LORD GEORGE BENTINCK

A POLITICAL BIOGRAPHY

By Benjamin Disraeli

'He left us the legacy of heroes: the memory of his great name and theinspiration of his great example. '

TO

LORD HENRY BENTINCK, IS INSCRIBED

This Political Biography

ONE FOR WHOM HE ENTERTAINED A DEEP AFFECTION, AND WHOSE TALENTS AND VIRTUES

HE SHARES. 

LORD GEORGE BENTINCK

A POLITICAL BIOGRAPHY

[Illustration: bentink-page009]

CHAPTER I. 

 _The Man_

THE political career of Lord George Bentinck was peculiar. He had, touse his own expression, 'sate in eight Parliaments without having takenpart in any great debate, ' when remarkable events suddenly impelled himto advance and occupy not only a considerable but a leading positionin our public affairs. During three years, under circumstances of greatdifficulty, he displayed some of the highest qualities of politicallife: courage and a lofty spirit; a mastery of details which experienceusually alone confers; a quick apprehension and a clear intelligence;indomitable firmness; promptness, punctuality, and perseverance whichnever failed; an energy seldom surpassed; and a capacity for labourwhich was perhaps never equalled. At the very moment when he hadovercome many contrarieties and prejudices; when he had been mostsuccessful in the House of Commons, and, sustained only by his ownresources, had considerably modified the legislation of the governmentwhich he opposed on a measure of paramount importance; when the nation, which had long watched him with interest, began to congratulate itselfon the devotion of such a man to the business of the country, he was inan instant taken from us. Then it was that, the memory of the past andthe hope of the future blending together, all men seemed to mourn overthis untimely end, and there was that pang in the public heart whichaccompanies the unexpected disappearance of a strong character. 

What manner of man this was, who thus on a sudden in the middle term oflife relinquished all the ease and pleasure of a patrician existence towork often eighteen hours daily, not for a vain and brilliant notoriety, which was foreign alike both to his tastes and his turn of mind, but forthe advancement of principles, the advocacy of which in the chief sceneof his efforts was sure to obtain for him only contention and unkindlyfeelings; what were his motives, purposes and opinions; how and whydid he labour; what were the whole scope and tendency of this original, vigorous, and self-schooled intelligence; these would appear to besubjects not unworthy of contemplation, and especially not uninterestingto a free and political community. 

The difficulty of treating cotemporary characters and events has beenever acknowledged; but it may be doubted whether the difficulty isdiminished when we would commemorate the men and things that havepreceded us. The cloud of passion in the first instance, or in theother the mist of time, may render it equally hard and perplexing todiscriminate. 

It should not be forgotten that the most authentic and interestinghistories are those which have been composed by actors in thetransactions which they record. The cotemporary writer who is personallyfamiliar with his theme has unquestionably a great advantage; but it isassumed that his pen can scarcely escape the bias of private friendshipor political connection. Yet truth, after all, is the sovereign passionof mankind; nor is the writer of these pages prepared to relinquish hisconviction that it is possible to combine the accuracy of the presentwith the impartiality of the future. 

Lord George Bentinck had sat for eighteen years in Parliament, and, before he entered it, had been for three years private secretary to Mr. Canning, who had married the sister of the Duchess of Portland. Such apost would seem a happy commencement of a public career; but whetherit were the untimely death of his distinguished relative, or a naturalindisposition, Lord George--though he retained the seat for King'sLynn, in which he had succeeded his uncle, the late governor-general ofIndia--directed his energies to other than parliamentary pursuits. Forsome time he had followed his profession, which was that of arms, butof late years he had become absorbed in the pastime and fortunes of theturf, in which his whole being seemed engrossed, and which he pursued ona scale that perhaps has never been equalled. 

Lord George had withdrawn his support from the government of the Duke ofWellington, when the friends of Mr. Canning quitted that administration;and when in time they formed not the least considerable portion of thecabinet of Lord Grey, he resumed his seat on the ministerial benches. Onthat occasion an administrative post was offered him and declined; andon subsequent occasions similar requests to him to take office wereequally in vain. Lord George, therefore, was an original and heartysupporter of the Reform Bill, and he continued to uphold the Whigs inall their policy until the secession of Lord Stanley, between whom andhimself there subsisted warm personal as well as political sympathies. Although he was not only a friend to religious liberty, as we shall haveoccasion afterwards to remark, but always viewed with great sympathythe condition of the Roman Catholic portion of the Irish population, heshrank from the taint of the ultra-montane intrigue. AccompanyingLord Stanley, he became in due time a member of the great Conservativeopposition, and, as he never did anything by halves, became one ofthe most earnest, as he certainly was one of the most enlightened, supporters of Sir Robert Peel. His trust in that minister was indeedabsolute, and he has subsequently stated in conversation that when, towards the end of the session of '45, a member of the Tory partyventured to predict and denounce the impending defection of theminister, there was no member of the Conservative party who moreviolently condemned the unfounded attack, or more readily impugned themotives of the assailant. 

He was not a very frequent attendant in the House. He might be countedon for a party division, and when, towards the termination of theMelbourne ministry, the forces were very nearly balanced, and thestruggle became very close, he might have been observed, on morethan one occasion, entering the House at a late hour, clad in awhite great-coat, which softened, but did not conceal, the scarlethunting-coat. 

Although he took no part in debate, and attended the House rather as aclub than as a senate, he possessed a great and peculiar influence init. He was viewed with interest, and often with extraordinary regard, by every sporting man in the House. With almost all of these he wasacquainted; some of them, on either side, were his intimate companionsand confederates. 

His eager and energetic disposition; his quick perception, clearjudgment, and prompt decision; the tenacity with which he clung to hisopinions; his frankness and love of truth; his daring and speculativespirit; his lofty bearing, blended as it was with a simplicity of mannervery remarkable; the ardour of his friendships, even the fiercenessof his hates and prejudices--all combined to form one of those strongcharacters who, whatever may be their pursuit, must always direct andlead. 

Nature had clothed this vehement spirit with a material form which wasin perfect harmony with its noble and commanding character. He was talland remarkable for his presence; his countenance almost a model of manlybeauty; the face oval, the complexion clear and mantling; the foreheadlofty and white; the nose aquiline and delicately moulded; the upperlip short. But it was in the dark-brown eye, which flashed with piercingscrutiny, that all the character of the man came forth: a brilliantglance, not soft, but ardent, acute, imperious, incapable of deceptionor of being deceived. 

Although he had not much sustained his literary culture, and of lateyears, at any rate, had not given his mind to political study, he hadin the course of his life seen and heard a great deal, and with profit. Nothing escaped his observation; he forgot nothing and always thought. So it was that on all the great political questions of the day he hadarrived at conclusions which guided him. He always took large viewsand had no prejudices about things, whatever he might indulge in asto persons. He was always singularly anxious to acquire the truth, andwould spare no pains for that purpose; but when once his mind was madeup, it was impossible to influence him. 

In politics, he was a Whig of 1688, which became him, modified, however, by all the experience of the present age. He wished to see our societyfounded on a broad basis of civil and religious liberty. He retainedmuch of the old jealousy of the court, but had none of popularfranchises. He was for the Established Church, but for nothing more, and was very repugnant to priestly domination. As for the industrialquestion, he was sincerely opposed to the Manchester scheme, becausehe thought that its full development would impair and might subvert ourterritorial constitution, which he held to be the real security of ourfreedom, and because he believed that it would greatly injure Ireland, and certainly dissolve our colonial empire. 

He had a great respect for merchants, though he looked with somedegree of jealousy on the development of our merely foreign trade. Hisknowledge of character qualified him in a great degree to govern men. And if some drawbacks from this influence might be experienced in histoo rigid tenacity of opinion, and in some quickness of temper, which, however, always sprang from a too sensitive heart, great compensationmight be found in the fact that there probably never was a human beingso entirely devoid of conceit and so completely exempt from selfishness. Nothing delighted him more than to assist and advance others. All thefruits of his laborious investigations were always at the service ofhis friends without reserve or self-consideration. He encouraged themby making occasions for their exertions, and would relinquish his ownopportunity without a moment's hesitation, if he thought the abandonmentmight aid a better man. 

CHAPTER II. 

 _The Protection Problem_

THERE was at this time a metropolitan society for the protection ofagriculture, of which the Duke of Richmond was chairman, and whichhad been established to counteract the proceedings of the Manchesterconfederation. It was in communication with the local Protectionsocieties throughout the country; and although the adhesion to itsservice by the parliamentary members of the old Conservative party hadbeen more limited than might have been expected, nevertheless manycounty members were enrolled in its ranks, and a few of the most eminentwere actively engaged in its management. In this they were assisted byan equal number of the most considerable tenant-farmers. In the presentstate of affairs, the council of the Protection Society afforded theearliest and readiest means to collect opinion and methodize action; andit was therefore resolved among its managers to invite all members ofParliament who sympathized with their purpose, though they might not bemembers of their society, to attend their meeting and aid them at thepresent crisis with their counsel. 

A compliance with this request occasioned the first public appearanceof Lord George Bentinck, as one of the organizers of a politicalparty, --for he aspired to no more. The question was, whether a thirdpolitical party could be created and sustained, --a result at all timesand under any circumstances difficult to achieve, and which had failedeven under the auspices of accomplished and experienced statesmen. Inthe present emergency, was there that degree of outraged public feelingin the country, which would overcome all obstacles and submit to anyinconveniences, in order to ensure its representation in the House ofCommons? It was the opinion of Lord George Bentinck that such was thecase; that if for the moment that feeling was inert and latent, it wasan apathy which arose from the sudden shock of public confidence, andthe despair which under such circumstances takes possession of men;that if it could be shown to the country, that the great bulk of theConservative party were true to their faith, and were not afraid, evenagainst the fearful odds which they would have to encounter, to proclaimit, the confidence and the courage of the country would rally, and theparty in the House of Commons would find external sympathy and support. 

With these views it became of paramount importance that the discussionon the government measure should be sustained on the part of theProtectionists with their utmost powers. They must prove to the country, that they could represent their cause in debate, and to this end alltheir energies must be directed. It would be fatal to them if thediscussion were confined to one or two nights, and they overborne bythe leading and habitual speakers. They must bring forward new men; theymust encourage the efforts of those now unrecognized and comparativelyunknown; they must overcome all reserve and false shame, and act asbecame men called upon to a critical and leading part, not by theirarrogance or ambition, but by the desertion and treachery of those towhose abilities they had bowed without impatience and reluctance. Therewas a probability of several vacancies immediately taking place incounties where the seats were filled by converts, but men of tooscrupulous an honour to retain the charge which they had sought andaccepted as the professors of opinions contrary to those which nowreceived their mournful adhesion. The result of these elections wouldgreatly depend upon the spirit and figure of the party in the House ofCommons, in their first encounter with the enemy. 

These views, so just and so spirited, advanced with high-bredearnestness by one rarely met in political turmoils, and enforced with afreshness and an affable simplicity which were very winning, wonderfullyencouraged those to whom they were addressed. All seemed touched by theflame which burned in the breast of that man, so lofty in his thoughtsbut so humble in his ambition, who counselled ever the highest deeds, and was himself ever prepared to undertake the humblest duties. 

The business of this day was notable. Calculations were made of thosewho might be fairly counted on to take a part in debate; some discussioneven ensued as to who should venture to reply late at night to theminister; a committee was appointed to communicate with all members oneither side supposed to be favourable to the principle of Protection tothe labour of the country; a parliamentary staff was organized, not onlyto secure the attendance of members, but to guard over the elections;finally, the form of the amendment to the government measure wasdiscussed and settled, and it was agreed that, if possible, it should bemoved by Mr. Philip Miles, the member for the city of Bristol, andwho had the ear of the House not merely from the importance of hisconstituency, and seconded by Sir William Heathcote, the member for thecounty of Hampshire, a country gentleman of great accomplishments, andso highly considered by both sides that he was very generally spoken ofas a probable successor to the chair. 

All was furnished by this lately forlorn party except a leader, and eventhen many eyes were turned and some hopeful murmurs addressed towardsLord George Bentinck, who in the course of this morning had given suchvarious proofs of his fitness and such evidence of his resource. But heshook his head with a sort of suppressed smile, a faint blush, and anair of proud humility that was natural to him: 'I think, ' he said, 'wehave had enough of leaders; it is not in my way; I shall remain the lastof the rank and file. '

So little desirous, originally, was Lord George Bentinck to interfereactively in that great controversy in which ultimately he took soleading a part, that before the meeting of Parliament in 1846 he beggeda gentleman whom he greatly esteemed, a member of the legal profession, and since raised to its highest honours, to call upon him at HarcourtHouse, when he said that he had taken great pains to master the caseof the protective system; that he was convinced its abrogation wouldultimately be very injurious to this country; but although, bothin point of argument and materials, he feared no opponent, he feltconstitutionally so incapable of ever making a speech, that he wishedto induce some eminent lawyer to enter the House of Commons, and availhimself of his views and materials, which he had, with that object, reduced to writing. He begged, therefore, that his friend, although afree-trader, would assist him, by suggesting a fitting person for thisoffice. 

Accordingly, the name of a distinguished member of the bar, who hadalready published a work of merit, impugning the principles of the newcommercial system, was mentioned, and this learned gentleman was appliedto, and was not indisposed to accept the task. A mere accident preventedthis arrangement being accomplished. Lord George then requested hisfriend to make some other selection; but his adviser very sensiblyreplied, that although the House of Commons would have listened withrespect to a gentleman who had given evidence of the sincerity of hisconvictions by the publication of a work which had no reference toParliament, they would not endure the instance of a lawyer brought intothe House merely to speak from his brief; and that the attempt would beutterly fruitless. He earnestly counselled Lord George himself to makethe effort; but Lord George, with characteristic tenacity, clung forsome time to his project, though his efforts to accomplish it werefortunately not successful. 

Some of the friends of Lord George Bentinck, remembering hisinexperience in debate, aware of the great length at which he mustnecessarily treat the theme, and mindful that he was not physicallywell-qualified for controlling popular assemblies, not having a strongvoice, or, naturally, a very fluent manner, were anxious that he shouldnot postpone his speech until an hour so late; that an audience, jadedby twelve nights' discussion, would be ill-attuned to statisticalarguments and economical details. But still clinging to the hopethat some accident might yet again postpone the division, so thatthe Protectionists might gain the vote of Mr. Hildyard, who had beenreturned that day for South Notts, having defeated a cabinet minister, Lord George remained motionless until long past midnight. Mr. Cobdenhaving spoken on the part of the confederation, the closing of thedebate was felt to be inevitable. Even then, by inducing a Protectionistto solicit the Speaker's eye, Lord George attempted to avert thedivision; but no supporter of the government measure, of any colour, advancing to reply to this volunteer, Bentinck was obliged to rise. He came out like a lion forced from his lair. And so it happened, thatafter all his labours of body and mind, after all his research andunwearied application and singular vigilance, after having been at hispost for a month, never leaving the House, even for refreshment, hehad to undertake the most difficult enterprise in which a man can wellembark, with a concurrence of every disadvantage which could ensurefailure and defeat. It would seem that the audience, the subject, andthe orator, must be equally exhausted; for the assembly had listened fortwelve nights to the controversy, and he who was about to address themhad, according to his strange habit, taken no sustenance the whole day;it being his custom to dine after the House was up, which was veryoften long after midnight, and this, with the exception of a slenderbreakfast, rigidly restricted to dry toast, was his only meal in thefour-and-twenty hours. 

He had been forced to this regimen, from food exercising a lethargicinfluence over him; so that, in addition to some constitutional weaknessin his organ, he usually laboured, when he addressed the House, underthe disadvantage of general exhaustion. And this was, no doubt, aprincipal cause of that over-excitement and apparently unnecessaryenergy in his manner of speaking, of which he was himself perfectly, and even painfully, conscious. He was wont to say, that before he couldspeak he had to make a voice, and, as it were, to pump it from the verycore of his frame. One who took a great interest in his success onceimpressed on him the expediency of trusting entirely to his naturalvoice and the interest and gravity of his matter, which, combinedwith his position as the recognized leader of a great party, would beadequate to command the attention of his audience; and he subsequentlyendeavoured very often to comply with this suggestion. He endeavouredalso very much to control his redundancy of action and gesture, whenthat peculiarity was pointed out to him with the delicacy, but thesincerity, of friendship. He entirely freed himself from a very awkwardfeature of his first style of speaking, namely, the frequent repetitionof a sentence, which seemed at first a habit inveterate with him; butsuch was his force of will, that when the necessity of ridding himselfof this drawback was properly pointed out to him, he achieved thedesired result. No one bore criticism more gently and kindly, so long asit was confined to his personal and intellectual characteristics, for hewas a man absolutely without vanity or conceit, who thought very humblyof himself, in respect of abilities, and deemed no labour too great toachieve even a slight improvement. But though in these respects the verychild of simplicity, he was a man of almost unexampled pride, and chafedunder criticism, when his convictions or his conduct were questioned. Hewas very tenacious of his opinion, almost inexorable; and it requireda courage nearly equal to his own, combined with a serene temper, successfully to impugn his conclusions. 

Not, therefore, excited by vanity, but sustained by self-respect, byan overpowering feeling that he owed it to himself and the opinions heheld, to show to the world that they had not been lightly adopted andshould not be lightly laid aside, Bentinck rose, long past the noon ofnight, at the end of this memorable debate, to undertake an officefrom which the most successful and most experienced rhetoricians ofParliament would have shrunk with intuitive discretion. But duty scornsprudence, and criticism has few terrors for a man with a great purpose. Unshaken by the adverse hour and circumstances, he proceeded toaccomplish the object which he had long meditated, and for which he wasfully prepared. 

Reminding the House, while he appealed to their indulgence, that, thoughhe had had the honour of a seat for eight parliaments, he had never onceventured to trespass on its time on any subject of great debate, heat once took a clear and comprehensive ground of objection to thegovernment scheme. He opposed it not only because he objected to thegreat change contemplated with respect to the agricultural interest, but, on principle, to the entire measure, 'a great commercialrevolution, which we are of opinion that the circumstances of thecountry do not by any means require. '

Noticing the observation of the Secretary at War, that the agriculturalinterest, in submitting to this great change, might now accept it withhonour, instead of its being eventually extorted by force, he happilyretorted, that vicious as he thought the measure, he should feel itdeprived of half its vice if it could be carried without loss of honour, damage to reputation, and forfeiture of public character to a vastnumber of gentlemen now present. And he proceeded to show among othertestimonies, by an appeal to the distinct language of the speech fromthe throne on the dissolution of 1841, that 'every member who occupied aseat in this House was returned pledged either to oppose or maintain theprinciple of protection to national industry. '

Adverting to the new position, that the experience of the lastthree years justified the reversal of the system which the existingadministration had been summoned to office to uphold, he wiselyremarked, that 'the country will not be satisfied with three years'experience of any system. Three years' experience is not sufficientlyextensive to afford a proper criterion by which we may decide thefailure or success of any description of policy whatsoever. '

Noticing that the minister had more especially founded 'his presentbelief in doctrines contrary to those which he had heretofore uniformlymaintained, ' by the assumption that the price of corn would not be morereduced than the price of cattle and other commodities affected by thetariff of 1842, and also by the results of previous experiments in theinstances of silk and wool, Lord George 'accepted his challenge'on these grounds, and proceeded in great detail to investigate theseexamples. 

The House listened with great attention for full two hours, duringwhich he treated these subjects. This attention no doubt was generallyaccorded because it was felt due to the occasion, and, under thecircumstances, to the speaker; but those who, however contrary mightbe the results at which they had arrived, had themselves deeply enteredinto these investigations, recognized very soon that Bentinck wasmaster of his subject. Sir Robert Peel looked round very often with thatexpression of appreciation which it was impossible for his nature torefuse to parliamentary success, even when the ability displayed washostile to his projects. The minister, with reference to the wool trade, had dwelt on the year 1842, when prices were much depressed, while theyhad greatly rallied in 1844, when the importation of foreign wool hadrisen from forty-five to sixty-five millions of pounds; and he had drawna triumphant inference that the increase of importation and the increaseof price were in consequence of the reduction of the duty. This instancehad produced a great effect; but Lord George showed the House, by areference to the tables of 1836, that the importation of foreign woolhad then risen to sixty-five millions of pounds, and that large foreignimportation was consistent with high prices to the domestic grower. Norwas he less successful about the foreign cattle. He reminded his friendson the Treasury bench how strenuously, previously to the introduction ofthe tariff of 1842, they had urged upon their agricultural friends thatno foreign cattle could enter under their regulations, and thatthe whole object of the change was to strengthen the hands of theagricultural interest, as regarded more essential protection, byremoving the odium of a nominal protection: 'Convinced by my righthonourable friends, in 1842, that their tariff would be as inoperativeas it has proved, I gave my cordial support to the measure. '

Perceiving that the House began to be wearied with the details ofthe silk trade, which he had investigated with extraordinary zeal, hepostponed until the specific vote in committee his objections to thereduction of the timber duties. The fact is, he had so thoroughlymastered all these topics, that his observations on each of them wouldhave themselves formed a speech of sufficient length and interest. Buthe successfully checked any interruption by what may be fairly styledhis dignified diffidence. 

'I trust the House will recollect that I am fighting the battle of aparty whose leaders have deserted them; and though I cannot wield myweapons with the skill of the right honourable gentleman on the Treasurybench, I trust the House will remember the emergency which has draggedme out to intrude upon their indulgence. '

And again, when he announced that he was now about to investigate thepretext of 'famine in the land, ' and some impatience was exhibited, hedrew up and said, 'I think, having sat eighteen years in this house, andnever once having trespassed on its time before in any one singlegreat debate, I may appeal to the past as a proof that I duly weigh themeasure of my abilities, and that I am painfully conscious of my properplace in this house. '

It was impossible to resist such appeals from such a person, even atthree o'clock in the morning; and diffident, but determined, he thenentered into what was, perhaps, the most remarkable portion of hisspeech--an investigation of what was the real position of the countrywith respect to the supply of food in the past autumn and at the presentmoment. Having shown from the trade circulars that, far from there beingat present 'a wheat famine, ' the stocks in the granaries in bond weremore than double in amount to what they were in the year 1845, 'a yearadmitted by all to be a year of extraordinary abundance, ' he proceededto the Irish part of the question: 'I beg leave to say, that though thisdebate has now continued for three weeks, I am the first gentlemanwho has at all entered into the real state of the case as regards theallegation of a potato famine in Ireland, upon which, be it remembered, is founded the sole case of her Majesty's ministers for a repeal of thecorn laws. '

And this was very true. The fact is, though the Protectionist party hadmade a most unexpected and gallant defence, no one was really preparedfor the contest except Bentinck. Between the end of November and themeeting of Parliament, he had thrown all the energies of his passionatemind into this question. He had sought information on all pointsand always at the fountain-head. He had placed himself in immediatecommunication with the ablest representatives of every considerableinterest attacked, and being ardent and indefatigable, gifted witha tenacious memory and a very clear and searching spirit, there wasscarcely a detail or an argument connected with his subject which wasnot immediately at his command. No speeches in favour of the protectivesystem have ever been made in the House of Commons compared with his indepth and range of knowledge; and had there been any member notconnected with the government, who had been able to vindicate the meritsof British agriculture as he did when the final struggle occurred, theimpression which was made by the too-often unanswered speeches of theManchester confederation would never have been effected. But the greatConservative party, exhausted by the labours of ten years of opposition, thought that after the triumph of '41 it might claim a furlough. Thedefence of their cause was left entirely to the ministers of theirchoice; and ministers, distracted with detail and wearied with officiallabour, are not always the most willing or the most efficient championsof the organic principles of a party. 

Sir Robert Peel, with respect to the disease in the Irish potato, hadlargely referred to the statements of the inspectors of police. LordGeorge wanted to know why the reports of the lieutenants of the Irishcounties were not given. Being well-informed upon this head, he askedthe government to produce the report of Lord Duncannon, the lordlieutenant of Carlow; especially that of his noble father, the earl ofBes-borough, lord lieutenant of Kilkenny. 'Is there any man in Englandor in Ireland whose opinion, from his business-like habits, his greatpractical knowledge, and the warm and affectionate interest which fora long period of years he has taken in everything which concerns theinterests of Ireland, especially of the Irish peasantry--is thereany man whose opinion would have greater weight? The opinion of LordBes-borough on an Irish subject, the lieutenant of an Irish county, andhimself long a cabinet minister? Well, sir, I am assured that, havingtaken the utmost pains to investigate this matter, Lord Besborough hasmade an elaborate report to the Irish government. Well, then, Idesire to know why Lord Besborough's report to the Irish governmentis suppressed? Is it because that report would not assist the presentpolicy of her Majesty's government?'

He alleged the names of many other individuals of high station whohad officially reported on the subject to the government: of LordCastlereagh, the lieutenant of Down, a member of the House; of Lordde Vesci, whose son was sitting for the Queen's County, over which hisfather presided in the name of the queen. A murmur ran round the House, that it would have been as well if these reports had been produced. 

The last portion of this argumentative harangue referred to the mostimportant division of the subject. Bentinck met it boldly, withoutevasion; nor was there any portion of his address more interesting, moresatisfactory, and more successful. 'I now come, ' he said, 'to the greatchallenge, which is ever and anon put forth by the Anti-Corn Law League, and now by their disciples, her Majesty's ministers. How are we, theyask, with our limited extent of territory, to feed a population annuallyand rapidly increasing at the rate of three hundred thousand a-year, as generally stated by the member for Stockport--a rate increased by mynoble friend, the member for the West Riding, to a thousand a day, orthree hundred and sixty-five thousand a year?'

