Debate in the House of Lords--Lord Harrowby's Position--Hopes of
a Compromise--Lord Melbourne's View--Disturbances caused by the
Cholera--The Disfranchisement Clause--The Number '56'--Peers
contemplated--The King's Hesitation--'The Hunchback'--Critical
Position of the Waverers--Bill carried by Nine in the Lords--
The Cholera in Paris--Moderate Speech of Lord Grey--End of the
Secession--Conciliatory Overtures--Negotiations carried on at
Newmarket--Hostile Division in the Lords--Lord Wharncliffe's
Account of his Failure--Lord Grey resigns--The Duke of
Wellington attempts to form a Ministry--Peel declines--
Hostility of the Court to the Whigs--A Change of Scene--The
Duke fails--History of the Crisis--Lord Grey returns to
Office--The King's Excitement--The King writes to the
Opposition Peers--Defeat and Disgrace of the Tories--
Conversation of the Duke of Wellington--Louis XVIII.--Madame du
Cayla--Weakness of the King--Mortality among Great Men--
Petition against Lord W. Bentinck's Prohibition of Suttee heard
by the Privy Council--O'Connell and the Cholera--Irish Tithe
Bill--Irish Difficulties--Mr. Stanley--Concluding Debates of
the Parliament--Quarrel between Brougham and Sugden--Holland
and Belgium--Brougham's Revenge and Apology--Dinner at Holland
House--Anecdotes of Johnson--Death of Mr. Greville's Father--
Madame de Flahaut's Account of the Princess Charlotte--Prince
Augustus of Prussia--Captain Hess--Hostilities in Holland and
in Portugal--The Duchesse de Berri--Conversation with Lord
Melbourne on the State of the Government.
March 28th, 1832 {p.274}
[Page Head: LORD HARROWBY'S PATRIOTIC CONDUCT.]
There appear to have been as many differences of opinion as of
people on the discussion in the House of Lords when the Bill was
brought up, and it seems paradoxical, but is true, that though it
was on the whole satisfactory, nobody was satisfied. Lord Grey
complained to me that Lord Harrowby was too stiff; Lord Harrowby
complained that Lord Grey was always beating about the bush of
compromise, but never would commit himself fairly to concession.
Melbourne complained last night that what was done was done in
such an ungracious manner, so niggardly, that he hated the man
(Harrowby) who did it. The ultra-Tories are outrageous 'that he
gave up everything without reason or cause;' the ultra-Whigs
equally furious 'that he had shown how little way he was disposed
to go in Committee; his object was to turn out the Government;'
and what is comical, neither party will believe that Harrowby
really is so obnoxious to the other as he is said to be. Each is
convinced that he is acting in the interests of the other. What a
position, what injustice, blindness, folly, obstinacy, brought
together and exhibited! If ever there was a man whose conduct was
exempt from the ordinary motives of ambition, and who made
personal sacrifices in what he is doing, it is Lord Harrowby, and
yet there is no reproach that is not cast upon him, no term of
abuse that is not applied to him, no motive that is not ascribed
to him. No wonder a man who has seen much of them is sick of
politics and public life. Nothing now is thought of but the
_lists_, and of course everybody has got one. The Tories still
pretend to a majority of seven; the Government and Harrowby think
they have one of from ten to twenty, and I suspect fifteen will
be found about the mark. The unfortunate thing is that neither of
our cocks is good for fighting, not from want of courage, but
Harrowby is peevish, ungracious and unpopular, and Wharncliffe
carries no great weight. To be sure neither of them pretends to
make a party, but then their opponents insist upon it that they
do, and men shrink from enlisting (or being supposed to enlist)
under Wharncliffe's banner. However, notwithstanding the violence
of the noisy fools of the party, and of the women, there is a
more rational disposition on the part of practical men, for
Wharncliffe spoke to Ellenborough yesterday, and told him that
though he knew he and Harrowby were regarded as traitors by all
of them, he did hope that when the Bill came into Committee they
would agree to consult together, and try and come to some
understanding as to the best mode of dealing with the question,
that it was absurd to be standing aloof at such a moment; to
which Ellenborough replied that he perfectly agreed with him, was
anxious to do so, and intended to advise his friends to take that
course.
April 1st, 1832 {p.276}
Wharncliffe got Lord Grey to put off the second reading for a few
days on account of the Quarter Sessions, which drew down a
precious attack from Londonderry, and was in fact very foolish and
unnecessary, as it looks like a concert between them, of which it
is very desirable to avoid any appearance, as in fact none exists.
The violence of the Tories continues unabated, and there is no
effort they do not make to secure a majority, and they expect
either to succeed or to bring it to a near thing. In the meantime
the tone of the other party is changed. Dover, who makes lists,
manages proxies, and does all the little jobbing, whipping-in,
busy work of the party, makes out a clear majority, and told me he
now thought the Bill would get through without Peers. The
Government, however, are all agreed to make the Peers if it turns
out to be necessary, and especially if the Bill should be thrown
out, it seems clear that they would by no means go out, but make
the Peers and bring it in again; so I gather from Richmond, and he
who was the most violently opposed of the whole Cabinet to
Peer-making, is now ready to make any number if necessary. There
is, however, I hope, a disposition to concession, which, if
matters are tolerably well managed, may lead to an arrangement.
Still Wharncliffe, who must have a great deal to do in Committee,
is neither prudent nor popular. The Tories are obstinate, sulky,
and indisposed to agree to anything reasonable. It is the unity of
object and the compactness of the party which give the Government
strength. Charles Wood told me the other day that they were well
disposed to a compromise on two special points, one the exclusion
of town voters from the right of voting for counties, the other
the metropolitan members. On the first he proposed that no man
voting for a town in right of a L10 house should have a vote for
the county in right of any freehold in that town. That would be
half-way between Wharncliffe's plan and the present. The second,
that Marylebone should return two members, and Middlesex two
more--very like Grey's proposition which Harrowby rejected--but I
suggested keeping the whole and varying the qualification, to
which he thought no objection would lie.
[Page Head: CONVERSATION WITH LORD MELBOURNE.]
At the Duchesse de Dino's ball the night before last I had a very
anxious conversation with Melbourne about it all. He said that
'he really believed there was no strong feeling in the country
for the measure.' We talked of the violence of the Tories, and
their notion that they could get rid of the whole thing. I said
the notion was absurd _now_, but that I fully agreed with him
about the general feeling. 'Why, then,' said he, 'might it not be
thrown out?'--a consummation I really believe he would rejoice
at, if it could be done. I said because there was a great party
which would not let it, which would agitate again, and that the
country wished ardently to have it settled; that if it could be
disposed of for good and all, it would be a good thing indeed,
but that this was now become impossible. I asked him if his
colleagues were impressed as he was with this truth, and he said,
'No.' I told him he ought to do everything possible to enforce
it, and to make them moderate, and induce them to concede, to
which he replied, 'What difficulty can they have in swallowing
the rest after they have given up the rotten boroughs? That is,
in fact, the essential part of the Bill, and the truth is _I do
not see how the Government is to be carried on without them_.
Some means may be found; a remedy may possibly present itself,
and it may work in practice better than we now know of, but I am
not aware of any, and I do not see how any Government can be
carried on when these are swept away.' This was, if not his exact
words, the exact sense, and a pretty avowal for a man to make at
the eleventh hour who has been a party concerned in this Bill
during the other ten. I told him I agreed in every respect, but
that it was too late to discuss this now, and that the rotten
boroughs were past saving, that as to the minor points, the
Waverers thought them of importance, looked upon them as
securities, compensations, and moreover as what would save their
own honour, and that the less their real importance was the more
easily might they be conceded. We had a great deal more talk, but
then it is all talk, and _a quoi bon_ with a man who holds these
opinions and acts as he does? Let it end as it may, the history
of the Bill, and the means by which it has been conceived,
brought forward, supported, and opposed, will be most curious and
instructive. The division in the Lords must be very close indeed.
Orloff, who was looked for like the Messiah, at last made his
appearance a few days ago, a great burly Russian, but no
ratification yet.[1]
[1] [Of the Belgian Treaty.]
[Page Head: THE CHOLERA IN ENGLAND.]
I have refrained for a long time from writing down anything about
the cholera, because the subject is intolerably disgusting to me,
and I have been bored past endurance by the perpetual questions of
every fool about it. It is not, however, devoid of interest. In
the first place, what has happened here proves that 'the people'
of this enlightened, reading, thinking, reforming nation are not a
whit less barbarous than the serfs in Russia, for precisely the
same prejudices have been shown here that were found at St.
Petersburg and at Berlin. The disease has undoubtedly appeared
(hitherto) in this country in a milder shape than elsewhere, but
the alarm at its name was so great that the Government could do no
otherwise than take such precautions and means of safety as
appeared best to avert the danger or mitigate its consequences.
Here it came, and the immediate effect was a great inconvenience
to trade and commerce, owing to restrictions, both those imposed
by foreigners generally on this country and those we imposed
ourselves between the healthy and unhealthy places. This begot
complaints and disputes, and professional prejudices and
jealousies urged a host of combatants into the field, to fight
about the existence or non-existence of cholera, its contagiousness,
and any collateral question. The disposition of the public was
(and is) to believe that the whole thing was a humbug, and
accordingly plenty of people were found to write in that sense,
and the press lent itself to propagate the same idea. The disease,
however, kept creeping on, the Boards of Health which were
everywhere established immediately became odious, and the vestries
and parishes stoutly resisted all pecuniary demands for the
purpose of carrying into effect the recommendations of the Central
Board or the orders of the Privy Council. In this town the mob has
taken the part of the anti-cholerites, and the most disgraceful
scenes have occurred. The other day a Mr. Pope, head of the
hospital in Marylebone (Cholera Hospital) came to the Council
Office to complain that a patient who was being removed with his
own consent had been taken out of his chair by the mob and carried
back, the chair broken, and the bearers and surgeon hardly
escaping with their lives. Furious contests have taken place about
the burials, it having been recommended that bodies should be
burned directly after death, and the most violent prejudice
opposing itself to this recommendation; in short, there is no end
to the scenes of uproar, violence, and brutal ignorance that have
gone on, and this on the part of the lower orders, for whose
especial benefit all the precautions are taken, and for whose
relief large sums have been raised and all the resources of
charity called into activity in every part of the town. The awful
thing is the vast extent of misery and distress which prevails,
and the evidence of the rotten foundation on which the whole
fabric of this gorgeous society rests, for I call that rotten
which exhibits thousands upon thousands of human beings reduced to
the lowest stage of moral and physical degradation, with no more
of the necessaries of life than serve to keep body and soul
together, whole classes of artisans without the means of
subsistence. However complicated and remote the causes of this
state of things, the manifestations present themselves in a
frightful presence and reality, and those whose ingenuity, and
experience, and philosophical views may enable them accurately to
point out the causes and the gradual increase of this distress are
totally unable to suggest a remedy or to foresee an end to it. Can
such a state of things permanently go on? can any reform
ameliorate it? Is it possible for any country to be considered in
a healthy condition when there is no such thing as a _general_
diffusion of the comforts of life (varying of course with every
variety of circumstance which can affect the prosperity of
individuals or of classes), but when the extremes prevail of the
most unbounded luxury and enjoyment and the most dreadful
privation and suffering? To imagine a state of society in which
everybody should be well off, or even tolerably well off, would be
a mere vision, as long as there is a preponderance of vice and
folly in the world. There will always be effects commensurate with
their causes, but it has not always been, and it certainly need
not be, that the majority of the population should be in great
difficulty, struggling to keep themselves afloat, and, what is
worse, in uncertainty and in doubt whether they can earn
subsistence for themselves and their families. Such is the case at
present, and I believe a general uncertainty pervades every class
of society, from the highest to the lowest; nobody looks upon any
institution as secure, or any interest as safe, and it is only
because those universal feelings of alarm which are equally
diffused throughout the mass but slightly affect each individual
atom of it that we see the world go on as usual, eating, drinking,
laughing, and dancing, and not insensible to the danger, though,
apparently indifferent about it.
