February 8th.—It is thought that the violence of the Protectionists is somewhat abated, and giving way to despondence. The resignations of seats still continue, but Peel is in high spirits, not at all dejected or dismayed. Francis Egerton went to Graham the other day and strongly advised him to give up the three years' delay. Meanwhile the Whigs have become perfectly reasonable, and mean to yield anything rather than risk the success of the measure. Clarendon had a long conversation with John Russell, and urged on him the expediency of moderation, and pointed out how he had bound himself by his letter to the Queen. He denied this, but yielded to the general argument, not however failing to display his bitterness towards Peel. He said since he had read my pamphlet he had a worse opinion of him than ever, and he saw no reason why he should do anything to assist him; that he (Peel) had no claim on him. I told Clarendon that the real truth was that he was jealous of Peel and envious, he could not bear Peel's popularity and the prevailing opinion that he was the best man. It is all very small, but he is small, and since I have looked more narrowly into past transactions, and his career, I am the more struck with it.

Yesterday I had Delane to dine with me, and Foster, the 'Times' Commissioner in Ireland, a very intelligent man, with plenty to say and no difficulty in saying it. My banquet to these potentates of the press did very well.

February 12th.—The debate in the House of Commons has been going on two nights, and will go on two or three more; very dull and languid. Graham and Sidney Herbert made speeches which have not been well received, and there is no disguising the fact that they cannot wriggle themselves out of a very awkward position, and no boldness or candour prevents their cutting a very sorry figure. However right the measure may be, and however pure their motives in acting as they do, it is vain to attempt to persuade people that there has not been something very wrong somewhere, and at some time. Nobody now doubts that the question will be carried, and that Peel will go out soon after. Ellice told me last night he had been doing all he could with John Russell to induce him to conciliate Peel, and to prepare when he came in to form a junction with some of Peel's people, such as Lincoln, Sidney Herbert, and Dalhousie, and to take them in as guarantees of the principles of his Government, and to ensure Peel's support. The advice is not bad, but I doubt his following it; he hates Peel so cordially that I doubt his doing anything which would savour of an alliance with him of any sort. But Lord John has behaved very well and very wisely about this measure, and spoke on Monday just as he ought.

February 14th.—I saw Aberdeen yesterday. He told me Peel was full of spirits and determination; he (Aberdeen) thought they could not go on long, though he believed they would not be beaten on the Sugar Duties, and he did not know on what question they would be defeated; and then they would have to decide whether they should try a dissolution, for which the Queen would press vehemently, for (he said) she was quite as anxious to keep Peel as ever she had been to keep Melbourne. I told him I hoped they would never think of dissolving unless pretty sure of success; that the Whigs had disgraced themselves and lost everything by this measure in 1841, and nothing but success could justify such an appeal. He said he quite agreed with me; and though he evidently wishes to stay in, he is prepared to go out, and would prefer doing so with credit rather than sticking to place dangerously and disreputably.

February 16th.—The debate in the House of Commons (the dullest on record) lasted all last week, and will probably last all this. Meanwhile affairs grow daily more uncomfortable and perplexed. The Government measure will certainly pass the House of Commons by a majority under one hundred, and most people think it will pass the House of Lords. Then will come the dissolution of the Government and the advent of John Russell; but how he is to get on, or what is to happen afterwards, nobody has an idea. Though the Tories have made up their minds to be defeated, they show no symptom of mitigated feelings towards Peel and the Government, but the contrary. The debate presents hardly any argument on their side, but bitter lamentations and reproaches, and quotations from former speeches or addresses of the Ministers who are now abandoning them. On the other hand, the Liberals, while they support Peel, encourage and confirm the Tories in their indignation and resentment, and they abuse the Government quite as lustily, not for what they are doing now, but for all they have been saying and doing for the last four years. The whole of the press takes the same line, the Tory and Whig papers naturally; and the 'Times' chuckles and sneers, and alternately attacks and ridicules Whigs, Protectionists, and Peelites.

