CHAPTER VI.

Dinner to Sir Charles Napier--A Ministerial Indiscretion--Doubts as to the Reform Bill--Discontent of Lord John Russell--The Secret Correspondence with Russia--War declared--Weakness of the Government--Mr. Greville disapproves the War--Divisions in the Cabinet--Withdrawal of the Reform Bill--Blunder of the Government--The Fast Day--Licences to trade in War--Death of the Marquis of Anglesey--Mr. Gladstone's Financial Failures--Dissolution of Parties--Mr. Gladstone's Budget--Lord Cowley's Opinion of the Emperor's Position--The House of Commons supports the War--Disraeli attacks Lord John Russell--A Change of Plans--Lord John Russell's Mismanagement--Attacks on Lord Aberdeen--Popularity of the War--Government Majority in the Lords--Attitude of the German Powers--A Meeting of the Liberal Party--An Appointment cancelled--Expedition to the Crimea--English and French Policy united in Spain--Close of the Session--The Character of Lord Aberdeen's Government--Effect of the Quarrel with Russia--Lord Palmerston's Resignation--Waywardness of the House of Commons.

DINNER TO SIR CHARLES NAPIER.

_London, March 13th_, 1854.--The only event of recent occurrence was the dinner given last week to Sir Charles Napier at the Reform Club, with Lord Palmerston in the chair. Everybody disapproves of the whole proceeding, which is thought to have been unwise and in bad taste. The only Ministers there besides Palmerston were Graham and Molesworth, and the former made an excessively foolish, indiscreet speech, which has been generally censured, and to-night he is to be called to account for it in the House of Commons. It is marvellous that a man of mature age, who has been nearly forty years in public life, should be so rash and ill-judged in his speeches.[1] There seems now to be a better chance of John Russell's again putting off his Reform Bill next month. There are not two opinions, except among the extreme Radicals, of the expediency of his doing so, and his best friends (including his brother) greatly regret that he did not put it off _sine die_ instead of to another fixed day.

[Footnote 1: At this dinner at the Reform Club, Sir James Graham made an intemperate speech in which he said: 'My gallant friend (Napier) says that when he goes into the Baltic he will declare war. I, as First Lord of the Admiralty, give my free consent to do so. I hope the war may be short, and that it may be sharp.' Sir Charles Napier's subsequent performances in the Baltic did not at all correspond to this heroic language, and did not add to his former reputation.]

_March 20th._--There has been a little episode, not very important, but which being entirely personal caused some noise in the world. About a week ago, or perhaps more, appeared the Petersburg 'Gazette' with a sort of manifesto, complaining bitterly of the conduct of the British Government, which was said to be the more inexcusable as a confidential correspondence had taken place between the two Governments, and we had been all along informed of their views and intentions. The 'Times' published this (as did all the other papers), and with it a peremptory denial of its truth, stating that John Russell, then Foreign Secretary, had sent an indignant refusal to the proposals made to us. Derby took this up in the House of Lords, complaining of State secrets having been imparted to the 'Times,' and insinuating his belief that Aberdeen had communicated them. Aberdeen denied the imputation with some resentment, and said that a flagrant breach of confidence had been certainly committed, and he had reason to believe that the culprit was a man formerly in the Foreign Office as clerk, though now out of it, who had been appointed by Lord Malmesbury. On this Malmesbury flared up, and desired to know his name, which Aberdeen said he did not know. On a subsequent night Malmesbury again took the matter up, and challenged Aberdeen to give the name and produce his proof. Aberdeen said he had received the information in a way which left no doubt on his mind of its truth, and he was willing to leave the matter to the gentleman himself, and if he denied it, he would acknowledge that he was mistaken and had been misinformed. By this time everybody was aware that a young man of the name of Astley was the accused party. He wrote a letter to Malmesbury denying the charge, but his letter was not very distinct. However, Malmesbury read it in the House, and called on Aberdeen to retract the charge, which he immediately and completely did, and there the matter ended; but though the man is thus acquitted, and the Opposition papers abuse Aberdeen (who in fact was very imprudent to mention it), there seems no doubt that he really did babble about this matter, though it is very certain it was not from him the 'Times' got its information.[1] The story told is this: Astley talked of the correspondence to some person in a railway carriage. That person told it to Lady Ashburton, who repeated it to Clarendon. When thus talked of, it might easily get to the 'Times;' and the only wonder is, it did not get into many other papers besides.

LORD JOHN RUSSELL'S REFORM BILL.

Lord John Russell continues in a very perplexed and uncertain state about his Reform Bill, and hesitates whether to bring it on or not next month. On one hand he is urged to do so by his little knot of domestic adherents, by Graham vehemently, and to a certain degree by Aberdeen; on the other he is entreated and argued with by all the rest of his colleagues, by his brother, by Hayter, and by an immense majority of his political friends and supporters. Still he hesitates. He has got a notion, and others tell him so, that his character is concerned in bringing it on, and that he is bound to risk everything to maintain it. Graham is quite inconceivable; always rash at one moment and cowardly at another, he is now, and on this question, in his rashest mood, and he has persuaded himself, and tries to persuade Lord John, that if he perseveres and is beaten (which he cannot disguise from himself is probable, if not certain) he will only have to go out in order to return in triumph as Prime Minister. If a dissolution is proposed, and the Cabinet consent to it, he fancies a new Parliament will give him everything; if the Cabinet will not dissolve, Lord John, Graham and Aberdeen would retire, the Government be broken up, and Lord John would have Parliament and the country with him in forming another. All this I believe to be pure delusion. By persisting in his course he may, and probably would, break up the Government, but he would destroy himself, he would never be forgiven by his party or by the country at large for breaking up the Government at such a moment as this, and all his visions of success and power would soon be dispersed. Whatever else might happen, he would be excluded from office, probably for ever. His discontent with his present position the more inclines him to take this hazardous step, because he wants a change of some sort.

The Duke of Bedford came to me the other day to tell me Lord John was determined no longer to go on as he now is, and it seems that he is moved principally by pecuniary considerations.[2] He is poor and has a large family. While he is in office he is obliged to incur expenses by giving dinners and parties, and this additional expense is defrayed by the Duke, but in a very unsatisfactory way. Lord John sends him a sort of estimate or account of his extra expenses, and the Duke pays the money. It is not surprising that Lord John dislikes such assistance as this, and though he never complains, he is probably mortified and provoked that his brother does not once for all give him a sum of money or a large annuity. Everybody else is amazed that he does not do this; but though he is much attached to Lord John, admires and is proud of him, his love of money is so great that he cannot bring himself, even for his brother, to do a generous thing on a great scale. His colossal fortune, which goes on increasing every day, and for which he has no use, might well be employed in making his brother easy, and in buying golden opinions for himself; but the passion of avarice and the pleasure of accumulation outweigh all such considerations, and he falls in readily with Lord John's notion of taking an office for the sake of its emoluments. The present idea is to have this matter settled before Easter, to turn out Mr. Strutt from the Duchy of Lancaster, and put Lord John in the place, with an increased salary during his occupation of it. Nothing, however, is settled about it yet.

The publication of the secret correspondence with Russia has excited great interest, and does great credit to the Government, but it increases the public indignation against the Emperor, because it exposes the extreme duplicity of his conduct; and as he must have been aware that such would be the inevitable result of publicity, it is difficult to conceive what induced him to provoke it, unless Walewski's conjecture is the true one. He thinks that the Emperor thought it would make bad blood between us and France, fancying that we had not imparted the correspondence to the French Government, in which he was mistaken, as we had done so.

[Footnote 1: The indiscretion, such as it was, appears to have been that of Lord Aberdeen himself, and Lord Malmesbury quoted with a good deal of wit and _à propos_, in the House of Lords, Sancho Panza's saying, 'that a cask may leak at the top as well as at the bottom.']