April 4th, 1832 {p.280}
[Page Head: A DIFFICULTY AT SCHEDULE A.]
Charles Wood[2] came to me yesterday, and brought a paper showing
the various effects of a different qualification from L10 to L40
for the metropolitan districts, to talk over the list, but
principally to get me to speak to Harrowby about a foreseen
difficulty. The first clause in the Bill enacts _that fifty-six
boroughs be disfranchised_. This gave great offence in the House
of Commons, was feebly defended, but carried by the majority,
which was always ready and required no reason; it was an
egregious piece of folly and arrogance there, here it presents a
real embarrassment. I told him I knew Harrowby had an invincible
repugnance to it, and that the effect would be very bad if they
split upon the first point. He said he should not defend it, that
all reason was against it, but that there it was, and how was it
to be got rid of? I suggested that it should be passed over, and
that they should go at once to the boroughs _seriatim_. He said
if that clause was omitted a suspicion would immediately arise
that there was an intention of altering Schedule A, and nothing
would avert that but getting through a great part of it before
Easter, and that this might be difficult, as the longest time
they could expect to sit would be three days in Passion Week. He
talked a great deal about the country expecting this, and that
they would not be satisfied if it was not done, and all the usual
jargon of the Reformers, which it was not worth while to dispute,
and it ended by my promising to talk to Lord Harrowby about it.
This I did last night, and he instantly flew into a rage. He said
'he would not be dragged through the mire by those scoundrels. It
was an insolence that was not to be borne; let them make their
Peers if they would, not Hell itself should make him vote for
_fifty-six_; he would vote for sixty-six or any number but that,
that he would not split with the Tories on the first vote; if
indeed _they_ would consent to fifty-six he would, or to anything
else they would agree to, but if the Government brought this
forward no consideration on earth should prevent his opposing
it.' We then discussed the whole matter, with the proposed
amendments which Wood and I had talked over with reference to the
metropolitan members and town and county voting, and I am to go
to-day and propose that after the second reading is carried they
should adjourn till after Easter, and give a little time for the
excitement (which there must be) to subside, and to see how
matters stand, and what probability there is of getting the thing
through quietly.
[2] [Mr. Charles Wood, afterwards Viscount Halifax, but at
this time private Secretary to Earl Grey, whose
daughter he married.]
April 6th, 1832 {p.281}
I called on the Duke of Richmond on Wednesday morning, and told
him what had passed between Wood and me, and Lord Harrowby and me
afterwards. He was aware of the difficulty, and regretted it the
more because he might have to defend it in the House of Lords. He
wished me very much to go to Downing Street and see Lord Grey
himself if possible before the levee, and he suggested that the
words fifty-six might be left in blank by Lord Grey's own motion,
that this would be in conformity with the forms of the House. I
set off, but calling at home on my way found Lord Harrowby at my
door. He came in, and was anxious to know if I had said anything;
he was more quiet than the night before, but still resolved not
to agree to fifty-six, though anxious to have the matter
compromised in some way. Lord Harrowby wanted to adjourn after
the second reading, but owned that the best effect would be to
get through Schedule A before Easter. Yesterday I saw Wood; he
harped upon the difficulty and the old strain of the country. I
suggested the point of form which Richmond had mentioned, but he
said that could not be _now_ in the Bill, as it was sent up from
the Commons, that if they were beaten on fifty-six the country
would consider it tantamount to throwing out Schedule A, and
would highly approve of a creation of Peers, and that, in fact
(if they wished it), it would be the best opportunity they could
have. I told him that it would heap ridicule upon all the
antecedent proceedings, and the pretext must be manifest, as it
would appear in the course of the discussions what the real
reason was. In the middle of our conversation Ellice came in, and
directly asked if my friends would swallow fifty-six, to which I
said, 'No.' We had then a vehement dispute, but at last Wood
turned him out, and he and I resumed. We finally agreed that I
should ask Lord Harrowby whether, if Lord Grey of his own accord
proposed to leave out the words fifty-six, but with an expression
of his opinion that this must be the number, he (Lord Harrowby)
would meet him with a corresponding declaration that he objected
to the specification of the number in the clause, without
objecting to the extent of the disfranchisement, it being always
understood that what passes between us is unauthorised talk, and
to commit nobody--'without prejudice,' as the lawyers say.
[Page Head: THE KING'S RELUCTANCE TO MAKE PEERS.]
I heard yesterday, however, from Keate, who is attending me (and
who is the King's surgeon, and sees him when he is in town), that
he saw his Majesty after the levee on Wednesday, and that he was
ill, out of sorts, and in considerable agitation; that he
enquired of him about his health, when the King said he had much
to annoy him, and that 'many things passed there (pointing to the
Cabinet, out of which he had just come) which were by no means
agreeable, and that he had had more than usual to occupy him that
morning.' Keate said he was very sure from his manner that
something unpleasant had occurred. This was, I have since
discovered, the question of a creation of Peers again brought
forward, and to which the King's aversion has returned so much so
that it is doubtful if he will after all consent to a large one.
It seems that unless the Peers are made (in the event of the
necessity arising) Brougham and Althorp will resign; at least so
they threaten. I have seen enough of threats, and doubts, and
scruples, to be satisfied that there is no certainty that any of
them will produce the anticipated effects, but I am resolved I
will try, out of these various elements, if I cannot work out
something which may be serviceable to the cause itself, though
the materials I have to work with are scanty. The Ministers were
all day yesterday settling who the new Peers shall be, so
seriously are they preparing for the _coup_. They had already
fixed upon Lords Molyneux, Blandford, Kennedy, Ebrington,
Cavendish, Brabazon, and Charles Fox, Littleton, Portman,
Frederick Lawley, Western, and many others, and this would be
what Lord Holland calls assimilating the House of Lords to the
spirit of the other House, and making it harmonise with the
prevailing sense of the people.
April 8th, 1832 {p.283}
Lord Harrowby was out of town when I called there on Friday, so I
wrote to him the substance of my conversation with Wood.
Yesterday he returned. In the evening I met Wood at dinner at
Lord Holland's, when he told me that he found on the part of his
friends more reluctance than he had expected to give up the
fifty-six, that he had done all he could to persuade them, but
they made great objections. Moreover he had had a conversation
with Sandon which he did not quite like, as he talked so much of
holding the party together. All this was to make me think they
are stouter than they really are, for I am better informed than
he thinks for.
Yesterday morning I got more correct information about what had
passed with the King. Lord Grey went to him with a minute of
Cabinet requiring that he should make Peers in case the second
reading was thrown out.[3] To this he demurred, raised difficulties
and doubts, which naturally enough alarm the Government very much.
However, when he got back to Windsor he wrote two letters,
explaining his sentiments, from which it appears that he has great
reluctance, that he will do it, but will not give any pledge
beforehand, that he objects to increasing the Peerage, and wants
to call up eldest sons and make Irish and Scotch Peers, that he
did not say positively he would make the Peers, but that he would
be in the way, and come up when it was necessary. They think that
he has some idea that his pledging himself beforehand (though in
fact he did so two months ago) might be drawn into an improper
precedent. However this may be, his reluctance is so strong that a
great deal may be made of it, as it is probable (if he continues
in the same mind, and is not turned by some violence of the
Opposition) that he will resist still more making Peers when the
Bill is in Committee to carry the details, some of which he
himself wishes to see altered, but the difficulty is very great.
It is impossible to communicate with the Tory leaders; they will
not believe what you tell them, and if they learnt the King's
scruples they would immediately imagine that they might presume
upon them to any extent, and stand out more obstinately than ever.
I went to Harrowby last night, and imparted to him the state of
things, which I shall do to nobody else. To Wharncliffe I dare
not. He is not indisposed to Wood's compromise, and I trust this
will be settled, but he still leans to putting off the second
reading till after Easter, and if the Tories also resolve upon
that (which they are mightily disposed to do) he will not separate
from them on that point, and they are sure to carry it. Unless
this was accompanied with some declaration from them that they
would be disposed to concede the great principles of the Bill, I
think the Government would consider it such an indication of
hostility as to call for an immediate creation of Peers, and I
doubt whether the King could or would resist. There are many
reasons why it would be desirable to make the second reading a
resting-place, and adjourn then till after Easter, provided all
parties consented, but it would be very unwise to make it the
subject of a contest, and nobody would ever believe that the real
reason was not to get rid of Schedule A by hook or by crook, or of
a good deal of it. Harrowby will, I am sure, not divide against
them on this, and they will not give it up; that there are means
of resistance, if they were judiciously applied, I am sure, and if
there were temper, discretion, and cordiality, the Bill might be
licked into a very decent shape.
[3] [This Cabinet minute of the 3rd of April, 1832, and the
King's remarks upon it, have been printed in the
'Correspondence of William IV. and Earl Grey,' vol. ii.
p. 307.]
[Page Head: 'THE HUNCHBACK.'.]
I went to see Sheridan Knowles' new play the other night, 'The
Hunchback.' Very good, and a great success. Miss Fanny Kemble
acted really well--for the first time, in my opinion, great
acting. I have not seen anything since Mrs. Siddons (and perhaps
Miss O'Neill) so good.
The Duke of Wellington made a very good speech on Irish affairs
on Friday, one of his best, and he speaks admirably _to points_
sometimes and on subjects he understands. I wish he had let alone
that Irish Education--disgraceful humbug and cant. I don't know
that there is anything else particularly new. Orloff is made a
great rout with, but he don't ratify. The real truth is that the
King of Holland holds out, and the other Powers delay till they
see the result of our Reform Bill, thinking that the Duke of
Wellington may return to power, and then they may make better
terms for Holland and dictate to Belgium and to France. If the
Reform Bill is carried, and Government stays in, they will
ratify, and not till then. The cholera is disappearing here and
in the country.
April 9th, 1832 {p.285}
Saw Lord Harrowby yesterday morning. He can't make up his mind
what is best to be done, whether to go into Committee or not. He
rather wishes to get through Schedule A, but he won't vote
against the Tories if they divide on adjourning. Then went to
Wood and told him there would be no difficulty about _fifty-six_.
Lord Grey came in, and talked the whole thing over. He said he
was ill--knocked up--that in his speech to-day he should be as
moderate and tame as anybody could wish. From what Wood said, and
he himself afterwards, I should think they wish to adjourn after
the second reading, but to make a merit of it if they do.
Duncannon, whom I saw afterwards, seemed to be of the same
opinion, that it would be best not to sit in Passion Week. At
night Wharncliffe came back from Yorkshire. He is all for getting
into Schedule A, and making no difficulties about fifty-six or
anything else, and Harrowby, now that he fancies the Government
want to adjourn, rather wants not, suspecting some trick. Upon
going all over the list, we make out the worst to give a majority
of six, and the best of eighteen, but the Tories still count upon
getting back some of our people. We had a grand hunt after Lord
Gambier's proxy; he sent it to Lord de Saumarez, who is laid up
with the gout in Guernsey, and the difficulty was to get at Lord
Gambier and procure another. At last I made Harrowby, who does
not know him, write to him, and Wood sent a messenger after him,
so we hope it will arrive in time.
