Signs of the Weakness of Government--The Irish Coercion
Bill--Lord John Russell on Ireland--Protectionist Opposition--The
Oregon Question--Lord Brougham canvassed--Weakness of the
Protectionists--Embarrassments of the Government--Violence of the
Protectionists--The Victories in India--Change of Opinion among
the Farmers--State of Ireland--Intentions of the Government--Lord
Palmerston visits Paris--A scheme of Alliance with the
Protectionists--Lord John Russell's Resolution--Lord Stanley's
Violence--The Duke of Wellington's Dissatisfaction--Anecdote of
the Father of Sir Robert Peel--Sir Robert Peel and Disraeli--Lord
Palmerston in Paris--Irish Coercion Bill--The Protectionist
Alliance--Conversation with Sir Robert Peel--Conversation with Sir
James Graham--The Factory Bill--The last Debate in the Commons
on the Corn Bill--Intrigues with the Protectionists--Defeated by
Lord John Russell--Meeting at Lansdowne House--Fine Speech of
Lord Stanley--'Alarm' wins the Emperor's Cup--Violent attacks
on Sir Robert Peel--The conduct of Sir Robert Peel to Mr.
Canning--Brougham and Stanley in the Lords--Opposition of the
Whigs to the Coercion Bill--Anxiety of Lord John Russell to get
back to Office--Mr. Disraeli renews the Attack on Peel--Lord
George Bentinck and Disraeli worsted by Peel.
_London, March 11th, 1846._--There has been nothing very remarkable
these last few days, except on Friday night, when the Corn Bill went
on rapidly, and the two amendments that had been announced were
disposed of by being severally withdrawn. Early in the evening,
however, the Government suffered a defeat, which was very significant
for the future. It was on a Poor Law question, which Graham thought
fit to fight. The majority against him was composed principally of
malignant Tories. John Russell voted with the Government, but could
not get the Whigs to stay for it; the Protectionists were uproarious
at beating the Government; the Whigs desired no better than that
they should be beaten; and so it will inevitably be. I do not think
anything can prevent a change of Government very soon, whatever may
happen afterwards. If Peel is wise, he will court this change, and let
people see how matters can be managed by others, and without him.
[Sidenote: THE IRISH COERCION BILL.]
_March 18th._--Few events or matters worth recording. John Russell,
without consulting anybody, according to his custom, gave notice of a
motion upon Ireland, having made up his mind, though very reluctantly,
not to oppose the Coercion Bill.[126] I met him one morning at Lord
Clarendon's, and talked to him about this Bill. His first intention
had been to oppose the Transportation clause, and he said O'Connell
had asked him what he meant to do. He replied he did not know. We
discussed the matter; and I told him I did not see how he could take
on himself the responsibility of opposing it; and he acknowledged
that he did not see it very well either; but he then broke out with a
bitterness beyond description against the Government, which he said
was the greatest curse to Ireland, and that while they were in office
no good was possible there. I did not think it worth while to dispute
with him; but just asked him what it was they had done or left undone?
He said, 'Their policy of first truckling to the Orangemen, insulting,
and then making useless concessions to, the Catholics, without
firmness or justice.' Nothing, in short, but what was vague and
unmeaning. I said, that, as to the Orangemen, I did not know what the
Government had done to them; but that if they had been favoured, they
were very ungrateful, for they abhorred and abused the Government with
all their strength. It was just after this, and I believe while the
bile was still flowing, that he gave his notice. It made a great stir.
The Protectionists eagerly hailed it as something that was to disable
and unseat Peel, while his own friends were excessively annoyed and
discomposed at what they thought a useless and dangerous move. The
dissatisfaction was so great that it threatened to embroil him with
his party, and the end was that the other night he put it off, which
is tantamount to giving it up. The Duke of Bedford does not approve of
it. I asked him why Lord John could not say what he wanted to say in a
speech on the Bill itself, and he said he would ask him.
In the House of Commons, the Protectionists are bent on delay, and on
not allowing the Bill to go up to the House of Lords before Easter.
They are now _the_ Opposition; they have elected George Bentinck their
leader, and Beresford and Newdegate whippers-in. Stanley, by all
accounts, declares himself more and more their leader in the Lords;
and means to urge them on. He has also two whips of his own, Eglinton
and Malmesbury. In the House of Commons they fix beforehand the day on
which they will divide, and generally a very distant one. They settled
some time ago to divide on the second reading next Friday week; ten
days hence. Meanwhile, as the debates go on, the arguments which go
forth to the country, the statistical details, and the progress of
famine and pestilence in Ireland, strengthen the Government case, and
produce effects on the public mind. The farmers in many places are
more and more anxious for a settlement, and Peel's fame and the notion
of his capacity for affairs extend.
Last night in the Lords a little scene was got up between Clarendon
and Aberdeen about Oregon. The former asked for papers and
information, and the latter made a speech, giving some papers,
refusing others, and declaring his confidence in the final
arrangement. It was not only amicable, but concerted. Aberdeen asked
Clarendon to do this, in order to give him an opportunity of saying
something. Means were at the same time taken to prevent anything
being said in the House of Commons, where Aberdeen dreads Peel saying
anything, for he is almost sure to say something he had better not.
His forte is not in dealing with foreign affairs, with which it seems
that it is always dangerous for anybody to meddle who is not in _the
trade_. The division of labour seems as essential in politics as in
matters of commerce and manual industry.
[Sidenote: DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE'S PAPERS.]
