ENTERS PARLIAMENT
1882-1846
(1832-1834)
I may speak of the House of Commons
as a school of discipline for those who enter
it. In my opinion it is a school of extraordinary
power and efficacy. It is a great and noble
school for the creation of all the qualities
of force, suppleness, and versatility of intellect.
And it is also a great moral school. It is a school
of temper. It is also a school of patience.
It is a school of honour, and it is a school
of justice. GLADSTONE (1878).
FOREIGN
TRAVEL
Leaving home in the latter part of
January (1832), with a Wordsworth for a pocket companion,
Mr. Gladstone made his way to Oxford, where he laboured
through his packing, settled accounts, ’heard
a very able sermon indeed from Newman at St. Mary’s,’
took his bachelor’s degree (Jan 26), and after
a day or two with relatives and friends in London,
left England along with his brother John at the beginning
of February. He did not return until the end
of July. He visited Brussels, Paris, Florence,
Naples, Rome, Venice, and Milan. Of this long
journey he kept a full record, and it contains one
entry of no small moment in his mental history.
A conception now began to possess him, that according
to one religious school kindled a saving illumination,
and according to another threw something of a shade
upon his future path. In either view it marked
a change of spiritual course, a transformation not
of religion as the centre of his being, for that it
always was, but of the frame and mould within which
religion was to expand.
In entering St. Peter’s at Rome
(March 31, 1832) he experienced his ‘first conception
of unity in the Church,’ and first longed for
its visible attainment. Here he felt ’the
pain and shame of the schism which separates us from
Rome whose guilt surely rests not upon the
venerable fathers of the English Reformed Church but
upon Rome itself, yet whose melancholy effects the
mind is doomed to feel when you enter this magnificent
temple and behold in its walls the images of Christian
saints and the words of everlasting truth; yet such
is the mass of intervening encumbrances that you scarcely
own, and can yet more scantily realise, any bond of
sympathy or union.’ This was no fleeting
impression of a traveller. It had been preceded
by a disenchantment, for he had made his way from
Turin to Pinerol, and seen one of the Vaudois valleys.
He had framed a lofty conception of the people as ideal
Christians, and he underwent a chill of disappointment
on finding them apparently much like other men.
Even the pastor, though a quiet, inoffensive man,
gave no sign of energy or of what would have been
called in England vital religion. With this chill
at his heart he came upon the atmosphere of gorgeous
Rome. It was, however, in the words of Clough’s
fine line from Easter Day, ’through the
great sinful streets of Naples as he passed,’
that a great mutation overtook him.
One Sunday (May 13) something, I know
not what, set me on examining the occasional
offices of the church in the prayer book. They
made a strong impression upon me on that very
day, and the impression has never been effaced.
I had previously taken a great deal of teaching
direct from the Bible, as best I could, but now the
figure of the Church arose before me as a teacher
too, and I gradually found in how incomplete
and fragmentary a manner I had drawn divine truth
from the sacred volume, as indeed I had also missed
in the thirty-nine articles some things which
ought to have taught me better. Such, for
I believe that I have given the fact as it occurred,
in its silence and its solitude, was my first introduction
to the august conception of the Church of Christ.
It presented to me Christianity under an aspect
in which I had not yet known it: its ministry
of symbols, its channels of grace, its unending
line of teachers joining from the Head: a sublime
construction, based throughout upon historic fact,
uplifting the idea of the community in which
we live, and of the access which it enjoys through
the new and living way to the presence of the Most
High. From this time I began to feel my way
by decrees into or towards a true notion of the
Church. It became a definite and organised
idea when, at the suggestion of James Hope, I read
the just published and remarkable work of Palmer.
But the charm of freshness lay upon that first
disclosure of 1832.
This mighty question: what
is the nature of a church and what the duties, titles,
and symbols of faithful membership, which in divers
forms had shaken the world for so many ages and now
first dawned upon his ardent mind, was the germ of
a deep and lasting pre-occupation of which we shall
speedily and without cessation find abundant traces.
II
OFFER OF
A SEAT
A few weeks later, the great rival
interest in Mr. Gladstone’s life, if rival we
may call it, was forced into startling prominence before
him. At Milan he received a letter from Lord
Lincoln, saying that he was commissioned by his father,
the Duke of Newcastle, to inform him that his influence
in the borough of Newark was at Mr. Gladstone’s
disposal if he should be ready to enter parliamentary
life. This was the fruit of his famous anti-reform
speech at the Oxford Union. No wonder that such
an offer made him giddy. ‘This stunning
and overpowering proposal,’ he says to his father
(July 8), ’naturally left me the whole of the
evening on which I received it, in a flutter of confusion.
Since that evening there has been time to reflect,
and to see that it is not of so intoxicating a character
as it seemed at first. First, because the Duke
of Newcastle’s offer must have been made at the
instance of a single person (Lincoln), that person
young and sanguine, and I may say in such a matter
partial.... This much at least became clear to
me by the time I had recovered my breath: that
decidedly more than mere permission from my dear father
would be necessary to authorise my entering on the
consideration of particulars at all.’ And
then he falls into a vein of devout reflection, almost
as if this sudden destination of his life were some
irrevocable priesthood or vow of monastic profession,
and not the mere stringent secularity of labour in
a parliament. It would be thin and narrow to
count all this an overstrain. To a nature like
his, of such eager strength of equipment; conscious
of life as a battle and not a parade; apt for all
external action yet with a burning glow of light and
fire in the internal spirit; resolute from the first
in small things and in great against aimless drift
and eddy, to such an one the moment of
fixing alike the goal and the track may well have been
grave.
Then points of doubt arose. ’It
is, I daresay, in your recollection,’ this
to his father, ’that at the time when
Mr. Canning came to power, the Duke of Newcastle,
in the House of Lords, declared him the most profligate
minister the country had ever had. Now it struck
me to inquire of myself, does the duke know the feelings
I happen to entertain towards Mr. Canning? Does
he know, or can he have had in his mind, my father’s
connection with Mr. Canning?’ The duke had in
fact been one of the busiest and bitterest of Canning’s
enemies, and had afterwards in the same spirit striven
with might and main to keep Huskisson out of the Wellington
cabinet. Another awkwardness appeared. The
duke had offered a handsome contribution towards expenses.
Would not this tend to abridge the member’s
independence? What was the footing on which patron
and member were to stand? Mr. Gladstone was informed
by his brother that the duke had neither heretofore
asked for pledges, nor now demanded them.
After a very brief correspondence
with his shrewd and generous father, the plunge was
taken, and on his return to England, after a fortnight
spent ’in an amphibious state between that of
a candidate and [Greek: idiotes] or private person,’
he issued his address to the electors of Newark (August
4, 1832). He did not go actually on to the ground
until the end of September. The intervening weeks
he spent with his family at Torquay, where he varied
electioneering correspondence and yachting with plenty
of sufficiently serious reading from Blackstone and
Plato and the Excursion down to Corinne.