April 11th, 1832 {p.286}
[Page Head: REFORM BILL CARRIED IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.]
The day before yesterday Lord Grey introduced the Reform Bill in
a speech of extreme moderation; as he promised, it was very
'tame.' The night's debate was dull; yesterday was better. Lord
Mansfield made a fine speech against the Bill; Harrowby spoke
well, Wharncliffe ill. Nothing can equal the hot water we have
been in--defections threatened on every side, expectations
thwarted and doubts arising, betting nearly even. Even de Ros
came to me in the morning and told me he doubted how he should
vote; that neither Harrowby nor Wharncliffe had put the question
on the proper ground, and his reason for seceding from the
Opposition was the menaced creation of Peers. I wrote to Harrowby
and begged him to say something to satisfy tender consciences,
and moved heaven and earth to keep De Ros and Coventry (who was
slippery) right, and I succeeded--at least I believe so, for it
is not yet over. Nothing can equal the anxiety out of doors and
the intensity of the interest in the town, but the debate is far
less animated than that of last year. As to our business, it is
'la mer a boire,' with nobody to canvass or whip in, and not
being a party. We shall, however, I believe, manage it, and but
just.
I saw Keate this morning, who had been with the King. His Majesty
talked in high terms of Ellenborough and of Mansfield. It is
difficult to count upon such a man, but if the second reading is
passed I do not believe he will make Peers to carry any points in
Committee, unless it be the very vital ones, but it is very
questionable if the Opposition will fight the battle then at all,
or, if they do, fight in a way to secure a fair, practical
result.
April 14th, 1832 {p.287}
The Reform Bill (second reading) was carried this morning at seven
o'clock in the House of Lords by a majority of nine. The House did
not sit yesterday. The night before Phillpotts, the Bishop of
Exeter, made a grand speech against the Bill, full of fire and
venom, very able. It would be an injury to compare this man with
Laud; he more resembles Gardiner; had he lived in those days he
would have been just such another, boiling with ambition, an
ardent temperament, and great talents. He has a desperate and a
dreadful countenance, and looks like the man he is. The two last
days gave plenty of reports of changes either way, but the
majority has always looked like from seven to ten. The House will
adjourn on Wednesday, and go into Committee after Easter; and in
the meantime what negotiations and what difficulties to get over!
The Duke of Wellington and Lord Harrowby have had some good-humoured
talk, and the former seems well disposed to join in amending the
Bill, but the difficulty will be to bring these extreme and
irritated parties to any agreement as to terms. The debate in the
Lords, though not so good as last year, has been, as usual, much
better than that in the Commons.
The accounts from Paris of the cholera are awful, very different
from the disease here. Is it not owing to our superior cleanliness,
draining, and precautions? There have been 1,300 sick in a day
there, and for some days an average of 1,000; here we have never
averaged above fifty, I think, and, except the squabbling in the
newspapers, we have seen nothing of it whatever; there many of the
upper classes have died of it. Casimir Perier and the Duke of
Orleans went to the Hotel Dieu, and the former was seized
afterwards, and has been very ill, though they doubt if it really
was cholera, as he is subject to attacks with the same symptoms.
April 15th, 1832 {p.288}
[Page Head: LORD WHARNCLIFFE AND LORD HARROWBY.]
The debate in the House of Lords was closed by a remarkable reply
from Lord Grey, full of moderation, and such as to hold out the
best hopes of an adjustment of the question--not that it pacified
the ultra-Tories, who were furious. The speech was so ill
reported at that late hour that it is not generally known what he
did say, and many of those who heard it almost doubt their own
accuracy, or suspect that he went further than he intended, so
unlike was it to his former violent and unyielding language. He
said, with regard to a creation of Peers, that nothing would
justify him in recommending the exercise of that prerogative but
a collision between the two Houses of Parliament, and that in
such a case (he is reported to have said) he should deem it his
duty first to recommend a dissolution, and to ascertain whether
the feeling of the country was with the other House (these were
not the words, but to this effect). If this be at all correct, it
is clear that he cannot make Peers to carry the clauses, for, in
fact, the collision between the two Houses will not have arrived
unless the Commons should reject any amendments which may be made
by the Lords. The tone, however, of the violent supporters of
Government is totally changed; at Lord Holland's last night they
were singing in a very different note, and, now, if the councils
of the Lords are guided by moderation and firmness, they may deal
with the Bill _almost_ as they please; but they must swallow
Schedule A. The difficulties, however, are great; the High Tories
are exasperated and vindictive, and will fiercely fight against
any union with the seceders. The Duke is moderate in his tone,
ready to act cordially with all parties, but he owes the seceders
a grudge, is anxious to preserve his influence with the Tories,
and will probably insist upon mutilating the Bill more than will
be prudent and feasible. The Harrowby and Wharncliffe party, now
that the second reading is over, ceases to be a party. It was a
patched-up, miscellaneous concern at best, of men who were half
reasoned, half frightened over, who could not bear separating
from the Duke, long to return to him, and, besides, are ashamed
of Wharncliffe as a chief. There never was such a 'chef de
circonstance.' He is a very honest man, with a right view of
things and a fair and unprejudiced understanding, vain and
imprudent, without authority, commanding no respect, and in a
false position as the ephemeral leader he is, marching in that
capacity _pari passu_ with Harrowby, who is infinitely more
looked up to, but whose bilious complexion prevents his mixing
with society and engaging and persuading others to follow his
opinions; nor has he (Lord Harrowby) any plan or design beyond
the object of the moment. He has no thought of mixing again in
public life, he does not propose to communicate with anybody on
anything further than the middle course to be adopted now, and
few people are disposed to sever the ties on which their future
political existence depends for the sake of cultivating this
short-lived connection. If the Government, therefore, looks to
the seceders who have carried the question for them to carry
other points, they will find it won't do, for their followers
will melt into the mass of the anti-Reformers, who, though they
will still frown upon the chiefs, will gladly take back the rank
and file. A fortnight will elapse, in the course of which
opportunities will be found of ascertaining the disposition of
the great party and the probability of an arrangement.
The debate was good on Friday, but very inferior to the last.
Phillpotts got a terrific dressing from Lord Grey, and was
handled not very delicately by Goderich and Durham, though the
latter was too coarse. He had laid himself very open, and, able
as he is, he has adopted a tone and style inconsistent with his
lawn sleeves, and unusual on the Episcopal Bench. He is carried
away by his ambition and his alarm, and horrifies his brethren,
who feel all the danger (in these times) of such a colleague. The
episode of which he was the object was, of course, the most
amusing part of the whole.
Newmarket, April 22nd, 1832 {p.290}
[Page Head: MEETING OF LORD GREY AND LORD WHARNCLIFFE.]
Ill and laid up with the gout for this week past. Came here on
Friday, the 20th. The carrying of the second reading of the Bill
seems to have produced no effect. Everybody is gone out of town,
the Tories in high dudgeon. The Duke of Wellington has entered a
protest with all the usual objections, which has been signed by a
whole rabble of Peers, but not by Lyndhurst, Ellenborough, or
Carnarvon, who monopolise the brains of the party; they declined.
In the meantime things look better. Wharncliffe, Harrowby, and
Haddington have had two interviews with Lyndhurst and Ellenborough,
and though they did not go into particulars the result was
satisfactory, and a strong disposition evinced to co-operation and
moderation. It was agreed they should meet again next week, and
see what could be arranged. On Friday Palmerston sent to
Wharncliffe and desired to see him. They met, and Palmerston told
him that he came from Lord Grey, who was desirous of having an
interview with him, adding that Lord Grey had now become convinced
that he might make much more extensive concessions than he had
ever yet contemplated. He added that Lord Grey would rather see
Wharncliffe alone, without Harrowby, whose manner was so snappish
and unpleasant that he could not talk so much at his ease as he
would to Wharncliffe alone. Wharncliffe replied that he could have
no objection to see Lord Grey, but that he must fairly tell him
his situation was no longer the same, having put himself in
amicable communication with Lyndhurst and Ellenborough; that the
concurrence of the Tories was indispensable to him and his friends
to effect the alterations they contemplated, and he could not do
anything which might have to them the appearance of underhand
dealing; that he could tell Lyndhurst and Ellenborough, and if
they made no objection he would see Lord Grey. Ellenborough was
gone out of town, but he went to Lyndhurst, who immediately
advised him to see Lord Grey, and said it was most desirable they
should be made acquainted with the views and disposition of
Government, and he undertook to write word to the Duke of
Wellington of all that had passed. Lord Grey was unable to leave
Sheen yesterday, so it was arranged that the meeting should be
delayed till Wharncliffe's return to London. The Duke of Richmond
has, however, got a letter of four sides from Grey, empowering him
to treat here with Wharncliffe, and Stanley and Graham being
expected, it is very likely some progress may be made. Nothing can
promise better, and if the chiefs of the Tories can be brought to
moderation the stupid obstinacy of the mass will not matter, and I
do not think they will dare hold out, for when a negotiation on
such a conciliatory basis is proposed, a terrible case would be
made hereafter against those who should refuse to listen to it.
The advantages are so clear that nothing would make them persist
in the line of uncompromising opposition but an unconquerable
repugnance to afford a triumph to the Waverers, which a successful
termination would do; not that they would profit by it, for they
are so few, and those who will have been wrong so many, that
clamour will silence justice, and a thousand excuses and pretences
will be found to deprive them of their rightful credit. It is a
long time--not probably since the days of Charles II.--that this
place (Newmarket) has been the theatre of a political negotiation,
and, conceding the importance of the subject, the actors are
amusing--Richmond, Graham, Wharncliffe, and myself. By-the-bye it
is perfectly true that (if I have not mentioned it before) the
Royal carriages were all ready the morning of the decision of the
second reading to take the King to the House of Lords to prorogue
Parliament, and on Tuesday the Peers would have appeared in the
'Gazette.'
London, May 12th, 1832 {p.291}
Nothing written for a long time, nor had I anything to write till
a few days ago. From the time of Wharncliffe's departure I heard
nothing, and I bitterly regret now not having been in town last
week.[4] The Committee stood for Monday; on Friday se'nnight last
I was at Buckenham, when the Duke of Rutland told me he was going
to London, that they meant to divide on Monday on a proposal to
postpone Schedules A and B till after C and D, and expected to
beat the Government; I wrote by that post to Lady Harrowby,
saying I hoped this was not true, and that if it was it appeared
to me most injudicious. On Tuesday I received by the post a
letter from Wharncliffe, saying that they had been in frequent
communication with Ellenborough and Lyndhurst, that the
Opposition were prepared to make great and satisfactory
concessions, and he thought all would go off well. The only
difficulty he apprehended was from the postponement of the
disfranchising clause, which the Tories insisted on, and to which
he and Harrowby had thought it right to agree. The next day I
received a second letter, with an account of the debate and its
consequences, to which I wrote him a trimming reply, and another
to Lady Harrowby, expressing my sentiments on their conduct on
the occasion. Before all this happened Wharncliffe had had to
encounter abuse of every kind, and he has certainly continued to
play his cards in such a way, from first to last, as to quarrel
with Whigs and Tories in succession. With very good intentions,
and very honest, he has exposed himself to every reproach of
insincerity, intrigue, and double-dealing.
