Chapter XXXII (1)

Difficulties ahead--Lord John Russell resigns--Conduct of
the Opposition--Lord Stanley waits on the Queen--Sir James
Graham's Views--Ministerial Negotiations--Lord Stanley attempts
to form a Ministry--Lord Stanley fails--The Whig Ministry
returns to Office--Sir James Graham stands aloof--Dislocation
of Parties--Embarrassments arising from the Papal Aggression
Bill--Weakness of the Government--Relations of Sir James Graham
and the Whigs--Debate on the Papal Aggression Bill--A Measure
of Chancery Reform--Lord Stanley at Newmarket--Hostility of
the Peelites--Opening of the Great Exhibition--Defeats of the
Ministry--The Exhibition saves the Government--M. Thiers in
London--Close of the Season--The Jew Bill--Overture to Sir James
Graham--Which is declined--Autumn Visits and Agitation--Lord
John Russell's Reform Bill--The Creed of a Capuchin--Kossuth's
Reception in England--The Kossuth Agitation in England--Mr.
Disraeli on Lord George Bentinck--Sir James Graham's Fears of
Reform--Dangers from Lord Palmerston's arbitrary Conduct--Case of
Greece--Case of Sicily--The _Coup d'…tat_ of the 2nd December.

_London, February 20th_, 1851.--I broke off what I was writing two months ago, having been attacked by a severe fit of the gout, which has tormented me on and off ever since, partly deterring and partly disabling me from writing anything whatever. Indeed I have been in a hundred minds whether I should not here and now close my journalising, for I don't feel as if I had, or was likely to have, anything more to say worth writing about. It is perhaps no loss to have omitted any notice of the meeting of Parliament, and what has taken place with reference to the Anti-Papal Bill, and other matters. Are not these things amply narrated in all the newspapers of the day?--and I do not think I have acquired any knowledge or information besides, or at least none of any importance. I shall therefore not attempt to go over the ground or any part of it, that we have been travelling over for the last two months; but I am induced to forego my purpose of shutting up my books and abandoning this occupation, partly from reluctance to quit it entirely, and partly because I think we are in a very precarious and difficult state, and that a crisis seems imminent, fraught with great interest and great danger. In such circumstances I like to write what I know and hear, and to record my own impressions and opinions.

[Sidenote: LORD JOHN RUSSELL RESIGNS.]

_Brocket, February 24th._--Events have come quickly on us. On Thursday night Locke King brought on his annual motion for extension of the suffrage, and moved for leave to bring in a bill. Lord John opposed it, but pledged himself that he would bring in a measure next Session, if he was still in office. Nevertheless he was beaten by two to one--100 to 52. The Conservatives went away, no trouble was taken, and this was the result. The conduct of the Radicals was offensive. Locke King, after Lord John's promise, wanted not to divide; but Hume, Bright, and their faction insisted on dividing, and one of them (I think Bright) insultingly said, 'If you don't divide and beat him, he will throw over his promise and do nothing.' It must be owned that he gave some colour to this suspicion by his conduct. A few nights before Hume asked him if he was going to bring in any measure _this year_. He said he was not, but that he still intended to do so, at what he should deem to be a fit time for it: not a word of _next_ year. This looks very much as if his promise on Thursday was an impromptu got up for the occasion. Still not a creature in or out of the House expected he would regard such a defeat as this as a matter of any importance, and great and general were the surprise and consternation when Lord John got up, just when the Budget was to have come on, and made an announcement which was tantamount to resignation.[130] The House dispersed in a state of bewilderment, and the town was electrified with the news. At night there was a party at Lady Granville's, and there it became known that the Government was in fact out. It seemed the more unaccountable because Stanley had sent them word of what had been resolved at his meeting, which was neither more nor less than a sham attack on the Income Tax, which the Tories did not expect or intend to succeed. Lord John, however, had resolved to resign after Friday's check, not on that account only, but on the cumulative case of many unmistakeable symptoms of the hostility of the House of Commons and the impossibility of his going on. So he thought he had better 'do early and from foresight that which he should be obliged to do from necessity at last,' as Mr. Burke said on a different occasion. Nobody knew what he was going to do,--none of his followers and subordinates. He saw the Queen in the morning, to whom he no doubt imparted his intention; then he assembled the Cabinet, where it must have been settled, and then he saw the Queen again. Lord Lansdowne was at Bowood, and ignorant of this decision. Carlisle was engaged in the City, not at the Cabinet, and heard from Grey when he came into the House of Lords that they were out. In the evening I was at home and upstairs, and many of the men came up to talk it all over. Ellice said Lord John was quite right. However, I think such was not the general opinion, nor is it mine. Looking at the state of the country and the obvious difficulty, if not impossibility, of forming any other Government, still more of forming one entitled to, or which could obtain, the confidence and support of the Crown and the country, I am very strongly of opinion that he ought to have fought the battle for some time longer, not to have yielded to any hostile manifestations, or to the probability, however great, of damaging or fatal defeats, but to have encountered without flinching all the opposition he might meet with, and not to desert his post till the worst he apprehended should actually occur. Many people think that, in spite of appearances, he would have weathered the storms; and though in the midst of great difficulties, he would eventually have evaded or surmounted them all.