There was a comment on my pamphlet in defence of Peel in Ward's paper, the 'Weekly Chronicle,' yesterday; very well done, with much truth in it. The real fact is that Peel is not obnoxious to blame for what he has done; it is very fair for party men to attack him on this score, but he is easily defensible on it. But nothing can excuse all that he and his colleagues have said. When the best excuse their conduct admits of is made for them, it will be found that their language, the opinions and the arguments they have put forth do not correspond with the excuse. This is the first point against them, and the second is that they have made out no adequate case for doing now what they have done. The case which Graham put forth really is no case at all. All this does unquestionably give their friends and supporters a just cause of complaint; and though as a Free Trader I rejoice at the repeal of the Corn Laws, I must own that if I belonged to Peel's party I should feel the same disgust and indignation they all do. Then there is no denying the immensity of the moral mischief that has been done. It is very remarkable that I am the only person who has defended Peel and made any apology for him whatever. It is impossible that hundreds of people, members of both Houses of Parliament, and the whole press should go on day after day crying out against treachery and deceit and a violation of public honour, and not produce a deep and strong impression. When one hears the apologies the Ministers make for themselves, one cannot but feel how insufficient they are. There is no getting over the speeches that are flung in their faces; they are unquestionably now conscientious in what they are doing; but what were they before? If they were sincere before, if they did not anticipate the changes they are now (as they think) compelled to make, they were blind and unsafe guides, deficient in sagacity and foresight. I must say that, on calm reflexion, I think Peel has shown throughout this matter a considerable want of skill and wisdom. His scheme of gradual alteration and step by step Reform was wise, and probably was the only one practicable; but by his speeches he has counteracted his own object. He was so afraid of saying too much at first, and of prematurely frightening his friends, that he ran into the opposite danger of confirming them in the convictions and expectations which it was his object to loosen; and at all events, if he did say enough to alarm them with a vague alarm, he said so little as to give them the right they are now exercising of reproaching him for the deceit he practised. He would have done much better to have proclaimed boldly at first that the principle of Free Trade was sound, but that its application was difficult, and could only be made safely by being made gradually and slowly. In this way he might have availed himself of what he calls his three years' experiment; but when he puts it forward as the ground of his conversion, everybody laughs at it and knows he is not speaking the truth. For my part, I earnestly wish to see this question settled, and the Government out; they cannot remain in either advantageously or creditably. If they can redeem their credit, it must be out of office, and through the success of their measure. To have sacrificed themselves to it is the only atonement that can be accepted for their former disingenuous professions. Their position is now very mortifying and embarrassing; their people who vacate can none of them be re-elected.

Rous will be beaten for Westminster, which will be a great slap on the face to the Government. This is the result of bad management; he never ought to have resigned without being pretty sure of re-election; neither he nor the Government took any pains to ascertain his chance. He fancied himself secure, told Peel so, and Peel believed him. The tardy and reluctant resignations of seats of some, and the clinging to seats of others, have excited a good deal of derision and disapprobation; in short, there is no shutting one's eyes to the fact, that this measure, so salutary in itself, is making its way through much that is deplorable and injurious to public morals. It matters not that by a very minute analysis it may be proved that the men who are accused are not really so much to blame as they appear, that it is difficult to show clearly what they ought to have done at different periods instead of what they have done; the loud and general clamour produces an effect which cannot be prevented, and they have furnished out of their own mouths materials for any condemnation their enemies, old or new, are disposed to pass on them.

February 18th.—The night before last Peel made a very grand speech, vindicating himself in a very high tone, making out a very good case for his measure at this time, and dealing in details with his usual skill. It was certainly one of his most successful efforts, and Charles Villiers told Clarendon it was one of the finest speeches he ever heard in Parliament. It served, however, to widen the breach between himself and the Tory party. Clarendon told me that he had been very unfair to John Russell in one point, when he said that he thought he would have carried the measure if he had taken office; that he must know this was not the case, for Peel would not have been able to bring twenty people with him when out of office.

While Peel was making this great speech in the House of Commons, Stanley was making a very different sort of speech in the Lords. There he denounced the measure in strong terms, exhibited a bitter feeling, and a disposition to put himself at the head of the Protectionists and throw out the measure. Such was the impression he gave, and his speech was rapturously hailed both there and elsewhere. It filled with alarm all the moderate people, and encouraged the violent. It is, however, quite impossible to conjecture what he will do when it comes to the point. It is difficult to decide whether his object is ambition and power, or only sport and mischief. As to his forming a Government, he is himself quite as unfit as the rest are incompetent. There is probably not a public man in the country who inspires so little confidence. His speech, however, has made the cauldron boil more hotly than ever, and increased the doubt whether the measure will pass.

I have had a long correspondence with the Duke of Bedford about people and things connected with this affair, and as he was always drawing comparisons between the purity and consistency of Lord John, and the dishonesty and inconsistency of others, I at last resolved to show him what Lord John's own course had been (though without finding fault with him), but letting him see that he was just as obnoxious to the charge of inconsistency or insincerity, if an enemy wished to urge it, as Peel or anybody else. I proved to him that between 1828 when he became (by his own avowal) the advocate of a fixed duty and 1839, during eleven years, he never opened his lips in favour of it; and on every occasion when it was brought forward by anybody else, he voted against it or stayed away. Then he advocated a fixed duty in 1841; and having done so with cogent reasons up to June 1845, in November of the same year he blurted out his famous letter declaring for total Repeal. The only excuse that his conduct admits of is that of expediency, the very same that is demanded, on grounds at least as strong, for Peel; but circumstances place the one man beyond the necessity of an apology, and render the other incapable of making the real and true one. Peel's best excuse for not having done before what he is doing now is afforded by the actual state of affairs. In spite of four or five years of discussion, of the dissemination of sound principles, of the diffusion of knowledge, of numerous and respectable conversions, of the success of his partial experiments in Free Trade, and of his having the potato famine as a base for his operation, he cannot do what he does now without entirely breaking up his party, and he has to encounter difficulties almost insurmountable—si argumentum requiris circumspice.