[4] [It was on the 7th of May that the Lords went into
Committee on the Bill, and Lord Lyndhurst's motion to
postpone the _dis_franchising clauses until after the
_en_franchising clauses had been agreed to was carried
by a majority of thirty-five against the Government.
The seventeen Peers who had assisted to carry the
second reading on the 11th of April relapsed into the
Conservative ranks, and the result was, for the moment,
such as to stop the progress of the Bill and turn out
the Government.]
[Page Head: DEFEAT OF GOVERNMENT IN COMMITTEE.]
On arriving in town I found a note from him, desiring I would see
him and hear his defence of himself before I expressed elsewhere
the opinion I had given to him. Accordingly I went to Boodle's,
where I found him, and he immediately began his case. He said that
on his return to town he saw Lord Grey, who said that he wished to
know what were the intentions of his party, and how far they were
disposed to go, and what concessions they looked for. He replied
that Lord Grey must understand that he now stood in a very
different position, and that, reunited as he was with the Tories,
he must act with them--much, in short, what he had before said to
Palmerston. They then discussed the question, and he said that
there was one point for which Lord Grey ought to be prepared, and
that he knew the Tories were much bent upon proposing the
postponement of Schedules A and B. Lord Grey said this would be
productive of the greatest embarrassment, that it would be a thing
they could not agree to, and he hoped he would do all in his power
to prevent it. Wharncliffe said that he would endeavour, but he
believed they were very eager about it, and he added that Lord
Grey might be sure _he_ would support nothing calculated to
interfere with the essential provisions of the Bill. After this
his and Harrowby's communications with Ellenborough and his
friends continued, and on the Saturday (I think) Lyndhurst told
him that the Tories were so irrevocably bent upon this, and that
they were so difficult to manage and so disposed to fly off, that
it was absolutely necessary to give way to them, and it must be
proposed, though he would gladly have waived it, but that was
impossible; upon which Harrowby and Wharncliffe gave in and agreed
to support it. One of them (Haddington, I think) suggested that
Wharncliffe ought to communicate this intention to Lord Grey, to
which, however, Lyndhurst objected, said that the Tories were
suspicious, had already taken umbrage at the communications
between Wharncliffe and Grey, and that it must not be. To this
prohibition Wharncliffe fatally submitted, and accordingly not a
word was said by anybody till the afternoon of the debate, when
just before it began Wharncliffe told the Duke of Richmond, who of
course told Lord Grey. Wharncliffe at the same time had some
conversation with John Russell and Stanley, who strongly
deprecated this intention, but it was too late to arrange or
compromise anything then. The debate came on; the proposition was
made in a very aggravating speech by Lyndhurst, and on its being
carried Lord Grey threw up the Bill and the Government in a
passion. It is the more remarkable that they should have taken
this course at once, because they certainly had very strong reason
to doubt whether the King would consent to a creation of Peers,
though they probably thought he might be bullied upon an occasion
which they fancied they could turn to great account; but he was
stout and would not hear of it.
[Page Head: POSITION OF PARTIES.]
The day after the debate Grey and Brougham went down to Windsor
and proposed to the King to make fifty Peers. They took with them
a minute of Cabinet signed by all the members except the Duke of
Richmond. Palmerston proposed it in Cabinet, and Melbourne made
no objection. His Majesty took till the next day to consider,
when he accepted their resignations, which was the alternative
they gave him. At the levee the same day nothing occurred; the
King hardly spoke to the Duke, but he afterwards saw Lyndhurst
(having sent for him). I do not know what passed between them,
but the Duke of Wellington was soon sent for. The Duke and
Lyndhurst endeavoured to prevail on Peel to take the Government
upon himself, and the former offered to act in any capacity in
which he could be useful, but Peel would not. Some communication
also took place between Lyndhurst and Harrowby, but the latter
declared at once he would support the new Government, but not
take office. When Peel finally declined, the Duke accepted, and
yesterday at three o'clock he went to St. James's. The King saw
Peel and the Speaker. Nothing is known of the formation of the
Cabinet, but the reports were first that Alexander Baring was to
be Chancellor of the Exchequer, and since that he has refused on
account of his health, and that Lyndhurst is to go to the King's
Bench, Tenterden to retire, and the Great Seal to be put in
commission.
The first act of the Duke was to advise the King to reject the
address of the Birmingham Union, which he did, and said he knew of
no such body. All very proper. In the morning I called upon Wood
at the Treasury, to explain to him that I had never been cognisant
of the late proceedings in the House of Lords, and that I was far
from approving the conduct of my old associates. He said he had
never believed that I was any party to it, and regretted that I
had not been in town, when it was just possible I might have
persuaded them of the unworthiness of the course they were taking.
He said that I did not know how bad it was, for that Wharncliffe
had distinctly said that if such a thing was proposed he should
oppose it, and that Palmerston was present when he said so. This
Wharncliffe positively denies, and yesterday he went to Palmerston
to endeavour to explain, taking with him a minute which he said he
had drawn up at the time of all that passed, but which he had
never before shown or submitted for correction, and which
Palmerston told him was incorrect, inasmuch, as it omitted that
engagement. They are at issue as to the fact. The position of the
respective parties is curious. The Waverers undertook a task of
great difficulty with slender means, and they accomplished it with
complete success. All turned out as they expected and desired,
but, after having been in confidential communication with both
parties, they have contrived mortally to offend both, and to
expose themselves to odium from every quarter, and to an universal
imputation of insincerity and double-dealing, and this without any
other fault than mismanagement and the false position in which
they found themselves, without influence or power, between two
mighty parties. The Tories, who have exhibited nothing but
obstinacy and unreasonableness, and who thwarted the Waverers by
every means they could devise, have reaped all the benefit of
their efforts, and that without admitting that they were right or
thanking them for bringing matters to this pass. They are
triumphant, in spite of all they did to prevent their own triumph,
and have had all the spiteful pleasure of abuse and obloquy, all
the glory of consistency, and the satisfaction of pertinacity,
with all the advantages that an opposite line of conduct promised
to give them. [Their triumph was of short duration, and nothing so
complete as their final discomfiture.]
The King took leave of his Ministers with a great effusion of
tenderness, particularly to Richmond, whom he entreated to remain
in office; but I take it that he easily consoles himself, and
does not care much more for one Minister than another.
The debate in the House of Commons was not so violent as might
have been expected, and the Tories were greatly elated with the
divisions on Ebrington's motion, because there was a majority
less by fifty-six than on a similar motion when the Bill was
rejected in October. The circumstances were, however, different,
and some would not vote because they disapprove of creating
Peers, which this vote would have committed them to approve of.
There is so much of wonder, and curiosity, and expectation abroad
that there is less of abuse and exasperation than might have been
expected, but it will all burst forth. The town is fearfully
quiet. What is odd enough is that the King was hissed as he left
London the other day, and the Duke cheered as he came out of the
Palace. There have been some meetings, with resolutions to
support the Bill, to express approbation of the Ministers, and to
protest against the payment of taxes, and there will probably be
a good deal of bustle and bluster here and elsewhere; but I do
not believe in real tumults, particularly when the rabble and the
unions know that there is a Government which will not stand such
things, and that they will not be able to bandy compliments with
the Duke as they did with Althorp and John Russell, not but what
much dissatisfaction and much disquietude must prevail. The funds
have not fallen, which is a sign that there is no alarm in the
City. At this early period of the business it is difficult to
form any opinion of what will happen; the present Government in
opposition will again be formidable, but I am disposed to think
things will go on and right themselves; we shall avoid a creation
of Peers, but we must have a Reform Bill of some sort, and
perhaps a harmless one after all, and if the elements of disorder
can be resolved into tranquillity and order again, we must not
quarrel with the means that have been employed, nor the quantum
of moral injustice that has been perpetrated.
[Page Head: PEEL REFUSES TO TAKE OFFICE.]
The Tories are very indignant with Peel for not taking office,
and if, as it is supposed, he is to support Government and the
Bill out of office, and when all is over come in, it is hardly
worth while for such a farce to deprive the King and the country
of his services in the way that they could be most useful, but he
is still smarting under Catholic question reminiscences, while
the Duke is more thick-skinned. After he had carried the Catholic
question the world was prepared for a good deal of versatility on
his part, but it was in mere derision that (after his speech on
Reform in 1830) it used to be said that he would very likely be
found proposing a Bill of Reform, and here he is coming into
office for the express purpose of carrying on this very Bill
against which the other day he entered a protest which must stare
him in the face through the whole progress of it, or, if not, to
bring in another of the same character, and probably nearly of
the same dimensions. Pretexts are, however, not wanting, and the
necessity of supporting the King is made paramount to every other
consideration. The Duke's worshippers (a numerous class) call
this the finest action of his life, though it is difficult to
perceive in what the grandeur of it consists, or the magnitude of
the sacrifice. However, it is fair to wait a little, and hear
from his own lips his exposition of the mode in which he intends
to deal with this measure, and how he will reconcile what he has
hitherto said with what he is now about to do. Talleyrand is of
course in a state of great consternation, which will be
communicated like an electrical shock to the Powers specially
favoured and protected by the late Government--Leopold and Don
Pedro, for instance. It will be a difficult thing for the Duke to
deal with some of the questions on which he has committed himself
pretty considerably while in opposition, both with respect to
foreign politics and especially Irish Education.
Monday, May 14th, 1832 {p.297}
Nothing more was known yesterday, but everybody was congregated at
the clubs, asking, discussing, and wondering. There was a great
meeting at Apsley House, when it was supposed everything was
settled. The Household went yesterday to St. James's to resign
their sticks and badges; amongst the rest Lord Foley. The King was
very civil to him; made him sit down and said, 'Lord Foley, you
are a young man.' 'Sir, I am afraid I cannot flatter myself that I
have any right to that appellation.' 'Oh, yes; you are a young
man--at all events in comparison with me--and you will probably
come into office again; but I am an old man, and I am afraid I
shall not have the pleasure of seeing you there.' It is supposed
that this _coup_ has been preparing for some time. All the Royal
Family, bastards and all, have been incessantly _at_ the King, and
he has probably had more difficulty in the long run in resisting
the constant importunity of his _entourage_, and of his womankind
particularly, than the dictates of his Ministers; and between this
gradual but powerful impression, and his real opinion and fears,
he was not sorry to seize the first good opportunity of shaking
off the Whigs. When Lord Anglesey went to take leave of him at
Windsor he was struck with the change in his sentiments, and told
Lady Anglesey so, who repeated it to my brother.
It is gratifying to find that those with whom I used to dispute,
and who would hear of nothing but rejecting the second reading,
now admit that my view was the correct one, and Vesey Fitzgerald,
with whom I had more than one discussion, complimented me very
handsomely upon the justification of my view of the question
which the event had afforded. The High Tories, of course, will
never admit that they could have been wrong, and have no other
resource but to insist boldly that the King never would have made
Peers at all.[5]
[5] [Everyone knows how short-lived were the expectations
caused by the temporary resignation of Lord Grey's
Government. It will be seen in the following pages how
soon the vision passed away; but the foregoing passages
are retained precisely because they contain a vivid and
faithful picture of the state of opinion at the
moment.]
London, May 17th, 1832 {p.298}
[Page Head: WELLINGTON'S EFFORTS TO FORM A MINISTRY.]
