Chapter XXV (2)

_February 8th._--A fortnight ago on Saturday week I went to the Grotes, at Burnham Beeches; Mrs. Butler and Prandi, a Piedmontese patriot, and formerly refugee, now restored by the adoption of liberal principles in Piedmont. He was condemned to death above twenty years ago, and escaped with great difficulty. He has lived ever since in London.

On Monday we received news of the revolution in Sicily, of the concessions extorted from the King, and since of the promulgation of a constitution at Naples.

On Saturday week I read in the newspapers the speech Cobden made at Manchester abusing the Duke of Wellington, and scouting the national defences. On Wednesday I wrote a letter to him in the 'Times,' which has had great success.[33] I have received innumerable compliments and expressions of approbation about it from all quarters, and the old Duke is pleased. I had no idea of making such a _hit_, but the truth is, everybody was disgusted at Cobden's impertinence and (it may be added) folly. His head is turned by all the flattery he has received, and he has miserably exposed himself since his return to England, showing that he is a man of one idea and no statesman.

[Footnote 33: [This letter is reprinted in the Appendix to this volume.]]

There was a meeting yesterday at Lord Stanley's to choose a leader, but they parted without doing anything. Stanley said it was not for him to point out a leader to the members of the House of Commons, and he eulogised George Bentinck, who has taken his place on the back benches. They are to meet again to-morrow, and it is supposed Granby[34] will be their choice! Except his high birth he has not a single qualification for the post; he is tall and good-looking, civil and good-humoured, if these are qualifications, but he has no others; and yet this great party can find no better man.

[Footnote 34: [The Marquis of Granby, born May 16, 1815, succeeded his father as Duke of Rutland in 1857.]]

_February 10th._--The Protectionists met yesterday and elected Granby, all the world laughing at their choice. It appears that the reports of George Bentinck's easy and good-humoured retirement are not true.[35] There was an angry correspondence, much heat, and considerable doubt about the successor; some being for Stafford, the majority for Granby, in the proportions of 60 to 40.

[Footnote 35: [Lord George Bentinck threw up the leadership of the Protectionist party in a fit of ill-humour, caused by some reflections of Major Beresford, which showed, he said, that he had not the confidence of the party. Mr. Disraeli called him 'a wrong-headed man,' although they had for some time worked together with apparent cordiality.]]

_February 13th._--On Friday I was with Graham for a long time, who talked of everything, affairs at home and abroad. He expressed a doubt if the Ministers were up to their work and capable of coping with all their difficulties, said Peel was 'more _sullen_ than he had seen him,' and had the same doubts, but nevertheless was more than ever resolved never to take office. He hoped, however, that Lord John might bring forward the state of the nation on Friday, and by making a great speech upon it show he was up to his situation; talked a good deal of colonial matters, and said the change in our commercial policy brought about the necessity of a great one in our colonial policy, that we ought to limit instead of extending our colonial empire, that Canada must soon be independent. He condemned the Caffre war, and extension of the Cape Colony, that we ought only to have a _Gibraltar_ there, a house of call; condemned New Zealand and Labuan and Hong Kong; considered the West India interest as gone, and dilated at great length (and very well) on these points. Then on foreign affairs, which he thinks very critical, especially estranged as we are from France, he wants Beauvale to be sent to Paris and Vienna to concert measures, and try to avert the dangers he apprehends. He is for 'defence,' but says the only way is to draw our troops home which are scattered over our useless and expensive dependencies. He is entirely against the squadron on the African coast and keeping up that humbug, which he says costs directly and indirectly a million a year. I told him Auckland said it only cost 300,000_l._; he replied, it was not so, and that including indirect expenses it cost a million. The Caffres cost another million, and now that we were going to add to the income-tax, it would only be endured by showing that we had made or would make every practicable reduction, and that we maintained no establishments that were not really necessary. He highly approved of my letter.

[Sidenote: A DINNER OF LAWYERS.]

_February 18th._--Dr. Sumner, Bishop of Chester, is appointed Archbishop of Canterbury, a great mortification to the Tractarians, and great joy to the Low Church; but he is so excellent a man, and has done so well in his diocese, that the appointment will be generally approved. I went last night to the Lords to hear Lord Lansdowne bring in the Diplomatic Bill (with Rome); he made a very good speech.

I could not stay out the debate, being engaged to dine with Chief Justice Wilde, where we had a great party almost all lawyers, Parke, Alderson, Lushington, Talfourd. I sat next to Alderson, and found him a very agreeable man, Senior Wrangler, Senior Medallist, a judge (and really a lawyer), a wit; a life all of law and letters, such as I might have led if I had chosen the good path. I always think of this when I meet such men who have 'scorned delights, and lived laborious days,' and now enjoy the benefit thereof. He told me he had been writing an exercise in the morning for one of his sons at Oxford, a dialogue between Erasmus and More, on the preference of the Latin to the Greek as a universal language. There is a good saying going about of the Court of Exchequer and its Barons; it runs thus--Parke settles the law, Rolfe settles the fact, Alderson settles the bar, Platt settles nothing, Pollock unsettles everything. Campbell is anxious to write again, and talked to me of writing the history of the Reform Bill. I told him I could give valuable materials, but that it is not yet time. He wants me to write memoirs of the last twenty years, and was pleased to say no man was so well qualified to do it. This is not true, but I have some qualifications from personal acquaintance with the actors and knowledge of the events of that period, and I might have had, and ought to have had, much more, but my habits and pursuits have prevented me, and only left me mere snatches of such real knowledge as could be turned to account.

