Chapter XX (1)

Sir Robert Peel returns to Office--Death of Lord Wharncliffe--Tory
View of the Whig Failure--Views of Sir Robert Peel and his
Colleagues--Favourable Position of the Cabinet--Lord Howick's
Statement--Lord John defended by his Friends--The Letters
of Junius--True Causes of the Whig Failure--The Corn Law
Measure under Consideration--A Vindication of Peel--Irritation
of the Duke of Wellington and the Tories--Lord Melbourne's
Vehemence--Lord Granville--Lord Bessborough in favour of
Coercive Measures in Ireland--Consequences of Lord John's
Letter on Corn Law Repeal--The Peelite Party--Sir Robert Peel's
Speech--Disclosure of Sir Robert Peel's Measure--Lord John's
View of it--Sir James Graham's View--The Movement for immediate
Repeal--The League press for immediate Repeal--Lord John's
Engagement--Hesitation on the subject of immediate Repeal--Lord
Stanley's growing Opposition--Mr. Sidney Herbert's Views and
Conduct--More moderate Counsels--Approaching Fate of the Peel
Ministry--No Dissolution--Inconsistency of Ministers--The
Westminster Election--Lord Stanley heads the Protectionist
Opposition--Lord John Russell's Inconsistency--Mr. Disraeli
leads the Protectionists in the Commons--The Conquest of the
Punjaub--Division on the Corn Bill--Lord George Bentinck's
Speech--Lord Hardinge blamed.

_London, Monday, December 22nd, 1845._--Yesterday there was an interval of repose, and the world is now looking with great curiosity for Peel's proceedings, and what changes, if any, will be made in the Cabinet. I met Monteagle at dinner at Palmerston's last night, when we talked over the rise and fall of Lord John's attempt, and he expressed a strong opinion that they ought to have gone on; that Lord John ought not to have argued with Howick at all, but have said at once, 'I am sorry to lose you, but since this is your resolution, I am afraid we must be deprived of your aid, but I trust you will support us.' He says he knows the man, and if Lord John had taken this course Howick would have given way. It is now said that he desired Edward Ellice to impart to Lord John his objections to Palmerston, and that Ellice never did it; but, be this as it may, he ought not to have left the matter in doubt, but have had a clear explanation with Lord John at first. Sidney Herbert told me they came back with great regret, but could not do otherwise, situated as the Queen was by Lord John's retiring. At this moment all speculation and all conjecture about what will happen, what Peel will propose, and what will be the event, must be so wild and uncertain, that though these questions are in everybody's mouth and occupy everybody's thoughts incessantly, I shall not now say anything on the subject.

[Sidenote: DEATH OF LORD WHARNCLIFFE.]

I have been so engaged in the narration of passing events that I have not said a word on the sudden death of Lord Wharncliffe, who, after an illness of ten days, was struck on Thursday last by a stroke of apoplexy, and died on Friday morning, none of his family having supposed him to be in any danger. He was not a popular man in general society; his manners were ungracious, and to those who knew little of him, or who had occasional relations with him, he generally gave offence; but he was deservedly loved and esteemed by his family and his friends. He was kind-hearted, affectionate, hospitable, and obliging, an excellent, well-meaning man, and those who disliked him at first, on a more intimate acquaintance grew to regard and respect him. He was very far from being a man of first-rate capacity, but he had good strong sense, liberal opinions, honesty, straightforwardness, and courage--rather more perhaps of physical than of moral courage, for a braver man never existed; but in political action he was checked by a consciousness of his insignificance in comparison with his compeers, and he did not assert his independence and put forth his opinions with the confidence which an abler and more indispensable man would have done. He gave unquestionable proofs of his physical courage by braving a mob in a very dauntless manner upon I forget now what occasion, but I think in Yorkshire during some of the Reform riots; and he showed a want of moral courage in submitting so meekly to join the Tories in their mad attempt upon the Reform Bill, after the second reading had been carried, when Lyndhurst proposed to postpone Schedule A, one of the greatest political blunders that ever was made. Wharncliffe's place in the political scale was that of the most conspicuous and important of the country gentlemen, with a large property, considerable local influence, fair talents, a respectable education, active, resolute, and honest. Upon two occasions he played a prominent part: first, when he moved the resolution which overturned the Ministry after Perceval's death, though that Ministry speedily recovered and had a long reign; and, secondly (by far the most important), when he, in conjunction with Lord Harrowby, collected that small band, in derision termed Waverers, whose junction with Lord Grey enabled him to carry the second reading of the Reform Bill in the House of Lords. In that Lord Wharncliffe did good service, but unhappily he had not resolution enough to persevere to the end, and was in such a hurry to reconcile himself to the Tories (who never forgave him) that he undid the merit of his first exploit, and contrived to render himself odious to both parties. The pages of this Journal are, however, full of the details of that transaction.[115] On Peel's Government being formed in '35, he came into office; and again in 1841 Peel invited him to join, but he was disappointed in not having a more important office. He grew, however, to like the Council Office well enough, and he addressed himself to the Education Department with great zeal and ardour. He conducted it very fairly and liberally, too liberally for the High Churchmen, who regarded him with distrust and dislike, and who were deeply offended at the plainspoken way in which he rebuked them for their obstinate and illiberal counteraction of the beneficent intentions of the Government. He had not weight enough, however, in the Cabinet to obtain as great an extension of the system as he would have desired. During the last struggle in Peel's Cabinet he took the Protectionist side, and was one of the sturdiest opponents of Repeal. He would, however, probably have returned with the Duke of Buccleuch and others, and Peel counted upon his disposition to have done so, and expressed his regret, in a letter to his son, that he had lost the aid of his courage and honesty at this trying time. Perhaps the moment of his life when he appeared to the greatest advantage was when he stood up in the House of Lords and prevented the Tory Peers from swamping the decision of the Law Lords in O'Connell's case. He was for above twenty years Chairman of the Quarter Sessions, and for four years Lord-Lieutenant of his county, and in both capacities acted with credit and approbation. In public life thus playing a secondary, but an honourable and useful part; in private life he was irreproachable, amiable, and respected. He had a warmth of affection and steadiness of friendship, and a simplicity both of manners and character, which endeared him to his family and his friends, and no man ever died with fewer enemies, with more general goodwill, and more sincerely regretted by every one belonging to or intimate with him.[116]