[Footnote 2: Lord John at this time had a seat in the Cabinet and led the House of Commons without any office in the Ministry and without any salary.]

WAR IS DECLARED.

_March 29th._--The die is cast, and war was declared yesterday. We are already beginning to taste the fruits of it. Every species of security has rapidly gone down, and everybody's property in stocks, shares, &c., is depreciated already from twenty to thirty per cent. I predict confidently that, before many months are over, people will be as heartily sick of it as they are now hot upon it. Nobody knows where our fleets and armies are going, nor what they mean to attempt, and we are profoundly ignorant of the resources and power of Russia to wage war against us. As the time for action approaches, Austria and Prussia grow more reluctant to engage in it. The latter has proclaimed her neutrality, and unless some events should make a change in her policy, I do not believe the former will ever be induced to _act_ with us and against Russia. The Government here are in a very weak unsatisfactory state. They are supported in carrying on war, but in every other respect they are treated with great indifference, and appear to have very little authority or influence either in Parliament or in the country. Nobody seems to have risen in estimation, except perhaps Clarendon, who has done his work well and got credit for it. Palmerston and Graham have positively disgraced themselves by their dinner to Napier, and the foolish speeches they made both there and in the House of Commons afterwards. I do not know what Palmerston's popularity might turn out to be if it should be tested by some change which brought him forward, but he certainly has greatly lost ground this year by his whole conduct from his resignation down to this time. Gladstone, the great card of the pack, has forfeited by the failure of his financial schemes a good deal of the credit he had obtained. John Russell has offended everybody by his obstinacy about his ill-timed Reform Bill, so that the Government does not stand very high, and is only strong in the weakness of all other parties. They are constantly beaten on small matters in the House of Commons, which produces a bad effect. Up to this moment nobody knows what John Russell means to do about the Reform Bill; if he puts it off again, he ought to do so to-morrow, when the discussion will take place about the declaration of war.

_April 2nd._--The debates in both Houses were marked by great bitterness on the part of the Opposition, by Derby in one House, and by Disraeli and Layard in the other. The war fever is still sufficiently raging to make it impossible for any man who denounces the war itself to obtain a patient hearing. Nobody ventures to cry out against it but Bright in the House of Commons, and Grey in the House of Lords, but already I see symptoms of disquietude and alarm. Some of those who were most warlike begin to look grave, and to be more alive to the risks, difficulties, and probably dangers of such a contest. I cannot read the remonstrances and warnings of Bright without going very much along with him; and the more I reflect on the nature of the contest, its object, and the degree to which we are committed in it, the more uneasy I feel about it, and the more lively my apprehensions are of our finding ourselves in a very serious dilemma, and being involved in great embarrassments of various sorts. Amongst other misfortunes, one is the discredit into which Gladstone has fallen as a financier. Notwithstanding his extraordinary capacity, most people who are conversant with the subject of finance think he has greatly mismanaged his affairs, and suffered his notions or crotchets to get the better of his prudence, and consequently that he has prepared for himself as Chancellor of the Exchequer very great difficulties. His Budget last year was so popular, and his wonderful readiness and skill in dealing with everything relating to finance excited so much admiration, that his reputation was prodigious, and he was not only the strength of the Government, but was marked out as the future Prime Minister whenever changes took place. All this _prestige_ is very much diminished; and although his failures are in great measure attributable to accidents over which he had no control, many who are not unfriendly to him think he has been rash, obstinate, and injudicious, and no longer feel the same confidence in him which they did a short time ago.

DIVISIONS IN THE CABINET.

_April 3rd._--The Duke of Bedford has just been here, as uneasy about the state of affairs and as disgusted and alarmed at the war as I am. He does not know what Lord John will do about the Reform Bill, but fears rather than hopes as to his intentions. Aberdeen had desired that there should be a Cabinet before Easter, and that Lord John should _then_ determine what he would do, but Palmerston requested that the final decision should only be made on the 26th, the day before that on which it is to come on. What his object is, they do not know. The Duke in talking to Lord John suggested the certainty of his breaking up the Government by bringing on his measure, and the enormous evil this would be, to which Lord John replied that if he knew what the internal state of the Government was, he would perhaps not think the evil of the dissolution so great. The fact is, that when the Opposition, as is their wont, taunt the Government with their internal disagreement and want of cordiality and union, they are much more right than they themselves are aware of. The Duke told me that the Queen told him the other day that she had herself written to Lord John urging him to give up bringing on his Bill. Not long ago the Queen was in favour of proceeding with it, but circumstances were very different at that time.

_April 15th._--This has been a week of excitement. It had been settled that on Monday last John Russell should announce his intention with regard to the Reform Bill. His uncertainty still prevailed, and he got into such a state of mind about it that it made him ill. He could not sleep, and was in a terrible state of vexation and perplexity. Aberdeen then proposed to him to give up the Bill, but to obtain from the Cabinet a unanimous consent to his pledging them to go on with it hereafter at some indefinite time. On Saturday there was a Cabinet, at which he made this proposal, but Palmerston and Lansdowne both refused their consent, and Lansdowne was in conversation with his friends very vehement about it. Graham appears to have been reasonable at this Cabinet, and ready to adopt the course proposed to Lord John. It was eventually settled that he should announce the abandonment of the Bill, and make the best statement he could, not pledging the _whole_ Cabinet as he had intended; but before this he urged them to accept his resignation, which they refused, and then Palmerston begged he might resign, which they refused equally. So matters stood on Saturday night, and everybody believed it was settled. On Sunday Lord John's doubts and fears returned, his mind became unsettled again, and he was inclined to withdraw from his agreement and to go on. To the surprise of the whole House of Commons, when Monday came, Lord John only said he would make his statement the next day. Everybody saw something was wrong, and the curiosity and excitement were very great. All Monday and Tuesday mornings were passed in conferences and going backwards and forwards, the Duke of Bedford being called in to work upon Lord John. He did his best, and at last on Tuesday morning he and others finally persuaded Lord John to adhere to what had been determined and withdraw his Bill. This he did in a very good speech, full of an emotion and manifestation of sensibility which succeeded completely with the House, and he was greeted with prodigious cheering and compliments and congratulations on all sides. Nothing could in fact go off better, or in a way more gratifying to him, and the Government appears to have been strengthened by the operation. His emotion was sincere, because he is no actor, but it was in my opinion totally uncalled for; and as there is but a step between the sublime and the ridiculous, it might just as well have appeared ridiculous; but fortunately for him his audience were disposed to take it _au grand sérieux_. Even his brother, partial as he is to him, takes the same view of this that I do, and has written to me that as Lord John has often been abused when he did not deserve it, so he has now been overpraised.

A FAST DAY.