February 25th.—The debate drags on, this being the third week of it. The Protectionists are very proud of the fight they have made, which in point of fact has been plausible and imposing enough, though for the most part consisting of sarcasms and assaults upon the Ministers and their supporters, and with a very slender portion of argument mixed therewith. Their great hero, Disraeli, spoke on Friday for two hours and a half, cleverly and pointedly; it was meant to be an argumentative speech, and to exhibit his powers in the grave line. Accordingly there was very little of his accustomed bitterness and impertinent sarcasms on Peel, but a great deal of statistical detail and reasoning upon it. The Protectionists thought it very fine, but in reality it was poor and worthless; and on Monday night Sir George Clerk, who is no great orator, made a very complete exposure of the fallacy of his arguments and the inaccuracy of his facts. Nobody has the least idea what the Lords will do, whether they will pass it, or throw it out altogether, or adopt Lord Ashburton's proposal of making the reduced sliding scale permanent.

These last few days we have been occupied with the Indian news, which has superseded the interest of the debate. Nobody knows what to think of it, the slaughter so dreadful, the success so equivocal, and the conduct of the authorities so questionable. At all events it was a great feat of arms as far as bravery and resolution go; but we seem to have been surprised, and it appears monstrous that a Sikh army should be provided with a matériel so superior to ours, an artillery with which ours could not cope.124

March 1st.—On Friday night at three o'clock, after twelve nights' debate, the House divided and the Government measure was carried by 97; but for the delay and some casualties the majority would have topped 100. George Bentinck, who had all along threatened to speak, and had gone through a most laborious preparation, and was armed at all points with statistical details, wound up the debate in a speech of three hours' length, which was listened to with great impatience, restrained only by consideration for a speaker so unused to address the House. As his speech consisted entirely of statistical details, it was, as might have been expected, intolerably tiresome, and he committed an enormous error in judgement in rising at twelve o'clock at night on the last day, when everybody was weary, exhausted, sick of the debate, and eager for the division. Nothing would have then gone down but a smart, brilliant, Israelitish philippic, if even that would. It was wonderful that the House was so enduring as it was, but everybody I have seen acknowledges that it was, all things considered, a very remarkable performance, exhibited great power of mind, extraordinary self-possession and clearness, and proving beyond a doubt that if he had for the last twenty years devoted himself to business instead of to horse-racing, if he had cultivated his mind and practised himself in the business of the House of Commons, he might have taken a high place in political life. My testimony as regards him is beyond suspicion, for we are not friends, and I have no doubt it is true that he has wasted energies and misused talents which, properly exercised, would have conferred on him an honourable fame, and made his career creditable and useful.

Cobden made an extraordinary speech last night, but one of the ablest I ever read, and it was, I am told, more striking still to hear, because so admirably delivered. The general opinion at Brooks's yesterday was, that this division would make the Lords pass the bill. On the whole, but with much hesitation, I incline to think so too; but it is very doubtful.

Now that we have got the whole of the Indian news, it is clear that Hardinge's mismanagement has been very great.125 He was in a continual cloud of error, not believing that would happen which did, though with every reason for its probability, and consequently making none of the preparations for encountering the danger, till so late that there was just a possibility of meeting and repelling it, and no more. From all these negligences and errors we have suffered such a loss as we never experienced in India before, so great as to take away all the pleasure and exultation we should naturally feel at a military exploit the brilliancy and bravery of which never was surpassed.

CHAPTER XXI.

Signs of the Weakness of Government—The Irish Coercion Bill—Lord John Russell on Ireland—Protectionist Opposition—The Oregon Question—Lord Brougham canvassed—Weakness of the Protectionists—Embarrassments of the Government—Violence of the Protectionists—The Victories in India—Change of Opinion among the Farmers—State of Ireland—Intentions of the Government—Lord Palmerston visits Paris—A scheme of Alliance with the Protectionists—Lord John Russell's Resolution—Lord Stanley's Violence—The Duke of Wellington's Dissatisfaction—Anecdote of the Father of Sir Robert Peel—Sir Robert Peel and Disraeli—Lord Palmerston in Paris—Irish Coercion Bill—The Protectionist Alliance—Conversation with Sir Robert Peel—Conversation with Sir James Graham—The Factory Bill—The last Debate in the Commons on the Corn Bill—Intrigues with the Protectionists—Defeated by Lord John Russell—Meeting at Lansdowne House—Fine Speech of Lord Stanley—'Alarm' wins the Emperor's Cup—Violent attacks on Sir Robert Peel—The conduct of Sir Robert Peel to Mr. Canning—Brougham and Stanley in the Lords—Opposition of the Whigs to the Coercion Bill—Anxiety of Lord John Russell to get back to Office—Mr. Disraeli renews the Attack on Peel—Lord George Bentinck and Disraeli worsted by Peel.

