice said

Lord John was quite right. However, I think such was not the general

opinion, nor is it mine. Looking at the state of the country and the

obvious difficulty, if not impossibility, of forming any other

Government, still more of forming one entitled to, or which could

obtain, the confidence and support of the Crown and the country, I am

very strongly of opinion that he ought to have fought the battle for

some time longer, not to have yielded to any hostile manifestations, or

to the probability, however great, of damaging or fatal defeats, but to

have encountered without flinching all the opposition he might meet

with, and not to desert his post till the worst he apprehended should

actually occur. Many people think that, in spite of appearances, he

would have weathered the storms; and though in the midst of great

difficulties, he would eventually have evaded or surmounted them all.

[Footnote 130: [It was on the 22nd of February that Lord John Russell

moved the postponement of the Committee of Ways and Means, which implied

his intention to resign, though it was not generally understood to have

that meaning. An interesting and accurate account of this transaction is

to be found in a letter from Lord Canning to Lord Malmesbury in the

first volume of Lord Malmesbury's Journal, p. 274.]]

The conduct of the Protectionists about the Income Tax showed how

uncertain and little adventurous they were. This is partly explained by

the revelation that has been made of the opinions of some of their

leading men. It has been for some time apparent that there is a great

ambiguity in the conduct of the party, different members of which hold

the most discordant and inconsistent language. Disraeli the other night

declared he was not going for Protection, that it was out of the

question in this Parliament, and that the country must settle the

question. Granby directly afterwards says he is for Protection. In the

House of Lords, on a motion of Lord Hardwicke's when a great Free Trade

debate was expected, and when it was well known that Stanley had been

preparing a great speech, he never opened his lips, and the whole thing

ended briefly and flatly. But the Duke of Richmond made one of his

furious harangues, pointed to Stanley as 'the Leader of the

Protectionist party,' and gave a eulogistic commentary on Disraeli's

speech, asserting that he only meant that the battle of Protection must

be fought on the hustings, where it not only would be fought, but would

be won. Still Stanley was silent, and did not utter a word in approval

or in repudiation of these sentiments and intentions. Notwithstanding

these ambiguities, people still talked of the probability or the

possibility of a Protectionist Government. It was said that Stanley had

made up his mind to take it, if he could get it, and that he was of

opinion that, great as the risks and serious as the consequences might

be, it was better to encounter them all than to let slip the best

opportunity they should ever have of ousting the Whigs, turning back the

current of Free Trade, and restoring the Protective system. Everybody

was looking with anxious curiosity for the decision of Stanley's meeting

on Friday morning, as to the course they should adopt in reference to

the Income Tax; and when it was known (which it was not till after John

Russell's announcement in the House of Commons), the impression was that

they were afraid to fight on that question; but at night I heard a very

strange thing, which placed the condition and prospects of that party

in quite a new light. Two of the best men they have in the House of

Commons are Walpole and Henley, especially the first. Walpole told

Jocelyn in the House of Commons that he would have nothing to do with

any Government that would attempt to reimpose any duty on foreign corn,

and he added that Henley was of the same mind; and so, in fact, were at

least half the members of his party. This statement Walpole made twice

over to Jocelyn, and he said the same thing to others besides. If such

were the sentiments of some of their best men, what was to become of

Protection? how was the battle to be fought on the hustings? and how was

Stanley ever to form a Government, and on what principles?

[Sidenote: THE PROTECTIONISTS.]

However, the Government had resigned; somebody must be sent for, and

something must be done. Oddly enough, while all this was going on in the

House of Commons, Stanley was dining at the Palace. Yesterday morning

the 'Times' (whose editor was at Lady Granville's party) announced the

news to the astonished town. I went to my office, where presently

Labouchere, Carlisle, Granville, and Evelyn Denison came into my room.

Labouchere gave John Russell's reasons for resigning, which to me seemed

quite insufficient, and I told them why. Carlisle said nothing, and I

suspect agreed with me. Denison did entirely. I then came down here,

where I found Brougham fall of indignation and disapprobation of the

hasty resignation, and talking mighty good sense about the whole

question and the aspect of affairs. We heard this morning that Stanley

had been with the Queen, had refused to take office for the present, but

said he did not refuse absolutely if no other Government could be

formed; and that John Russell, Aberdeen, and Graham met afterwards at

the Palace. So matters stand up to this time.[131]

[Footnote 131: [Lord Malmesbury gives an account of the failure of Lord

Stanley to form a Government in his Journals (vol. i. p. 278), which was

mainly due to the timid conduct of Mr. Henley and Mr. Herries. Mr.

Disraeli did not conceal his anger at the want of courage and interest

shown by those persons. They may, however, have had better reasons for

refusing to join a Protectionist Cabinet.]]

I have seen a great deal of Graham lately, and he has talked to me with

considerable openness about the state of affairs, present and

prospective; the condition and prospects of the Government, and their

recent conduct, pointing out many of the faults they have committed, and

what they might have done. He found great fault with Charles Wood's

Budget, and his general opinion was that the Government could not go on,

and _co˚te que co˚te_ that we must pass through the ordeal of a

Protectionist Government--not that he thought it would stand long, and

he was aware that the experiment would be attended with great peril to

our institutions, and might lead to very serious consequences. Still

that it was inevitable. He said that his joining the Government now

would be of no use to them whatever, and he should only involve himself

in, without averting, their fate. He was evidently much pleased and

satisfied with his own speech on Disraeli's motion.[132] He was

conscious of its success, and of the great service he had rendered the

Government; for, while disapproving of much that they have done, he is

now desirous of reconciling himself with his old friends, looks

hereafter to coming into power with them, and is excessively pleased at

having put himself on amicable terms with John Russell. He told me that

he had said to John Russell the other day, that though circumstances had

separated them, and placed them for a long time in opposition to each

other, it would always be satisfactory to him to remember, that on the

three great questions which he regarded as the most important of his

political life, they had been agreed, and had taken the same part,

sometimes together and sometimes independently. These were the Catholic

Question, Reform in Parliament, and the Repeal of the Corn Laws.

[Footnote 132: [Lord Stanley said of this speech of Graham's that it was

very bitter but very telling; and it convinced him that the Tories had

nothing to hope for from the leading Peelites but opposition.]]

[Sidenote: THE PEELITES NEGOTIATE WITH THE WHIGS.]

I found Graham in very low spirits, and full of disquiet and

apprehensions about the future prospects of the country. This is

generally his disposition, and he has communicated much of his alarm

and anxiety to me. On Friday morning, after Locke King's division, and

before he knew anything of John Russell's intention, I received a note

from him in these terms: 'My anticipations are most gloomy. I foresee

nothing but confusion; there are no means of escaping it; everything

will be shaken, and something more than a Government, I fear, will fall.

The "Times," I see, has passed sentence of death on the Administration

this morning. It is most likely it will be executed speedily, and I

doubt whether for their sakes it may not be said, the sooner the better.

They have lost all command over the House of Commons, and indistinct

promises of democratic change when made by a Prime Minister are most

dangerous, for vagueness encourages hope, and the hope is deferred. This

state of doubt and fear cannot last much longer; the public on all hands

would greatly prefer a struggle and a settlement.' When he wrote these

lines John Russell had already made up his mind to resign.

_London, February 25th._--I came to town yesterday morning and found

everything unsettled: Aberdeen, Graham, and John Russell trying to agree

upon some plan, and to form a Government. At half-past four Delane came

into my room, straight from Aberdeen. Aberdeen told him he was still

engaged in this task, but, he owned, with anything but sanguine hopes of

success. Delane said to him he hoped if he did succeed he would not

overlook the numbers and importance of the Liberal party. Aberdeen

replied, 'You may rest assured that I am well aware of their importance,

and I believe I am at least as _Radical_ as any of those who are just

gone out.' I went to Brooks's, found it very full and excited; some

persuaded Graham and his friends would come to terms and patch the thing

up. Bear Ellice and others thought it impossible, and that Stanley is

inevitable. In the House of Commons John Russell made his statement, and

when he had made it Disraeli, without tact or decency, denied that it

was correct. John Russell was not very discreet in what he said. He

ought not to have said a word, nor need he, of what passed between

Stanley and the Queen. Disraeli disgusted everybody by what he said,

and his manner of saying it. Lord Lansdowne, Carlisle, and Labouchere

dined here (Bruton Street), and about eleven o'clock a box was brought

to Lord Lansdowne. It was a circular from John Russell announcing the

final failure of the Graham negotiation, and that everything was at an

end. It broke off on the Papal Question, on which they could not come to

an agreement, though John Russell was ready to make some concessions. I

don't think Graham wished to complete any combination, and preferred

throwing the thing back on Stanley. His extreme timidity and his

inveterate habit of magnifying dangers and exaggerating difficulties are

very unfortunate and seriously mar his efficiency. If he had some of the

confidence and sanguine disposition of Palmerston--if he could only

bring himself to think that 'dangers disappear, when boldly they are

faced,' it would be better for the country and for himself. Gladstone is

expected to-morrow; Sidney Herbert says he will not join a Stanley

Government. Everybody goes over the lists of Peers and Commoners whom

Stanley can command, and the scrutiny presents the same blank result of

men without experience or capacity, save only Herries, who is past

seventy, and has been rusting for twenty years and more; and Disraeli,

who has nothing but the cleverness of an adventurer. Nobody has any

confidence in him, or supposes he has any principles whatever; and it

remains to be seen whether he has tact and judgement enough to lead the

House of Commons. It seems that in these negotiations everybody has

behaved well. There have been no difficulties about persons, no

pretensions, no selfishness, no vexatious obstacles from or in any

quarter. Had the thing been patched up, Charles Wood was resolved to go.