He first proved in a complete manner that, from the year 1821 to theyear 1844, the population of the country had increased at the rate ofless than thirty-two per cent. , while the growth of wheat during thesame period had increased no less than sixty-four per cent. He thenproceeded to inquire why, with such an increased produce, we were still, as regards bread corn, to a certain extent, an importing nation? This heaccounted for by the universally improved condition of the people, andthe enlarged command of food by the working classes. He drew an animatedpicture, founded entirely on the representations of writers and publicmen adverse to the Protective System, of the superior condition of thepeople of 'England, happy England, ' to that of other countries: how theyconsumed much more of the best food, and lived much longer. This wasunder Protection, which Lord John Russell had stigmatized, in hisletter, 'the bane of agriculture. ' 'In the history of my noble friend'sillustrious family, ' he continued, 'I should have thought that he wouldhave found a remarkable refutation of such a notion. ' And then he drew alively sketch of the colossal and patriotic works of the Earls andDukes of Bedford, 'whereby they had drained and reclaimed threehundred thousand acres of land drowned in water, and brought theminto cultivation, and thus converted into fertile fields a vast morassextending over seven counties in England. ' Could the system which hadinspired such enterprise be justly denounced as baneful?

To show the means of the country to sustain even a much-increasingpopulation, and that those means were in operation, he entered into oneof the most original and interesting calculations that was perhapsever offered to the House of Commons. Reminding the House that in thepreceding year (1845) the farmers of England, at a cost of two millionssterling, had imported two hundred and eighty thousand tons of guano, heproceeded to estimate what would be the effect on the productive powersof the land of that novel application. Two hundred thousand tons, or, inother words, four million hundred-weight, were expended on the landin 1845. Half of these, he assumed, would be applied to the growth ofwheat, and the other half to the growth of turnips preparatory to thewheat crop of the ensuing year. According to the experiments tried andrecorded in the Royal Agricultural Journal, it would seem that by theapplication of two hundred-weight of guano to an acre of wheat land, theproduce would be increased by one quarter per acre. At this rate, onehundred thousand tons, or two million hundred-weight of guano would addone million quarters of wheat to the crop, or bread for one year forone million of people. But as he was very careful never to over-statea case, Lord George assumed, that it would require three hundredhundredweight of guano to an acre to produce an extra quarter of wheat. According to this estimate, one hundred thousand tons of guano, appliedto the land in 1845, must have added six hundred and sixty-six thousandsix hundred and sixty-six quarters of grain to the wheat crop, or, inother words, bread for six hundred and sixty-six thousand six hundredand sixty-six additional mouths. 'And now for turnips, ' he continued. The Norfolk authorities whom he quoted have in like manner proved thattwo hundred-weight of guano will add ten tons per acre to the turnipcrop. But again, for fear of exaggeration, he supposed that threehundred-weight would be requisite to create such increased fertility. Inthis case, two million hundredweight of guano would add six million sixhundred and sixty-six thousand six hundred and sixty tons to the naturalunmanured produce of the crop. Now it is generally considered that oneton of Swedes would last twenty sheep three weeks, and that each sheepshould gain half a pound of meat per week, or one pound and a half inthree weeks; thus twenty sheep feeding on one ton of turnips in threeweeks should in the aggregate make, as the graziers say, thirty poundsof mutton. But to be safe in his estimate, he would assume that one tonof turnips makes only half this quantity. 'Multiply, then, ' exclaimedBentinck with the earnest air of a crusader, 'six million six hundredand sixty-six thousand six hundred and sixty by fifteen, and you have noless than ninety-nine million nine hundred and ninety-nine thousand andnine hundred pounds of mutton as the fruits of one hundred thousand tonsof guano; which, at ninety-two pounds per man--the average Englishman'sallowance--affords meat for one million eight hundred and sixty thousandnine hundred and fifty-five--nearly two million of her Majesty'ssubjects. '

This is a specimen of those original and startling calculations towhich the House was soon to become accustomed from his lips. They werereceived at first with astonishment and incredulity; but they were neverimpugned. The fact is, he was extremely cautious in his data, and noman was more accustomed ever to impress upon his friends the extremeexpediency of not over-stating a case. It should also be remarked ofLord George Bentinck, that in his most complicated calculations he neversought aid from notes. 

We have necessarily only noticed a few of the traits of this remarkableperformance. Its termination was impressive. 

'We have heard in the course of these discussions a good deal about anancient monarchy, a reformed House of Commons, and a proud aristocracy. Sir, with regard to our ancient monarchy, I have no observation to make;but, if so humble an individual as myself might be permitted to whisper, a word in the ear of that illustrious and royal personage who, ashe stands nearest, so is he justly dearest, to her who sits upon thethrone, I would take leave to say, that I cannot but think he listenedto ill advice, when, on the first night of this great discussion, heallowed himself to be seduced by the first minister of the crown tocome down to this House to usher in, to give _éclat_, and as it wereby reflection from the queen, to give the semblance of the personalsanction of her Majesty to a measure which, be it for good or for evil, a great majority at least of the landed aristocracy of England, ofScotland, and of Ireland, imagine fraught with deep injury, if not ruin, to them

--a measure which, not confined in its operation to this great class, is calculated to grind down countless smaller interests engaged in thedomestic trades and, interests of the empire, transferring the profitsof all these interests--English, Scotch, Irish, and Colonial

--great and small alike, from Englishmen, from Scotchmen, and fromIrishmen, to Americans, to Frenchmen, to Russians, to Poles, toPrussians, and to Germans. Sir, I come now to the reformed House ofCommons; and as one who was a party to that great measure, I cannot butfeel a deep interest in its success, and more especially in thatportion of it which extended the franchise to the largest and the mostrespectable body in the kingdom--I mean the landed tenantry of England;and deeply should I regret should any large proportion of those memberswho have been sent to Parliament to represent them in this House, prove to be the men to bring lasting dishonour upon themselves, theirconstituencies, and this House, by an act of tergiversation so grossas to be altogether unprecedented in the annals of any reformedor unreformed House of Commons. Sir, lastly, I come to the "proudaristocracy. " We are a proud aristocracy, but if we are proud, it isthat we are proud in the chastity of our honour. If we assisted in '41in turning the Whigs out of office, because we did not consider afixed duty of eight shillings a quarter on foreign corn a sufficientprotection, it was with honesty of purpose and in single-mindedness wedid so; and as we were not before the fact, we will not be accomplicesafter the fact in the fraud by which the Whig ministers were expelledfrom power. If we are a proud aristocracy, we are proud of our honour, inasmuch as we never have been guilty, and never can be guilty, ofdouble-dealing with the farmers of England--of swindling our opponents, deceiving our friends, or betraying our constituents. '

The division was called. The West-India interest, notwithstandingthe amendment was moved by the member for Bristol, deserted theProtectionists. Deaf to the appeals, and the remonstrances, and thewarnings of Lord George, one of their leading members replied, witha smile of triumphant content, that 'they had made a satisfactoryarrangement for themselves. ' How satisfactory did the West-Indians findit four months subsequently? All the shipping interest deserted theland. They were for everything free, except navigation; there was nodanger of that being interfered with; 'it rested on quite distinctgrounds--national grounds. ' They were warned, but they smiled inderisive self-complacency. Lord George Bentinck lived to have theWest-India interest and the shipping interest on their knees to him, to defend their perilled or to restore their ruined fortunes; and withcharacteristic generosity and proud consistency, he undertook the task, and sacrificed his life in the attempt. 

Notwithstanding these terrible defalcations, when the numbers wereannounced, at nearly four o'clock in the morning, the majority hadnot reached those three magical figures supposed necessary, under thecircumstances, to success. In a house of five hundred and eighty-onemembers present, the amendment of the Protectionists was defeated onlyby ninety-seven; and two hundred and forty-two gentlemen, in spite ofdesertion, difficulty, and defeat, still maintained the 'chastity oftheir honour. '

CHAPTER III. 

 _The Irish Question_

IN THE meantime, besides the prolonged and unforeseen resistance of theProtectionists, there were other and unexpected causes at work whichequally, or perhaps even more powerfully tended to the fulfilment of thescheme of delay, which Lord George Bentinck had recommended his friendsto adopt and encourage. 

In the latter months of the year 1845, there broke out in some of thecounties of Ireland one of those series of outrages which have hithertoperiodically occurred in districts of that country. Assassination andcrimes of violence were rife: men on the queen's highway were shot frombehind hedges, or suddenly torn from their horses and beaten to deathwith clubs; houses were visited in the night by bodies of men, maskedand armed--their owners dragged from their beds, and, in the presenceof their wives and children, maimed and mutilated; the administration ofunlawful oaths, with circumstances of terror, indicated the existence ofsecret confederations, whose fell intents, profusely and ostentatiouslyannounced by threatening letters, were frequently and savagelyperpetrated. 

These barbarous distempers had their origin in the tenure of land inIreland, and in the modes of its occupation. A combination of causes, political, social, and economical, had for more than a century undulystimulated the population of a country which had no considerableresources except in the soil. That soil had become divided into minuteallotments, held by a pauper tenantry, at exorbitant rents, of a classof middlemen, themselves necessitous, and who were mere traders in land. A fierce competition raged amid the squalid multitude for these stripsof earth which were their sole means of existence. To regulate thisfatal rivalry, and restrain this emulation of despair, the peasantry, enrolled in secret societies, found refuge in an inexorable code. He whosupplanted another in the occupation of the soil was doomed by an occulttribunal, from which there was no appeal, to a terrible retribution. Hishouse was visited in the night by whitefeet and ribbonmen--his doom wascommunicated to him, by the post, in letters, signed by Terry Alt, orMolly M'Guire, or he was suddenly shot, like a dog, by the orders ofCaptain Rock. Yet even these violent inflictions rather punished thanprevented the conduct against which they were directed. The Irishpeasant had to choose between starving and assassination. If, indeference to an anonymous mandate, he relinquished his holding, he andthose who depended on him were outcasts and wanderers; if he retained oraccepted it, his life might be the forfeit, but subsistence was secured;and in poor and lawless countries, the means of living are more valuedthan life. Those who have treated of the agrarian crimes of Irelandhave remarked, that the facility with which these outrages have beencommitted has only been equalled by the difficulty of punishing them. Amurder, perpetrated at noonday, in the sight of many persons, cannot beproved in a court of justice. The spectators are never witnesses; and ithas been inferred from this, that the outrage is national, and that theheart of the populace is with the criminal. But though a chief landlord, or a stipendiary magistrate, may occasionally be sacrificed, the greatmajority of victims are furnished by the humblest class. Not sympathy, but terror, seals the lip and clouds the eye of the bystander. And thisis proved by the fact that while those who have suffered have almostalways publicly declared that they were unable to recognize theirassailants, and believed them to be strangers, they have frequently, inconfidence, furnished the police with the names of the guilty. 

Thus, there is this remarkable characteristic of the agrarian anarchyof Ireland which marks it out from all similar conditions of othercountries: it is a war of the poor against the poor. 

Before the rapid increase of population had forced governments to studypolitical economy and to investigate the means of subsisting a people, statesmen had contented themselves by attributing to political causesthese predial disturbances, and by recommending for them politicalremedies. The course of time, which had aggravated the condition of theIrish peasantry, had increased the numbers, the wealth, and the generalimportance of those of the middle classes of Ireland who professed theRoman Catholic faith. Shut out from the political privileges of theconstitution, these formed a party of discontent that was a valuableally to the modern Whigs, too long excluded from that periodical shareof power which is the life-blood of a parliamentary government and thesafeguard of a constitutional monarchy. The misgovernment of Irelandbecame therefore a stock topic of the earlier Opposition of the presentcentury; and advocating the cause of their clients, who wished to becomemayors, and magistrates, and members of the legislature, they arguedthat in the concession of those powers and dignities, and perhaps inthe discreet confiscation of the property of the Church, the only curescould be found for threatening notices, robbery of arms, administeringof unlawful oaths, burglary, murder, and arson. 

Yet if these acts of violence were attributable to defective politicalinstitutions, why, as was usually the case, were they partial in theiroccurrence? Why were they limited to particular districts? If politicalgrievances were the cause, the injustice would be as sharp in tranquilWexford as in turbulent Tipperary. Yet out of the thirty-two countiesof Ireland, the outrages prevailed usually in less than a third. Theseoutrages were never insurrectionary: they were not directed againstexisting authorities; they were stimulated by no public cause orclamour; it was the private individual who was attacked, and for aprivate reason. This was their characteristic. 

But as time elapsed, two considerable events occurred: the RomanCatholic restrictions were repealed, and the Whigs became ministers. Notwithstanding these great changes, the condition of the Irishpeasantry remained the same; the tenure of land was unchanged, the modesof its occupation were unaltered, its possession was equally necessaryand equally perilous. The same circumstances produced the sameconsequences. Notwithstanding even that the Irish Church had beenremodelled, and its revenues not only commuted but curtailed;notwithstanding that Roman Catholics had not only become members ofParliament but even Parliament had been reformed; Irish outrage becamemore flagrant and more extensive than at any previous epoch--and theWhigs were ministers. 

Placed in this responsible position, forced to repress the evil, thecauses of which they had so often explained, and which with theircooperation had apparently been so effectually removed, the Whiggovernment were obliged to have recourse to the very means which theyhad so frequently denounced when recommended by their rivals, and that, too, on a scale of unusual magnitude and severity. They proposed forthe adoption of Parliament one of those measures which would suspend theconstitution of Ireland, and which are generally known by the name ofCoercion Acts. 

The main and customary provisions of these Coercion Acts were ofsevere restraint, and scarcely less violent than the conduct they wereconstructed to repress. They invested the lord lieutenant with powerto proclaim a district as disturbed, and then to place its inhabitantswithout the pale of the established law; persons out of their dwellingsbetween sunset and sunrise were liable to transportation; and to securethe due execution of the law, prisoners were tried before militarytribunals, and not by their peers, whose verdicts, from sympathy orterror, were usually found to baffle justice. 

These Coercion Acts were effectual; they invariably obtained their end, and the proclaimed districts became tranquil. But they were an affairof police, not of government; essentially temporary, their effect wasalmost as transient as their sway, and as they were never accompaniedwith any deep and sincere attempt to cope with the social circumstanceswhich produced disorder, the recurrence of the chronic anarchy wasmerely an affair of time. Whether it were that they did not sufficientlyapprehend the causes, or that they shrank from a solution which mustbring them in contact with the millions of a surplus population, thereseems always to have been an understanding between the public menof both parties, that the Irish difficulty should be deemed a purelypolitical, or at the utmost a religious one. And even so late as 1846, no less a personage than the present chief secretary, put forward byhis party to oppose an Irish Coercion Bill which themselves had loudlycalled for, declared that he could not sanction its penal enactmentsunless they were accompanied by the remedial measures that werenecessary, to wit, an Irish Franchise Bill, and a Bill for the amendmentof municipal corporations!

When Sir Robert Peel, in 1841, after a memorable opposition of tenyears, acceded to office, sustained by all the sympathies of thecountry, his Irish policy, not sufficiently noticed amid the vast andurgent questions with which he had immediately to deal, was, however, tothe political observer significant and interesting. As a mere matter ofparty tactics, it was not for him too much to impute Irish disturbancesto political and religious causes, even if the accumulated experienceof the last ten years were not developing a conviction in his mind, thatthe methods hitherto adopted to ensure the tranquillity of that countrywere superficial and fallacious. His cabinet immediately recognizeda distinction between political and predial sources of disorder. The first, they resolved into a mere system of agitation, no longerjustifiable by the circumstances, and this they determined to put down. The second, they sought in the conditions under which land was occupied, and these they determined to investigate. Hence, on the one hand, theO'Connell prosecution: on the other, the Devon commission. 

This was the bold and prudent policy of a minister who felt he hadthe confidence of the country and was sustained by great parliamentarymajorities; and when the summoner of monster meetings was convicted, andthe efficient though impartial manner in which the labours of the landcommission were simultaneously conducted came to be bruited about, thereseemed at last some prospect of the system of political quackery ofwhich Ireland had been so long the victim being at last subverted. Butthere is nothing in which the power of circumstances is more evidentthan in politics. They baffle the forethought of statesmen, and controleven the apparently inflexible laws of national development and decay. 

Had the government of 1841 succeeded in its justifiable expectation ofterminating the trade of political agitation in Ireland, armed with allthe authority and all the information with which the labours of the landcommission would have furnished them, they would in all probability havesuccessfully grappled with the real causes of Irish misery and misrule. They might have thoroughly reformed the modes by which land is holdenand occupied; have anticipated the spontaneous emigration that now ragesby an administrative enterprise scarcely more costly than the barrenloan of '47, and which would have wafted native energies to imperialshores; have limited under these circumstances the evil of the potatofamine, even if the improved culture of the interval might not havealtogether prevented that visitation; while the laws which regulated thecompetition between home and foreign industry in agricultural producemight have been modified with so much prudence, or, if necessary, ultimately repealed with so much precaution, that those rapid andstartling vicissitudes that have so shattered the social fabric ofIreland might altogether have been avoided. 

But it was decreed that it should be otherwise. Having achieved theincredible conviction of O'Connell, by an Irish jury, the great culpritbaffled the vengeance of the law by a quirk which a lawyer only couldhave devised. As regards his Irish policy, Sir Robert Peel neverrecovered this blow, the severity of which was proportionably increasedby its occurrence at a moment of unprecedented success. Resolute not torecur to his ancient Orangeism, yet desperate after his discomfiture ofrallying a moderate party around his ministry, his practical mind, more clear-sighted than foreseeing, was alarmed at the absence of allinfluences for the government of Ireland. The tranquillity which mightresult from a reformed tenure of the soil, must, if attainable, bea distant blessing, and at present he saw only the obstacles to itsfulfilment--prejudiced landlords, and the claims and necessities ofpauper millions. He shrank from a theory which might be an illusion. Herequired a policy for the next post and the next division. There wasin his view only one course to take, to outbid his predecessors assuccessfully in Irish politics as he was doing in taxes and tariffs. Heresolved to appropriate the liberal party of Ireland, and merge it intothe great Conservative confederation which was destined to destroy somany things. He acted with promptitude and energy, for Sir Robert Peelnever hesitated when he had made up his mind. His real character wasvery different from his public reputation. Far from being timidand wary, he was audacious and even headstrong. It was his cold andconstrained demeanour that misled the public. There never was a man whodid such rash things in so circumspect a manner. He had been fortunatein early disembarrassing himself of the Orange counsellors who hadconducted his Irish questions when in opposition; vacant judgeshipshad opportunely satisfied the recognized and respectable claims ofMr. Serjeant Jackson and Mr. Lefroy; and so Sir Robert Peel, withouta qualm, suddenly began to govern Ireland by sending it 'messages ofpeace. '

They took various forms; sometimes a Charitable Bequests Act virtuallyplaced the Roman Catholic hierarchy in friendly equality with theprelates of the Established Church; sometimes a 'godless college'called forth a moan from alarmed and irritated Oxford; the endowmentof Maynooth struck wider and deeper, and the middle-classes of England, roused from their religious lethargy, called in vain to the rescue ofa Protestantism betrayed. But the minister was unshaken. Successfuland self-sufficient, impressed with a conviction that his governmentin duration would rival that of a Walpole or a Pitt, and exceed bothin lustre, he treated every remonstrance with imperious disdain. He hadeven accustomed his mind to contemplate an ecclesiastical adjustmentof Ireland which would have allied in that country the Papacy with theState, and have terminated the constitutional supremacy of the AnglicanChurch, when suddenly, in the very heat of all this arrogant fortune, the mighty fabric of delusion shivered and fell to the ground. 

An abused and indignant soil repudiated the ungrateful race that hadexhausted and degraded its once exuberant bosom. The land refusedto hold those who would not hold the land on terms of justice and ofscience. All the economical palliatives and political pretences oflong years seemed only to aggravate the suffering and confusion. Thepoor-rate was levied upon a community of paupers, and the 'godlesscolleges' were denounced by Rome as well as Oxford. 

After a wild dream of famine and fever, imperial loans, rates inaid, jobbing public works, confiscated estates, constituenciesself-disfranchised, and St. Peter's bearding St. James's in a spiritbecoming Christendom rather than Europe, time topped the climax of Irishmisgovernment; and by the publication of the census of 1851, proved thatthe millions with whose evils no statesmen would sincerely deal, but whose condition had been the pretext for so much empiricism, haddisappeared, and nature, more powerful than politicians, had settled the'great difficulty. '

Ere the publication of that document, the mortal career of Sir RobertPeel had closed, and indeed several of the circumstances to which wehave just alluded did not occur in his administration; but the contrastbetween his policy and its results was nevertheless scarcely lessstriking. It was in '45 that he transmitted his most important 'messageof peace' to Ireland, to be followed by an autumnal visit of her Majestyto that kingdom, painted in complacent and prophetic colours by herprime minister. The visit was not made. In the course of that autumn, ten counties of Ireland were in a state of anarchy; and, mainly inthat period, there were 136 homicides committed, 138 houses burned, 483houses attacked, and 138 fired into; there were 544 cases of aggravatedassault, and 551 of robbery of arms; there were 89 cases of bandsappearing in arms; there were more than 200 cases of administeringunlawful oaths; and there were 1, 944 cases of sending threateningletters. By the end of the year, the general crime of Ireland haddoubled in amount and enormity compared with the preceding year. 

CHAPTER IV. 

 _The Cure for Irish Ills_

LORD GEORGE BENTINCK had large but defined views as to the policy whichshould be pursued with respect to Ireland. He was a firm supporter ofthe constitutional preponderance allotted to the land in our scheme ofgovernment, not from any jealousy or depreciation of the other greatsources of public wealth, for his sympathy with the trading classeswas genuine, but because he believed that constitutional preponderance, while not inconsistent with great commercial prosperity, to be the bestsecurity for public liberty and the surest foundation of enduring power. But as reality was the characteristic of his vigorous and sagaciousnature, he felt that a merely formal preponderance, one not sustainedand authorized by an equivalent material superiority, was a position notcalculated to endure in the present age, and one especially difficult tomaintain with our rapidly increasing population. For this reason he wasalways very anxious to identify the policy of Great Britain with thatof Ireland, the latter being a country essentially agricultural; and healways shrank from any proposition which admitted a difference in theinterests of the two kingdoms. 

Liberal politicians, who some years ago were very loud for justice toIreland, and would maintain at all hazards the identity of the interestsof the two countries, have of late frequently found it convenientto omit that kingdom from their statistical bulletins of nationalprosperity. Lord George Bentinck, on the contrary, would impress on hisfriends, that if they wished to maintain the territorial constitution oftheir country, they must allow no sectarian considerations to narrow thebasis of sympathy on which it should rest; and in the acres and millionsof Ireland, in its soil and its people, equally neglected, he would havesought the natural auxiliaries of our institutions. To secure for ourIrish fellow-subjects a regular market for their produce; to developthe resources of their country by public works on a great scale; andto obtain a decent provision for the Roman Catholic priesthood from theland and not from the consolidated fund, were three measures which helooked upon as in the highest degree conservative. 

When the project of the cabinet of 1846 had transpired, Lord George atonce declared, and was in the habit of reiterating his opinion, that 'itwould ruin the 500, 000 small farmers of Ireland, ' and he watched withgreat interest and anxiety the conduct of their representatives inthe House of Commons. It was with great difficulty that he could bringhimself to believe, that political liberalism would induce the membersfor the south and west of Ireland to support a policy in his opinion sofatal to their countrymen as the unconditional repeal of the corn laws;and, indeed, before they took that step, which almost all of themhave since publicly regretted and attempted to compensate for by theirsubsequent votes in the House of Commons, the prospect of their conductfrequently and considerably varied. 

The Earl of St. Germans, the chief secretary of the Lord Lieutenant, introduced the Coercion Bill to the House of Lords on the 24th ofFebruary, and, considering the exigency, and the important referenceto it in the speech from the throne, this step on the part of thegovernment was certainly not precipitate. It was observed that thestrongest supporters of the measure in the House of Lords on thisoccasion were the leaders of the Whig party. Lord Lansdowne, 'so farfrom complaining of the Government for bringing forward the measure atso early a period of the session, was ready to admit, that after thedeclaration of her Majesty, a declaration unhappily warranted byfacts known to many of their lordships, every day was lost in which aneffectual remedy was not at least attempted to put an end to a stateof society so horrible. ' Lord Clanricarde 'gave his ready assent to thebill;' and even Lord Grey, 'though he regretted the necessity for thismeasure, was of opinion that the chief secretary had established asufficient case for arming the executive government with some additionalpowers. ' When, therefore, at the end of the month of March, Lord GeorgeBentinck was invited to attend a meeting of his friends, held at thehouse of Mr. Bankes, to consider the course which should be adoptedby the Protectionist party with respect to the Coercion Bill, it wasassumed, as a matter of course, that the coalition of the governmentand the Whigs must secure the passing of the measure, even if theProtectionists were disposed, for the chance of embarrassing theministry, to resist it; and of course there was no great tendency inthat direction. Men are apt to believe that crime and coercion areinevitably associated. There was abundance of precedent for the course, which seemed also a natural one. 

