MEMBER FOR
OXFORD
1847-1852
(1847)
There is not a feature or a point in
the national character which has made England
great among the nations of the world, that is not
strongly developed and plainly traceable in our
universities. For eight hundred or a thousand
years they have been intimately associated with
everything that has concerned the highest interests
of the country. GLADSTONE.
In 1847 the fortunes of a general
election brought Mr. Gladstone into relations that
for many years to come deeply affected his political
course. As a planet’s orbit has puzzled
astronomers until they discover the secret of its
irregularities in the attraction of an unseen and
unsuspected neighbour in the firmament, so some devious
motions of this great luminary of ours were perturbations
due in fact to the influence of his new constituency.
As we have seen, Mr. Gladstone quitted Newark when
he entered the cabinet to repeal the corn law.
At the end of 1846, writing to Lord Lyttelton from
Fasque, he tells him: ’I wish to be in
parliament but coldly; feeling at the same time that
I ought to wish it warmly on many grounds. But
my father is so very keen in his protective opinions,
and I am so very decidedly of the other way of thinking,
that I look forward with some reluctance and regret
to what must, when it happens, place me in marked
and public contrast with him.’ The thing
soon happened.
I remained, he says, without a seat
until the dissolution in June 1847. But
several months before this occurred it had become known
that Mr. Estcourt would vacate his seat for Oxford,
and I became a candidate. It was a serious
campaign. The constituency, much to its honour,
did not stoop to fight the battle on the ground of
protection. But it was fought, and that fiercely,
on religious grounds. There was an incessant
discussion, and I may say dissection, of my character
and position in reference to the Oxford movement.
This cut very deep, for it was a discussion which each
member of the constituency was entitled to carry
on for himself. The upshot was favourable.
The liberals supported me gallantly, so did many
zealous churchmen, apart from politics, and a good
number of moderate men, so that I was returned
by a fair majority. I held the seat for
eighteen years, but with five contests and a final
defeat.
The other sitting member after the
retirement of Mr. Estcourt was Sir Robert Harry Inglis,
who had beaten Peel by a very narrow majority in the
memorable contest for the university seat on the final
crisis of the catholic question in 1829. He was
blessed with a genial character and an open and happy
demeanour; and the fact that he was equipped with a
full store of sincere and inexorable prejudices made
it easy for him to be the most upright, honourable,
kindly, and consistent of political men. Repeal
of the Test acts, relief of the catholics, the Reform
bill, relief of the Jews, reform of the Irish church,
the grant to Maynooth, the repeal of the corn laws one
after another he had stoutly resisted the whole catalogue
of revolutionising change. So manful a record
made his seat safe. In the struggle for the second
seat, Mr. Gladstone’s friends encountered first
Mr. Cardwell, a colleague of his as secretary of the
treasury in the late government. Cardwell was
deep in the confidence and regard of Sir Robert Peel,
and he earned in after years the reputation of an
honest and most capable administrator; but in these
earlier days the ill-natured called him Peel-and-water,
others labelled him latitudinarian and indifferent,
and though he had the support of Peel, promised before
Mr. Gladstone’s name as candidate was announced,
he thought it wise at a pretty early hour to withdraw
from a triangular fight. The old high-and-dry
party and the evangelical party combined to bring
out Mr. Round. If he had achieved no sort of distinction,
Mr. Round had at least given no offence: above
all, he had kept clear of all those tractarian innovations
which had been finally stamped with the censure of
the university two years before.