They wanted him to change his office, but he would not hear of it, and

said he would not face Halifax. He thought both Grey and Palmerston

ought to go out with him, but they declare that one and all were ready

to make any sacrifice that might be required.[133]

[Footnote 133: [The details of this negotiation between the Whigs, Lord

Aberdeen and Sir James Graham, have been published in an article on the

'Correspondence of Lord Aberdeen,' which appeared in the 'Edinburgh

Review' for October 1883. The insurmountable objections of the Peelites

to the Anti-Papal Bill was the deciding cause of the failure; but the

transaction is interesting, because it was the forerunner of the

Coalition ultimately formed between the Whigs and the Peelites in

1852.]]

[Sidenote: LORD STANLEY'S ATTEMPT.]

_February 26th._--Nothing more known yesterday except that Stanley had

accepted the task of _trying_ to form a Government. From the Queen he

went to Aberdeen, and from him to Lord Canning. As I don't know what

passed, I will say no more. This morning Lord Lansdowne sent for me, and

on leaving him I met John Russell. He told me Stanley was to give his

answer to the Queen _to-day_, though Gladstone is not come. I asked him

what he thought would be the result. He was inclined to think it would

be _No_.

_February 27th._--It appears that Stanley was to say yesterday whether

he would _try_ or not. He is trying. Canning and Gladstone having

refused, it remains to be seen whether he can and will make a Government

out of his own party. Most people think he will not. Everybody asks,

nobody can tell, whether he will throw over Protection or go for it. His

followers now say nothing about _Protection_, but ask for _confidence_.

His rabble are very violent, and abuse him for not at once taking the

Government. This does not make his position easier. Disraeli has behaved

very well and told Stanley to do what he pleased with him; he would take

any office, and, if he was likely to be displeasing to the Queen, one

that would bring him into little personal communication with her. If he

could get anybody essential to his Government to join (Gladstone, of

course), he would act under him. All along everybody seems to have acted

personally well. The town is in a fever of curiosity, incessant

enquiries and no answers, heaps of conjectures and lies. I dined at

Grillon's last night; Graham in the chair, in high spirits. He said, if

Stanley took the Government, he _must_ dissolve on Friday night. But

even if disposed, it is said that this would be impossible, and that he

must get the Mutiny Bill and a money vote before he dissolves.

_February 28th._--I met Gladstone yesterday morning. From the tone of

his conversation his negotiation with Stanley must have been very short

indeed. He said he had come over entirely on account of the Papal Bill.

After another day of curiosity, and rather a growing belief that Stanley

would form a Government, it was announced in the afternoon that he had

given it up. He had a meeting of some of his principal friends, and they

agreed with him in the propriety of his resigning the task. Great

excitement at night, and the Whigs in extraordinary glee, foreseeing the

restoration of John Russell and his colleagues. The Ministers were all

to meet at Lansdowne House this morning and determine on the next move.

Lord John, who is rather sore, and not unconscious of the blame that

attaches to him, said with some bitterness to Granville yesterday, 'Lady

Palmerston called on Lady John for the purpose of telling her that all

that has happened is my fault. Lady John might have told her that if

Palmerston had chosen to be present on Locke King's motion, and have

spoken, it probably would not have happened at all.' Lady Palmerston is

evidently provoked that Palmerston has not been thought of to form a

Government in all this confusion, and at hearing so much of Clarendon

and Graham, and nothing of her husband.

[Sidenote: LORD STANLEY'S FAILURE.]

_March 2nd._--I went to the House of Lords on Friday to hear Stanley's

statement. He made a very good speech and a lucid statement. Nothing

could be more civil and harmonious than all that passed; great

moderation and many compliments. The impression on my mind was that

Stanley was sick to death of his position as leader of the

Protectionists, and everybody agrees that he has been in tearing spirits

these last days, and especially since the announcement of his failure.

His conduct seems obnoxious to no reproach, and he did what he was bound

to do with reference to the Queen and his party. They would have been

intolerably disgusted if he had left untried any means of forming a

Government, and though there will be some grumbling and much

mortification and disappointment amongst them, they have no cause for

complaint. He tried everything and everybody, as I believe, without

either the desire or the expectation of succeeding. Nothing surprises

me more than that anybody should think he could form a Government, as

many very acute people did. What happened was almost sure to happen--the

fear and reluctance of many of his own people to undertake a task for

which they were conscious they were unfit. A man must be very ambitious

and very rash and confident, who, when it comes to the point, does not

hesitate to accept a very important and responsible office without

having had any official experience, or possessing any of the knowledge

which a due administration of the office demands. It was not, however,

without some appearance of sarcasm and bitterness that Stanley spoke of

the men of his own party, who for various reasons had declined to take

office. The man whose private affairs prevented him was Tom Baring; the

modest man was Henley, who is said to have told Stanley that he would

not _disgrace_ his Government by presenting himself to the House of

Commons as Home Secretary; the man who thought it would not last is said

to be Thesiger. Sugden accepted the Great Seal, and the Duke of

Northumberland the Admiralty, for which nobody imagines that he has any

qualification whatever; and it shows what slender materials Derby could

command when he applied to such a man.

John Russell made a poor speech in the other House, and his peroration

was a failure. The speeches of Aberdeen and Graham showed that any

coalition is out of the question, and nothing will induce them to be

parties to the Papal Bill. I think them too stiff on this question, and

can see no reason why they should not consent to be parties to a measure

which they admit to be indispensable. It would have been one thing to

consent to its introduction, but it is another to consent to

its going on, and with great modifications, after it had been once

introduced.[134] _Fieri non debuit, factum valet._ But Graham has all

along had a fixed idea that we must pass through what he calls the

ordeal of a Stanley Government, and he has been continually hoping, and

partly expecting, that Stanley would make the attempt. His object was

reconciliation with John Russell and the Whigs, and ultimate junction

with them, after Stanley should have failed, and I can't help thinking

these notions and views have confirmed him in scruples he might

otherwise have got over.

[Footnote 134: [In the negotiations with the Peelites, Lord John Russell

had offered to reduce the provisions of the 'Ecclesiastical Titles Bill'

to a minimum, and to omit the preamble. It was impossible for him, after

what had passed, to withdraw it altogether.]]

On Friday morning the Queen resolved to send for the Duke of Wellington,

which, however, was in reality a mere farce, for the Duke can do nothing

for her, and can give her no advice but to send for John Russell again.

He was on Friday at Strathfieldsaye receiving the Judges and the County,

so he only came to town yesterday. I do not know what passed between Her

Majesty and his Grace, but Lord Lansdowne went to her again in the

afternoon, and so matters stand at present, nobody doubting that the

Government will stay in as they are, and without any change. Labouchere

confided to me that the majority of the Cabinet did not wish for any

renewal of negotiation or any coalition with Graham, though he did

himself, which does not at all surprise me. No reconciliation, no

necessity for his co-operation, and no manifestation of goodwill on his

part, will do away with all the jealousy and dislike with which many of

the Whigs regard the Peelites.

[Sidenote: LORD JOHN RETURNS TO OFFICE.]

I have been annoyed and disgusted at the part the 'Times' has taken

latterly, turning round upon the Government and upon John Russell in

particular with indecent acrimony. They have attempted a defence of

their conduct, but it is a very lame one, and they have been very

severely and very justly handled by the other papers, especially by the

'Daily News.' No doubt John Russell has committed great errors, and may

be reproached for carelessness and bad management. He has incurred much

odium with certain parties; he has lost a good deal of his authority and

influence in the House of Commons; but he is not a man to be flung aside

as damaged and used up, nor can his faults and mistakes, either of

omission or commission, cancel the antecedents of a long political life

or deprive him of the great position which, in spite of them and of

appearances, he still holds in the estimation of the Whig party and the

country. Nobody can be more sensible of the faults of his character and

of the blunders he has committed than I am; but he has still great

qualities, and I do not believe the Government could go on without him.

I heard last night the details of the Notts election, which appears to

have been lost by bad management. It was a very foolish thing in Lord

Manners to put up his son at all, but having done so, he ought to have

left no stone unturned to secure the victory. The effect of this contest

and the breach between landlords and tenants, unless it can be repaired,

presents the most alarming sign of the times.

_March 4th._--The last act of the drama fell out as everybody foresaw it

would and must. The Duke of Wellington advised the Queen to send for

Lord John again. He was sent for, and came back with his whole crew, and

without any change whatever. This was better than trying some trifling

patch-up, or some shuffling of the same pack, and it makes a future

reconstruction more easy. Last night it was announced to both Houses,

and coldly enough received in the House of Commons. There can be no

doubt that Lord John returns damaged, weak, and unpopular. His personal

and social qualities are not generally attractive, and this is a great

misfortune in such circumstances of difficulty. It is very difficult to

say how they will be able to go on, and what sort of treatment they will

experience from the House of Commons. The only thing that will obtain

for them anything like forbearance and support will be the very general

dread of a dissolution, and the anxiety of members to stave it off. This

may get them through the Session; but their friends are nervous,

frightened, and uneasy, and the general opinion is that they will break

down again before the end of it. If they do, they must dissolve, for

that is the only alternative left.

