The Duke wrote to his son on April 26—

All I hear upon politics so disgusts and dispirits me that I almost wish to hear nothing further on so painful a subject. Still, however, as an old coachman loves the crack of the whip. pray write me your calm and unbiassed opinion. I consider myself as completely hors de combat; but it is painful to me to differ from those I love and value.

He added three days afterwards—

I have just received your letter. It is a candid and dispassionate statement of the strange political intrigues just brought to a conclusion, and I need not add that your own decision upon the line you mean to adopt is upright and honourable. You view the matter in a far more favourable light than I do, and I own I cannot but feel out of spirits when I see the Whig party lowered as it is by these transactions. I do not blame Lansdowne, because I am sure he has acted from motives of the highest honour, but I do very sincerely pity him. ... He has been the victim and dupe of the two greatest rogues (politically speaking) in the kingdom. I consider the hope of carrying the Catholic

question as now at an end.

On May 12 he wrote:

I have closed my political book, and will content myself with assuring you that I have no feelings either of 'bitterness or displeasure.' . . . Literary subjects are far pleasanter than those connected with politics, and I hear much anxiety in many quarters to learn whether we are to expect anything further from you in the historical or memoir department. I wish also to consult you about my family papers, which I propose to print, but I think not to publish.

And again in August, after Mr. Canning's death, he wrote:I had determined to write to you no more on politics, as it is my misfortune to differ from you, and I hate differing from those I love. . . . We owe all our misfortunes to a little faction at Brooks's consisting of Brougham, Sir Robert Wilson, Sir F. Burdett, and Duncannon. Each had his own views, and it is no difficult matter to surmise by what their views were directed. . . . Lord Goderich seems to be a good-natured and good-humoured man, but totally unfit for a Prime Minister, or to be leader of a party in either House of Parliament; in principle a very decided

Tory (the Catholic question always excepted), and longing to get back amongst his old friends and associates.

So far the Duke of Bedford. Lady Holland, who spoke Lord Holland's mind, wrote to Lord John in April :

The negotiation between Canning and Lord L[ansdowne] is suspended, perhaps I should say at an end. . . . But there is an eagerness for their junction that makes men forget all their former principles in their desire to attain it. This confounded division of the country into Protestant and Catholic makes the King as powerful as ever Henry VIII. was. He is at present as antiCatholic as his father, and has assured the Archbishop that they may depend on him as Defender of the Church. The other sentiment that influences him is resentment against the seceders. . . Canning flatters this passion by obsequiousness to his will; and, as I understand the matter, hopes for nothing and will dare to do nothing, till time and his own dexterity overcome the scruples of H. M.'s conscience. This is a pretty state of things for Whigs to support, and nothing but fear of the seceders coming back to office and forming a thoroughly ultra-Tory and antiCatholic Government could induce them to a coalition so repugnant to all their feeling and principles.

Lord John himself wrote to Mr. Moore in July :

Canning, I hope, will last in spite of your prognostics. His physician says he has a good constitution, and only requires temperance to be well. Next session who knows but what after all Peel may support Government, and Althorp, Tavistock, and I be in opposition? I hope not. But these new gentry must do something for the people: they ought to repeal all the bad parts of the Six Acts and favour my small Reform. Bringing Birmingham and Manchester into Parliament would be very popular.

Mr. Canning's death terminated this speculation.

COWDRAY: Aug. 16. DEAR MOORE,-I cannot think about Lord Byron 1 now. Other thoughts occupy me like the rest of the world. The loss

1 Mr. Moore was engaged on the Life of Lord Byron, and had asked Lord John for his opinion on some matters connected with it. Cowdray Park in Sussex, from which the letter is dated, was at this time the seat of Mr. Poyntz. It is now the property of Lord Egmont

of Canning is one of which we before spoke, but did not expect so soon. Although his death has not broken up the Administration, its spirit, I fear, will be impaired by that loss. He inspired foreign powers with respect, domestic Tories with hatred. . . . Now foreign powers will fear no longer, and outwit, if they do not bully us. The Tories, instead of opposing Lord Goderich, will court him. If he yields to their seductions he must break with us. If he does not feel eagerly for the Catholic question, he will make himself a regular Tory Minister.