OXFORD SUPPORTERS
Charles Wordsworth, his old tutor
and now warden of Glenalmond, found it hard to give
Mr. Gladstone his support, because he himself held
to the high principle of state conscience, while the
candidate seemed more than ever bent on the rival
doctrine of social justice. Mr. Hallam joined
his committee, and what that learned veteran’s
adhesion was in influence among older men, that of
Arthur Clough was among the younger. Northcote
described Clough to Mr. Gladstone as a very favourable
specimen of a class, growing in numbers and importance
among the younger Oxford men, a friend of Carlyle’s,
Frank Newman’s, and others of that stamp; well
read in German literature and an admirer of German
intellect, but also a still deeper admirer of Dante;
just now busily taking all his opinions to pieces
and not beginning to put them together again; but so
earnest and good that he might be trusted to work
them into something better than his friends inclined
to fear. Ruskin, again, who had the year before
published the memorable second volume of his Modern
Painters (he was still well under thirty), was
on the right side, and the Oxford chairman is sure
that Mr. Gladstone will appreciate at its full value
the support of such high personal merit and extraordinary
natural genius. Scott, the learned Grecian who
had been beaten along with Mr. Gladstone in the contest
for the Ireland scholarship seventeen years before,
wrote to him: ’Ever since the time
when you and I received Strypes at the hand of the
vice-chancellor, and so you became my
[Greek:
homomastigias
labon agonos tas
isas plegas émoi,’]
I have looked forward to your being
the representative of the university.’
Richard Greswell of Worcester was the faithful chairman
of his Oxford committee now and to the end, eighteen
years off. He had reached the dignity of a bachelor
of divinity, but nearly all the rest were no more
than junior masters.
Routh, the old president of Magdalen,
declined to vote for him on the well-established ground
that Christ Church had no business to hold both seats.
Mr. Gladstone at once met this by the dexterous proposition
that though Christ Church was not entitled to elect
him against the wish of the other colleges, yet the
other colleges were entitled to elect him if they
liked, by giving him a majority not made up of Christ
Church votes. His eldest brother had written
to tell him in terms of affectionate regret, that
he could take no part in the election; mere political
differences would be secondary, but in the case of
a university, religion came first, and there it was
impossible to separate a candidate from his religious
opinions. When the time came, however, partly
under strong pressure from Sir John, Thomas Gladstone
took a more lenient view and gave his brother a vote.
The Round men pointed triumphantly
to their hero’s votes on Maynooth and on the
Dissenters’ Chapels bill, and insisted on the
urgency of upholding the principles of the united
church of England and Ireland in their full integrity.
The backers of Mr. Gladstone retorted by recalling
their champion’s career; how in 1834 he first
made himself known by his resistance to the admission
of dissenters to the universities; how in 1841 he
threw himself into the first general move for the increase
of the colonial episcopate, which had resulted in
the erection of eleven new sees in six years; how
zealously with energy and money he had laboured for
a college training for the episcopalian clergy in Scotland;
how instrumental he was in 1846, during the few months
for which he held the seals of secretary of state,
in erecting four colonial bishoprics; how the Society
for the Propagation of the Gospel, through the mouth
of the Archbishop of Canterbury himself, had thanked
him for his services; how long he had been an active
supporter of the great societies for the spread of
church principles, the propagation of church doctrines,
and the erection of church fabrics. As for the
Dissenters’ Chapels bill, it was an act of simple
justice and involved no principles at issue between
the church and dissent, and Mr. Gladstone’s masterly
exposition of the tendency of dissent to drop one
by one all the vital truths of Christianity was proclaimed
to be a real service to the church. The reader
will thus see the lie of the land, what it meant to
be member for a university, and why Mr. Gladstone
thought the seat the highest of electoral prizes.
THE CONTEST
A circular was issued impugning his
position on protestant grounds. ’I humbly
trust,’ wrote Mr. Gladstone in reply (July 26),
’that its writers are not justified in exhibiting
me to the world as a person otherwise than heartily
devoted to the doctrine and constitution of our reformed
church. But I will never consent to adopt as the
test of such doctrine, a disposition to identify the
great and noble cause of the church of England with
the restraint of the civil rights of those who differ
from her.’ Much was made of Mr. Gladstone’s
refusal to vote for the degradation of Ward.