_April 24th._--When this Government was formed, its principal merit was supposed to be its great administrative capacity, and the wonderful way in which the business of the country was to be done. It has turned out just the reverse of what was expected, for they commit one blunder after another, and nothing can be more loose, careless, and ignorant than the way in which their business is conducted. All sorts of mistakes and embarrassments are continually occurring in the House of Commons, and I have had occasion to see ample proofs of what I say, in all that has been done and is doing about licences and trade permissions, consequent on the recent declarations and Orders in Council.[1] Now another matter has occurred, discreditable from the carelessness which has been evinced. When it was thought necessary to order a fast day for the war, the Queen set her face against it. She thought it very absurd (as it is) and objected _in toto_. Aberdeen with some difficulty overcame her objections, setting forth that it had been done by George III., and that the religious part of the community would make a clamour if it were not done. So she gave way, but still insisted it should not be a 'fast,' so they settled it should be a day of 'humiliation.' The Archbishop of Canterbury fully concurred, and the proclamation was issued accordingly. But the other day the merchants took alarm, and represented that, as the word 'fast' was omitted, the case would not come within the provisions of Masterman's Bill, and that bills of exchange, &c., would be payable on the day itself, and not the day before as provided by that Act, and that all sorts of confusion would arise. The Bank of England took the Solicitor General's opinion, who thought that such would be the law. A great difficulty arose, for time pressed. The Chancellor thought the case would stand, and was for taking the chance, but the Cabinet on Saturday decided that it would be safer to correct the error even thus late. Aberdeen went to the Queen and told her, and this afternoon there is to be a Council to turn the 'day of humiliation' into a 'fast day,' in order that 'merchants' bills may be presented on one day instead of another, and that banking operations may not be deranged. The ridicule this throws on the religious part of the question is obvious, and the effect it ought to have is to discontinue these preposterous observances, which all sensible people regard as a mockery and a delusion. But all this ought to have been provided for, and the law officers ought to have foreseen the consequences and advised accordingly. In Peel's time this never would have happened; but with a nominal Premier, a Home Secretary who will give himself no trouble about the details of his office, and an Attorney General who does nothing, knows nothing of law, and won't attend to anything, it is no wonder that such things and many others occur.

To return to the question of trading licences. When we went to war, the Government, I believe very wisely, resolved to relax belligerent rights and give all possible latitude to trade, with no more restrictions and reservations than were essentially necessary for carrying on the war. But this resolution involved a revolution of the old system and the necessity of completely constructing a new one, and as they long ago knew war was inevitable, they ought to have well considered all this, and framed their regulations before they issued their orders. But not a bit of this was done, and the consequence was a state of unparalleled confusion and embarrassment, applications from all sides, and hosts of petitions for leave to export goods of different descriptions. The Government at last set to work to deal with these cases, but in a very irregular, unbusinesslike way. Some two or three of them met in Committee at the Council Office, and with the help of Cardwell, President of the Board of Trade but not in the Cabinet, and Dr. Lushington, who has nothing to do with the Government, they have contrived to scramble through the business; but the _laches_ and indifference of those who ought to be most concerned, and the loose way of proceeding, have been very striking. Some would not come at all, some came for a short time, different people attended on different days, so that different opinions prevailed, and no regular system was established. The other day, on Cardwell's saying these questions would be taken up as soon as Parliament met and Government called to account, I suggested to ---- that, such being the case, he ought to get Lord John Russell to attend the Committee. He said he would ask him, 'but John Russell could not bear details; he doubted if he would come, and, if he did, would be of no use, as he would be sure to go to sleep;' and this is the way business of the greatest importance is transacted.

[Footnote 1: On the outbreak of the war a Committee of Council was summoned to consider and frame divers Orders with reference to the prohibition of the export of military and naval stores, the detention of Russian ships, and questions of trade in Russian produce. Dr. Lushington, the judge of the Admiralty, was a member of this Committee, besides several Cabinet Ministers. The French Government proposed to revert to the old system of licences to trade with the enemy; but this proposal was not agreed to by Great Britain. The Russian trade was left open, except when stopped by blockade. Licences were issued by the Privy Council for the export of military and naval stores to neutral ports.]

DEATH OF THE MARQUIS OF ANGLESEY.

_May 3rd._--The death of Lord Anglesey, which took place a few days ago, has removed one of the last and the most conspicuous of the comrades of the Duke of Wellington, who all seem to be following their commander very rapidly. I have lived with Lord Anglesey for so many years in such intimacy, and have received from him such constant kindness, that I cannot pass over his death without a brief notice.

A more gallant spirit, a finer gentleman, and a more honourable and kindhearted man never existed. His abilities were not of a very high order, but he had a good fair understanding, excellent intentions, and a character remarkably straightforward and sincere. In his youth he was notoriously vain and arrogant, as most of his family were, but as he advanced in age, his faults and foibles were diminished or softened, and his virtues and amiable disposition manifested themselves the more. He distinguished himself greatly in the command of the cavalry in Sir John Moore's retreat, but was not employed in the Duke's army during the subsequent years of the Peninsular war. In the Waterloo campaign he again commanded the cavalry, not, as was supposed, entirely to the Duke's satisfaction, who would have preferred Lord Combermere in that post. He lost a leg at the battle of Waterloo; for this wound Lord Anglesey was entitled to a very large pension, of which he never would take a shilling. He was a great friend of George IV., and exposed himself to unpopularity by taking the King's part in the Queen's trial; but their friendship came to an end when Lord Anglesey connected himself with the Whig party, and when he went to Ireland as Lord Lieutenant he deeply offended the King by his open advocacy of the Roman Catholic cause in 1829. The Duke of Wellington, then Minister and about to give up the Catholic question, quarrelled with Lord Anglesey and recalled him. For some years past they had not been on very friendly terms. Lord Anglesey was jealous of the Duke, and used to affect to disparage his capacity both as a general and a statesman, and this political difference completed their mutual estrangement. These hostile feelings did not, however, last long; Lord Anglesey had a generous disposition, and was too fair and true to do permanent injustice to the Duke. I do not know how the reconciliation between them was brought about, but their temporary alienation was succeeded by a firm and lasting friendship, and the most enthusiastic admiration and attachment entertained by Lord Anglesey towards the Duke. For many years before the death of the latter, the two old warriors were the most intimate friends and constant companions, and every vestige of their former differences and antipathies was effaced and had given way to warm sentiments of mutual regard. When the regiment of Guards became vacant, King William sent for Lord Anglesey and announced to him that he was to have it; he of course expressed his acknowledgements; but early the next morning he went to the King and said to him that he felt it his duty to represent to him that there was a man worthier than himself to have the regiment, that Lord Ludlow had lost his arm at their head, and that he could not bear to accept that to which Lord Ludlow was so justly entitled. This remonstrance, so unselfish and honourable, was accepted, and the regiment was conferred on Lord Ludlow.[1]

[Footnote 1: George James, 3rd Earl of Ludlow in the peerage of Ireland, and created a baron of the United Kingdom in 1831, was born December 12, 1758, and died April 16, 1842, when the titles became extinct. He served with distinction in the army, and was colonel of the 38th regiment of foot.]

A FINANCIAL FAILURE.

_May 7th._--The failure of Gladstone's Exchequer Bill scheme has been very injurious to the Government, and particularly to him. The prodigious applause and admiration with which he was greeted last year have given way to distrust and apprehension of him as a finance minister, and the repeated failures of his different schemes have in a very short time materially damaged his reputation, and destroyed the prestige of his great abilities. All practical men in the City severely blame him for having exposed himself to the risk of failure, and reproach him with the folly of trying to make too good a bargain, and by so doing exposing himself to the defeat he has sustained. The consequences will not probably be serious, but the Government is weakened by it, and the diminution of public confidence in Gladstone is a public misfortune.

Next in importance to the financial difficulty is the Oxford Bill, with which Government have got into a mess, and they are struggling through the measure with doubtful and small majorities, having been beaten on an important point, and now quite uncertain if they shall be able to carry it. I fell in with Graham yesterday, and spoke to him about these things, when he replied that Gladstone's failure was very unfortunate, but he had no doubt he would make a great speech in his own defence on Monday night. With regard to Oxford, he said it was quite true that they could not depend on carrying the clauses of their bill, but that was because in the present state of the House 'they could not carry a turnpike bill,' they were absolutely without power, and 'it was a state of things that could not go on.'[1] Last night I had a talk with Charles Wood on the same subject, and he said that the truth was, a revolution had silently been effected. Parties were at an end, and the House of Commons was no longer divided into and governed by them; and that the predicament in which this Government is placed would be the same with every other, and business could no longer be conducted in Parliament in the way it used to be. All this is in my opinion quite true, and what has long struck me. Whether the extreme elasticity of our institutions, and the power of adaptation to circumstances which seems to pervade them, will enable us to find remedies and resources, and that the apparent derangement will right itself, remains to be seen. But it is a condition of affairs full of uncertainty, therefore of danger, and which makes me very uneasy whenever I think of it. It is evident that this Government is now backed by no great party, and that it has very few independent adherents on whom it can count. It scrambles on with casual support, and its continuing at all to exist is principally owing to the extreme difficulty of forming any other, and the certainty that no other that could be formed would be stronger or more secure, either more popular or more powerful.