London, March 11th, 1846.—There has been nothing very remarkable these last few days, except on Friday night, when the Corn Bill went on rapidly, and the two amendments that had been announced were disposed of by being severally withdrawn. Early in the evening, however, the Government suffered a defeat, which was very significant for the future. It was on a Poor Law question, which Graham thought fit to fight. The majority against him was composed principally of malignant Tories. John Russell voted with the Government, but could not get the Whigs to stay for it; the Protectionists were uproarious at beating the Government; the Whigs desired no better than that they should be beaten; and so it will inevitably be. I do not think anything can prevent a change of Government very soon, whatever may happen afterwards. If Peel is wise, he will court this change, and let people see how matters can be managed by others, and without him.

March 18th.—Few events or matters worth recording. John Russell, without consulting anybody, according to his custom, gave notice of a motion upon Ireland, having made up his mind, though very reluctantly, not to oppose the Coercion Bill.126 I met him one morning at Lord Clarendon's, and talked to him about this Bill. His first intention had been to oppose the Transportation clause, and he said O'Connell had asked him what he meant to do. He replied he did not know. We discussed the matter; and I told him I did not see how he could take on himself the responsibility of opposing it; and he acknowledged that he did not see it very well either; but he then broke out with a bitterness beyond description against the Government, which he said was the greatest curse to Ireland, and that while they were in office no good was possible there. I did not think it worth while to dispute with him; but just asked him what it was they had done or left undone? He said, 'Their policy of first truckling to the Orangemen, insulting, and then making useless concessions to, the Catholics, without firmness or justice.' Nothing, in short, but what was vague and unmeaning. I said, that, as to the Orangemen, I did not know what the Government had done to them; but that if they had been favoured, they were very ungrateful, for they abhorred and abused the Government with all their strength. It was just after this, and I believe while the bile was still flowing, that he gave his notice. It made a great stir. The Protectionists eagerly hailed it as something that was to disable and unseat Peel, while his own friends were excessively annoyed and discomposed at what they thought a useless and dangerous move. The dissatisfaction was so great that it threatened to embroil him with his party, and the end was that the other night he put it off, which is tantamount to giving it up. The Duke of Bedford does not approve of it. I asked him why Lord John could not say what he wanted to say in a speech on the Bill itself, and he said he would ask him.

In the House of Commons, the Protectionists are bent on delay, and on not allowing the Bill to go up to the House of Lords before Easter. They are now the Opposition; they have elected George Bentinck their leader, and Beresford and Newdegate whippers-in. Stanley, by all accounts, declares himself more and more their leader in the Lords; and means to urge them on. He has also two whips of his own, Eglinton and Malmesbury. In the House of Commons they fix beforehand the day on which they will divide, and generally a very distant one. They settled some time ago to divide on the second reading next Friday week; ten days hence. Meanwhile, as the debates go on, the arguments which go forth to the country, the statistical details, and the progress of famine and pestilence in Ireland, strengthen the Government case, and produce effects on the public mind. The farmers in many places are more and more anxious for a settlement, and Peel's fame and the notion of his capacity for affairs extend.

Last night in the Lords a little scene was got up between Clarendon and Aberdeen about Oregon. The former asked for papers and information, and the latter made a speech, giving some papers, refusing others, and declaring his confidence in the final arrangement. It was not only amicable, but concerted. Aberdeen asked Clarendon to do this, in order to give him an opportunity of saying something. Means were at the same time taken to prevent anything being said in the House of Commons, where Aberdeen dreads Peel saying anything, for he is almost sure to say something he had better not. His forte is not in dealing with foreign affairs, with which it seems that it is always dangerous for anybody to meddle who is not in the trade. The division of labour seems as essential in politics as in matters of commerce and manual industry.