[Footnote 130: [It was on the 22nd of February that Lord John Russell moved the postponement of the Committee of Ways and Means, which implied his intention to resign, though it was not generally understood to have that meaning. An interesting and accurate account of this transaction is to be found in a letter from Lord Canning to Lord Malmesbury in the first volume of Lord Malmesbury's Journal, p. 274.]]

The conduct of the Protectionists about the Income Tax showed how uncertain and little adventurous they were. This is partly explained by the revelation that has been made of the opinions of some of their leading men. It has been for some time apparent that there is a great ambiguity in the conduct of the party, different members of which hold the most discordant and inconsistent language. Disraeli the other night declared he was not going for Protection, that it was out of the question in this Parliament, and that the country must settle the question. Granby directly afterwards says he is for Protection. In the House of Lords, on a motion of Lord Hardwicke's when a great Free Trade debate was expected, and when it was well known that Stanley had been preparing a great speech, he never opened his lips, and the whole thing ended briefly and flatly. But the Duke of Richmond made one of his furious harangues, pointed to Stanley as 'the Leader of the Protectionist party,' and gave a eulogistic commentary on Disraeli's speech, asserting that he only meant that the battle of Protection must be fought on the hustings, where it not only would be fought, but would be won. Still Stanley was silent, and did not utter a word in approval or in repudiation of these sentiments and intentions. Notwithstanding these ambiguities, people still talked of the probability or the possibility of a Protectionist Government. It was said that Stanley had made up his mind to take it, if he could get it, and that he was of opinion that, great as the risks and serious as the consequences might be, it was better to encounter them all than to let slip the best opportunity they should ever have of ousting the Whigs, turning back the current of Free Trade, and restoring the Protective system. Everybody was looking with anxious curiosity for the decision of Stanley's meeting on Friday morning, as to the course they should adopt in reference to the Income Tax; and when it was known (which it was not till after John Russell's announcement in the House of Commons), the impression was that they were afraid to fight on that question; but at night I heard a very strange thing, which placed the condition and prospects of that party in quite a new light. Two of the best men they have in the House of Commons are Walpole and Henley, especially the first. Walpole told Jocelyn in the House of Commons that he would have nothing to do with any Government that would attempt to reimpose any duty on foreign corn, and he added that Henley was of the same mind; and so, in fact, were at least half the members of his party. This statement Walpole made twice over to Jocelyn, and he said the same thing to others besides. If such were the sentiments of some of their best men, what was to become of Protection? how was the battle to be fought on the hustings? and how was Stanley ever to form a Government, and on what principles?

[Sidenote: THE PROTECTIONISTS.]

However, the Government had resigned; somebody must be sent for, and something must be done. Oddly enough, while all this was going on in the House of Commons, Stanley was dining at the Palace. Yesterday morning the 'Times' (whose editor was at Lady Granville's party) announced the news to the astonished town. I went to my office, where presently Labouchere, Carlisle, Granville, and Evelyn Denison came into my room. Labouchere gave John Russell's reasons for resigning, which to me seemed quite insufficient, and I told them why. Carlisle said nothing, and I suspect agreed with me. Denison did entirely. I then came down here, where I found Brougham fall of indignation and disapprobation of the hasty resignation, and talking mighty good sense about the whole question and the aspect of affairs. We heard this morning that Stanley had been with the Queen, had refused to take office for the present, but said he did not refuse absolutely if no other Government could be formed; and that John Russell, Aberdeen, and Graham met afterwards at the Palace. So matters stand up to this time.[131]

[Footnote 131: [Lord Malmesbury gives an account of the failure of Lord Stanley to form a Government in his Journals (vol. i. p. 278), which was mainly due to the timid conduct of Mr. Henley and Mr. Herries. Mr. Disraeli did not conceal his anger at the want of courage and interest shown by those persons. They may, however, have had better reasons for refusing to join a Protectionist Cabinet.]]