[Footnote 1: Lord John Russell introduced a bill to make further provision for the good government of the University of Oxford and the colleges therein, which passed both Houses, with some amendments, in the course of the session.]

MR. GLADSTONE'S BUDGET.

_May 7th._--It is scarcely a year ago that I was writing enthusiastic panegyrics on Gladstone, and describing him as the great ornament and support of the Government, and as the future Prime Minister. This was after the prodigious success of his first Budget and his able speeches, but a few months seem to have overturned all his power and authority. I hear nothing but complaints of his rashness and passion for experiments; and on all sides, from men, for example, like Tom Baring and Robarts, one a Tory, the other a Whig, that the City and the moneyed men have lost all confidence in him. To-morrow night he is to make his financial statement, and intense curiosity prevails to see how he will provide the ways and means for carrying on the war. Everybody expects that he will make an able speech; but brilliant speeches do not produce very great effect, and more anxiety is felt for the measures he will propose than for the dexterity and ingenuity he may display in proposing them. Parliament is ready to vote without grumbling any money that is asked for, and as yet public opinion has not begun to waver and complain; but we are only yet at the very beginning of this horrible mess, and people are still looking with eager interest to the successes they anticipate, and have not yet begun to feel the cost.

_May 10th._--Gladstone made a great speech on Monday night. He spoke for nearly four hours, occupying the first half of the time in an elaborate and not unsuccessful defence of his former measures. His speech, which was certainly very able, was well received, and the Budget pronounced an honourable and creditable one. If he had chosen to sacrifice his conscientious convictions to popularity, he might have gained a great amount of the latter by proposing a loan, and no more taxes than would be necessary for the interest of it. I do not yet know whether his defence of his abortive schemes has satisfied the monetary critics. It was certainly very plausible, and will probably be sufficient for the uninformed and the half-informed, who cannot detect any fallacies which may lurk within it. He attacked some of his opponents with great severity, particularly Disraeli and Monteagle, but I doubt if this was prudent. He flung about his sarcasms upon smaller fry, and this certainly was not discreet. I think his speech has been of service to his financial character, and done a good deal towards the restoration of his credit.

_May 12th._--Cowley called on me yesterday, when we talked over the war with all its etceteras. He said the Emperor had been most reluctant to go into it, but was now firmly resolved to pursue it vigorously, and not to desist till he had obtained fair terms of peace; above all things he is bent on going on with us in unbroken amity. Cowley thinks his political position as secure as any position can be in France, and certainly the country seems satisfied with his rule. His social position is unimproved and rather worse; his marriage was a fatal measure; he would have done far better if he could have married the Hohenlohe girl, who was dying to be Empress, and Cowley thinks the Queen was wrong to prevent the match. In that case the Court might have been very different. In the beginning, after his marriage, he attempted to purify it as well as he could, and to get rid of all the disreputable women about it; but by degrees they have all come back again, and now they are more _encanaillées_ than ever.

The French Government have given a strong proof of their goodwill to us by recalling Baraguay d'Hilliers from Constantinople, and not sending another ambassador, as they find none can possibly live on good terms with Stratford. Cowley says the war might have been prevented, he thinks, and particularly if Stratford had not been there. The Emperor would have made greater concessions if Stratford had not been at Constantinople, and another ambassador would have striven to preserve peace instead of being, as he was, bent on producing a war.

Edward Mills tells me Gladstone's recent speech has immensely raised him, and that he stands very high in the City, his defence of his measures very able, and produced a great effect; he said he lately met Walpole, who told him he had the highest admiration of Gladstone, and thought he had more power than ever Peel had even at his highest tide.

DEFEATS OF THE GOVERNMENT.

_May 28th._--I have been so much occupied with the very dissimilar occupations of preparations for Epsom races in the shape of trials, betting, &c., and the finishing and correction of an article in the 'Edinburgh Review' on King Joseph's Memoirs, that I have had no leisure to think of politics, or to record what has been going on in the political world, nor in truth has much material been furnished either by domestic or foreign transactions. The last fortnight in Parliament has been going on much in the way in which the present Government always goes on, and Gladstone, whom I met at dinner the other day, repeated to me very much what Graham had said some time before, about their utter inability to carry their measures in the House of Commons. There is, however, one important exception to this rule, and that is one of vital importance. On everything which relates to the war, and on all questions of supply, they can do whatever they please, and have no difficulty, and encounter no opposition. Tom Baring's motion on Monday last exhibited a striking proof of this; he introduced it by an able speech, and he mustered all the support that could be got, and yet he was defeated by above 100. I met Disraeli in the street the next day, when he said, 'Your Government is very strong.' I said, the war which was supposed to be their weakness turns out to be their strength. They can carry everything which appertains to that, and nothing else. And so it is; no sooner do they get a great majority on some important question than they find themselves in a minority, perhaps more than one, on something else. John Russell got beaten on his Oaths Bill the other night, a victory which was hailed with uproarious delight by the Opposition, though leading to nothing, and only mortifying to John Russell personally. These defeats, however, do not fail to be morally injurious to the Government, and to shake their credit. It was an ill advised measure, which drew down upon itself those who are against the Jews and those who are against the Catholics. Palmerston has been showing ill humour in the House of Commons, and has ceased to be so very popular as he used to be there. They have great difficulty in getting on with the University Bill, and Gladstone told me the other night he was very doubtful if they should be able to bring it to a successful end. All the Tories and High Churchmen are against it of course, and the Dissenters regard it with no favour because it does not do for them what they desire; so it is left to the support of the friends of Government and those who sincerely desire a good measure of reform for those bodies.

_June 5th._--I was at Epsom all last week. In the beginning of it or the week before there was a great passage of arms in the House of Commons between John Russell and Disraeli, not a very creditable exhibition, but which excited greater interest than more important matters. Though Disraeli began the attack, Lord John threw the first stone of offence, which he had better have let alone. In reply to this Disraeli broke out with inconceivable violence and made the most furious assault upon John that he could, saying everything most offensive and provoking. Lord John made a rejoinder, and was followed by Bright, whose speech was very hostile and spiteful, and much more calculated to annoy Lord John than that of Disraeli, though much less vituperative. Disraeli seems inclined to have recourse to his old tactics against Peel, and to endeavour to treat John Russell, and Gladstone when he can, in the same way, hoping probably to re-ingratiate himself with his own side by giving them some of those invectives and sarcasms against their opponents which are so congenial to their tastes. This course will not raise him either in the House or in the country, and he will not find in Lord John a man either so sensitive or so vulnerable as Peel, and he can make out nothing against a man who refuses place, patronage, and emolument, and gives his gratuitous services at a great personal sacrifice because he thinks it his public duty to do so. There is nothing new in the condition of the Government; they are very firmly seated in their places, the House of Commons supporting them by large majorities in all their great measures and those which involve a question of confidence; but having no dependable majority on miscellaneous questions, nor even knowing whether they can carry any measure or not, it is idle to twit them with being a Government on sufferance and Lord John with not 'leading' the House of Commons. A revolution has taken place in the conditions of the political existence of governments in general and their relations with Parliament, and there is at present no likelihood that any government that can be formed will find itself in different circumstances, or that the old practice by which a government could command the House of Commons on almost everything will ever be restored. Whether the new system be better or worse than the old may be doubtful, but governments must make up their minds to conform to it for the present at least. In the course of the next few days the division of the Colonial from the War Department will take place. There seems little doubt that Newcastle will elect to take the War Department, and Clarendon told me yesterday he thought he would be the best man for it, warmly praising his energy, industry, and ability, and his popular and conciliatory qualities. Their great object is to prevail on Lord John to take the Colonial Office, which I expect he will eventually do, but not without much reluctance and hesitation. Granville tells me he is in a dissatisfied state of mind, in which he will probably long remain, especially as his _entourage_ will always do their best to foment his discontent.