I was told the other day by Baring Wall, who had it from Labouchere,
that John Russell was not disinclined to take in Brougham. I was
surprised, for I thought Lord John disliked and distrusted him; so I
asked the Duke of Bedford. He said that he was not surprised at the
report; that Lord John had never objected to Brougham so much as some
others; that in 1835 he was not one of those who wanted to get rid of
him, and that at one of his meetings, at the crisis, he had thrown
out a word about him, and said, 'What do you think about Brougham?'
or something to that effect, on which somebody (he did not say who,
and I did not ask him), vehemently opposed the idea of taking him
in; when Lord John at once put an end to the discussion, by saying,
'Oh, very well,' and proceeding to something else, passing as it were
to the order of the day, seeing it would not take, and probably not
caring himself. But this was enough for Labouchere to think and to say
that Lord John would not be averse to taking Brougham in. There is no
doubt that he is ready to join any party--Whigs, Protectionists, or
Peelites--who would have him, and they are all rather anxious to keep
on good terms with him; but--except perhaps the Protectionists, who
would be glad of an ally so powerful, though so perilous--not at all
disposed to include him in any ministerial arrangement, or to form
any close connexion with him. He is giving dinners to everybody, and
keeping himself as open as possible for any engagement that may be
offered to him.
[Footnote 126: [The state of Ireland at this time was appalling. A
Coercion Bill was introduced by Lord St. Germans in the House of
Lords, when he stated that during the years 1844-1845 there had
been 242 cases of firing at the person, 1,048 cases of aggravated
assult, 710 robberies of arms, 79 bands of men appearing in arms,
2,306 cases of threatening letters, and 737 of attacking houses.
The Bill gave the Lord-Lieutenant power to proclaim the disturbed
districts, to apprehend persons out of their houses between sunset
and sunrise, and to make provision out of the rates for the
families of persons murdered.]]
_March 21st, 1846._--Yesterday I went to Chiswick, where the Duke
of Devonshire showed me his manuscripts, which he has got very well
arranged. He gave me four boxes full of letters, written by his mother
to her mother, Lady Spencer; the beginning of a long correspondence
from the time of her marriage. These I am going to look over. He
talked to me of Devonshire House in the old time, and the strange
connexion that existed between the Duke, the Duchess, and Lady
Elizabeth Foster.[127] Lady Elizabeth, without great talents or great
beauty, seems to have been one of those women, of whom there are
rare instances, who are gifted with an undefinable attraction--or
perhaps attractiveness is the word--which none can resist. Everybody
was in love with her, and she exercised an influence of one sort or
another up to the end of her life. In youth she drew to her lovers
and friends, and made _la pluie et le beau temps_ in society. In old
age, Popes and Cardinals, savants and artists, attended her _levées_,
rendered her an unceasing homage, and were obedient to all her wishes
or commands.
The Tariff was got through last night; George Bentinck making a speech
of two hours and a quarter. From never having spoken, he never now
does anything else, and he is completely overdoing it, and, like a
beggar set on horseback, riding to the devil. Stanley, in the House
of Lords, declared his intention to oppose the Bill; but he tells his
friends he will neither lead an Opposition nor make a Government.
As the time advances, the division in the House of Lords looks more
promising for Government. The delay which the Protectionists have
caused has been of great service to the measure, for the longer the
debates continue, the more effect is produced by the speeches in
Parliament, the statistics published, and the able articles in the
press. On the other hand, the new Opposition have cut a poor figure in
point of reasoning and argument. Abstracting their abuse and charges
of treachery and perfidy, very little is left in their speeches. The
Court seem now to be convinced that Peel will eventually be obliged to
go out, and that Lord John must come in.
[Footnote 127: [William, fifth Duke of Devonshire, born in 1748,
married Georgiana, daughter of John, Earl Spencer, in 1774. Upon
the death of this lady in 1806, his Grace married in 1809 Lady
Elizabeth Foster, a daughter of the Earl of Bristol and widow of
John Thomas Foster, Esq., to whom he had long been attached, and to
whom, singularly enough, the late Duchess had been as much attached
as the Duke, for she made her a bosom friend, and dreaded nothing
so much as the loss of her society. This Duke died in 1811; the
second Duchess lived till 1824, spending the latter years of her
life in Rome, where she enjoyed an immense popularity and social
influence.]]
[Sidenote: STATE OF PARTIES.]
_March 29th._--Everything here is in a disturbed, doubtful, and uneasy
state; people angry, perplexed, and dissatisfied. The second reading
was carried on Friday night, after four nights' debate, by 88--nine
less than the first great division. Graham and Peel both spoke. The
first made an attack on Shaw, who deserved to be attacked; but it
was so clumsily, so savagely done, that it only recoiled on himself.
Peel was heavy, but he was explicit enough about his intentions and
expectations as to office. He said he knew that with 112 men he
could not go on, and they could turn him out when they would. It is,
however, said he is resolved to cling to office as long as he can.
I believe he will only resolve not to quit it till he has carried
through the Corn Bill. To-night there is the devil to pay about the
Irish question. The Whigs and Irish are going to move the previous
question, and postpone the Coercion Bill. If the Protectionists stay
away in any numbers (much more if they vote), the Government will be
beaten. It is, however, not expected that Peel will resign if he is
beaten, but everything that has been and is done with regard to this
Bill is wrong. In the first place, the Government are much to blame in
not having had the Bill ready when Parliament met. They ought to have
laid it on the table the first night, and urged it through as quickly
as possible, instead of waiting for a month before they brought it
in, and letting three months elapse before its passing. Then, as it
is brought in, and the Whigs don't mean to oppose it, it is very
absurd and very wrong to prevent the first reading; for the delay will
not expedite the Corn Bill, and the Coercion Bill is of more urgent
importance than the other. Bessborough and many of the party are very
much against this move, and the whole Irish question is proving a
serious cause of disagreement among them.