Lord Granville dined at the Palace last night, and the Queen and Prince

Albert both talked to him a great deal of what has been passing, and

very openly. She is satisfied with herself, as well she may be, and

hardly with anybody else; not dissatisfied personally with Stanley, of

whom she spoke in terms indicative of liking him. She thinks John

Russell and his Cabinet might have done more than they did to obtain

Graham and the Peelites, and might have made the Papal question more of

an open question; but Granville says that it is evident she is heart and

soul with the Peelites, so strong is the old influence of Sir Robert,

and they are very stout and determined about Free Trade. The Queen and

Prince think this resuscitated concern very shaky, and that it will not

last. Her favourite aversions are: first and foremost, Palmerston; and

Disraeli next. It is very likely that this latter antipathy (which no

doubt Stanley discovered) contributed to his reluctance to form a

Government. Such is the feeling about him in their minds. It is

difficult to penetrate Palmerston's conduct and motives during the late

crisis; but I am much inclined to think he was playing, or at least

looking for an occasion to play, a part of his own.[135]

[Footnote 135: [It is a remarkable proof of the candid and dispassionate

spirit of the Queen, that the three men who, at different times and for

different reasons, were notoriously the objects of her distrust and

aversion, subsequently obtained, as First Ministers of the Crown, her

entire confidence. Sir Robert Peel was no favourite at the time of his

abortive attempt to succeed Lord Melbourne in 1839. Lord Palmerston was

entirely at variance with the Court whilst he held the seals of the

Foreign Office. And Mr. Disraeli was supposed to be especially disliked.

Yet in the higher office of Prime Minister each of these statesmen

enjoyed the confidence and approval of the Sovereign, and carried on the

Government with success for several years. None, certainly, ever

received higher marks of favour and distinction than have been bestowed,

in life and in death, on Sir Robert Peel and Lord Beaconsfield.]]

[Sidenote: DISLOCATION OF PARTIES.]

_March 8th._--At Brocket from Tuesday till Thursday. In the morning I

saw Graham and had a long talk with him, principally about the Papal

Bill. I asked him why he could not make up his mind to support the

amended and curtailed Bill, which would not be inconsistent with his

original objection to any measure; but he went into the whole question

and satisfied me of the impossibility of his supporting and defending

(as he must have done) any measure whatever. The truth moreover is, that

he was not sorry to have this excuse for keeping aloof, for if he could

have got over this, there still remained behind the great difficulty of

Palmerston. This was never touched upon at all, and consequently they

were all able to say there were no _personal_ difficulties; but Graham

was satisfied that if he had joined them, he and Palmerston should have

speedily disagreed, and I do not think any coalition will ever be

possible which embraces Palmerston's remaining at the Foreign Office. My

own opinion is that Graham wished Stanley's Government to be formed; and

I am confirmed in this view by the remarkable fact that he and Aberdeen

_advised_ Lord Canning to accept Stanley's offer. Canning told Granville

this, and I asked Graham if Aberdeen had advised Canning to do so, and

why. He replied, rather evasively, that it was a great temptation; that

Canning was not committed to Free Trade; and that Aberdeen had suggested

there was no objection if he was disposed to accept. It was, however,

very strange advice. Granville thinks very ill of the prospects of the

Government, and has no reliance on their _savoir faire_. Meanwhile there

they are again, having lost something in reputation, while it is

questionable whether they have gained much in support; but, I think,

_something_. There is a greater disposition to toleration, and to let

them work through the Session, for everybody dreads a dissolution. There

is a universal feeling of doubt, disquiet, and insecurity. Parties are

dislocated; there is no respect for, or confidence in, any public men or

man. Notwithstanding the creditable manner in which every actor in the

late crisis is said to have played his part, and the fairness,

unselfishness, public spirit, and mutual urbanity and politeness

displayed by all, there lurks under this smooth surface no little

jealousy, dislike and ill-will; in truth, in all that passed, nobody was

in earnest. The Government threw up their offices not wishing to resign.

Stanley did not desire, and did not intend, if he could possibly avoid

it, to form a Government; Graham did not wish to coalesce with the Whig

Government, nor they with him. John Russell would have taken him in, if

they could have agreed; but most of his colleagues hated the idea of

coalition; he would have been ill received by most of the adherents of

the Government, and he is himself persuaded that he should not have gone

on long without a difference of some sort. Many great difficulties, as

they would have proved, were never touched upon, particularly who were

to come in, and who were to go out.

_March 10th._--I was interrupted, as I was writing, by the arrival of

Graham himself, who stayed two hours, talking over everything. He left

no doubt about his wishes for Stanley's forming a Government, for he

told me that he never was more sorry for anything than for his failure.

He still contemplates the great probability of such a Government,

supposing a dissolution to take place, and the return of a Parliament

prepared to vote for an import duty, and his mind is still bent on a

joint action between himself and the Whigs _in opposition_. This is what

he wants. He is not aware of the antipathy there is towards him on the

part of many of them. Lord Grey, for example, is very bitter against

him, and _tantum mutatus_, that he is now the warmest supporter and most

zealous colleague of Palmerston! John Russell told Graham that last year

Palmerston strongly urged him to get Graham to join them and take

office, if he could be persuaded to do so. This is curious enough.

[Sidenote: THE ANTI-PAPAL BILL.]

Graham again entered at great length into all the objections against the

Papal Bill, and the bad policy and mistakes of the Government. He

thought it was one to have put up George Grey to usher it out, when John

Russell had himself ushered it in;[136] for he said it was both evident

and notorious that George Grey was in favour of stringent measures, and

his speech was one in favour of the clauses the omission of which he was

announcing. He said the announcement was very ill received, and he

thinks the Bill will not pass. He fancies the Protectionists will throw

it out, in which I disagree with him. There is an idea that they will

try and make it more stringent, by proposing to retain the clauses or

some other way; but this would be the best thing for the Government, and

would bring Whigs, Radicals, and Irish all together. Meanwhile the

effect of all that has happened is as bad as possible. I said in my

letter (Carolus), 'We shall assuredly look very foolish if all the

hubbub should turn out to have been made without some definite,

reasonable, and moreover attainable object; and yet we appear to be in

imminent danger of finding ourselves in this perplexing and mortifying

predicament.' Never, I may make bold to say, was any prediction more

signally accomplished than this. Everybody seems disgusted, provoked,

and ashamed at the position in which we are placed. The Roman Catholics

alone are chuckling over their triumph and our perplexity. They see that

we have plunged ourselves into a situation of embarrassment, which

leaves us no power of advancing or receding without danger or disgrace.

Our Government, and especially its chief, have gone on from one fault

and blunder to another. They manage to conciliate nobody, and to offend

everybody. Their concessions are treated with rage and indignation on

one side, and with scorn and contempt on the other. The Bill is reduced

to a nullity, but this does not appease the wrath of the Irish and the

Catholics; though what is left of it will do them no injury, they still

oppose this remnant with undiminished violence, determined if possible

to make us drain the last drop in the cup of mortification and shame. It

is not unnatural that people should be indignant with a Government whose

egregious folly has got us into such an unhappy and discreditable

dilemma. We are in such a position that the Roman Catholics and the

Radicals are alone the gainers; and accordingly, while all others are

disturbed and terrified at such a state of things, they are delighted,

and confidently expect their several ends and objects will be advanced

by the confusion, disunion, and discontent which prevail.

[Footnote 136: [The provisions of the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill were

considerably curtailed, when Sir George Grey moved the next stage of the

proceedings on this measure.]]

_London, March 18th._--Everything still going on as bad as possible. The

Government is now so weak and powerless that its feebleness is openly

talked of in Parliament, as well as derided in the Press. A day or two

ago we appeared to be on the eve of an immediate crisis. Baillie gave

notice of a motion of censure on Torrington and Lord Grey, on which John

Russell declared he would not go on with the Budget or any public

business with this vote hanging over their heads (which if carried

involved resignation) nor till it was decided. Last night Baillie

withdrew it, and business will go on. Nothing is more extraordinary than

the conduct of many of their friends, and the levity with which almost

everybody follows his own particular inclination or opinion, regardless

of the condition of the Government and of the grave questions which are

looming in the distance.

[Sidenote: SIR JAMES GRAHAM VACILLATES.]