I have seen a great deal of Graham lately, and he has talked to me with considerable openness about the state of affairs, present and prospective; the condition and prospects of the Government, and their recent conduct, pointing out many of the faults they have committed, and what they might have done. He found great fault with Charles Wood's Budget, and his general opinion was that the Government could not go on, and _co˚te que co˚te_ that we must pass through the ordeal of a Protectionist Government--not that he thought it would stand long, and he was aware that the experiment would be attended with great peril to our institutions, and might lead to very serious consequences. Still that it was inevitable. He said that his joining the Government now would be of no use to them whatever, and he should only involve himself in, without averting, their fate. He was evidently much pleased and satisfied with his own speech on Disraeli's motion.[132] He was conscious of its success, and of the great service he had rendered the Government; for, while disapproving of much that they have done, he is now desirous of reconciling himself with his old friends, looks hereafter to coming into power with them, and is excessively pleased at having put himself on amicable terms with John Russell. He told me that he had said to John Russell the other day, that though circumstances had separated them, and placed them for a long time in opposition to each other, it would always be satisfactory to him to remember, that on the three great questions which he regarded as the most important of his political life, they had been agreed, and had taken the same part, sometimes together and sometimes independently. These were the Catholic Question, Reform in Parliament, and the Repeal of the Corn Laws.

[Footnote 132: [Lord Stanley said of this speech of Graham's that it was very bitter but very telling; and it convinced him that the Tories had nothing to hope for from the leading Peelites but opposition.]]

[Sidenote: THE PEELITES NEGOTIATE WITH THE WHIGS.]

I found Graham in very low spirits, and full of disquiet and apprehensions about the future prospects of the country. This is generally his disposition, and he has communicated much of his alarm and anxiety to me. On Friday morning, after Locke King's division, and before he knew anything of John Russell's intention, I received a note from him in these terms: 'My anticipations are most gloomy. I foresee nothing but confusion; there are no means of escaping it; everything will be shaken, and something more than a Government, I fear, will fall. The "Times," I see, has passed sentence of death on the Administration this morning. It is most likely it will be executed speedily, and I doubt whether for their sakes it may not be said, the sooner the better. They have lost all command over the House of Commons, and indistinct promises of democratic change when made by a Prime Minister are most dangerous, for vagueness encourages hope, and the hope is deferred. This state of doubt and fear cannot last much longer; the public on all hands would greatly prefer a struggle and a settlement.' When he wrote these lines John Russell had already made up his mind to resign.

_London, February 25th._--I came to town yesterday morning and found everything unsettled: Aberdeen, Graham, and John Russell trying to agree upon some plan, and to form a Government. At half-past four Delane came into my room, straight from Aberdeen. Aberdeen told him he was still engaged in this task, but, he owned, with anything but sanguine hopes of success. Delane said to him he hoped if he did succeed he would not overlook the numbers and importance of the Liberal party. Aberdeen replied, 'You may rest assured that I am well aware of their importance, and I believe I am at least as _Radical_ as any of those who are just gone out.' I went to Brooks's, found it very full and excited; some persuaded Graham and his friends would come to terms and patch the thing up. Bear Ellice and others thought it impossible, and that Stanley is inevitable. In the House of Commons John Russell made his statement, and when he had made it Disraeli, without tact or decency, denied that it was correct. John Russell was not very discreet in what he said. He ought not to have said a word, nor need he, of what passed between Stanley and the Queen. Disraeli disgusted everybody by what he said, and his manner of saying it. Lord Lansdowne, Carlisle, and Labouchere dined here (Bruton Street), and about eleven o'clock a box was brought to Lord Lansdowne. It was a circular from John Russell announcing the final failure of the Graham negotiation, and that everything was at an end. It broke off on the Papal Question, on which they could not come to an agreement, though John Russell was ready to make some concessions. I don't think Graham wished to complete any combination, and preferred throwing the thing back on Stanley. His extreme timidity and his inveterate habit of magnifying dangers and exaggerating difficulties are very unfortunate and seriously mar his efficiency. If he had some of the confidence and sanguine disposition of Palmerston--if he could only bring himself to think that 'dangers disappear, when boldly they are faced,' it would be better for the country and for himself. Gladstone is expected to-morrow; Sidney Herbert says he will not join a Stanley Government. Everybody goes over the lists of Peers and Commoners whom Stanley can command, and the scrutiny presents the same blank result of men without experience or capacity, save only Herries, who is past seventy, and has been rusting for twenty years and more; and Disraeli, who has nothing but the cleverness of an adventurer. Nobody has any confidence in him, or supposes he has any principles whatever; and it remains to be seen whether he has tact and judgement enough to lead the House of Commons. It seems that in these negotiations everybody has behaved well. There have been no difficulties about persons, no pretensions, no selfishness, no vexatious obstacles from or in any quarter. Had the thing been patched up, Charles Wood was resolved to go. They wanted him to change his office, but he would not hear of it, and said he would not face Halifax. He thought both Grey and Palmerston ought to go out with him, but they declare that one and all were ready to make any sacrifice that might be required.[133]

[Footnote 133: [The details of this negotiation between the Whigs, Lord Aberdeen and Sir James Graham, have been published in an article on the 'Correspondence of Lord Aberdeen,' which appeared in the 'Edinburgh Review' for October 1883. The insurmountable objections of the Peelites to the Anti-Papal Bill was the deciding cause of the failure; but the transaction is interesting, because it was the forerunner of the Coalition ultimately formed between the Whigs and the Peelites in 1852.]]