The events of the last few days have passed with a rapidity which
hardly left time to think upon them--such sudden changes and
transitions from rage to triumph on one side, and from foolish
exultation to mortification and despair on the other. The first
impression was that the Duke of Wellington would succeed in
forming a Government, with or without Peel. The first thing he
did was to try and prevail upon Peel to be Prime Minister, but he
was inexorable. He then turned to Baring,[6] who, after much
hesitation, agreed to be Chancellor of the Exchequer. The work
went on, but with difficulty, for neither Peel, Goulburn, nor
Croker would take office. They then tried the Speaker, who was
mightily tempted to become Secretary of State, but still doubting
and fearing, and requiring time to make up his mind. At an
interview with the Duke and Lyndhurst at Apsley House he declared
his sentiments on the existing state of affairs in a speech of
three hours, to the unutterable disgust of Lyndhurst, who
returned home, flung himself into a chair, and said that 'he
could not endure to have anything to do with such a _damned
tiresome old bitch_.' After these three hours of oratory Manners
Sutton desired to have till the next morning (Monday) to make up
his mind, which he again begged might be extended till the
evening. On that evening (Monday) ensued the memorable night in
the House of Commons, which everybody agrees was such a scene of
violence and excitement as never had been exhibited within those
walls. Tavistock told me he had never heard anything at all like
it, and to his dying day should not forget it. The House was
crammed to suffocation; every violent sentiment and vituperative
expression was received with shouts of approbation, yet the
violent speakers were listened to with the greatest attention.[7]
Tom Duncombe made one of his blustering Radical harangues, full
of every sort of impertinence, which was received with immense
applause, but which contrasted with an admirable speech, full of
dignity, but also of sarcasm and severity, from John Russell--the
best he ever made. The conduct of the Duke of Wellington in
taking office _to carry the Bill_, which was not denied, but
which his friends feebly attempted to justify, was assailed with
the most merciless severity, and (what made the greatest
impression) was condemned (though in more measured terms) by
moderate men and Tories, such as Inglis and Davies Gilbert.
Baring, who spoke four times, at last proposed that there should
be a compromise, and that the ex-Ministers should resume their
seats and carry the Bill. This extraordinary proposition was
drawn from him by the state of the House, and the impossibility
he at once saw of forming a new Government, and without any
previous concert with the Duke, who, however, entirely approved
of what he said. After the debate Baring and Sutton went to
Apsley House, and related to the Duke what had taken place, the
former saying he would face a thousand devils rather than such a
House of Commons. From that moment the whole thing was at an end,
and the next morning (Tuesday) the Duke repaired to the King, and
told him that he could not form an Administration. This
communication, for which the debate of the previous night had
prepared everybody, was speedily known, and the joy and triumph
of the Whigs were complete.
[6] [Alexander Baring, afterwards Lord Ashburton.]
[7] [The debate arose on a petition of the City of London,
praying that the House would refuse supplies until the
Reform Bill had become law.]
The King desired the Duke and Lyndhurst (for they went together)
to advise him what he should do. They advised him to write to
Lord Grey (which he did), informing him that the Duke had given
up the commission to form a Government, that he had heard of what
had fallen from Mr. Baring in the House of Commons the night
before on the subject of a compromise, and that he wished Lord
Grey to return and resume the Government upon that principle.
Lord Grey sent an answer full of the usual expressions of zeal
and respect, but saying that he could give no answer until he had
consulted his colleagues. He assembled his Cabinet, and at five
o'clock the answer was sent.[8]
[8] [These communications have been published in the
'Correspondence of Earl Grey with William IV.,' vol.
ii. pp. 406-411.]
[Page Head: TRIUMPH OF THE WHIGS.]
Yesterday morning Lord Grey saw the King; but up to last night
nothing was finally settled, everything turning upon the terms to
be exacted, some of the violent of the party desiring they should
avail themselves of this opportunity to make Peers, both to show
their power and increase their strength; the more moderate,
including Lord Grey himself and many of the old Peer-makers, were
for sparing the King's feelings and using their victory with
moderation, all, however, agreeing that the only condition on
which they could return was the certainty of carrying the Reform
Bill unaltered, either by a creation of Peers or by the secession
of its opponents. Up to the present moment the matter stands
thus: the King at the mercy of the Whigs, just as averse as ever
to make Peers, the violent wishing to press him, the moderate
wishing to spare him, all parties railing at each other, the
Tories broken and discomfited, and meditating no further
resistance to the Reform Bill. The Duke is to make his _expose_
to-night.
Peel, who has kept himself out of the scrape, is strongly
suspected of being anything but sorry for the dilemma into which
the Duke has got himself, and they think that he secretly
encouraged him to persevere, with promises of present support and
future co-operation, with a shrewd anticipation of the fate that
awaited him. I am by no means indisposed to give credit to this,
for I well remember the wrath of Peel when the Duke's Government
was broken up in 1830, and the various instances of secret
dislike and want of real cordiality which have peeped from under
a decent appearance of union and friendship. Nothing can be more
certain than that he is in high spirits in the midst of it all,
and talks with great complacency of its being very well as it is,
and that the salvation of character is everything; and this from
him, who fancies he has saved his own, and addressed to those who
have forfeited theirs, is amusing.
The joy of the King at what he thought was to be his deliverance
from the Whigs was unbounded. He lost no time in putting the Duke
of Wellington in possession of everything that had taken place
between him and them upon the subject of Reform, and with regard
to the creation of Peers, admitting that he had consented, but
saying he had been subjected to every species of persecution. His
ignorance, weakness, and levity put him in a miserable light, and
prove him to be one of the silliest old gentlemen in his
dominions; but I believe he is mad, for yesterday he gave a great
dinner to the Jockey Club, at which (notwithstanding his cares)
he seemed in excellent spirits; and after dinner he made a number
of speeches, so ridiculous and nonsensical, beyond all belief but
to those who heard them, rambling from one subject to another,
repeating the same thing over and over again, and altogether such
a mass of confusion, trash, and imbecility as made one laugh and
blush at the same time.
As soon as the Duke had agreed to try and form a Government he
applied to the Tories, who nearly all agreed to support him, and
were prepared to go to all lengths, even to that of swallowing the
whole Bill if necessary; the Duke of Newcastle particularly would
do anything. These were the men who were so squeamish that they
could not be brought to support amendments even, unless they were
permitted to turn the schedules upside-down, straining at gnats
out of office and swallowing camels in. It is remarkable that
after the sacrifice Wharncliffe made to re-ingratiate himself with
the Tories, incurring the detestation and abuse of the Whigs, and
their reproach of bad faith, the former have utterly neglected
him, taking no notice of him whatever during the whole of their
proceedings from the moment of the division, leaving him in
ignorance of their plans and intentions, never inviting him to any
of their meetings, and although a communication was made by
Lyndhurst to Harrowby (they wanted Harrowby to be Prime Minister),
the latter was not at liberty to impart it to Wharncliffe. It is
not possible to be more deeply mortified than he is at the
treatment he has experienced from these allies after having so
committed himself. From the account of the King's levity
throughout these proceedings, I strongly suspect that (if he
lives) he will go mad. While the Duke and Lyndhurst were with him,
at one of the most critical moments (I forget now at which) he
said, 'I have been thinking that something is wanting with regard
to Hanover. Duke, you are now my Minister, and I beg you will
think of this; I should like to have a slice of Belgium, which
would be a convenient addition to Hanover. Pray remember this,'
and then resumed the subject they were upon.
May 19th, 1832 {p.302}
The night before last the Duke made his statement. It was
extremely clear, but very bald, and left his case just where it
was, as he did not say anything that everybody did not know
before. His friends, however, extolled it as a masterpiece of
eloquence and a complete vindication of himself. The Tory Lords
who spoke after him bedaubed him with praise, and vied with each
other in expressions of admiration. These were Carnarvon,
Winchelsea, and Haddington. There was not one word from the Duke
(nor from the others) indicative of an intention to secede, which
was what the Government expected. His speech contained a sort of
covert attack upon Peel; in fact, he could not defend himself
without attacking Peel, for if the one was in the right in taking
office the other must have been in the wrong in refusing to join
him. There was nothing, however, which was meant as a reproach,
though out of the House the Duke's friends do not conceal their
anger that Peel would not embark with him in his desperate
enterprise.
Lyndhurst was exceedingly able, highly excited, very eloquent,
and contrived to make his case a good one. It was a fine display
and very short. Carnarvon and Mansfield were outrageously
violent, but both in their way clever, and parts of the speech of
the latter were eloquent. Lord Grey was excellent, short, very
temperate and judicious, exactly what was requisite and nothing
more. Nobody else spoke on his side, except Mulgrave at the end.
[Page Head: THE KING'S LETTER TO THE PEERS.]
The debate, however interesting, left the whole matter in
uncertainty; and the next day the old question began again. What
was to be done--Peers or no Peers? A Cabinet sat nearly all day,
and Lord Grey went once or twice to the King. He, poor man, was at
his wits' end, and tried an experiment (not a very constitutional
one) of his own by writing to a number of Peers, entreating them
to withdraw their opposition to the Bill. These letters were
written (I think) before the debate. On Thursday nothing was
settled, and at another meeting of the Cabinet a minute was drawn
up agreeing to offer again the same advice to the King. Before
this was acted upon Richmond, who had been absent, arrived, and he
prevailed upon his colleagues to cancel it. In the meantime the
Duke of Wellington, Lyndhurst, and other Peers had given the
desired assurances to the King, which he communicated to Lord
Grey. These were accepted as sufficient securities, and
declarations made accordingly in both Houses of Parliament. If the
Ministers had again gone to the King with this advice, it is
impossible to say how it would have ended, for he had already been
obstinate, and might have continued so on this point, and he told
Lord Verulam that he thought it would be contrary to his
coronation oath to make Peers. Our princes have strange notions of
the obligations imposed by their coronation oath.
On Thursday in the House of Commons Peel made his statement, in
which, with great civility and many expressions of esteem and
admiration of the Duke, he pronounced as bitter a censure of his
conduct, while apparently confining himself to the defence of his
own, as it was possible to do, and as such it was taken. I have
not the least doubt that he did it _con amore_, and that he is
doubly rejoiced to be out of the scrape himself and to leave
others in it.
May 31st, 1832 {p.304}
Since I came back from Newmarket there has not been much to write
about. A calm has succeeded the storm. Last night Schedules A and
B were galloped through the Committee, and they finished the
business. On Thursday next the Bill will probably be read a third
time. In the House of Lords some dozen Tories and Waverers have
continued to keep up a little skirmish, and a good deal of
violent language has been bandied about, in which the Whigs,
being the winners, have shown the best temper. In society the
excitement has ceased, but the bitterness remains. The Tories
are, however, so utterly defeated, and the victory of their
opponents is so complete, that the latter can afford to be
moderate and decorous in their tone and manner; and the former
are exceedingly sulky, cockering up each other with much
self-gratulation and praise, but aware that in the opinion of the
mass of mankind they are covered with odium, ridicule, and
disgrace. Peel and the Duke are ostensibly great friends, and the
ridiculous farce is still kept up of each admiring what he would
not do himself, but what the other did.
June 1st, 1832 {p.305}
[Page Head: FAVOURITES OF LOUIS XVIII.]