Of all strange and unaccountable things the conduct of Graham is the

strangest with reference to his ultimate views, objects and

expectations. On Lord Duncan's motion about the Woods and Forests, he

ostentatiously marched out first to vote against them; on the Naval

Estimates he went away. All this exasperates and disgusts the Whigs,

with whom he looks forward hereafter to acting, and whose chief he means

to be. On Duncan's motion, John Russell's brother-in-law, Romilly, voted

against him; his nephew, Hastings Russell, was in the House and did not

vote. Hayter told John Russell that when such men acted thus, he could

not ask independent members to come down and support the Government. I

called on Graham yesterday, and found him in a state of great disgust at

the Solicitor-General's speech the night before, against the violence

and imprudence of which he bitterly inveighed. He said that Stanley was

preparing resolutions, and he had contemplated having to fight the

battle of religious liberty side by side with John Russell, and the

Government against them; but that this speech perplexed him, and left

him in doubt what he ought to do or what he was to expect. Did John

Russell adopt all the furious 'No Popery' of his law officer, and was he

prepared to legislate in that sense? If so, he would oppose him _totis

viribus_. I told him I did not believe John Russell (who was not

present) by any means concurred with Cockburn, whose speech he must

only regard as an individual effusion, singularly injudicious. He talked

a great deal about this and on other things. I asked him why he had

voted against the Government on Duncan's motion, and told him that his

doing so had greatly annoyed them. He said they were to blame to fight

such a bad case; that he could not but vote with Duncan, having put his

name to an instrument, together with several other eminent persons he

named, recommending this very principle; and that the Government ought

to have shown more deference for the opinion of Parliament and less

condescension to the Court, to please which this proposition had been

resisted. He ridiculed the argument of Parliamentary control being

useless and inefficient, as Seymour pretended. Moreover, he said he had

told Tufnell how he was going to vote. I told him that as he

contemplated at some future time the dissolution of this Government, and

its reconstruction with a large Liberal infusion, including himself, a

combination devoutly to be desired, and as the great Whig party must

constitute the main strength of such a Government, it was very desirable

that he should avoid giving umbrage to them, and exciting hostile

feelings against himself as much as he could and that I wished when he

thought himself obliged to oppose them, that he would tell them so

fairly and amicably. He might prevent many things being done, and at all

events it would obviate much of the bitterness that otherwise was sure

to arise, and that as he was now on such good terms with John Russell he

could very easily do this, and could speak to him at any time. He said

he and John Russell were very good friends, but that all the rest hated

him. He had nothing to complain of on the part of John Russell in the

last transactions, but he thought he had on that of the others, and he

knew very well they did not desire his junction with them, and were very

glad it had failed. And while he took the same view that I do of the

necessity of widening considerably the basis of the Administration, and

taking in men from the Liberal ranks, he said nothing of the kind was

contemplated the other day. We had a great deal of talk, and I gathered

that the present state of his mind and opinions is this. He thinks

Stanley is ready to take the Government, but not just yet; that he is

prepared to push the Ministers later in the Session, and drive them out;

then to dissolve, and if such a Parliament as he hopes and expects be

returned, that Palmerston will join him and lead the House of Commons,

Stratford Canning taking the Foreign Office (as he fancied) till

Palmerston joined. We parted, and I undertook to find out for him what

the Government really meant to do, and whether they did intend

strenuously to resist any attempt to make the Anti-Papal Bill more

stringent, and he promised that he would communicate more frankly and

freely with John Russell in respect to any matters of difference, and

when he was disposed to take any adverse part.

_March 22nd._--I told Labouchere what had passed between Graham and me,

and suggested to him to speak to John Russell about it, which he said he

would do; and this morning I have a note from Lord John desiring me to

call on him. Labouchere told me that it was very true, that most of his

colleagues disliked and distrusted Graham, and they all seem aware that

his object is to see the Government broken up, it being necessary that

the old house should be pulled down before the new one can be built in

which he intends to live. He told me, moreover, that half the Cabinet

were disposed to make up to the Protectionists, but that _he_ considered

such policy equally false and discreditable. This is very curious,

however, and as I cannot doubt that Palmerston is one of this half, it

looks very much as if he would join Stanley whenever circumstances

permitted this junction.

[Sidenote: MR. WALPOLE'S POSITION.]

_March 24th._--Yesterday morning Graham called on me, and said he heard

his speech had greatly offended the Ministerialists, he thought without

reason; that he had studiously avoided saying anything disagreeable to

John Russell, and had not touched on his letter or certain passages in

his first speech which might have provoked comment; that he had stated

his views and his case against the Bill very strongly as he was obliged

to do. For having refused to join the Government expressly and

exclusively on account of his invincible objections to this Bill, he was

compelled to show all the strength and force of these objections. He

then dilated afresh on the whole question, much as he had done before. I

told him that it was true they resented his speech, which they

characterised as one of bitter hostility to the Government, and that it

was so considered by some who did not belong to the Government, such as

Charles Villiers, for example, and they coupled this with his previous

vote on Duncan's motion, and inferred that he was actuated by a desire

to do them all the mischief he could; besides which they thought he was

much to blame in certain topics he had urged in reference to the

possibility of an Irish rebellion. I reminded him of what I had said to

him the other day, and of the bad impression he was making on the minds

of the Whigs, and how serious this was in reference to the possibility

of any future coalition.

He then talked in his usual way about Stanley and the Government he is

to form; said Walpole had made so good a speech that it put him up very

high, and would enable Stanley to make him Secretary of State; and then

he told me of a sort of overture or feeler which Walpole had the night

before made to him. It was at the Speaker's _levÈe_, where they were

conversing on the state of affairs and the prospects of the country,

when Walpole said, 'The only thing would be for you and Lord Stanley to

shut yourselves up in a room together, when you might come to an

understanding.' Graham replied it was impossible; Lord Stanley was a man

of honour, who would abide by his pledges and declarations; and he must,

if he came into power, propose a duty on corn. Walpole said if there was

a majority against it Stanley would give it up, and at all events it

would only be a duty for revenue, and not for protection. Graham replied

that was all nonsense. Let it be called what it would, it was and was

meant to be Protection; and in no way and under no name would he ever be

a party to any duty whatever on foreign corn. Besides, there was the

Papal question. He opposed the Government Bill, and Stanley and Walpole

were prepared to carry legislation still further; therefore these two

important questions rendered any understanding between him and Stanley

impossible. I told him I was going to John Russell, and that I was

pretty sure he had sent for me to talk to me about him.

In the afternoon I called on Lord John, and found him in very good

spirits and humour. It was as I expected, and he said to me exactly what

I had already said to Graham, that since the conferences which had taken

place, at which time there was a general acquiescence (though with some

a reluctant one) in his joining the Government, circumstances had very

materially altered, and that his recent conduct had produced so much

irritation and estrangement that any coalition with him for some time to

come would be very difficult. Time and other circumstances might again

render it possible, but now it was out of the question; this, it was fit

Graham should know, and as he did not like to say it to him himself, he

wished I would. I told him I was not surprised, and that I had already

said as much to him, and had pointed out to him the inevitable

consequences of the course he had adopted. The truth is they, most of

them, dislike and fear him. They dread his propensity to truckle to the

Radicals and to popular clamour, above all as to economy; and Lord John

told me that Palmerston, who had urged him at the close of the last

Session to get Graham to join him, had this year said he did not think

he would be safe, for he would probably insist on cutting down our

establishments to some dangerous extent. I told Lord John all I had said

to Graham about communicating with himself, and he said that he

personally felt no resentment towards him; he acknowledged that he had

not said anything offensive or hostile to him personally, and that he

should be very glad to talk to him, particularly about the Budget, which

was not definitely settled, and he desired me to propose to Graham to

let him call on him for that purpose. This ending did not correspond

well to the beginning of the communication I was to make to him, but I

said I would tell him, which I shall do, softening the hard part as

much as I can.

[Sidenote: SIR JAMES GRAHAM AND THE WHIGS.]

I afterwards called on Lord Lyndhurst, whom I found very flourishing.

Brougham was there, and they were full of talk, chiefly about law, and

agreeable enough. I asked Lyndhurst what would happen, and he said he

really did not know from any communication he had had with Stanley or

anybody, but his belief was that Stanley was prepared to take the

Government, whenever the way was made clear for him by the necessary

money being voted, and the Mutiny Bill passed. This is now the general

opinion.

_March 27th._--On Monday I called on Graham, and found John Russell had

already been there. Graham was dressing, and could not see him, but made

an appointment to call in Chesham Place at three o'clock. I told Graham,

with a good deal of _mÈnagememt_, what John Russell had said, and I

added as much as I could, in addition to what I had said to him before

about his relations with the Government. He insisted that John Russell's

people hated him, and he said there were people about him who hated

them; and then he added that he could do nothing _alone_. I had little

difficulty in perceiving what is passing in his mind, and by what

considerations and with what views he is actuated. He thinks he can

rally round himself a body of supporters, of men who will look up to him

as a leader, and, by so doing, when there is a break-up, he may play the

part of a political potentate, and, in the event of the construction of

a Liberal Government, that he may have a large share of influence, and

make his own terms. He knows or suspects that the Whigs want nothing of

him, but that he should singly join them to help them out of their

difficulties, thereby giving up altogether any claim he might have to be

a political leader, and all distinctive character as such. This

intention of theirs he both resents and abhors, and though he is really

anxious to be on good terms with John Russell, with whom he wishes

hereafter to act, he can neither conceal his desire nor abstain from his

efforts to upset his Government. He is the strongest mixture of

timidity and rashness I ever saw. He is generally afraid of everything,

and sees many unnecessary and imaginary dangers; nevertheless, he is

prepared to hazard almost anything to bring about that consummation on

which his thoughts and his heart are fixed, but which can only be worked

out by the downfall of this, and the experiment of a Stanley Government.

He gave me to understand that it was probable that those who opposed the

second reading of the Papal Bill would take no part in the Committee,

and leave the Government to be beaten there on the clauses, in order to

compel them to vote against the third reading of their own Bill; and he

would do this, although the effect would be to leave the question

unsettled, and to render a terrific No-Popery agitation the principal

ingredient of a general election. His conduct and his views appear to me

greatly deficient in sagacity, and besides being mistaken and

mischievous, to be somewhat tortuous and insincere. One thing is

certain, that he has excited a strong sentiment of disapprobation and

distrust amongst all but the Radicals and the Irish, who probably care

very little for him, except so far as he plays their game. While he is

quite right in the main on the Papal question and probably on some

others likewise, he pursues these particular objects at the expense of

sacrificing or endangering far greater, more important, and more

permanent interests.