THE PRESIDENCY OF THE COUNCIL.

_June 11th._--Yesterday and the day before the world was made acquainted with the recent arrangements and appointments, which have been received with considerable disapprobation.[1] Nobody can understand what it all means, and why John Russell, if he was to take office, was to insist on so strange an arrangement, and such a departure from the invariable practice of putting a peer in the office of President of the Council. Nothing can be more ungracious than the air of the whole proceeding: he turns out Granville to make room for himself, and turns out Strutt to make room for Granville. It seems that they wanted him to be Colonial Secretary, but this he would not hear of on the score of his health, and as it is now admitted as an axiom that the leader in the House of Commons has enough to do, and cannot efficiently discharge the duties of a laborious department, it was reasonable enough that Lord John should decline the Colonies; but there seems no sufficient reason for his not taking the Duchy of Lancaster, for the more completely the office is a sinecure, the more consistent his taking it would appear. However, he would be President of the Council or nothing. I have been amazed at his indelicacy and want of consideration towards Granville, who deserved better treatment at his hands. Granville has always been his steady and stout adherent, defending his Reform Bill, holding himself his especial follower in the Coalition Cabinet, and ready to support him or go out with him if necessary. It was therefore particularly odious to insist on foisting himself into Granville's place, and inflicting on him the mortification of going downstairs. Granville behaved very well about it, with great good humour, only anxious to do whatever was best for the general interest, and putting aside every personal consideration and feeling; and his conduct is the more meritorious, because he dislikes the arrangement of all things. Aberdeen behaved very kindly to him, and told him, if he objected to the change, he would not consent to it, and, cost what it might, would tell John Russell he could not and should not have the place. Granville proposed to go out, at least for a time, but Aberdeen said he could not spare him, and nothing could be more flattering than all he expressed of his usefulness in the House of Lords, and of the value of his services. Personally, therefore, he loses nothing; for though he preferred the Council Office to the Duchy, his conduct has raised him in everybody's estimation, and he will play a part even more prominent than he did before.

LORD JOHN RUSSELL'S POSITION.

One reason why Lord John should not have come to the Council Office was the embarrassment he will be sure to find himself in about questions of education, his reputation and his antecedents, as well as his political connexions, making him peculiarly unfit to be at the head of the Education Department; and I am inclined to agree with Vernon Smith, who said to me the other day that it would infallibly end in Lord John's bringing in next year an impracticable Education Bill and withdrawing it. George Grey's coming into office will be of use to the Government. Newcastle's being War Minister is sure to be attacked, and all the Palmerstonians are indignant that Palmerston is not in that place, which never was offered him, nor was he consulted about the arrangement. I think there is still a considerable opinion that he would make a good War Minister, though everybody is aware he makes a very bad Home one, and the _prestige_ about him and his popularity are greatly worn out. They have been obliged to go back to the reign of Henry VIII. to find a precedent for a commoner being President of the Council, when they say there was one, but I don't know who he was.

[Footnote 1: Lord John Russell insisted on taking the office of Lord President of the Council, which has always been held by a peer, and to effect this change Earl Granville was removed from the higher office of Lord President to that of Chancellor of the Duchy. The Right Honourable Edward Strutt, who had been Chancellor of the Duchy with a seat in the Cabinet, was dismissed from office, but he was subsequently raised to the peerage with the title of Lord Belper. This transaction reflected no credit on the author of it, who consulted nothing but his own dignity and convenience.]

_June 21st._--At St. Leonards last week for Ascot races, where I got wet, and have been ever since confined with the gout. The 'Times,' though by way of supporting the Government, went on violently attacking John Russell about the recent changes. Lord John was very well received in the City at his election, and at the opening of the Crystal Palace he was more cheered than anybody. This morning the Duke of Bedford came here and told me he had had a good deal of conversation with his brother about this business, to which he (the Duke) had been a stranger while it was going on. Lord John said that when the Government was formed he had proposed to Aberdeen that he should be President of the Council, but Aberdeen had objected on the score of its being so unusual, therefore he was only going back to his original design. He had an invincible repugnance to taking the Duchy of Lancaster or any inferior office. Both when the Government was formed and now, he would have much preferred to have kept aloof, and to have led in the House of Commons that section of the Whig party which would have followed him, but he found this impossible, and as the Government could not have been formed without him, and could not now go on without him, he was obliged to sacrifice his own inclination. I said I could not conceive why he could not go on as he was till the end of the session, and then settle it, that his pushing out Granville had a very ungracious appearance, and he would have done much better to take the sinecure office of the Duchy, it being quite absurd to suppose that he could be degraded by holding any office, no matter what. The Duke owned it would have been better to wait till Parliament was up before anything was done, and he regarded the question of the particular office much as I do.

There was a discussion in the House of Lords on Monday night on the war, when Lyndhurst made a grand speech, wonderful at his age--82; he spoke for an hour and a quarter with as much force and clearness as at any time of his life: it was greatly admired. Clarendon spoke well and strongly, and elicited expressions of satisfaction from Derby, after whom Aberdeen rose, and imprudently spoke in the sense of desiring peace, a speech which has been laid hold of, and drawn down upon him a renewal of the violent abuse with which he has been all along assailed. I see nothing in his speech to justify the clamour, but it was very ill judged in him with his antecedents to say what he did, which malignity could so easily lay hold of.

LORD JOHN RUSSELL VOTES WITH THE TORIES.

_June 25th._--There never was such a state of things as that which now exists between the Government, the Party, and the House of Commons. John Russell made such a hash of it last week, and put himself and his Government in such a position, that nothing but the war, and the impossibility which everybody feels there is of making any change of Government in the midst of it, prevents the immediate downfall of this Administration. Last week John Russell opposed the motion for the abolition of Church rates in a flaming High Tory and Church speech. The motion was rejected by a slender majority, but his speech gave great offence to the Liberal party and his own friends. Immediately afterwards came on the motion in the University Bill for admitting Dissenters to the University. This John Russell opposed again, although in his speech he declared he was in favour of the admission of Dissenters, but he objected to the motion on various grounds. The result was that he went into the lobby with Disraeli and the whole body of the Tories, while the whole of the Liberal party and all his own friends and supporters went against him and defeated him by a majority of 91. He took with him six or seven of his colleagues, and two or three of the underlings. Molesworth, Bernal Osborne, and some more stayed away, and some others voted in the majority. In the majority were found Christopher and a few Tories besides, who, however, only voted with the object and hope of damaging the bill itself and procuring its rejection in the House of Lords. Never was man placed in so deplorable and humiliating a position as John Russell, and nothing can exceed his folly and mismanagement in getting himself into such a scrape. The indignation and resentment of the Liberals are boundless, and I think he has completely put an extinguisher on himself as a statesman and as the leader of a party; they never will forgive him or feel any confidence in him again. There was a capital article on him and his proceedings in the 'Times' yesterday, which was not acrimonious, like some others on him, and was perfectly just and true.