_February 20th._--At the House of Lords on Friday night, for the Committee on the Diplomatic Bill. Government beaten by three, and all by bad management; several who ought to have been there, and might easily have been brought up, were absent: the Duke of Bedford, Duke of Devonshire, Lord Petre, a Catholic, dawdling at Brighton, and Beauvale. The Duke of Wellington, with his deafness, got into a complete confusion, and at the last moment voted against Government. It was a melancholy thing to see Stanley with Beaufort on one side of him, and Buckingham on the other, now going into a corner with the Bishop of Exeter, now earwigging Lord Kenyon, thus prostrating his fine talents to the folly and bigotry of the titled, tinselled mob, in the midst of whom he sits. Aberdeen behaved very ill, and spoke against admitting ecclesiastics; indeed, against any Nuncio, which was all wrong and untrue as to fact, and which he was crammed with by Bunsen. I did not stay it out, but went away to dinner, where I met Dr. Logan, head of Oscott; a very able man, very pleasing and good-looking, and neither in manner nor dress resembling a Roman Catholic priest. He is supposed to be the writer of Lord Shrewsbury's letters. He told Panizzi, however, that he was sorry to find that the English Catholics were very indignant with Lord Shrewsbury for having written these letters, which is very strange and very lamentable, for it has always been believed that they were more liberal and well-disposed than the Irish, and regarded with horror the excesses of MacHale and Co.

On Friday night Lord John Russell brought forward his financial statement, in a speech which has been much criticised. He seems to have treated the subject of defence, and to have alluded to the military establishments of France, in a style far from judicious; his speech and his plan were very ill received, and the state of the House was considered to be ominous and alarming; dissatisfaction was expressed in all quarters, and opposition threatened upon the most opposite grounds. Disraeli and Cobden both spoke against him, and the former vehemently attacked the latter, and made a very clever speech. Cobden's tone and spirit were bad, and, so far as can be judged of his intentions, he means to go to work in the line of pure democracy, and with the object of promoting the power of the middle classes over that of the aristocracy. The most serious blow to the Government was the speech of Francis Baring, which told mightily. On the whole, the impression is very bad; people are gloomy, frightened, and angry; the Government inspires no confidence; the great monetary and commercial interests do not think Lord John and Charles Wood equal to their situation, and they cast back longing eyes towards Peel. This Macgregor told me yesterday, and it is confirmed by various signs.

[Sidenote: THE WHIGS AND THE PEELITES.]

Yesterday morning John Russell sent for me, and asked me to go to Graham and speak to him about the 'Godless' Colleges, and the payment of professors, giving me a letter of Clarendon's about it, which I was to show Graham with Clarendon's scheme, and ask if it was in accordance with their Bill, and if he and Peel would approve of it. Graham said he did approve, and would support the scheme, but he advised a different mode of paying the professors (by a vote in the estimates instead of paying them out of the 7,000_l._ a year given by the Act), which Lord John agreed to adopt. We had much talk about the House of Commons and the state of things. Graham thought the appearance of the House very alarming, said Lord John spoke well in a very difficult position, rather defended him, found fault with some of the details of the estimates, and thought they might have adjusted their taxation differently. Neither he nor Peel said a word on Friday. Peel went away after Lord John's speech. I can see that the Whigs are in a state of continual uneasiness about Peel and Graham and the Peelites. They hear it constantly repeated that Peel will not take office, and has announced that he will be no leader of a party, but they look with great apprehension towards Lincoln, who is certainly ambitious of playing a great part, and preparing to do so; and they suspect Peel is secretly aiding and encouraging him. The 'Morning Chronicle' is believed by the Government people to have been bought by Lincoln.[36] It is certain that its tone is quite altered. Old Delane (father of the 'Times' editor) has got the management of it, and a Mr. Cook, who was employed for two years under Lincoln in the Duchy of Cornwall, is editor. When Easthope sold it, he tried to bargain for its continued support of Palmerston, which was flatly refused. Young Delane told me the paper meant to support the Government, but it has begun by an attack on Grey, and has evinced no very friendly feeling to Lord John himself. The state of affairs is to the last degree extraordinary and perplexing.

[Footnote 36: [The 'Morning Chronicle' newspaper was sold by Sir John Easthope, and purchased by Lord Lincoln, Sidney Herbert, and the other followers of Sir Robert Peel. It was conducted with ability, but it failed to command public support, and after a few years, and the loss of a great deal of money, the old Whig organ sank altogether.]]

[Sidenote: DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOVERNMENT.]