[Footnote 115: [These details will be found in the first part of
these Journals, vol. ii. pp. 211-220.]]

[Footnote 116: [On the death of Lord Wharncliffe the Duke of
Buccleuch took the office of Lord President of the Council.
Lord Stanley resigned office, and Mr. Gladstone became Colonial
Secretary.]]

[Sidenote: CAUSES OF THE FAILURE.]

_December 23rd._--Yesterday morning Lord Aberdeen stated that they did not mean to make many changes; hinted that the measure they contemplated would not be a decisive one; said the Queen had been much astonished at John Russell's conduct of the recent affair--first, at his taking so much time to consider, and secondly, throwing it up so soon after he had decided to take office, and on such grounds; and that she had contrasted the alacrity with which Sir Robert Peel retook it, with the hesitation of his opponents. In the afternoon Graham sent for me. He began to talk over the Whig failure, expressed his amazement at the want of firmness and resolution of John Russell, qualities for which he had always given him unlimited credit, and in which he seemed to have been strangely wanting on this occasion. He expatiated on this at great length, and said pretty much what all the Whigs are themselves saying; he said he regretted it on Lord John's account, for whom he felt regard and admiration; that he was sensible of the great advantage it had given to them; that if John Russell had resigned on the public grounds he might have alleged, they should have been placed in great difficulty, and have incurred great odium and suspicion; but that as it was, the Whigs would appear to have failed discreditably, their leader to have evinced weakness and vacillation, and they were only doing what, under the circumstances, they could not avoid, and accepting a task that was forced upon them. He evidently considered that the Lord had delivered his opponents into the hands of himself and friends. I told him what the real cause of the failure was, the fears and scruples of the Whig Peers, and how this last difficulty revived and strengthened the objections and doubts before felt and expressed, and that John Russell would not attempt to drag on to the battle a Cabinet half of which was reluctant and frightened. Graham did not think these reasons at all sufficient, and still more that as they were such as could not be put forth, the case must appear a very bad one to the world in general--a lame and unaccountable conclusion. He then remarked upon the want of resource as well as of firmness of John Russell, said the remedy was obvious, that he should have let Howick go at once, and have called Palmerston up to the House of Peers; that Palmerston would then have had a fine position; that he could not have declined, as John Russell, after having stood by him, would have had a right to require him to lend his aid to the Government in whatever manner it could be rendered most efficient; that if it was not enough to call up Palmerston, he would have called up Morpeth, Macaulay, or any member that might have been necessary--anything rather than recede, after having advanced so far. He said that such infirmity of purpose was so unlike John Russell that he could not help thinking something had in some degree unnerved him. He said the Whigs could have carried this question better than they could, and that his and Peel's support would have enabled them to do so; gave me to understand that this support might have been counted upon; alluded to the extraordinary and unprecedented course of applying to them (without touching on particulars), but admitted that the circumstances of the case were extraordinary, and excused a deviation from ordinary practice. He told me nothing of the plans of his own Government; expressed in the outset of the conversation some apprehension lest there might be some hidden and unexplained motive for the extraordinary break-up, and some ingredient of distrust or suspicion of them. I told him that there was no reason but that which had appeared, and certainly no distrust of them. After I left him, he saw George Lewis, and went over pretty much the same ground with him also. At night I met Morpeth at Miss Berry's, who talked it all over, and acknowledged his disgust and disappointment. He said he could not help thinking that some domestic anxiety had had a considerable effect on Lord John's mind, and unstrung his nerves; that when he had seen him after the _finale_ he (Morpeth) had expressed himself rather strongly, and the next day he called on Lord John and said he was afraid he had done so. Lord John said he had felt a little hurt, and then pulled out of his pocket a letter, and desired him to read it. He burst into tears, and said he rejoiced for himself to be out of it. This corresponded with Graham's impression. So far as I have seen, all the strong men of the party are of Morpeth's opinion. Le Marchant, wishing to extract sweet from bitter, said, 'Well, after all, it may do us good. It will show that the Whigs are not so greedy after office, and it will wipe out the recollection of those two years when we stayed in too long.' Macaulay replied, 'I don't know that at all, it may only increase the blame. We stayed in when we ought to have gone out, and now we stay out when we ought to have gone in.'