People wrote to the newspapers that it was an admitted
and notorious fact that a sister of Mr. Gladstone’s
under his own influence had gone over to the church
of Rome. The fable was retracted, but at once
revived in the still grosser untruth, that he habitually
employed ‘a Jesuitical system of argument’
to show that nobody need leave the church of England,
’because all might be had there that was to
be enjoyed in the church of Rome.’ Maurice
published a letter to a London clergyman vigorously
remonstrating against the bigoted spirit that this
election was warming into life, and fervently protesting
against making a belief in the Nicene creed into the
same thing as an opinion about a certain way of treating
the property of unitarians. ‘One artifice
of this kind,’ said Maurice, ’has been
practised in this election which it makes me blush
to speak of. Mr. Ward called the reformation
a vile and accursed thing; Mr. Gladstone voted against
a certain measure for the condemnation of Mr. Ward;
therefore he spoke of the reformation as a vile and
accursed thing. I should not have believed it
possible that such a conclusion had been drawn from
such prémisses even by our religious press.’
The worthy Mr. Round, on the other
hand, was almost impregnable. A diligent scrutiny
at last dragged the dark fact to the light of day,
that he had actually sat on Peel’s election committee
at the time of catholic emancipation in 1829, and
had voted for him against Inglis. So it appears,
said the mocking Gladstonians, that the protestant
Mr. Round ’was willing to lend a helping hand
to the first of a series of measures which are considered
by his supporters as fraught with danger to the country’s
very best interests.’ A still more sinister
rumour was next bruited abroad: that Mr. Round
attended a dissenting place of worship, and he was
constrained to admit that, once in 1845 and thrice
in 1846, he had been guilty of this blacksliding.
The lost ground, however, was handsomely recovered
by a public declaration that the very rare occasions
on which he had been present at other modes of Christian
worship had only confirmed his affection and reverential
attachment to the services and formularies of his
own church.
VICTORY AT
THE POLL
The nomination was duly made in the
Sheldonian theatre (July 29), the scene of so many
agitations in these fiery days. Inglis was proposed
by a canon of Christ Church, Round by the master of
Balliol, and Gladstone by Dr. Richards, the rector
of Exeter. The prime claim advanced for him by
his proposer, was his zeal for the English church in
word and deed, above all his energy in securing that
wherever the English church went, thither bishoprics
should go too. Besides all this, his master work,
he had found time to spare not only for public business
of the commonwealth, but for the study of theology,
philosophy, and the arts. Then the voting began.
The Gladstonians went into the battle with 1100 promises.
Northcote, passing vigilant days in the convocation
house, sent daily reports to Mr. Gladstone at Fasque.
Peel went up to vote for him (splitting for Inglis);
Ashley went up to vote against him. At the close
of the second day things looked well, but there was
no ground for over-confidence. Inglis was six
hundred ahead of Gladstone, and Gladstone only a hundred
and twenty ahead of Round. The next day Round
fell a little more behind, and when the end came (August
3) the figures stood: Inglis 1700, Gladstone
997, Round 824, giving Gladstone a majority of 173
over his competitor.
Numbers were not the only important
point. When the poll came to be analysed by eager
statisticians, the decision of the electors was found
to have a weight not measured by an extra hundred and
seventy votes. For example, Mr. Gladstone had
among his supporters twenty-five double-firsts against
seven for Round, and of single first-classes he had
one hundred and fifty-seven against Round’s sixty-six.
Of Ireland and Hertford scholars Mr. Gladstone had
nine to two and three to one respectively; and of
chancellor’s prizemen who voted he had forty-five
against twelve. Of fellows of colleges he had
two hundred and eighteen against one hundred and twenty-eight,
and his majority in this class was highest where the
elections to fellowships were open. The heads
of the colleges told a different tale. Of these,
sixteen voted for Round and only four for Gladstone.
This discrepancy it was that gave its significance
to the victory. Sitting in the convocation house
watching the last casual voters drop in at the rate
of two or three an hour through the summer afternoon,
the ever faithful Northcote wrote to Mr. Gladstone
at Fasque:
Since I have been here, the contest
has seemed even more interesting than it did
in London. The effect of the contest itself has
apparently been good. It has brought together
the younger men without distinction of party,
and has supplied the elements of a very noble
party which will now look to you as a leader.
I think men of all kinds are prepared to trust
you, and though each feels that you will probably
differ from his set in some particulars, each
seems disposed to waive objections for the sake of
the general good he expects....
