were utterly unfounded. Those I consulted-all, with the exception of my brother the Duke of Bedford, persons who had belonged to her Majesty's Privy Council, and had been in the Cabinet during either the present or the former reign-entirely concurred with me in the sentiments expressed in my letter. Her Majesty next day desired I would attend her at Windsor Castle; and, when I then explained the difficulty which I felt, she put into my hands a letter from the right honourable Baronet, which, if he has no objection, I will read."

Sir Robert Peel." I have no objection."

Lord John Russell then read the following letter from Sir Robert Peel to the Queen :—

"Whitehall, Dec. 17, 1845. "Sir Robert Peel presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and takes the earliest opportunity of acknowledging the receipt of your Majesty's letter of yesterday, which reached him at a late hour last night.

"Sir Robert Peel feels assured that your Majesty will permit him humbly to refer to the communications he has addressed to your Majesty since his tender of resignation, as an evidence of his earnest desire to co-operate in a private capacity in the adjustment of the question of the Corn Laws.

"In the letter of Lord John Russell to your Majesty, he expresses his concurrence in the reasoning of Sir Robert Peel, which shows the inexpediency of pledging Sir Robert Peel to the outline of a series of measures connected with the settlement of that question.

"Lord John Russell requires, at the same time, that Sir Robert Peel should give assurances, which

amount substantially to a pledge, that he will support one of those measures, namely, the immediate and total repeal of the Corn Laws.

"Sir Robert Peel humbly expresses to your Majesty his regret that he does not feel it to be consistent with his duty to enter upon the consideration of this important question in Parliament fettered by a previous engagement of the nature of that required from him.'

Lord John Russell thought that Sir Robert Peel had misapprehended his meaning. He did not want an absolute pledge from him. "What I wished from the right honourable gentleman was, that he should not feel himself precluded from taking the measure into consideration when brought into Parliament. The letter I have just read, though it proceeds on a misunderstanding of my letter, seems to amount substantially to this-that the right honourable gentleman was quite ready to consider, and did not regard himself as precluded from supporting, such a measure, if brought before Parliament by Her Majesty's Ministers. On considering that letter, those with whom I consulted, as well as myself, were of opinion, that though the task

was

one subject to great risk, though it was full of danger and hazard, yet, placed as we were, we should run that peril, and assure Her Majesty that we would undertake the task." He was fully aware of the heavy responsibility which attached to him in his attempt to form a Government; but he wished to see the Corn-law question settled without a violent struggle between opposing interests. He knew that many men of liberal politics, as well as men who cared nothing about politics, were disposed to support Sir Robert

66

Peel if he brought forward a measure for the repeal of the Corn Laws. On the other hand, he knew that there were many men who would follow Sir Robert Peel so as to retain him in power, but who would not vote for any measure founded on the same principle, brought forward by another. He also knew that he might rely upon the support of such men as the mover of the Address, if they thought that the proposed measure was suited to the circumstances of the country. Still, the difficulties to be encountered were great; and he felt it necessary that those who were to join him in the Government should be prepared to encounter the opposition which to a certainty awaited them. This assurance he received. "I therefore wrote to Her Majesty, on the 18th of December, that I was ready to undertake the formation of an Administration; but on the following morning, after I had endeavoured to make my arrangements, I found that one of those with whom I had consulted had objections which it was impossible to overcome, and that I should lose his assistance in the administration which I proposed to form. I do not think it necessary to enter on the grounds of those objections: it is quite enough to say that they had power to deprive me of the assistance of his services. His name has been frequently mentioned, and I see not why I should not state that I refer to Lord Grey. With the highest respect for Lord Grey, for his great talents, for his courage and his honesty, I should, nevertheless, not have thought, on an ordinary occasion, that the loss of a person even of his importance should have prevented me from undertaking the formation of a Go

vernment. But when I took into view the risk which was to be encountered, and the necessity which existed that we should all go together on this great questionwhen I considered that my noble friend was among the first of those acting with me in Parliament, who declared that he regarded no other measure but complete free trade in corn adequate to meet the exigencies of the country-when I put all these things together, I did think that the task of forming a Government, leaving out my noble friend, was a task which I was not justified in attempting. I could not but consider, that if my noble friend was absent from that Ministry, all kinds of interpretations would be put upon his absence, and the Ministry be weakened at its very commencement. Considering, therefore, the absolute necessity, as I thought there was, for complete agreement-considering the importance of the person who could not take a part in the Administration-I came to the conclusion that it was necessary for me to give up the task which Her Majesty had graciously confided to me. accordingly waited upon the Queen on the morning of the 20th of December, and made the following communication :—

He

"Chesham Place, 20th Dec. 1845. “Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and has the honour to state that he has found it impossible to form an Administration.