[Sidenote: SMART SAYING OF MACAULAY.]

_London, December 24th._--Yesterday I attended a Council at Windsor; Stanley out, and Gladstone in. There I had a great deal of talk with Graham, Aberdeen, and Peel; nothing fresh with the former. Aberdeen expressed, like everybody else, his astonishment at the conduct of the Whigs; said they would have carried their measure, and that Peel would have unquestionably given them every support. They could not doubt that, after what he had said. I told him they were not satisfied with what he had said, that they had indeed resolved to go on and to trust to him, but that there was a strong minority who thought his reply not explicit enough, and that it was not expedient to make the attempt upon so vague a promise of support. He expressed the greatest surprise at this, and that they, knowing the character of Peel, should expect anything more explicit from him, and that they should not see in the answer, such as it was, an unmistakeable indication of his resolution to support them. We then talked a little of _his_ measure and _their_ measure, and he said that, desirable as it was to settle the question once for all and put an end to the League, it might be very difficult for Peel to propose, what the Whigs might very properly and consistently do, and that he might have supported out of office, and under present circumstances, a measure which he could not himself have proposed as Minister. He hinted, however, that the change in the state of affairs enabled him now to do _more_ (at least so I understood him) than he had contemplated doing before the break-up of his Cabinet. He talked very fairly of Palmerston, and said that he and Peel too had done all they could to reconcile the Foreign Ministers and others to Palmerston's return to the Foreign Office, and assured them that they had nothing to apprehend from it. He then talked of Oregon, treated the President's message with great indifference, and said he was quite certain to settle the question in the course of the year, and confident there was no disposition to go to war in America.

Peel afterwards talked about Lord John's failure, and expressed his astonishment and (with what sincerity is best known to himself) his regret, inasmuch as it lowered John Russell, for whom he felt great consideration and esteem; that he ought, when sent for, at once to have taken or at once to have refused office; that when the Queen told him (Peel) how she was situated, he at once said he would resume the Government; from that moment he was her Minister. He was evidently elated at the advantage that had been thrown into his hands, and chuckling mightily at the pitiful figure which the Whigs cut, and at the contrast so favourable to himself which the whole case will exhibit.

[Sidenote: REUNION OF THE CABINET.]

Coming back, Graham said to me, 'You see we have only one resignation. The whole Cabinet remains except Stanley.' The Duke of Wellington said that it was no longer a question of Corn Laws, but a question of Government: whether the Queen should be without a Government, or be placed in the alternative of a Government of Lord Grey and Mr. Cobden and a Government of Sir Robert Peel; and the Duke of Buccleuch also said that in such circumstances he would not desert the Queen's service. Upon this fresh ground Peel has put the question, and the paramount necessity of providing the Queen and the country with a Government has silenced all objections, composed all differences, and reunited the Cabinet. Thus Peel is placed in a far more advantageous situation than he would have been in if he had never resigned. Whether there was a good case originally for what he did, between the blunders of the other party and his own good fortune, the way has been marvellously cleared for him and a vast load of difficulty removed; and though plenty of difficulty remains behind, and the framing of his measures is a nice and delicate matter, and embraces many and various considerations, I am inclined to think that he will work them out successfully, and that his power will be strengthened and confirmed.

