the consumption of the people, and which were subjected to the heaviest imposts. He defended his selection of the Malt Duty against the various attacks made upon it, and expressed his opinion that, by the end of the year 1854, there would be a considerable surplus of income; whilst the public service might be improved and made more economical by judicious administrative reforms. The conclusion of his speech deserves attention:-"Some advice has been offered to me which I ought perhaps to notice. I have been told to withdraw my Budget. I was told that Mr. Pitt withdrew his Budget, and that more recently other persons have done so too. Now, I do not aspire to the fame of Mr. Pitt, but I will not submit to the degradation of others. No, Sir, I have seen the consequences of a Government not being able to pass their measures-consequences not honourable to the Government, not advantageous to the country, and not, in my opinion, conducive to the reputation of this House-which is most dear to us. I remember a Budget which was withdrawn and re-withdrawn and withdrawn again in 1848. What was the consequence of the Government existing upon sufferance? What was the consequence to the finances of this country? Why that ignoble transaction respecting the commutation of the Window and House Duty, which now I am obliged to attempt to readjust. The grievance is deeper than mere questions of party consideration. When parties are balanced, when a Government cannot pass its measures, the highest principles of public life, the most important dogmas of politics, degenerate into party questions. Look at this question of direct taxation, the most important question of the day. It is a question which must sooner or later force itself upon everybody's attention, and I see before me many

The Hour and the Man.

383

who I know sympathise, as far as that important principle is concerned, with the policy of the Government. Well, direct taxes, though applied with wisdom, temperance and prudence become a party question. Talk of administrative reform! Talk of issuing commissions to inquire into our dockyards! Why, if I were, which is not impossible by intense labour, to bring forward a scheme which might save a million to this country, administrative reform would become a party-question to-morrow. Yes, I know what I have to face. I have to face a coalition. The combination may be successful. A coalition has before this been successful. But coalitions, although successful, have always found this, that their triumph has been very brief. This I know that England has not loved coalitions. I appeal from the coalition to that public opinion which governs this country -to that public opinion, whose wise and irresistible influence can control even the decrees of Parliament, and without whose support the most august and ancient institutions are but the 'baseless fabric of a vision.""

Mr. Disraeli sat down amidst cheering so hearty and so long continued that one might almost have imagined that the House of Commons had really risen to the height of his great argu

The hour had come and

ment, and had recognised its ruler. here was obviously the man. For a moment even the mediocrities who form the rank and file of every political party appeared to confess that a great man had risen in Israel. The cheering had been incessant and enthusiastic. Every sentence had told, and even veteran Whigs were taken by the enthusiasm and joined in the chorus of applause. But now came an incident of the debate which is worth recalling. In the course of his speech Mr. Disraeli had spoken with some contempt of Sir

James Graham-who will perhaps be remembered by posterity chiefly through Leech's caricature of "the dirty boy who was always getting into a mess," and had said of his opinions that he "regarded but did not respect them." No sooner had Mr. Disraeli sat down, than ineffable virtue, in the person of Mr. Gladstone, rose to rebuke him. With that air of superiority which he is so fond of assuming, Mr. Gladstone delivered himself of a school-masterish lecture, of which about one-half was audible, the latter portion of his bitter and excited sentences being drowned in the outcries of his own and of the Tory party alike. Enough was said, however, to prove the existence of that intense exasperation of personal feeling which has uniformly characterised Mr. Gladstone's relations with his great and victorious rival. As regards the attack itself, nothing more need be said than that if Mr. Disraeli expressed his contempt for the onslaughts of Sir James Graham in terms somewhat too contemptuous, Mr. Gladstone rebuked that language in words. which were scarcely parliamentary, and whose true character was fairly appreciated by the House. This personal attack he followed up by a reiteration of his onslaught on the Budget, which is now chiefly remarkable as showing how wonderfully the aspects of great questions change when those who consider them leave the ranks of the Opposition for the Treasury bench.

Well intentioned though it may have been, it may be doubted whether Mr. Gladstone's flood of eloquence had any effect upon the division. The result had been discounted long before. With such a House of Commons no Budget could have been brought forward by a Tory Government with even the shadow of success. The Protectionists were angry at the appearance of even the smallest concession to the principles of Free Trade; the Whigs

Lord Derby Resigns.

385

were indignant that the imbecility of their leader had deprived them for a time of those sweets of office which none appreciate more perfectly than they, while the Peelites had personal reasons for detesting the statesman who had held their idol up to public contempt. Mr. Disraeli had, indeed, to face a coalition -if the combination against him does not deserve a stronger word. The Opposition at this time had literally no other policy than that of attacking the Government. Theorists of the most diverse order, and partisans of the most opposite character found themselves bound together by the one tie of hatred of the Tories, and the result was that when the division was taken Ministers found themselves in a minority of 19, the numbers being 305 against the Budget to 286 in its favour. All was thus over. The Ministers who had declared that they would not be Ministers upon sufferance, were not likely to hesitate as to their proper course when they found themselves in a minority in the House of Commons. The division was taken at four o'clock in the morning. In the course of the day her Majesty received a letter from Lord Derby announcing the resignations of himself and of his colleagues: a Cabinet Council was called for noon, and after sitting for an hour broke up. Lord Derby went down to Osborne by the three o'clock train, and formally resigned the seals of office. In the evening of Monday, the 20th of December, Mr. Disraeli stated what had happened to the assembled House of Commons, and in a few minutes more the first Administration of Lord Derby and of Mr. Disraeli had ceased to be.

VOL. I.

0 0

CHAPTER VII.

AGAIN IN OPPOSITION.

The Coalition Government-A strong administration-Clouds in the East-At home-Ministerial indiscretions-The French alliance-Attacks on foreign powers-Analysis of the situation-The Budget-Conceived in a spirit of hostility to the land-Anti-Russian feeling in England-A new Reform Bill -Palmerston's resignation-Absurd reports about the Prince Consort— Opening of the Session-Ministerial explanations-Speech on the Address— Lord John's Reform Bill-Drifting into war-Speech on the Government policy Preparations for war-The Supplemental Budget-Criticisms of the chief of the Opposition-Government war policy -Prorogation of Parliament -Landing of the Allies in the Crimea-Vacillation of Lord AberdeenSpeech on the conduct of the war-The Prince Consort's Proposals-Lord John Russell "upsets the coach"-Re-assembling of Parliament, January, 1855-The Crimean Inquiry-Collapse of the Government—The Interregnum -Palmerston Prime Minister-Speech of Mr. Disraeli-Retirement of the Peelites-Ministerial explanations-Sir G. C. Lewis's Budget-Failure of the Vienna Conference-“ Ambiguous language and uncertain conduct of the Government "-Resolution-Aggressive war and protective diplomacy— Amendments-Lord John Russell at Vienna-Retirement of Lord John Russell-Cabinet sympathy with the Peace party-Prorogation and the Queen's Speech.

THE coalition having thus succeeded in driving the Tories from office, it was only natural that they should be entrusted with the formation of the new Government. We are told that "the Queen felt that the time had now come for the formation of a strong administration, and for closing the unsatisfactory epoch of Government upon sufferance, which had resulted from the disorganization of parties since 1846."* Her Majesty deter

"Life of the Prince Consort," vol. ii. p. 482.