"Lord John Russell was aware, from the first moment when your Majesty was pleased to propose to him this commission, that there were very great difficulties in the way, which it required the most cordial cooperation on the part of his friends, and the firm support of a large

"Lord John Russell has had solely in view the settlement of the question of the Corn Laws, by which the country is so much agitated.

"Those who have served your Majesty and your royal predecessor in cabinet offices, during the Administrations of Lord Grey and Lord Melbourne, who are now in political connexion with Lord John Russell, were consulted by him. They agreed on the principles by which they would be guided in framing a measure for the repeal of the Corn Laws. Thus one great difficulty was surmounted. But, as the party which acts with Lord John Russell is in a minority in both Houses of Parliament, it was necessary to ascertain how far they were likely to obtain the support of Sir Robert Peel.

"Your Majesty is acquainted with all that has passed on this subject. Lord John Russell is quite ready to admit, that Sir Robert Peel has been willing from the commencement to the end to diminish the difficulties in the course of a new Government prepared to attempt the settlement of the Corn Laws. But Sir Robert Peel could not, of course, rely on the support of his political friends, should the proposed measure be in their eyes dangerous and unwise.

"In this uncertainty of obtaining a majority in the House of Commons, it was absolutely necessary that all those who were prominent in the political party to which Lord John Russell is attached should give their zealous aid, and act in concert in the new Administration.

"Lord John Russell has, in one instance, been unable to obtain this concert; and he must now con

66

Lord John Russell is deeply sensible of the embarrassment caused by the present state of public affairs. He will be ready, therefore, to do all in his power, as a member of Parliament, to promote the settlement of that question which, in present circumstances, is the source of so much danger, especially to the welfare and peace of Ireland.

"Lord John Russell would have formed his Ministry on the basis of a complete free trade in corn, to be established at once without gradation or delay. He would have accompanied that proposal with measures of relief to a considerable extent to the occupiers of land from the burdens to which they are subjected. But he will be little disposed to insist, as a member of Parliament, on what may seem to your Majesty's advisers an impracticable course. The country requires, above all things, an early and peaceable settlement of a question which, if not soon settled, may, in an adverse state of affairs, cause a fearful convulsion."

"I owe, proceeded Lord John Russell, "a debt of the deepest gratitude to Her Majesty, for the gracious manner in which she intrusted me with the task of forming an Administration, and for the facilities which she was always ready to afford with the view of lessening the difficulties of the task I had undertaken. Her Majesty has imposed upon me a burden of obligation which I cannot sufficiently acknowledge. I would say, in reference to the right honourable gentleman's offer of assistance, that it was entirely spontaneous; and as to his subsequent communications,

there was nothing that tended to make my task more difficult." He was exceedingly sorry at not having been able to overcome the objections of Lord Grey: it was due to him to state that his objections were not of a personal nature, but originated in his sense of public duty.

As to the Corn Laws, Lord John Russell expressed his surprise at seeing it alleged at protection meetings, that the danger of scarcity had been exaggerated, and that therefore the protecting laws should remain untouched. Did those who used such language never carry their thoughts forward? Was there any one who had watched events that would say the law of 1842 was sufficient of itself to provide for the food of the people in 1846? The House had just heard what the author of that law had stated as the result of his observation and experience.

As regarded Ireland, Lord John remarked, that he entertained the hope, had he succeeded in removing the restrictive duties on corn and various manufactures, of being able to propose a comprehensive scheme which would have laid the foundation of future peace in that country. Allusion had been made in the Queen's Speech to the necessity of measures to meet the murderous outrages which prevailed, and he should be ready to support measures calculated to suppress such crimes. He was sorry to say, however, that he did not think that any thing had been done by the present Government to establish that peace, or procure for England that affection, which were so much to be desired.