At night I met Howick at the Travellers', who said he wanted very much to talk to me, that he heard I had abused him violently. I told him I had not done that, because I never condemned anybody without knowing first what they had to say; but that, like most others, I had certainly been unfavourably impressed with what I had reason to believe were the facts in respect to his conduct. He begged me to tell him what I supposed the facts to be, and I did so. He then said that he wished me to be acquainted with the true state of the case, the substance of which was as follows. He came up to town with Edward Ellice, and he then told him his insuperable objection to Palmerston's being at the Foreign Office. He did not, indeed, desire Ellice to tell John Russell, but knowing that he would be confidentially consulted by John Russell, he made sure he would tell him, as he intended that he should. He did not himself in the first instance say anything to Lord John on the subject, nor Lord John to him. It was on a Monday they first met, and entered on discussion. There was then a difference of opinion about the measure to be proposed, which John Russell wanted to be less decisive than was afterwards settled, an intention which Howick opposed, and in which he prevailed. There were other discussions on various matters, but none on the composition of the Cabinet; but on Wednesday Howick wrote a long letter to John Russell, in which he expressed his sentiments and his wishes in respect to the Irish Church and one other matter, which I have forgotten, and then went at large into the question of the Cabinet. He said that he would much rather not take office at all, and that if he could do without him he would engage to give him every support out of office; but if he considered him indispensable, he must tell him upon what understanding he would consent to serve; that he considered that they should be very weak, do what they would, and that it was therefore of paramount importance that the Cabinet should be framed in such a manner as to command the confidence of the country; that the different offices should be filled by the men who were the best fitted for them, and that no considerations of interest or favour, but especially that no claims upon the ground of former possession, should be listened to. He dwelt upon the importance of this, and desired that the rule he proposed to lay down should be applied to everybody without exception. He said that it was impossible John Russell could have any doubt about his meaning, that he had indeed purposely abstained from naming Palmerston, because it was an invidious thing to do, and because he wished to put it on general rather than personal grounds; that to have named Palmerston would have greatly embarrassed Lord John; and, moreover, he knew that the objection he felt, and which he meant thus to convey, was felt by him in common with many other members of the new Government, and especially by John Russell himself. He said that he knew Palmerston's appointment would be regarded with the greatest alarm by the great interests and the public generally here, and with dismay all over the Continent, and that he considered it of vital importance not to begin their difficult task by an appointment which all the world would consider so unwise and so dangerous. Having thus discharged his mind, he said no more. John Russell wrote him an answer in which he replied to the other topics, but did not say a word upon this. Then came the Thursday, the day John Russell resolved to accept; and he came to this resolution without any explanation with Howick. On Friday came the explosion. Howick said that the objection he raised was only what he had already intimated in his letter on Wednesday; but while he felt so strongly upon it that he could not give way, he offered to make every concession in his power to adjust the matter. Having been offered the Colonial Office, and the lead in the House of Lords, he offered to resign both to Palmerston if he would take them; to act under him if he would go to the Lords, and to take any other office which John Russell thought him fit for. He said he thought these were great concessions, that he had been extremely dissatisfied with other arrangements, particularly Hobhouse going back to the Board of Control, and Charles Wood having a sinecure, and not in the Cabinet; but these he had submitted to, and had given way on certain other matters which had not satisfied him; but that to Palmerston's being at the Foreign Office he could not and would not consent. This was the substance of his explanation to me, interlarded with many comments and much miscellaneous matter. I told him that this certainly altered the case very much, and put it in a very different light; but I would not conceal from him that in so important a matter he ought not to have left anything to chance, or have suffered an hour to elapse without coming to a clear understanding with John Russell; that he should not have trusted to Edward Ellice telling him, and that since he regarded it as a matter of such consequence that his consent or refusal to join depended on it, he ought to have cleared everything up at once; on the other hand, that I must own his letter ought to have been intelligible, and that after receiving it Lord John was also much to blame in not bringing on an explanation. In fact, both were to blame; but I think John Russell was most to blame, because it was his business to see his way clearly before him, to reconcile and adjust rival pretensions and incompatible opinions; and most assuredly he had had warning enough on Wednesday not to pass the Rubicon on Thursday without settling so important a matter. Howick knows that Lord John tried to get Palmerston to take the Colonies, and he knows how many of the Whig leaders in their hearts thought as he did. He means to make his own defence in the House of Lords, and it is evident that he counts upon general sympathy with himself as to the cause of the dispute, whatever may be thought of the manner of conducting it. But whatever may be thought of Howick or Palmerston, it will add to the discredit which already attaches to Lord John as a statesman and leader of a great party; it will afford fresh evidence of a deficiency of the qualities requisite for his post and the task he undertook. There were no resource and adroitness, none of those arts of conciliation and persuasion, none of that commanding and insinuating influence which are so necessary in the conduct of transactions of such a difficult and delicate nature.

[Sidenote: LORD GREY'S EXPLANATION.]

_December 26th._--I receive daily letters from the Duke of Bedford, to whom all sorts of people write upon the subject of the late affair. He is exceedingly anxious to make out that Lord John and his friends acted well and wisely, but he evidently labours all the time under a consciousness that their case is not defensible, and that in public opinion they cut a very poor figure. He endeavours to comfort himself with the approbation which is expressed by many who may be sincere, but who may also only say to him what they think it would be agreeable to him to hear. Meanwhile the news of the return of Peel has been received abroad with transports of joy, and here the funds and all securities have risen with extraordinary rapidity. My letters have been read at Paris by Guizot and Madame de Lieven with the greatest avidity, and by the former taken to the King, under a promise that he would say nothing about them in his own correspondence with Windsor.[117]

[Sidenote: THE FRENCH VIEW OF LORD PALMERSTON.]

The other day Mr. Woodfall, grandson of the original publisher of 'Junius' Letters,' came to me to ask me if I would edit a new edition of 'Junius.' He said he had nothing new to furnish, and the only scrap that never has been published is one which never could be, a copy of very indecent verses upon the Duke of Grafton and Nancy Parsons in Junius' handwriting, and sent to Woodfall. He told me that his father never had an idea who Junius was, but never would believe that Francis was the man.

[Footnote 117: [I was myself in Paris during this crisis in the
British Government, and I received from Mr. Greville day by day
the narrative of the singular vicissitudes occurring in London,
related by him in almost the same words in which he recorded them
in his journal. This information was of great value at the time,
because the future relations of France and England were supposed to
be affected (and were in fact affected) by the possible transfer of
the Foreign Office from the hands of Lord Aberdeen to those of Lord
Palmerston. This event, therefore, excited the liveliest interest
in Paris, and was even of a nature to shake the stability of M.
Guizot's administration and to encourage the opposition, of M.
Thiers. I therefore communicated the information I received to M.
Guizot and Lord Cowley (the first Lord Cowley, who was afterwards
succeeded in the Embassy by his son). Some of the letters were
also shown to the King, who was pleased to say that they were
'du Saint-Simon tout pur.' To complete the picture of the effect
produced abroad by the anticipated return of Lord Palmerston to
the Foreign Office, I shall here venture to insert a few extracts
from the letters addressed by me to Mr. Greville in answer to his
communications.