The state of parties is curious and full of difficulty. The
Protectionists are bent upon turning Peel out, and if possible
grow more, rather than less, bitter. On Friday this was especially
apparent; no Prime Minister was ever treated as Peel was by them
that night, when he rose to speak. The Marquis of Granby rose at the
same time, and for five minutes they would not hear Peel, and tried
to force their man on the House, and to make the Prime Minister sit
down. The Speaker alone decided it, and called on Peel. When he said
he knew they could turn him out, they all cheered _savagely_. Then
the Whigs are just as eager to be in active opposition again; so that
between the two parties--the rage and vengeance of the one, and the
habitual rivalry of the other--his fall is certain. But the other
night George Bentinck, the Protectionist organ, told the Whigs he
would oppose them, so that when the Whig Government is formed, though
it may be suffered to go on for a time, it will be intrinsically very
weak and powerless, for the ultra-Liberals rather lean to Peel than to
John Russell. Such a state of things, so confused, so uncertain, so
at the sport of events and circumstances, never was seen before. Many
people fancy that Peel will not go out, though they are quite unable
to show how he is to stay in; but everybody sees clearly enough that
parties are so divided and power so scattered, that any Government
that can be formed must hold office by a very feeble and doubtful
tenure. At present, however, Peel holds office for the sole purpose
of carrying _the_ Bill. The Whigs are guarding him, while he is doing
this work, ready to turn against him the moment he has done it, and
then, this great contest over, the Protectionists will either join the
Whigs in their first onset, or leave him to his fate. _They_ do not
care what happens so long as they can break up this Government; they
do not care how public business can be carried on, or by whom; whether
a strong or a weak Government can be formed. Revenge is their sole
object.
_April 4th._--The Government would have been beaten on the Irish
question if the division had taken place earlier than it did. John
O'Connell would speak, and the time he gave saved a defeat. We are
now involved in a maze of endless delays, but the news of the great
victory at Sobraon and termination of the Sikh war has put the world
in such good spirits, and filled everybody with such joy, that for the
time everything else has been almost forgotten. There certainly never
was anything more complete than this piece of Indian history, so grand
and so dramatic, such a glorious mixture of bravery and moderation,
and such a display of national dignity and power. Auckland said to
me last night that it was impossible to pick a fault if you wished
to do so. He approves of everything that Hardinge has done. The Duke
was very energetic in the House of Lords on the thanks; and it is a
fine thing for him to have lived to see his military children covering
themselves with glory on the scene of his own first achievements
half a century ago, and himself still hale, fresh, and his intellect
vigorous and unclouded.
[Sidenote: TRIUMPH OF FREE TRADE.]
The delay that the Protectionists have contrived to make in the Free
Trade measures is proving fatal to their cause, for it is now past
a doubt that a great change has been produced over all the country
_among the farmers_. They do not care for, do not dread, the repeal of
the Corn Laws, but they do most particularly wish to have the question
settled. The evidences of this change are not to be mistaken, and
many of the Protectionists admit it. They find to their astonishment
that there is no depreciation in landed property, that there is no
difficulty in letting farms, and that rents are generally rising
rather than falling.
_April 23rd._--I was all last week at Newmarket, and as a matter of
course utterly disabled from writing, reading, or thinking about
politics or anything else. Came back on Friday night, went to Bath on
Monday, and returned yesterday. Nothing can be more deplorable than
the state of affairs, or less promising in reference to the existence
or formation of a strong Government and the improvement of Ireland,
the present paramount object of interest. The unhappy Irish Coercion
Bill still lingers on in the House of Commons; and Monday night, when
there seemed to be a chance of the Irish consenting to divide, there
was no House. This had a very bad appearance, and was the fault of the
Whippers-in; but probably they have a difficult duty to discharge, for
their numbers are scanty and their people are indifferent, thinking
the Government itself on its last legs. Peel is said to have been much
annoyed. After all, it is more than probable that the Irish Bill will
not pass. The Duke of Bedford told me yesterday that Bessborough and
Clanricarde, the two Whigs who most strenuously supported it, have
now entirely changed their minds and are convinced it will do more
harm than good, and that in fact it has already done a great deal
of harm. Clanricarde has been in Ireland, and is come back of this
opinion. Blake, who has also been there, and had much conversation
with the Lord-Lieutenant, says that he never remembers Ireland in so
bad a state, political and social. The consequence of all this is that
John Russell is gone into the country, and does not mean to come back
and vote on the Bill. Still, as the Protectionists mean to vote for
the first reading, it will probably be carried, but it will hardly
make its way through the other stages in the midst of such vehement
opposition and lukewarm support. In my opinion, they deserve every
distress and difficulty in which they may be placed, for their conduct
about this Bill. If it was necessary at all, the necessity was urgent
and admitted of no delay; if the country can go on without it for
three or four months (three have already elapsed), it may as well go
on for ever. The moment Parliament met, it ought to have been ready;
and when they let week after week pass away without doing anything,
and only did it at last when _poked_ by Brougham, they lost their best
title to general support. However, the final decision on this Bill
will probably not take place till the Corn Law has got through the
House of Lords, and then if Ministers are beaten upon it, it will be
a good opportunity for their resigning. This I find they are quite
prepared to do.
The Duke of Bedford gave me some information the other day which
exhibits the present views and animus of the different parties. The
Peelites and the Protectionists equally contemplate the speedy advent
of John Russell, and both have made overtures, direct or indirect, to
him. Aberdeen called on Lord John the other day about some private
business, after discussing which he talked on politics. He said that
it was impossible they could go on, that Peel was well aware of it,
and quite determined not to dissolve Parliament; that he did not know
on what question they would have to go out; that he was told it would
not be on the sugar duties, and that they should carry them; but that
it was clear they would be beaten on something else if not on that;
that a Whig Government must be formed, which must rely upon Peel and
his friends for support, and would receive it. He told him that he had
been wrong in not giving Peel credit for a real intention to support
him before, and that he must look to that support for the future.
John Russell would not distrust Aberdeen's sincerity, but it would be
difficult to make him place reliance on that of Peel.
[Sidenote: THE WHIGS AND THE PROTECTIONISTS.]
On the other hand, the Duke of Bedford came up with George Bentinck
in the train the other day, and had much talk with him. George
Bentinck said that they were aware Lord John must come in, and were
not indisposed to support him; that they wanted to turn Peel out, and
that if he was to move a vote of want of confidence he could now keep
all his people together for it, but that they were afraid the Whigs
would come to Peel's support and defeat them. He beat about the bush
to find out whether this was probable, or whether the Whigs would
be disposed to accept the support of the Protectionists. All this
the Duke told his brother. He said that Lord John was not tempted by
this bait, and very properly said, 'The question is, Do we agree with
the Protectionists?' But he said that, though this was Lord John's
feeling, there were many of the party (and 'I should surprise you,'
he said, 'if I told you who they are') who are inclined to coalesce
with the Protectionists for the purpose and to accept their support.