One Sunday morning (September 23), his father burst
into his bedroom, with the news that his presence was
urgently needed at Newark. ’I rose, dressed,
and breakfasted speedily, with infinite disgust.
I left Torquay at 83/4 and devoted my Sunday to the
journey. Was I right?... My father drove
me to Newton; chaise to Exeter. There near an
hour; went to the cathedral and heard a part of the
prayers. Mail to London. Conversation with
a tory countryman who got in for a few miles, on Sunday
travelling, which we agreed in disapproving.
Gave him some tracts. Excellent mail. Dined
at Yeovil; read a little of the Christian Year
[published 1827]. At 61/2 A.M. arrived at Piccadilly,
181/2 hours from Exeter. Went to Fetter Lane,
washed and breakfasted, and came off at 8 o’clock
by a High Flyer for Newark. The sun hovered red
and cold through the heavy fog of London sky, but in
the country the day was fine. Tea at Stamford;
arrived at Newark at midnight.’ Such in
forty hours was the first of Mr. Gladstone’s
countless political pilgrimages.
His two election addresses are a curious
starting-point for so memorable a journey. Thrown
into the form of a modern programme, the points are
these: union of church and state, the defence
in particular of our Irish establishments; correction
of the poor laws; allotment of cottage grounds; adequate
remuneration of labour; a system of Christian instruction
for the West Indian slaves, but no emancipation until
that instruction had fitted them for it; a dignified
and impartial foreign policy. The duke was much
startled by the passage about labour receiving adequate
remuneration, ’which unhappily among several
classes of our fellow countrymen is not now the case.’
He did not, however, interfere. The whig newspaper
said roundly of the first of Mr. Gladstone’s
two addresses, that a more jumbled collection of words
had seldom been sent from the press. The tory
paper, on the contrary, congratulated the constituency
on a candidate of considerable commercial experience
and talent. The anti-slavery men fought him stoutly.
They put his name into their black schedule with nine-and-twenty
other candidates, they harried him with posers from
a pamphlet of his father’s, and they met his
doctrine that if slavery were sinful the Bible would
not have commended the regulation of it, by bluntly
asking him on the hustings whether he knew a text
in Exodus declaring that ’he that stealeth a
man and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand,
he shall surely be put to death.’ His father’s
pamphlets undoubtedly exposed a good deal of surface.
We cannot be surprised that any adherent of these standard
sophistries should be placed on the black list of the
zealous soldiers of humanity. The candidate held
to the ground he had taken at Oxford and in his election
address, and apparently made converts. He had
an interview with forty voters of abolitionist complexion
at his hotel, and according to the friendly narrative
of his brother, who was present, ’he shone not
only in his powers of conversation, but by the tact,
quickness, and talent with which he made his replies,
to the thorough and complete satisfaction of baptists,
wesleyan methodists, and I may say even, of almost
every religious sect! Not one refused their vote:
they came forward, and enrolled their names, though
before, I believe, they never supported any one on
the duke’s interest!’
ISSUES ADDRESS
AT NEWARK
The humours of an election of the
ancient sort are a very old story, and Newark had
its full share of them. The register contained
rather under sixteen hundred voters on a scot and
lot qualification, to elect a couple of members.
The principal influence over about one quarter of
them was exercised by the Duke of Newcastle, who three
years before had punished the whigs of the borough
for the outrage of voting against his nominee, by
serving, in concert with another proprietor, forty
of them with notice to quit. Then the trodden
worm turned. The notices were framed, affixed
to poles, and carried with bands of music through the
streets. Even the audacity of a petition to parliament
was projected. The duke, whose chief fault was
not to know that time had brought him into a novel
age, defended himself with the haughty truism, then
just ceasing to be true, that he had a right to do
as he liked with his own. This clear-cut enunciation
of a vanishing principle became a sort of landmark,
and gave to his name an unpleasing immortality in our
political history. In the high tide of agitation
for reform the whigs gave the duke a beating, and
brought their man to the top of the poll, a tory being
his colleague. Handley, the tory, on our present
occasion seemed safe, and the fight lay between Mr.
Gladstone and Sergeant Wilde, the sitting whig, a
lawyer of merit and eminence, who eighteen years later
went to the woolsack as Lord Truro. Reform at
Newark was already on the ebb. Mr. Gladstone,
though mocked as a mere schoolboy, and fiercely assailed
as a slavery man, exhibited from the first hour of
the fight tremendous gifts of speech and skill of
fence. His Red club worked valiantly; the sergeant
did not play his cards skilfully; and pretty early
in the long struggle it was felt that the duke would
this time come into his own again. The young
student soon showed that his double first class, his
love of books, his religious preoccupations, had not
unfitted him by a single jot for one of the most arduous
of all forms of the battle of life. He proved
a diligent and prepossessing canvasser, an untiring
combatant, and of course the readiest and most fluent
of speakers. Wilde after hearing him said sententiously
to one of his own supporters, ‘There is a great
future before this young man.’ The rather
rotten borough became suffused with the radiant atmosphere
of Olympus. The ladies presented their hero with
a banner of red silk, and an address expressive of
their conviction that the good old Red cause was the
salvation of their ancient borough. The young
candidate in reply speedily put it in far more glowing
colours. It was no trivial banner of a party
club, it was the red flag of England that he saw before
him, the symbol of national moderation and national
power, under which, when every throne on the continent
had crumbled into dust beneath the tyrannous strength
of France, mankind had found sure refuge and triumphant
hope, and the blast that tore every other ensign to
tatters served only to unfold their own and display
its beauty and its glory. Amid these oratorical
splendours the old hands of the club silently supplemented
eloquence and argument by darker agencies, of which
happily the candidate knew little until after.
There was a red band and each musician received fifteen
shillings a day, there happening accidentally to be
among them no fewer than ten patriotic red plumpers.
Large tea-parties attracted red ladies. The inns
great and small were thrown joyously open on one side
or other, and when the time came, our national heroes
from Robin Hood to Lord Nelson and the Duke of Wellington,
as well as half the animal kingdom, the swan and salmon,
horses, bulls, boars, lions, and eagles, of all the
colours of the rainbow and in every kind of strange
partnership, sent in bills for meat and liquor supplied
to free and independent electors to the tune of a
couple of thousand pounds. Apart from these black
arts, and apart from the duke’s interest, there
was a good force of the staunch and honest type, the
life-blood of electioneering and the salvation of party
government, who cried stoutly, ’I was born Red,
I live Red, and I will die Red.’ ‘We
started on the canvass,’ says one who was with
Mr. Gladstone, ’at eight in the morning and
worked at it for about nine hours, with a great crowd,
band and flags, and innumerable glasses of beer and
wine all jumbled together; then a dinner of 30 or 40,
with speeches and songs until say ten o’clock;
then he always played a rubber of whist, and about
twelve or one I got to bed and not to sleep.’