In less than a century there had been seventeen coercive acts forIreland, a circumstance which might make some ponder whethersuch legislation were as efficacious as it was violent. However, assassination rife, Captain Rock and Molly M'Guire out at night, Whigsand Tories all agreed, it was easy to catch at a glance the foregoneconclusion of the meeting. One advantage of having a recognized organ ofa political party is, that its members do not decide too precipitately. They listen before they determine, and if they have a doubt, theywill grant the benefit of it to him whose general ability they haveacknowledged, and to whom they willingly give credit for having viewedthe question at issue in a more laborious and painful manner thanthemselves. Without a leader, they commit themselves to opinionscarelessly and hastily adopted. This is fatal to a party in debate; butit often entails very serious consequences when the mistakes have beencommitted in a less public and responsible scene than the House ofCommons. 

In the present case, there was only one individual who took anyconsiderable lead in the management of the party who ventured to suggestthe expediency of pausing before they pledged themselves to support anunconstitutional measure, proposed by a government against which theywere arrayed under circumstances of urgent and unusual opposition. Thesupport of an unconstitutional measure may be expedient, but it cannotbe denied that it is the most indubitable evidence of confidence. Thissuggestion, though received with kindness, elicited little sympathy, andLord George Bentinck, who had not yet spoken, and who always refrainedat these meetings from taking that directing part which he never wishedto assume, marking the general feeling of those present, and wishing toguide it to a practical result advantageous to their policy, observedthat the support of the Coercion Bill by the Protectionists, ought to bemade conditional on the government proving the sincerity of their policyby immediately proceeding with their measure; that if life were insuch danger in Ireland as was officially stated, and as he was boundto believe, no Corn or Customs' Bill could compete in urgency with thenecessity of pressing forward a bill, the object of which was to arrestwholesale assassination. He was, therefore, for giving the governmenta hearty support, provided they proved they were in earnest in theirdetermination to put down murder and outrage in Ireland, by giving apriority in the conduct of public business to the measure in question. 

This view of the situation, which was certainly adroit, for it combinedthe vindication of order with an indefinite delay of the measures forthe repeal of the protective system, seemed to please every one; therewas a murmur of approbation, and when one of the most considerable ofthe country gentlemen expressed the prevalent feeling, and added thatall that was now to be desired was that Lord George Bentinck wouldkindly consent to be the organ of the party on the occasion, and statetheir view to the House, the cheering was very hearty. It came from thehearts of more than two hundred gentlemen, scarcely one of whom had apersonal object in this almost hopeless struggle beyond the maintenanceof a system which he deemed advantageous to his country; but they wishedto show their generous admiration of the man who, in the dark hour ofdifficulty and desertion, had proved his courage and resource, hadsaved them from public contempt, and taught them to have confidence inthemselves. And after all, there are few rewards in life which equalsuch sympathy from such men. The favour of courts and the applauseof senates may have their moments of excitement and delight, but theincident of deepest and most enduring gratification in public life is topossess the cordial confidence of a high-spirited party, for it touchesthe heart as well as the intellect, and combines all the softer feelingsof private life with the ennobling consciousness of public duty. 

Lord George Bentinck, deeply moved, consented to become the organ of theProtectionists in this matter; but he repeated in a marked manner hisprevious declaration, that his duty must be limited to the occasion: hewould serve with them, but he could not pretend to be the leader of aparty. In that capacity, however, the government chose to recognize him, and there occurred in consequence, very shortly after this meeting, ascene in the House of Commons, which occasioned at the time a great dealof surprise and scandal. The Secretary of the Treasury, in pursuanceof one of his principal duties, which is to facilitate by mutualunderstanding the conduct of public business in the House of Commons, applied to Lord George Bentinck, confessedly at the request of SirRobert Peel, to 'enter into some arrangement' as to the conduct ofpublic business before Easter. The arrangement suggested was, that ifthe Protectionists supported the Coercion Bill, which it was the wishof Sir Robert Peel should be read a first time before Easter, the thirdreading of the Bill for the Repeal of the Corn Laws should be postponeduntil after Easter. The interview by appointment took place in the VoteOffice, where the Secretary of the Treasury 'called Lord George aside'and made this proposition. Lord George stated in reply, 'what hebelieved to be the views of the party with whom he served, ' and theywere those we have already intimated. The 'arrangement' was concluded, and it was at the same time agreed that certain questions, of whichnotice had been given by Lord John Russell, relative to the progressof these very measures, should be allowed by the Protectionists to pass_sub silentio_. This 'pledge, ' made by the noble lord for himself andhis friends, was 'scrupulously observed. ' Nevertheless, after all this, a letter arrived from the Secretary of the Treasury, addressed to thenoble lord, stating that the secretary 'had not been authorized insaying as much as he had said, ' and requesting that the conversationwhich had taken place might be considered private. Upon this, LordGeorge Bentinck drew up a statement, 'setting forth all that hadpassed, ' and forwarded it to the secretary as his reply. Subsequently, he met that gentleman, who admitted that 'every word in that statement, as respected the conversation which had passed, was perfectly correct. '

This being the state of the case, on the second night of the debateon Mr. Eliot Yorke's amendment, which we have noticed, and after theadjournment had been moved and carried, the government proceeded withsome motions of form, which indicated their intention to secure, ifpossible, the third reading of the Corn Bill before Easter. Uponthis, Lord George Bentinck, after a hurried and apparently agitatedconversation with the Secretary of the Treasury and others connectedwith the government, rose to move the adjournment of the House. He thengave as his reason the circumstances which we have briefly conveyed. Ascene of considerable confusion occurred; the Secretary of the Treasuryadmitted the correctness of the statement; the First Lord of theTreasury rejected the alleged authority of the secretary. Mr. Tuffnell, on the part of the Whigs, intimated that public business could not becarried on if the recognized organs were repudiated by their chief. Thefeeling of all parties coincided with Mr. Tuffnell; finally, an Irishrepealer rose and announced that the government were bartering theirCorn Bill to secure coercion to Ireland. Lord George Bentinck said theCoercion Bill was 'a second Curfew Act, ' that nothing but necessitycould justify it, and if it were necessary it must be immediate. SirRobert remained irritated and obstinate. He would not give up a stageeither of the Corn Bill or the Coercion Bill; he wanted to advance bothbefore Easter. The mere division of the House between Free-traders andProtectionists had already ceased; there were breakers ahead, and itwas not difficult from this night to perceive that the course of thegovernment would not be so summary as they had once expected. 

This strange interlude occurred after midnight on the 26th of March. OnFriday, the 27th, the House divided on the amendment of Mr. Eliot Yorke, and the Corn Bill was read for the second time. On the reassembling ofthe House on Monday, the 30th, an extraordinary scene took place. 

It appears that the cabinet, after painful deliberation, had arrived atthe conclusion that, notwithstanding the importance of sending upthe Corn Bill to the House of Lords before Easter, it was absolutelynecessary to proceed at once with the Coercion Bill; and it was resolvedthat the Secretary of State should on this evening lay before the Housethe facts and reasons which 'induce the Government to believe in thenecessity of the measure. ' Mr. O'Connell and his followers had alreadyannounced their intention of opposing the first reading of the bill, an allowable but very unusual course. It is competent to the House ofCommons to refuse a first reading to any bill sent down to it; but thejournals afford few examples of the exercise of such a privilege. Amember of the House of Lords may lay on the table, as a matter of pureright, any bill which he thinks proper to introduce, and it is read afirst time as a matter of course; the orders of the House of Commons aredifferent, and a member must obtain permission before he introduces abill. This permission is occasionally refused; but when a bill comesfrom the House of Lords, the almost invariable custom is to read itfor the first time without discussion. There are, however, as we haveobserved, instances to the contrary, and the Irish Coercion Bill of '33was one of them. So pregnant a precedent could not be forgotten onthe present occasion. The government therefore were prepared for anopposition to the first reading of their bill; but trusting to thestrength of their case and the assumed support of the Whig party, theybelieved that this opposition would not be stubborn, more especiallyas there were numerous stages of the measure on which the views of itsopponents might be subsequently expressed, and as they themselves wereprepared to engage that they would not proceed further than thisfirst reading until the Corn Bill had passed the House of Commons. Theconsternation, therefore, of the government could scarcely beconcealed, when they found on Monday night that they had to encounter awell-organized party opposition, headed by Sir William Somerville, andsanctioned and supported in debate by Lord John Russell and Sir GeorgeGrey. 

It would seem indeed a difficult and somewhat graceless office for theWhigs to oppose the first reading of a government bill, concerning, too, the highest duties of administration, which had received suchunqualified approval from all the leading members of their party in theHouse of Lords, who had competed in declarations of its necessity andacknowledgments of its moderation, while they only regretted the tootardy progress of a measure so indispensable to the safety ofthe country and the security of her Majesty's subjects. A curiouscircumstance, however, saved them from this dilemma, which yet inthe strange history of faction they had nevertheless in due time toencounter. 

As the Coercion Bill coming from the Lords appeared on the paper ofthe day in the form of a notice of motion, the Secretary of State, this being a day on which orders have precedence, had to move that suchorders of the day should be postponed, so that he might proceed withthe motion on the state of Ireland, of which notice had been given. Thestrict rule of the House is, that on Mondays and Fridays, orders ofthe day should have precedence of notices of motion, so that it wasimpossible for the Secretary of State to make his motion, that a certainbill (the Protection of Life--Ireland--Bill) should be read a first timewithout permission of the House, a permission always granted as a matterof course on such nights to the government, since the business which canbe brought forward, whether in the shape of orders or motions, ispurely government business, and thus the interests and privilege of noindependent member of Parliament can be affected by a relaxation ofthe rules which the convenience of a ministry and the conduct of publicbusiness occasionally require. However, on this night, no sooner hadthe Secretary of State made, in a few formal words, this formal request, than up sprang Sir William Somerville to move an amendment, that theorders of the day should not be postponed, which he supported in aspirited address, mainly on the ground of the great inconvenience thatmust be suffered from the postponement of the Corn Bill. The motion ofthe Secretary of State would produce a long, exciting, and exasperatingdebate. Time would be lost--for what? To advance one stage of a measurewhich it was avowedly not the intention of the government to press atthe present moment. Sir William concluded with a very earnest appealto Lord George Bentinck and his friends, who might at no very distantperiod have the government of Ireland entrusted to them, not, for thesake of a momentary postponement of the Corn Bill, to place themselves, by voting for this measure of coercion, in collision with the Irishnation. ' He called upon Lord George Bentinck to weigh the position inwhich he was placed. 

This amendment was seconded by Mr. Smith O'Brien, the member for thecounty of Limerick, who warned the government that they 'were enteringon a contest which would continue for months. ' He taunted the ministerwith governing the country without a party. What chance was there ofreconciliation with his estranged friends? After the treatment of that'disavowed plenipotentiary, ' the Secretary of the Treasury, who would beagain found willing to undertake the mission of patching up a truce?He was not present when the terms of the treaty were exposed: but heunderstood, that if the government introduced this Coercion Bill beforeEaster, then that Lord George Bentinck would deem it wise, proper, andexpedient; but if after Easter, then the complexion and character of thebill were, in the noble lord's judgment, utterly transformed, and it wasdeclared to be quite untenable and unconstitutional. Was that the kindof support on which the government calculated for passing this measure?

The Secretary of State made a dexterous, conciliatory, almost humbleaddress, in reply to the taunts of Mr. Smith O'Brien. He said that hewas well aware of the fact of which he had been just reminded, that, inthe present state of parties, the declared adherents of the governmentwere a small minority; he even, while excusing the delay in the progressof the Irish measure, reminded the House of the curious fact, that sincethe meeting of Parliament, two successive Irish secretaries had losttheir seats in the House of Commons in consequence of supporting theadministration of which they were members. 

The case of the government was really so good and clear, that for amoment it seemed the opposition could hardly persist in their unusualproceeding: but this was a night of misfortunes. 

There had been for some time a smouldering feud between the secretaryand the Recorder of Dublin. The learned gentleman had seized theoccasion which the present state of parties afforded, and in thecourse of the recent debate on the second reading of the Corn Bill, haddeclared that the asserted famine in Ireland was, on the part of thegovernment, 'a great exaggeration. ' The secretary had addressed himselfparticularly to this observation in his speech on the 27th, the nightof the division, and had noticed it in a tone of acerbity. He had evenintimated that it might have been used by one who was a disappointedsolicitor for high office, and whom the government had declined toassist in an unwarrantable arrangement of the duties and salary ofthe judicial post he at present occupied. The learned Recorder, justlyindignant at this depreciating innuendo, resolved to make an opportunityon the following Monday for his vindication and retort. He rose, therefore, immediately after the skilful and winning appeal of thesecretary, and pronounced an invective against the right honourablegentleman which was neither ill-conceived nor ill-delivered. Itrevived the passions that for a moment seemed inclined to lull, andthe Protectionists, who on this occasion were going to support thegovernment, forgot the common point of union, while the secretary wasdescribed as 'the evil genius of the cabinet. '

After this, it was impossible to arrest the course of debate. Mr. O'Connell, who appeared to be in a state of great debility, made oneof those acute points for which he was distinguished. He said thegovernment complained of the threat held out by those who opposed thebill, that they would avail themselves of the forms of the House togive it every opposition in their power. But what did the government dothemselves? Why, they were trying to trample upon one of the sessionalorders and to abrogate the forms of the House in order to coerce theIrish people. Lord George Bentinck said, that 'the chief minister hadtold them, that this was a bill to put down murder and assassination; inthat case, if this bill were delayed, the blood of every man murderedin Ireland was on the head of her Majesty's ministers. ' Sir George Greyfollowed, and avoiding any discussion of the state of Ireland, inwhich Lord George had entered, supported the amendment of Sir WilliamSomerville, on the broad ground that the bill for the repeal of the cornlaws ought not to be for a moment delayed. 'The debates on thatmeasure had continued several weeks; and all who had any lengthenedparliamentary experience must be convinced, that if the further progressof the Corn Bill was postponed until after Easter, they would have muchlonger and protracted debates in its future stages, than if the billwere pushed _de die in diem_. As he had understood, the government hadintended that this bill should have gone up to the House of Lords beforeEaster, when it would have been printed, and the second reading couldhave taken place at an early day after the holidays; but if it were putoff until after Easter, he would defy any man to show any reasonableexpectation of its getting to a second reading in the other House beforeJune, or July, or even August. ' This was encouraging, and the plotseemed to thicken. The Secretary at War was put up by the government toneutralize the effect of the speech of Sir George Grey, and he said, 'Ispeak not only as a cabinet minister, but also as a considerableIrish proprietor. ' He said, 'that anything so horrible as the state ofdemoralization and crime in which many parts of Ireland were plunged, anything so perfect as the suspension of the law in those parts of thecountry, anything, in short, so complete as the abrogation of libertythat obtained there, was, perhaps never known. ' He thought that, 'no manand no minister could, under these circumstances, decline to admit thatevery and any measure ought to be postponed until a division had beentaken, at least upon the principle of a measure which had for its objectthe suppression of these horrors. ' After such a declaration it was clearthe government were in a false position when by the same organ it had tostate, 'that in asking to read this bill to-night, they only intended topostpone the Corn Bill for one night. '

Lord John Russell following, admitted, that 'in voting for the motion ofSir William Somerville it was not to be supposed, that if the Secretaryof State made out a case, he would not support the government bill;'yet how the secretary was ever to find an opportunity of making out hiscase, if the amendment of Sir William Somerville was carried, wasnot very apparent. Sir Robert Peel, who was disquieted by the wholeproceedings connected with the Coercion Bill, irritated by the episodeof 'the disavowed plenipotentiary, ' from which he did not for sometime recover, and really alarmed at the indefinite prospect of delay inpassing his all-important measures which now began to open, could notconceal his vexation in the remarks which he offered, and speaking ofthe amendment as one 'of a frivolous character, ' indignant cries of 'No, no, ' from his usual admirers, obliged him to withdraw the expression. His feelings were not soothed when, later in the evening, even Mr. Cobden rose to deplore the conduct of that minister whom he otherwise somuch admired. 'He certainly regarded it as a great calamity. Somethinghad actuated the government which he could not understand. He had aperfect belief in the sincerity of the prime minister, but in all humanprobability the Corn Bill would not now enter the House of Lords beforethe beginning or middle of May; and when it would come out again, heavenonly knew!'

The House now divided, and being supported by all the Protectionistspresent, the government had a majority of thirty-nine, so the standingorder was for that night rescinded; and, although the hour was late forsuch a statement, the secretary proceeded with the official exposition. Notwithstanding the depressing circumstances of the previous debate, the speech of Sir James Graham was distinguished by all that lucidarrangement of details and that comprehensive management of his subjectwhich distinguished him. The statement made a great impression upon theHouse and the country; but, unfortunately for the government, the morenecessary they made the measure appear, the more unjustifiable was theirconduct in not immediately and vehemently pursuing it. They had, indeed, in the speech from the throne at the commencement of this memorablesession, taken up a false position for their campaign; and we shall see, as we pursue this narrative of these interesting events, that the fallof Sir Robert Peel was perhaps occasioned not so much by his repealof the corn laws as by the mistake in tactics which this adroit andexperienced parliamentary commander so strangely committed. 

On this night of the 30th the government made no advance; immediatelyafter the secretary had finished, the followers of Mr. O'Connell movedthe adjournment of the House, and persisted in this line notwithstandingthe almost querulous appeal of the first minister. 

CHAPTER V. 

 _The Passing of O'Connell. _

LORD GEORGE wrote the next morning (Tuesday, March 31st) to a friend, who had not been able to attend the debate: 'I look upon last night asthe most awkward night the government have had yet; I believe they wouldhave given their ears to have been beaten. We have now fairly setthem and the tail at loggerheads, and I cannot see how they are to getanother stage of either the tariff or Corn Bill before next Tuesday atany rate. I doubt if they will do anything before Easter. '

It was understood that the House would adjourn for the Easter recesson the 8th instant. There were therefore only two nights remaining forgovernment business before the holidays. On the first of these (Friday, April the 3rd), Mr. O'Connell had announced that he should state hisviews at length on the condition of Ireland, and the causes of theseagrarian outrages. Accordingly, when the order of the day for resumingthe adjourned debate was read, he rose at once to propose an amendmentto the motion. He sat in an unusual place--in that generally occupied bythe leader of the opposition--and spoke from the red box, convenientto him from the number of documents to which he had to refer. Hisappearance was of great debility, and the tones of his voice were verystill. His words, indeed, only reached those who were immediately aroundhim and the ministers sitting on the other side of the green table, wholistened with that interest and respectful attention which became theoccasion. 

It was a strange and touching spectacle to those who remembered theform of colossal energy and the clear and thrilling tones that had oncestartled, disturbed, and controlled senates. Mr. O'Connell was on hislegs for nearly two hours, assisted occasionally in the management ofhis documents by some devoted aide-de-camp. To the House generally itwas a performance in dumb show, a feeble old man muttering before atable; but respect for the great parliamentary personage kept all asorderly as if the fortunes of a party hung upon his rhetoric; and thoughnot an accent reached the gallery, means were taken that next morningthe country should not lose the last and not the least interesting ofthe speeches of one who had so long occupied and agitated the mind ofnations. 

This remarkable address was an abnegation of the whole policy of Mr. O'Connell's career. It proved, by a mass of authentic evidence rangingover a long term of years, that Irish outrage was the consequence ofphysical misery, and that the social evils of that country could not besuccessfully encountered by political remedies. To complete the picture, it concluded with a panegyric of Ulster and a patriotic quotation fromLord Clare. 

Lord John Russell, who, as an experienced parliamentary leader, hadalready made more than one effort to extricate the Whigs from theconsequences of the hearty support given to the government measures inthe other House by Lords Lansdowne and Clanricarde, and even by LordGrey, ventured to-night even to say that if he should agree that theHouse would do well to assent to the first reading of this bill, hethought he was bound to state also that in the future stages of it, heshould have 'objections to offer, going to the foundations of some ofits principal provisions. '

His speech was curious, as perhaps the last considerable manifesto ofWhig delusion respecting Ireland. Coercion Bills might be occasionallynecessary; no doubt of it; Lord Grey had once a Coercion Bill, and LordJohn Russell had voted for it; but then remedial measures ought to beintroduced with coercive ones: the evil should be repressed, but alsocured. Thus, Lord Althorp, when the government introduced their greatCoercion Bill, introduced also a measure which, besides making a greatreform in the Protestant Church of Ireland, exempted the whole Catholiccommunity of Ireland from the payment of church cess, which hadpreviously been felt as a very great grievance. On another day LordAlthorp declared his intention of pressing through Parliament a JuryBill, which had been brought into the House the previous session, butwhich was allowed to drop in the House of Lords. 

Again, there was another declaration which Lord Althorp had made, which, somehow or other, seemed to have been forgotten; it was a declarationwith respect to the municipal corporations of Ireland. Lord Althorp saidit was exceedingly desirable that the institutions of the two countriesshould be assimilated as much as possible; and that, as a general rule, the corporate bodies of Ireland should be the same as England. Mr. O'Connell had said on that occasion that there was no greater grievancein Ireland than the existence of corporations in their then shape. LordJohn contrasted this language of Lord Althorp, 'simple, plain, emphatic, and decided, ' with the language of the government of Sir Robert Peel;and held up to admiration the Whig policy of 1833, certainly coercive, but with remedial measures--a measure for the abolition of church cess, introduced ten days before the Coercion Bill, and a promise of municipalreform made simultaneously with the proclamation of martial law. Thiswas real statesmanship and touching the root of the evil. Whereas'Sir Robert Peel had only consented to passing the Municipal Bill in acrippled state, and only now (in 1846) promised, that the corporationsof Ireland should be placed on the same footing as the corporations ofEngland. ' Who could be surprised that such a policy-should end in famineand pestilence?

The followers of Mr. O'Connell again succeeded in adjourning the debateuntil Monday the 6th. On that day Sir Robert Peel made 'an earnestappeal' to extricate himself from the almost perilous position in whichhe found his administration suddenly involved. In case the division onthe first reading of the Irish Bill should not take place that night, heendeavoured to prevail on those members who had notices on the paperfor the following night (Tuesday the 7th), the last night before theholidays, to relinquish their right and to permit the Irish debateto proceed and conclude. 'He had no wish to interfere with the duediscussion of the measure; but he believed that the Irish members, ifthey permitted the House to proceed with the Corn Bill, by concludingthe discussion on the Irish Bill, would be rendering an essentialservice to their country. '

But this earnest appeal only influenced still more the fiery resolvesof Mr. Smith O'Brien and his friends. They threw the responsibility fordelay of the Corn Bill on the government. The inconvenience whichthe country suffered was occasioned by the minister, not by the Irishmembers. He ought, on Friday last, to have adjourned the discussion onthe Coercion Bill until after Easter. He and other members who wereon the paper for to-morrow would willingly relinquish their right ofpriority in favour of the Corn Bill, or of any measure of a remedialkind, but not in favour of a Coercion Bill. He did not wish to have anyconcealment with the minister as to the course which the Irish memberswould pursue. It was their bounden duty to take care that _pari passu_with the discussion of the Coercion Bill there should be discussionsas to the misgovernment of Ireland; and that, in the absence of anyremedial measures of the government, they should have an opportunity ofsuggesting such as they thought advisable for removing those evils whichthey utterly denied that the measure now before the House would remove. 

In vain Sir Robert, in his blandest tones and with that remarkablecommand of a temper not naturally serene which distinguished him, acknowledged to a certain degree the propriety of the course intimatedby Mr. Smith O'Brien; but suggested at the same time that it wascompatible with allowing the Irish bill to be now read for a first time, since on its subsequent stages Mr. O'Brien and his friends would havethe full opportunity which they desired, of laying before the House thewhole condition of the country. All was useless. No less a personagethan Mr. John O'Connell treated the appeal with contempt, and lecturedthe first minister on the 'great mistake' which he had made. Littletraits like these revealed the true parliamentary position of the onceomnipotent leader of the great Conservative party. With the legionsof the Protectionists watching their prey in grim silence, whilethe liberal sections were united in hostile manouvres against thegovernment, it was recognised at once that the great minister had astaff without an army; not a reconnoitring could take place without thewhole cabinet being under orders, and scarcely a sharpshooter salliedfrom the opposite ranks without the prime minister returning his fire inperson. 

Sir Robert Peel mournfully observed that he 'did not wish to provokea recriminatory discussion, ' and he resigned himself to his fate. Immediately the third night of the adjourned debate on the Irish billcommenced, and was sustained principally by the Irish members until alate hour. It had not been the intention of Lord George Bentinck to havespoken on this occasion, though he had never been absent for a momentfrom his seat, and watched all that occurred with that keen relish whichwas usual with him when he thought things were going right; but havingbeen personally and not very courteously appealed to by the late Mr. Dillon Browne, and deeming also the occasion, just before the holidays, a not unhappy one, he rose and concluded the debate. His speech was notlong, it was not prepared, and it was very animated. 