[Sidenote: LORD STANLEY'S ATTEMPT.]

_February 26th._--Nothing more known yesterday except that Stanley had accepted the task of _trying_ to form a Government. From the Queen he went to Aberdeen, and from him to Lord Canning. As I don't know what passed, I will say no more. This morning Lord Lansdowne sent for me, and on leaving him I met John Russell. He told me Stanley was to give his answer to the Queen _to-day_, though Gladstone is not come. I asked him what he thought would be the result. He was inclined to think it would be _No_.

_February 27th._--It appears that Stanley was to say yesterday whether he would _try_ or not. He is trying. Canning and Gladstone having refused, it remains to be seen whether he can and will make a Government out of his own party. Most people think he will not. Everybody asks, nobody can tell, whether he will throw over Protection or go for it. His followers now say nothing about _Protection_, but ask for _confidence_. His rabble are very violent, and abuse him for not at once taking the Government. This does not make his position easier. Disraeli has behaved very well and told Stanley to do what he pleased with him; he would take any office, and, if he was likely to be displeasing to the Queen, one that would bring him into little personal communication with her. If he could get anybody essential to his Government to join (Gladstone, of course), he would act under him. All along everybody seems to have acted personally well. The town is in a fever of curiosity, incessant enquiries and no answers, heaps of conjectures and lies. I dined at Grillon's last night; Graham in the chair, in high spirits. He said, if Stanley took the Government, he _must_ dissolve on Friday night. But even if disposed, it is said that this would be impossible, and that he must get the Mutiny Bill and a money vote before he dissolves.

_February 28th._--I met Gladstone yesterday morning. From the tone of his conversation his negotiation with Stanley must have been very short indeed. He said he had come over entirely on account of the Papal Bill. After another day of curiosity, and rather a growing belief that Stanley would form a Government, it was announced in the afternoon that he had given it up. He had a meeting of some of his principal friends, and they agreed with him in the propriety of his resigning the task. Great excitement at night, and the Whigs in extraordinary glee, foreseeing the restoration of John Russell and his colleagues. The Ministers were all to meet at Lansdowne House this morning and determine on the next move. Lord John, who is rather sore, and not unconscious of the blame that attaches to him, said with some bitterness to Granville yesterday, 'Lady Palmerston called on Lady John for the purpose of telling her that all that has happened is my fault. Lady John might have told her that if Palmerston had chosen to be present on Locke King's motion, and have spoken, it probably would not have happened at all.' Lady Palmerston is evidently provoked that Palmerston has not been thought of to form a Government in all this confusion, and at hearing so much of Clarendon and Graham, and nothing of her husband.

[Sidenote: LORD STANLEY'S FAILURE.]

_March 2nd._--I went to the House of Lords on Friday to hear Stanley's statement. He made a very good speech and a lucid statement. Nothing could be more civil and harmonious than all that passed; great moderation and many compliments. The impression on my mind was that Stanley was sick to death of his position as leader of the Protectionists, and everybody agrees that he has been in tearing spirits these last days, and especially since the announcement of his failure. His conduct seems obnoxious to no reproach, and he did what he was bound to do with reference to the Queen and his party. They would have been intolerably disgusted if he had left untried any means of forming a Government, and though there will be some grumbling and much mortification and disappointment amongst them, they have no cause for complaint. He tried everything and everybody, as I believe, without either the desire or the expectation of succeeding. Nothing surprises me more than that anybody should think he could form a Government, as many very acute people did. What happened was almost sure to happen--the fear and reluctance of many of his own people to undertake a task for which they were conscious they were unfit. A man must be very ambitious and very rash and confident, who, when it comes to the point, does not hesitate to accept a very important and responsible office without having had any official experience, or possessing any of the knowledge which a due administration of the office demands. It was not, however, without some appearance of sarcasm and bitterness that Stanley spoke of the men of his own party, who for various reasons had declined to take office. The man whose private affairs prevented him was Tom Baring; the modest man was Henley, who is said to have told Stanley that he would not _disgrace_ his Government by presenting himself to the House of Commons as Home Secretary; the man who thought it would not last is said to be Thesiger. Sugden accepted the Great Seal, and the Duke of Northumberland the Admiralty, for which nobody imagines that he has any qualification whatever; and it shows what slender materials Derby could command when he applied to such a man.

John Russell made a poor speech in the other House, and his peroration was a failure. The speeches of Aberdeen and Graham showed that any coalition is out of the question, and nothing will induce them to be parties to the Papal Bill. I think them too stiff on this question, and can see no reason why they should not consent to be parties to a measure which they admit to be indispensable. It would have been one thing to consent to its introduction, but it is another to consent to its going on, and with great modifications, after it had been once introduced.[134] _Fieri non debuit, factum valet._ But Graham has all along had a fixed idea that we must pass through what he calls the ordeal of a Stanley Government, and he has been continually hoping, and partly expecting, that Stanley would make the attempt. His object was reconciliation with John Russell and the Whigs, and ultimate junction with them, after Stanley should have failed, and I can't help thinking these notions and views have confirmed him in scruples he might otherwise have got over.