HUMOURS OF AN
OLD ELECTION
At length the end came. At the
nomination the show of hands was against the reds,
but when the poll was taken and closed on the second
day, Gladstone appeared at the head of it with 887
votes, against 798 for his colleague Handley, and
726 for the fallen Wilde. ‘Yesterday’
(Dec 13, 1832), he tells his father, ’we went
to the town hall at 9 A.M., when the mayor cast up
the numbers and declared the poll. While he was
doing this the popular wrath vented itself for the
most part upon Handley.... The sergeant obtained
me a hearing, and I spoke for perhaps an hour or more,
but it was flat work, as they were no more than patient,
and agreed with but little that I said. The sergeant
then spoke for an hour and a half.... He went
into matters connected with his own adieu to Newark,
besought the people most energetically to bear with
their disappointment like men, and expressed his farewell
with great depth of feeling. Affected to tears
himself, he affected others also. In the evening
near fifty dined here [Clinton Arms] and the utmost
enthusiasm was manifested.’ The new member
began his first speech as a member of parliament as
follows:
Gentlemen: In looking forward
to the field which is now opened before me, I
cannot but conceive that I shall often be reproached
with being not your representative but the representative
of the Duke of Newcastle. Now I should rather
incline to exaggerate than to extenuate such
connection as does exist between me and that nobleman:
and for my part should have no reluctance to see every
sentiment which ever passed between us, whether
by letter or by word of mouth, exposed to the
view of the world. I met the Duke of Newcastle
upon the broad ground of public principle, and upon
that ground alone. I own no other bond of
union with him than this, that he in his exalted
sphere, and I in my humble one, entertained the same
persuasion, that the institutions of this country are
to be defended against those who threaten their
destruction, at all hazards, and to all extremities.
Why do you return me to parliament? Not
because I am the Duke of Newcastle’s man, simply:
but because, coinciding with the duke in political
sentiment, you likewise admit that one possessing
so large a property here, and faithfully discharging
the duties which the possession of that property
entails, ought in the natural course of things to exercise
a certain influence. You return me to parliament,
not merely because I am the Duke of Newcastle’s
man: but because both the man whom the duke
has sent, and the duke himself, are your men.
RETURNED FOR
NEWARK
The election was of course pointed
to by rejoicing conservatives as a proof the more
of that reaction which the ministerial and radical
press was audacious enough to laugh at. This
borough, says the local journalist, was led away by
the bubble reform, to support those who by specious
and showy qualification had dazzled their eyes; delusion
had vanished, shadows satisfied no longer, Newark
was restored to its high place in the esteem of the
friends of order and good government. Of course
the intimates of the days of his youth were delighted.
We want such a man as Gladstone, wrote Hallam to Gaskell
(October 1, 1832); ’in some things he is likely
to be obstinate and prejudiced; but he has a fine
fund of high chivalrous tory sentiment, and a tongue,
moreover, to let it loose with. I think he may
do a great deal.’
In the course of his three months
of sojourn at Newark Mr. Gladstone paid his first
visit to the great man at Clumber.
The duke received me, he tells his
father, with the greatest kindness, and conversed
with such ease and familiarity of manner as speedily
to dispel a certain degree of awe which I had previously
entertained, and to throw me perhaps more off
my guard than I ought to have been in company
with a man of his age and rank.... The utmost
regularity and subordination appears to prevail in
the family, and no doubt it is in many respects
a good specimen of the old English style.
He is apparently a most affectionate father, but still
the sons and daughters are under a certain degree of
restraint in his presence.... A man, be his
station of life what it may, more entirely divested
of personal pride and arrogance, more single-minded
and disinterested in his views, or more courageous
and resolute in determination to adhere to them
as the dictates of his own conscience, I cannot
conceive.
From this frigid interior Mr. Gladstone
made his way to the genial company of Milnes Gaskell
at Thornes and had a delightful week. Thence
he proceeded to spend some days with his sick mother
at Leamington. ’We have been singularly
dealt with as a family,’ he observes, ’once
snatched from a position where we were what is called
entering society, and sent to comparative seclusion
as regards family establishment and now
again prevented from assuming the situation that seems
the natural termination of a career like my father’s.
Here is a noble trial for me personally
to exercise a kindly and unselfish feeling, if amid
the excitements and allurements now near me, I am
enabled duly to realise the bond of consanguinity
and suffer with those whom Providence has ordained
to suffer.’ And this assuredly was no mere
entry in a journal. In betrothals, marriages,
deaths, on all the great occasions of life in his
circle, his letters under old-fashioned formalities
of phrase yet beat with a marked and living pulse
of genuine interest, solicitude, sympathy, unselfishness,
and union.
III
As always, he sought refreshment from
turmoil that was only moderately congenial to him,
in reading and writing. Among much else he learns
Shelley by heart, but his devotion to Wordsworth is
unshaken. ’One remarkable similarity prevails
between Wordsworth and Shelley; the quality of combining
and connecting everywhere external nature with internal
and unseen mind. But how different are they in
applications. It frets and irritates the one,
it is the key to the peacefulness of the other.’
Two books of Paradise Regained, he finds ’very
objectionable on religious grounds,’ the
books presumably where Milton has been convicted of
Arian heresy. He still has energy enough left
for more mundane things, to write a succession of
articles for the Liverpool Standard, and he
finds time to record his joy (December 7) ’over
five Eton first classes’ at Oxford. Then,
by and by, the election accounts come in. The
arrangement had been made that the expenses were not
to exceed a thousand pounds, of which the duke was
to contribute one half, and John Gladstone the other
half. It now appeared that twice as much would
not suffice. The new member flung himself with
all his soul into a struggle with his committee against
the practice of opening public houses and the exorbitant
demands that came of it. Open houses, he protested,
meant profligate expenditure and organised drunkenness;
they were not a pecuniary question, but a question
of right and wrong. In the afternoon of the second
day of polling, his agent had said to him, speaking
about special constables, that he scarcely knew how
they could be got if wanted, for he thought nearly
every man in the town was drunk. It was in vain
that the committee assured him of the discouraging
truth that a certain proportion of the voters could
not be got to the poll without a breakfast; and an
observer from another planet might perhaps have asked
himself whether all this was so remarkable an improvement
on the duke doing what he liked with his own.
Mr. Gladstone still stood to it that a system of entertainment
that ended in producing a state of general intoxication,
was the most demoralising and vicious of all forms
of outlay, and the Newark worthies were bewildered
and confounded by the gigantic dialectical and rhetorical
resources of their incensed representative. The
fierce battle lasted, with moments of mitigation,
over many of the thirteen years of the connection.
Of all the measures that Mr. Gladstone was destined
in days to come to place upon the statute book, none
was more salutary than the law that purified corrupt
practices at elections.
HIS BIRTHDAY
On his birthday at the close of this
eventful year, here is his entry in his diary: ’On
this day I have completed my twenty-third year....