I was told the other day by Baring Wall, who had it from Labouchere, that John Russell was not disinclined to take in Brougham. I was surprised, for I thought Lord John disliked and distrusted him; so I asked the Duke of Bedford. He said that he was not surprised at the report; that Lord John had never objected to Brougham so much as some others; that in 1835 he was not one of those who wanted to get rid of him, and that at one of his meetings, at the crisis, he had thrown out a word about him, and said, 'What do you think about Brougham?' or something to that effect, on which somebody (he did not say who, and I did not ask him), vehemently opposed the idea of taking him in; when Lord John at once put an end to the discussion, by saying, 'Oh, very well,' and proceeding to something else, passing as it were to the order of the day, seeing it would not take, and probably not caring himself. But this was enough for Labouchere to think and to say that Lord John would not be averse to taking Brougham in. There is no doubt that he is ready to join any party—Whigs, Protectionists, or Peelites—who would have him, and they are all rather anxious to keep on good terms with him; but—except perhaps the Protectionists, who would be glad of an ally so powerful, though so perilous—not at all disposed to include him in any ministerial arrangement, or to form any close connexion with him. He is giving dinners to everybody, and keeping himself as open as possible for any engagement that may be offered to him.

March 21st, 1846.—Yesterday I went to Chiswick, where the Duke of Devonshire showed me his manuscripts, which he has got very well arranged. He gave me four boxes full of letters, written by his mother to her mother, Lady Spencer; the beginning of a long correspondence from the time of her marriage. These I am going to look over. He talked to me of Devonshire House in the old time, and the strange connexion that existed between the Duke, the Duchess, and Lady Elizabeth Foster.127 Lady Elizabeth, without great talents or great beauty, seems to have been one of those women, of whom there are rare instances, who are gifted with an undefinable attraction—or perhaps attractiveness is the word—which none can resist. Everybody was in love with her, and she exercised an influence of one sort or another up to the end of her life. In youth she drew to her lovers and friends, and made la pluie et le beau temps in society. In old age, Popes and Cardinals, savants and artists, attended her levées, rendered her an unceasing homage, and were obedient to all her wishes or commands.

The Tariff was got through last night; George Bentinck making a speech of two hours and a quarter. From never having spoken, he never now does anything else, and he is completely overdoing it, and, like a beggar set on horseback, riding to the devil. Stanley, in the House of Lords, declared his intention to oppose the Bill; but he tells his friends he will neither lead an Opposition nor make a Government. As the time advances, the division in the House of Lords looks more promising for Government. The delay which the Protectionists have caused has been of great service to the measure, for the longer the debates continue, the more effect is produced by the speeches in Parliament, the statistics published, and the able articles in the press. On the other hand, the new Opposition have cut a poor figure in point of reasoning and argument. Abstracting their abuse and charges of treachery and perfidy, very little is left in their speeches. The Court seem now to be convinced that Peel will eventually be obliged to go out, and that Lord John must come in.

March 29th.—Everything here is in a disturbed, doubtful, and uneasy state; people angry, perplexed, and dissatisfied. The second reading was carried on Friday night, after four nights' debate, by 88—nine less than the first great division. Graham and Peel both spoke. The first made an attack on Shaw, who deserved to be attacked; but it was so clumsily, so savagely done, that it only recoiled on himself. Peel was heavy, but he was explicit enough about his intentions and expectations as to office. He said he knew that with 112 men he could not go on, and they could turn him out when they would. It is, however, said he is resolved to cling to office as long as he can. I believe he will only resolve not to quit it till he has carried through the Corn Bill. To-night there is the devil to pay about the Irish question. The Whigs and Irish are going to move the previous question, and postpone the Coercion Bill. If the Protectionists stay away in any numbers (much more if they vote), the Government will be beaten. It is, however, not expected that Peel will resign if he is beaten, but everything that has been and is done with regard to this Bill is wrong. In the first place, the Government are much to blame in not having had the Bill ready when Parliament met. They ought to have laid it on the table the first night, and urged it through as quickly as possible, instead of waiting for a month before they brought it in, and letting three months elapse before its passing. Then, as it is brought in, and the Whigs don't mean to oppose it, it is very absurd and very wrong to prevent the first reading; for the delay will not expedite the Corn Bill, and the Coercion Bill is of more urgent importance than the other. Bessborough and many of the party are very much against this move, and the whole Irish question is proving a serious cause of disagreement among them.

The state of parties is curious and full of difficulty. The Protectionists are bent upon turning Peel out, and if possible grow more, rather than less, bitter. On Friday this was especially apparent; no Prime Minister was ever treated as Peel was by them that night, when he rose to speak. The Marquis of Granby rose at the same time, and for five minutes they would not hear Peel, and tried to force their man on the House, and to make the Prime Minister sit down. The Speaker alone decided it, and called on Peel. When he said he knew they could turn him out, they all cheered savagely. Then the Whigs are just as eager to be in active opposition again; so that between the two parties—the rage and vengeance of the one, and the habitual rivalry of the other—his fall is certain. But the other night George Bentinck, the Protectionist organ, told the Whigs he would oppose them, so that when the Whig Government is formed, though it may be suffered to go on for a time, it will be intrinsically very weak and powerless, for the ultra-Liberals rather lean to Peel than to John Russell. Such a state of things, so confused, so uncertain, so at the sport of events and circumstances, never was seen before. Many people fancy that Peel will not go out, though they are quite unable to show how he is to stay in; but everybody sees clearly enough that parties are so divided and power so scattered, that any Government that can be formed must hold office by a very feeble and doubtful tenure. At present, however, Peel holds office for the sole purpose of carrying the Bill. The Whigs are guarding him, while he is doing this work, ready to turn against him the moment he has done it, and then, this great contest over, the Protectionists will either join the Whigs in their first onset, or leave him to his fate. They do not care what happens so long as they can break up this Government; they do not care how public business can be carried on, or by whom; whether a strong or a weak Government can be formed. Revenge is their sole object.