Met the Duke of Wellington at dinner yesterday, and afterwards had
a long talk with him, not on politics. I never see and converse
with him without reproaching myself for the sort of hostility I
feel and express towards his political conduct, for there are a
simplicity, a gaiety, and natural urbanity and good-humour in him,
which are remarkably captivating in so great a man. We talked of
Dumont's book and Louis XVIII.'s 'Memoirs.' I said I thought the
'Memoirs' were not genuine. He said he was sure they were, that
they bore the strongest internal evidence of being so, particularly
in their accuracy as to dates, that he was the best chronologist
in the world, and that he knew the day of the week of every event
of importance. He once asked the Duke when he was born, and when
he told him the day of the month and year, he at once said it was
on a Tuesday; that he (the Duke) had remembered that throughout
the book the day of the week was always mentioned, and many of the
anecdotes he had himself heard the King tell. He then talked of
him, and I was surprised to hear him say that Charles X. was a
cleverer man, as far as knowledge of the world went, though Louis
XVIII. was much better informed--a most curious remark,
considering the history and end of each. [Nothing could be more
mistaken and untrue than this opinion.] That Louis XVIII. was
always governed, and a favourite indispensable to him. At the
Congress of Vienna the Duke was deputed to speak to M. de Blacas,
his then favourite, and tell him that his unpopularity was so
great in France that it was desirable he should not return there.
Blacas replied, 'You don't know the King; he must have a
favourite, and he had better have me than another. I shall go; he
will have another, and you should take pains to put a _gentleman_
in that situation, for he is capable of taking the first person
that finds access to him and the opportunity of pleasing him.' He
added that he should not wonder if he took Fouche. He did not take
Fouche, who was not aware of the part he might have played, but he
took De Cazes, who governed him entirely. This continued till the
Royal Family determined to get rid of him, and by threatening to
make an _esclandre_ and leave the chateau they at last succeeded,
and De Cazes was sent as Ambassador to London. Then the King wrote
to him constantly, sending him verses and literary scraps. The
place remained vacant till accident threw Madame du Cayla in his
way.[9] She was the daughter of Talon, who had been concerned in
the affair of the Marquis de Favras, and she sent to the King to
say she had some papers of her father's relating to that affair,
which she should like to give into his own hands. He saw her and
was pleased with her. The Royal Family encouraged this new taste,
in order to get rid entirely of De Cazes, and even the Duchesse
d'Angouleme promoted her success. It was the same thing to him to
have a woman as a man, and there was no sexual question in the
matter, as what he wanted was merely some one to whom he could
tell everything, consult with on all occasions, and with whom he
could bandy literary trifles. Madame du Cayla, who was clever, was
speedily installed, and he directly gave up De Cazes. He told the
Duke that he was _brouille_ with De Cazes, who had behaved very
ill to him, but he had nothing specific to allege against him,
except that his manner to him was not what it ought to have been.
The Ministers paid assiduous court to Madame du Cayla, imparted
everything to her, and got her to say what they wanted said to the
King; she acted all the part of a mistress, except the essential,
of which there never was any question. She got great sums of money
from him and very valuable presents.
[9] [This lady has already been noticed in a previous
portion of these Memoirs, when she visited England. See
vol. i. p. 215 [July 10th, 1829].]
June 18th, 1832 {p.306}
[Page Head: CHARACTER OF WILLIAM IV.]
Breakfasted on Thursday with Rogers, and yesterday at the
Athenaeum with Henry Taylor, and met Mr. Charles Austin, a
lawyer, clever man, and Radical. The Bills are jogging on and
there is a comparative calm. The Whigs swear that the Reformed
Parliament will be the most aristocratic we have ever seen, and
Ellice told me that they cannot hear of a single improper person
likely to be elected for any of the new places. [Their choice did
not correspond with this statement of their disposition.] The
metropolitan districts want rank and talent. The Government and
their people have now found out what a fool the King is, and it
is very amusing to hear them on the subject. Formerly, when they
thought they had him fast, he was very honest and rather wise;
now they find him rather shuffling and exceedingly silly. When
Normanby went to take leave of him on going to Jamaica, he
pronounced a harangue in favour of the slave trade, of which he
has always been a great admirer, and expressed sentiments for
which his subjects would tear him to pieces if they heard them.
It is one of the great evils of the recent convulsion that the
King's imbecility has been exposed to the world, and in his
person the regal authority has fallen into contempt; his own
personal unpopularity is not of much consequence as long as it
does not degrade his office; that of George IV. never did, so
little so that he could always as King cancel the bad impressions
which he made in his individual capacity, and he frequently did
so. Walter Scott is arrived here, dying. A great mortality among
great men; Goethe, Perier, Champollion, Cuvier, Scott, Grant,
Mackintosh, all died within a few weeks of each other.
June 25th, 1832 {p.307}
At Fern Hill all last week; a great party, nothing but racing and
gambling; then to Shepperton, and to town on Saturday. The event
of the races was the King's having his head knocked with a stone.
It made very little sensation on the spot, for he was not hurt,
and the fellow was a miserable-looking ragamuffin. It, however,
produced a great burst of loyalty in both Houses, and their
Majesties were loudly cheered at Ascot. The Duke of Wellington,
who had been the day before mobbed in London, also reaped a
little harvest of returning popularity from the assault, and so
far the outrages have done rather good than harm.
July 12th, 1832 {p.307}
The suttee case was decided at the Privy Council on Saturday
last, and was not uninteresting. The Chancellor, Lord President,
Graham, John Russell and Grant, Sir Edward East, the Master of
Rolls, Vice-Chancellor, Lord Amherst, and Lord Wellesley were
present (the latter not the last day). Lushington was for the
appeal, and Home and Starkie against. The former made two very
able and ingenious speeches; when the counsel withdrew the Lords
gave their opinions _seriatim_. Leach made a very short and very
neat speech, condemning the order[10] of the Governor-General,
but admitting the danger of rescinding it, and recommending,
therefore, that the execution of it should be suspended. Sir
Edward East, in a long, diffusive harangue, likewise condemned
the order, but was against suspension; Sir James Graham was
against the order, but against suspension; Lord Amherst the same.
The rest approved of the order altogether. John Russell gave his
opinion very well. The Chancellor was prolix and confused; he hit
upon a bit of metaphysics in one of the cases on which he took
pleasure in dilating. The result was that the petition was
dismissed.
[10] The order was a decree of the Governor-General of India
abolishing the practice of suttee, against which
certain Hindoos appealed to the King in Council.
Another party, however, were in favour of the order,
and the Rajah Rammohun Roy is acting in this country as
their agent.
I know nothing of politics for some time past. The Reform fever
having subsided, people are principally occupied with speculations
on the next elections. At present there is every appearance of the
return of a House of Commons very favourable to the present
Government, but the Tory party keeps together in the House of
Lords, and they are animated with vague hopes of being able to
turn out the Ministry, more from a spirit of hatred and revenge
than from any clear view of the practicability of their carrying
on the Government. I conceive, however, that as soon as Parliament
is up there will be a creation of Peers. In the House of Commons
the Irish Tithe question has been the great subject of interest
and discussion. O'Connell and the Irish members debate and adjourn
just as they please, and Althorp is obliged to give way to them.
When Stanley moved for leave to bring in his Bill, he detailed his
plan in a speech of two hours. They thought fit to oppose this,
which is quite unusual, and O'Connell did not arrive till after
Stanley had sat down. Not having heard his speech he could not
answer him, and he therefore moved the adjournment. Upon a former
occasion, during the Reform Bill, when the Tories moved an
adjournment after many hours' debate, the Government opposed it,
and voted on through the night till seven o'clock in the morning;
now the Tories were ready to support Government against the Irish
members, but they would not treat the Radicals as they did the
Tories, and then on a subsequent occasion they submitted to have
the debate adjourned.
[Page Head: O'CONNELL'S DREAD OF CHOLERA.]
O'Connell is supposed to be horridly afraid of the cholera. He
has dodged about between London and Dublin, as the disease
appeared first at one and then the other place, and now that it
is everywhere he shirks the House of Commons from fear of the
heat and the atmosphere. The cholera is here, and diffuses a
certain degree of alarm. Some servants of people well known have
died, and that frightens all other servants out of their wits,
and they frighten their masters; the death of any one person they
are acquainted with terrifies people much more than that of
twenty of whom they knew nothing. As long as they read daily
returns of a parcel of deaths here and there of A, B, and C they
do not mind, but when they hear that Lady such a one's nurse or
Sir somebody's footman is dead, they fancy they see the disease
actually at their own door.
July 15th, 1832 {p.309}
[Page Head: IRISH TITHES.]
I had a good deal of conversation yesterday with Lord Duncannon
and Lord John Russell about Ireland. The debate the night before
lasted till four o'clock. O'Connell made a furious speech, and
Dawson the other evening another, talking of resistance and of
his readiness to join in it. This drew up Peel, who had spoken
before, and who, when attacked with cries of 'Spoke!' said, 'Yes,
I have spoken, but I will say that no party considerations shall
prevent my supporting Government in this measure, and giving them
my cordial support.' He was furious with Dawson, and got up in
order to throw him over, though he did not address himself to
him, or to anything he had said expressly. John Russell spoke out
what ought to have been said long ago, that the Church could not
stand, but that the present clergyman must be paid. Both he and
Duncannon are aware of the false position in which the Government
is placed, pretending to legislate with a knowledge that their
laws cannot be enforced, and the latter said that, whatever might
be done, the Irish would take nothing at the hands of Stanley. It
is unfortunate that his attachment to the Church makes him the
unfittest man in the country to manage Irish affairs, and he has
contrived to make himself so personally unpopular that with the
best intentions he could not give satisfaction. Under these
circumstances his remaining there is impossible, but what is to
be done with him? He is of such importance in the House of
Commons that they cannot part with him. I asked John Russell why
they did not send Hobhouse to Ireland and make Stanley Secretary
of War. He said would he consent to exchange? that he was tired
of office, and would be glad to be out. I said I could not
suppose in such an emergency that he would allow any personal
considerations to influence him, and that he would consent to
whatever arrangement would be most beneficial to the Government
and conducive to the settlement of Irish affairs. The truth is
(as I told him) that they are, with respect to Ireland, in the
situation of a man who has got an old house in which he can no
longer live, not tenable; various architects propose this and
that alteration, to build a room here and pull down one there,
but at last they find that all these alterations will only serve
to make the house habitable a little while longer, that the dry
rot is in it, and that they had better begin, as they will be
obliged to end, by pulling it down and building up a new one. He
owned this was true, but said that here another difficulty
presented itself with regard to Stanley--whether he would, as a
leading member of the Cabinet, consent to any measures which
might go so much further than he would be disposed to do. I said
that I could not imagine (whatever might be his predilections)
that his mind was not awakened to the necessity of giving way to
the state of things, and that he might consent to measures which
he felt he was not a fit person to introduce and recommend. He
assented to this. He then talked of the views of the Protestants,
of the Lefroys, &c., that they began to admit the necessity of a
change, but by no means would consent to the alienation of Church
property from Protestant uses, that they were willing where there
was a large parish consisting entirely of Catholics that the
tithes should be taken from the rector of such parish and given
to one who had a large Protestant flock--an arrangement which
would disgust the Catholics as much as or more than any other,
and be considered a perfect mockery. The fact is we may shift and
change and wriggle about as much as we will, we may examine and
report and make laws, but tithe, the tithe system is at an end.
The people will not pay them, and there are no means of
compelling them. The march of events is just as certain as that
of the seasons. The question which is said to be beset with
difficulties is in fact very easy--that is, its difficulties
arise from conflicting interests and passions, and not from the
uncertainty of its operation and end. Those conflicting passions
are certainly very great and very embarrassing, and it is no easy
matter to deal with them, but it seems to me that the wisest
policy is to keep our eyes steadfastly fixed on the end, and,
admitting the inevitable conclusion, labour to bring it about
with the smallest amount of individual loss, the greatest general
benefit, and the best chance of permanence and stability. By
casting lingering looks at the old system, and endeavouring to
save something here and there, by allowing the Church to remain
in the rags and tatters of its old supremacy, we shall foster
those hostile feelings which it is essential to put down for
ever, and leave the seeds of grievance and hatred to spring up in
a future harvest of agitation and confusion.