The exertions of the year have been smaller than those
of the last, but in some respects the diminution has
been unavoidable. In future I hope circumstances
will bind me down to work with a rigour which my natural
sluggishness will find it impossible to elude.
I wish that I could hope my frame of mind had been
in any degree removed from earth and brought nearer
to heaven, that the habit of my mind had been imbued
with something of that spirit which is not of this
world. I have now familiarised myself with maxims
sanctioning and encouraging a degree of intercourse
with society, perhaps attended with much risk....
Nor do I now think myself warranted in withdrawing
from the practices of my fellow men except when they
really involve an encouragement of sin, in
which case I do certainly rank races and theatres....’
’Periods like these,’ he writes to his
friend Gaskell (January 3, 1833), ’grievous
generally in many of their results, are by no means
unfavourable to the due growth and progress of individual
character. I remember a very wise saying of Archidamus
in Thucydides, that the being educated [Greek:
en tois anankaiotatois] brings strength and efficacy
to the character.’
In one of his letters to his father
at this exciting epoch Mr. Gladstone says, that before
the sudden opening now made for him, what he had marked
out for himself was ’a good many years of silent
reading and inquiry.’ That blessed dream
was over; his own temperament and outer circumstances,
both of them made its realisation impossible; but in
a sense he clung to it all his days. He entered
at Lincoln’s Inn (January 25), and he dined
pretty frequently in hall down to 1839, meeting many
old Eton and Oxford acquaintances, more genuine law
students than himself. He kept thirteen terms
but was never called to the bar. If he had intended
to undergo a legal training, the design was ended by
Newark. After residing for a short time in lodgings
in Jermyn Street, he took quarters at the Albany (March
1833), which remained his London home for six years.
‘I am getting on rapidly with my furnishing,’
he tells his father, ’and I shall be able, I
feel confident, to do it all, including plate, within
the liberal limits which you allow. I cannot
warmly enough thank you for the terms and footing on
which you propose to place me in the chambers, but
I really fear that after this year my allowance in
all will be greater not only than I have any title
to, but than I ought to accept without blushing.’
He became a member of the Oxford and Cambridge Club
the previous month, and now was ’elected
without my will (but not more than without it)
a member of the Carlton Club.’ He would
not go to dinner parties on Sundays, not even with
Sir Robert Peel. He was closely attentive to
the minor duties of social life, if duties they be;
he was a strict observer of the etiquette of calls,
and on some afternoons he notes that he made a dozen
or fourteen of them. He frequented musical parties,
where his fine voice, now reasonably well trained,
made him a welcome guest, and he goes to public concerts
where he finds Pasta and Schroeder splendid. His
irrepressible desire to expand himself in writing
or in speech found a vent in constant articles in
the Liverpool Standard, neither better nor worse
than the ordinary juvenilia of a keen young college
politician. He was confident that, whether estimated
by their numbers, their wealth, or their respectability,
the conservatives indubitably held in their hands
the means and elements of permanent power. He
discharges a fusillade from Roman history against
the bare idea of vote by ballot, quotes Cicero as
its determined enemy, and ascribes to secret suffrage
the fall of the republic. He quotes with much
zest a sentence from an ultra-radical journal that
the life of the West Indian negro is happiness itself
compared with that of the poor inmate of our spinning-mills.
He scores a good point for the patron of Newark, by
an eloquent article on the one man who had laboured
to retrieve the miserable condition of the factory
children, and ends with a taunting reminder to the
reformers that this one man, Sadler, was the nominee
of a borough-monger, and that borough-monger the Duke
of Newcastle.
LONDON
LIFE
It need not be said that his church-going
never flagged. In 1840 his friend, the elder
Acland, interested himself in forming a small brotherhood,
with rules for systematic exercises of devotion and
works of mercy. Mr. Gladstone was one of the
number. The names were not published, nor did
any one but the treasurer know the amounts given.
The pledge to personal and active benevolence seems
not to have been strongly operative, for at the end
of 1845 (Dec 7) Mr. Gladstone writes to Hope in reference
to Acland’s scheme: ’The desire
we then both felt passed off, as far as I am concerned,
into a plan of asking only a donation and subscription.
Now it is very difficult to satisfy the demands of
duty to the poor by money alone. On the other
hand, it is extremely hard for me and I
suppose possibly for you to give them much
in the shape of time and thought, for both with me
are already tasked up to and beyond their powers....
I much wish we could execute some plan which without
demanding much time would entail the discharge of some
humble and humbling office.... If you thought
with me and I do not see why you should
not, except to assume the reverse is paying myself
a compliment let us go to work, as in the
young days of the college plan but with a more direct
and less ambitious purpose.’ Of this we
may see something later. At a great service at
St. Paul’s, he notes the glory alike of sight
and sound as ’possessing that remarkable criterion
of the sublime, a grand result from a combination
of simple elements.’ Edward Irving did
not attract; ‘a scene pregnant with melancholy
instruction.’ He was immensely struck by
Melvill, whom some of us have heard pronounced by
the generation before us to be the most puissant of
all the men in his calling. ‘His sentiments,’
says Mr. Gladstone, ’are manly in tone; he deals
powerfully with all his subjects; his language is
flowing and unbounded; his imagery varied and intensely
strong. Vigorous and lofty as are his conceptions,
he is not, I think, less remarkable for soundness
and healthiness of mind.’ Such a passage
shows among other things how the diarist was already
teaching himself to analyse the art of oratory.
I may note one rather curious habit, no doubt practised
with a view to training in the art of speech.
Besides listening to as many sermons as possible,
he was also for a long time fond of reading them aloud,
especially Dr. Arnold’s, in rather a peculiar
way. ‘My plan is,’ he says, ‘to
strengthen or qualify or omit expressions as I go along.’
IV
HOUSE
OF COMMONS
In an autobiographical note, written
in the late days of his life, when he had become the
only commoner left who had sat in the old burned House
of Commons, he says:
I took my seat at the opening of 1833,
provided unquestionably with, a large stock of
schoolboy bashfulness. The first time that business
required me to go to the arm of the chair to say something
to the Speaker, Manners Sutton the
first of seven whose subject I have been who
was something of a Keate, I remember the revival in
me bodily of the frame of mind in which a schoolboy
stands before his master. But apart from
an incidental recollection of this kind, I found
it most difficult to believe with, any reality of
belief, that such a poor and insignificant creature
as I, could really belong to, really form a part
of, an assembly which, notwithstanding the prosaic
character of its entire visible equipment, I
felt to be so august. What I may term its corporeal
conveniences were, I may observe in passing, marvellously
small. I do not think that in any part of
the building it afforded the means of so much
as washing the hands. The residences of members
were at that time less distant: but they
were principally reached on foot. When a
large House broke up after a considerable division,
a copious dark stream found its way up Parliament
Street, Whitehall, and Charing Cross.
I remember that there occurred some
case in which a constituent (probably a maltster)
at Newark sent me a communication which made oral
communication with the treasury, or with the chancellor
of the exchequer (then Lord Althorp), convenient.