April 4th.—The Government would have been beaten on the Irish question if the division had taken place earlier than it did. John O'Connell would speak, and the time he gave saved a defeat. We are now involved in a maze of endless delays, but the news of the great victory at Sobraon and termination of the Sikh war has put the world in such good spirits, and filled everybody with such joy, that for the time everything else has been almost forgotten. There certainly never was anything more complete than this piece of Indian history, so grand and so dramatic, such a glorious mixture of bravery and moderation, and such a display of national dignity and power. Auckland said to me last night that it was impossible to pick a fault if you wished to do so. He approves of everything that Hardinge has done. The Duke was very energetic in the House of Lords on the thanks; and it is a fine thing for him to have lived to see his military children covering themselves with glory on the scene of his own first achievements half a century ago, and himself still hale, fresh, and his intellect vigorous and unclouded.

The delay that the Protectionists have contrived to make in the Free Trade measures is proving fatal to their cause, for it is now past a doubt that a great change has been produced over all the country among the farmers. They do not care for, do not dread, the repeal of the Corn Laws, but they do most particularly wish to have the question settled. The evidences of this change are not to be mistaken, and many of the Protectionists admit it. They find to their astonishment that there is no depreciation in landed property, that there is no difficulty in letting farms, and that rents are generally rising rather than falling.

April 23rd.—I was all last week at Newmarket, and as a matter of course utterly disabled from writing, reading, or thinking about politics or anything else. Came back on Friday night, went to Bath on Monday, and returned yesterday. Nothing can be more deplorable than the state of affairs, or less promising in reference to the existence or formation of a strong Government and the improvement of Ireland, the present paramount object of interest. The unhappy Irish Coercion Bill still lingers on in the House of Commons; and Monday night, when there seemed to be a chance of the Irish consenting to divide, there was no House. This had a very bad appearance, and was the fault of the Whippers-in; but probably they have a difficult duty to discharge, for their numbers are scanty and their people are indifferent, thinking the Government itself on its last legs. Peel is said to have been much annoyed. After all, it is more than probable that the Irish Bill will not pass. The Duke of Bedford told me yesterday that Bessborough and Clanricarde, the two Whigs who most strenuously supported it, have now entirely changed their minds and are convinced it will do more harm than good, and that in fact it has already done a great deal of harm. Clanricarde has been in Ireland, and is come back of this opinion. Blake, who has also been there, and had much conversation with the Lord-Lieutenant, says that he never remembers Ireland in so bad a state, political and social. The consequence of all this is that John Russell is gone into the country, and does not mean to come back and vote on the Bill. Still, as the Protectionists mean to vote for the first reading, it will probably be carried, but it will hardly make its way through the other stages in the midst of such vehement opposition and lukewarm support. In my opinion, they deserve every distress and difficulty in which they may be placed, for their conduct about this Bill. If it was necessary at all, the necessity was urgent and admitted of no delay; if the country can go on without it for three or four months (three have already elapsed), it may as well go on for ever. The moment Parliament met, it ought to have been ready; and when they let week after week pass away without doing anything, and only did it at last when poked by Brougham, they lost their best title to general support. However, the final decision on this Bill will probably not take place till the Corn Law has got through the House of Lords, and then if Ministers are beaten upon it, it will be a good opportunity for their resigning. This I find they are quite prepared to do.

The Duke of Bedford gave me some information the other day which exhibits the present views and animus of the different parties. The Peelites and the Protectionists equally contemplate the speedy advent of John Russell, and both have made overtures, direct or indirect, to him. Aberdeen called on Lord John the other day about some private business, after discussing which he talked on politics. He said that it was impossible they could go on, that Peel was well aware of it, and quite determined not to dissolve Parliament; that he did not know on what question they would have to go out; that he was told it would not be on the sugar duties, and that they should carry them; but that it was clear they would be beaten on something else if not on that; that a Whig Government must be formed, which must rely upon Peel and his friends for support, and would receive it. He told him that he had been wrong in not giving Peel credit for a real intention to support him before, and that he must look to that support for the future. John Russell would not distrust Aberdeen's sincerity, but it would be difficult to make him place reliance on that of Peel.