Recapitulating himself the main features of the disturbed district, hesaid: 'It is because of these things, sir, that I am prepared to supportat least the first reading of a bill, which I freely admit to be mostunconstitutional in itself. '

Noticing a speech made in the course of the evening by Lord Morpeth, who had himself once been chief secretary of the Lord Lieutenant, Lord George thought it discreet to remind the House of the unequivocalsupport given to this bill by the Whig leaders in another place: 'Sir, Ithink when we see all the great leaders of the Whig party supporting themeasure elsewhere, we cannot be justly impugned for doing as they do. 'Lord Morpeth had referred to 'remedial measures which he thinksshould be introduced for Ireland: to measures for the extension of themunicipal, and also of the parliamentary, franchise of that country; andhe expressed his desire to see those franchises put on the same footingas the franchises of England. ' 'For the life of me, ' exclaimed LordGeorge, 'I confess, I cannot see in what way the extension of politicalfranchises of any description in Ireland would afford a remedy forthe evils which this measure aims to suppress. I think, sir, it isimpossible not to perceive that there is a connection between agrarianoutrage and the poverty of the people. '

After noticing the inadequate poor-law which then existed in Ireland, he added: 'There is also another point immediately connected withthis subject to which I must refer. I allude, sir, to the system ofabsenteeism. I cannot disguise from myself the conviction, that manyof the evils of Ireland arise from the system of receiving rents byabsentee landlords who spend them in other countries. I am well awarethat, in holding this doctrine, I am not subscribing to the creed ofpolitical economists. I am well aware that Messrs. Senior and M'Cullochhold that it makes no difference whether the Irish landlord spends hisrents in Dublin, on his Irish estates, in London, in Bath, or elsewhere. I profess, sir, I cannot understand that theory. I believe that thefirst ingredient in the happiness of a people is, that the gentry shouldreside on their native soil, and spend their rents among those from whomthey receive them. I cannot help expressing a wish that some arrangementmay be made connected with the levying of the poor-rate in Ireland, bywhich absentee landlords may be made to contribute in something like afair proportion to the wants of the poor in the district in which theyought to reside. There is an arrangement in the hop-growing districts inEngland in respect to tithe, which might, I think, afford a very usefulsuggestion. There are two tithes: the one, the ordinary tithe; theother, extraordinary; which is levied only so long as the land iscultivated in hops. I think if there were two poor-rates introduced intoIreland, the one applying to all occupiers of land, and the other to allthose who did not spend a certain portion of the year on some portion oftheir estates in Ireland, it would prove useful. I think, that by thusappealing to their interests, it might induce absentee landlords toreside much more in Ireland, than is now unfortunately the case. 

'But, sir, I think there are other remedial measures. Some days ago, theSecretary of State told the member for Stroud (Mr. Poulett Scrope), when he suggested some such measure, that he was treading on dangerousground, and that the doctrines he was advocating might be written inletters of blood in Ireland; but, notwithstanding all this, I still saythat I think measures might be introduced for improving the relationsbetween landlord and tenant in Ireland. I do not think that someguarantee might and ought to be given to the tenantry of Ireland for theimprovements they make upon their farms. 

'Sir, the Secretary of State, in introducing this measure, maintaineda doctrine which, I think, much more likely to be written in letters ofblood, for he bound up the question of the corn laws with the presentone. He said, that unless he could, have prevailed on his colleaguesto accede to his free-trade measures as regards corn, he would not haveintroduced this bill. Why, sir, far from giving food to the people ofIreland, in my opinion the measures of her Majesty's ministers will takeaway from the people of Ireland their food, by destroying the profitsof their only manufacture--the manufacture of corn--and injuring theiragriculture; depriving them of employment; in fact, by taking away fromthem the very means of procuring subsistence. Sir, I cannot see how therepeal of those laws affecting corn can be In any way connected with thesuppression of outrage and the protection of life. What is this but tosay, that unless we have a free trade in corn, we must be prepared toconcede a free trade in agrarian outrage--a free trade in maiming andhoughing cattle--a free trade in incendiarism--a free trade in theburning and sacking of houses--a free trade in midnight murder, and innoon-day assassination? What is this but telling the people ofIreland, that assassination, murder, incendiarism, are of such lightconsideration in the eyes of the Secretary of State, that their sanctionor suppression by the minister of the crown hinges upon the condition ofthe corn market and the difference in the price of potatoes?

'Sir, what has the potato disease to do with the outrages in Ireland?Some think a great deal. I have taken the trouble of looking intothe matter. I have examined into the state of crime in at least fivecounties--Tipperary, Roscommon, Limerick, Leitrim, and Clare--and Ifind, that during the three months prior to the first appearance ofthe potato disease, and when in fact food was as cheap in Ireland as atalmost any former period--when plenty abounded in all quarters of theempire, that the amount of crime exceeded that in the three monthsimmediately following. Now, those who doubt this statement will have anopportunity of ascertaining the correctness of my figures, for I willnot deal in general assertions. Well then, sir, I find in the threemonths, May, June, and July last, that the number of crimes committed inthe five counties I have mentioned amounted to no less than 1, 180, whilein the three months immediately after the potato disease, or famine asit is called, the amount of crime committed in the same three months wasnot 1, 180, but 870. I should like to know, therefore, what this agrarianoutrage has to do with the potato famine; and where is the justificationfor a minister coming down to this House, and declaring that unless wepass a free-trade measure, we are not to obey her Majesty's commandsby passing a measure for the protection of life in Ireland. Why, sir, Ithink when this language reaches the people of Ireland--coming, too, asit does from the Treasury, above all, from the Secretary of State forthe Home Department--there is indeed danger to be apprehended that sucha doctrine may be written in letters of blood in that country. Why, sir, if we are to hear such language as this from that minister of the crowncharged with the peace of the country, we may just as well have CaptainRock established as lord lieutenant in the castle of Dublin, a Whitefootfor chief secretary, and Molly M'Guire installed at Whitehall with theseals of the home department. '

And afterwards he remarked, 'I have been taunted that when I may beentrusted with the government of Ireland, I should perhaps then learnthat Tyrone was an Orange county. Sir, in answer to that taunt, I musttake leave to ask what expression of mine, either in this house or outof it, justifies any such remark? When or where can it be said that Ihave ever permitted myself to know any distinction between an Orangemanand a Catholic; when, in the whole course of my parliamentary career, have I ever given a vote or uttered a sentiment hostile or unfriendly tothe Roman Catholics, either of England or Ireland?' This speech, thoughdelivered generally in favour of the Irish bill, attracted very muchthe attention, and, as it appeared afterwards, the approbation of thoseIrish members, who, although sitting on the Liberal benches, did notacknowledge the infallible authority of Mr. O'Connell, and was theorigin of a political connection between them and Lord George Bentinck, which, on more than one subsequent occasion, promised to bring importantresults. 

Two successive motions were now made for the adjournment of the debate, and Sir Robert Peel at length said, that he 'saw it was useless topersist. ' He agreed to the adjournment until the next day, with theunderstanding that if it did come on, he would name the time to which itshould be postponed after the holidays. 

Upon this, Sir William Somerville made one more appeal to the ministerto postpone the further discussion of the Irish bill altogether untilthe Corn Bill had passed the Commons. He intimated that unless thegovernment at once adopted this resolution, they would find themselvesafter Easter in the same perplexity which now paralyzed them. They wouldnot be permitted to bring on this measure except upon government nights, and the discussion might then last weeks. 

The minister, exceedingly embarrassed, would not, however, relent. Onthe following day, when he moved the adjournment of the House for theholidays, he reduced the vacation three days, in order to obtain Friday, a government night, which otherwise would have been absorbed in theholidays, and he announced the determination of the government againto proceed on that night with the Irish bill in preference to the CornBill. The Irish members glanced defiance, and the Protectionists couldscarcely conceal their satisfaction. The reputation of Sir RobertPeel for parliamentary management seemed to be vanishing; never was agovernment in a more tottering state; and the Whigs especially began torenew their laments that the Edinburgh letter and its consequences hadprevented the settlement of the corn question from devolving to thenatural arbitrator in the great controversy, their somewhat rash butstill unrivalled leader, Lord John Russell. 

CHAPTER VI. 

 _A Third Party_

THE members of the Protectionist opposition returned to theirconstituents with the sanguine feelings which success naturallyinspires. Their efforts had surprised, not displeased, the country;the elections were in their favour; the government business halted; thedelay in the calculated arrival of the famine had taken the edge off thenecessity which it was supposed would have already carried the Corn Billthrough the Commons; while the twin measure which the throes of Irelandhad engendered had developed elements of opposition which even thecalmest observer thought might possibly end in overthrow. Above all, that seemed to have happened which the most experienced in parliamentarylife had always deemed to be impracticable; namely, the formation of athird party in the House of Commons. 

How completely this latter and difficult result was owing to theabilities and energies of one man, and how anomalous was the positionwhich he chose to occupy in not taking the formal lead of a party whichwas entirely guided by his example, were convictions and considerationsthat at this juncture much occupied men's minds. And it was resolvedamong the most considerable of the country gentlemen to make someearnest and well-combined effort, during the recess, to induce LordGeorge Bentinck to waive the unwillingness he had so often expressed ofbecoming their avowed and responsible leader. 

When Lord George Bentinck first threw himself into the breach, he wasinfluenced only by a feeling of indignation at the manner in which hethought the Conservative party had been trifled with by the governmentand Lord Stanley, his personal friend and political leader, deserted bya majority of the cabinet. As affairs developed, and it became evidentthat the bulk of the Conservative party throughout the country hadrallied round his standard, Lord George could not conceal from himselfthe consequences of such an event, or believe that it was possiblethat the party in the House of Commons, although Lord Stanley mighteventually think fit to guide it by his counsels, and become, ifnecessary, personally responsible for its policy, could be long heldtogether unless it were conducted by a leader present in the sameassembly, and competent under all circumstances to represent itsopinions in debate. Lord George, although a very proud man, had novanity or self-conceit. He took a very humble view of his own powers, and he had at the same time a very exalted one of those necessary to aleader of the House of Commons. His illustrious connection, Mr. Canning, was his standard. He had been the private secretary of that ministerin his youth, and the dazzling qualities of that eminent personagehad influenced the most susceptible time of life of one who was verytenacious of his impressions. What Lord George Bentinck appreciatedmost in a parliamentary speaker was brilliancy: quickness of perception, promptness of repartee, clear and concise argument, a fresh andfelicitous quotation, wit and picture, and, if necessary, a passionateappeal that should never pass the line of high-bred sentiment. Believinghimself not to be distinguished by these rhetorical qualities, he wouldlisten with no complacency to those who would urge in private that thepresent period of parliamentary life was different from the days of Mr. Canning, and that accumulated facts and well-digested reasoning on theirbearing, a command of all the materials of commercial controversy, anda mastery of the laws that regulate the production and distribution ofpublic wealth, combined with habits of great diligence and application, would ensure the attention of a popular assembly, especially when unitedto a high character and great social position. This might be urged;but he would only shake his head, with a ray of humour twinkling in hispiercing eyes, and say, in a half-drawling tone, 'If Mr. Canning werealive, he could do all this better than any of them, and be not a whitless brilliant. '

There was also another reason why Lord George Bentinck was unwilling toassume the post of leader of the Conservative party, and this very muchinfluenced him. Sprung from a great Whig house, and inheriting all theprinciples and prejudices of that renowned political connection whichhad expelled the Stuarts, he had accepted, in an unqualified sense, thedogma of religious liberty. This principle was first introduced intoactive politics in order to preserve the possessions of that portionof the aristocracy which had established itself on the plunder ofthe Church. It was to form the basis of a party which should preventreaction and restitution of church lands. Whether the principle be atrue one, and whether its unqualified application by any party in thestate be possible, are questions yet unsettled. It is not probable, forexample, that the worship of Juggernaut, which Lord Dalhousie permitsin Orissa, would be permitted even by Lord John Russell at Westminster. Even a papist procession is forbidden, and wisely. The application ofthe principle, however, in Lord George Bentinck's mind, was among otherthings associated with the public recognition of the Roman Catholichierarchy by the state, and a provision for its maintenance in Irelandin accordance with the plan of Mr. Pitt. What had happened, with respectto the vote on the endowment of Maynooth in 1845, had convinced him thathis opinions on this subject presented an insuperable barrier to hisever becoming the leader of a party which had contributed three-fourthsof the memorable minority on that occasion. It was in vain that itwas impressed upon him by those most renowned for their Protestantprinciples, and who were at the same time most anxious to see LordGeorge Bentinck in his right position, that the question of Maynooth wassettled, and there was now no prospect of future measures of a similarcharacter. This was not the opinion of Lord George Bentinck. He nursedin his secret soul a great scheme for the regeneration and settlementof Ireland, which he thought ought to be one of the mainstays of aConservative party; and it was his opinion that the condition of theRoman Catholic priesthood must be considered. 

It was in vain, in order to assist in removing these scruples, that itwas represented to him by others that endowment of a priesthood by thestate was a notion somewhat old-fashioned, and opposed to the spiritof the age which associated true religious freedom with the fulldevelopment of the voluntary principle. He listened to these suggestionswith distrust, and even with a little contempt. Mr. Canning had been infavour of the endowment of the Irish priesthood--that was sufficient forthat particular; and as for the voluntary principle, he looked upon itas priestcraft in disguise; his idea of religious liberty being that allreligions should be controlled by the state. 

Besides these two prominent objections to accepting the offered post, namely, his unaffected distrust in his parliamentary abilities and hisassumed want of concordance with his followers on a great principleof modern politics, we must also remember that his compliance withthe request involved no ordinary sacrifice of much which renders lifedelightful. He was to relinquish pursuits of noble excitement to whichhe was passionately attached, and to withdraw in a great degree froma circle of high-spirited friends, many of them of different politicalconnection from himself, by whom he was adored. With all his unrivalledpowers of application when under the influence of a great impulse, hewas constitutionally indolent and even lethargic. There was nothing, therefore, in his position or his temperature to prick him on in '46;it was nothing but his strong will acting upon his indignation whichsustained him. It is not, therefore, marvellous that he exhibited greatreluctance to commit irretrievably his future life. At a subsequentperiod, indignation had become ambition, and circumstances of variouskinds had made him resolve to succeed or die. 

On the adjournment, Lord George had gone down to Newmarket, which hegreatly enjoyed after his exhausting campaign. Here some letters on thesubject of the leadership passed, but nothing was definitely arrangedtill some time after the re-assembling of Parliament. For conveniencewe mention here the result. The wish of the party was repeatedlyand personally urged by the popular and much-esteemed member forDorsetshire, and at last Lord George consented to their wishes, on theseconditions: that he should relinquish his post the moment the right manwas discovered, who, according to his theory, would ultimately turn up;and secondly, that his responsible post was not to restrict or embarrasshim on any questions in which a religious principle was involved. 

Before, however, this negotiation was concluded, and while yet atNewmarket, he wrote to a friend, the day before the House met (April16th). 

'I think there is no doubt, but that the Irish will take care of Friday(to-morrow) night. I have not much hope of their keeping up the debatebeyond Friday. 

'It is quite clear from O'Connell's language at Dublin that we have nohope from the Irish tail. 

'I still think myself, that delay affords a great chance of somethingturning up in our favour; already the rejection of any reciprocity byM. Guizot has provided us with a grand weapon, which, I trust, you drivewell home into * * * *'s vitals; a very short delay would probably bringover similar intelligence from the United States and their Congress. I trust we shall have an important deputation over from Canada, representing that the inevitable results of these free-trade measuresin corn and timber will be to alienate the feelings of our Canadiancolonists, and to induce them to follow their sordid interests, whichwill now, undoubtedly, be best consulted and most promoted by annexationto the United States. 

'Lord------'s intended tergiversation has been, I believe, some timeknown; he admits that all farmers without capital, in short, all littlemen, must be sacrificed. What a barbarous and odious policy, thatgoes upon the principle that none but capitalists are henceforth tobe allowed to live, as farmers at least. We must turn the tables uponLord------and all such heartless doctrinaires!

'I fear the majority in the Lords will be greater than was expected;I am told that we must endeavour to put ministers in a minority two orthree times before the bill gets to its second reading in the Lords, no matter upon what question. I hear there are many peers whose votesdepend entirely upon their notions, whether or not Peel can, by hook orby crook, carry on. '

CHAPTER VII. 

 _Railroads for Ireland_

IF WE take a general view of the career of Lord George Bentinck duringthe last year--from the time indeed when he was trying to find a lawyerto convey his convictions to the House of Commons until the moment whenher Majesty prorogued her Parliament, the results will be found to bevery remarkable. So much was never done so unexpectedly by any publicman in the same space of time. He had rallied a great party which seemedhopelessly routed; he had established a parliamentary discipline, in their ranks which old political connections, led by experiencedstatesmen, have seldom surpassed; he had brought forward from thoseranks, entirely through his discrimination and by his personalencouragement, considerable talents in debate; he had himself proved amaster in detail and in argument of all the great questions arisingout of the reconstruction of our commercial system; he had made avindication of the results of the Protective principle as applied toagriculture, which certainly, so far as the materials are concerned, isthe most efficient plea that ever was urged in the House of Commonsin favour of the abrogated law; he had exhibited similar instances ofinvestigation in considerable statements with respect to the silk tradeand other branches of our industry; he had asserted the claims of theproductive classes in Ireland, and in our timber and sugar producingcolonies, with the effect which results from a thorough acquaintancewith a subject; he had promulgated distinct principles with regard toour financial as well as to our commercial system; he had maintainedthe expediency cf relieving the consumer by the repeal of excise inpreference to customs' duties, and of establishing fiscal reciprocity asa condition of mercantile exchange. On subjects of a more occasionalbut analogous nature he had shown promptitude and knowledge, as in theinstances of the urgent condition of Mexico and of our carrying tradewith the Spanish colonies, both of which he brought forward in the lasthours of the session, but the importance of which motions was recognizedby all parties. Finally, he had attracted the notice, and in manyinstances obtained the confidence, of large bodies of men in thecountry, who recognized in him a great capacity of labour combined withfirmness of character and honesty of purpose. 

At the close of the session (August 28), Cord George visited Norfolk, where he received an entertainment from his constituents at King's Lynn, proud of their member, and to whom he vindicated the course which he hadtaken, and offered his views generally as to the relations which shouldsubsist between the legislation of the country and its industry. From Norfolk he repaired to Belvoir Castle, on a visit to the Duke ofRutland, and was present at a banquet given by the agriculturists ofLeicestershire to his friend and supporter the Marquis of Granby. Afterthis he returned to Welbeck, where he seems to have enjoyed a littlerepose. Thus he writes to a friend from that place on the 22ndSeptember:

'Thanks for your advice, which I am following, having got LordMalmesbury's Diary; but I am relapsing into my natural dawdling, lazy, and somnolent habits, and can with difficulty get through the leaderseven of the "Times. "

* * * * 'The vehemence of the farmers is personal against Peel; it isquite clear that the rising price of wheat has cured their alarm. Therailway expenditure must keep up prices and prosperity, both of whichwould have been far greater without free trade; but in face of highprices, railway prosperity, and potato famine, depend upon it we shallhave an uphill game to fight. 

'O'Connell talks of Parliament meeting in November, to mend the IrishLabour-rate Act. Do you believe this?'

The Labour-rate Act, passed at the end of the session ('46), was one bywhich the Lord Lieutenant was enabled to require special baronysessions to meet in order to make presentments for public works for theemployment of the people, the whole of the money requisite for theirconstruction to be supplied by the imperial treasury, though tobe afterwards repaid. The machinery of this act did not worksatisfactorily, but the government ultimately made the necessaryalterations on their own responsibility, and obtained an indemnity fromParliament when it met in '47. The early session, therefore, talkedof by Mr. O'Connell, became unnecessary. As the only object of thisLabour-rate Act was to employ the people, and as it was supposed therewere no public works of a reproductive nature which could be undertakenon a sufficient scale to ensure that employment, the Irish people wereoccupied, towards the end of the autumn of '46, mainly in making roads, which, as afterwards described by the first minister, 'were not wanted. 'In the month of September more than thirty thousand persons were thusemployed; but when the harvest was over, and it was ascertained that itsterrible deficiency had converted pauperism into famine, the numberson the public works became greatly increased, so that at the end ofNovember the amount of persons engaged was four hundred thousand, receiving wages at the rate of nearly five millions sterling per annum. These immense amounts went on increasing every week, and when Parliamentmet in February, 1847, five hundred thousand persons were employed onthese public works, which could bring no possible public advantage, atan expense to the country of between £700, 000 and £800, 000 per month. No Board of Works could efficiently superintend such a multitude, orprevent flagrant imposition, though the dimensions of thatdepartment appeared almost proportionably to have expanded. Whatwith commissioners, chief clerks, check clerks, and pay clerks, theestablishment of the Board of Works in Ireland, at the end of '46, consisted of more than eleven thousand persons. 

Always intent upon Ireland, this condition of affairs early andearnestly attracted the attention of Lord George Bentinck. So vast anexpenditure in unproductive labour dismayed him. He would noteasily assent to the conclusion that profitable enterprise under thecircumstances was impossible. Such a conclusion seemed to him unnatural, and that an occasion where we commenced with despair justified a boldand venturesome course. The field is legitimately open to speculationwhere all agree that all is hopeless. The construction of harbours, thedevelopment of fisheries, the redemption of waste lands, were resourceswhich had been often canvassed, and whatever their recommendations, withthe exception of the last, they were necessarily very limited; and thelast, though it might afford prompt, could hardly secure profitable, employment. Prompt and profitable employment was the object which LordGeorge wished to accomplish. Where millions were to be expended by thestate, something more advantageous to the community should accrue thanthe temporary subsistence of the multitude. 

Lord George had always been a great supporter of railway enterprise inEngland, on the ground that, irrespective of all the peculiar advantagesof those undertakings, the money was spent in the country; and that ifour surplus capital were not directed to such channels, it would go, asit had gone before, to foreign mines and foreign loans, from which in agreat degree no return would arrive. When millions were avowedly to belaid out in useless and unprofitable undertakings, it became a questionwhether it were not wiser even somewhat to anticipate the time when thenecessities of Ireland would require railways on a considerable scale;and whether by embarking in such enterprises, we might not only findprompt and profitable employment for the people, but by giving a newcharacter to the country and increasing its social relations and thecombinations of its industry, might not greatly advance the period whensuch modes of communication would be absolutely requisite. 

Full of these views, Lord George, in the course of the autumn, consultedin confidence some gentlemen very competent to assist him in such aninquiry, and especially Mr. Robert Stephenson, Mr. Hudson, and Mr. Laing. With their advice and at their suggestion, two engineers ofgreat ability, Mr. Bidder and Mr. Smith, were despatched to Ireland, personally to investigate the whole question of railroads in thatcountry. 

Meditating over the condition of Ireland, a subject very frequentlyin his thoughts, and of the means to combat its vast and inveteratepauperism, Lord George was frequently in the habit of reverting tothe years '41-42 in England, when there were fifteen hundred thousandpersons on the parish rates; eighty-three thousand able-bodied men, actually confined within the walls of the workhouse, and more than fourhundred thousand able-bodied men receiving out-door relief. What changedall this and restored England in a very brief space to a conditionof affluence hardly before known in her annals? Not certainly thealterations in the tariff which were made by Sir Robert Peel at thecommencement of his government, prudent and salutary as they were. Noone would pretend that the abolition of the slight duty (five-sixteenthsof a penny) on the raw material of the cotton manufacturer, or the freeintroduction of some twenty-seven thousand head of foreign cattle, or even the admission of foreign timber at reduced duties, could haveeffected this. Unquestionably it was the railway enterprise whichthen began to prevail that was the cause of this national renovation. Suddenly, and for several years, an additional sum of thirteen millionsof pounds sterling a year was spent in the wages of our native industry;two hundred thousand able-bodied labourers received each upon an averagetwenty-two shillings a week, stimulating the revenue both in excise andcustoms by their enormous consumption of malt and spirits, tobacco andtea. This was the main cause of the contrast between the England of '41and the England of '45. 

Was there any reason why a proportionate application of the same remedyto Ireland should not proportionately produce a similar result? Wasthere anything wild or unauthorized in the suggestion? On the contrary:ten years before (1836), the subject had engaged the attention of herMajesty's government, and a royal commission had been issued to inquireinto the expediency of establishing railway communication in Ireland. The commissioners, men of great eminence, recommended that a systemof railways should be established in Ireland, and by the pecuniaryassistance of government. They rested their recommendation mainly on theabundant evidence existing of the vast benefits which easy communicationhad accomplished in Ireland, and of the complete success which hadattended every Parliamentary grant for improving roads in that country. 

The weakness of the government, arising from the balanced state ofparties, rendered it impossible at that time for them to prosecute themeasures recommended by the royal commissioners, though they made anineffectual attempt in that direction. Could it be suspected that therecommendation of the commissioners had been biassed by any politicalconsideration? Was it a Whig commission attempting to fulfil a Whigobject? Another commission, more memorable, at the head of which was theEarl of Devon, was appointed by a Tory government some years afterwards, virtually to consider the condition of the people of Ireland, and thebest means for their amelioration. The report of the Devon commissionconfirmed all the recommendations of the railway commissioners of '36, and pointed to these new methods of communication, by the assistance ofloans from the government, as the best means of providing employment forthe people. 

When Mr. Smith of Deanston was examined by a Parliamentary committee, and asked what measure of all others would be the one most calculated toimprove the agriculture and condition of Ireland, he did not reply, assome might have anticipated, that the most efficient measure would beto drain the bogs; but his answer was, 'advance the construction ofrailways, and then agricultural improvement will speedily follow. '

To illustrate the value of railways to an agricultural population, Mr. Smith, of Deanston, said, 'that the improvement of the land for one mileonly on each side of the railway so constructed would be so great, thatit would pay the cost of the whole construction. ' He added, that therewere few districts' in Ireland, in which railway communication couldbe introduced, where the value of the country through which the railwaypassed would not be raised to an extent equal to the whole cost of therailway. 

Arguing on an area of six hundred and forty acres for every square mile, after deducting the land occupied by fences, roads, and buildings, Mr. Smith, of Deanston, entered into a calculation of the gain deliverablefrom the mere carriage of the produce of the land, and the back carriageof manure, coals, tiles, bricks, and other materials, and estimated thesaving through those means on every square mile to more than £300, orsomething above £600 on 1, 280 acres abutting each mile of railway, this being the difference of the cost of carriage under the old mode ofconveyance as compared with the new. Following up this calculation, he showed that fifteen hundred miles of railway would improve the landthrough which it passed to the extent of nearly two million acres at therate of a mile on each side; and, taken at twenty-five years' purchase, would equal twenty-four millions sterling in the permanent improvementof the land. 