The victorious Liberals managed their affairs very ill. Instead of resting satisfied with a victory which must have been decisive (for after all the House of Commons had affirmed the principle of admitting the Dissenters by so large a majority, neither the House of Lords nor the University would have ventured to oppose it), they imprudently pressed on another division[1] in which they were beaten, though by a small majority, and this of course does away with a good deal of the effect of the first division. Between the recent changes which were universally distasteful, and his extraordinary maladroitness in these questions, Lord John is fallen prodigiously in public favour and opinion, and while he is, or has been till very recently, dreaming of again being Prime Minister, it is evident that he is totally unfit to be the leader of the Government in the House of Commons even in a subordinate post. He communicates with nobody, he has no confidence in or sympathy with any one, he does not impart his intentions or his wishes to his own political followers, and does not ask to be informed of theirs, but he buries himself at Richmond and only comes forth to say and do everything that is most imprudent and unpopular.

The House of Commons is in a state of complete anarchy, and nobody has any hold on it; matters, bad enough through John Russell, are made worse by Aberdeen, whose speech the other night has made a great, but I think unnecessary clamour; and Layard, who is his bitter enemy, took it up in the House of Commons, and has given notice of a motion on it which is equivalent to a vote of censure. Almost at the same moment Aberdeen, with questionable prudence and dignity, gave notice in the Lords that on Monday he should explain the speech he made the other night. Layard's design can hardly be matured, because they never can permit a speech made in one House of Parliament to be made the subject of a motion and debate in the other. It is, however, incontestable that clamour and misrepresentation have succeeded in raising a vast prejudice against Aberdeen, and that he is exceedingly unpopular.

The people are wild about this war, and besides the general confidence that we are to obtain very signal success in our naval and military operations, there is a violent desire to force the Emperor to make a very humiliating peace, and a strong conviction that he will very soon be compelled to do so. This belief is the cause of the great rise which has been taking place in the public securities, and all sorts of stories are rife of the terror and dislike of the war which prevail in Russia, and of the agitation and melancholy in which the Emperor is said to be plunged. But the authentic accounts from St. Petersburg tell a very different tale. They say, and our Consul just arrived from St. Petersburg confirms the statement, that the Emperor is calm and resolute, that his popularity is very great, and the Russians of all classes enthusiastic in his cause, and that they are prepared to a man to sacrifice their properties and their lives in a vigorous prosecution of the war.

Footnote 1: It seems it was Mr. Walpole who insisted on the second division, which he did for the express purpose of neutralising the effect of the first, hoping to get a majority, which he did, and it was rather dexterously done.

UNPOPULARITY OF LORD ABERDEEN.

_July 9th._--It is remarkable that the Government are unquestionably stronger in the House of Lords than in the House of Commons, as has been clearly proved by the result of the Oxford University Bill. Derby endeavoured to alter it, and was completely defeated. There were several divisions, in all of which the Government obtained large majorities, and at last Derby said it was evidently useless to propose any alterations, as the Government could do what they pleased in that House. The session is drawing to a close; that is, though it will last a month longer, all important business is over. The Government will end it much in the same condition as they were in at the beginning of it, only that their weakness and want of popularity have been manifested in a thousand ways during the session. Aberdeen's explanatory speech and the publication of his despatch of 1829 have given rather a turn to the current against him; for though his violent opponents still snarl at him and abuse him, the impartial people begin to think he is not so bad as he has been represented, and the excessive absurdity of the charges with which he has been assailed begins to strike people. There is still, however, a strong prejudice against him, particularly amongst the extreme Liberals, and I saw a long letter from Sir Benjamin Hall to the Duke of Bedford setting forth the discontent of the Liberal party and vehemently urging that the Government should be immediately modified, Aberdeen retire, and Lord John Russell again be Minister, with Palmerston as War Minister--perfectly absurd and impracticable, but showing what the notions are of the ultra-Radicals. The Tories, agreeing in nothing else, concur with the Radicals in hating Aberdeen because he represents the Peel party, and is Minister as the successor of Sir Robert Peel, for whose memory their hatred is as intense as it was for his person when he was alive. The war goes on without any immediate results, and without, as far as can be seen, a probability of the attainment of any signal or important successes. The foolish public here, always extravagant and impatient, clamour for attacks upon Sebastopol and Cronstadt, and are very indignant that these places are not taken, without knowing anything of the feasibility of such operations. We now begin to believe that Austria is going to side actively with us, but we do not feel certain of it, nor shall we till she actually enters on the campaign.

_July 19th._--Within a few days everything is changed. In respect to Austria, the intrigues of Russia with Prussia, and the determination of the King to do everything that he can or that he dares to assist his imperial brother-in-law, have had the effect of paralysing the Austrian movements, and suspending the operation of her Treaty with Turkey. She cannot venture to declare war against Russia and to march her army into the Principalities while there is a large Russian force on the borders of Galicia, and the Prussians are in such an ambiguous attitude and disposition, that she can not only not depend upon Prussia to execute their defensive Treaty by protecting her dominions in the event of their being attacked by Russia, but she cannot depend upon not being taken in flank by Prussia as the ally of Russia. Clarendon told me on Sunday that it was impossible to make out what Austria was about, or what she really means to do. There is no doubt about Prussia, and he still inclines to believe that Austria's disposition to act with us is unchanged, but that she is compelled to act a cautious and dilatory part by her uncertainty as to Prussia.

On Monday John Russell convoked his supporters and quasi-supporters to a gathering in Downing Street, when he harangued them on the state of affairs and the difficulties of the Government, intimating the necessity of being better supported if the Government was to go on at all. There are differences of opinion as to the way in which the meeting went off, and whether it was on the whole satisfactory. The principal speakers were Bright, Vernon Smith, and Horsman, the two latter bitter enough against the Government. Bright, rather hostile, spoke well and alluded to Aberdeen in a friendly spirit, as did Hume. The meeting gradually melted away, so that Lord John had no opportunity of making a reply, which was a pity, as he might have answered the objectors. The best proof, however, that on the whole it was successful, was afforded by the fact that there was neither debate nor division on the War Secretary's estimate moved for by Lord John that night. All went off with the greatest ease. I am in hopes therefore that the Government is somewhat in better plight than it was.

AN APPOINTMENT CANCELLED.

_August 4th._--I have been out of town for the greater part of the time since the 19th ultimo, at Goodwood, nearly ten days. Nothing very important has occurred in politics. As the session has drawn towards a close, the Government have, on the whole, done rather better in Parliament, that is, the Opposition have been quite incapable of striking any blows or doing them any injury. The points that were expected to be made against them entirely failed, and, with the exception of one personal matter, they have had no difficulties or annoyances to vex them. This matter was the case of----, the _dénouement_ of which took place two days ago; after being Gladstone's private secretary for two years, this gentleman was appointed by Newcastle, just before he gave up the Colonies, to be Governor of South Australia. The appointment was criticised, but about ten days ago it was called in question in the House of Commons, and at the same time rumours were rife that he had been gambling in the funds and had lost money; he denied, and authorised his friends to deny the imputation, but some of the Carlton runners got scent of his transactions and followed it up with such perseverance that he became alarmed and thought himself obliged to prevent the shame and odium of detection by confessing the fact. The consequence was that the appointment was cancelled, and the whole matter explained and discussed on Thursday night in the House of Commons, when George Grey made a long statement. The discussion upon it was very creditable to the House, for there was no personal animosity and no coarseness or inhumanity displayed, but, on the contrary, forbearance and good nature towards the individual. Any expectation of being able to wound Gladstone through him has quite failed. He is a clever fellow enough and well educated, but he has been very imprudent, and contrived at once to lose his place of private secretary, his government, his seat in Parliament, his character, and his money.

At last it does now appear as if Austria was going to join us completely against Russia, and the invasion of the Crimea is about to take place in complete ignorance of the means of resistance and defence possessed by Russia, and whether it will be a nearly impossible or comparatively easy enterprise.