24 Rue de la Paix, Paris: December 20th, 1845.

I think the apprehension with which the possibility of Lord
Palmerston's return to office was at first viewed here is somewhat
allayed among the leading politicians, but it prevails in its
fullest extent at the Bourse and in the country. Rothschild says:
'Lord Palmerston est un ami de la maison. Il dîne chez nous à
Francfort. Mais il a l'inconvénient de faire baisser les fonds de
toute l'Europe sans nous en avertir.'

The King's repugnance to Lord Palmerston is however insurmountable.
He has spoken of him within the last few days as 'l'ennemi de ma
maison,' upon which I took the liberty of replying to the person
who told it me, that such a speech indicated a gross forgetfulness
of the services rendered by Lord Palmerston in the time of Lord
Grey to his house. But the Spanish affair still rankles, and for
this reason Lord Clarendon would perhaps be less fit for this
Embassy than Lord Beauvale or one or two other persons. Lord
Clarendon, on the contrary, would be the best possible ambassador
if Thiers returned to office. That event, however, is by no means
probable. The Opposition is powerless and divided; the Conservative
body rather alarmed, and therefore compact. The Ministers are in
good spirits.

When Lord Palmerston meant to come here, he employed the Cowleys
through Madame de Lieven to enquire of the King how he would be
received at the Tuileries. The King coldly replied that he would
give him a dinner.

Thiers and his friends, who derive all they know about English
affairs from Edward Ellice, are still in high spirits, and affect
to believe that Lord Palmerston's first object will be to restore
them to power. I am going to see Thiers to-morrow (having purposely
deferred my visit), and I shall certainly endeavour to undeceive
him. I do not think Guizot has any fear of treachery or hostility
on the part of the Whig Government, for he entertains the highest
respect for its members, and the common interest and object of the
two Cabinets is too obvious to be doubted....

Paris, December 20th, 3 o'clock.

Since I despatched my other letters, yours of Thursday have
arrived, and I have communicated their contents to M. Guizot and
Lord Cowley.

My conversation with the former was highly satisfactory as regards
the maintenance of the most amicable relations with the new
Government. He said again and again, 'Je serai exactement de même
pour Lord Palmerston que je l'ai été pour Lord Aberdeen,' and that
he confidently relied on Lord John's good disposition towards
France and himself.

The alarm occasioned by the change all over the Continent, and
especially in this country, is far greater than it is in the French
Cabinet; but this alarm strengthens M. Guizot's administration,
because the Conservative party rely on his prudence and temper as
their chief safeguard, and the Opposition would not allow their
leaders to be more conciliatory to England than M. Guizot has been.

For many reasons Lord Beauvale is the best Ambassador who can be
sent here. In all the highest quarters that opinion prevails,
and Lord Cowley also entertains it most strongly. The presence
of Lord Beauvale here would give strength to M. Guizot; and if
circumstances of difficulty should arise, there is no one in whom
the King would have so much confidence.

At this moment, with the Deputies arriving in a state of alarm, it
certainly is desirable for Guizot to have as much as possible the
appearance of a good understanding with the English Government, and
the sooner an effectual and official representative arrives the
better.

Ever yours faithfully, H. REEVE.

C.C. Greville, Esq. Paris, December 22nd, 1845.

I was sitting last night alone with Princess Lieven in her
boudoir before her usual reception began, when the doors were
thrown open and M. Guizot entered. His manner was more rapid and
emphatic than I had seen it since I have been here. He turned
to me and began: 'Vous avez vu combien j'étais raisonnable à
l'endroit de Lord Palmerston quand vous êtes arrivé. Je le suis
encore, et je vous disais bien en vous parlant de son caractère
que j'en concevais moins d'alarme que les autres. Mais vous ne
vous faites pas d'idée de l'effet de ce nom-là sur ce pays et sur
mon parti. Je sors d'un dîner avec la grosse Banque--des gens
dont le plus mince avait certainement cinq millions--je les ai
trouvés dans la consternation. On est venu vers moi me prendre la
main en me disant: "Mais, Monsieur le Ministre, que ferez-vous
de cet homme-là? En six mois nous sommes en lutte ouverte avec
l'Angleterre. Il vous fera des difficultés partout--en Espagne,
en Orient, à Tahiti--c'est terrible." J'ai voulu les rassurer,'
continued Guizot, 'mais c'est frappant--c'est frappant. Tenez,
Princesse, vous ne m'avez pas vu ces jours-ci aussi ému que je le
suis à cette heure.' He was really agitated.