The ground, therefore, was sound on which Lord George cautiously, andafter due reflection, ventured to place his foot. 

And now, after the reports of these two royal commissions, what was thestate of railway enterprise in Ireland in the autumn of '46, when a vastmultitude could only subsist by being employed by the government, andwhen the government had avowedly no reproductive or even useful workwhereon to place them; but allotted them to operations which weredescribed by Colonel Douglas, the inspector of the government himself, 'as works which would answer no other purpose than that of obstructingthe public conveyances?'

In '46, acts of Parliament were in existence authorizing theconstruction of more than fifteen hundred miles of railway in Ireland, and some of these acts had passed so long as eleven years previously, yet at the end of '46 only one hundred and twenty-three miles of railwayhad been completed, and only one hundred and sixty-four were in thecourse of completion, though arrested in their progress from want offunds. Almost in the same period, two thousand six hundred miles ofrailway had been completed in England, and acts of Parliament had passedfor constructing five thousand four hundred miles in addition: in thewhole, eight thousand miles. 

What then was the reason of this debility in Ireland in prosecutingthese undertakings? Were they really not required; were the elementsof success wanting? The first element of success in railway enterprise, according to the highest authorities, is population; property is onlythe second consideration. Now, Ireland in '46 was more densely inhabitedthan England. A want of population could not therefore be the cause. But a population so impoverished as the Irish could not perhaps availthemselves of the means of locomotion; and yet it appeared from researchthat the rate of passengers on the two Irish railways that were opengreatly exceeded in number that of the passengers upon English andScotch railways. The average number of passengers on English and Scotchrailways was not twelve thousand per mile per annum, while on the Ulsterrailway the number was nearly twenty-two thousand, and on the Dublin andDrogheda line the number exceeded eighteen thousand. 

The cause of the weakness in Ireland to prosecute these undertakingswas the total want of domestic capital for the purpose, and theunwillingness of English capitalists to embark their funds in a countrywhose social and political condition they viewed with distrust, howeverpromising and even profitable the investment might otherwise appear. This was remarkably illustrated by the instance of the Great Southernand Western Railway of Ireland, one of the undertakings of which thecompletion was arrested by want of funds, yet partially open. Comparedwith a well-known railway in Great Britain, the Irish railway had costin its construction £15, 000 per mile, and the British upwards of £26, 000per mile; the weekly traffic on the two railways, allowing for somedifference in their extent, was about the same on both, in amountvarying from £1, 000 to £1, 300 per week; yet the unfinished Britishrailway was at £40 premium in the market, and the incomplete Irishrailway at £2 discount. It was clear, therefore, that the commercialprinciple, omnipotent in England, was not competent to cope with thepeculiar circumstances of Ireland. 

Brooding over the suggestions afforded by the details which we haveslightly indicated, Lord George Bentinck, taking into considerationnot merely the advantage that would accrue to the country from theestablishment of a system of railroads, but also remembering thepeculiar circumstances of the times, the absolute necessity of employingthe people, and the inevitable advance of public money for that purpose, framed a scheme with reference to all these considerations, and whichhe believed would meet all the conditions of the case. He spared nothought, or time, or labour, for his purpose. He availed himself of theadvice of the most experienced, and prosecuted his researches ardentlyand thoroughly. When he had matured his scheme, he had it thrown intothe form of a parliamentary bill by the ablest hands, and then submittedthe whole to the judgment and criticism of those who shared hisconfidence and counsels. Towards the end of November he was at Knowsley, from whence he communicated with the writer of these pages. 'I am herehatching secret plans for the next session; and now, if you have notquite abjured politics, as you threatened for the next three months todo, devoting yourself to poetry and romance, I think I ought to have aquiet day with you, in order that we may hold council together and talkover all our policy. I shall be at Harcourt House on the 30th. I shallstay there till the 3rd of December, for a meeting on that day of theNorfolk Estuary Company, of which I am chairman. Would that eveningsuit you--or Friday--or Wednesday? I am not well acquainted with thegeography of Buckinghamshire, but presume you are accessible either byrail or road in less than twelve hours. 

'The activity in the dockyard must be in preparation to interfere inPortugal, to keep King Leopold upon the Portuguese throne: it cannot befor Mexico, for our friend the "Times" formally abandoned Mexico in hisleader some days ago. 

'* * * * has been entertaining Lord * * * * in Ireland, and writes: "HowPeel must chuckle at the Whig difficulties. " I dare say he does, butin Ireland it seems to me Lord Besborough is putting the fate Irishgovernment to shame, whilst the rupture of the _entente cordiale_, theconquest of California and New Mexico, and the complications in theriver Plata, --are complete inheritances from Lord Aberdeen. 

'Eaton has come to life again: else there was a prospect of GeorgeManners quietly succeeding him in Cambridgeshire. I fear we shall do nogood in Lincolnshire, notwithstanding the industry of our dear friendthe "Morning Post, " in getting hold of Lord Ebrington's and Lord Rich'sletters to Lord Yarborough. I suppose there is no mistake in LordDalhousie ("the large trout") going out to Bombay with the reversion ofBengal. 

'The duchy of Lancaster is to be put in commission, Lord * * * * tobe one of the commissioners, _but unpaid_. He has begun, I presume, toovercome the false delicacy which prevented his acceptance of officeunder the Whigs in July. S * * * * thought G * * * * was to be anotherof the Board, but that turns out a mistake, but Lord H * * * * is to be. 

'The manufacturers are working short time, and reducing wages inall directions, John Bright and Sons at Rochdale among the rest. TheZollverein increasing their import duties on cotton and linen yarn, andputting export duties of 25 per cent. (some of the states at least) ongrain. '

We must not omit to record, that in the autumn of this year, at Goodwoodraces, the sporting world was astounded by hearing that Lord GeorgeBentinck had parted with his racing stud at an almost nominal price. Lord George was present, as was his custom, at this meeting, held in thedemesne of one who was among his dearest friends. Lord George was notonly present but apparently absorbed in the sport, and his horseswere very successful. The world has hardly done justice to the greatsacrifice which he made on this occasion to a high sense of duty. He notonly parted with the finest racing stud in England, but he parted withit at a moment when its prospects were never so brilliant; and he knewthis well. We may have hereafter to notice on this head an interestingpassage in his life. 

He could scarcely have quitted the turf that day without a pang. He hadbecome the lord paramount of that strange world, so difficult to sway, and which requires for its government both a stern resolve and a courtlybreeding. He had them both; and though the blackleg might quail beforethe awful scrutiny of his piercing eye, there never was a man soscrupulously polite to his inferiors as Lord George Bentinck. Theturf, too, was not merely the scene of the triumphs of his stud andhis betting-book. He had purified its practice and had elevated itscharacter, and he was prouder of this achievement than of any otherconnected with his sporting life. Notwithstanding his mighty stakes andthe keenness with which he backed his opinion, no one perhaps ever caredless for money. His habits were severely simple, and he was the mostgenerous of men. He valued the acquisition of money on the turf, becausethere it was the test of success. He counted his thousands after a greatrace as a victorious general counts his cannon and his prisoners. 

CHAPTER VIII. 

 _The Versatility of Lord George Bentinck_

THOSE who throw their eye over the debates of the session of '47, cannot fail to be struck by the variety of important questions in thediscussion of which Lord George Bentinck took a leading or prominentpart. And it must be borne in mind that he never offered his opinion onany subject which he had not diligently investigated and attemptedto comprehend in all its bearings. His opponents might object to hisprinciples or challenge his conclusions, but no one could deny thathis conclusions were drawn from extensive information and that hisprinciples were clear and distinct. He spared no pains to acquire byreading, correspondence, and personal research, the most authenticintelligence on every subject in debate. He never chattered. He neveruttered a sentence in the House of Commons which did not convey aconviction or a fact. He was too profuse indeed with his facts: he hadnot the art of condensation. But those who have occasion to refer to hisspeeches and calmly to examine them, will be struck by the amplitudeand the freshness of his knowledge, the clearness of his views, thecoherence in all his efforts, and often--a point for which he never hadsufficient credit--by his graphic idiom. 

The best speech on the affairs of Cracow, for example, the mostvigorous and the best informed, touching all the points with a thoroughacquaintance, was that of Lord George Bentinck. The discussion onCracow, which lasted several nights and followed very shortly afterthe defeat of his Irish bill, appeared to relate to a class of subjectswhich would not have engaged his attention; but on the contrary, he hadgiven days and nights to this theme, had critically examined all thedocuments, and conferred with those qualified to supply him with anysupplementary information requisite. He spoke several times this sessionon questions connected with our foreign affairs, and always impressedthe House with a conviction that he was addressing it after a due studyof his subject: as for example, his speech against our interference inPortugal, and the statement in which he brought forward the claims ofthe holders of Spanish bonds on the government of Spain before the Houseof Commons. In the instance of Portugal, a motion of censure onthe conduct of ministers had been introduced by Mr. Hume, and thegovernment were only saved from a minority by the friendly interpositionof Mr. Duncombe, who proposed an amendment to the motion of Mr. Humewhich broke the line of the liberal force. Lord George Bentinck in thiscase followed Mr. Macaulay, whose speech, as was his wont, had been richin historical illustration. 'The right honourable and learned member forEdinburgh, ' Lord George replied, 'had entered into a very interestinghistory of various interferences which had taken place in the affairsof Portugal; but in making that statement he forgot to mention onecircumstance which had occurred in that history, and it was this

--that when Philip II. Of Spain sought to conquer Portugal, the methodhe had recourse to for that purpose was one which he thought herMajesty's ministers had successfully practised on the present occasion

--he persuaded the leaders in Portugal to mix sand with the powder oftheir troops. And so, on this occasion, her Majesty's ministers hadprevailed on the member for Finsbury, and those other members who wereso ready to profess a love of liberty, to mix sand with their powder. '

In a previous chapter we have treated at some length of the meansproposed or adopted by the Parliament for the sustenance and reliefof the people of Ireland. The new poor law for that country also muchengaged the attention of both Houses this session. Lord George Bentincktook a very active part in these transactions, and moved the mostimportant of all the amendments to the government measure, namely, anattempt to assimilate the poor law of Ireland as much as possible tothat of England, and make the entire rates be paid by the occupyingtenant. His object, he said, was to 'prevent lavish expenditure andencourage profitable employment to the people. ' This amendment was onlylost by a majority of four. 

On the 26th of March, on the government bringing forward their bill onthe rum duties, Lord George Bentinck brought before the House thecase of the British and Irish distillers, not with any preferenceor partiality towards English, Scotch, or Irish distillers over thecolonial producer. 'I am no advocate of any monopoly whatever. I desireonly equal and exact justice between both parties; and the only way inwhich that end can, in my opinion, be properly attained, is in a selectcommittee upstairs, consisting of impartial members of this house. '

He often used to say that no subject ever gave him more troublethoroughly to master than the spirit duties; and he noticed thecharacter of the theme at the beginning of his speech. He said herequired, not only the most especial indulgence, but even the tolerationof the House, 'for of all the dry and dull subjects which could possiblybe introduced, the question which it is now my misfortune to bring underthe consideration of the House is the driest and the dullest. If thisquestion had been one merely of pounds, shillings, and pence, it wouldhave been dull and complicated enough; but this is a question in whichare concerned not pounds and shillings, but pence, and halfpence, andfarthings. '

The Whitsuntide holidays occurred at the end of May. It had originallybeen the intention of Lord George Bentinck, at the request of leadingmerchants and manufacturers of all parties and opinions, to have broughtforward the question of the Bank Act after these holidays, and to move aresolution that some discretionary power should be established as to theissue of notes. He thus alludes to this point in a letter to Mr. Wright, of the 24th of May:--

'I return you No. 1019, of the "Bankers' Circular, " with many thanks. 

'This delightful and timely change in the weather will do wonders forthe country, and by producing an abundant and seasonable harvest, willsave the country, and _may save the Bank Charter Act_; but it is prettywell settled that I am to give notice immediately after the holidays, of a resolution very much in the spirit of the memorial contained in thepaper I am returning to you. 

'Things are better in the City and at Liverpool, and with this weatherwill continue to improve; but it seems to me any reverse in the weather, such as would occasion a late and deficient harvest, could not fail tobring the commerce of the country to a dead lock. 

'The opinion is gaining ground, that in the present state not onlyof Ireland, but of many districts in England, the government will notventure upon a general election till after the harvest, and not then, unless the harvest should prove favourable. 

'I am glad to read your opinion in opposition to Lord Ashburton's, thatrailways keep the gold in the country, and do not send it out. Glyn gavestrong evidence last year to this effect before the railway committee. '

Neither of the prospects in this letter was realised. The commercial andmanufacturing interest, after the Whitsun recess, thought it advisablefor reasons of great weight that Lord George Bentinck should postponefor a month or six weeks his intended motion on the Bank Charter, andthe ministers resolved to dissolve Parliament before the harvest: thusit happened that the merchants and manufacturers lost their chance ofrelief from the yoke, and experienced the reign of terror in the autumn, the terrible events of which ultimately occasioned the assembling of thenew Parliament in November. 

Anticipating the immediate dissolution of Parliament, Sir Robert Peelhad issued an address to the electors of Tamworth, justifying hiscommercial policy. In the opinion of Lord George Bentinck it set fortha statement as to the effect and operation of those financial measureswhich had taken place in the course of the last six years, which, ifleft altogether unrefuted, might have a dangerous tendency at thecoming elections. The general effect of that statement was, that by thereduction of duties to a large extent, it was possible to relieve thepeople of this country of burdens amounting to more than seven millionsand a half sterling with little or no loss whatever to the revenue. Butthe truth was, Sir Robert Peel in his reductions had dealt only withlittle more than ten millions sterling of the revenue of the country, and had left the remaining thirty-seven millions untouched. Now onthat portion of the revenue with which alone he had dealt, there wasa deficiency, through his changes, to the amount of five millionssterling, which loss was compensated by the increase on those veryarticles which Sir Robert had left untouched. It was the opinion of LordGeorge Bentinck that the conclusion which Sir Robert Peel had drawnfrom the comparatively barren results of the increased duties on importscarried by the Whigs in 1840, viz. , that indirect taxation had reachedits limit, and which was indeed the basis of his new system, was afallacy, and that the anticipated increase of import duties had notaccrued in 1840 in consequence of our having had three successive badharvests, 'and a bad cotton crop to boot, ' all of which had checked theconsuming power of the community. Sir Robert Peel had been favoured bythree successive good harvests and nearly £100, 000, 000 invested in sixyears in domestic enterprise. 'The interposition of Providence, ' saidLord George, 'is never a part of our debates. '

Under these circumstances, Lord George took occasion to review thecommercial policy of Sir Robert Peel, on the 20th July, in the House ofCommons, only three days before the prorogation, and in one of his mostsuccessful speeches. He was much assisted by the fact that the exportsof all our staple manufactures had then greatly diminished, and ofcourse he urged this point triumphantly. 'If we had been indemnified forthe dead loss of £650, 000 on cotton wool by any great impulse givento our manufacturers, it would be a consolation which unfortunately wecould not enjoy. ' He traced all the consumption to railway enterprise, and showed that it alone had compensated for the fruitless loss ofrevenue which we had incurred in vainly stimulating the exports of ourmanufactures, which had actually diminished. He was so impressed withthe importance that, 'on the eve of a dissolution, such a statementas that of Sir Robert Peel should not go forth to the countryuncontroverted, as in that case the necessary result would be thatthe people would come to the opinion that they might abolish taxesaltogether and yet maintain the revenue, ' that he sat up all nightwriting an address to his constituents, the electors of King's Lynn, which took up nearly two columns of the newspapers, in which hepresented his refutation to the public of the commercial manifesto ofTamworth, illustrated by the necessary tables and documents. 

There is a sentence in this speech which, as a distinct expression ofpolicy, should perhaps be quoted:

'Sir, I am one of those who seek for the repeal of the malt tax and thehop duties. I am one of those who think that the excise duties ought tobe taken off. But, sir, I do not pretend that you can repeal the malttax or the hop duties, or remove the soap tax without commutation forother taxes. I will not delude the people by pretending that I couldtake off more than seven millions and a half of taxes without replacingthem by others, and not leave the nation bankrupt. But I think thesereforms of Sir Robert Peel have been in a mistaken direction; I thinkthat revenue duties on all foreign imports ought to be maintained, andthat a revenue equal to those excise duties which I have mentioned canbe levied upon the produce of foreign countries and foreign industry, without imposing any greater tax than one which shall fall far short ofMr. Walker's "perfect revenue standard of 20 per cent. " I say that byimposing a tax far less than 20 per cent. Upon all articles of foreignimport, a revenue might be derived far less burdensome to this countrythan that of excise, a revenue of which the burden would be largelyshared in by foreign countries, and in many cases paid altogether byforeign countries. '

Lord George at this time watched with great interest a novel featurein our commercial transactions. He wrote on the 29th May (1847), to Mr. Burn, the editor of the 'Commercial Glance, ' and an individual of whoseintelligence, accuracy, and zeal he had a high and just opinion, 'Canyou inform me how the raw cotton purchased for exportation stands inthe first three weeks of the present month of May, as compared with thecorresponding periods of '46--5--4--3?

'I observe from a cotton circular sent to me the other day, that seventhousand five hundred bags of cotton had been purchased for exportationbetween the 1st and 21st of May. If with reduced stocks of raw cottonwe are commencing a career of increased exportation, it appears to me toinvolve very serious consequences for our cotton manufactures as growingout of the existing monetary difficulties of the manufacturers. 

'If you could answer me these queries within the next three or fourdays, I should feel greatly obliged to you. '

Again, on the 22d of July, on the point of going down to hisconstituents, he was still pursuing his inquiries in the same quarter. 'I want particularly to compare, ' he says to Mr. Burn, 'the export of thelast ten weeks of raw cotton with the corresponding ten weeks of '46and '45, and at the same time to compare the importations and deliveriesinto the hands of the manufacturers during these same periods. 

'Pray address me, Lynn, Norfolk, where I go on Saturday, and shallremain till after my election on Thursday. '

He writes again from Lynn, with great thanks for the information whichhad been accordingly forwarded to him there. 'Might I ask you to give mean account of the cotton wool imported weekly into Liverpool, and alsothe quantity sold to dealers, exporters, and speculators, in the threecorresponding weeks of '45-46. 

'This information by return of post would greatly oblige me. '

On the 23d of July, 1847, the last day of the second Parliament of QueenVictoria, Lord George went down to the House of Commons early, and tookthe opportunity of making a statement respecting the condition of oursugar-producing colonies, which were now experiencing the consequencesof the unjustifiable legislation of the preceding year. He said therewere appearances in the political horizon which betokened that he shouldnot be able to obtain a select committee in the present session, andtherefore, if he had the honour of a seat in the next Parliament, hebegged to announce that he would take the earliest occasion to move fora committee to inquire into the present power of our colonies to competewith those countries which have still the advantage of the enforcedlabour of slaves. The returns just laid upon the table of the Housecould leave no doubt, he thought, on any man's mind on that point. Sincethe emancipation, the produce of sugar by the colonies, from '31 to '46, had been reduced one half, and of rum and coffee had been reduced to onefourth. When the act of last year which admitted slave-grown sugar wasintroduced, the allegation of the English colonies, that they couldnot compete with the labour of slaves, was denied. The proof of thatallegation was, that they were already overwhelmed. 

When one recalls all to which this speech led, the most memorable effortof that ardent, energetic life to which it was perhaps fatal, one canscarcely observe the origin of such vast exertions without emotion. 

The Under Secretary of State replied to Lord George, making a cry ofcheap sugar for the hustings which were before everybody's eyes, butmaking also this remarkable declaration, that 'the Island of Mauritiuswas in a state of the greatest prosperity. ' While Lord George wasspeaking, the cannon were heard that announced the departure of hermajesty from the palace. 

Then followed a motion of Mr. Bankes about the sale of bread, which ledto some discussion. Mr. Bankes threatened a division. Lord Palmerston, who on this occasion was leading the House, said it would be acting likea set of schoolboys, if when Black Rod appeared they should be in thelobby instead of attending the Speaker to the other House. But as themembers seemed very much inclined to act like schoolboys, the Secretaryof State had to speak against time on the subject of baking. He analyzedthe petition, which he said he would not read through, but the lastparagraph was of great importance. 

At these words, Black Rod knocked at the door, and duly making hisappearance, summoned the House to attend the Queen in the House ofLords, and Mr. Speaker, followed by a crowd of members, duly obeyed thesummons. 

In about a quarter of an hour, Mr. Speaker returned without the mace, and standing at the table read her Majesty's speech to the membersaround, after which they retired, the Parliament being prorogued. In thecourse of the afternoon, the Parliament was dissolved by proclamation. 

CHAPTER IX. 

 _The Great Panic_

THE general election of 1847 did not materially alter the position ofparties in the House of Commons. The high prices of agricultural producewhich then prevailed naturally rendered the agricultural interestapathetic, and although the rural constituencies, from a feeling ofesteem, again returned those members who had been faithful to theprotective principle, the farmers did not exert themselves to increasethe number of their supporters. The necessity of doing so was earnestlyimpressed upon them by Lord George Bentinck, who warned them then thatthe pinching hour was inevitable; but the caution was disregarded, andmany of those individuals who are now the loudest in their imprecationson the memory of Sir Robert Peel, and who are the least content with thetemperate course which is now recommended to them by those who have theextremely difficult office of upholding their interests in the House ofCommons, entirely kept aloof, or would smile when they were asked fortheir support with sarcastic self-complacency, saying, 'Well, Sir, doyou think after all that free trade has done us so much harm?' Perhapsthey think now, that if they had taken the advice of Lord GeorgeBentinck and exerted themselves to return a majority to the House ofCommons, it would have profited them more than useless execrations andbarren discontent. But it is observable, that no individuals now grumbleso much as the farmers who voted for free trader in 1847, unless indeedit be the shipowners, every one of whom for years, both in and out ofParliament, supported the repeal of the corn laws. 

The Protectionists maintained their numbers, though they did notincrease them, in the new Parliament. Lord George Bentinck howevergained an invaluable coadjutor by the re-appearance of Mr. Herriesin public life, a gentleman whose official as well as parliamentaryexperience, fine judgment, and fertile resource, have been ofinestimable service to the Protectionist party. The political connectionwhich gained most were the Whigs; they were much more numerous andcompact, but it was in a great measure at the expense of the generalliberal element, and partly at the cost of the following of Sir RobertPeel. The triumphant Conservative majority of 1841 had disappeared;but the government, with all shades of supporters, had not an absolutemajority. 

Had the general election been postponed until the autumn, the resultsmight have been very different. That storm--which had been longgathering in the commercial atmosphere--then burst like a typhoon. Theannals of our trade afford no parallel for the widespread disaster andthe terrible calamities. In the month of September, fifteen of the mostconsiderable houses in the city of London stopped payment for betweenfive and six millions sterling. The governor of the Bank of Englandwas himself a partner in one of these firms; a gentleman who had latelyfilled that office, was another victim; two other Bank directors wereincluded in the list. The failures were not limited to the metropolis, but were accompanied by others of great extent in the provinces. AtManchester, Liverpool, and Glasgow large firms were obliged to suspendpayments. This shock of credit arrested all the usual accommodation, and the pressure in the money-market, so terrible in the spring, wasrevived. The excitement and the alarm in the city of London were sogreat that when the Chancellor of the Exchequer hurried up to town onthe 1st of October, he found that the interest of money was at the rateof 60 per cent. Per annum. The Bank Charter produced the same injuriouseffect as it had done in April; it aggravated the evil by forcing mento hoard. In vain the commercial world deplored the refusal of thegovernment to comply with the suggestion made by Lord George Bentinckand Mr. Thomas Baring in the spring; in vain they entreated them atleast now to adopt it, and to authorize the Bank of England to enlargethe amount of their discounts and advances on approved security, withoutreference to the stringent clause of the charter. The government, acting, it is believed, with the encouragement and sanction of SirRobert Peel, were obstinate, and three weeks then occurred duringwhich the commercial credit of this country was threatened with totaldestruction. Nine more considerable mercantile houses stopped paymentin the metropolis, the disasters in the provinces were still moreextensive. The Royal Bank of Liverpool failed; among several principalestablishments in that town, one alone stopped payment for upwards of amillion sterling. The havoc at Manchester was also great. The Newcastlebank and the North and South Wales bank stopped. Consols fell to 79 1/4, and exchequer bills were at last at 35 per cent, discount. The ordinaryrate of discount at the Bank of England was between 8 and 9 per cent. , but out of doors accommodation was not to be obtained. In such a stateof affairs, the small houses of course gave way. From their rising inthe morning until their hour of retirement at night, the First Lord ofthe Treasury and the Chancellor of the Exchequer were employed inseeing persons of all descriptions, who entreated them to interfere andpreserve the community from universal bankruptcy. 'Perish the world, sooner than violate a principle, ' was the philosophical exclamation ofher Majesty's ministers, sustained by the sympathy and the sanction ofSir Robert Peel. At last, the governor and the deputy-governor of theBank of England waited on Downing Street, and said it could go on nomore. The Scotch banks had applied to them for assistance. Thewhole demand for discount was thrown upon the Bank of England. Twobill-brokers had stopped; two others were paralyzed. The Bank of Englandcould discount no longer. Thanks to the Bank Charter, they were safe andtheir treasury full of bullion, but it appeared that everybody elsemust fall, for in four-and-twenty hours the machinery of credit wouldbe entirely stopped. The position was frightful, and the government gaveway. They did that on the 25th of October, after houses had fallen tothe amount of fifteen millions sterling, which they had been counselledto do by Lord George Bentinck on the 25th of April. It turned outexactly as Mr. Thomas Baring had foretold. It was not want of capital ordeficiency of circulation which had occasioned these awful consequences. It was sheer panic, occasioned by an unwisely stringent law. No soonerhad the government freed the Bank of England from that stringency, than the panic ceased. The very morning the letter of license fromthe government to the Bank of England appeared, thousands and tens ofthousands of pounds sterling were taken from the hoards, some from boxesdeposited with bankers, although the depositors would not leave thenotes in their bankers' hands. Large parcels of notes were returned tothe Bank of England cut into halves, as they had been sent down into thecountry, and so small was the real demand for an additional quantity ofcurrency, that the whole amount taken from the Bank, when the unlimitedpower of issue was given, was under £400, 000, and the Bank consequentlynever availed itself of the privilege which the government had accordedit. The restoration of confidence produced an ample currency, andthat confidence had solely been withdrawn from the apprehension of thestringent clauses of the Bank Charter Act of 1844. 