On the other hand, the Duke of Bedford came up with George Bentinck in the train the other day, and had much talk with him. George Bentinck said that they were aware Lord John must come in, and were not indisposed to support him; that they wanted to turn Peel out, and that if he was to move a vote of want of confidence he could now keep all his people together for it, but that they were afraid the Whigs would come to Peel's support and defeat them. He beat about the bush to find out whether this was probable, or whether the Whigs would be disposed to accept the support of the Protectionists. All this the Duke told his brother. He said that Lord John was not tempted by this bait, and very properly said, 'The question is, Do we agree with the Protectionists?' But he said that, though this was Lord John's feeling, there were many of the party (and 'I should surprise you,' he said, 'if I told you who they are') who are inclined to coalesce with the Protectionists for the purpose and to accept their support. This is certainly a most curious political entanglement, full of uncertainty and affording an open field for intrigues of all kinds.

Palmerston has been preparing for his return to the Foreign Office by a visit to Paris, where his name has been held in terror and execration for some years; and the intelligence of his probable restoration to power created universal dismay. Nevertheless, his visit has been triumphantly successful. The Court, the Ministers, the Opposition, the political leaders of all shades, have vied with each other in civilities and attentions. He has dined with the King, with Guizot, with Thiers, with Broglie, with Molé; he met with nothing but smiles, prévenance and empressement. Brougham was furious; he did all he could to prevent the Palmerstons going to Paris, abused them for going, and everybody whom he thought instrumental to their going, and when they arrived fawned upon them and insisted on doing the honours of them everywhere. He is now come back, but he had written to Le Marchant a letter full of spite, and desiring that nobody would believe what they heard of Palmerston's reception, which was by no means cordial and sincere; and that in their hearts they disliked his coming there, and hated him as much as ever.

Newmarket, Sunday.—For once in a way I sit down to write something at this place where I never do anything; but I have got the gout, and that, by disabling my foot, sets my hand to work. Yesterday morning I saw Clarendon and had a long talk with him on the subject of the Duke of Bedford's communication to me, which he had likewise had from the Duke even with more details. He told him (which he had not done me) the names of the people who wanted the Whigs to coalesce with the Protectionists. These are Lords Anglesey and Bessborough. The former, I hardly know why, except from a fancy he seems to have to join what he considers the most aristocratic party; the second is taken in by all the wonderful things the Protectionists offer to do for Ireland, and which have been conveyed to him through Duncannon by George Bentinck. Accordingly, Bessborough wrote off to John Russell, urging this strange and disgraceful alliance. It seems that the Protectionists profess to be ready to do anything the Irish please, provided they will not be expected to destroy the Irish Church; but even any reform in that they are prepared for. It was evidently in pursuance of this scheme that the ridiculous farce was got up between Smith O'Brien and George Bentinck in the House of Commons on Friday night. Hearing now what has already passed with Bessborough, it is impossible to doubt that this scene has been concocted and concerted after considerable preparation, though at present I have no idea how or with whom it originated; it smells of the same shop, however. Clarendon said he did not imagine there would be any hesitation or doubt on the subject, or that any of the leading Whigs are in the least disposed to connect themselves with a party with whom they have no community of principle or opinion, by whom they know they are detested, and whom they heartily despise. This eccentricity of Bessborough's shows how unfit he is to take the lead and to direct affairs. His forte is in patching up quarrels, finding expedients for especial cases, and acting as a general go-between and negotiator, in which minor matters he displays a good deal of tact and temper.

Clarendon told me that Lord John had resolved, if sent for again, to take the government at once, and not make any difficulties. He and I both agreed that he must rely on Peel, and take his chance of his reliance being well placed. It is the straightforward, intelligible, and honourable course, and he had far better fall by that than succeed by such a monstrous and discreditable connexion as that with the Protectionists would be. The latter have now but one object, which is to turn out Peel, to wreak their vengeance on him, and they do not care what happens after, whether there is a good or bad, a weak or strong Government, nor what confusion or difficulty may occur. They are ready to join the detested Whigs, and to concur in the whole of those Liberal measures, by a partial adoption of which Peel had already rendered himself so obnoxious to them. No considerations of consistency, no care for the public interests, in the slightest degree influence their minds. It is impossible, however, to suppose that this party, now breathing nothing but rage and revenge, can be long held together for such an end. They entertain some glimmering of hope that events may open the way to their accession to office, and they want to hold together for this chance. Bessborough, however, who seems to have taken a very low view of the matter all along, urged John Russell to connect himself with the Protectionists rather than with Peel, for this reason: that Peel was all staff, and no rank and file; men who would want offices and high ones, and bring little strength; whereas the others would bring great numbers, and be satisfied with very few and very subordinate offices! A very likely matter with a party of which George Bentinck and Disraeli are the leaders in the Commons and Stanley in the Lords! À propos of Stanley, he is supposed to be by this time identified with the Protectionists, and embarked in vehement opposition to the Government, in direct contradiction of all his promises and professions when he left them. Sidney Herbert told me the other day that when he went out he was still on excellent terms with them, and told them that he was well aware the Bill must pass, and that now he considered it best that it should; and he intimated his intention to prevent opposition as much as he could. Graham said long ago his moderation never would continue.