This is certainly a most curious political entanglement, full of
uncertainty and affording an open field for intrigues of all kinds.
Palmerston has been preparing for his return to the Foreign Office
by a visit to Paris, where his name has been held in terror and
execration for some years; and the intelligence of his probable
restoration to power created universal dismay. Nevertheless, his
visit has been triumphantly successful. The Court, the Ministers, the
Opposition, the political leaders of all shades, have vied with each
other in civilities and attentions. He has dined with the King, with
Guizot, with Thiers, with Broglie, with Molé; he met with nothing but
smiles, _prévenance_ and _empressement_. Brougham was furious; he did
all he could to prevent the Palmerstons going to Paris, abused them
for going, and everybody whom he thought instrumental to their going,
and when they arrived fawned upon them and insisted on doing the
honours of them everywhere. He is now come back, but he had written
to Le Marchant a letter full of spite, and desiring that nobody would
believe what they heard of Palmerston's reception, which was by no
means cordial and sincere; and that in their hearts they disliked his
coming there, and hated him as much as ever.
_Newmarket, Sunday._--For once in a way I sit down to write something
at this place where I never do anything; but I have got the gout, and
that, by disabling my foot, sets my hand to work. Yesterday morning
I saw Clarendon and had a long talk with him on the subject of the
Duke of Bedford's communication to me, which he had likewise had
from the Duke even with more details. He told him (which he had not
done me) the names of the people who wanted the Whigs to coalesce
with the Protectionists. These are Lords Anglesey and Bessborough.
The former, I hardly know why, except from a fancy he seems to have
to join what he considers the most aristocratic party; the second is
taken in by all the wonderful things the Protectionists offer to do
for Ireland, and which have been conveyed to him through Duncannon by
George Bentinck. Accordingly, Bessborough wrote off to John Russell,
urging this strange and disgraceful alliance. It seems that the
Protectionists profess to be ready to do anything the Irish please,
provided they will not be expected to destroy the Irish Church; but
even any reform in that they are prepared for. It was evidently in
pursuance of this scheme that the ridiculous farce was got up between
Smith O'Brien and George Bentinck in the House of Commons on Friday
night. Hearing now what has already passed with Bessborough, it is
impossible to doubt that this scene has been concocted and concerted
after considerable preparation, though at present I have no idea how
or with whom it originated; it smells of the same shop, however.
Clarendon said he did not imagine there would be any hesitation or
doubt on the subject, or that any of the leading Whigs are in the
least disposed to connect themselves with a party with whom they
have no community of principle or opinion, by whom they know they
are detested, and whom they heartily despise. This eccentricity of
Bessborough's shows how unfit he is to take the lead and to direct
affairs. His forte is in patching up quarrels, finding expedients for
especial cases, and acting as a general go-between and negotiator, in
which minor matters he displays a good deal of tact and temper.
[Sidenote: THE WHIGS DECLINE THE ALLIANCE.]
Clarendon told me that Lord John had resolved, if sent for again, to
take the government at once, and not make any difficulties. He and
I both agreed that he must rely on Peel, and take his chance of his
reliance being well placed. It is the straightforward, intelligible,
and honourable course, and he had far better fall by that than succeed
by such a monstrous and discreditable connexion as that with the
Protectionists would be. The latter have now but one object, which
is to turn out Peel, to wreak their vengeance on him, and they do
not care what happens after, whether there is a good or bad, a weak
or strong Government, nor what confusion or difficulty may occur.
They are ready to join the detested Whigs, and to concur in the whole
of those Liberal measures, by a partial adoption of which Peel had
already rendered himself so obnoxious to them. No considerations of
consistency, no care for the public interests, in the slightest degree
influence their minds. It is impossible, however, to suppose that this
party, now breathing nothing but rage and revenge, can be long held
together for such an end. They entertain some glimmering of hope that
events may open the way to their accession to office, and they want to
hold together for this chance. Bessborough, however, who seems to have
taken a very _low_ view of the matter all along, urged John Russell to
connect himself with the Protectionists rather than with Peel, for
this reason: that Peel was all staff, and no rank and file; men who
would want offices and high ones, and bring little strength; whereas
the others would bring great numbers, and be satisfied with very few
and very subordinate offices! A very likely matter with a party of
which George Bentinck and Disraeli are the leaders in the Commons and
Stanley in the Lords! _À propos_ of Stanley, he is supposed to be by
this time identified with the Protectionists, and embarked in vehement
opposition to the Government, in direct contradiction of all his
promises and professions when he left them. Sidney Herbert told me the
other day that when he went out he was still on excellent terms with
them, and told them that he was well aware the Bill must pass, and
that now he considered it best that it should; and he intimated his
intention to prevent opposition as much as he could. Graham said long
ago his moderation never would continue.
The Duke of Bedford has lately had a great deal of conversation with
Arbuthnot, who talked to him very openly and told him a great many
things about Peel, all unfavourable. I don't believe he (Arbuthnot)
has ever liked him, and now, with others of the Duke of Wellington's
friends, he is full of resentment against him for breaking up the
party, and for dragging the Duke, much against his inclinations and
opinions, through all this mire. Arbuthnot, as an old Tory deeply
imbued with Tory principles and the _alter ego_ of the Duke, whose
disgust and annoyance he well knows at the whole state of affairs, is
naturally very bitter against Peel. He told him that the Duke never
knows anything of what is going on. They never tell him, and he is
so deaf that in the Cabinet he does not hear. When they want him to
know or to do something, Peel sends for Arbuthnot and tells it to him,
well knowing he will report it to the Duke. Then he sends for papers,
reads what is necessary for his information, and without concert or
communication with anybody goes down to the House of Lords and speaks;
hence the strange things he says, and the confusion that is often made
between the apparent opinions of the Duke and his colleagues.
[Sidenote: ANECDOTE OF SIR ROBERT PEEL.]