As to the means of bringing this about, I was
puzzled and abashed. Some experienced friend
on the opposition bench, probably Mr. Goulburn, said
to me, There is Lord Althorp sitting alone on
the treasury bench, go to him and tell him your
business. With such encouragement I did it.
Lord Althorp received me in the kindest manner
possible, alike to my pleasure and my surprise.
The exact composition of the first
reformed House of Commons was usually analysed as
tories 144; reformers 395; English and Scotch radicals
76; Irish repealers 43. Mr. Gladstone was for
counting the decided conservatives as 160 and reckoning
as a separate group a small party who had once been
tories and now ranked between conservative opposition
and whig ministers. The Irish representatives
he divided between 28 tories, and a body of 50 who
were made up of ministerialists, conditional repealers,
and tithe extinguishers. He heard Joseph Hume,
the most effective of the leading radicals, get the
first word in the reformed parliament, speaking for
an hour and perhaps justifying O’Connell’s
witty saying that Hume would have been an excellent
speaker, if only he would finish a sentence before
beginning the next but one after it.
No more diligent member of parliament
than Mr. Gladstone ever sat upon the green benches.
He read his blue-books, did his duty by election committees,
and on the first occasion when, in consequence of staying
a little too long at a dinner at the Duke of Hamilton’s,
he missed a division, his self-reproach was almost
as sharp as if he had fallen into mortal sin.
This is often enough the way with virtuous young members,
but Mr. Gladstone’s zealous ideal of parliamentary
duty lasted, and both at first and always he was a
singular union of deep meditative seriousness with
untiring animation, assiduity, and practical energy
and force working over a wide field definitely mapped.
MAIDEN
SPEECH
In the assembly where he was one day
to rank among the most powerful orators ever inscribed
upon its golden roll, he first opened his lips in
a few words on a Newark petition (April 30) and shortly
after (May 21) he spoke two or three minutes on an
Edinburgh petition. A little later the question
of slavery, where he knew every inch of the ground,
brought him to a serious ordeal. In May, Stanley
as colonial secretary introduced the proposals of
the government for the gradual abolition of colonial
slavery. Abolition was to be preceded by an intermediate
stage, designated as apprenticeship, to last for twelve
years; and the planters were to be helped through
the difficulties of the transition by a loan of fifteen
millions. In the course of the proceedings, the
intermediate period was shortened from twelve years
to seven, and the loan of fifteen millions was transformed
into a free gift of twenty. To this scheme John
Gladstone, whose indomitable energy made him the leading
spirit of the West Indian interest, was consistently
opposed, and he naturally became the mark of abolitionist
attack. The occasion of Mr. Gladstone’s
first speech was an attack by Lord Howick on the manager
of John Gladstone’s Demerara estates, whom he
denounced as ’the murderer of slaves,’ an
attack made without notice to the two sons of the incriminated
proprietor sitting in front of him. He declared
that the slaves on the Vreedenhoop sugar plantations
were systematically worked to death in order to increase
the crop. Mr. Gladstone tried in vain to catch
the eye of the Chairman on May 30, and the next day
he wished to speak but saw no good opportunity.
’The emotions through which one passes, at least
through which I pass, in anticipating such an effort
as this, are painful and humiliating. The utter
prostration and depression of spirit; the deep sincerity,
the burdensome and overpowering reality of the feeling
of mere feebleness and incapacity, felt in the inmost
heart, yet not to find relief by expression, because
the expression of such things goes for affectation, these
things I am unequal to describe, yet I have experienced
them now.’ On June 3, the chance came.
Here is his story of the day: ’Began lé
miei Prigioni. West India meeting of members
at one at Lord Sandon’s. Resolutions discussed
and agreed upon; ... dined early. Re-arranged
my notes for the debate. Rode. House 5 to
1. Spoke my first time, for 50 minutes.
My leading desire was to benefit the cause of those
who are now so sorely beset. The House heard me
very kindly, and my friends were satisfied. Tea
afterwards at the Carlton.’ The speech
was an uncommon success. Stanley, the minister
mainly concerned, congratulated him with more than
those conventional compliments which the good nature
of the House of Commons expects to be paid to any decent
beginner. ‘I never listened to any speech
with greater pleasure,’ said Stanley, himself
the prince of debaters and then in the most brilliant
part of his career; ’the member for Newark argued
his case with a temper, an ability, and a fairness
which may well be cited as a good model to many older
members of this House.’ His own leader,
though he spoke later, said nothing in his speech
about the new recruit, but two days after Mr. Gladstone
mentioned that Sir R. Peel came up to him and praised
Monday night’s affair. King William wrote
to Althorp: ’he rejoices that a young member
has come forward in so promising a manner, as Viscount
Althorp states Mr. W. E. Gladstone to have done.’
Apart from its special vindication
in close detail of the state of things at Vreedenhoop
as being no worse than others, the points of the speech
on this great issue of the time were familiar ones.
He confessed with shame and pain that cases of cruelty
had existed, and would always exist, under the system
of slavery, and that this was ’a substantial
reason why the British legislature and public should
set themselves in good earnest to provide for its
extinction.’ He admitted, too, that we
had not fulfilled our Christian obligations by communicating
the inestimable benefits of our religion to the slaves
in our colonies, and that the belief among the early
English planters, that if you made a man a Christian
you could not keep him a slave, had led them to the
monstrous conclusion that they ought not to impart
Christianity to their slaves. Its extinction
was a consummation devoutly to be desired, and in
good earnest to be forwarded, but immediate and unconditioned
emancipation, without a previous advance in character,
must place the negro in a state where he would be
his own worst enemy, and so must crown all the wrongs
already done to him by cutting off the last hope of
rising to a higher level in social existence.
At some later period of his life Mr. Gladstone read
a corrected report of his first speech, and found
its tone much less than satisfactory. ‘But
of course,’ he adds, ’allowance must be
made for the enormous and most blessed change of opinion
since that day on the subject of negro slavery.
I must say, however, that even before this time I
had come to entertain little or no confidence in the
proceedings of the resident agents in the West Indies.’
‘I can now see plainly enough,’ he said
sixty years later, ’the sad defects, the real
illiberalism of my opinions on that subject. Yet
they were not illiberal as compared with the ideas
of the times, and as declared in parliament in 1833
they obtained the commendation of the liberal leaders.’
COMMON OPINIONS
ON SLAVERY
It is fair to remember that Pitt,
Fox, Grenville, and Grey, while eager to bring the
slave trade to an instant end, habitually disclaimed
as a calumny any intention of emancipating the blacks
on the sugar islands. In 1807, when the foul
blot of the trade was abolished, even Wilberforce
himself discouraged attempts to abolish slavery, though
the noble philanthropist soon advanced to the full
length of his own principles. Peel in 1833 would
have nothing to do with either immediate emancipation
or gradual. Disraeli has put his view on deliberate
record that ’the movement of the middle class
for the abolition of slavery was virtuous, but it
was not wise. It was an ignorant movement.