Delane came to me yesterday morning to talk over the ministerial _exposÈ_ and its effects. He said nothing could be worse, that it was _fatal_, that there was no use in attempting to defend them. He found people in the City all against the plan, that it could not pass; and he talked of nothing but defeat and resignation, without being able to suggest any possible alternative. He says, however, that people don't care for this, that they are reckless, that the Government must not look to be carried through, _for fear they should resign_, and because there is nobody to take their places; that nobody will be frightened by this, but that their measure will be opposed, let what may come of it. Others think differently, and Tom Baring told me last night that he thought, notwithstanding the discontent, they would find support enough for their purpose. It is difficult, however, as yet, in the midst of the uncertainty, excitement, and discontent that prevail, to form any plausible conclusion as to their prospect. There can be no doubt that, as a Government, their position is very unenviable; they are not strong in numbers--that is, they have not an absolute majority of the House of Commons--and they are in a minority in the House of Lords. They enjoy no confidence, and no favour; neither collectively nor individually are they strong in public confidence and attachment. There is no enmity to them, and they have a sort of negative support, as being well-intentioned, honest, tolerably capable, and, from the state of parties, the only possible Government. But they are surrounded with cavilling, discontented people, and fragments of parties, all animated with particular objects and designs of their own, which are not yet ripe--people biding their time, and looking for their overthrow. There are the Protectionists, without any leader, and absolutely unable to find one; the Peelite staff, with a dozen men fit to lead, and most of them willing, but still kept asunder by the old film of political repulsion, the ever-burning hatred of Peel and Peelites on one side, and the honour and feeling which forbids any desertion of, or disrespect to, Peel on the other; and these feelings will still keep the two Conservative sections in this antagonistic state, till events and common interests, Heaven knows how or when, bring them together. There are, however, enormous difficulties, inherent in such a state of things, and aggravated by their continuance, and among them none greater than Stanley's position, and the egregious folly of his conduct. This is, in truth, the great security which the present Government has for keeping in office. If they are defeated, and offer to resign, no other Government will be found possible, and they will be forced to stay in; but I doubt much, even in such a contingency, if they would be able to do so entirely on their own terms, and they would never dare to make public opinion, if unmistakeably expressed, surrender at discretion.

_February 23rd._--On Monday night Wood came suddenly down to the House of Commons, and proposed to refer the Army and Navy Estimates to a secret Committee, and then the miscellaneous estimates. This scheme was violently attacked, particularly the secrecy. Disraeli spoke forcibly against it. Peel came to the rescue. The effect was very bad: a confession of weakness and perplexity, and the Government lost credit. Last night Wood again proposed the Committees, owned he was wrong about their being _secret_, and asked for 'select.' Disraeli attacked him very severely; Peel came forward handsomely, spoke for the Committees, but defended the estimates, and talked very sensibly about them and defences, ridiculing Ellesmere's letter very much. Delane had a long interview with the Chancellor of the Exchequer the day before yesterday, who told him he had been driven to his present expedient by the deplorable effect of Lord John's speech, which appears to have inflicted _tortures_ on his colleagues all the time he was delivering it. He not only (Wood said) said all that he ought not to have done, and made great mistakes in his way of dealing with the subject, but he omitted a great part of what he was to have said, two points especially: Ireland, and what had been done there, and the Spanish marriage question, _which it had been his intention to throw over_! It certainly is remarkable that he showed none of the tact and dexterity which usually pre-eminently distinguish him; he had not been well, and was oppressed with the subject. The effect was very bad, and, as usual, his meaning ridiculously distorted and misrepresented. All the friends of the Government are exceedingly alarmed, and we do certainly appear to be very near a deadlock.

[Sidenote: LORD WILLIAM HERVEY.]

In reference to the Spanish marriage question, I have had some concern in stopping what would have been a very mischievous publication. William Hervey, who is mad on it, has written an elaborate _polÈmique_ in the shape of a pamphlet, or rather book. He sent this over last summer to Clarendon, who, not having time to read it, asked George Lewis to prepare it for, and correct, the press; but first it was sent to Palmerston. He kept it some months, and about Christmas sent it to Lewis, with his imprimatur; Lewis, by accident, mentioned it to me just as he was correcting the last sheets. I thought it so objectionable that I begged him not to let it be published without John Russell's knowledge and approval. Lord John said he would not let it appear, for such a publication, at the moment when the Duchesse de Montpensier's _grossesse_ is announced, would be irritating to the last degree, and nothing could be more indiscreet.[37]

[Footnote 37: [Lord William Hervey, then First Secretary of Embassy at Paris, had taken up the question of the Spanish Marriages with extreme warmth. He it was who mainly disinterred and relied upon the renunciations annexed to the Treaty of Utrecht, which were designed to exclude any other branch of the House of Bourbon from the Spanish throne. Lord Palmerston adopted these arguments, but without effect, as, indeed, the whole state of Europe had changed; and Lord John Russell never thought there was much weight in them. Lord William Hervey was a highly accomplished and honourable diplomatist, third son of the Marquis of Bristol. His health was bad, and he died in May 1850, at the age of forty-five.]]