[Footnote 134: [In the negotiations with the Peelites, Lord John Russell had offered to reduce the provisions of the 'Ecclesiastical Titles Bill' to a minimum, and to omit the preamble. It was impossible for him, after what had passed, to withdraw it altogether.]]

On Friday morning the Queen resolved to send for the Duke of Wellington, which, however, was in reality a mere farce, for the Duke can do nothing for her, and can give her no advice but to send for John Russell again. He was on Friday at Strathfieldsaye receiving the Judges and the County, so he only came to town yesterday. I do not know what passed between Her Majesty and his Grace, but Lord Lansdowne went to her again in the afternoon, and so matters stand at present, nobody doubting that the Government will stay in as they are, and without any change. Labouchere confided to me that the majority of the Cabinet did not wish for any renewal of negotiation or any coalition with Graham, though he did himself, which does not at all surprise me. No reconciliation, no necessity for his co-operation, and no manifestation of goodwill on his part, will do away with all the jealousy and dislike with which many of the Whigs regard the Peelites.

[Sidenote: LORD JOHN RETURNS TO OFFICE.]

I have been annoyed and disgusted at the part the 'Times' has taken latterly, turning round upon the Government and upon John Russell in particular with indecent acrimony. They have attempted a defence of their conduct, but it is a very lame one, and they have been very severely and very justly handled by the other papers, especially by the 'Daily News.' No doubt John Russell has committed great errors, and may be reproached for carelessness and bad management. He has incurred much odium with certain parties; he has lost a good deal of his authority and influence in the House of Commons; but he is not a man to be flung aside as damaged and used up, nor can his faults and mistakes, either of omission or commission, cancel the antecedents of a long political life or deprive him of the great position which, in spite of them and of appearances, he still holds in the estimation of the Whig party and the country. Nobody can be more sensible of the faults of his character and of the blunders he has committed than I am; but he has still great qualities, and I do not believe the Government could go on without him.

I heard last night the details of the Notts election, which appears to have been lost by bad management. It was a very foolish thing in Lord Manners to put up his son at all, but having done so, he ought to have left no stone unturned to secure the victory. The effect of this contest and the breach between landlords and tenants, unless it can be repaired, presents the most alarming sign of the times.

_March 4th._--The last act of the drama fell out as everybody foresaw it would and must. The Duke of Wellington advised the Queen to send for Lord John again. He was sent for, and came back with his whole crew, and without any change whatever. This was better than trying some trifling patch-up, or some shuffling of the same pack, and it makes a future reconstruction more easy. Last night it was announced to both Houses, and coldly enough received in the House of Commons. There can be no doubt that Lord John returns damaged, weak, and unpopular. His personal and social qualities are not generally attractive, and this is a great misfortune in such circumstances of difficulty. It is very difficult to say how they will be able to go on, and what sort of treatment they will experience from the House of Commons. The only thing that will obtain for them anything like forbearance and support will be the very general dread of a dissolution, and the anxiety of members to stave it off. This may get them through the Session; but their friends are nervous, frightened, and uneasy, and the general opinion is that they will break down again before the end of it. If they do, they must dissolve, for that is the only alternative left.

Lord Granville dined at the Palace last night, and the Queen and Prince Albert both talked to him a great deal of what has been passing, and very openly. She is satisfied with herself, as well she may be, and hardly with anybody else; not dissatisfied personally with Stanley, of whom she spoke in terms indicative of liking him. She thinks John Russell and his Cabinet might have done more than they did to obtain Graham and the Peelites, and might have made the Papal question more of an open question; but Granville says that it is evident she is heart and soul with the Peelites, so strong is the old influence of Sir Robert, and they are very stout and determined about Free Trade. The Queen and Prince think this resuscitated concern very shaky, and that it will not last. Her favourite aversions are: first and foremost, Palmerston; and Disraeli next. It is very likely that this latter antipathy (which no doubt Stanley discovered) contributed to his reluctance to form a Government. Such is the feeling about him in their minds. It is difficult to penetrate Palmerston's conduct and motives during the late crisis; but I am much inclined to think he was playing, or at least looking for an occasion to play, a part of his own.[135]

[Footnote 135: [It is a remarkable proof of the candid and dispassionate spirit of the Queen, that the three men who, at different times and for different reasons, were notoriously the objects of her distrust and aversion, subsequently obtained, as First Ministers of the Crown, her entire confidence. Sir Robert Peel was no favourite at the time of his abortive attempt to succeed Lord Melbourne in 1839. Lord Palmerston was entirely at variance with the Court whilst he held the seals of the Foreign Office. And Mr. Disraeli was supposed to be especially disliked. Yet in the higher office of Prime Minister each of these statesmen enjoyed the confidence and approval of the Sovereign, and carried on the Government with success for several years. None, certainly, ever received higher marks of favour and distinction than have been bestowed, in life and in death, on Sir Robert Peel and Lord Beaconsfield.]]