The great debate terminated yesterday morning, after a magnificent

speech from Gladstone, and a very smart personal attack of Disraeli on

Graham, which was done with his usual sarcastic power, and was very

generally cheered. As they left the House, Disraeli said to John

Russell, 'I could not help attacking your _Right Honourable friend_, but

I don't suppose you are very angry with me.' 'No,' he replied, 'I am not

angry with you, but you did not say anything of which I have any reason

whatever to complain.' The debate was on the whole very able, but a

preponderance of argument on one side as great as the majority was on

the other. Roundell Palmer, Graham, Fox, and Gladstone made admirable

speeches; while, except Walpole's, there was nothing very good on the

other. Disraeli did not attempt to argue the case.

[Sidenote: CHANCERY REFORM.]

_April 2nd._--Graham called on me on Sunday; said he had had a most

agreeable conversation with John Russell, who was very friendly, and

even confidential; in short, Graham appeared in much better humour than

before, and he said he had engaged, and was resolved, to do all he could

to help them in the Budget. I asked him if he could not do something

with the Irish members, whose cause he had espoused with so much

gallantry and devotion, and he said he thought he could, as he had a

channel of communication through Sir J. Young, and he would try. He then

talked of the Chancery measure, which would not do, and advised that

Lord John should consult Turner[137] about it, who thought it was in the

right line, though not the right thing, and that with some alterations

it might be made into a good measure. Graham thought Stanley quite ready

to take the Government, and that Ceylon was the case on which he meant

to give them the mortal stab. But it remains to be seen whether

Torrington's successful defence of himself last night will not defeat

this scheme if it really existed. I told John Russell what had passed

between Graham and me about Turner. This move of his about the Chancery

Reform has been another blunder. The measure is scouted, and the

Government do not themselves think it will do. I told Charles Wood and

John Russell that it would not. The former replied, 'I don't think it

will, but the House of Commons must be taught that if good services are

to be performed they must be paid for;' and this was again Lord John's

notion, and he acknowledged to me that 'he supposed it would not do.' He

was going to see Pemberton Leigh, and he told me afterwards he had seen

him, and that he disapproved. Why not have seen and consulted him before

producing his scheme instead of after? And why assume that the House of

Commons would be niggardly, instead of framing the best measure they

could, and casting on the House of Commons the responsibility of

refusing the necessary funds to carry out a proper and desirable

arrangement? All this is miserable, bad management. The other night

Lyndhurst came out for the second time, and made an attack on the

Chancery scheme; very well done, marvellous considering his age and his

recent illness. The Chancellor replied well enough, and Grey very

unwisely spoke after him. He is leading the Lords now that Lord

Lansdowne is away, but by no means with the same tact and discretion.

[Footnote 137: [George Turner, Esq., Q.C., afterwards one of the Lords

Justices in Equity.]]

Torrington made his speech last night, and did it very well, making a

very favourable impression, and a good case for himself. Nobody said

anything, and all would have ended there, and ended well, if Grey had

not unwisely got up and made a bitter speech against the Committee, and

on the case generally, in the course of which he said something about

martial law, and the Duke of Wellington's administration of it in Spain;

on which the old Duke rose in a fury, and delivered a speech in a

towering passion, which it would have been far better for Torrington to

have avoided. The Duke was quite wrong, and Grey made a proper

explanation, but the incident was disagreeable.

_April 10th._--At Newmarket on Sunday, and returned yesterday. It was

worth while to be there to see Stanley. A few weeks ago he was on the

point of being Prime Minister, which only depended on himself. Then he

stood up in the House of Lords, and delivered an oration full of gravity

and dignity, such as became the man who had just undertaken to form an

Administration. A few days ago he was feasted in Merchant Taylors' Hall,

amidst a vast assembly of lords and commoners, who all acknowledged him

as their chief. He was complimented amidst thunders of applause upon his

great and statesmanlike qualities, and he again delivered an oration,

serious as befitted the lofty capacity in which he there appeared. If

any of his vociferous disciples and admirers, if some grave members of

either House of Parliament, or any distinguished foreigner who knew

nothing of Lord Stanley but what he saw, heard, or read of him, could

have suddenly found themselves in the betting room at Newmarket on

Tuesday evening and seen Stanley there, I think they would have been in

a pretty state of astonishment. There he was in the midst of a crowd of

blacklegs, betting men, and loose characters of every description, in

uproarious spirits, chaffing, rowing, and shouting with laughter and

joking. His amusement was to lay Lord Glasgow a wager that he did not

sneeze in a given time, for which purpose he took pinch after pinch of

snuff, while Stanley jeered him and quizzed him with such noise that he

drew the whole mob around him to partake of the coarse merriment he

excited. It really was a sight and a wonder to see any man playing such

different parts, and I don't suppose there is any other man who would

act so naturally, and obey all his impulses in such a way, utterly

regardless of appearances, and not caring what anybody might think of

the minister and the statesman so long as he could have his fun.

_April 14th._--Graham called on me yesterday. He generally comes every

Sunday now; talked gloomily about everything, and seemed to think it

very doubtful if the Government would get through the Session. On

Disraeli's motion the other night,[138] on which there was only a

majority of thirteen, he said Gladstone had a great mind to vote against

them, and if he had, others of the Peelites would have gone with him,

and the Government would have been in a minority; that Disraeli had

managed his matters very ill, and had made a very bad speech. If he had

proposed to apply the surplus to a partial reduction of the Malt Tax, he

would have put the Government in a great dilemma, and they probably

would have been defeated. I told him I did not think he could have done

this, or could have got a majority on it, for nobody ever dreams of

abolishing the Malt Tax. He told me that Gladstone was disgusted with

the Government, and determined to turn them out if he could, and from

what he said of the disposition of the Peelites, I infer that they are

disposed to take Gladstone as their leader, and that they are animated

with the same spirit of hostility to the Government. Their views are

these: they think that when they have got the Government out, and there

shall have been a general election, Stanley will find there is so small

a majority for Protection, or none at all, that he will give it up, and

then Protection being abandoned, that they may join him, and the old

Conservative party may be thus rallied and reunited. Such is the view of

Gladstone, and the Duke of Newcastle and Sidney Herbert go along with

him. Then as to the Papal Bill, he returned to what he had before

mentioned to me, the notion of throwing all things into confusion in

Committee; that the Stanleyites will oppose the withdrawal of the

clauses, the opponents of the second reading take no part, the

Government be beaten, and then the Government and the _Anti-Billites_

together throw it out on the third reading. This accomplished, he

fancies there will be no more question of any Bill whatever, that

Stanley will give the go-by to legislation by appointing a Committee,

and so this great difficulty will be got rid of. I would not listen to

this fine scheme, which involved a whole series of discreditable

inconsistencies. He and those who were opposed to penal legislation

refusing to assist in expunging those clauses of the Bill which had such

a character, for the chance of indirectly getting rid of the whole, and

Stanley's coming into power and throwing over both Protection and Papal

aggression, after having fought his way to it upon nothing but the

assertion of these two principles. I urged him as strongly as I could to

be no party to any such schemes, but to co-operate in getting this

odious and mischievous question settled and disposed of in the best and

only way that circumstances now admit of. He is evidently much

perplexed, conscious he is in a false position, and does not see his way

clearly as to the best course for him to adopt. He said he was satisfied

Stanley was determined not to come into office if he could possibly

avoid it, and could find pretexts for refusing it; but his followers are

so eager and impatient, and he has led them on so far, that it is

become difficult for him to avoid it if fresh opportunities present

themselves.

[Footnote 138: [On April 11 Mr. Disraeli moved resolutions in favour of

the owners and occupiers of land, which were negatived by 263 to 250

votes.]]

[Sidenote: THE GREAT EXHIBITION.]

_May 10th._--On the day of the opening of the Great Exhibition I went

into the Park instead of the inside, being satisfied with fine sights in

the way of processions and royal magnificence, and thinking it more

interesting and curious to see the masses and their behaviour. It was a

wonderful spectacle to see the countless multitudes, streaming along in

every direction, and congregated upon each bank of the Serpentine down

to the water's edge; no soldiers, hardly any policemen to be seen, and

yet all so orderly and good-humoured. The success of everything was

complete, the joy and exultation of the Court unbounded. The Queen wrote

a touching letter to John Russell, full of delight at the success of her

husband's undertaking, and at the warm reception which her subjects gave

her. Since that day all the world has been flocking to the Crystal

Palace, and we hear nothing but expressions of wonder and admiration.

The _frondeurs_ are all come round, and those who abused it most

vehemently now praise it as much.

Government has been again defeated in the House of Commons, and the

state of affairs is worse than ever.[139] The apathy, indifference, and

careless disposition of almost everybody is as strange as it is

disgusting. One cannot make out what people want. The mass of the

Protectionists know what they want--to turn out the Government, get in

themselves, procure (as they expect) a majority on a dissolution, and

then restore Protection. Stanley is hanging back as much as he can,

evidently, and no wonder, shrinking from committing himself to the

desperate experiment of such an attempt; but his eager followers push

him on, and he has gone too far with them now to hang back. Yet on the

whole I think the Government will still scramble through the Session,

but a scramble it is. John Russell made one of his very best speeches

the other night, in reply to Roebuck who urged him to resign. But _non

est qualis erat_, he has committed great blunders and has been very

neglectful. Tufnell told me last night, he had observed for the last two

years that his personal influence was waning. There seems no doubt that

Protection has gained many advocates of late, and that in the event of a

dissolution most of the counties and the agricultural boroughs will

return Protectionists. It is therefore probable that there may be a

majority in favour of some import duties, still it is not likely that

the change can be so great as to give more than a bare majority to a

Protectionist Government, and such men with such a majority can hardly

hope to succeed in reversing the whole of our commercial policy and

restoring the old system. But the contest will be very alarming, and

nobody can tell what will come out of the new Reform Bill, and above all

out of the restless spirit of change and progress which has been put in

motion. I cannot help fearing that we are approaching times of

difficulty and danger, the more difficult and dangerous from the lack of

statesmen who have either capacity to deal with political exigencies, or

who possess the confidence and regard of the country sufficiently to be

enabled to take the conduct of affairs into their own hands, who will be

followed, listened to, and obeyed.