July 25th, 1832 {p.311}
Nothing of moment has occurred lately; the dread of cholera
absorbs everybody. Mrs. Smith, young and beautiful, was dressed
to go to church on Sunday morning, when she was seized with the
disorder, never had a chance of rallying, and died at eleven at
night. This event, shocking enough in itself from its suddenness
and the youth and beauty of the person, has created a terrible
alarm; many people have taken flight, and others are suspended
between their hopes of safety in country air and their dread of
being removed from metropolitan aid. The disease spreads
gradually in all directions in town and country, but without
appearing like an epidemic; it is scattered and uncertain; it
brings to light horrible distress. We, who live on the smooth and
plausible surface, know little of the frightful appearance of the
bowels of society.
Don Pedro has never been heard of since he landed, and nobody
seems much to care whether he or Miguel succeed. The Tories are
for the latter and the Whigs for the former. In a fourth debate
on the Russian Dutch Loan Ministers got a good finale, a large
division, and a brilliant speech from Stanley, totally unprepared
and prodigiously successful. Nothing could be worse in point of
tactics than renewing this contest, neither party having, in
fact, a good case. Parliament is going to separate soon, and the
cholera will accelerate the prorogation; not a step has been made
towards an approximation between the rival parties, who appear to
be animated against each other with unabated virulence. The
moderate Tories talk of their desire to see the Government
discard their Radical friends, but the great body give them no
encouragement to do so by evincing any diminished hostility to
them as a party. Opinions are so different as to the probable
composition of the next Parliament, that it is difficult to
arrive at any satisfactory conclusion about it. The Tories
evidently expect that they shall reappear in very formidable
strength, though in particular places the Tory party is entirely
crushed; the sooner it is so altogether the better, for no good
can be expected from it, and it would be far better to erect a
Conservative party upon a new and broader basis than to try and
bolster up this worn-out, prejudiced, obstinate faction. But the
times are difficult and men are wanting; the middle classes are
pressing on, and there are men enough there of fortune, energy,
activity, zeal, and ambition--no Cannings perhaps or Broughams,
but a host of fellows of the calibre of the actors in the old
French Constituent Assembly.
July 29th, 1832 {p.312}
[Page Head: QUARREL BETWEEN BROUGHAM AND SUGDEN.]
There has been a great breeze between the Chancellor and Sugden,
abusing and retorting upon each other from their respective
Houses of Parliament. As all personal matters excite greater
interest than any others, so has this. Scott, Lord Eldon's son,
died, and his places became vacant. Brougham had recommended
their abolition long ago in his evidence before the House of
Commons, and both publicly and privately. Some days ago Sugden
gave notice to Horne (Solicitor-General) that he meant to put a
question to him in the House of Commons as to whether these
appointments were to be filled up or not, but before he did so
(at four o'clock in the morning) the writ was moved for James
Brougham, who had been put by the Chancellor in Scott's place.
Accordingly the next day Sugden attacked the appointment in the
House of Commons, and though he was by way of only asking a
question, he in fact made a long vituperative speech. Nobody was
there to reply. Althorp said he knew nothing of the matter, and
various speeches were made, all expressive of a desire that the
appointment should only be temporary. Horne (it seems) had never
told the Chancellor what Sugden said, and Denman, who had no
authority from him, did not dare get up and say that it was not
to be permanent. Later in the day, having received instructions
from the Chancellor, he did get up and say so. The next day
Brougham introduced the subject in the House of Lords, and
attacked Sugden with all the sarcasm and contumely which he could
heap upon him, comparing him to 'a crawling reptile,' &c. Not one
of his Tory friends said a word, and, what is curious, the Duke
of Wellington praised Brougham for his disinterestedness, and old
Eldon defended the place. The following day (Friday) Sugden again
brought the matter before the House of Commons, complained
bitterly of the Chancellor's speech, was called to order by
Stanley, when the Speaker interfered, and, dexterously turning
Sugden's attack upon the newspaper report, enabled him to go on.
A violent discussion followed, rather awkward for the Chancellor,
whose friends endeavoured to soften the thing down by denying the
accuracy of the report. After much acrimonious debate the matter
ended. Yesterday the 'Times,' throwing over Brougham and Sugden,
asserted the accuracy of its own reporter, and declared that
whether the Chancellor was right or wrong to have uttered them,
the words were spoken by him exactly as they had been reported.
Both parties are furious, but on the whole the Chancellor seems
at present to have the worst of it, for it is worse for a man in
his station to be in the wrong, and more indecent to be
scurrilous, than for an individual who is nothing. Sugden now
declares he will bring on a motion he has long meditated on the
subject of the Court of Chancery, in which he will exhibit to the
world the whole conduct of Brougham since he has held the Great
Seal, his early haste and precipitation, his recent carelessness
and delay, his ignorance, inattention, and incompetence for the
office he holds. In this he expects to be supported by Wetherell,
Knight, and Pemberton, three of the most eminent Chancery
lawyers, while Brougham has nobody but Horne (of the profession)
to defend him. If this should occur he may thank himself, for he
would put Horne there.
Sir Charles Bagot called on me yesterday; told me that he thought
the Belgian question was at last on the point of being settled,
that the King of Holland had made 'the great concession,' and
that the rest must soon follow, that he had never passed two such
years amidst such difficulties, the King so obstinate. His view
was that by holding out and maintaining a large army events would
produce war, and that he would be able to sell himself to some
one of the contending parties, getting back Belgium as the price
of his aid, that he now only gave in because not a hope was left,
that the difficulties were so great that it was not the fault of
this Government that matters were not settled before. I asked him
how the Dutch had contrived to make such an exertion. He said it
was very creditable to them, but that they were very rich and
very frugal, and had lugged out their hoards. They had saddled
themselves with a debt the interest of which amounts to about
L700,000 a year--a good deal for two millions of people.
August 1st, 1832 {p.314}
[Page Head: BROUGHAM'S RESENTMENT.]
Here is an anecdote exhibiting the character of Brougham, hot,
passionate, and precipitate. He is preparing his Bill for the
amendment of the Court of Chancery, by which the patronage is to
be done away with. Compensation was to be given to the present
interests, but upon this recent affair between Sugden and him, to
revenge himself upon men who are all or mostly of Sugden's party,
he ordered the compensation clauses to be struck out. Sefton (who
is a sort of Sancho to him) came up to dinner quite elated at
having heard the order given. 'I wish,' said he, 'you had heard a
man treated as I did in the Chancellor's room. He came in to ask
him about the Bill he was drawing up. "I suppose the compensation
clauses are to be put in?" "Compensation?" said Brougham. "No, by
God; no compensation. Leave them out, if you please. They chose
to attack me, and they shall have enough of it."' And what will
be the end of all this--that the Chancellor shows his spite and
commits himself, shows that he is influenced in legislation by
personal feelings, and incurs the suspicion that because he
cannot get a compensation for his brother he is resolved nobody
else shall have any? Althorp's speech about the pensions on
Monday set at rest the question of compensation, and if these
offices are abolished the Chancellor cannot prevent their getting
it. In the House of Lords the eternal Russian Dutch Loan came on
again. The Duke made a speech and Wynford made a speech, and they
were opposed to each other; the Duke hit the right nail on the
head, and took that course which he frequently does, and which is
such a redeeming quality in his political character--addressed
himself to the _question itself_, to the real merits of it,
without making it a mere vehicle for annoying the Government.
Aberdeen sneered, but when the Duke throws over his people they
can do nothing.
August 8th, 1832 {p.315}
Pedro's expedition, which always has hobbled along, and never
exhibited any of that dash which is essential to the success of
such efforts, may be considered hopeless; Palmella arrived here a
day or two ago, very low, and the Regency scrip has fallen four
per cent. Nobody joins them, and it seems pretty clear that, one
_coquin_ for another, the Portuguese think they may as well have
Miguel. The Dutch affair is not yet settled, but on the point of
it; for the fiftieth time a 'little hitch' has again arisen. Last
night, in the House of Lords, the Chancellor, in one of his most
bungling ways, made what he meant to be a sort of _amende_ to
Sugden, making the matter rather worse than it was before, at
least for his own credit, for he said that 'he had never intended
to give pain, which he of all things abhorred,' and that he had
not been at all in a passion--both false, and the latter being in
fact his only excuse. I sat next to Melbourne at dinner, who
concurred in the judgment of the world on the whole transaction,
and said, 'The real truth is, he was in a great rage, for he had
forgotten all his own evidence and his own speeches, and he meant
to have kept the place.' This evidence from his own colleague and
friend is conclusive, and will be a nice morsel for the future
biographer of Brougham.
I dined at Holland House yesterday; a good many people, and the
Chancellor came in after dinner, looking like an old clothes man
and dirty as the ground. We had a true Holland House dinner, two
more people arriving (Melbourne and Tom Duncombe) than there was
room for, so that Lady Holland had the pleasure of a couple of
general squeezes, and of seeing our arms prettily pinioned. Lord
Holland sits at table, but does not dine. He proposed to retire
(not from the room), but was not allowed, for that would have
given us all space and ease. Lord Holland told some stories of
Johnson and Garrick which he had heard from Kemble. Johnson loved
to bully Garrick, from a recollection of Garrick's former
impertinence. When Garrick was in the zenith of his popularity,
and grown rich, and lived with the great, and while Johnson was
yet obscure, the Doctor used to drink tea with him, and he would
say, 'Davy, I do not envy you your money nor your fine acquaintance,
but I envy you your power of drinking such tea as this.' 'Yes,'
said Garrick, 'it is very good tea, but it is not my best, nor
that which I give to my Lord this and Sir somebody t'other.'
Johnson liked Fox because he defended his pension, and said it
was only to blame in not being large enough. 'Fox,' he said, 'is
a liberal man; he would always be "aut Caesar aut nullus;"
whenever I have seen him he has been _nullus_.' Lord Holland said
Fox made it a rule never to talk in Johnson's presence, because
he knew all his conversations were recorded for publication, and
he did not choose to figure in them.
August 12th, 1832 {p.317}
The House of Commons has finished (or nearly) its business.
Althorp ended with a blunder. He brought in a Bill to extend the
time for payment of rates and for voters under the new Bill, and
because it was opposed he abandoned it suddenly; his friends are
disgusted. Robarts told me that the Bank Committee had executed
their laborious duties in a spirit of great cordiality, and with
a general disposition to lay aside all political differences and
concur in accomplishing the best results; a good thing, for it is
in such transactions as these, which afford an opportunity for
laying aside the bitterness of party and the rancorous feelings
which animate men against each other, that the only chance can be
found of a future amalgamation of public men. He told me that the
evidence all went to prove that little improvement could be made
in the management of the Bank.
[Page Head: CHARACTER OF MACAULAY.]