[Sidenote: DISLOCATION OF PARTIES.]

_March 8th._--At Brocket from Tuesday till Thursday. In the morning I saw Graham and had a long talk with him, principally about the Papal Bill. I asked him why he could not make up his mind to support the amended and curtailed Bill, which would not be inconsistent with his original objection to any measure; but he went into the whole question and satisfied me of the impossibility of his supporting and defending (as he must have done) any measure whatever. The truth moreover is, that he was not sorry to have this excuse for keeping aloof, for if he could have got over this, there still remained behind the great difficulty of Palmerston. This was never touched upon at all, and consequently they were all able to say there were no _personal_ difficulties; but Graham was satisfied that if he had joined them, he and Palmerston should have speedily disagreed, and I do not think any coalition will ever be possible which embraces Palmerston's remaining at the Foreign Office. My own opinion is that Graham wished Stanley's Government to be formed; and I am confirmed in this view by the remarkable fact that he and Aberdeen _advised_ Lord Canning to accept Stanley's offer. Canning told Granville this, and I asked Graham if Aberdeen had advised Canning to do so, and why. He replied, rather evasively, that it was a great temptation; that Canning was not committed to Free Trade; and that Aberdeen had suggested there was no objection if he was disposed to accept. It was, however, very strange advice. Granville thinks very ill of the prospects of the Government, and has no reliance on their _savoir faire_. Meanwhile there they are again, having lost something in reputation, while it is questionable whether they have gained much in support; but, I think, _something_. There is a greater disposition to toleration, and to let them work through the Session, for everybody dreads a dissolution. There is a universal feeling of doubt, disquiet, and insecurity. Parties are dislocated; there is no respect for, or confidence in, any public men or man. Notwithstanding the creditable manner in which every actor in the late crisis is said to have played his part, and the fairness, unselfishness, public spirit, and mutual urbanity and politeness displayed by all, there lurks under this smooth surface no little jealousy, dislike and ill-will; in truth, in all that passed, nobody was in earnest. The Government threw up their offices not wishing to resign. Stanley did not desire, and did not intend, if he could possibly avoid it, to form a Government; Graham did not wish to coalesce with the Whig Government, nor they with him. John Russell would have taken him in, if they could have agreed; but most of his colleagues hated the idea of coalition; he would have been ill received by most of the adherents of the Government, and he is himself persuaded that he should not have gone on long without a difference of some sort. Many great difficulties, as they would have proved, were never touched upon, particularly who were to come in, and who were to go out.

_March 10th._--I was interrupted, as I was writing, by the arrival of Graham himself, who stayed two hours, talking over everything. He left no doubt about his wishes for Stanley's forming a Government, for he told me that he never was more sorry for anything than for his failure. He still contemplates the great probability of such a Government, supposing a dissolution to take place, and the return of a Parliament prepared to vote for an import duty, and his mind is still bent on a joint action between himself and the Whigs _in opposition_. This is what he wants. He is not aware of the antipathy there is towards him on the part of many of them. Lord Grey, for example, is very bitter against him, and _tantum mutatus_, that he is now the warmest supporter and most zealous colleague of Palmerston! John Russell told Graham that last year Palmerston strongly urged him to get Graham to join them and take office, if he could be persuaded to do so. This is curious enough.

[Sidenote: THE ANTI-PAPAL BILL.]

Graham again entered at great length into all the objections against the Papal Bill, and the bad policy and mistakes of the Government. He thought it was one to have put up George Grey to usher it out, when John Russell had himself ushered it in;[136] for he said it was both evident and notorious that George Grey was in favour of stringent measures, and his speech was one in favour of the clauses the omission of which he was announcing. He said the announcement was very ill received, and he thinks the Bill will not pass. He fancies the Protectionists will throw it out, in which I disagree with him. There is an idea that they will try and make it more stringent, by proposing to retain the clauses or some other way; but this would be the best thing for the Government, and would bring Whigs, Radicals, and Irish all together. Meanwhile the effect of all that has happened is as bad as possible. I said in my letter (Carolus), 'We shall assuredly look very foolish if all the hubbub should turn out to have been made without some definite, reasonable, and moreover attainable object; and yet we appear to be in imminent danger of finding ourselves in this perplexing and mortifying predicament.' Never, I may make bold to say, was any prediction more signally accomplished than this. Everybody seems disgusted, provoked, and ashamed at the position in which we are placed. The Roman Catholics alone are chuckling over their triumph and our perplexity. They see that we have plunged ourselves into a situation of embarrassment, which leaves us no power of advancing or receding without danger or disgrace. Our Government, and especially its chief, have gone on from one fault and blunder to another. They manage to conciliate nobody, and to offend everybody. Their concessions are treated with rage and indignation on one side, and with scorn and contempt on the other. The Bill is reduced to a nullity, but this does not appease the wrath of the Irish and the Catholics; though what is left of it will do them no injury, they still oppose this remnant with undiminished violence, determined if possible to make us drain the last drop in the cup of mortification and shame. It is not unnatural that people should be indignant with a Government whose egregious folly has got us into such an unhappy and discreditable dilemma. We are in such a position that the Roman Catholics and the Radicals are alone the gainers; and accordingly, while all others are disturbed and terrified at such a state of things, they are delighted, and confidently expect their several ends and objects will be advanced by the confusion, disunion, and discontent which prevail.