These extraordinary events had not occurred unnoticed by Lord GeorgeBentinck. The two subjects that mostly engaged his attention after thegeneral election were the action of the Bank Charter and the state ofour sugar colonies. Perhaps it would be best to give some extracts fromhis correspondence at this period. He was a good letter-writer, easy andclear. His characteristic love of details also rendered this styleof communication interesting. It is not possible to give more thanextracts, and it is necessary to omit all those circumstances whichgenerally in letter-reading are most acceptable. His comments on men andthings were naturally free and full, and he always endeavoured, for theamusement of his correspondents, to communicate the social gossip of thehour. But although all this must necessarily be omitted, his letters mayafford some illustrations of his earnestness and energy, the constancyof his aim, and the untiring vigilance with which he pursued hisobject--especially those which are addressed to gentlemen engaged incommercial pursuits who cooperated with him in his investigations. 

TO A FRIEND. 

Harcourt House, August 30, 1847. 

An answer is come out to my address to my constituents at King's Lynn, and to my speech in answer to Peel's manifesto. Pray read it. At firstI thought I could swear to its being * * * *, I now think I can swearto its being * * * *; the servility to Peel, and the official red-tapestyle would equally do for either; but the no-popery page, I think, fixes it on * * * *. 

I think it wretchedly weak, and have written some notes on the margin, showing up the principal points. The nine months' famine of 1846-47, ascontrasted with Peel's famine, shows a difference of between £6, 000, 000and £7, 000, 000; that is to say, on the balance in the nine months1845-46, Ireland exported about three millions' worth of breadstuffs, and not a soul died of famine. In the nine months 1846-47, she importedthree millions' sterling worth of bread-stuffs, which insufficed toprevent one million--or say half a million--of the people from dying ofstarvation. 

At present I have seen no notice of the pamphlet in any of thenewspapers: if it is either * * * *'s, or * * * *'s, or * * * *'s weshall see it reviewed in 'Times, ' 'Chronicle, ' and 'Spectator. '

The Bank of England has raised the interest on * * * *'s mortgageone-third per cent. , making an additional annual charge of £1, 500 a yearto him. I am very sorry for him, but I know nothing so likely to rousethe landed aristocracy from their apathy, and to weaken their idolatryof Peel so much as this warning note of the joint operation of his freetrade and restrictive currency laws. 

TO A FRIEND. 

Harcourt House, September 2, 1847. 

I think it is * * * *. The trickster, I observe, has carefully reducedthe pounds of cotton to cwts. , in the hopes of concealing a great fraudto which he has condescended; taking, in the Whig year of 1841, the homeconsumption of cotton, whilst in Peel's year he gives entire importationas the home consumption, representing both as home consumption. 

In Peel's year, 1846, officially we have only the gross importation; butin the Whig year, 1841, the entire importation and the home consumptionare given separately: the importation exceeding the home consumption byfifty million pounds. Burn's 'Glance, ' however, gives the importationand home consumption for both years; unfortunately, however, not inlbs. Or cwts. , but in bags. * * * *'s fraud, however, is not the lessapparent. 

He selects a Whig year when the home consumption was 220, -000 bags underthe importation, and a year for Peel when the importation exceeded thehome consumption by 280, 000 bags, and claps down the figures as alikedescribing the home consumption. 

None of the Peel papers have taken up the subject: if they should, the'Morning Post' will answer the pamphlet; but I should like to have mineback again, in order that I may furnish them with the notes. 

* * * * was with me this morning, and called my attention to thecircumstance that the author starts with 'We, ' but drops into thesingular number; * * * * fancies it is Peel himself, but the page onendowment fixes it on * * * *. 

Lord L * * * * means, I presume, that Peel's savage hatred is appliedto the Protectionist portion of his old party, not of course to thejanissaries and renegade portion. 

The following letter was in reply to one of a friend who had sent himinformation, several days before they occurred, of the great failuresthat were about to happen in the city of London. The list wasunfortunately quite accurate, with the exception indeed of theparticular house respecting which Lord George quotes the opinion ofBaron Rothschild. 

TO A FRIEND. 

Welbeck, September 17, 1847. 

A thousand thanks for your letter, the intelligence in which created agreat sensation at Doncaster. 

As yet none of the houses appear to have failed except S * * * *. BaronRothschild was at Doncaster. I talked with him on the subject; he seemednot to doubt the probable failure of any of the houses you named, except* * * *. He declared very emphatically 'that * * * * house was as soundas any house in London. '

Lord Fitzwilliam declares 'it is no free trade without free trade inmoney. '

Lord Clanricarde is here--laughs at the idea of Parliament meeting inOctober; but talks much of the difficulties of Ireland--says he does notsee how the rates are to be paid. 

Messrs. Drummond are calling in their mortgages. I expect to hear thatthis practice will be general; money dear, corn cheap, incumbrancesenhanced, and rents depressed. What will become of the apathetic countrygentlemen? I judge from * * * * 's language, that Lord John Russellwill stand or fall by the Bank Charter Act-but that he feels veryapprehensive of being unable to maintain it. 

I agree with Bonham, in thinking that the Protectionist party issmashed for the present Parliament; but I must say I think Protectionistprinciples and policy are likely to come into repute again far soonerthan was expected; and though Peel's party be a compact body, andformidable in the House of Commons, I cannot think that there appearsthat in the working of his measures to make it likely that he should besoon again carried into power on the shoulders of the people. I thinkhis political reputation must ebb further before it can rise again, if it should ever rise again. * * * * thought him 'broken and in lowspirits, ' when he met him at Longshaw; but Lord * * * *, who was thereat the same time, came away more Peelite than ever, and told them atBretby that Sir Robert said, 'That he was quite surprised at the numberof letters he got every day from members returned to Parliament, sayingthey meant to vote with him. '

You may rely upon it the Peelites are very sanguine that they will be inpower again almost directly. We must keep them out. 

TO MR. BURN, EDITOR OF THE 'COMMERCIAL GLANCE. '

Welbeck, September 38, 1847. To the many courtesies you have alreadybestowed upon me, I will sincerely thank you to add that of informing mewhat have been the estimated cotton crops in the United States ineach of the last four years. I would also thank you to inform me thecomparative importation, home consumption, re-exportation, and stockson hand of cotton of the first seven months of the current and threepreceding years. 

TO MR. BURN. 

Welbeck, October 4, 1847. 

Your statistics have reached me in the very nick of time, and areinvaluable. I care nothing about 'outsides, ' it is 'insides' I look to;give me a good 'heart, ' and I don't care how rough the 'bark' is. 

Anything so good I fear to spoil by suggesting the most trivialaddition, else I should say it would be an interesting feature toclassify the exports of cotton goods, etc. , etc. , under three heads:--

1st. To the British colonies and British possessions abroad. 

2nd. To the northern states of Europe, France, Spain, Germany, Italy, etc. , etc. , the United States of America, and other countries havinghigh tariffs. 

3rd. To China, Turkey, Africa, and the Southern States of America, andcountries with low tariffs. 

I fear these failures of East and West India houses must entail greatdistress upon Manchester, and the manufacturing interests generally. Youhave given an account of the bankruptcies in the cotton trade during along series of years till last year inclusive; are you able to say howthe first nine months of the current year stands in comparison with itspredecessors?

I so highly prize your new work, that I must ask for a dozen copies todistribute among my friends. 

P. S. I have already parted with the copy you sent me; may I, therefore, beg another without waiting for any other binding?

TO A FRIEND. 

Welbeck, October 5, 1847. 

I shall go up to town on Friday evening, in my way to Newmarket, and shall be at Harcourt House all Saturday and Sunday, and shall bedelighted to see you, and have a thorough good talk with you. Free tradeseems working mischief faster than the most fearful of us predicted, and Manchester houses, as I am told, 'failing in rows, ' ashamed todo penance in public, are secretly weeping in sackcloth and ashes, andheartily praying that Peel and Cobden had been hanged before they wereallowed to ruin the country. 

Money at Manchester is quoted one and a quarter per cent, for ten days:£45 12s. 6d. Per cent. Per annum!

TO A FRIEND. 

Harcourt House, October 22, 1847. I have this moment got a note fromStuart, telling me that 'the Chancellor has this afternoon sent out hisnotice of the business to be taken in his own court during Michaelmasterm, that is, from the 2nd of November till the 26th, and below itthere is this notice--_except those days on which the Lord Chancellormay sit in the House of Lords_!!!'

Surely this must portend a November session. 

TO A FRIEND. 

Harcourt House, October 23, 1847. The fat banker's gossip is all stuff. Peel goes to Windsor today, I believe on an invitation of some standing. * * * * who had been dining at Palmerston's last night, tells me that hedoes not think that ministers mean calling Parliament together, and isconfident they mean to maintain the Bank Charter Act. There have beensome first-rate articles and letters in the 'Morning Chronicle' latelyon this subject. 

TO A FRIEND. 

Harcourt House, November 6, 1847. 

I will stay over Tuesday, that I may have the pleasure of a thoroughtalk with you. 

I am told things are gradually getting better. I expect, however, afresh reverse about six weeks or two months hence, when the returnedlists of the stoppages in the East and West Indies, consequent upon thelate failures here, come home. The Western Bank of Scotland is whisperedabout. If that were to fail, it might bring the canny Scots to theirsenses; but they are a headstrong race. 

A committee on commercial distress having been appointed, the principalreason for the summoning of the new Parliament in the autumn had beensatisfied, and an adjournment until a month after Christmas was inprospect. Before, however, this took place, a new and interestingquestion arose, which led to considerable discussion, and whichultimately influenced in no immaterial manner the parliamentary positionof Lord George Bentinck. 

The city of London at the general election had sent to the House ofCommons, as a colleague of the first minister, a member who found adifficulty in taking one of the oaths appointed by the House to besworn preliminarily to any member exercising his right of voting. Thedifficulty arose from this member being not only of the Jewish race, butunfortunately believing only in the first part of the Jewish religion. 

CHAPTER X. 

 _The Jews_

THE relations that subsist between the Bedoueen race that, under thename of Jews, is found in every country of Europe, and the Teutonic, Sclavonian, and Celtic races which have appropriated that division ofthe globe, will form hereafter one of the most remarkable chapters ina philosophical history of man. The Saxon, the Sclav, and the Celthave adopted most of the laws and many of the customs of these Arabiantribes, all their literature and all their religion. They are thereforeindebted to them for much that regulates, much that charms, and muchthat solaces existence. The toiling multitude rest every seventh dayby virtue of a Jewish law; they are perpetually reading, 'for theirexample, ' the records of Jewish history, and singing the odes andelegies of Jewish poets; and they daily acknowledge on their knees, withreverent gratitude, that the only medium of communication between theCreator and themselves is the Jewish race. Yet they treat that race asthe vilest of generations; and instead of logically looking upon themas the human family that has contributed most to human happiness, theyextend to them every term of obloquy and every form of persecution. 

Let us endeavour to penetrate this social anomaly that has harassed andperplexed centuries. 

It is alleged that the dispersion of the Jewish race is a penaltyincurred for the commission of a great crime: namely, the crucifixionof our blessed Lord in the form of a Jewish prince, by the Romans, atJerusalem, and at the instigation of some Jews, in the reign of TiberiusAugustus Caesar. Upon this, it may be observed, that the allegation isneither historically true nor dogmatically sound. 

I. _Not historically true_. It is not historically true, because at thetime of the advent of our Lord, the Jewish race was as much dispersedthroughout the world as at this present time, and had been so for manycenturies. Europe, with the exception of those shores which are bathedby the midland sea, was then a primeval forest, but in every city of thegreat Eastern monarchies and in every province of the Roman empire, theJews had been long settled. We have not precise authority for sayingthat at the advent there were more Jews established in Egypt than inPalestine, but it may unquestionably be asserted that at that periodthere were more Jews living, and that too in great prosperity andhonour, at Alexandria than at Jerusalem. It is evident from variousRoman authors, that the Jewish race formed no inconsiderable portionof the multitude that filled Rome itself, and that the Mosaic religion, undisturbed by the state, even made proselytes. But it is unnecessary toenter into any curious researches on this head, though the authoritiesare neither scant nor uninteresting. We are furnished with evidencethe most complete and unanswerable of the pre-dispersion by the sacredwritings themselves. Not two months after the crucifixion, when theThird Person of the Holy Trinity first descended on Jerusalem, it beingthe time of the great festivals, when the Jews, according to the customof the Arabian tribes pursued to this day in the pilgrimage to Mecca, repaired from all quarters to the central sacred place, the holywritings inform us that there were gathered together in Jerusalem 'Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. ' And that this expression, so general but so precise, should not be mistaken, we are shortlyafterwards, though incidentally, informed, that there were Parthians, Medes, and Persians at Jerusalem, professing the Mosaic faith; Jews fromMesopotamia and Syria, from the countries of the lesser and the greaterAsia; Egyptian, Libyan, Greek, and Arabian Jews; and, especially, Jewsfrom Rome itself, some of which latter are particularly mentioned asRoman proselytes. Nor is it indeed historically true that the smallsection of the Jewish race which dwelt in Palestine rejected Christ. The reverse is the truth. Had it not been for the Jews of Palestine, the good tidings of our Lord would have been unknown for ever to thenorthern and western races. The first preachers of the gospel were Jews, and none else; the historians of the gospel were Jews, and none else. Noone has ever been permitted to write under the inspiration of the HolySpirit, except a Jew. For nearly a century no one believed in the goodtidings except Jews. They nursed the sacred flame of which they were theconsecrated and hereditary depositaries. And when the time was ripe todiffuse the truth among the ethnics, it was not a senator of Rome or aphilosopher of Athens who was personally appointed by our Lord for thatoffice, but a Jew of Tarsus, who founded the seven churches of Asia. Andthat greater church, great even amid its terrible corruptions, that hasavenged the victory of Titus by subjugating the capital of the Caesars, and has changed every one of the Olympian temples into altars of the Godof Sinai and of Calvary, was founded by another Jew, a Jew of Galilee. 

From all which it appears that the dispersion of the Jewish race, preceding as it did for countless ages the advent of our Lord, could notbe for conduct which occurred subsequently to the advent, and that theyare also guiltless of that subsequent conduct which has been imputed tothem as a crime, since for Him and His blessed name, they preached, andwrote, and shed their blood 'as witnesses. '

But, is it possible that that which is not historically true can bedogmatically sound? Such a conclusion would impugn the foundations ofall faith. The followers of Jesus, of whatever race, need not however bealarmed. The belief that the present condition of the Jewish race is apenal infliction for the part which some Jews took at the crucifixion isnot dogmatically sound. 

2. _Not dogmatically sound_. There is no passage in the sacred writingsthat in the slightest degree warrants the penal assumption. Theimprecation of the mob at the crucifixion is sometimes strangely quotedas a divine decree. It is not a principle of jurisprudence, human orinspired, to permit the criminal to ordain his own punishment. Why, too, should they transfer any portion of the infliction to their posterity?What evidence have we that the wild suggestion was sanctioned byOmnipotence? On the contrary, amid the expiating agony, a Divine Voiceat the same time solicited and secured forgiveness. And if unforgiven, could the cry of a rabble at such a scene bind a nation?

But, dogmatically considered, the subject of the crucifixion must beviewed in a deeper spirit. We must pause with awe to remember what wasthe principal office to be fulfilled by the advent. When the ineffablemystery of the Incarnation was consummated, a Divine Person moved on theface of the earth in the shape of a child of Israel, not to teach but toexpiate. True it is that no word could fall from such lips, whether inthe form of profound parable, or witty retort, or preceptive lore, butto guide and enlighten; but they who, in those somewhat lax effusionswhich in these days are honoured with the holy name of theology, speakof the morality of the Gospel as a thing apart and of novel revelation, would do well to remember that in promulgating such doctrines they aretreading on very perilous ground. There cannot be two moralities; and tohold that the Second Person of the Holy Trinity could teach a differentmorality from that which had been already revealed by the First Personof the Holy Trinity, is a dogma so full of terror that it may perhapsbe looked upon as the ineffable sin against the Holy Spirit. When thelawyer tempted our Lord, and inquired how he was to inherit eternallife, the great Master of Galilee referred him to the writings of Moses. There he would find recorded 'the whole duty of man;' to love God withall his heart, and soul, and strength, and mind, and his neighbour ashimself. These two principles are embalmed in the writings of Moses, andare the essence of Christian morals. *

 * 'Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the Lord. ' --Leviticus xix. 18. 

It was for something deeper than this, higher and holier than even Mosescould fulfil, that angels announced the Coming. It was to accomplish anevent pre-ordained by the Creator of the world for countless ages. Born from the chosen house of the chosen people, yet blending in hisinexplicable nature the Divine essence with the human elements, asacrificial Mediator was to appear, appointed before all time, to purifywith his atoning blood the myriads that had preceded and the myriadsthat will follow him. The doctrine embraces all space and time--nay, chaos and eternity; Divine persons are the agents, and the redemption ofthe whole family of man the result. If the Jews had not prevailed uponthe Romans to crucify our Lord, what would have become of the Atonement?But the human mind cannot contemplate the idea that the most importantdeed of time could depend upon human will. The immolators werepreordained like the victim, and the holy race supplied both. Could thatbe a crime which secured for all mankind eternal joy--which vanquishedSatan, and opened the gates of Paradise? Such a tenet would sully andimpugn the doctrine that is the corner-stone of our faith and hope. Menmust not presume to sit in judgment on such an act. They must bow theirheads in awe and astonishment and trembling gratitude. 

But, though the opinion that the dispersion of the Jewish race must bedeemed a penalty incurred for their connection with the crucifixionhas neither historical nor doctrinal sanction, it is possible that itsdegrading influence upon its victims may have been as efficacious as iftheir present condition were indeed a judicial infliction. Persecution, in a word, although unjust, may have reduced the modern Jews to a statealmost justifying malignant vengeance. They may have become so odiousand so hostile to mankind, as to merit for their present conduct, nomatter how occasioned, the obloquy and ill-treatment of the communitiesin which they dwell and with which they are scarcely permitted tomingle. 

Let us examine this branch of the subject, which, though of more limitedinterest, is not without instruction. 

In all the great cities of Europe, and in some of the great cities ofAsia, among the infamous classes therein existing, there will always befound Jews. They are not the only people who are usurers, gladiators, and followers of mean and scandalous occupations, nor are they anywherea majority of such, but considering their general numbers, theycontribute perhaps more than their proportion to the aggregate of thevile. In this they obey the law which regulates the destiny of allpersecuted races: the infamous is the business of the dishonoured; andas infamous pursuits are generally illegal pursuits, the persecuted racewhich has most ability will be most successful in combating the law. The Jews have never been so degraded as the Greeks were throughout theLevant before the emancipation, and the degradation of the Greeks wasproduced by a period of persecution which, both in amount and suffering, cannot compare with that which has been endured by the children ofIsrael. This peculiarity, however, attends the Jews under the mostunfavourable circumstances; the other degraded races wear out anddisappear; the Jew remains, as determined, as expert, as persevering, as full of resource and resolution as ever. Viewed in this light, thedegradation of the Jewish race is alone a striking evidence of itsexcellence, for none but one of the great races could have survived thetrials which it has endured. 

But, though a material organization of the highest class may account forso strange a consequence, the persecuted Hebrew is supported by othermeans. He is sustained by a sublime religion. Obdurate, malignant, odious, and revolting as the lowest Jew appears to us, he is rarelydemoralized. Beneath his own roof his heart opens to the influence ofhis beautiful Arabian traditions. All his ceremonies, his customs, andhis festivals are still to celebrate the bounty of nature and the favourof Jehovah. The patriarchal feeling lingers about his hearth. A man, however fallen, who loves his home is not wholly lost. The trumpet ofSinai still sounds in the Hebrew ear, and a Jew is never seen upon thescaffold, unless it be at an _auto da fè_. 

But, having made this full admission of the partial degradation of theJewish race, we are not prepared to agree that this limited degeneracyis any justification of the prejudices and persecution which originatedin barbarous or mediæval superstitions. On the contrary, viewing theinfluence of the Jewish race upon the modern communities, withoutany reference to the past history or the future promises of Israel;dismissing from our minds and memories, if indeed that be possible, allthat the Hebrews have done in the olden time for man and all which itmay be their destiny yet to fulfil, we hold that instead of being anobject of aversion, they should receive all that honour and favour fromthe northern and western races, which, in civilized and refined nations, should be the lot of those who charm the public taste and elevate thepublic feeling. We hesitate not to say that there is no race at thispresent, and following in this only the example of a long period, thatso much delights, and fascinates, and elevates, and ennobles Europe, asthe Jewish. 

We dwell not on the fact, that the most admirable artists of the dramahave been and still are of the Hebrew race: or, that the most entrancingsingers, graceful dancers, and exquisite musicians, are sons anddaughters of Israel: though this were much. But these brilliantaccessories are forgotten in the sublimer claim. 

It seems that the only means by which in these modern times weare permitted to develop the beautiful is music. It would appeardefinitively settled that excellence in the plastic arts is theprivilege of the earlier ages of the world. All that is now producedin this respect is mimetic, and, at the best, the skilful adaptationof traditional methods. The creative faculty of modern man seems by anirresistible law at work on the virgin soil of science, daily increasingby its inventions our command over nature, and multiplying the materialhappiness of man. But the happiness of man is not merely material. Wereit not for music, we might in these days say, the beautiful is dead. Music seems to be the only means of creating the beautiful, in which wenot only equal, but in all probability greatly excel, the ancients. Themusic of modern Europe ranks with the transcendent creations of humangenius; the poetry, the statues, the temples, of Greece. It produces andrepresents as they did whatever is most beautiful in the spirit ofman and often expresses what is most profound. And who are the greatcomposers, who hereafter will rank with Homer, with Sophocles, withPraxiteles, or with Phidias? They are the descendants of those Arabiantribes who conquered Canaan, and who by favour of the Most High havedone more with less means even than the Athenians. 

Forty years ago--not a longer period than the children of Israel werewandering in the desert--the two most dishonoured races in Europe werethe Attic and the Hebrew, and they were the two races that had done mostfor mankind. Their fortunes had some similarity: their countries werethe two smallest in the world, equally barren and equally famous; theyboth divided themselves into tribes: both built a most famous temple onan acropolis; and both produced a literature which all European nationshave accepted with reverence and admiration. Athens has been sackedoftener than Jerusalem, and oftener razed to the ground; but theAthenians have escaped expatriation, which is purely an Oriental custom. The sufferings of the Jews, however, have been infinitely more prolongedand varied than those of the Athenians. The Greek nevertheless appearsexhausted. The creative genius of Israel, on the contrary, never shoneso bright; and when the Russian, the Frenchman, and the Anglo-Saxon, amid applauding theatres or the choral voices of solemn temples, yieldthemselves to the full spell of a Mozart or a Mendelssohn, it seemsdifficult to comprehend how these races can reconcile it to their heartsto persecute a Jew. 

We have shown that the theological prejudice against the Jews has nofoundation, historical or doctrinal; we have shown that the socialprejudice, originating in the theological but sustained by superficialobservations, irrespective of religious prejudice, is still moreunjust, and that no existing race is so much entitled to the esteemand gratitude of society as the Hebrew. It remains for us to notice theinjurious consequences to European society of the course pursued bythe communities to this race; and this view of the subject leads us toconsiderations which it would become existing statesmen to ponder. 

The world has by this time discovered that it is impossible to destroythe Jews. The attempt to extirpate them has been made under the mostfavourable auspices and on the largest scale; the most considerablemeans that man could command have been pertinaciously applied to thisobject for the longest period of recorded time. Egyptian Pharaohs, Assyrian kings, Roman emperors, Scandinavian crusaders, Gothic princes, and holy inquisitors have alike devoted their energies to the fulfilmentof this common purpose. Expatriation, exile, captivity, confiscation, torture on the most ingenious, and massacre on the most extensive, scale, with a curious system of degrading customs and debasing lawswhich would have broken the heart of any other people, have been tried, and in vain. The Jews, after all this havoc, are probably more numerousat this date than they were during the reign of Solomon the Wise, arefound in all lands, and, unfortunately, prospering in most. All of whichproves that it is in vain for man to attempt to battle the inexorablelaw of nature, which has decreed that a superior race shall never bedestroyed or absorbed by an inferior. 