[Footnote 139: [A motion of Mr. Hume, limiting the Income Tax to one

year, was carried against the Government by 244 to 230.]]

[Sidenote: M. THIERS IN LONDON.]

_May 31st._--I have been too much occupied, even absorbed, by my Derby

concerns to trouble myself about anything else, but I have at least been

occupied to some purpose, for I won the largest sum I ever did win in

any race, the greatest part of which I have received, and no doubt shall

receive the whole. Meanwhile the world seems to have thought of nothing

but the Exhibition, and all politics have appeared flat, stale, and

unprofitable. This has turned to the advantage of the Government, who

after weathering other storms were finally set on their legs by the

excellent division they got on Baillie's motion about Ceylon. Everybody

now admits that they are quite safe for this Session, after which we

shall see; but though they are considered, and really are, a weak

Government, their weakness is strength compared with that of the other

party, which is hopelessly distracted and disorganised. They have no

unity of purpose, object, or opinion, no reliance on their leaders;

there is no mutual confidence and esteem amongst them; and their great

man, Stanley, has been all along making game of them, humbugging them

and laughing in his sleeve. He has never really intended to turn out the

Government, nor to take office himself, and his whole object has been to

pretend to aim at both these things, taking all the time especial care

to avoid being successful. I am now told that they are beginning to open

their eyes to what has long been obvious to all cool observers. All this

could hardly be otherwise; Stanley could not fail to be disgusted with a

party which suffers itself to be in great measure represented by such

men as G. F. Young and Ferrand.

_June 8th._--I broke off what I was writing to go to Ascot. There is a

picture in 'Punch' of the shipwrecked Government saved by the

'Exhibition' steamer, which really is historically true, thanks in great

measure to the attractions of the Exhibition, which have acted upon the

public as well as upon Parliament. The attacks upon the Government have

for some time past become so languid, and there has been so much

indifference and _insouciance_ about politics and parties, that John

Russell and his Cabinet have been relieved from all present danger. The

cause of Protection gets weaker every day; all sensible and practical

men give it up as hopeless; nevertheless that party will make a

desperate struggle when the elections take place, and though they will

infallibly fail in bringing back Protection, they will probably have

success enough to make government if possible more difficult than it is

now.

M. Thiers has just been over here for a week. He came to see the

Exhibition, and was lodged at Ellice's house. He was indefatigable while

he was here, excessively amused and happy, and is gone back enchanted at

his reception in the world, and full of admiration of all he saw. He was

met by great and general cordiality, invited everywhere, had long

conversations with Palmerston, John Russell, and Aberdeen, dined with

Disraeli to meet Stanley, who, however, did not come, and he was the

only conspicuous man he missed seeing. He was presented to the Queen at

the Exhibition. Hearing he was there (for he usually went early every

morning like herself) she sent for him, was very gracious, and both she

and the Prince talked to him a good while. He talked very conservative

language while he was here, and did not abuse anybody.

_July 5th._--Politics are stagnant; the Government has had no

difficulties, and they are gliding through the Session with an ease and

safety which was not promised at the beginning of it. Their enemies have

done more for them than their friends. Lord Derby's death has taken

Stanley out of the field for a time. Disraeli made a foolish motion and

a bad speech. Government had a good majority; nobody took the least

interest in the proceeding. Protection falls lower and lower and becomes

every day more obviously hopeless; and this really is about all there is

to say. The great question of Law Reform seems to have a chance of being

taken up in earnest; the new Government Bill is rather popular, and has

been well received, and there appears to be something like a stir in the

public mind and a disposition to insist on an attempt being made to

cleanse this Augean stable. The question that most interests the public

is that of the retention or removal of the Crystal Palace. Curiously

enough, the Prince, whose child it is, and who was so earnestly bent on

keeping it in existence, has now turned round, and is for demolishing

it.

The Anti-Papal Bill passed the other night, Thesiger having succeeded in

getting in some amendments, apparently making it more efficient and

stringent; but I don't believe, though they had better not be there,

that it will make any difference. While it was receiving its finishing

touches in the Commons, another rescript of the Pope made its appearance

with a fresh creation of Bishops in England! The opponents of the Bill

had intended to make one more grand display (Gladstone especially) on

the third reading; but by some blundering or negligence they lost the

opportunity. Gladstone made a short but good speech as it was.

[Sidenote: RETURN TO THE GROVE.]

_London, July 25th._--I have had nothing to say for some weeks past. I

went to Liverpool for the races; stayed there to assist at a great

_fÍte_ given by Mr. Brown, M.P. for Lancashire, on board the 'Atlantic,'

to the Exhibition Commissioners and foreigners. The 'Atlantic' is

magnificent, fitted up like a luxurious house, all painting, gilding,

silk and velvet, and with every sort of comfort. I went all about the

river and the docks. Foreigners are much struck with all they saw, there

and elsewhere. Thence I started on an expedition to the lakes, got to

Bowness, found nothing but torrents of rain, a hurricane of wind, cold

and discomfort; so came back to town after taking a look at Windermere,

without going on to Derwentwater and Ullswater, as I had intended. I

found London expiring, and the Session drawing to a close; Government

safe if not sound; two election defeats, Knaresborough and Scarborough,

have a bad aspect; John Russell is mortified at the last and disgusted

with Londesborough, whom he made a Peer, and whose agents took active

part in favour of G. F. Young. The Ecclesiastical Titles Bill has passed

the Lords by an enormous majority, after a tolerable debate. Brougham

and Derby both absent. The Jews are again defeated, and kicking and

plunging in the House of Commons, and going to try their case in a Court

of Law. They will not take the oath as it stands, which I would do if I

were a Jew. They have so far committed themselves against that course,

that they perhaps cannot now take it without inconsistency and

dishonour; but it would have been their best course if they had thought

of it at first. As it is, the Lords will not give way, but it is an

awkward question to have continually agitated. I have not seen Graham

for many weeks, but John Russell told me he had been acting a very

friendly part.

_The Grove, September 7th._--After four years' absence during

Clarendon's viceroyalty I find myself here again, glad to revisit a

place where I have passed so much agreeable time, glad to be in my old

room, and look upon the pictures, which are like old and familiar

acquaintances. My journalising has grown very slack; instead of one book

in three months or four, I have written half a book in six. I had

contemplated a summary of the Session, but abandoned it in disgust, and

I have never met with anybody or heard anything sufficient to rouse me

from my idleness and indifference for weeks or even months past. I did

indeed breakfast at Grote's one morning to meet LÈon Faucher, the French

Minister of the Interior, and had some talk with him about French

politics, from which I brought away nothing particular except his

defence of centralisation, and his confident prediction that Louis

Napoleon would be re-elected. I have myself been so occupied with

racing, at which I have been generally successful, that I have hardly

thought of politics. For a long time I had not seen Graham. The Duke of

Bedford and I have ceased to correspond, and we seldom meet, so that my

sources of political information have been nearly dried up. One day,

however, not long ago, the Duke of Bedford came to me and told me that

Lord John had a great disposition to invite Graham to join the Cabinet,

and asked me what I thought of it. I said that I was against it, and

thought he had better strengthen his Government by his own friends; that

a Cabinet could only become stronger by the accession of persons who

would be well received, and between whom and those they joined there

would be feelings of cordiality and mutual confidence, which would not

be the case between Graham and the Whigs; that they disliked him, and

had no mind to have him; while he was not only aware of, but

exaggerated, their repugnance and dislike of him. The Duke said he took

the same view that I did, and should tell Lord John so. Some time after,

about a fortnight ago, he came to me again, and said Lord John had made

up his mind to make an overture to Graham, had broached it to the

Cabinet, who had consented, that others were to be invited with him, but

it was not settled who. Some were for Gladstone, some for Newcastle,

almost all for Cardwell; but what he had particularly to say to me was

this, that Lord John felt the difficulty and delicacy of this intended

negotiation with Graham; that he should not like to make an offer to be

refused; and as much discussion would be necessary he wished it to be

carried on through me, and that I should undertake to make the

overtures. I said that I should of course be ready to do anything Lord

John wished in the matter, and I suppose it will end in my having to

undertake the negotiation.

[Sidenote: GEORGE LEWIS'S MISSION TO NETHERBY.]

_September 23rd._--At the Grove on Saturday last, where I heard, with

some surprise, that George Lewis had been sent to Netherby a day or two

before with John Russell's proposals to Graham. He took a memorandum

with a frank and friendly offer, but I was quite sure it would not be

accepted, when I learnt that it was the Board of Control for himself,

and the Under Secretaryship of the Colonies for Frederic Peel. He was

informed that all the Cabinet concurred in the offer, and wished him to

join them; and their idea was, that if he was not indisposed, the Office

would not signify, besides that the India Board would be important nest

year, when the Charter of the East India Company had to be renewed. As

Graham had said he had no connexions, and the only man he cared about

was Frederick Peel, they offered him this office in place of Hawes,

which would be of consequence, as he would have to do all the House of

Commons work. It seems George Lewis himself did not expect this offer

would be accepted, nor did Clarendon, who told me this when I got to the

Grove on Saturday. Accordingly, the next morning, Sunday, a letter

arrived from George Lewis to his wife, informing her that Graham had

declined, and this is all I have as yet heard about it.