Arbuthnot told the Duke of Bedford an anecdote, which I have great
difficulty in believing. It is this: that when he was at the Treasury
one day, old Sir Robert Peel called on him and said, 'I am come to you
about a matter of great importance to myself, but which I think is
also of importance to your Government. If you do not speedily confer
high office on my son he will go over to the Whigs, and be for ever
lost to the party.' He told Lord Liverpool this, who immediately made
young Peel Irish Secretary. If it is true, never did any father do
a greater injury to a son, for if Peel had joined a more congenial
party he might have followed the bent of his political inclination,
and would have escaped all the false positions in which he has been
placed; instead of the insincere career that he has pursued, which
must have been replete with internal mortification, disgust, and
shame, he might have given out his real sentiments and acted upon
them. He would neither have fettered nor perverted his understanding,
and he would have been an abler, a better, and a happier man, besides
incomparably more useful to the country. As it is, his whole life
has been spent in doing enormous mischief, and in attempts to repair
that mischief. It will be a curious biography whenever it comes to be
written, but not a creditable one.
On Friday night there was a breeze between Peel and Disraeli which at
first appeared menacing, but ended amicably enough, though amicable
is hardly a word to be used between these two men. But there was
very near being something more serious out of the House owing to the
excitement of Jonathan Peel. Disraeli had commented on Peel's cheering
a certain part of Cobden's speech in his usual tone of impertinence
and bitterness, and he said that Peel had by his cheer expressed his
concurrence with such and such sentiments. Peel interrupted him,
saying, 'I utterly deny it,' on which Disraeli said he had given him
the lie, and sat down. Then came all that is reported, which ended as
I have said, but in the meantime Jonathan Peel went over to Disraeli,
sat down by him and said, 'What you have just said is false.' He
repeated it, and then went to George Bentinck and told him what he
had just said. Disraeli was so astonished that he said nothing at
first, but soon went to George Bentinck, told him also, and placed
the matter in his hands. This made a referee necessary on Jonathan
Peel's side, and he went and fetched Rous and put him in communication
with George Bentinck. As soon as Rous heard the story he saw that
his principal could not be justified, and he consented to an apology
which was agreed on between him and George Bentinck, who seems to have
acted with becoming moderation. The apology was not abject, but it
was ample. Peel is a man of quick passions and excitable temper, but
he generally has great command over himself, which he lost on this
occasion.
_May 3rd._--At Newmarket all last week. Stanley was there, joking and
_chaffing_ all the time, but I could not hear that he talked seriously
upon politics; he was always with George Bentinck. The Palmerstons
are come back from Paris, after a successful visit, excepting only
his foolish letter to Louis Philippe.[128] They say, however, now
that he wrote it because it was suggested to him by _somebody_
(meaning somebody about the Court) that it would be well taken; but
it was a great mistake of his, and is thought very ridiculous here.
Madame de Lieven writes me word 'that his language was _très-mesuré
et très-convenable_,' but Normanby, who is just come over, says the
French were beginning to ask themselves why they were so civil and
_empressés_, and could not answer the question, and that in a few
more days the tide would have turned, and something disagreeable
would have been said or done. Normanby, who had made Ibrahim Pacha's
acquaintance at Florence, took Palmerston to see him; and when he
presented him, the Pacha was so diverted at finding himself thus face
to face with the great enemy of his house, that he burst out into an
uncontrollable fit of laughter, but he received him very well.
[Sidenote: LORD PALMERSTON AND IBRAHIM PACHA.]
On Friday night the first reading of the Coercion Bill was at last
carried; the minority large. It is generally supposed, by the very
distant day Peel has fixed for the second reading, that he has no
notion of passing it eventually. It is not improbable that by the end
of the month he may be out of office.
[Footnote 128: [King-Louis Philippe had been fired at by a man
named Lecomte, who was executed for the crime, whilst Lord and Lady
Palmerston were in Paris, upon which Lord Palmerston wrote a letter
to the King congratulating him on his escape. This was considered
impertinent from a foreign minister casually at Paris.]]
_May 4th._--There has been something unpleasant between Peel and John
Russell (not personal, but political), which was set right through
Arbuthnot. Peel was annoyed at Lord John's not coming up during the
last week's debate on the Coercion Bill, and they believed, as they
thought on good grounds, that he had made a case against Lord John
with the Queen thereupon. The Duke of Bedford went to Arbuthnot and
desired him to speak to Peel, explaining that Lord John really had
business in the country, that his wife's health required his presence,
and that he had left word that he would come whenever he was sent
for. Arbuthnot communicated this to Peel, who wrote a letter that
was perfectly satisfactory to Lord John's friends. The Duke told
me the other day that Bessborough was the man most anxious for the
Protectionist alliance, and that Normanby, who is come over, takes the
same line.
_May 7th._--The day before yesterday I met Sir Robert Peel in the
Park, and for the first time for many years had some communication
with him. He was in high spirits; asked me what I heard and what
I thought of the Lords. I told him I believed they were prepared
to pass the second reading of his Corn Bill, and meant to muster
their strength in Committee to perpetuate the 5_s._ duty. He said he
believed so too, but thought they would not carry it, because he did
not think Stanley would be a party to it, and that he is not prepared
to accept office and make a Government, as he must be if he did this.
I told him that the Protectionists had no object or desire but to
drive him out, and if they could only succeed in this, they cared
not who came in, whether there was a good or bad, or strong or weak
Government. He said he was quite aware of it, and that they could have
no difficulty in getting him out; that there never had been known
in the history of this country such a state of things, with three
parties, neither of which had sufficient strength to stand alone.
The case it most resembled was that of Lord Shelburne's Government
before the Coalition, a state of things which was brought about by
its weakness; that what was wanting was _a man_, and if Lord John had
been what last year he believed him to be, there would have been no
difficulty. This was remarkable enough from him, and I have no doubt
it is what he tells the Queen; there is a great deal of truth in it.