The victory is not looked upon as ‘Puseyite’;
it is a victory of the masters over the Hebdomadal
board, and as such a very important one.
The Heads felt it their last chance, and are said to
have expressed themselves accordingly. The
provost of Queen’s, who is among the dissatisfied
supporters of Round, said the other day, ’He
would rather be represented by an old woman than
by a young man.’ It is not as a Maynoothian
that you are dreaded here, though they use the
cry against you and though that is the country feeling,
but as a possible reformer and a man who thinks.
On the other hand, the young men exult, partly
in the hope that you will do something for the
university yourself, partly in the consciousness that
they have shown the strength of the magisterial
party by carrying you against the opposition
of the Heads, and have proved their title to be considered
an important element of the university. They do
not seem yet to be sufficiently united to effect
great things, but there is a large amount of
ability and earnestness which only wants direction,
and this contest has tended to unite them. ‘Puseyism’
seems rather to be a name of the past, though
there are still Puseyites of importance.
Marriott, Mozley, and Church appear to be regarded
as leaders; but Church who is now abroad, is looked
upon as something more, and I am told may be
considered on the whole the fairest exponent
of the feelings of the place. Stanley, Jowett,
Temple, and others are great names in what is
nicknamed the Germanising party. Lake, and
perhaps I should say Temple, hold an intermediate
position between the two parties.... Whatever
may have been the evils attendant on the Puseyite
movement, and I believe they were neither few
nor small, it has been productive of great results;
and it is not a little satisfactory to see how its
distinctive features are dying away and the spirit
surviving, instead of the spirit departing and
leaving a great sham behind it.
PECULIARITY OF
ELECTION
Of the many strange positions to which
in his long and ardent life Mr. Gladstone was brought,
none is more startling than to find him, as in this
curious moment at Oxford, the common rallying-point
of two violently antagonistic sections of opinion.
Dr. Pusey supported him; Stanley and Jowett supported
him. The old school who looked on Oxford as the
ancient and peculiar inheritance of the church were
zealous for him; the new school who deemed the university
an organ not of the church but of the nation, eagerly
took him for their champion. A great ecclesiastical
movement, reviving authority and tradition, had ended
in complete academic repulse in 1845. It was
now to be followed by an anti-ecclesiastical movement,
critical, sceptical, liberal, scornful of authority,
doubtful of tradition. Yet both the receding force
and the rising force united to swell the stream that
bore Mr. Gladstone to triumph at the poll. The
fusion did not last. The two bands speedily drew
off into their rival camps, to arm themselves in the
new conflict for mastery between obscurantism and
illumination. The victor was left with his laurels
in what too soon proved to be, after all, a vexed and
precarious situation, that he could neither hold with
freedom nor quit with honour.
Meanwhile he thoroughly enjoyed his
much coveted distinction:
To Mrs.
Gladstone.
Exeter Coll., No, 1847. This
morning in company with Sir R. Inglis, and under
the protection or chaperonage of the dean, I have
made the formal circuit of visits to all the heads
of houses and all the common-rooms. It has
gone off very well. There was but one reception
by a head (Corpus) that was not decidedly kind,
and that was only a little cold. Marsham
(Merton), who is a frank, warm man, keenly opposed,
said very fairly, to Inglis, ’I congratulate
you warmly’; and then to me, ’And
I would be very glad to do the same to you, Mr.
Gladstone, if I could think you would do the same
as Sir R. Inglis.’ I like a man for
this. They say the dean should have asked
me to dine to-day, but I think he may be, and perhaps
wisely, afraid of recognising me in any very marked
way, for fear of endangering the old Christ Church
right to one seat which it is his peculiar duty
to guard.
We dined yesterday in the hall at Christ
Church, it being a grand day there. Rather
unfortunately the undergraduates chose to make a row
in honour of me during dinner, which the two censors
had to run all down the hall to stop. This
had better not be talked about. Thursday
the warden of All Souls’ has asked me and I think
I must accept; had it not been a head (and it
is one of the little party of four who voted
for me) I should not have doubted, but at once have
declined.