The history of the abolition of slavery by the English,
and its consequences, would be a narrative of ignorance,
injustice, blundering, waste, and havoc, not easily
paralleled in the history of mankind.’
A week later Lord Howick proposed
to move for papers relating to Vreedenhoop. Lord
Althorp did not refuse to grant them, but recommended
him to drop his motion, as Mr. Gladstone insisted on
the equal necessity of a similar return for all neighbouring
plantations. Howick withdrew his motion, though
he afterwards asserted that ministers had declined
the return, which was not true. When Buxton moved
to reduce the term of apprenticeship, Mr. Gladstone
voted against him. On the following day Stanley,
without previous intimation, announced the change from
twelve years to seven. ‘I spoke a few sentences,’
Mr. Gladstone enters in his diary, ’in much
confusion: for I could not easily recover from
the sensation caused by the sudden overthrow of an
entire and undoubting alliance.’
The question of electoral scandals
at Liverpool, which naturally excited lively interest
in a family with local ties so strong, came up in
various forms during the session, and on one of these
occasions (July 4) Mr. Gladstone spoke upon it, ’for
twenty minutes or more, anything but satisfactorily
to myself.’ Nor can the speech now be called
satisfactory by any one else, except for the enunciation
of the sound maxim that the giver of a bribe deserves
punishment quite as richly as the receiver. Four
days later he spoke for something less than half an
hour on the third reading of the Irish Church Reform
bill. ‘I was heard,’ he tells his
father, ’with kindness and indulgence, but it
is, after all, uphill work to address an assembly
so much estranged in feeling from one’s self.’
Peel’s speech was described as temporising, and
the deliverance of his young lieutenant was temporising
too, though firm on the necessary principle, as he
called it, of which the world was before long to hear
so much from him, that the nation should be taxed for
the support of a national church.
Besides his speeches he gave a full
number of party votes, some of them interesting enough
in view of the vast career before him. I think
the first of them all was in the majority of 428 against
40 upon O’Connell’s amendment for repeal, an
occasion that came vividly to his memory on the eve
of his momentous change of policy in 1886. He
voted for the worst clauses of the Irish Coercion
bill, including the court-martial clause. He
fought steadily against the admission of Jews to parliament.
He fought against the admission of dissenters without
a test to the universities, which he described as
seminaries for the established church. He supported
the existing corn law. He said ‘No’
to the property tax and ‘Aye’ for retaining
the house and window taxes. He resisted a motion
of Hume’s for the abolition of military and naval
sinécures (February 14), and another motion of
the same excellent man’s for the abolition of
all flogging in the army save for mutiny and drunkenness.
He voted against the publication of the division lists.
He voted with ministers both against shorter parliaments
and (April 25) against the ballot, a cardinal reform
carried by his own government forty years later.
On the other hand he voted (July 5) with Lord Ashley
against postponing his beneficent policy of factory
legislation; but he did not vote either way a fortnight
later when Althorp sensibly reduced the limit of ten
hours’ work in factories from the impracticable
age of eighteen proposed by Ashley, to the age of
thirteen. He supported a bill against work on
Sundays.
V
PURCHASE
OF FASQUE
A page or two from his diary will
carry us succinctly enough over the rest of the first
and second years of his parliamentary life.
July 21, 1833, Sunday.
... Wrote some lines and prose also. Finished
Strype. Read Abbott and Sumner aloud. Thought
for some hours on my own future destiny, and
took a solitary walk to and about Kensington
Gardens. July 23. Read L’Allemagne,
Rape of the Lock, and finished factory
report. July 25. Went to breakfast
with old Mr. Wilberforce, introduced by his son.
He is cheerful and serene, a beautiful picture
of old age in sight of immortality. Heard
him pray with his family. Blessing and honour
are upon his head. July 30. L’Allemagne.
Bulwer’s England. Parnell. Looked
at my Plato. Rode. House. July 31. Hallam
breakfasted with me.... Committee on West
India bill finished.... German lesson. August
2. Worked German several hours.
Head half of the Bride of Lammermoor.
L’Allemagne. Rode. House. August
3. German lesson and worked alone....
Attended Mr. Wilberforce’s funeral; it
brought solemn thoughts, particularly about the slaves.
This a burdensome question. [German kept up steadily
for many days.] August 9. House
... voted in 48 to 87 against legal tender clause....
Read Tasso. August 11. St. James’s
morning and afternoon. Read Bible.
Abbott (finished) and a sermon of Blomfield’s
aloud. Wrote a paraphrase of part of chapter 8
of Romans. August 15. Committee
1-31/4. Rode. Plato. Finished Tasso,
canto 1. Anti-slavery observations on bill.
German vocabulary and exercise. August 16. 23/4-31/2
Committee finished. German lesson. Finished
Plato, Republic, bk. v. Preparing to pack.
August 17. Started for Aberdeen
on board Queen of Scotland at 12. August
18th. Rose to breakfast, but uneasily.
Attempted reading, and read most of Baxter’s
narrative. Not too unwell to reflect. August
19th. Remained in bed. Read Goethe
and translated a few lines. Also Beauties
of Shakespeare. In the evening it blew:
very ill though in bed. Could not help admiring
the crests of the waves even as I stood at cabin
window. August 20. Arrived 81/2 A./2
hours.
His father met him, and in the evening
he and his brother found themselves at the new paternal
seat. In 1829 John Gladstone, after much negotiation,
had bought the estate of Fasque in Kincardineshire
for, L80,000, to which and to other Scotch affairs
he devoted his special and personal attention pretty
exclusively. The home at Seaforth was broken
up, though relatives remained there or in the neighbourhood.
For some time he had a house in Edinburgh for private
residence the centre house in Atholl Crescent.
They used for three or four years to come in from
Kincardineshire, and spend the winter months in Edinburgh.
Fasque was his home for the rest of his days.
This was W. E. Gladstone’s first visit, followed
by at least one long annual spell for the remaining
eighteen years of his father’s life.
On the morning of his arrival, he
notes, ’I rode to the mill of Kincairn to see
Mackay who was shot last night. He was suffering
much and seemed near death. Read the Holy Scriptures
to him (Psalms 51, 69, 71, Isaiah 55, Joh 14, Col
3). Left my prayer book.’ The visit
was repeated daily until the poor man’s death
a week later. Apart from such calls of duty,
books are his main interest. He is greatly delighted
with Hamilton’s Men and Manners in America.
Alfieri’s Antigone he dislikes as having
the faults of both ancient and modern drama. He
grinds away through Gifford’s Pitt, and
reads Hallam’s Middle Ages. ’My
method has usually been, 1, to read over regularly;
2, to glance again over all I have read, and analyse.’
He was just as little of the lounger in his lighter
reading. Schiller’s plays he went through
with attention, finding it ’a good plan to read
along with history, historical plays of the same events
for material illustration, as well as aid to the memory.’