I told him that overtures had been made to the Whigs, that there were
men in the Whig party who wanted to have them accepted, but that John
Russell, like a man of honour and sense, had at once declared he would
have nothing to do with people with whom he had no agreement. Lord
John had in fact spoken the night before, and well, in a corresponding
sense, and Peel must have been pleased with his speech. I was not
sorry to let him know that the Whigs could get other support than his
if they chose. He replied to this, 'Yes; Lord John would rather rely
on my support than on theirs.' I told the Duke of Bedford this, and
desired him to tell Lord John.
_May 11th._ I was with Graham for two hours yesterday, and talked
about the whole state of affairs, telling him their real condition
and the strenuous endeavours that were making to retain a fixed duty.
He said, come what might, he and Peel would be no parties to it. He
is convinced that Stanley will and must take the Government if he
succeeds in making this alteration in the Committee of the Lords. I
told him I was convinced he did not mean to try to form a Government.
Graham thinks he would be lost as a public man if he shrank from it.
I said Lord Derby with 60,000_l._ a year, and the finest debater in
Parliament, could never be lost. I suggested the possible case of
this alteration accepted as a compromise by all the Protectionists in
the House of Commons, and what then? It had not struck him so much
before; but he thought, if Palmerston could be got to join Stanley,
a Government on this basis might be formed and stand, though there
would then be a strong Opposition with Peel and John Russell acting in
concert if not united, and a good stand-up fight. He said he should
like to see such a combination and such a Government, and he thinks
now that there is no solution of the present difficulties but through
the attempt and the failure of a Protectionist Ministry; that is, of
course, supposing the Bill to be mutilated.
[Sidenote: THE WHIGS AND SIR ROBERT PEEL.]
But a great part of our conversation turned on the Factory Bill on
Wednesday next, and on John Russell's vote on it, together with
the votes of those who go with him. He thinks this a matter of the
greatest importance, and one which will have a most serious effect on
future events. John Russell's extraordinary change of opinion on this
question is now producing the most disastrous effects. It will not
improbably determine the resignation of the Government, if carried
against them, though they will not stir till the Corn Law question is
decided; but as the Protectionists will vote against Government in
a body merely to turn out Peel, if they are beaten it will be by a
union of John Russell with them, the majority avowedly being animated
(though he may not be) by mere hostility to the Minister. Graham said
that this would be most unfortunate in every way for the Whigs, the
disunion of the leaders on such a vital question, the separation of
the manufacturing interest from them, and the difference it could not
fail to make in Peel's future relations with the Government of John
Russell if he did come in; he added that their conduct indeed would be
the same in reference to the measures of the Government, but that the
feeling would be necessarily different.
_May 21st._--Last week the debate in the House of Commons came to a
close at last, wound up by a speech of Disraeli's, very clever, in
which he hacked and mangled Peel with the most unsparing severity,
and positively tortured his victim. It was a miserable and degrading
spectacle. The whole mass of the Protectionists cheered him with
vociferous delight, making the roof ring again; and when Peel spoke,
they screamed and hooted at him in the most brutal manner. When he
vindicated himself, and talked of honour and conscience, they assailed
him with shouts of derision and gestures of contempt. Such treatment
in a House of Commons where for years he had been an object of
deference and respect, nearly overcame him. The Speaker told me that
for a minute and more he was obliged to stop, and for the first time
in his life, probably, he lost his self-possession; and the Speaker
thought he would have been obliged to sit down, and expected him to
burst into tears. They hunt him like a fox, and they are eager to run
him down and kill him in the open, and they are full of exultation at
thinking they have nearly accomplished this object. It is high time
such a state of things should finish. To see the Prime Minister and
leader in the House of Commons thus beaten and degraded, treated with
contumely by three-fourths of the party he has been used to lead,
is a sorry sight, and very prejudicial to the public weal. He is no
longer able to conduct the business of the country in Parliament. It
matters not what the Government proposes; the Protectionists are ready
to oppose anything and everything for the mere pleasure of beating
it, and defeats are only prevented by the grudging, lukewarm, casual
support of the Whigs, who, many of them, desire no better than to see
the Government in difficulties. Such is the deplorable state of things
in the House of Commons. Meanwhile the greatest doubt and anxiety
prevail among the friends of the Bill as to its success in Committee,
and the Protectionists are full of confidence that they shall succeed
in making the alterations they contemplate. There is an active
attempt going on to bring about this end by a coalition of a part
of the Whigs with the whole of the Protectionists, and the greatest
lies are unscrupulously told to advance it. Among others, stories
are circulated of the Duke of Wellington's undisguised wish that
the Bill may not pass. It is true enough that he dislikes the whole
concern, and laments over the breaking up of his party, but it is
false that he has ever said anything to induce anybody to oppose the
measure; and having consented to act in the cause, he is sure to prove
faithful to it. It is from conversations here and there one gathers
the secret wishes of different parties. Lady Ashley, who of course
speaks the sentiments of Palmerston House, told me the other night
that she was convinced this would be the end of the contest, and that
John Russell would be induced to acquiesce in the compromise, which
would be agreeable to many of the Whigs, and would bring about a union
between them and the Protectionists. She said that Palmerston would
not separate from John Russell and take this line alone; but that Lord
John would (she was persuaded) go with him. Last night Cecil Forester,
who passes every evening with Bessborough at Mrs. Lane Fox's, told me
the same thing; and he said that the Whig party was not less disunited
than the Tory party; so that there is a sort of intrigue on foot
adding to the general confusion, and indicating the discordance of
opinions and objects which undoubtedly prevails among the Whigs. The
Ministers, however, are confident the Bill will pass; and Aberdeen
told Delane the other day that they have made up their minds to employ
all the means the forms of Parliament will admit of, and, if beaten in
Committee, to restore the integrity of the measure on the report. This
design is already bruited about, but the Protectionists maintain that
it is impossible; that the Government will not attempt it, and would
not succeed if they did.
[Sidenote: TACTICS OF THE PROTECTIONISTS.]