Clarendon, when I saw him last Sunday, expressed great alarm at the state of affairs in Spain, from the weakness of Espartero, the difficulty of any cordial union between the military chiefs, so long rivals, and above all from the republican element which is so rife in Spain, and which may produce effects extending far beyond that country. He said that the French Government were acting in complete harmony and concert with us; the Emperor is much alarmed at the state of Spain, but resolved to go with us in the policy of non-interference, and to take no part but such as we should take also. If he adheres to this wise course, it will cement the alliance between the countries, and bind us to him more than anything that could happen, and it will form a great and happy contrast to the policy of Louis Philippe and the conduct of Palmerston and Guizot.

PARLIAMENTARY GOVERNMENT.

_August 14th._--The session closed on Saturday, and, all things considered, the Government wound it up tolerably well. Clanricarde, true to the last to his spiteful opposition, gave Clarendon an opportunity of making a parting speech on foreign affairs, of which he acquitted himself very successfully, and placed himself and the Government in a very good position as respects our diplomacy and the conduct of the war. But though all immediate danger is removed from the Government, and, unless they fall to pieces during the recess by any internal dissensions, they will probably go on unscathed, the state of affairs is very unsatisfactory, and pregnant with future troubles and difficulties. The Government in its relations with the House of Commons throughout the past session has been extraordinary, and I believe unprecedented. From the Revolution to the time of the Reform Bill, that is during 150 years, the system of Parliamentary government had been consolidating itself and was practically established; the Sovereign nominally, the House of Commons really, appointed the ministers of the Crown, and it was settled as an axiom that when the Government was unable to carry its measures, and was subjected to defeats in the House of Commons, its resignation was indispensable--not indeed that any and every defeat was necessarily fatal, because governments have often been beaten on very important questions without being ruined or materially weakened, but it was supposed that repeated defeats and Government measures repeatedly rejected implied the withdrawal of the confidence and support of Parliament so clearly that in the aggregate such defeats were equivalent to an absolute vote of want of confidence, which is in itself a sentence of political death. In former times the Crown was a power, and the House of Commons was a power, generally blended and acting harmoniously together, but sometimes resolving themselves into their separate elements, and acting independently, perhaps antagonistically, towards each other. In modern times, and more entirely in our own, this separate and independent action ceased, the Crown became identified with the majority of the House of Commons, and no minister, when he could no longer command that majority so as to be certain of carrying out all, or nearly all, his measures of government and legislation, could continue to be minister, and was obliged as a matter of course to surrender office to those who were in possession of, or could count upon, that command. The ministers were taken from the ranks of the Parliamentary majority, and when once appointed it was considered indispensable and certain that the same majority would place confidence in them, accept at their hands all the measures they should concert and propose, and support them against all hostile attacks, the spirit of party and combination suppressing all individual prejudices, crotchets, fancies, and partial or local influences. The Government and the party were bound by a sort of mutual allegiance to each other, and supposed to be, and usually were, animated by the same spirit and a communion of opinion and interest. Such were the general relations and such the normal state of things, liable to occasional variations and disturbances, bringing about various political changes according to circumstances. But the system was complete, and practically it worked well, and conduced to the prosperity and progress of the country.

REVIEW OF PARTIES.

When the great measure of Reform in Parliament was introduced in 1831, apart from all question of party struggles there was the still greater question considered by many reflecting people, whether the new Parliamentary and electoral system would be found compatible with the old practice of government by means of party and steady Parliamentary majorities. The Duke of Wellington in particular expressed his apprehension that it would not, and he put the question which has so often been quoted and referred to, 'How is the King's Government to be carried on?' He did not, so far as I remember, develope his thoughts at the time, and argue the matter in detail, but it is very evident that what he anticipated was some such state of things as that at which we now appear to have arrived. For a long time his apprehensions appeared to be groundless, and certainly they were not realised by the course of events. In consequence of political circumstances which I shall not stop to specify and explain, notwithstanding all the changes which were effected, the governments contrived to go on without any insuperable difficulties, and without any striking difference from the way in which governments had been previously conducted. The popularity of the Reform Bill Administration supported them for a few years, and the Tory reaction, together with the great abilities of Sir Robert Peel, supported the Conservative Government for a few years more. Matters went on better or worse, as might be, till the great Conservative schism in 1846, which completely broke up that party, and produced a final separation between the able few and the numerous mediocrity of the party. Ever since that time the House of Commons has been in a state of disorganisation and confusion: the great party ties had been severed. After the repeal of the Corn Laws and the establishment of Free Trade it was difficult to find any great party principles which could be converted into bonds of union, and every day it became obviously more and more difficult to form any government that could hope to be strong or permanent. John Russell succeeded on the fall of Peel, but the Peelites warmly resented the conduct of the Whigs in Peel's last struggle, and, though they hated Derby and his crew much more, never gave Lord John's Government a cordial support.

Next came the quarrel between Palmerston and Lord John and the fall of the Whig Government. Many people, and Graham especially, were of opinion that a Derby Government _for a time_ was an inevitable but indispensable evil, and after one abortive attempt at length a Derby Government was formed. From the beginning nobody thought it could last; the wretched composition of it, its false position, and the mixture of inconsistency and insincerity which characterised it, deprived it of all respect, authority, and influence, and it was the more weak because divided and dissatisfied within, and because all the more honest and truthful of the party were disgusted and ashamed of the part they were playing. Thus feeble and powerless, despised by the public and detested by the Court, the first moment that the different parties and sections of parties combined to overthrow them, their destruction was inevitable, and after enjoying office for one year they fell.

It was easier to turn them out than to find a good and strong government to replace them. It was obvious that neither the Whigs nor the Peelites could form a government, still less Palmerston or the Radicals, and it became a matter of absolute necessity to attempt a coalition, which, whatever objections there might be to coalitions, would at least have the advantage of filling the several offices with able men.

When the Queen had a short time before, in anticipation of the event, consulted the Duke of Bedford as to whom she should send for when Derby resigned, he had advised her to send for Lord Lansdowne and Lord Aberdeen, being himself conscious that Lord John could not again form a government, at least not at that time. She did send for them, and each of them very sincerely and earnestly endeavoured to persuade the other to accept the post of Prime Minister, and the task of forming a Government. Lansdowne was ill at the time, and while it is very doubtful whether anything would have induced him to come forward, his attack of gout was enough to ensure his peremptory refusal, and nothing remained but that Aberdeen should make the attempt. The task was difficult and unpleasant, for it was impossible not to make many people discontented and mortified, inasmuch as places could not be found for all who had previously been in office, or who aspired to it, and it was no easy matter to decide who should be taken in, and who left out. Aberdeen resolved to make the coalition very comprehensive, and as much as possible to form a government which should represent the Opposition which had turned Derby out, but he put almost all the Peelite leaders into good offices, and the exclusions were principally on the Whig side. For a long time it was very doubtful whether John Russell would enter the Government at all, but Aberdeen was so well aware that he could not do without him that he announced his determination to throw up the Government unless Lord John consented to join. After much hesitation, and a struggle between his family and some malcontent hangers on who wished him to keep aloof, on one side, and the wisest of his political friends and colleagues who urged that it was his duty to come forward on the other, Lord John consented to lead the House of Commons, but without an office. He proposed indeed to take the Presidency of the Council, to which Aberdeen objected, but gave him the choice of every other office. He said that if he could not be President of the Council he would be nothing at all, and so it was settled. Next came the negotiation about Palmerston, who first refused, and afterwards, at the pressing solicitation of Lansdowne, agreed to join. Molesworth came in to represent the Radicals; Monsell and Keogh (not in the Cabinet) represented the Irish, and so the Coalition Government was completed.

THE COALITION GOVERNMENT.