I replied that if the Whig Cabinet were not resolved to conduct its
foreign policy with moderation, it would obviously augment tenfold
its internal difficulties; that the Exchange of London would be
as much frightened by the prospect of war as that of Paris; that,
in short, I firmly believed Lord John was resolved to restrain
Palmerston, and would do it. I said I knew that a strong effort had
been made to prevent him from returning to the Foreign Office, and
that he himself was perfectly aware of the difficulty, which must
lead to his ultimate secession from the Cabinet if he was disposed
to thwart Lord John's views on foreign policy. In short, that he
and the French must look to the policy of _the Cabinet_, not to the
character of the Minister. He was pacified, but the scene was a
curious one.

The Deputies are coming to town, and I have seen several leaders of
the Opposition. Their opinion is that the change in England will
be followed by the fall of Guizot, not as an immediate, but an
ultimate consequence. I assured them, as I do the Conservatives,
that the Whigs can entertain no desire to bring about a change of
Ministry here, which they think quite natural. Their candidate for
the Presidency of the Chamber is Dufaure, but Sauzet will beat him
by 30 or 35 votes.

Yours, &c. H. REEVE.

It will be seen in the next volume of these Journals how far these
apprehensions and speculations were or were not realised. Lord
Palmerston returned to the Foreign Office, not in December, but
in the following July, when Lord John Russell's administration
was formed. Lord Normanby, and not Lord Beauvale, was sent to
Paris as British Ambassador in the place of Lord Cowley, with
the most deplorable results, for he threw himself into the arms
of the Opposition and quarrelled with the Ministers. The fatal
question of the Spanish marriages immediately arose to embroil the
two Cabinets, and Lord Normanby remained long enough in Paris to
witness the fall, not only of the Ministry, but of the dynasty in
1848. These great events are foreshadowed by the incidents I have
attempted to describe.--H.R.]]

[Sidenote: AUTHORSHIP OF 'JUNIUS.']

_January 1st, 1846._--I went to the Grove last Saturday; nothing new, but the agitation of the famous ten days still leaves a ruffled surface, and the world is full of talk about the past and speculation about the future. John Russell, who was much disquieted at the effect produced by the sudden explosion of his concern, has got into good spirits again from the encouragement and approbation with which he has been comforted from his own adherents and friends. I have had a controversy with his brother about it, who, partly from conviction and partly from affection, highly approves of the resignation, while regretting it did not take place before, or rather that he ever accepted. He has satisfied me, now that I see even more than I did before of the extreme reluctance of some of his leading men, not merely to take office, but to the measure for which it was to be taken, that it ought to have been given up at once. Lord John was right to make the attempt for the Queen's sake, but he might and ought at once to have told her after the first meeting he could not undertake it. Instead of putting the matter upon the issue of Peel's answer, he ought not to have applied to Peel at all, but have given it up on the ground of difference among his own friends. If they had been united and cordial, then he might have communicated with Peel, and under the extraordinary circumstances he would have been justified in doing so. When I told the Duke of Bedford what Graham said about Palmerston's going to the House of Lords, he said, and repeated afterwards that it was impossible. I asked him why. In a letter to-day he tells me. He says that Palmerston was so much against the measure (the repeal of the Corn Laws), and so disapproved of Lord John's letter, that he made a great sacrifice in joining the Government at all, wished not to have done so, and that the most that could be expected from him was his vote; that to require him to go to the Lords, for the purpose of taking the lead in introducing and arguing for a measure of which in his heart he disapproved, would have been disgraceful to all parties, and he expressed the strongest feelings upon such a hypothetical case. His letter is a very good one, and his sentiments are just and honourable and do him credit. I entirely agree in this view of the case; but though I was aware of Palmerston's opinions, I did not know they were so strong and decided as he tells me that they are. Melbourne's are the same.[118] It is pretty clear that if Lord John had not so publicly and so irrevocably pronounced himself in his famous letter, there would have been disputes in his Cabinet on the measure they should propose which would have made the formation of any Government impossible. As it was, the different members had only to make up their minds whether they would subscribe to his declaration or not. Lord Aberdeen states that Peel had received many assurances of support from Conservatives, and many from quarters where he had reckoned upon opposition; that the plan for the Repeal of the Corn Laws is not yet matured, but that it was to be something of this sort--an immediate reduction of duty to the amount of two-thirds, a total abolition in three years.

[Footnote 118: [Both Lord Melbourne and Lord Palmerston were
strongly opposed to the Repeal of the Corn Laws, and never
comprehended or embraced the entire theory of Free Trade.]]

[Sidenote: COBDEN ADVERSE TO PEEL.]

_January 7th._--I have had some communication with Clarendon and Charles Villiers about the supposed plan of the Government. Both are very reasonable and moderate, and disposed to support it if it so turns out, and to prevail on others to do so. Charles Villiers wrote to Cobden; but his answer was evasive and unsatisfactory, disinclined to say what he would do, and hinting at uniting with the Protectionists to throw out Peel and his measure. Against this Charles Villiers is resolved to contend, and, if necessary, openly and publicly. I believe his disposition to be good, and without doubt he has no love for Cobden, who has taken the wind out of his sails, and got all the glory of a case of which Charles Villiers worked the beginning.