The Duke of Bedford has lately had a great deal of conversation with Arbuthnot, who talked to him very openly and told him a great many things about Peel, all unfavourable. I don't believe he (Arbuthnot) has ever liked him, and now, with others of the Duke of Wellington's friends, he is full of resentment against him for breaking up the party, and for dragging the Duke, much against his inclinations and opinions, through all this mire. Arbuthnot, as an old Tory deeply imbued with Tory principles and the alter ego of the Duke, whose disgust and annoyance he well knows at the whole state of affairs, is naturally very bitter against Peel. He told him that the Duke never knows anything of what is going on. They never tell him, and he is so deaf that in the Cabinet he does not hear. When they want him to know or to do something, Peel sends for Arbuthnot and tells it to him, well knowing he will report it to the Duke. Then he sends for papers, reads what is necessary for his information, and without concert or communication with anybody goes down to the House of Lords and speaks; hence the strange things he says, and the confusion that is often made between the apparent opinions of the Duke and his colleagues.

Arbuthnot told the Duke of Bedford an anecdote, which I have great difficulty in believing. It is this: that when he was at the Treasury one day, old Sir Robert Peel called on him and said, 'I am come to you about a matter of great importance to myself, but which I think is also of importance to your Government. If you do not speedily confer high office on my son he will go over to the Whigs, and be for ever lost to the party.' He told Lord Liverpool this, who immediately made young Peel Irish Secretary. If it is true, never did any father do a greater injury to a son, for if Peel had joined a more congenial party he might have followed the bent of his political inclination, and would have escaped all the false positions in which he has been placed; instead of the insincere career that he has pursued, which must have been replete with internal mortification, disgust, and shame, he might have given out his real sentiments and acted upon them. He would neither have fettered nor perverted his understanding, and he would have been an abler, a better, and a happier man, besides incomparably more useful to the country. As it is, his whole life has been spent in doing enormous mischief, and in attempts to repair that mischief. It will be a curious biography whenever it comes to be written, but not a creditable one.

On Friday night there was a breeze between Peel and Disraeli which at first appeared menacing, but ended amicably enough, though amicable is hardly a word to be used between these two men. But there was very near being something more serious out of the House owing to the excitement of Jonathan Peel. Disraeli had commented on Peel's cheering a certain part of Cobden's speech in his usual tone of impertinence and bitterness, and he said that Peel had by his cheer expressed his concurrence with such and such sentiments. Peel interrupted him, saying, 'I utterly deny it,' on which Disraeli said he had given him the lie, and sat down. Then came all that is reported, which ended as I have said, but in the meantime Jonathan Peel went over to Disraeli, sat down by him and said, 'What you have just said is false.' He repeated it, and then went to George Bentinck and told him what he had just said. Disraeli was so astonished that he said nothing at first, but soon went to George Bentinck, told him also, and placed the matter in his hands. This made a referee necessary on Jonathan Peel's side, and he went and fetched Rous and put him in communication with George Bentinck. As soon as Rous heard the story he saw that his principal could not be justified, and he consented to an apology which was agreed on between him and George Bentinck, who seems to have acted with becoming moderation. The apology was not abject, but it was ample. Peel is a man of quick passions and excitable temper, but he generally has great command over himself, which he lost on this occasion.

May 3rd.—At Newmarket all last week. Stanley was there, joking and chaffing all the time, but I could not hear that he talked seriously upon politics; he was always with George Bentinck. The Palmerstons are come back from Paris, after a successful visit, excepting only his foolish letter to Louis Philippe.128 They say, however, now that he wrote it because it was suggested to him by somebody (meaning somebody about the Court) that it would be well taken; but it was a great mistake of his, and is thought very ridiculous here. Madame de Lieven writes me word 'that his language was très-mesuré et très-convenable,' but Normanby, who is just come over, says the French were beginning to ask themselves why they were so civil and empressés, and could not answer the question, and that in a few more days the tide would have turned, and something disagreeable would have been said or done. Normanby, who had made Ibrahim Pacha's acquaintance at Florence, took Palmerston to see him; and when he presented him, the Pacha was so diverted at finding himself thus face to face with the great enemy of his house, that he burst out into an uncontrollable fit of laughter, but he received him very well.