He read Scott’s chapters on Mary Stuart in his
history of Scotland, ’to enable me better to
appreciate the admirable judgment of Schiller (in
Maria Stuart) both where he has adhered to history
and where he has gone beyond it.’ He finds
fault with the Temistocle of Metastasio,
as ‘too humane.’ ’History should
not be violated without a reason. It may be set
aside to fill up poetical verisimilitude. If
history assigns a cause inadequate to its effect, or
an effect inadequate to its cause, poetry may supply
the deficiency for the sake of an impressive whole.
But it is too much to overset a narrative and call
it a historical play.’ Then came a tragic
stroke in real life.
DAYS IN
SCOTLAND
October 6, 1833. Post
hour to-day brought me a melancholy announcement the
death of Arthur Hallam. This intelligence was
deeply oppressive even to my selfish disposition.
I mourn in him, for myself, my earliest near
friend; for my fellow creatures, one who would
have adorned his age and country, a mind full of beauty
and of power, attaining almost to that ideal standard
of which it is presumption to expect an example.
When shall I see his like? Yet this dispensation
is not all pain, for there is a hope and not (in my
mind) a bare or rash hope that his soul rests with
God in Jesus Christ.... I walked upon the
hills to muse upon this very mournful event,
which cuts me to the heart. Alas for his family
and his intended bride. October 7th. My
usual occupations, but not without many thoughts
upon my departed friend. Bible. Alfieri,
Wallenstein, Plato, Gifford’s Pitt,
Biographia Literaria. Rode with my
father and Helen. All objects lay deep in the
softness and solemnity of autumnal decay.
Alas, my poor friend was cut off in the spring
of his bright existence.
December 13, Edinburgh. Breakfast
with Dr. Chalmers. His modesty is so extreme
that it is oppressive to those who are in his company,
especially his juniors, since it is impossible for
them to keep their behaviour in due proportion
to his. He was on his own subject, the Poor
Laws, very eloquent, earnest, and impressive.
Perhaps he may have been hasty in applying maxims
drawn from Scotland to a more advanced stage
of society in England. December 17. Robertson’s
Charles V., Plato, began book 10. Chalmers.
Singing-lesson and practice. Whist.
Walked on the Glasgow road, first milestone to
fourth and back in 70 minutes the returning
three miles in about 333/4. Ground in some
places rather muddy and slippery. December
26. A feeble day. Three successive
callers and conversation with my father occupied
the morning. Read a good allowance of Robertson,
an historian who leads his reader on, I think,
more pleasantly than any I know. The style most
attractive, but the mind of the writer does not
set forth the loftiest principles. December
29th, Sunday. Twenty-four years have
I lived.... Where is the continuous
work which ought to fill up the life of a Christian
without intermission?... I have been growing,
that is certain; in good or evil? Much fluctuation;
often a supposed progress, terminating in finding
myself at, or short of, the point which I deemed
I had left behind me. Business and political
excitement a tremendous trial, not so much alleviating
as forcibly dragging down the soul from that
temper which is fit to inhale the air of heaven.
Ja, 1834, Edinburgh. Breakfast
with Dr. Chalmers. Attended his lecture 2-3....
More than ever struck with the superabundance
of Dr. C.’s gorgeous language, which leads
him into repetitions, until the stores of our tongue
be exhausted on each particular point. Yet
the variety and magnificence of his expositions
must fix them very strongly in the minds of his
hearers. In ordinary works great attention would
be excited by the very infrequent occurrence
of the very brilliant expressions and illustrations
with which he cloys the palate. His gems
lie like paving stones. He does indeed seem to
be an admirable man.
Of Edinburgh his knowledge soon became
intimate. His father and mother took him to that
city, as we have seen, in 1814. He spent a spring
there in 1828 just before going to Oxford, and he
recollected to the end of his life a sermon of Dr.
Andrew Thomson’s on the Repentance of Judas,
’a great and striking subject.’ Some
circumstance or another brought him into relations
with Chalmers, that ripened into friendship. ’We
used to have walks together,’ Mr. Gladstone
remembered, ’chiefly out of the town by the
Dean Bridge and along the Queensferry road. On
one of our walks together, Chalmers took me down to
see one of his districts by the water of Leith, and
I remember we went into one or more of the cottages.
He went in with smiling countenance, greeting and
being greeted by the people, and sat down. But
he had nothing to say. He was exactly like the
Duke of Wellington, who said of himself that he had
no small talk. His whole mind was always full
of some great subject and he could not deviate from
it. He sat smiling among the people, but he had
no small talk for them and they had no large talk.
So after some time we came away, he pleased to have
been with the people, and they proud to have had the
Doctor with them. For Chalmers he never lost a
warm appreciation, often expressed in admirable words ’one
of nature’s nobles; his warrior grandeur, his
rich and glowing eloquence, his absorbed and absorbing
earnestness, above all his singular simplicity and
detachment from the world.’ Among other
memories, ’There was a quaint old shop at the
Bowhead which used to interest me very much. It
was kept by a bookseller, Mr. Thomas Nelson. I
remember being amused by a reply he made to me one
day when I went in and asked for Booth’s Reign
of Grace. He half turned his head towards
me, and remarked with a peculiar twinkle in his eye,
“Ay, man, but ye’re a young chiel to be
askin’ after a book like that."’
RELATIONS WITH
CHALMERS
On his way south in January 1834,
Mr. Gladstone stays with relatives at Seaforth, ’where
even the wind howling upon the window at night was
dear and familiar;’ and a few days later finds
himself once more within the ever congenial walls
of Oxford.
January 19, Sunday. Read
the first lesson in morning chapel. A most
masterly sermon of Pusey’s preached by Clarke.
Lancaster in the afternoon on the Sacrament.
Good walk. Wrote [family letters]. Read
Whyte. Three of Girdlestone’s Sermons.
Pickering on adult baptism (some clever and singularly
insufficient reasoning). Episcopal pastoral
letter for 1832. Doane’s Ordination sermon,
1833, admirable, Wrote some thoughts.
Jan 20. Sismondi’s Italian
Republics. Dined at Merton, and spent all
the evening there in interesting conversation.
I was Hamilton’s guest [afterwards Bishop
of Salisbury]. It was delightful, it wrings joy
even from the most unfeeling heart, to see religion
on the increase as it is here. Jan 23rd. Much
of to-day, it fell out, spent in conversation
of an interesting kind, with Brandreth and Pearson
on eternal punishment; with Williams on baptism;
with Churton on faith and religion in the university;
with Harrison on prophecy and the papacy....
Jan 24. Began Essay on Saving
Faith, and wrote thereon. Jan 29th. Dined
at Oriel. Conversation with Newman chiefly
on church matters.... I excuse some idleness to
myself by the fear of doing some real injury
to my eyes. [After a flight of three or four
days to London, he again returns for a Sunday in Oxford.]