_June 1st._--So entirely occupied with Epsom all last week, that I
had not a moment of time to attend to politics. I must, therefore,
now that I have an interval of leisure, narrate briefly what I ought
to have recorded at the time more in detail. On May 21, I mentioned
the sanguine hopes and expectations of the Protectionists, which were
suddenly and entirely overthrown by a bold, judicious, and successful
move of John Russell's. It reached his ears, from various quarters,
that certain proceedings, very like intrigues, were going on,
principally hatched at Palmerston House, and that it was confidently
asserted by Protectionists and by Whigs who wanted to coalesce with
the Protectionists, that a compromise and a coalition would certainly
be brought about, to which he (John Russell) would be a party. He
resolved at once and decisively to crush these hopes, and put an end
to such reports. He accordingly begged Lord Lansdowne to convoke a
meeting of Whig Peers at Lansdowne House, for the purpose of deciding
what they should do. This was very unpalateable to the malcontents;
but Lord Lansdowne did it. The meeting was attended by about sixty
Peers, all who were in London, and by John Russell, Labouchere,
and Palmerston. Lord John made a very stout speech, announcing his
intention to support the measure _in toto_, saying he had once been
for a fixed duty, which would then have settled the question, but
would not do so now; and after the course Peel had taken, it would be
inconsistent with his personal and political honour to be a party to
any attempt to alter or mutilate it. Lord Fitzwilliam spoke, and said
he had always been for a fixed duty, but that the time was come when
he thought he ought to waive his own opinion and join in promoting
the success of the measure as it was, and that he was ready to make
this sacrifice. Melbourne made a bitter speech against Peel, and said
that as he saw everybody was resolved to take what he considered a
very mischievous course, he should not separate from his friends, but
would assist in doing the mischief. There was some discontent evinced,
but little or no disunion. Lord De Mauley declared he would vote in
Committee against the Bill; but the rest were nearly unanimous. Lord
Clarendon said that it was very desirable they should be apprised
of the intentions of the Government, and that he was authorised to
make them known to the meeting. He had had a conversation with the
Chancellor, who had told him that the Government were resolved,
in the event of any alteration being made in Committee, to have
recourse to the expedient of restoring the original clauses on the
report, and that he was at liberty to communicate to his friends
this determination. Normanby protested in strong terms against such
a course, and declared he would oppose it. On this, Lord Cottenham
rose, and made a speech, setting forth that it was justifiable both
on precedent and principle, and he was supported by Lord Campbell
so strongly that the meeting generally acquiesced in their views.
This meeting and the result of it was speedily bruited through the
town, and nothing could exceed the despair and mortification of the
Protectionists at the news. It at once extinguished the hopes even of
the most sanguine. The Duchess of Beaufort, of all men or women the
most violent, owned to me that their game was up; their depression was
in exact proportion to their previous elation.
[Sidenote: MEETING OF THE WHIG PEERS.]
On the Monday came on the debate in the Lords, very creditably
conducted. Stanley made, by the acknowledgement of everybody, a
magnificent speech. Palmerston told me it was far the best he ever
made, and that nobody could make a better. Lord Lansdowne told
somebody it was the finest speech he ever heard in Parliament.
He spoke for three hours--with the exception of a few strong
expressions--restraining his temper, and speaking of his former
colleagues in decent and respectful terms. Ashburton spoke well
on his side; on the other, the two best speeches were Clarendon's
and Dalhousie's;[129] both very good, particularly the latter. He
will be a very leading man, for he is popular, pleasing, and has a
virgin, unsoiled reputation, nothing to apologise for, and nothing to
recant; and he is a good man of business and an excellent speaker.
The majority was pretty much what was expected, and is considered
conclusive as to the Committee.
[Footnote 129: [James Andrew, tenth Earl of Dalhousie, born
in 1812. This prediction was amply verified. He was appointed
Governor-General of India by the Whig Government in 1847, and
continued to fill that great office with consummate ability till
1856. He was raised to the rank of Marquis of Dalhousie in 1849,
but he returned from India in broken health and died in 1860, at
the early age of forty-eight.]]
_June 14th._--All last week at Ascot at a house of Lady Mary
Berkeley's with a racing party. I won the Emperor's Cup with Alarm,
but won little more than 2,000_l._ on it: small compensation for the
loss of the Derby last year, which would have made me independent
and allowed me to quit office and be my own master. It was a moment
of excitement and joy when I won this fine piece of plate, in the
midst of thousands of spectators; but that past, there returned the
undying consciousness of the unworthiness of the pursuit, filling my
thoughts, hopes, and wishes to the exclusion of all other objects and
occupations, agitating me, rendering me incapable of application,
thought, and reflexion, and paralysing my power of reading or busying
myself with books of any kind. All this is very bad and unworthy of a
reasonable creature. I ought to throw off these trammels, and abandon
a pursuit so replete with moral mischief to me. Ibrahim Pacha was at
Ascot on the Cup day, and desired to shake hands with me when I won
the Cup. He is a coarse-looking ruffian, and his character is said not
to belie his countenance.
The past week has been occupied by the Irish Coercion Bill in the
House of Commons, on which George Bentinck made a furious and
outrageous speech, attacking Peel with a coarseness and virulence
which disgusted all but those to whom scurrility and insolence are
particularly palateable. Stanley was very much annoyed at it, and
nothing could be more injurious to the Protectionist party than such
a speech from their elected leader. The gist of it was an accusation
of his having 'hunted Mr. Canning to death' nineteen years ago. Peel
replied on Friday night with a moderation that savoured of lowness of
tone, and, as the House was with him, he had a fine opportunity for
annihilating George Bentinck, if he had chosen to do so. He treated
him much too leniently, but he vindicated himself in the matter of
Canning with great success, and he is really indebted to his opponent
for having given him the opportunity of doing so. I had myself been
always under the impression that he had behaved very ill to Canning,
and that he had avowed a change of opinion antecedent to his refusal
to join him when he formed his Government in 1827; but he certainly
proved that this was not the case, and made out that his refusal
to join Canning was almost inevitable in his position. It was his
misfortune to be the leader and advocate of a cause which was rapidly
declining, but which it was becoming dangerous to sustain any longer.
It should not be forgotten that when Canning took office it was with
the understanding, probably with a stipulation, that he should not
urge the Catholic question, and he never attempted to advance it.