But the influence of a great race will be felt; its greatness does notdepend upon its numbers, otherwise the English would not have vanquishedthe Chinese, nor would the Aztecs have been overthrown by Cortez anda handful of Goths. That greatness results from its organization, theconsequences of which are shown in its energy and enterprise, in thestrength of its will and the fertility of its brain. Let us observewhat should be the influence of the Jews, and then ascertain how itis exercised. The Jewish race connects the modern populations with theearly ages of the world, when the relations of the Creator with thecreated were more intimate than in these days, when angels visitedthe earth, and God himself even spoke with man. The Jews represent theSemitic principle; all that is spiritual in our nature. They are thetrustees of tradition and the conservators of the religious element. They are a living and the most striking evidence of the falsity of thatpernicious doctrine of modern times--the natural equality of man. The political equality of a particular race is a matter of municipalarrangement, and depends entirely on political considerations andcircumstances; but the natural equality of man now in vogue, and takingthe form of cosmopolitan fraternity, is a principle which, were itpossible to act on it, would deteriorate the great races and destroyall the genius of the world. What would be the consequence on the greatAnglo-Saxon republic, for example, were its citizens to secede fromtheir sound principle of reserve, and mingle with their negro andcoloured populations? In the course of time they would become sodeteriorated that their states would probably be reconquered andregained by the aborigines whom they have expelled, and who would thenbe their superiors. But though nature will never ultimately permit thistheory of natural equality to be practised, the preaching of this dogmahas already caused much mischief, and may occasion much more. The nativetendency of the Jewish race, who are justly proud of their blood, isagainst the doctrine of the equality of man. They have also anothercharacteristic, the faculty of acquisition. Although the Europeanlaws have endeavoured to prevent their obtaining property, they havenevertheless become remarkable for their accumulated wealth. Thusit will be seen that all the tendencies of the Jewish race areconservative. Their bias is to religion, property, and naturalaristocracy: and it should be the interest of statesmen that this biasof a great race should be encouraged, and their energies and creativepowers enlisted in the cause of existing society. 

But existing society has chosen to persecute this race which shouldfurnish its choice allies, and what have been the consequences?

They may be traced in the last outbreak of the destructive principle inEurope. An insurrection takes place against tradition and aristocracy, against religion and property. Destruction of the Semitic principle, extirpation of the Jewish religion, whether in the Mosaic or in theChristian form, the natural equality of man, and the abrogation ofproperty, are proclaimed by the secret societies who form provisionalgovernments, and men of Jewish race are found at the head of every oneof them. The people of God coöperate with atheists; the most skilfulaccumulators of property ally themselves with communists; the peculiarand chosen race touch the hand of all the scum and low castes of Europe!And all this because they wish to destroy that ungrateful Christendomwhich owes to them even its name, and whose tyranny they can no longerendure. 

When the secret societies, in February, 1848, surprised Europe, theywere themselves surprised by the unexpected opportunity, and so littlecapable were they of seizing the occasion, that had it not been for theJews, who of late years unfortunately have been connecting themselveswith these unhallowed associations, imbecile as were the governments, the uncalled-for outbreak would not have ravaged Europe. But the fieryenergy and the teeming resources of the children of Israel maintainedfor a long time the unnecessary and useless struggle. If the readerthrow his eye over the provisional governments of Germany and Italy, andeven of France, formed at that period, he will recognize everywhere theJewish element. Even the insurrection, and defence, and administrationof Venice, which, from the resource and statesmanlike moderationdisplayed, commanded almost the respect and sympathy of Europe, wereaccomplished by a Jew--Manini--who, by the bye, is a Jew who professesthe whole of the Jewish religion, and believes in Calvary as well asSinai, --'a converted Jew, ' as the Lombards styled him, quite forgetting, in the confusion of their ideas, that it is the Lombards who are theconverts--not Manini. 

Thus it will be seen, that the persecution of the Jewish race hasdeprived European society of an important conservative element, andadded to the destructive party an influential ally. Prince Metternich, the most enlightened of modern statesmen, not to say the mostintellectual of men, was, though himself a victim of the secretsocieties, fully aware of these premises. It was always his custom, great as were the difficulties which in so doing he had to encounter, to employ as much as possible the Hebrew race in the public service. Hecould never forget that Napoleon, in his noontide hour, had been checkedby the pen of the greatest of political writers; he had found thatillustrious author as great in the cabinet as in the study; he knew thatno one had more contributed to the deliverance of Europe. It was notas a patron, but as an appreciating and devoted friend, that theHigh Chancellor of Austria appointed Frederick Gentz secretary to theCongress of Vienna--and Frederick Gentz was a child of Israel. 

It is no doubt to be deplored that several millions of the Jewish raceshould persist in believing in only a part of their religion; but thisis a circumstance which does not affect Europe, and time, with differenttreatment, may remove the anomaly which perhaps may be accounted for. Itshould be recollected, that the existing Jews are perhaps altogether thedescendants of those various colonies and emigrations which, voluntaryor forced, long preceded the advent. Between the vast carnage of theRoman wars, from Titus to Hadrian, and the profession of Christ by hiscountrymen, which must have been very prevalent, since the Christianreligion was solely sustained by the Jews of Palestine during thegreater part of its first century, it is improbable that any descendantsof the Jews of Palestine exist who disbelieve in Christ. After the fallof Jerusalem and the failure of Barchochebas, no doubt some portion ofthe Jews found refuge in the desert, returning to their original landafter such long and strange vicissitudes. This natural movement wouldaccount for those Arabian tribes, of whose resistance to Mohammed wehave ample and authentic details, and who, if we are to credit theaccounts which perplex modern travellers, are to this day governed bythe Pentateuch instead of the Koran. 

When Christianity was presented to the ancestors of the present Jews, it came from a very suspicious quarter, and was offered in a veryquestionable shape. Centuries must have passed in many instances beforethe Jewish colonies heard of the advent, the crucifixion, and theatonement; the latter, however, a doctrine in perfect harmony withJewish ideas. When they first heard of Christianity, it appeared to be aGentile religion, accompanied by idolatrous practices, from which severemonotheists, like the Arabians, always recoil, and holding the Jewishrace up to public scorn and hatred. This is not the way to makeconverts. 

There have been two great colonies of the Jewish race in Europe; inSpain and in Sarmatia. The origin of the Jews in Spain is lost inthe night of time. That it was of great antiquity we have proof. Thetradition, once derided, that the Iberian Jews were a Phoenician colonyhas been favoured by the researches of modern antiquaries, who havetraced the Hebrew language in the ancient names of the localities. It may be observed, however, that the languages of the Jews and thePhilistines, or Phoenicians, were probably too similar to sanction anypositive induction from such phenomena; while on the other hand, inreply to those who have urged the improbability of the Jews, who had noseaports, colonizing Spain, it may be remarked that the colony mayhave been an expatriation by the Philistines in the course of the longstruggle which occurred between them and the invading tribes previousto the foundation of the Hebrew monarchy. We know that in the time ofCicero the Jews had been settled immemorially in Spain. When the Romans, converted to Christianity and acted on by the priesthood, began totrouble the Spanish Jews, it appears by a decree of Constantine thatthey were owners and cultivators of the soil, a circumstance whichalone proves the antiquity and the nobility of their settlement, forthe possession of the land is never conceded to a degraded race. The conquest of Spain by the Goths in the fifth and sixth centuriesthreatened the Spanish Jews, however, with more serious adversaries thanthe Romans. The Gothic tribes, very recently converted to their Syrianfaith, were full of barbaric zeal against those whom they looked upon asthe enemies of Jesus. But the Spanish Jews sought assistance fromtheir kinsmen the Saracens on the opposite coast; Spain was invaded andsubdued by the Moors, and for several centuries the Jew and the Saracenlived under the same benignant laws and shared the same brilliantprosperity. In the history of Spain during the Saracenic supremacy anydistinction of religion or race is no longer traced. And so it cameto pass that when at the end of the fourteenth century, after the felltriumph of the Dominicans over the Albigenses, the holy inquisition wasintroduced into Spain, it was reported to Torquemada that two-thirds ofthe nobility of Arragon, that is to say of the proprietors of the land, were Jews. 

All that these men knew of Christianity was, that it was a religionof fire and sword, and that one of its first duties was to avenge somemysterious and inexplicable crime which had been committed ages ago bysome unheard of ancestors of theirs in an unknown land. The inquisitorsaddressed themselves to the Spanish Jews in the same abrupt andferocious manner in which the monks saluted the Mexicans and thePeruvians. All those of the Spanish Jews, who did not conform afterthe fall of the Mohammedan kingdoms, were expatriated by the victoriousGoths, and these refugees were the main source of the Italian Jews, andof the most respectable portion of the Jews of Holland. These exilesfound refuge in two republics; Venice and the United Provinces. ThePortuguese Jews, it is well known, came from Spain, and their ultimateexpulsion from Portugal was attended by the same results as the Spanishexpatriation. 

The other great division of Jews in Europe are the Sarmatian Jews, andthey are very numerous. They amount to nearly three millions. Theseunquestionably entered Europe with the other Sarmatian nations, descending the Borysthenes and ascending the Danube, and are accordingto all probability the progeny of the expatriations of the times ofTiglath-Pileser and Nebuchadnezzar. They are the posterity of those'devout men, ' Parthians, Medes, and Elamites, who were attending thefestivals at Jerusalem at the time of the descent of the Holy Spirit. Living among barbarous pagans, who never molested them, these peoplewent on very well, until suddenly the barbarous pagans, under theinfluence of an Italian priesthood, were converted to the Jewishreligion, and then as a necessary consequence the converts began toharass, persecute, and massacre the Jews. 

These people had never heard of Christ. Had the Romans not destroyedJerusalem, these Sarmatian Jews would have had a fair chance ofobtaining from civilized beings some clear and coherent account of thegreat events which had occurred. They and their fathers before themwould have gone up in customary pilgrimage to the central sacred place, both for purposes of devotion and purposes of trade, and they might haveheard from Semitic lips that there were good tidings for Israel. Whatthey heard from their savage companions, and the Italian priesthoodwhich acted on them, was, that there were good tidings for all the worldexcept Israel, and that Israel, for the commission of a great crimeof which they had never heard and could not comprehend, was to beplundered, massacred, hewn to pieces, and burnt alive in the name ofChrist and for the sake of Christianity. 

The Eastern Jews, who are very numerous, are in general the descendantsof those who in the course of repeated captivities settled in the greatEastern monarchies, and which they never quitted. They live in the samecities and follow the same customs as they did in the days of Cyrus. They are to be found in Persia, Mesopotamia, and Asia Minor; at Bagdad, at Hamadan, at Smyrna. We know from the Jewish books how very scant wasthe following which accompanied Esdras and Nehemiah back to Jerusalem. A fortress city, built on a ravine, surrounded by stony mountains andwatered by a scanty stream, had no temptations after the gardens ofBabylon and the broad waters of the Euphrates. But Babylon has vanishedand Jerusalem remains, and what are the waters of Euphrates to the brookof Kedron! It is another name than that of Jesus of Nazareth with whichthese Jews have been placed in collision, and the Ishmaelites have notforgotten the wrongs of Hagar in their conduct to the descendants ofSarah. 

Is it therefore wonderful that a great portion of the Jewish race shouldnot believe in the most important portion of the Jewish religion? As, however, the converted races become more humane in their behaviour tothe Jews, and the latter have opportunity fully to comprehend and deeplyto ponder over true Christianity, it is difficult to suppose that theresult will not be very different. Whether presented by a Roman orAnglo-Catholic or Genevese divine, by pope, bishop, or presbyter, thereis nothing, one would suppose, very repugnant to the feelings of a Jewwhen he learns that the redemption of the human race has been effectedby the mediatorial agency of a child of Israel: if the ineffable mysteryof the Incarnation be developed to him, he will remember that theblood of Jacob is a chosen and peculiar blood; and if so transcendent aconsummation is to occur, he will scarcely deny that only one race couldbe deemed worthy of accomplishing it. There may be points of doctrineon which the northern and western races may perhaps never agree. TheJew like them may follow that path in those respects which reason andfeeling alike dictate; but nevertheless it can hardly be maintained thatthere is anything revolting to a Jew to learn that a Jewess is the queenof heaven, or that the flower of the Jewish race are even now sitting onthe right hand of the Lord God of Sabaoth. 

Perhaps, too, in this enlightened age, as his mind expands, and he takesa comprehensive view of this period of progress, the pupil of Moses mayask himself, whether all the princes of the house of David have done somuch for the Jews as that prince who was crucified on Calvary. Had itnot been for Him, the Jews would have been comparatively unknown, orknown only as a high Oriental caste which had lost its country. Has notHe made their history the most famous in the world? Has not He hung uptheir laws in every temple? Has not He vindicated all their wrongs?Has not He avenged the victory of Titus and conquered the Caesars? Whatsuccesses did they anticipate from their Messiah? The wildest dreams oftheir rabbis have been far exceeded. Has not Jesus conquered Europe andchanged its name into Christendom? All countries that refuse the crosswither, while the whole of the new world is devoted to the Semiticprinciple and its most glorious offspring the Jewish faith, and the timewill come when the vast communities and countless myriads of Americaand Australia, looking upon Europe as Europe now looks upon Greece, andwondering how so small a space could have achieved such great deeds, will still find music in the songs of Sion and still seek solace in theparables of Galilee. 

These may be dreams, but there is one fact which none can contest. Christians may continue to persecute Jews, and Jews may persist indisbelieving Christians, but who can deny that Jesus of Nazareth, theIncarnate Son of the Most High God, is the eternal glory of the Jewishrace?

CHAPTER XI. 

 _Jewish Disabilities_

IT WOULD seem to follow from the views expressed in the precedingchaptet, that in communities professing a belief in our Lord, theJewish race ought not to be subject to any legislative dishonour ordisqualification. These views, however, were not those which influencedLord George Bentinck in forming his opinion that the civil disabilitiesof those subjects of her Majesty who profess that limited belief indivine revelation which is commonly called the Jewish religion shouldbe removed. He had supported a measure to this effect in the year1833, guided in that conduct by his devoted attachment to the equivocalprinciple of religious liberty, the unqualified application of whichprinciple seems hardly consistent with that recognition of religioustruth by the state to which we yet adhere, and without which it ishighly probable that the northern and western races, after a disturbingand rapidly degrading period of atheistic anarchy, may fatally recurto their old national idolatries, modified and mythically dressed upaccording to the spirit of the age. It may be observed that the declineand disasters of modern communities have generally been relative totheir degree of sedition against the Semitic principle. Since the greatrevolt of the Celts against the first and second testament, at the closeof the last century, France has been alternately in a state of collapseor convulsion. Throughout the awful trials of the last sixty years, England, notwithstanding her deficient and meagre theology, has alwaysremembered Sion. The great Transatlantic republic is intenselySemitic, and has prospered accordingly. This sacred principle alone hasconsolidated the mighty empire of all the Russias. How omnipotent itis cannot be more clearly shown than by the instance of Rome, where itappears in its most corrupt form. An old man on a Semitic throne bafflesthe modern Attilas, and the recent invasion of the barbarians, under theform of red republicans, socialists, communists, all different phaseswhich describe the relapse of the once converted races into theirprimitive condition of savagery. Austria would long ago have dissolvedbut for the Semitic principle, and if the north of Germany has neversucceeded in attaining that imperial position which seemed its naturaldestiny, it is that the north of Germany has never at any time beenthoroughly converted. Some perhaps may point to Spain as a remarkableinstance of decline in a country where the Semitic principle hasexercised great influence. But the fall of Spain was occasioned by theexpulsion of her Semitic population: a million families of Jews andSaracens, the most distinguished of her citizens for their industry andtheir intelligence, their learning and their wealth. 

It appears that Lord George Bentinck had offended some of his followersby an opinion expressed in his address to his constituency in '47, thatin accordance with the suggestion of Mr. Pitt, some provision shouldbe made for the Roman Catholic priesthood of Ireland out of the land. Although this opinion might offend the religious sentiments of some, and might be justly looked upon by others as a scheme ill-suited to thecharacter of an age adverse to any further religious endowments, it mustbe acknowledged that no member of the Protectionist party had any justcause of complaint against Lord George for the expression of an opinionwhich he had always upheld, and of his constancy to which he had fairlygiven his friends notice. This was so generally felt that the repiningdied away. The Jewish question, as it was called, revived thesereligious emotions. These feelings, as springing from the highestsentiment of our nature, and founded, however mistaken in theirapplication, on religious truth, are entitled to deep respect andtenderness; but no one can indulge them by the compromise of the highestprinciples, or by sanctioning a course which he really believes to bedestructive of the very object which their votaries wish to cherish. 

As there are very few Englishmen of what is commonly called the Jewishfaith, and as therefore it was supposed that political considerationscould not enter into the question, it was hoped by many of the followersof Lord George Bentinck that he would not separate himself from hisparty on this subject, and very earnest requests and representationswere made to him with that view. He was not insensible to them; he gavethem prolonged and painful consideration; they greatly disquieted him. In his confidential correspondence he often recurs to the distressand anxiety which this question and its consequences as regarded hisposition with those friends to whom he was much attached occasioned him. It must not, therefore, be supposed that, in the line he ultimatelytook with reference to this question, he was influenced, as some haveunkindly and unwarrantably fancied, by a self-willed, inexorable, andimperious spirit. He was no doubt, by nature, a proud man, inclined evento arrogance, and naturally impatient of contradiction; but twosevere campaigns in the House of Commons had already mitigated thesecharacteristics: he understood human nature, he was fond of his party, and, irrespective of other considerations, it pained his ardent andgenerous heart to mortify his comrades. It was therefore not in anydegree from temper, but from principle, --from as pure, as high, and asnoble a sense of duty as ever actuated a man in public life, --that LordGeorge Bentinck ultimately resolved that it was impossible for himto refuse to vote for the removal of what are commonly called Jewishdisabilities. He had voted in this particular cause shortly afterhis entrance into public life; it was in accordance with that generalprinciple of religious liberty to which he was an uncompromisingadherent; it was in complete agreement with the understanding whichsubsisted between himself and the Protectionist party, when at theirurgent request he unwillingly assumed the helm. He was entreated not tovote at all; to stay away, which the severe indisposition under whichhe was then labouring warranted. He did not rudely repulse these latterrepresentations, as has been circulated. On the contrary, he listenedto them with kindness, and was not uninfluenced by them. Enfeebled byillness, he had nearly brought himself to a compliance with a requesturged with affectionate importunity, but from which his reason and senseof duty held him aloof. After long and deep and painful pondering, whenthe hour arrived, he rose from his bed of sickness, walked into theHouse of Commons, and not only voted, but spoke in favour of hisconvictions. His speech remains, one of the best ever delivered on thesubject, not only full of weighty argument, but touched with a high andeven tender vein of sentiment. 

This vote and speech of Lord George Bentinck no doubt mortified at themoment a considerable portion of his followers, and occasioned greatdissatisfaction among a very respectable though limited section ofthem. This latter body must either have forgotten or they must have beenstrangely unacquainted with the distinct understanding on which LordGeorge had undertaken the lead of the party, or otherwise they couldnot have felt authorized in conveying to him their keen sense ofdisapprobation. Unfortunately he received this when the House hadadjourned for the holidays, and when Mr. Bankes, who had been the organof communication with him in '46, was in the country, and when the partywas of course generally dispersed. Lord George did not take any pains toascertain whether the representation which was made to him was that ofthe general feeling of a large party, or that only of a sincere, highlyestimable, but limited section. He was enfeebled and exhausted byindisposition; he often felt, even when in health, that the toil of hislife was beyond both his physical and moral energies; and though he wasof that ardent and tenacious nature that he never would have complained, but have died at his post, the opportunity of release coming to him ata moment when he was physically prostrate was rather eagerly seized, andthe world suddenly learnt at Christmas, with great astonishment, thatthe renowned leader of the Protectionist party had relinquished histrust. 

The numerous communications which he received must have convincedhim that the assumed circumstances under which he acted had not beenaccurately appreciated by him. He was implored to reconsider his course, as one very detrimental to the cause to which he was devoted, andwhich would probably tend to the triumph of those whose policy hehad attempted to defeat, and whose personal conduct he had at leastsucceeded in punishing. 

'The prophesied time has come, ' he wrote to his friend Mr. Bankes, onthe 23rd of December, 1847, 'when I have ceased to be able to servethe party, the great cause of Protection, or my country, by any longerretaining the commission bestowed on me in the spring of 1846. You willremember, however, that when unfeignedly and honestly, but in vain, trying to escape from being raised to a position which I foresaw I mustfail to maintain with advantage to you or honour to myself, I at lastgave my consent, I only did so on the express understanding that myadvancement should be held to be merely a pro tempore appointment, waiting till the country should have the opportunity of sending toParliament other men better fitted to lead the country gentlemen ofEngland. I have recalled these circumstances to your mind with no otherpurpose than that the party may feel how entirely free they are, withouteven the suspicion of doing an injustice to me or of showing me inthis any disrespect, to remodel their arrangements, and to supersede mylieutenancy by the appointment of a superior and permanent commander. '

And again on Christmas-day, to the same gentleman, in reply to anacknowledgment of the preceding, he says, while thanking Mr. Bankes'for his warm-hearted letter as very grateful to his feelings, '--'Confidentially I tell you, that far from feeling in the least annoyed, I shall feel greatly relieved by a restoration to privacy and freedom. Iworked upon my spirit in '46 and '47; but I have learnt now that I haveshaken my constitution to the foundation, and I seriously doubt my beingable to work on much longer. '

He wrote on the 24th of December to one of his most intimate friends andwarmest supporters, Mr. Christopher, the member for Lincolnshire, whohad remonstrated with him as to his decision: 'It is not in my nature toretain a station one moment after I get a hint even that any portionof those who raised me to it are wearied of seeing me there. The oldmembers of the party will all recollect how clearly I foresaw andforetold that I should be found a very inconvenient as well as a veryinefficient leader, so soon as the great Protection battle was broughtto a close. I predicted all that has since occurred; and no one morecordially agrees than I do in the wisdom of the present decision, thespirit I presume of which is that no great party or large body of mencan be successfully, or to any good purpose, led except by a manwho heart and soul sympathizes with them in all their feelings, partialities, and prejudices. Cold reason has a poor chance against suchinfluences. There can be no _esprit de corps_ and no zeal where thereis not a union of prejudices as well as of commercial opinions. Theelection of a leader united with the great body of the party in theserespects, will tend greatly to reunite its scattered particles, even onthose questions where I shall be able to give my aid with all my wontedzeal, which will not be the less spirited because it will be free andindependent. '

At a later period, acknowledging an address signed by the great bodyof the Protectionist party, and presented to him by the present EarlTalbot, then a member of the House of Commons, Lord George wrote, 'Theconsiderations which obliged me to surrender a post of honour whichevery independent and high-minded English gentleman has at all timesprized above the highest rewards in the gift of the crown, "theleadership of the country gentlemen of England, " will never influenceme to swerve from any endeavours of which my poor abilities and bodilyenergies are capable in the promotion of the prosperity of all classesin the British empire at home and in the colonies, any more thanthey can ever make me forget the attachment, the friendship, and theenthusiastic support of those who stood by me to the end of the deathstruggle for British interests and for English good faith and politicalhonour, and to whose continued friendship and constancy I know I amindebted for this graceful and grateful compliment. '

If Lord George Bentinck was inexorable to the entreaties of his friends, it must not be supposed that he was influenced in the course which hepursued, as was presumed by many at the time not acquainted with thecircumstances, by any feeling of pique or brooding sullenness. Nohigh-spirited man under vexatious and distressing circumstances everbehaved with more magnanimity. In this he was actuated in a great degreeby a sense of duty, but still more by that peculiar want of selfishnesswhich was one of the most beautiful traits of his character. The momenthe had at all recovered from the severe attack by which, to use his ownlanguage, he had been 'struck down in the first week of the session, 'and from the effects of which it may be doubted whether he ever entirelyrecovered, he laboured zealously to induce some competent person toundertake the office which he had thought it expedient to resign, offering in several instances to serve in the ranks, and to assist withhis utmost energies, both in and out of the House, the individual whowould undertake the responsible direction in the Commons. 

These efforts, though indefatigable, were not successful, for those whowere competent to the office cared not to serve under any one excepthimself. About this time, a personage of great station, and who verymuch admired Lord George Bentinck, wrote to him, and recommended himnot to trouble himself about the general discipline of the party, butto follow his own course, and lead that body of friends who under allcircumstances would adhere to him, instancing the case of Mr. Canning, under circumstances not altogether dissimilar. Lord George replied: 'Asfor my rallying a personal party round myself, as Mr. Canning did, Ihave no pretension to anything of the kind; when Mr. Canning did that, the House of Commons, and England too, acknowledged him to be thegreatest orator who had survived Pitt and Fox; he had been Secretary ofState for foreign affairs, and had taken a conspicuous part in rousingthe country to carry on the war against France. '

The nature of the subject, dealing as it necessarily does with somany personal details, renders it impossible to make public thecorrespondence in which Lord George Bentinck was engaged at this time inhis attempts to place the Protectionist party under the guidance of onewho would unite all sympathies; but were that publication possible, itwould place Lord George Bentinck in a very noble and amiable light, andprove a gentleness and softness in his nature for which those who werenot very intimate with him did not give him credit. Not that it must befor a moment supposed that he was insensible to what was occurring. Hewas the most sensitive as well as the proudest of men. When the writercalled at Harcourt House, to bid him farewell, before the Christmasholidays, and, conversing very frankly on the course which he was thenpursuing, inquired as to his future proceedings, Lord George said withemotion: 'In this cause I have shaken my constitution and shortenedmy days, and I will succeed or die. ' In the course of the year 1848, walking home, talking together, from the House of Commons, he twicerecurred to this terrible alternative. 