I went last week to Hickleton Hall for Doncaster Races, but there was

nobody there, and I had little or no conversation with Charles Wood.

Lady Mary spoke to me about John Russell, and lamented that he was so

careless and indifferent in his relations with the Court, exhibiting

such a contrast to Sir Robert Peel, who was so full of zeal and

attention, and ready on all occasions to give the Queen advice and

assistance in whatever way she might require it. This was _‡ propos_ of

their having asked him for his opinion and advice on some matter, when

he sent no answer at all. She thought very justly that this was

impolitic as well as wrong.

_September 27th._--George Lewis called on me the other day, and told me

all that passed between Graham and himself. He had written to him

previously, saying he had a message to deliver from John Russell, and

asking him to receive it at Netherby. They met at Carlisle, and George

Lewis says he is sure Graham guessed the purport of his visit, and had

already made up his mind to decline. He proposed forthwith to open the

matter to him, but Graham would not let him, and said, 'We will

talk of business to-morrow.' He evidently shirked the subject,

evinced no curiosity to hear his errand, and tried to put off the

_Èclaircissement_. The next day after breakfast Graham proposed a walk,

when George Lewis opened the business, saying he was sent to ask him to

join the Government. Graham immediately began to make all sorts of

objections, talked of various matters and made many criticisms, and said

it was out of the question. Lewis argued the point with him, without

making any impression, and at last said, 'Well, but you had better let

me tell you what the offer is.' Graham replied he did not want to hear

it, and it was better he should not tell him. The other insisted, saying

he should not have fulfilled his mission unless he communicated the

offer, when Graham agreed to hear it. Lewis says he thinks he was rather

pleased than otherwise with the offer, particularly with that part of it

which concerned Frederic Peel. He said this was a very advantageous

offer to him. However, it made no difference, and ultimately he came

away, bringing with him a memorandum for John Russell which Graham

wrote, setting forth the reasons of his refusal. I was not sorry to hear

that on the subject of reform he was an alarmist, and only afraid lest

Lord John should go too far. So ends this negotiation, and I am glad

that Lewis was sent instead of myself upon so abortive a mission.

[Sidenote: KOSSUTH'S ARRIVAL IN ENGLAND.]

_October 10th._--Lord Granville returned to England a few days ago, when

I told him what had passed about Graham. He told me that he had known

what had taken place on the subject some time ago, when the resistance

in the Cabinet to his being invited was so great that it was given up.

The man most against it was Palmerston, and he wanted offers to be made

to Gladstone instead. If Graham had known this, it would have served to

improve his disposition to decline the offer.

_London, November 8th._--I was not aware till I opened this book that a

month had elapsed since I had written a line in it. At Newmarket I

seldom hear or think of politics, but this time an incident occurred in

which I took a part, and which was very near leading to serious

consequences. About three weeks ago Kossuth arrived in England, and was

received at Southampton and Winchester with prodigious demonstrations

and a great uproar on the part of Mayors and Corporations, the rabble

and a sprinkling of Radicals, of whom the most conspicuous were Cobden

and Dudley Stuart. While Kossuth was still at Southampton, but about to

proceed to London, on Monday, October 24th, I received a letter from my

brother Henry, informing me that he had just received information that

Palmerston was going to receive Kossuth, and he entreated me, if I had

any influence with the Government, to try and prevent such an outrage,

and that he believed if it was done Buol would be recalled. I could not

doubt that the information from such a quarter was correct, and it was

confirmed by a notice in one of the pro-Kossuth papers, that Lord

Palmerston was going to receive Mr. Kossuth 'privately and

unofficially.' Thinking that it would be an outrage, and one in all

probability attended with serious consequences, I resolved to write to

John Russell at once. I sent him a copy of my brother's letter, only

putting the names in blank, said that the authority on which this was

notified to me compelled me to attend to it, and added, 'I send you this

without comment; you will deal with it as you think fit, "liberavi

animam meam."' The result of this communication was that Lord John

Russell addressed a remonstrance to Lord Palmerston. Lord Palmerston

replied with his usual audacity that 'he would not be dictated to and

should receive whomsoever he pleased in his own house, but that his

office was at the disposal of the Government.' On receiving this answer

Lord John instantly summoned a Cabinet and laid it before them.

Ministers were of opinion (all but one) that Lord Palmerston should not

receive Kossuth, and he accordingly submitted to the decision of his

colleagues.

They are in great perplexity about this new measure of Reform, and how

to concoct it. Lord John, who hates details, and the collection and

examination of statistics, chose to entrust the first consideration of

it to a Committee of the Cabinet, consisting of Minto, Carlisle, and

Charles Wood. The first two are strange men to appoint, and the whole

business was in fact committed to Wood. He undertook to collect the

necessary statistics, and he began by expressing an opinion that they

should commence the work by disfranchisement, get rid of such small

boroughs as still remained--a new Schedule A. This the Duke of Bedford

strongly combated. Since that Charles Wood says the more he goes into

the matter the more difficulty he finds. He is, however, to lay his

statistics before Lord John, and it will probably end in the latter

concocting some scheme. There have been reports rife of dissensions in

the Cabinet about Reform, which is quite untrue, as no discussion has

yet taken place. I told Lord Lansdowne that many people were alarmed at

the prospect of a new Reform Bill, but still relied upon him, and

considered his being in the Cabinet a guarantee that no strong measure

would be proposed. He replied, 'They may rely with entire confidence on

me, for you may be sure that if any strong measure was to be

contemplated by the Cabinet, I should immediately walk out of it.'

[Sidenote: LORD PALMERSTON AND KOSSUTH.]

_November 16th._--I was at Windsor for a Council on Friday. There I saw

Palmerston and Lord John mighty merry and cordial, talking and laughing

together. Those breezes leave nothing behind, particularly with

Palmerston, who never loses his temper, and treats everything with

gaiety and levity. The Queen is vastly displeased with the Kossuth

demonstrations, especially at seeing him received at Manchester with as

much enthusiasm as attended her own visit to that place. The numbers and

the noise that have hailed Kossuth have certainly been curious, but not

one individual of station or consideration has gone near him, which

cannot fail to mortify him deeply. Delane is just come from Vienna,

where he had a long interview with Schwarzenberg, who treated, or at

least affected to do so, the Kossuth reception with contempt and

indifference.

_November 22nd._--At Brocket on Tuesday and Wednesday last. I found

Beauvale knew all about the Palmerston and Kossuth affair, and was of

course mightily pleased at his brother-in-law's defeat, and at the

interview not having taken place. But on Wednesday afternoon we were

both of us astounded at reading in the paper the account of the

deputation to Palmerston, the addresses and his answers.[140] We both

agreed that he had only _reculÈ pour mieux sauter_, and that what he had

now done was a great deal worse and more offensive than if he had

received Kossuth. The breach of faith and the defiance towards John

Russell and his colleagues are flagrant, and the whole affair

astonishing even in him who has done such things that nothing ought to

astonish me. I am waiting with the greatest curiosity to see what John

Russell will do, and how he will take it, and how it will be taken by

the Queen and the foreign Courts and Ministers. To receive an address in

which the Emperors of Russia and Austria are called despots, tyrants,

and odious assassins, and to express great gratification at it, is an

unparalleled outrage, and when to this is added a speech breathing

Radical sentiments and interference, it is difficult to believe that the

whole thing can pass off without notice. But I have seen such repeated

instances of lukewarmness and pusillanimous submission to Palmerston

that I have little or no expectation of his colleagues taking it up

seriously; and if they do stir in the matter Palmerston, with his usual

mixture of effrontery and adroitness, will contrive to pacify them and

get rid of the whole thing, and then go on as before. I think, however,

this is on the whole the worst thing he has ever done. The public do not

know how bad it is, because they do not know what had previously passed

in the Cabinet, and its consequences. In the great squabbles on the

Syrian question, and again on the Greek, he had a great advantage

because they were all committed with him and could not consistently go

against him, but this is a very different affair in all its bearings.

The ostentatious bidding for Radical favour and the flattery of the

democracy, of which his speeches were full, are disgusting in themselves

and full of danger. It is evident that he has seized the opportunity of

the Kossuth demonstrations to associate himself with them, and convert

the popular excitement into political capital for himself. He thinks to

make himself too formidable, by having the masses at his back, for his

colleagues to dare to quarrel with him, and by this audacious defiance

of them he intends to make himself once for all master of the situation.

If they endure this tamely he will be their master, and henceforward

they must do his bidding, be it what it may.[141]

[Footnote 140: [On November 18, a deputation from Finsbury and Islington

waited upon Lord Palmerston to congratulate him on the liberation of

Kossuth. Lord Palmerston took the opportunity of expressing his strong

sympathy and that of the British nation with the Hungarian cause.]]

[Footnote 141: [This transaction, which was little known at the time and

is now forgotten, derives importance from the events which followed, and

which led to Lord Palmerston's expulsion from the Cabinet. The proximate

cause of that rupture was his unauthorised approval of the _coup d'Ètat_

in France on December 2. But that incident was only the crowning

incident of a long series of disputes recorded in these pages, which had

rendered Lord Palmerston's autocracy in the Foreign Office alike

intolerable to the Court and to his colleagues.]]

[Sidenote: DISRAELI'S 'LIFE OF LORD GEORGE BENTINCK.']