Between you and I [sic], a friend of ours,1 honest as the purest virgin, is most unfit to deal with men in important political transactions; he is too yielding, too mild, and has too little ambition. He should be made of sterner stuff. For this reason

I hope Lord Holland will come in and inspire him with timely resolution. ..-Yours faithfully,

J. RUSSELL.

Mr. Moore wrote to Lord John on October 31:—

I feel a little anxious to know exactly the colour of your politics just now; as from the rumours I hear of some of your brother 'watchmen,' Althorp, Milton, &c., I begin sometimes to apprehend that you too may be among the fallers off. Lord Lansdowne tells me, however, you continue quite staunch, and for his sake I hope so.

I had a glimpse of your book 2 the other day at Bowood; but as it was in request I could not get hold of it but for a few minutes before breakfast: so I do not as yet know how far you have brought the very interesting information (which I see it contains) to bear upon the present state of the Turkish question. How close you have been about the book, telling it to no one (Rogers says) but the Literary Gazette! Sam has been at Bowood, alternately amusing and disagreeable, flowery and thorny, smile and bile, as usual. He did not mention the bread sauce, but he spoke with great satisfaction of the bad bedroom they gave Luttrell at Cassiobury, 'a little bedroom they always put him and Ben King into.' 3

1 Lord Lansdowne.

2 The Establishment of the Turks in Europe.

3 Lord John had written to Mr. Moore, 'Sydney Smith says Rogers was in very bad humour at Ampthill House. Luttrell was helped to bread sauce before him.' Mr. Rogers, Mr. Moore, Mr. Smith, and Lord John were the closest friends, but the idiosyncrasies of Mr. Rogers were a source of never failing amusement. Lord John himself said, 'Rogers was so exceedingly sensitive that the most harmless remark offended him.' Lord John has preserved the

While, however, the Duke of Bedford, Lord John, and Mr. Moore were speculating on these matters, internal jealousies and dissensions were leading to the downfall of the Goderich Administration. Differences, which were irreconcilable, or which Lord Goderich had no power to heal, were terminated by the resignation of the Prime Minister and the formation of a Tory Government under the Duke of Wellington. Thenceforward politics assumed a new phase. The Tories, on one side, rallied under the Duke and Mr. Peel; while the Whig followers both of Lord Lansdowne and of Lord Grey resumed their natural places on the Opposition benches.

following anecdote of Mr. Rogers. 'Luttrell and Rogers went one day in a boat on the Thames to see the works which were then preparing for the erection of a new London Bridge. Rogers said, Some very sensible men think that, if these works are carried into effect, the tide will flow so rapidly under the bridge that dangerous consequences may follow." "My dear Rogers," answered Luttrell, "if some very sensible men had been attended to, we should still have been eating acorns.'

CHAPTER VI.

RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.

THE formation of the Wellington Administration removed the restraint which Mr. Canning's accession to office had placed on Lord John Russell. Like other members of the Whig party connected with Lord Lansdowne and Lord Holland, he resumed his accustomed attitude of opposition to Ministers. He did not, indeed, reintroduce the comprehensive measure which he had brought forward in 1822 and 1823. His chief efforts in the Parliament of 1826 were devoted to another cause. In the old Parliament, often estranged from his own friends, he had been the advocate of Parliamentary Reform. In the new Parliament, in concert with the Whigs, he was the champion of religious liberty.

The question of Roman Catholic Emancipation had been in the front of the Whig programme for twenty-five years; but, before the old Parliament of 1820 had run its course, a variety of circumstances showed that it was becoming ripe for settlement. The agitation which Mr. O'Connell had already commenced in Ireland was imparting fresh activity to the attack; the reconstruction of the Liverpool Administration had weakened the party of resistance; and when, in March. 1825, Sir F. Burdett carried an abstract motion for the relief of the Roman Catholics, the Tories, fearing that further resistance was impracticable, endeavoured to arrange a compromise. They proposed that a measure of emancipation should be accompanied with what at the time were called two wings, viz, the disfranchisement of the forty-shilling freeholders and the endowment of the Roman Catholic clergy in Ireland. It was thought, with some reason, that if the

VOL. I.

145

K