He concluded by stating that, whether in office or out of office, he should be ready to give his

hearty assent to measures calculated to benefit the country, without reference to the proposer of them. Lord John Russell's speech was received with much cheering.

Mr. Disraeli expressed his intention of adhering to the principles of protection which had sent him into that House, and which would have compelled him to resign his seat if he had conscientiously relinquished them. He did not envy Sir Robert Peel his feelings in the apologetic address which he had that night delivered to those who were once his party in that House. The opinions which Sir Robert Peel had that night expressed might as well have been expressed when he held a position in that House scarcely less influential than his present, namely, when he was the leader of the Conservative Opposition. What could the House think of a statesman who, having served four Sovereigns, was at last compelled, by the observations which he had made in the last three or four years, to change his opinions on a subject which must have been repeatedly brought under his consideration, in every point of view, in the manifold debates of nearly twenty years? Such a statesman might be conscientious, but he was at any rate unfortunate, and ought not to address his former friends in the tone of menace. He knew of no parallel to Sir Robert Peel's conduct save that of a late Captain of the Pasha of Constantinople, who, having received the command of a fleet from the Sultan to attack Mehemet Ali, steered that fleet at once into the enemy's port. The Admiral was called a traitor; but he defended himself from the charge on the ground that he was an enemy to war, that he hated a prolonged contest, and that he had terminated

it by betraying the cause of his master. Mr. Disraeli denounced the speech of Sir Robert Peel that evening as a glorious example of egotistical rhetoric, and censured him in the severest terms for the manner in which he had turned round upon his former party. It was not the favour of his Sovereign which had placed Sir Robert Peel in office, but the sacred cause of protection, by which a Parliament had been dissolved, and a nation taken in. Sir Robert Peel a great statesman, who was always marching after the events of his age! He was just as much a great statesman as he who got up behind a carriage was a great whip. Both were the disciples of progress, and both were anxious for a good place. Who was he that dared to tell the House that an ancient monarchy, and a proud aristocracy, were useless lumber, and that he was the only man who could reconcile their action to that of a reformed House of Commons, whose reformation he had resisted to the utmost? When Sir Robert Peel said that his Conservative policy had put down agitation, notwithstanding his (Mr. Disraeli's) knowledge of the extent to which Parliamentary assurance could sometimes go, he was perfectly thunderstruck. When he said that, too, in the presence of Mr. Cobden and Mr. Bright, he had achieved one of the first great attributes of an orator, for he had made an impression on the House. He wondered how Sir Robert could assert that his proposed legislation had no reference to the agitation on the Corn Laws; and he concluded a bitter invective against Sir Robert Peel, who, he said, had been deserted by Lord Stanley because he had deserted all the principles on which the Mi

nistry had obtained office, by declaring that he was not the Minister who ought to abrogate the Corn Laws. He hoped that, whatever might be the opinion of the House as to free trade, it would resist, to the utmost, the free politics of such statesmen as Sir Robert Peel.

Mr. Miles said, that no amendment had been moved on the Address, because on an early occasion next week an opportunity would be given to the House of expressing a decision on the extraordinary change of principle avowed that night by Sir R. Peel. What had become of those members of his Cabinet who had first objected to his plan? Were they determined to sacrifice every thing to their idol? If so, he hoped they would sacrifice their seats, and make an appeal at once to their constituents. He gave notice on behalf of himself and several other members that the strongest constitutional opposition would be given to his plan, and that every impediment would be made use of to prevent its passing into law.

After a few words to the same effect from Colonel Sibthorp, the Address was agreed to without a dissentient voice.

In the House of Lords on a subsequent day, January the 26th, the Duke of Wellington, on being asked by the Duke of Richmond whether he had received Her Majesty's permission to state the reasons which had induced the Government to resign, and again to accept office, replied in the following brief but characteristic

manner:

"My lords: When the accounts were received from Ireland and different parts of Great Britain during last autumn of the state