Yesterday I went to Graham, to talk to him about the state of affairs, and to tell him what might interest him. I told him what the two brothers said, and about Cobden. He said, 'What I should like to know is, what John Russell says, and how he is disposed. I have the greatest confidence in his capacity and his honour; he is by far the ablest man, and I consider that everything now depends upon him. We made a tender of the Government to those who we thought had a better right than we had to settle this question. I believe he is not dissatisfied with our conduct to him. It remains for us to propose a measure, the best we can devise, and such as we think ought to be accepted. We shall, as soon as Parliament meets, declare what we propose. We think it better that there should be no concert or communication between us and anybody; but when we have announced our plan, it will be for John Russell to consider it, and if he thinks, all things considered, that it is such a plan as we can and ought to propose, and as it would be expedient to accept, if it is a plan to which he thinks he can conscientiously give his assent (and if he does think so, I know his support will be given with effect), then I have no doubt we shall succeed. I consider everything depends upon this. I have never given myself the trouble of counting noses, nor should I, for I hold it quite impossible that any measure concurrently supported by Peel and John Russell can fail.' He said that as far as they could see at present the agriculturists would present 'an unbroken phalanx' in the House of Commons. I asked him about adhesions, and he shook his head and gave me to understand there were none of any consequence. They have asked Francis Egerton to move the address.

_January 13th._--I wrote the Duke of Bedford word what Graham had said, and he sent my letter to Lord John. I have occupied myself for the last week in writing a pamphlet, which I call 'Sir Robert Peel and the Corn Law Crisis,' and the title describes the subject. I have attempted a vindication of Peel's _general policy_, and have done so because I sincerely believe he has been acting a disinterested and public-spirited part.

[Sidenote: DUKE OF WELLINGTON ON THE CORN LAWS.]

Clarendon received Henry Pierrepoint at the Grove a few days ago, who came from Strathfieldsaye, and his account of the Duke, and of what he said, is not without interest, so I transcribe it from his letter. 'Henry Pierrepoint has been very willing to communicate all he knew, which did not amount to much. It is clear that the Duke of Wellington resents the whole of Peel's conduct, that he dislikes him, feels he has never had his whole confidence, and has foreseen for the last six months that he was preparing to overthrow the Corn Laws. Pierrepoint considers this to be the cause of the unapproachable state of irritation in which he has been during the autumn. The Duke says, "rotten potatoes have done it all; they put Peel in his d--d fright;" and both for the cause and the effect he seems to feel equal contempt. When he found that Peel was determined to meddle with the Corn Laws, he wrote a long paper against it, but said that he should defer to Peel, and certainly not leave the Government, if the majority of the Cabinet were in favour of the measure. He was not, however, sorry to be released by the majority being dissentient. When they all shuffled back to their places by the Queen's command, he looked on himself as one of the rank and file, ordered to _fall in_, and he set about doing his duty, and preparing for battle. He has written a great many letters to Tory Lords, such as Rutland, Beaufort, Salisbury, Exeter, and has received some very stiff and unsatisfactory answers, particularly from Beaufort, who tells him that when they all sacrificed their opinions on the Catholic question, they had at the head of the Government a leader on whose honour they relied and whose conscientious motives they could not but respect; but that the case was very different now, when they had for their leader a man who had violated every principle and pledge, and in whom no party could put any trust.' I have little doubt that Alvanley, who has long been laid up at Badminton, dictated this letter, for he is very violent, and says 'Peel ought not to die a natural death.'

There has been a curious scene with Melbourne at Windsor, which was told me by Jocelyn, who was present. It was at dinner, when Melbourne was sitting next to the Queen. Some allusion was made to passing events and to the expected measure, when Melbourne suddenly broke out, 'Ma'am, it is a damned dishonest act.' The Queen laughed, and tried to quiet him, but he repeated, 'I say again it is a very dishonest act,' and then he continued a tirade against abolition of Corn Laws, the people not knowing how to look, and the Queen only laughing. The Court is very strong in favour of Free Trade, and not less in favour of Peel. Jocelyn told me that he went one day to covert with the Prince, when he asked him if he did not think John Russell had lowered himself very much by his conduct in the crisis, by taking so many days to consider whether he should take the Government, and then so suddenly giving it up for such a cause. Jocelyn said he did not think so, and added what occurred to him about the difficulties of the case, when the Prince said 'he acted very differently from Sir Robert Peel in 1835, and again the other day. _He_ took no time to consider, but at once undertook it without any hesitation or delay.'

Leveson has asked me to write something about his father, and I am going to attempt to do so. He was a very amiable man, and a good friend to me always; his life was long and prosperous beyond that of most men; he never made an enemy, and had the art of making more and warmer friends than any man I have known, which, as he was reserved in his manners, is a proof of the excellence and the attractive qualities of his character. This is really the amount of what is to be said of him, for he was not concerned in any great events, or even took an active part in party politics, although he was engaged in many diplomatic missions of importance. But a just tribute may be paid to those high and honourable qualities which secured to him so much real regard and consideration from all who became intimately acquainted with him, not less in France than in this country, and a devoted affection from his nearest and dearest relations which nothing could surpass.[119]

[Footnote 119: [Earl Granville, the youngest son of the first
Marquis of Stafford, died on January 6th, 1846, at the age of
seventy-one. He had filled for many years with great ability the
post of British Ambassador at the Court of France.]]