But all considerations were merged at this moment in the predominant onewhich was to keep the party together. He wrote to a friend at the end ofJanuary, who urged him, as the hour of work approached and the injuriousinconveniences of his abdication would be more felt, to confer with hisformer followers and reconsider his position, that no personal feelingprevented his taking that course, but that he felt any resumption ofresponsibility on his part would not be pleasing to a section of thosewho formerly served with him, and that there would be a 'split' in theranks. 'As far as I am personally concerned, ' he added, 'I could submitto anything short of having my ears cut off and appearing as a "Croppy, "to be free again. My pride cannot stand leading an unwilling party; Iwould just as soon thrust myself into a dinner-room where I was at oncean uninvited and an unwelcome guest. '

In the meantime, according to his custom, the moment that he hadsufficiently recovered from his illness, he prepared with the utmostzeal for the coming struggle respecting the fate of our sugar colonies, in which subject he was soon absorbed. 

Parliament reassembled on the 3rd of February, and on that night LordGeorge Bentinck brought forward his motion for 'a select committeeto inquire into the present condition and prospects of the interestsconnected with and dependent on sugar and coffee planting in herMajesty's East and West Indian possessions and the Mauritius, and toconsider whether any and what measures can be adopted by Parliament fortheir relief. ' When he entered the House, Lord George walked up to thehead of the second bench below the gangway, on the opposition side, and thus significantly announced that he was no longer the responsibleleader of the Protectionist party. It was the wish of the writer ofthese pages, who had resolved to stand or fall by him, to have followedhis example and to have abdicated the prominent seat in which the writerhad been unwillingly and fortuitously placed; but by the advice, orrather at the earnest request, of Lord George Bentinck, this course wasrelinquished as indicative of schism, which he wished to discourage; andthe circumstance is only mentioned as showing that Lord George was notless considerate at this moment of the interests of the Protectionistparty than when he led them with so much confidence and authority. The session, however, was to commence without a leader, without anyrecognized organ of communication between parties, or any responsiblerepresentative of opinion in debate. All again was chaos. There is, however, something so vital in the Conservative party that it seemsalways to rally under every disadvantage. 

Lord George spoke well to his resolution: the House soon recognizedhe was master of his case, and though few foresaw at the moment theimportant consequences to which this motion would lead, the House wasinterested from the first; and though there was no division, the debatelasted two days, and was sustained on both sides with great animation. 

The mover vindicated himself very successfully for only proposing acommittee of inquiry. 'It has been represented to me, ' he said, 'by thecolonies and by persons in this country who are interested in them, thatthe course which I am proposing is not consistent with the necessitiesof the case; that there is something pusillanimous in the motion whichI am going to make; that in point of fact the interests connected withsugar and coffee planting are in extremis; and that while the questionof their redress is being discussed in a committee above-stairs, thesegreat interests will perish. They say to me that a committee of inquirywill be to them of the nature of that comfort which, "Like cordials after death, come late; "

and that before the committee shall have reported, the West-Indianinterest will be altogether past recovery. But, sir, it is for me toconsider what my power is to obtain any substantial relief by a directvote of this House; and when I remember that in July, 1846, I moved aresolution the purport of which was, to maintain the protection forthe West-Indian and the East-Indian free-labour colonies which they nowseek, and that I had but one hundred and thirty gentlemen to support me, while two hundred and sixty-five votes were recorded in favour of themeasure of the Government admitting slave-labour sugar, I feel that itis hopeless for me to endeavour in this House, where I have no reasonto suppose any addition has been made to the members acquiescing in myviews, to convert that minority into a majority; and more especiallywhen I recollect that on that occasion but five gentlemen connected withthe West-Indian and East-Indian interests recorded their votes with me, I think the West-Indian interest has not a good case against me whenthey blame me for not taking a more resolute step on this occasion. '

He was not, however, without hope from the course which he had decidedto pursue. 'Looking, as I have done, at the deplorable state of theWest Indies, the East Indies, and the Mauritius, and holding, as I do, in my hand a list of forty-eight great houses in England--twenty-sixof the first commercial houses in London, sixteen in Liverpool, and sixelsewhere--which have failed, and whose liabilities amount in the wholeto £6, 300, 000 and upwards, none of which I believe would have fallen hadit not been for the ruin brought upon them by the change in the sugarduties and the consequent reduction in the price of their produce, --Ido hope, through the intervention of a committee of this House, I may beable to prevail upon the House to change its policy with regard to thisgreat question. '

Lord George was supported in this debate by Mr. Thomas Baring, in oneof the best speeches ever made in the House of Commons. Few more combinemastery of the case with parliamentary point than this gentleman. It isnot impossible to find a man capable of addressing the House of Commonswho understands the subject; it is not impossible to find a man whocan convey his impressions on any subject to the House in a lively andcaptivating manner, though both instances are rarer than the world wouldimagine; but a man who at the same time understands a question and canhandle it before a popular assembly in a popular style, who teacheswithout being pedantic, can convey an argument in an epigram, andinstruct as the Mexicans did by picture, possesses a talent for theexercise of which he is responsible to his sovereign and his country. 

Mr. Baring said that he could not perfectly agree either with Lord JohnRussell or Lord George Bentinck, that Protection or Free Trade must bein what they called a circle, round which in their legislation they mustalways move; that they must either give protection to everything orfree trade to everything. He could not say that because sugar claimedprotection, coals must have protection also. Neither would he, on theother hand, apply free trade to every article. He acknowledged theadvantage of competition as a stimulus: he thought that, placing thingson equal grounds, competition was undoubtedly a great advantage. Hecould understand a competition to try the mutual speed of race-horses;but there could be no competition between a race-horse and asteam-engine, for the power of the animal could bear no comparison withthat of the machine!

Mr. Baring could look back to no legislation more humiliating than thelegislation regarding our colonies. No great interest was ever so muchtrifled with, so much sacrificed to the cry of the day; at one moment tono slavery and another to cheap sugar. 

The committee was granted, and it was generally felt that the questionwas consequently quieted for the session. 

CHAPTER XII. 

 _Leader Perforce_

DURING the first six weeks of this famous committee the attendanceof its members was not very regular, and its labours attracted littleattention. The evidence on the East-India part of the question wasclosed and reported to the House by the end of February; after thatperiod the evidence was reported to the House every week or tendays. Towards the end of March, rumours began to circulate of theextraordinary vigour and ability with which this investigation waspursued, and of the novel, authentic, and striking evidence that hadbeen elicited. The proceedings were talked of in the House of Commonsand on the Royal Exchange; the City men who were examined went backto their companions with wondrous tales of the energy and acutenessof Harcourt House, and the order, method, and discipline of thecommittee-room at Westminster. As time elapsed, the hopes of thecolonial interest again revived. It was generally felt that Lord Georgehad succeeded in establishing an irresistible case. It was rumoured thatthe government could not withstand it. Those who had originally murmuredat the course which he had adopted of moving for a committee of inquiry, instead of proposing a specific measure of relief, and had treated aninvestigation as a mere means of securing inaction, now recanted theirrash criticism, and did justice to his prescience and superior judgment, as well as to his vast information and indefatigable exertions. The weekduring which the committee sat on their report was a very anxiousone; the divisions were known every day in the House of Commons; thealternations of success and discomfiture, and the balanced numbers thatso often called for the interposition of the chairman, were calculatedto sustain the excitement; and when, on the 29th of May, it was knownthat the report was at length agreed to, and that a committee of freetraders had absolutely recommended a differential duty of 10s. In favourof our own produce, one might have fancied from the effect visiblyproduced, that a government was changed. 

A few days before--it was the day after the Derby, May 25th--the writermet Lord George Ben-tinck in the library of the House of Commons. Hewas standing before the book-shelves, with a volume in his hand, andhis countenance was greatly disturbed. His resolutions in favour ofthe colonial interest after all his labours had been negatived by thecommittee on the 22nd, and on the 24th, his horse Surplice, whom hehad parted with among the rest of his stud, solely that he might pursuewithout distraction his labours on behalf of the great interests of thecountry, had won that paramount and Olympian stake, to gain which hadbeen the object of his life. He had nothing to console him, and nothingto sustain him except his pride. Even that deserted him before a heartwhich he knew at least could yield him sympathy. He gave a sort ofsuperb groan:--

'All my life I have been trying for this, and for what have I sacrificedit!' he murmured. 

It was in vain to offer solace. 

'You do not know what the Derby is, ' he moaned out. 

'Yes, I do; it is the blue ribbon of the turf. '

'It is the blue ribbon of the turf, ' he slowly repeated to himself, andsitting down at the table, he buried himself in a folio of statistics. 

But on Monday, the 29th, when the resolution in favour of a 10s. Differential duty for the colonies had at the last moment been carried, and carried by his casting vote, 'the blue ribbons of the turf were allforgotten. Not for all the honours and successes of all the meetings, spring or autumn, Newmarket, Epsom, Goodwood, Doncaster, would he haveexchanged that hour of rapture. His eye sparkled with fire, his nostrildilated with triumph, his brow was elate like a conqueror, his sanguinespirit saw a future of continued and illimitable success. 

'We have saved the colonies, ' he said, --'saved the colonies. I knew itmust be so. It is the knell of free trade. '

Notwithstanding the formal renunciation of the leadership of theProtectionist party by Lord George Bentinck, it was soon evident to theHouse and the country that that renunciation was merely formal. In thesedays of labour, the leader of a party must be the man who does the work, and that work cannot now be accomplished without the devotion of a life. Whenever a great question arose, the people out of doors went to LordGeorge Bentinck, and when the discussion commenced, he was always foundto be the man armed with the authority of knowledge. There was, however, no organized debate and no party discipline. No one was requested totake a part, and no attendance was ever summoned. The vast majoritysitting on the Protectionist benches always followed Bentinck, who, whatever might be his numbers in the lobby, always made a redoubtablestand in the House. The situation however, it cannot be denied, was adangerous one for a great party to persevere in, but no permanent damageaccrued, because almost every one hoped that before the session wasover, the difficulty would find a natural solution in the virtual chiefresuming his formal and responsible post. Notwithstanding his labours onthe two great committees of the year--those on colonial and commercialdistress, --Lord George Bentinck found time to master the case of theshipping interest when the navigation laws were attacked, to impugn ina formal motion the whole of the commercial policy of Sir Robert Peel, even while the sugar and coffee planting committee was still sitting, and to produce, early in March, a rival budget. It was mainly throughthe prolonged resistance which he organized against the repeal of thenavigation laws, that the government, in 1848, was forced to abandontheir project. The resistance was led with great ability by Mr. Herries, and the whole party put forward their utmost strength to support him. But it is very difficult to convey a complete picture of the laboriouslife of Lord George Bentinck during the sitting of Parliament. At half-past nine o'clock there called upon him the commercialrepresentatives of the question of the day; after these conferences camehis elaborate and methodical correspondence, all of which he carriedon himself in a handwriting clear as print, and never employing asecretary; at twelve or one o'clock he was at a committee, and he onlyleft the committee-room to take his seat in the House of Commons, whichhe never quitted till the House adjourned, always long past midnight, and often at two o'clock in the morning. Here he was ready for allcomers, never omitting an opportunity to vindicate his opinions, orwatching with lynx-like vigilance the conduct of a public office. Whatwas not his least remarkable trait is, that although he only breakfastedon dry toast, he took no sustenance all this time, dining at White'sat half-past two o'clock in the morning. After his severe attack ofthe influenza he broke through this habit a little during the lastfew months of his life, moved by the advice of his physician and theinstance of his friends. The writer of these observations prevailedupon him a little the last year to fall into the easy habit of diningat Bellamy's, which saves much time, and permits the transaction ofbusiness in conversation with a congenial friend. But he grudged it:he always thought that something would be said or done in his absence, which would not have occurred had he been there; some motion whiskedthrough, or some return altered. His principle was that a member shouldnever be absent from his seat. 

The session of '48 had been one of unexampled length, having lasted tenmonths, and, as usual under such circumstances, the obstacles to thetransaction of public business were sought everywhere except in thereal quarter. The forms of the House and the propensity to unnecessarydiscussion among its members were chiefly denounced. Lord GeorgeBentinck did not agree in the justness of these criminations; they wereeagerly caught by the thoughtless and the superficial, but it was hishabit to investigate and analyze everything, and he found that thesecharges had no basis. The forms of the House of Commons are theresult of accumulated experience and have rarely been tampered withsuccessfully, while on the other hand a parliamentary government is byname and nature essentially a government of discussion. It is not at alldifficult to conceive a mode of governing a country more expeditiousthan by a parliament; but where truth as well as strength is held tobe an essential element of legislation, opinion must be secured anunrestricted organ. Superfluity of debate may often be inconvenient toa minister, and sometimes perhaps even distasteful to the community;but criticizing such a security for justice and liberty as a free-spokenparliament is like quarrelling with the weather because there is toomuch rain or too much sunshine. The casual inconvenience should beforgotten in the permanent blessing. Acting upon these false imputationsa committee was even appointed, two years ago, of the most eminentmembers of the House of Commons, to investigate the subject and suggestremedies, and some votaries of the Transatlantic type recommended theadoption of the rules of Congress where each speaker is limited toan hour. But an hour from an uninteresting speaker would be a greatinfliction. The good sense and the good taste of the House of Commonswill be found on the whole to be the best regulators of the duration ofa debate. 

The truth is that the delay in the conduct of parliamentary businesswhich has been much complained of during the last few years, murmurs ofwhich were especially rife in 1848, is attributable to the fact that theministry, though formed of men inferior in point of ability to none whocould be reasonably intrusted with administration, had notsufficient parliamentary strength. After all their deliberations andforesight, --after all their observations of the times and study of thepublic interest, their measures when launched from the cabinet into theHouse were not received by a confiding majority, firm in their faithin the statesmanlike qualities of the authors of these measures and intheir sympathy with the general political system of which the ministrywas the representative. On the contrary, the success of the measuresdepended on a* variety of sections who in their aggregate exceeded innumber and influence the party of the ministers. These became criticsand took the ministerial measures in hand; the measures became, themeasures, not of the cabinet, but of the House of Commons; and a purelylegislative assembly became, in consequence of the weakness of thegovernment, yearly more administrative. This was undoubtedly a greatevil, and occasioned, besides great delay, many crude enactments, aswill be the case where all are constructors and none are responsible, but the evil was not occasioned by the forms of the House or thelength of the speeches. Sir Robert Peel was unquestionably a very ableadministrator, but if he had not had a majority of ninety he wouldhave fallen in as ill repute as has been too often the lot of Lord JohnRussell. 

Lord George Bentinck was very anxious that there should be aparliamentary summary of this enormous and eventful session of '48, thatthe conduct of business by the ministry should be traced and criticizedand the character of the House of Commons vindicated, and he appealed tothe writer of these observations to undertake the task. But the writerwas unwilling to accede to this suggestion, not only because at the endof August he shrank from a laborious effort, but principally because hedid not hold that his position in the House of Commons warranted on hispart such an interference, since, after all, he was only the comrade inarms of one who chose to be only an independent member of the House. Hetherefore unaffectedly stated that he thought the office was somewhatabove his measure. But Lord George Bentinck would not listen to theserepresentations. 'I don't pretend to know much, ' he said, 'but I canjudge of men and horses. ' It is difficult to refuse those who arethemselves setting a constant example of self-sacrifice, and therefore, so far as the labour was concerned, the writer would not have shrunkfrom the exertion even on the last day of the month of August, and whenthe particular wish of Lord George was found to be more general than thewriter presumed to suppose, he accordingly endeavoured to accomplish theintention. 

Three or four days after this, the writer, about to leave London, calledat Harcourt House, to say farewell to his comrade in arms. Hepassed with Lord George the whole morning, rather indulging in thecontemplation of the future than in retrospect. Lord George was serene, cheerful, and happy. He was content with himself, which was rarely thecase, and remembered nothing of his career but its distinction, and theennobling sense of having done his duty. 

Any misunderstandings that may have for a moment irritated him seemedforgotten; he appeared conscious that he possessed the confidenceand cordial regard of the great majority of the Protectionist party, although he chose to occupy a private post, and he was proud of theconsciousness. He was still more sensible of the sympathy which he hadcreated out of doors, which he greatly appreciated, and to which, thoughwith his usual modesty, he more than once recurred. 'The thing isto get the people out of doors with you, ' he repeated, 'men like themerchants; all the rest follow. ' It was evident that the success of hiscolonial committee had greatly satisfied his spirit. He had receivedthat day the vote of thanks of the West-India body for his exertions. He said more than once, that with a weak government, a parliamentarycommittee properly worked might do wonders. He said he would have acommittee on import duties next year, and have all the merchants to showwhat share the foreigners had obtained of the reductions that had beenmade of late years. He maintained, that, quite irrespective of thegeneral arrangements of the new commercial system, Sir Robert Peel hadthrown away a great revenue on a number of articles of very inferiorimportance, and he would prove this to the country. He said our colonialempire ought to be reconstructed by a total abolition of all duties onproduce from her Majesty's dominions abroad. 

All his ideas were large, clear, and coherent. He dwelt much on thevicissitudes which most attend all merely foreign trade, which, thoughit should be encouraged, ought not to be solely relied on, as was thefashion of this day. Looking upon war as occasionally inevitable, hethought a commercial system based upon the presumption of perpetualpeace to be full of ruin. His policy was essentially imperial and notcosmopolitan. 

About to part probably for many months, and listening to him as hespoke, according to his custom, with so much fervour and sincerity, onecould not refrain from musing over his singular and sudden career. Itwas not three years since he had in an instant occupied the mindsof men. No series of parliamentary labours had ever produced so muchinfluence in the country in so short a time. Never was a reputation sosubstantial built up in so brief a period. AH the questions with whichhe had dealt were colossal questions: the laws that should regulatecompetition between native and foreign labour; the interference of thestate in the development of the resources of Ireland; the social andcommercial condition of our tropical colonies; the principles upon whichour revenue should be raised; the laws which should regulate and protectour navigation. But it was not that he merely expressed opinionsupon these subjects; he came forward with details in support of hisprinciples and policy, which it had before been believed none but aminister could command. Instead of experiencing the usual and almostinevitable doom of private members of Parliament, and having hisstatements shattered by official information, Lord George Bentinck onthe contrary, was the assailant, and the successful assailant, ofan administration on these very heads. He often did their work moreeffectually than all their artificial training enabled them to do it. His acute research, and his peculiar sources of information, rousedthe vigilance of all the public offices of the country. Since his time, there has been more care in preparing official returns, and in arrangingthe public correspondence placed on the table of the House of Commons. 

When one remembered that in this room, not three years ago, he wastrying to find a lawyer who would make a speech for him in Parliament, it was curious to remember that no one in the period had probablyaddressed the House of Commons oftener. Though his manner, which wasdaily improving, was not felicitous in the House, the authority of hisintellect, his knowledge, and his character, made him one of the greatpersonages of debate; but with the country who only read his speecheshe ranked high as an orator. It is only those who have had occasioncritically to read and examine the long series of his speeches who canbe conscious of their considerable merits. The information is alwaysfull and often fresh, the scope large, the argument close, and thestyle, though simple, never bald, but vigorous, idiomatic, and oftenpicturesque. He had not credit for this in his day, but the passageswhich have been quoted in this sketch will prove the justness of thiscriticism. As a speaker and writer, his principal need was condensation. He could not bear that anything should remain untold. He was deficientin taste, but he had fervour of feeling, and was by no means void ofimagination. 

The writer, in his frequent communications with him of faithful andunbounded confidence, was often reminded of the character by Mr. Burkeof my Lord Keppell. 

The labours of Lord George Bentinck had been supernatural, and one oughtperhaps to have felt then that it was impossible they could be continuedon such a scale of exhaustion; but no friend could control his eagerlife in this respect; he obeyed the law of his vehement and fierynature, being one of those men who in whatever they undertake know nomedium, but will 'succeed or die. '

But why talk here and now of death! He goes to his native county and hisfather's proud domain, to breathe the air of his boyhood and move amidthe parks and meads of his youth. Every breeze will bear health, and thesight of every hallowed haunt will stimulate his pulse. He is scarcelyolder than Julius Cæsar when he commenced his public career, he looks ashigh and brave, and he springs from a long-lived race. 

He stood upon the _perron_ of Harcourt House, the last of the greathotels of an age of stately dwellings with its wings, and court-yard, and carriage portal, and huge outward walls. He put forth his hand tobid farewell, and his last words were characteristic of the man--of hiswarm feelings and of his ruling passion: 'God bless you; we must work, and the country will come round us. '

CHAPTER XIII. 

 _The Curtain Falls_

THE heavens darken; a new character enters upon the scene. 

They say that when great men arise they have a mission to accomplishand do not disappear until it is fulfilled. Yet this is not always true. After all his deep study and his daring action Mr. Hampden died on anobscure field, almost before the commencement of that mighty strugglewhich he seemed born to direct. In the great contention between thepatriotic and the cosmopolitan principle which has hardly begun, andon the issue of which the fate of this island as a powerful communitydepends, Lord George Ben-tinck appeared to be produced to represent thetraditionary influences of our country in their most captivating form. Born a natural leader of the people, he was equal to the post. Free fromprejudices, his large mind sympathized with all classes of the realm. His courage and his constancy were never surpassed by man. He valuedlife only as a means of fulfilling duty, and truly it may be said ofhim, that he feared none but God. 

A few days after the interview noticed in the last chapter, Lord GeorgeBentinck returned to Welbeck. Some there were who thought him worn bythe exertions of the session, and that an unusual pallor had settledupon that mantling and animated countenance. He himself never felt inbetter health or was ever in higher spirits, and greatly enjoyed thechange of life, and that change to a scene so dear to him. 

On the 21 st of September, after breakfasting with his family, heretired to his room, where he employed himself With some papers, andthen wrote three letters, one to Lord Enfield, another to the Duke ofRichmond, and the third to the writer of these pages. That letter isnow at hand; it is of considerable length, consisting of seven sheets ofnote-paper, full of interesting details of men and things, and writtennot only in a cheerful but even a merry mood. Then, when his letterswere sealed, about four o'clock he took his staff and went forth towalk to Thoresby, the seat of Lord Manvers, distant between five and sixmiles from Welbeck, where Lord George was to make a visit of two days. In consequence of this his valet drove over to Thoresby at the same timeto meet his master. But the master never came. Hours passed on and themaster never came. At length the anxious servant returned to Welbeck, and called up the groom who had driven him over to Thoresby and who wasin bed, and inquired whether he had seen anything of Lord George on theway back, as his lord had never reached Thoresby. The groom got up, andaccompanied by the valet and two others took lanthorns, and followedthe footpath which they had seen Lord George pursuing as they themselveswent to Thoresby. 

About a mile from the Abbey, on the path which they had observed himfollowing, lying close to the gate which separates a water meadow fromthe deer-park, they found the body of Lord George Bentinck. He was lyingon his face; his arms were under his body, and in one hand he graspedhis walking-stick. His hat was a yard or two before him, havingevidently been thrown off in falling. The body was cold and stiff. Hehad been long dead. 

A woodman and some peasants passing near the spot, about two hundredyards from the gate in question, had observed Lord George, whom at thedistance they had mistaken for his brother the Marquis of Titchfield, leaning against this gate. It was then about half-past four o'clock, orit might be a quarter to five, so he could not have left his home muchmore than half an hour. The woodman and his companions thought 'thegentleman' was reading, as he held his head down. One of them lingeredfor a minute looking at the gentleman, who then turned round, and mighthave seen these passers-by, but he made no sign to them. 

Thus it seems that the attack, which was supposed to be a spasm of theheart, was not instantaneous in its effects, but with proper remediesmight have been baffled. Terrible to think of him in his death-strugglewithout aid, and so near a devoted hearth! For that hearth, too, what animpending future!

The terrible news reached Nottingham on the morning of the 22nd, athalf-past nine o'clock, and, immediately telegraphed to London, was announced by a second edition of the 'Times' to the country. Consternation and deep grief fell upon all men. One week later, theremains arrived from Welbeck at Harcourt House, to be entombed in thefamily vault of the Bentincks, that is to be found in a small buildingin a dingy street, now a chapel of ease, but in old days the parishchurch among the fields of the pretty village of Marylebone. 

The day of interment was dark, and cold, and drizzling. Although thelast offices were performed in the most scrupulously private manner, thefeelings of the community could not be repressed. From nine till eleveno'clock that day all the British shipping in the docks and the river, from London Bridge to Gravesend, hoisted their flags half-mast high, and minute guns were fired from appointed stations along the Thames. The same mournful ceremony was observed in all the ports of England andIreland; and not only in these, for the flag was half-mast high on everyBritish ship at Antwerp, at Rotterdam, and at Havre. 

Ere the last minute gun sounded, all was over. Followed to his tomb bythose brothers who, if not consoled, might at this moment be sustainedby the remembrance that to him they had ever been brothers not only inname but in spirit, the vault at length closed on the mortal remains of_George Bentinck_. 

One who stood by his side in an arduous and unequal struggle, who oftenshared his councils and sometimes perhaps soothed his cares, who knewwell the greatness of his nature and esteemed his friendship amongthe chief of worldly blessings, has stepped aside from the strife andpassion of public life to draw up this record of his deeds and thoughts, that those who come after us may form some conception of his characterand career, and trace in these faithful though imperfect pages theportraiture of an _English Worthy_.