Kossuth is at last gone, but promising to return in a few weeks, and

openly announcing that he does so for the purpose of stirring up war

against Austria, and a great democratic movement for the liberation of

Hungary and all other countries under absolute Governments, in which he

expects England to take a conspicuous part; and his last injunction and

entreaty to his friends is to agitate for this purpose. His last speech

is by far the most open and significant that he has delivered, and

exhibits his confidence, well or ill founded, in the progress he has

made. That he is very able, and especially a great speaker, cannot be

denied; but I take it that a more hypocritical, unscrupulous,

mischievous adventurer never existed. His speeches here have been very

clever, but I derive a higher idea of his oratorical power from a

speech, reported in the 'Times' on Wednesday last, which he made in the

Hungarian Diet upon the question of employing Hungarian troops in Italy,

which was admirable, and reminded me of Plunket in lucidity and

closeness of reasoning.

_November 24th._--Yesterday morning Disraeli called on me to speak to me

about his work, 'The Life of George Bentinck,' which he has written and

is just going to bring out. I read him a part of my sketch of his

character. I found that he meant to confine it to his political career

of the last three years of his existence, and to keep clear of racing

and all his antecedent life. He seems to have formed a very just

conception of him, having, however, seen the best of him, and therefore

taking a more favourable view of his character than I, who knew him

longer and better, could do. I asked him, supposing George Bentinck had

lived, what he thought he would have done, and how he would have

succeeded as a Minister and Leader of a Government in the House of

Commons if his party had come in. He said he would have failed. There

were, besides, the defects of his education and want of flexibility in

his character. In his speaking there were physical defects he never

could have got over, and as it had been proved that he could not lead an

Opposition, still less would he have been able to lead a Government. He

said, what is very true, that he had not a particle of conceit; he was

very obstinate, but had no vanity. Disraeli thinks Henry Bentinck very

clever too. He told me his book was to contain a character of Peel which

had never been described. I asked him if he would like to see what I had

written about him. Very much, he said, so I gave it to him.

I find there are not two opinions about Palmerston's conduct, and those

who think so are ignorant how bad it is, because they know nothing of

what passed between Lord John and him. I have had two long letters from

Graham all about Palmerston and the new Reform Bill. With regard to the

latter he is full of gloomy apprehensions, and seems in a state of

contradiction with himself, desperately afraid lest John Russell should

go too far, and equally afraid he should not go far enough. With all his

ability he is a most strange and inconsistent politician. It is

impossible to know what he will do, and I suspect he does not know

himself. He writes to me one day full of alarm lest the Queen's Speech

should contain anything binding the Government to go considerable

lengths, and expressing strong hopes that the Court will resist any

proposal of the sort. The next day he says, unless they disfranchise I

know not how many boroughs, they will give no satisfaction, be deserted

by the Radicals, and he is not at all sure that the Conservatives will

support them; in short, his fears assume the most different shapes, and

it is pretty clear that whatever the Government proposes he will find

fault with their plan.

_December 2nd._--I was at the Grange last week from Wednesday to

Saturday. There I met Walewski, who talked to me a great deal about

Palmerston, whose character he seems to understand pretty well. He said

that nothing could be more _aimable_ than he was to him personally, or

more civil and obliging in their intercourse, but from the experience he

had already had of him he was convinced that, if France got over her

present difficulties and acquired a settled and permanent Government, so

as to be able to attend to foreign affairs, in which her domestic

troubles now prevented her from exercising any influence, six months

would not elapse without a quarrel of some sort taking place between the

two Governments. He then spoke of his interference, his _procÈdÈs_, and

his invincible obstinacy, which made it impossible to make any

impression on him, and he told me of two recent cases, one regarding

Greece, the other Sicily.

[Sidenote: LORD PALMERSTON'S CLAIMS ON NAPLES.]

It seems that many months ago Wyse wrote an account to Palmerston of the

frightful brigandage that was going on in Greece, not, however,

pretending that there was any complaint to make on the part of British

subjects. On this Palmerston wrote a despatch in his usual style of

objurgation, bitterly reproaching the Greek Government for not putting

the brigandage down. The Greek Government, angry and frightened,

appealed to the French and the Russian Ministers, from whom of course

they received sympathy and comfort, and recently the Greek Minister has

sent 'a very strong answer.' This fresh squabble is probably by no means

distasteful to either the French or Russian Governments, particularly

the latter, and will have the effect of throwing Greece into the arms of

the Emperor. I do not know what the political effect of such dependence

may be, nor how British interests may be affected by it, but this result

is almost inevitable, and, whatever the consequences may be, is owing to

Palmerston's violence.

The case of Sicily is eminently characteristic. During the troubles in

'48 a destruction occurred of the property of English and other

foreigners, both at Naples and in Sicily, for which their respective

Governments required an indemnity. A Commission was appointed,

consisting of the French, Austrian, and English Ministers, and I think

the Russian. All the claims were laboriously investigated, and after

above a year of enquiry, the Commissioners came to a decision, and

allotted the amount of compensation they thought due, which was to be

paid in inscriptions in the Grand Livre or Neapolitan funds. This award

was regularly drawn up and signed by Sir William Temple. It was sent

home, when, after some delay, Palmerston sent it back and said the money

was not enough, and he arbitrarily fixed a higher sum to be given to the

English. Of this the Neapolitan Government bitterly complained, and the

other Commissioners considered it unwarrantable and unfair. After a

great deal of remonstrance and discussion, Palmerston proving

inexorable, the Neapolitans gave way. They then considered the affair

settled; but not at all. Palmerston then sent it back again, and said

the allotted sum should not be paid in stock, but in money. Walewski

told me this as I have written it down. In the course of the dispute he

arrived here, and very soon had to discuss the matter with Palmerston.

He represented to him that the English claims had already been treated

with peculiar favour and a very large indemnity granted, that Temple was

quite satisfied, and had subscribed to the award, and he pointed out the

injustice of fresh demands being superadded from hence. He had a

conversation of two hours with Palmerston, who listened with great

politeness, appeared struck by Walewski's representations, and ended by

saying, 'Well, I will write to Temple about it.' Walewski went away,

fancying he had produced a great effect, and that Palmerston was going

to write to Temple to relax the rigour of his exactions; but he did not

then know his man, and was only undeceived when he found afterwards that

he had written to Temple, but only to desire him to press his demands,

and exact a concession to them to the uttermost farthing.

_December 3rd._--At twelve o'clock yesterday morning the wonderful

Electric Telegraph brought us word that two hours before the President

had accomplished his _Coup d'…tat_ at Paris with success. Everybody

expected it would happen, nobody that it would happen so soon. Madame de

Lieven wrote to Beauvale on Sunday, giving him an account of the efforts

that were making by the Moderates, Guizot at the head of them, to bring

about a reconciliation and compromise with the President, and auguring

success. She says, 'Beaucoup de personnes prÈtendent que tout en ayant

l'air de s'y prÍter, le PrÈsident n'a pas grande envie de ce moyen; un

Coup d'…tat le ferait mieux arriver: il s'y est tout prÈparÈ, la troupe

est ‡ lui, le pays aussi.' She little thought that in twenty-four hours

the _Coup d'…tat_ 'allait Èclater,' and that all was in preparation for

it, while he was amusing the Burgraves and Moderates with negotiations

and _pourparlers_, in which he was never serious.

[Sidenote: THE COUP D'…TAT IN PARIS.]

_Panshanger, December 14th._--Naturally the French Revolution has

absorbed all interest. The success of Louis Napoleon's _Coup d'…tat_ has

been complete, and his audacity and unscrupulousness marvellous. The

French are indeed a strange people, so restless, fierce, and excitable

that they are ready to upset governments with the smallest possible

show of reason or necessity--with cause as in 1830, or without cause as

in 1848--and they acquiesce without a struggle, and tamely endure the

impudent and vulgar democratic rule of the blackguards and mountebanks

of the Provisional Government at the latter period, and now the

unlimited and severe military despotism of Louis Napoleon. The Press in

this country has generally inveighed with great indignation against him,

very much overdoing the case. Society in general is in a rather neutral

state. Few can approve of his very violent measures and arbitrary acts,

but on the other hand there was such a general feeling of contempt for

the Constitution, and of disgust at the conduct of the Assembly and the

parties which divided it, that nobody lamented their overthrow, or

regarded with the slightest interest or compassion the leaders who have

been so brutally and ignominiously treated. Everybody rejoices at the

misfortunes of Thiers, who is universally regarded as the evil genius of

France and the greatest maker of mischief who ever played a part on the

stage of politics. Flahault, who has been the agent and confidant of the

President, writes word that he has saved France, and it is the object of

his adherents to make the world believe that his measures were rendered

necessary by a Socialist plot, which he has saved the country by putting

down; and besides this we hear of an Orleanist plot, and of the violence

the Assembly was about to have recourse to against him, if he had not

anticipated them. These seem to be, and probably are, mere pretences,

got up to cover his violence with something plausible, and which the

world may swallow; the truth being that he prepared all that he has done

with singular boldness, secrecy adroitness, and success, amusing his

enemies with the semblance of negotiations which he never meant

sincerely to carry out to an end, and relying (as it has turned out that

he could do) upon the Army, by whose aid he has taken all power into his

own hands. Having done so, he resolved to do nothing by halves, and

certainly by the prompt, peremptory, and arbitrary measures he adopted

he has secured present success, given confidence as to the stability of

his Government, raised his own reputation for energy and ability, and in

all probability has prevented a great amount of disorder and bloodshed,

which would have taken place if his success had been less complete than

it was.

[Sidenote: DISRAELI'S LIFE OF BENTINCK]