Feb 9. Two university sermons and
St. Peter’s. Round the meadows with
Williams. Dined with him, common room. Tea
and a pleasant conversation with Harrison.
Began Chrysostom de Sacerdotio, and Cecil’s
Friendly Visit. [Then he goes back to town
for the rest of the session.] Feb 12, London. Finished
Friendly Visit, beautiful little book.
Finished Tennyson’s poems. Wrote a
paper on [Greek: ethike pistis] in poetry.
Recollections of Robert Hall 13th. With
Doyle, long and solemn conversation on the doctrine
of the Trinity.... Began Wardlaw’s Christian
Ethics. 26th, London. A
busy day, yet of little palpable profit.... Read
two important Demerara papers.... Rode.
At the levee. House 51/2 11.
Wished to speak, but deterred by the extremely ill
disposition to hear. Much sickened by their
unfairness in the judicial character, more still
at my own wretched feebleness and fears. April
1. Dined at Sir R. Peel’s.
Herries, Sir G. Murray, Chantrey, etc.
Sir R. Peel very kind in his manner to us. May
29. Mignet’s Introduction
[to ’the History of the Spanish succession,’
one of the masterpieces of historical literature].
June 4. Bruce to breakfast.
Paper. Mignet and analysis. Burke.
Harvey committee. Ancient music concert.
Dined at Lincoln’s Inn. House 111/4-123/4.
Rode. June 6. Paradise Lost.
Began Leibnitz’s Tentamina Theodiceae.
June 11. Read Pitt’s speeches
on the Union in January, 1799, and Grattan on
Catholic petition in 1805. 15th. Read
some passages in the latter part of Corinne,
which always work strongly on me. 18th. Coming
home to dine, found Remains of A. H. H.
Yesterday a bridal at a friend’s, to-day a
sad memorial of death. ’Tis a sad subject,
a very sad one to me. I have not seen his
like. The memory of him reposes gently in my
inmost heart, a fountain of tears which soften
and fertilise it in the midst of pursuits whose
tendency is to dry up the sources of emotion
by the fever of excitement. I read his memoir.
His father had done me much and undeserved kindness
there. 20th. Most of my time
went in thinking confusedly over the university question.
Very anxious to speak, tortured with nervous
anticipations; could not get an opportunity.
Certainly my inward experience on these occasions
ought to make me humble. Herbert’s maiden
speech very successful. I ought to be thankful
for my miss; perhaps also because my mind
was so much oppressed that I could not, I fear, have
unfolded my inward convictions. What a world it
is, and how does it require the Divine power
and aid to clothe in words the profound and mysterious
thoughts on those subjects most connected with
the human soul thoughts which the mind does
not command as a mistress, but entertains reverentially
as honoured guests ... content with only a partial
comprehension, hoping to render it a progressive
one, but how difficult to define in words a conception,
many of whose parts are still in a nascent state
with no fixed outline or palpable substance.
July 2. ... Guizot. Cousin.
Bossuet (Hist. Univ.). Rode.
Committee and House. Curious detail from
O’Connell of his interview with Littleton. 10th. 71/4
A.M.-71/2 in an open chaise to Coggeshall and
back with O’Connell and Sir G. Sinclair,
to examine Skingley [a proceeding arising from the
Harvey committee], which was done with little
success.
THE UNIVERSITY
QUESTION
The conversation of the great Liberator
was never wholly forgotten, and it was probably his
earliest chance of a glimpse of the Irish point of
view at first hand.
July 11. No news
till the afternoon and then heard on very good authority
that the Grey government is definitely broken up, and
that attempts at reconstruction have failed.
Cousin, Sismondi, Education evidence. Letters.
House. 21st. To-day not for the
first time felt a great want of courage to express
feelings strongly awakened on hearing a speech
of O’Connell. To have so strong an
impulse and not obey it seems unnatural; it seems like
an inflicted dumbness. 28th. Spoke
30 to 35 minutes on University bill, with more
ease than I had hoped, having been more mindful or
less unmindful of Divine aid. Divided in
75 v 164. [To his father next day.] You will
see by your Post that I held forth last night
on the Universities bill. The House I am
glad to say heard me with the utmost kindness,
for they had been listening previously to an Indian
discussion in which very few people took any interest,
though indeed it was both curious and interesting.
But the change of subject was no doubt felt as
a relief, and their disposition to listen set
me infinitely more at my ease than I should otherwise
have been. 29th. Pleasant house
dinner at Carlton. Lincoln got up the party.
Sir R. Peel was in good spirits and very agreeable.
It was on this occasion that he wrote
to his mother, ’Sir Robert Peel caused
me much gratification by the way in which he spoke
to me of my speech, and particularly the great warmth
of his manner. He told me he cheered me loudly,
and I said in return that I had heard his voice under
me while speaking, and was much encouraged thereby.’
He ends the note already cited (Sept 6, 1897) on
the old House of Commons, which was burned down this
year, with what he calls a curious incident concerning
Sir Robert Peel, and with a sentence or two upon the
government of Lord Grey:
Cobbett made a motion alike wordy and
absurd, praying the king to remove him [Peel]
from the privy council as the author of the act for
the re-establishment of the gold standard in 1819.
The entire House was against him, except his
colleague Fielden of Oldham, who made a second
teller. After the division I think Lord Althorp
at once rose and moved the expunction of the proceedings
from the votes or journals; a severe rebuke to
the mover. Sir Robert in his speech said,
’I am at a loss, sir, to conceive what can be
the cause of the strong hostility to me which
the honourable gentleman exhibits. I never
conferred on him an obligation.’ This stroke
was not original. But what struck me at the
time as singular was this, that notwithstanding
the state of feeling which I have described,
Sir R. Peel was greatly excited in dealing with one
who at the time was little more than a contemptible
antagonist. At that period shirt collars
were made with ‘gills’ which came up upon
the cheek; and Peel’s gills were so soaked
with perspiration that they actually lay down
upon his neck-cloth.
In one of these years, I think 1833,
a motion was made by some political economist
for the abolition of the corn laws. I (an absolute
and literal ignoramus) was much struck and staggered
with it. But Sir James Graham who
knew more of economic and trade matters, I think,
than the rest of the cabinet of 1841 all put together made
a reply in the sense of protection, whether high or
low I cannot now say. But I remember perfectly
well that this speech of his built me up again
for the moment and enabled me (I believe) to
vote with the government.
A YEAR OF SPLENDID
LEGISLATION
The year 1833 was, as measured by quantity
and in part by quality, a splendid year of legislation.
In 1834 the Government and Lord Althorp far beyond
all others did themselves high honour by the new Poor
Law Act, which rescued the English peasantry from the
total loss of their independence. Of the
658 members of Parliament about 480 must have
been their general supporters. Much gratitude
ought to have been felt for this great administration.
But from a variety of causes, at the close of
the session 1834 the House of Commons had fallen
into a state of cold indifference about it.
He was himself destined one day to
feel how soon parliamentary reaction may follow a
sweeping popular triumph.