[Footnote 136: [The provisions of the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill were considerably curtailed, when Sir George Grey moved the next stage of the proceedings on this measure.]]

_London, March 18th._--Everything still going on as bad as possible. The Government is now so weak and powerless that its feebleness is openly talked of in Parliament, as well as derided in the Press. A day or two ago we appeared to be on the eve of an immediate crisis. Baillie gave notice of a motion of censure on Torrington and Lord Grey, on which John Russell declared he would not go on with the Budget or any public business with this vote hanging over their heads (which if carried involved resignation) nor till it was decided. Last night Baillie withdrew it, and business will go on. Nothing is more extraordinary than the conduct of many of their friends, and the levity with which almost everybody follows his own particular inclination or opinion, regardless of the condition of the Government and of the grave questions which are looming in the distance.

[Sidenote: SIR JAMES GRAHAM VACILLATES.]

Of all strange and unaccountable things the conduct of Graham is the strangest with reference to his ultimate views, objects and expectations. On Lord Duncan's motion about the Woods and Forests, he ostentatiously marched out first to vote against them; on the Naval Estimates he went away. All this exasperates and disgusts the Whigs, with whom he looks forward hereafter to acting, and whose chief he means to be. On Duncan's motion, John Russell's brother-in-law, Romilly, voted against him; his nephew, Hastings Russell, was in the House and did not vote. Hayter told John Russell that when such men acted thus, he could not ask independent members to come down and support the Government. I called on Graham yesterday, and found him in a state of great disgust at the Solicitor-General's speech the night before, against the violence and imprudence of which he bitterly inveighed. He said that Stanley was preparing resolutions, and he had contemplated having to fight the battle of religious liberty side by side with John Russell, and the Government against them; but that this speech perplexed him, and left him in doubt what he ought to do or what he was to expect. Did John Russell adopt all the furious 'No Popery' of his law officer, and was he prepared to legislate in that sense? If so, he would oppose him _totis viribus_. I told him I did not believe John Russell (who was not present) by any means concurred with Cockburn, whose speech he must only regard as an individual effusion, singularly injudicious. He talked a great deal about this and on other things. I asked him why he had voted against the Government on Duncan's motion, and told him that his doing so had greatly annoyed them. He said they were to blame to fight such a bad case; that he could not but vote with Duncan, having put his name to an instrument, together with several other eminent persons he named, recommending this very principle; and that the Government ought to have shown more deference for the opinion of Parliament and less condescension to the Court, to please which this proposition had been resisted. He ridiculed the argument of Parliamentary control being useless and inefficient, as Seymour pretended. Moreover, he said he had told Tufnell how he was going to vote. I told him that as he contemplated at some future time the dissolution of this Government, and its reconstruction with a large Liberal infusion, including himself, a combination devoutly to be desired, and as the great Whig party must constitute the main strength of such a Government, it was very desirable that he should avoid giving umbrage to them, and exciting hostile feelings against himself as much as he could and that I wished when he thought himself obliged to oppose them, that he would tell them so fairly and amicably. He might prevent many things being done, and at all events it would obviate much of the bitterness that otherwise was sure to arise, and that as he was now on such good terms with John Russell he could very easily do this, and could speak to him at any time. He said he and John Russell were very good friends, but that all the rest hated him. He had nothing to complain of on the part of John Russell in the last transactions, but he thought he had on that of the others, and he knew very well they did not desire his junction with them, and were very glad it had failed. And while he took the same view that I do of the necessity of widening considerably the basis of the Administration, and taking in men from the Liberal ranks, he said nothing of the kind was contemplated the other day. We had a great deal of talk, and I gathered that the present state of his mind and opinions is this. He thinks Stanley is ready to take the Government, but not just yet; that he is prepared to push the Ministers later in the Session, and drive them out; then to dissolve, and if such a Parliament as he hopes and expects be returned, that Palmerston will join him and lead the House of Commons, Stratford Canning taking the Foreign Office (as he fancied) till Palmerston joined. We parted, and I undertook to find out for him what the Government really meant to do, and whether they did intend strenuously to resist any attempt to make the Anti-Papal Bill more stringent, and he promised that he would communicate more frankly and freely with John Russell in respect to any matters of difference, and when he was disposed to take any adverse part.