Very strongly composed, it never, however, was so strong as it looked. The Ministers, Aberdeen, John Russell, Palmerston, having consented to act together, were too sensible, too gentlemanlike and well-bred, not to live in outward good fellowship with each other, but their respective and relative antecedents could not be forgotten. There could be no real cordiality between Palmerston and Aberdeen, or between Palmerston and John Russell, and both the latter all along felt uncomfortable and dissatisfied with their respective positions. Lord John fancied he was degraded, and his flatterers endeavoured to persuade him he was so, by joining a government of which he was not the head, and by serving under Aberdeen. Palmerston could not forget the long and bitter hostility which had been carried on between himself and Aberdeen upon foreign policy, and still less his having been turned out of the Foreign Office by John Russell. The Whigs were dissatisfied that the Peelites, who had no party to bring to the support of the Government, should have so large a share of the offices, and above all the great bulk of the Whig party could not endure that a Peelite should be at the head of the Government, and of all the Peelites they most particularly disliked Aberdeen, so that they yielded a reluctant allegiance, and gave a grudging and capricious support to the coalition.

Nevertheless, the first session of Parliament was pretty well got through, principally owing to Gladstone's successful Budget, the great ability he displayed in the House of Commons, and the efficient way in which the public business was done, while the numerous measures of improvement which were accomplished raised the reputation of the Government, and gave them security if not strength. The session of 1853 closed in quiet, prosperity, and sunshine, but during the recess clouds began to gather round the Government; they were beset with internal and external difficulties. John Russell became more and more discontented, and at last he announced to Aberdeen that he was resolved not to meet Parliament again in his present position, and intimated his intention to be once more Prime Minister or to quit the concern. In the meantime the Turco-Russian quarrel had begun, the hostile correspondence with Russia was in full activity, the public mind in a high state of excitement, the press bellowed for war and poured forth incessant volleys of abuse against the Government, but more particularly against Aberdeen, who was singled out as the object of attack, and the persevering attempts to render him unpopular produced a certain amount of effect. The Cabinet became divided as to the mode of carrying on the dispute and the negotiations, some being for what were called vigorous measures, that is, for threats and demonstrations of force which could only lead to immediate war, while others were for exhausting every attempt to bring about an accommodation and preserve peace. Something was known or suspected of these divisions, they were published and commented on with enormous exaggerations and the most unscrupulous violations of truth, and the Tory and Radical newspapers vied with each other in the violence of their denunciations of Aberdeen, and, in a less degree, of Clarendon.

When this fury was at its height, the world was startled and astounded by the news of Palmerston's resignation. It is needless to state here the history of that affair, which I have already recorded in ample detail. It was in vain that the 'Times' proclaimed that it was the Reform Bill and not the Eastern Question which was the cause of it. The statement was scouted with the utmost scorn, and the public incredulity was confirmed when the 'Morning Post,' which was notoriously devoted to Palmerston, asserted the direct contrary. Everybody imagined that the Government would go to pieces, that when Parliament met there would be prodigious revelations, and that the Eastern Question with its supposed mismanagement would prove fatal to the Coalition Cabinet. The Derbyites were in raptures, and already counted on Palmerston as their own. Great as had been the public surprise and the exultation of the Carlton Club at Palmerston's resignation, greater still was that surprise and the mortification and disappointment of the Carlton, when a few days afterwards it was announced that Palmerston had changed his mind and was not going to resign. Nobody could comprehend what it all meant, and ample scope was afforded to every sort of conjecture, and to all the statements and inventions that anybody chose to circulate. But as about the same time the Eastern affair progressed a step or two, and some energetic measures were adopted, the most plausible explanation was, that Palmerston had resigned because enough was not done, that the Government had been frightened into doing what he had before advised, and that, on their adopting his suggestion, he had consented to remain. In process of time the truth began to ooze out, but it never was completely known till Parliament met, and even then many people continued to believe that though the Reform Bill was the pretext, the Eastern Question was the real cause of Palmerston's conduct.

THE BLUE BOOKS.

These threatening clouds cleared away. Aberdeen told Lord John nothing should induce him to resign after all the attacks that had been made on him, and he would meet Parliament and defend himself. Lord John gave up his demands, and consented to go on leading the House of Commons. Palmerston agreed to swallow the Reform Bill, and at length Parliament met. Everybody was ravenous for the Blue Books, which as soon as possible were produced. Their production was eminently serviceable to the Government, and though some criticisms were made, and there were some desultory attacks in both Houses, and the press continued to be as scurrilous and abusive as ever, the general impression was extremely favourable. Clarendon's despatches were highly approved of, and all fair and candid observers, including many who had found fault with the Government before, declared that they were perfectly satisfied that our policy had been wise and proper, and the whole of the negotiations very creditable to all who had been concerned in carrying them on. So little did the event correspond with the general expectation, that the Eastern Question, which had been considered to be the weak part of the Government, turned out to be its greatest strength; and the war which eventually broke out has been the principal cause of their being able to maintain themselves in power. It is now the fashion to say that if it were not for the war, they would have been turned out long ago. It is certainly true that their power in the House of Commons has been limited to all that concerns the war, in respect to which they have had no difficulty to contend with. The estimates have been granted without a semblance of opposition, and they have received hearty and unanimous support in every measure and every demand requisite for carrying on the war, nor, though exposed to some adverse criticism, have they been seriously assailed with regard to their diplomacy or their warlike preparations.

But while this, which is the most essential, has also been their strongest point, on everything else, without exception, they have been almost powerless, and the House of Commons has run riot with an independence and waywardness and a caprice of which it would be impossible to find an example. The Government has had no majority on which it could depend, and it has never brought forward any measure which it could count upon carrying through. Obliged to withdraw many measures altogether, and to submit to the alteration of others till they became totally different from what they originally proposed, their defeats have been innumerable, and nobody seems to have the smallest scruple in putting them in a minority upon any occasion; at the same time it was very evident that the House of Commons was determined that they should continue in office, for whenever any vital question arose, or any vote which could be construed into a question of confidence, and therefore involved the existence of the Government, they were always sure of a majority, and the Derbyite opposition, while they were able to worry and insult them by partial defeats and by exposing their general weakness, found themselves miserably baffled whenever they attempted anything which had a tendency to place the Government in serious embarrassment. The whole conduct of the Session, and the relations of the Government with the House of Commons, presented something certainly very different from what had ever been seen before in the memory of the oldest statesman, implied a total dissolution of party ties and obligations, and exhibited the Queen's Government and the House of Commons as resolved into their separate elements, and acting towards each other in independent and often antagonistic capacities. Disraeli was always reproaching the Government with holding office on what he termed the unconstitutional principle of not being supported by a majority of the House of Commons, and of living from hand to mouth; but though this was a plausible topic, he knew very well that no other government could be formed which could exist otherwise, and that the House of Commons, while it buffeted the Government about _au gré de ses caprices_, was quite determined to keep it alive, and not to allow any other to be substituted for it. At present it is difficult to see how this state of things is to be altered, and time alone can show whether great parties will again be formed, and governments be enabled to go on as in times past, powerful in a consistent and continual Parliamentary support, or whether a great change must be submitted to, and governments be content to drag on a precarious existence, taking what they can get from the House of Commons, and endeavouring to strengthen themselves by enlisting public opinion on their side.

PRECARIOUS TENURE OF THE MINISTRY.

With regard to the prospects of this Government, much depends on the progress of the war; for though they have done their part and are not responsible for failure or success, they are sure to be strengthened by success or weakened by failure. But much depends also upon what passes in the Cabinet. John Russell, whose mind is in a state of chronic discontent which was suspended for a time, is again becoming uneasy and restless, and will soon begin making fresh difficulties. Then his Reform Bill, which he gave up so reluctantly, is still in his thoughts, and he will most likely insist upon bringing it forward again, a proposition which is sure to produce dissension in the Cabinet.