[Sidenote: CANNING AND PEEL.]
Stanley got a tremendous dressing on Friday night from Grey, and still
more from Brougham, who spoke, they say, in his very best House of
Commons style, cutting up Stanley with admirable wit, and keeping
the House of Lords in a roar at his expense for three-quarters of an
hour, the very thing that would annoy him the most. He had been very
arrogant about his own speech, talking of nobody having answered it,
though the many fallacies it contained had been exposed and refuted
over and over again. There are now again all sorts of reports and
speculations about Peel's destiny and his intentions. Some fancy that,
notwithstanding the declared opposition of George Bentinck and John
Russell, the Coercion Bill will be carried, and again, that if it
is lost, he will dissolve instead of resigning. I think nothing of
either report, and am persuaded he will be beaten and will resign.
The best thing for him would be to resign without being beaten, and
if the Corn Bill passes the Lords in the next few days he may still
do this. But I cannot make out that he and his friends are taking
the right and dignified view of their position. They are very angry
with the Whigs for opposing the Coercion Bill, and a very bitter and
acrimonious conversation took place at Lady Peel's the other evening
between Aberdeen and Clarendon, the former attacking the party of
the latter and their conduct in respect to this Bill in terms wholly
unwarrantable. It was a curious outbreak of temper, because Aberdeen
and Clarendon have always been great friends, and the latter has
constantly abstained from any opposition to his foreign policy, and
lent himself on all occasions to any explanation he desired to make
in the House of Lords, a forbearance and assistance not palateable to
many of his own friends. Clarendon was very indignant, and poured in
a broadside in reply; but they cooled afterwards, parted amicably, and
Aberdeen next day wrote him a friendly note.
Clarendon told me yesterday that John Russell had done himself an
injury by letting it be seen how anxious he is to go back into office,
and that what the Speaker had said to me about his cold and uncordial
support of Peel was felt and disliked by many others. He is not aware
how little he is regarded in the country in comparison with Peel, or,
if aware of it, the consciousness rankles in his mind, and embitters
his naturally sour feelings against Peel. While Peel is thus tottering
and about to fall, there is a disposition in the great towns, London
included, to get up a manifestation in his favour, and to present
addresses to him begging him not to resign.
_June 19th._--A day or two after Peel's speech in reply to George
Bentinck, Disraeli came down and renewed the fight not without effect,
treating Peel's defence of himself as an attack on George Bentinck,
who could not speak again. Dizzy undertook to speak for him. It
was a labour of love to him, and he accordingly delivered a bitter
philippic against Peel, reviewing the charge of George Bentinck and
supporting it with a mass of fresh evidence culled out of Hansard,
and worked very adroitly into a plausible and formidable attack, and
again putting Peel on his defence. It was to the last degree virulent,
but very able, and considerably effective. Peel rose (as it was said
very much annoyed), begged the House to suspend its judgement, and
promised a future and full explanation. The Protectionists have ever
since been uproarious, and their papers have teemed with articles
abusive of Peel. The Whigs, though more reserved and decorous in their
language, are not indisposed to chime in, and treat the matter as a
serious blow very damaging to Peel, and in short rejoice greatly in
the injury which they think his character sustains, and whisper to the
same effect as the Protectionists go bawling about. Meanwhile Peel
has buckled on his armour, and declared that to-night he will make
his defence. It is certainly a great occasion, and he has always
rejoiced in personal altercation. If he has a clear conscience and
a good case, this is the moment for his firing with effect upon his
assailants, and he ought to take a far higher tone than he has ever
yet done. It is at all events a curious and exciting exhibition, and
wonderfully interesting to see how he comes out of it. There are
generally in all matters of this sort various important details which
it is impossible to produce, and I have little doubt that such is the
case here. The real reason why so many of Canning's colleagues refused
to serve under him in 1827 was that they had a bad opinion of him, and
would not trust him. They knew of his intriguing, underhand practices,
and though for the sake of not breaking up the party they would have
gone on with him, some other person being head of the Government,
they would not consent to his assuming that powerful and responsible
post. This was a reason they did not and could not give at the time,
and which it would be still more impossible to give now; and it is
exceedingly possible that they, Peel as well as others, may have given
reasons for their refusal which, though containing a part of the
truth, did not contain the whole truth. Nothing is so difficult as to
analyse such a case at such a distance of time, and, where something
must be concealed, to present it in a perfect shape to public
discussion. I well remember the correspondence between the Duke and
Canning at the time, and how very much the Duke had the best of it,
the sincerity and straightforwardness of the one appearing to great
advantage against the finessing of the other. They knew very well that
Canning was secretly negotiating with Brougham and Wilson.
[Sidenote: DISTRUST OF CANNING.]
_June 20th._--Though ill with the gout, I made shift to hobble down
to the House of Commons to hear Peel's defence last night. It was
very triumphant, crushing George Bentinck and Disraeli, and was
received with something like enthusiasm by the House. George Bentinck
rose, in the midst of a storm of cheers at the end of Peel's speech,
which lasted some minutes, in a fury which his well-known expression
revealed to me, and, with the dogged obstinacy which super-eminently
distinguishes him, and a no less characteristic want of tact and
judgement, against all the feelings and sympathies of the House,
endeavoured to renew and insist upon his charges. Nothing could be
more injurious to himself and his party. I never heard him speak
before, and was induced to stay for five minutes out of curiosity. I
was surprised at his self-possession and fluency, and his noise and
gesticulation were even greater than I was prepared for. John Russell
spoke handsomely of Peel, and so did Morpeth, which was very wise of
them and will be very useful. Nothing could be more miserable than
the figure which the choice pair, George Bentinck and Disraeli, cut;
and they got pretty well lectured from different sides of the House,
but not half so well as they ought and might have been. However, this
affair has been of great service to Peel, and sheds something of
lustre over his last days. The abortive attempt to ruin his character,
which has so signally failed and recoiled on the heads of his
accusers, has gathered round him feelings of sympathy which will find
a loud and general echo in the country.
[Sidenote: FALL OF SIR ROBERT PEEL'S MINISTRY.]