Dined yesterday at Holland House; the Chancellor, Lord Grey,
Luttrell, Palmerston, and Macaulay. The Chancellor was sleepy and
would not talk; he uttered nothing but yawns and grunts. Macaulay
and Allen disputed history, particularly the character of the
Emperor Frederick II., and Allen declared himself a Guelph and
Macaulay a Ghibelline. Macaulay is a most extraordinary man, and
his astonishing knowledge is every moment exhibited, but (as far
as I have yet seen of him, which is not sufficient to judge) he
is not _agreeable_. His propositions and his allusions are rather
too abrupt; he starts topics not altogether naturally; then he
has none of the graces of conversation, none of that exquisite
tact and refinement which are the result of a felicitous
intuition or a long acquaintance with good society, or more
probably a mixture of both. The mighty mass of his knowledge is
not animated by that subtle spirit of taste and discretion which
alone can give it the qualities of lightness and elasticity, and
without which, though he may have the power of instructing and
astonishing, he never will attain that of delighting and
captivating his hearers. The dinner was agreeable, and enlivened
by a squabble between Lady Holland and Allen, at which we were
all ready to die of laughing. He jeered at something she said as
brutal, and chuckled at his own wit.
Shepperton, August 31st, 1832 {p.318}
I came here last Sunday to see my father, who (my mother wrote me
word) had been unwell for a day or two. I got here at four o'clock
(having called on Madame de Lieven at Richmond on the way), and
when I arrived I found my father at the point of death. He was
attacked as he had often been before; medicines afforded him no
relief, and nothing would stay on his stomach. On Saturday violent
spasms came on, which occasioned him dreadful pain; they continued
intermittingly till Sunday afternoon, when as they took him out of
bed to put him in a warm bath, he fainted. From this state of
insensibility he never recovered, and at half-past twelve o'clock
he expired. My brothers were both here. I sent an express for my
sister, who was at Malvern, and she arrived on Tuesday morning.
Dr. Dowdeswell was in the house, and he stayed on with us and did
all that was required. This morning he was buried in the church of
this village, close to the house, in the simplest manner, and was
followed to the grave by my brothers and brother-in-law,
Dowdeswell, Ives, the doctor who attended him, and the servants.
He had long been ailing, and at his age (nearly 70 years) this
event was not extraordinary, but it was shocking, because so
sudden and unexpected, and no idea of danger was entertained by
himself or those about him. My father had some faults and many
foibles, but he was exposed to great disadvantages in early youth;
his education was neglected and his disposition was spoilt. His
father was useless, and worse than useless, as a parent, and his
mother (a woman of extraordinary capacity and merit) died while he
was a young man, having been previously separated from her
husband, and having retired from the world.[11] The circumstances
of his marriage, and the incidents of his life, would be
interesting to none but his own family, and need not be recorded
by me. He was a man of a kind, amiable, and liberal disposition,
and what is remarkable, as he advanced in years his temper grew
less irritable and more indulgent; he was cheerful, hospitable,
and unselfish. He had at all times been a lively companion, and
without much instruction, extensive information, or a vigorous
understanding, his knowledge of the world in the midst of which he
had passed his life, his taste and turn for humour, and his
good-nature made him a very agreeable man. He had a few intimate
friends to whom he was warmly attached, a host of acquaintance,
and I do not know that he had a single enemy. He was an
affectionate father, and ready to make any sacrifices for the
happiness and welfare of his children--in short, he was amiable
and blameless in the various relations of life, and he deserved
that his memory should be cherished as it is by us with sincere
and affectionate regret.
[11] [Mr. Charles Greville, senior, was the fifth son of
Fulk Greville of Wilbury, by Frances Macartney, a lady
of some literary reputation as the authoress of an 'Ode
to Indifference.' She was the daughter of General
Macartney. Horace Walpole speaks of her as one of the
beauties of his time. She died in 1789. Mr. Greville
may have inherited from her his strong literary
tastes.]
September 18th, 1832 {p.319}
[Page Head: ANECDOTES OF PRINCESS CHARLOTTE.]
I have been in London, at Shepperton, and twice at Brighton to see
Henry de Ros; came back yesterday. The world is half asleep. Lord
Howe returns to the Queen as her Chamberlain, and that makes a
sensation. I met at Brighton Lady Keith [Madame de Flahaut], who
told us a great deal about French politics, which, as she is a
partisan, was not worth much, but she also gave us rather an
amusing account of the early days of the Princess Charlotte, at
the time of her escape from Warwick House in a hackney coach and
taking refuge with her mother, and of the earlier affair of
Captain Hess. The former escapade arose from her determination to
break off her marriage with the Prince of Orange, and that from
her falling suddenly in love with Prince Augustus of Prussia, and
her resolving to marry him and nobody else, not knowing that he
was already married _de la main gauche_ in Prussia. It seems that
she speedily made known her sentiments to the Prince, and he
(notwithstanding his marriage) followed the thing up, and had two
interviews with her at her own house, which were contrived by Miss
Knight, her governess. During one of these Miss Mercer arrived,
and Miss Knight told her that Prince Augustus was with the
Princess in her room, and what a fright she (Miss Knight) was in.
Miss Mercer, who evidently had no mind anybody should conduct such
an affair for the Princess but herself, pressed Miss Knight to go
and interrupt them, which on her declining she did herself. The
King (Regent as he was then) somehow heard of these meetings, and
measures of coercion were threatened, and it was just when an
approaching visit from him had been announced to the Princess that
she went off. Miss Mercer was in the house at the time, and the
Regent, when he came, found her there. He accused her of being a
party to the Princess's flight, but afterwards either did or
pretended to believe her denial, and sent her to fetch the
Princess back, which after many _pourparlers_ and the intervention
of the Dukes of York and Sussex, Brougham, and the Bishop of
Salisbury, her preceptor, was accomplished at two in the morning.
Hess's affair was an atrocity of the Princess of Wales. She
employed him to convey letters to her daughter while she used to
ride in Windsor Park, which he contrived to deliver, and
occasionally to converse with her; and on one occasion, at
Kensington, the Princess of Wales brought them together in her own
room. The Princess afterwards wrote him some letters, not
containing much harm, but idle and improper. When the Duke of
York's affair with Mrs. Clark came out, and all the correspondence,
she became very much alarmed, told Miss Mercer the whole story,
and employed her to get back her letters to Hess. She accordingly
wrote to Hess (who was then in Spain), but he evinced a
disinclination to give them up. On his return to England she saw
him, and on his still demurring she threatened to put the affair
into the Duke of York's hands, which frightened him, and then he
surrendered them, and signed a paper declaring he had given up
everything. The King afterwards heard of this affair, and
questioning the Princess, she told him everything. He sent for
Miss Mercer, and desired to see the letters, and then to keep
them. This she refused. This Captain Hess was a short, plump,
vulgar-looking man, afterwards lover to the Queen of Naples,
mother of the present King, an amour that was carried on under the
auspices of the Margravine at her villa in the Strada Nova at
Naples. It was, however, detected, and Hess was sent away from
Naples, and never allowed to return. I remember finding him at
Turin (married), when he was lamenting his hard fate in being
excluded from that _Paradiso_ Naples.
September 28th, 1832 {p.321}
[Page Head: BELGIUM, SPAIN, FRANCE.]
At Stoke from the 22nd to the 26th, then to the Grove, and
returned yesterday; at the former place Madame de Lieven,
Alvanley, Melbourne; tolerably pleasant; question of war again.
The Dutch King makes a stir, and threatens to bombard the town of
Antwerp; the French offered to march, and put their troops in
motion, but Leopold begged they would not, and chose rather to
await the effect of more conferences, which began with great
vigour a few days ago. What they find to say to each other for
eight or ten hours a day for several consecutive days it is hard
to guess, as the question is of the simplest kind. The King of
Holland will not give up the citadel of Antwerp, nor consent to
the free navigation of the Scheldt; the Belgians insist on these
concessions; the Conference says they shall be granted, but
Russia, Prussia, and Austria will not coerce the Dutchman;
England and France will, if the others don't object. A French
army is in motion, and a French fleet is off Spithead; so
probably something will come of it. Nothing has damaged this
Government more than these protracted and abortive conferences.
Four days ago there was a report that the King of Spain was dead,
accompanied with a good many particulars, and all the world began
speculating as to the succession, but yesterday came news that he
was not dead, but better. Pedro and Miguel are fighting at Oporto
with some appearance of spirit; Miguel is the favourite. The
French Government is represented to be in a wretched state,
squabbling and feeble, and nobody is inclined to be Minister.
Dupin was very near it, but refused because Louis Philippe would
not make him President of the Council. The King is determined to
be his own Minister, and can get nobody to take office on these
terms. They think it will end in Dupin. The present Government
declares it cannot meet the Chambers until Antwerp is evacuated
by the Dutch and the Duchesse de Berri departed out of France or
taken. This heroine, much to the annoyance of her family, is
dodging about in La Vendee and doing rather harm than good to her
cause. The Dauphiness passed through London, when our Queen very
politely went to visit her. She has not a shadow of doubt of the
restoration of her nephew, and thinks nothing questionable but
the time. She told Madame de Lieven this. I talked to Madame de
Lieven about war, and added that if any did break out it would be
the war of opinion which Canning had predicted. She said yes, and
that the monarchical principle (as she calls the absolute
principle) would then crush the other.
[Page Head: CONVERSATION WITH LORD MELBOURNE.]
I came up with Melbourne to London. He is uneasy about the state
of the country--about the desire for change and the general
restlessness that prevails. We discussed the different members of
the Government, and he agreed that John Russell had acted
unwarrantably in making the speech he did the other day at Torquay
about the Ballot, which, though hypothetical, was nothing but an
invitation to the advocates of Ballot to agitate for it; this,
too, from a Cabinet Minister! Then comes an awkward sort of
explanation, that what he said was in his _individual_ capacity,
as if he had any right so to speak. Melbourne spoke of Brougham,
who he said was tossed about in perpetual caprices, that he was
fanciful and sensitive, and actuated by all sorts of littlenesses,
even with regard to people so insignificant that it is difficult
to conceive how he can ever think about them; that he is
conservative, but under the influence of his old connexions,
particularly of the Saints. His friends are so often changed that
it is not easy to follow him in this respect. Durham used to be
one; now he hates him; he has a high opinion of Sefton! of his
judgment!! What is talent, what are great abilities, when one sees
the gigantic intellect of Brougham so at fault? Not only does the
world manage to go on when little wisdom guides it, but how ill it
may go on with a great deal of _talent_, which, however, is
different from _wisdom_. He asked me what I thought of Richmond,
and I told him that he was ignorant and narrow-minded, but a good
sort of fellow, only appearing to me, who had known him all my
life, in an odd place as a Cabinet Minister. He said he was sharp,
quick, the King liked him, and he stood up to Durham more than any
other man in the Cabinet, and that altogether he was not
unimportant; so that the ingredients of this Cabinet seem to be
put there to neutralise one another, and to be good for nothing
else; because Durham has an overbearing temper, and his
father-in-law is weak, there must be a man without any other merit
than spirit to curb that temper. He talked of Ireland, and the
difficulty of settling the question there, that the Archbishop of
Canterbury was willing to reform the Church, but not to alienate
any of its revenues. 'Not,' I asked, 'for the payment of a
Catholic clergy?' 'No, not from Protestant uses.' I told him there
was nothing to be done but to pull down the edifice and rebuild
it. He said you would have all the Protestants against you, but he
did not appear to differ. To this things must come at last.
Melbourne is exceedingly anxious to keep Lord Hill and Fitzroy
Somerset at the head of the army, from which the violent of his
party would gladly oust them, but he evidently contemplates the
possibility of having occasion for the army, and does not wish to
tamper with the service or play any tricks with it. It is curious
to see the working and counterworking of his real opinions and
principles with his false position, and the mixture of bluntness,
facility and shrewdness, discretion, levity and seriousness,
which, colouring his mind and character by turns, make up the
strange compound of his thoughts and his actions.