[Sidenote: LORD BESSBOROUGH'S OPINION.]

_January 14th._--I saw Lord Bessborough[120] last night, just come from Ireland, talked over present affairs, respecting which he is, like most other people, in a state of great uneasiness and uncertainty; he regrets that he was not here while Lord John's Government was forming, and does not doubt that if he had been he should have prevented what has occurred; for Howick would have told him _at first_ his intentions, when he should have gone at once to John Russell and got everything cleared up before they proceeded further. His impression seems rather to be, that he should have prevented the acceptance; but he is clear that first taking it without seeing their way, and then giving it up, was all wrong. He says that he is sure Howick would have been reasonable and have given way. He has had a great deal of communication with him now, and he told me a part of Howick's case which I had not heard before. It seems that after his interview with Lord John on Friday, he went home and wrote him a letter, setting forth his reasons for objecting to Palmerston. This letter Lord John put into Ellice's hands, who went to Howick and asked him if it was final. Howick said it was, and asked him if he thought he was wrong. Ellice replied, 'I don't say I think you are wrong; but I tell you, if you persist, you will break up the attempt to form a Government,' and then he left him. Howick says that he did not believe the Government would have been thus thrown up, and that if an opportunity had been given him he would have referred the question to his colleagues, and if they had been of opinion that Palmerston ought to be at the Foreign Office, he would have deferred to that opinion and waived his own objection. This, however, is very well to say now; he should have said so at once, as he might have done. Bessborough says Howick cannot be excused for not speaking out to John Russell at once the first moment he saw him. I told him what I believed the Corn Law measure was to be, and he said that this would carry the support of the Liberal party, but not without some exceptions; he doubts if the Irish will come over. He says there will be no deficiency of consequence in the potato crop, none of the potatoes are _entirely_ spoiled; but the state of Ireland is very bad in parts, and requires coercive measures. He wants the Proclamation Act to be renewed; the Conciliation Hall has its agents everywhere, and governs Ireland more than the Government does. If he had been Lord Lieutenant he would not have consented to divide authority with that body, but would have insisted on curbing it in some way, and he thinks the Proclamation Act would be the most effectual.

I forgot to say that at the Grove we were talking over John Russell's letter _inter alia_, when Clarendon said that Lord John, in the first instance, thought of proposing a measure like that of '92 (it must have been '91 or '93), but that it was found this would not square with his letter, and they were obliged to spread it out on the table before them during their consultation, in order to see whether the plans that appeared eligible would be consistent with it! So that he had so fettered himself and his colleagues, that they were no longer free to consider what was the best and most desirable measure, but what this letter would allow them to do.

[Footnote 120: [John William, fourth Earl of Bessborough, born in
1781; died May 16th, 1847--an active and able member of the Whig
party.]]

_January 22nd._--Parliament meets to-day, and the truth will soon be out. My pamphlet has been generally read and bitterly attacked. It displeases the Whigs for its defence of Peel, and the Tories for its hostility to the Corn Laws; but Peel and his friends are highly delighted with it, and Graham sent me a note which Peel had written him (evidently to be shown to me), in which he said that 'he had rarely seen so much truth told with so much ability in the compass of the same number of pages.' His friends like it, but as they are in a miserable minority it may be considered to be generally unpopular.[121]

[Sidenote: OPENING OF THE SESSION.]

During these last days the Whig and Peelite (for now there are Peelites, as contradistinguished from Tories) whippers-in have been making lists, and they concur in giving Peel a large majority. They reckon Protectionists 200, Peelites 180, and then there are the Whigs and Liberals 200 or 300; but Bessborough, who is very experienced, says these lists are very loose and not to be depended on at all. Francis Egerton tells me Peel is in very good spirits--better than his colleagues--and thinks he has a very good case to make for himself. He tells me that he wrote to Peel to tell him he had changed his own opinion on the Corn Laws, and that the time was arrived when protective duties must be abolished. He wrote this letter knowing nothing of what was going on, and he sent it the very day before the famous article in the 'Times' appeared. He did not get an answer till after the resignations. He also told me that they would have made him Earl of Bridgewater and President of the Council, which he declined.

I met John Russell at dinner on Tuesday night. No particular talk; but Young, the Secretary of the Treasury, had been with him, which looked well enough for concert. Clarendon told me after dinner that Lord John was bitter against Peel, more so than when he left town; this is very unfortunate. He is very clever, but his mind is little. It is difficult not to think that he is jealous of Peel. He is probably provoked that a man of whom he has so bad an opinion should have outstripped him in popularity and public consideration; for, without doubt, if the country were to be polled whether he or Peel should be Minister, there would be a great majority for Peel.

[Footnote 121: [It is a striking proof of Mr. Greville's love of
truth and justice, that although he had no personal regard for
Sir Robert Peel, or intimacy with him, and sometimes judged his
actions and his motives with severity, yet at this crisis he took
the trouble to write a pamphlet in defence of the Minister, whom
he conceived to be unfairly traduced and assailed, not only by his
political opponents, but by some of his former friends.]]