_March 22nd._--I told Labouchere what had passed between Graham and me, and suggested to him to speak to John Russell about it, which he said he would do; and this morning I have a note from Lord John desiring me to call on him. Labouchere told me that it was very true, that most of his colleagues disliked and distrusted Graham, and they all seem aware that his object is to see the Government broken up, it being necessary that the old house should be pulled down before the new one can be built in which he intends to live. He told me, moreover, that half the Cabinet were disposed to make up to the Protectionists, but that _he_ considered such policy equally false and discreditable. This is very curious, however, and as I cannot doubt that Palmerston is one of this half, it looks very much as if he would join Stanley whenever circumstances permitted this junction.

[Sidenote: MR. WALPOLE'S POSITION.]

_March 24th._--Yesterday morning Graham called on me, and said he heard his speech had greatly offended the Ministerialists, he thought without reason; that he had studiously avoided saying anything disagreeable to John Russell, and had not touched on his letter or certain passages in his first speech which might have provoked comment; that he had stated his views and his case against the Bill very strongly as he was obliged to do. For having refused to join the Government expressly and exclusively on account of his invincible objections to this Bill, he was compelled to show all the strength and force of these objections. He then dilated afresh on the whole question, much as he had done before. I told him that it was true they resented his speech, which they characterised as one of bitter hostility to the Government, and that it was so considered by some who did not belong to the Government, such as Charles Villiers, for example, and they coupled this with his previous vote on Duncan's motion, and inferred that he was actuated by a desire to do them all the mischief he could; besides which they thought he was much to blame in certain topics he had urged in reference to the possibility of an Irish rebellion. I reminded him of what I had said to him the other day, and of the bad impression he was making on the minds of the Whigs, and how serious this was in reference to the possibility of any future coalition.

He then talked in his usual way about Stanley and the Government he is to form; said Walpole had made so good a speech that it put him up very high, and would enable Stanley to make him Secretary of State; and then he told me of a sort of overture or feeler which Walpole had the night before made to him. It was at the Speaker's _levÈe_, where they were conversing on the state of affairs and the prospects of the country, when Walpole said, 'The only thing would be for you and Lord Stanley to shut yourselves up in a room together, when you might come to an understanding.' Graham replied it was impossible; Lord Stanley was a man of honour, who would abide by his pledges and declarations; and he must, if he came into power, propose a duty on corn. Walpole said if there was a majority against it Stanley would give it up, and at all events it would only be a duty for revenue, and not for protection. Graham replied that was all nonsense. Let it be called what it would, it was and was meant to be Protection; and in no way and under no name would he ever be a party to any duty whatever on foreign corn. Besides, there was the Papal question. He opposed the Government Bill, and Stanley and Walpole were prepared to carry legislation still further; therefore these two important questions rendered any understanding between him and Stanley impossible. I told him I was going to John Russell, and that I was pretty sure he had sent for me to talk to me about him.

In the afternoon I called on Lord John, and found him in very good spirits and humour. It was as I expected, and he said to me exactly what I had already said to Graham, that since the conferences which had taken place, at which time there was a general acquiescence (though with some a reluctant one) in his joining the Government, circumstances had very materially altered, and that his recent conduct had produced so much irritation and estrangement that any coalition with him for some time to come would be very difficult. Time and other circumstances might again render it possible, but now it was out of the question; this, it was fit Graham should know, and as he did not like to say it to him himself, he wished I would. I told him I was not surprised, and that I had already said as much to him, and had pointed out to him the inevitable consequences of the course he had adopted. The truth is they, most of them, dislike and fear him. They dread his propensity to truckle to the Radicals and to popular clamour, above all as to economy; and Lord John told me that Palmerston, who had urged him at the close of the last Session to get Graham to join him, had this year said he did not think he would be safe, for he would probably insist on cutting down our establishments to some dangerous extent. I told Lord John all I had said to Graham about communicating with himself, and he said that he personally felt no resentment towards him; he acknowledged that he had not said anything offensive or hostile to him personally, and that he should be very glad to talk to him, particularly about the Budget, which was not definitely settled, and he desired me to propose to Graham to let him call on him for that purpose. This ending did not correspond well to the beginning of the communication I was to make to him, but I said I would tell him, which I shall do, softening the hard part as much as I can.

[Sidenote: SIR JAMES GRAHAM AND THE WHIGS.]

I afterwards called on Lord Lyndhurst, whom I found very flourishing. Brougham was there, and they were full of talk, chiefly about law, and agreeable enough. I asked Lyndhurst what would happen, and he said he really did not know from any communication he had had with Stanley or anybody, but his belief was that Stanley was prepared to take the Government, whenever the way was made clear for him by the necessary money being voted, and the Mutiny Bill passed. This is now the general opinion.