an elaborate scheme for the disfranchisement of rotten boroughs, the enfranchisement of populous places, and other objects. In May, Mr. O'Connell urged the adoption of triennial Parliaments, universal suffrage, and vote by ballot. Lord John, who had given a conditional support to Lord Blandford's motion, met Mr. O'Connell's proposal with a resolution affirming the expediency of extending the basis of the representation of the people. But his effort was not confined, in this critical session, to the discussion of other people's projects. Early in the session he introduced a Bill to enable or allow Manchester, Leeds, and Birmingham to return members to Parliament. The measure was rejected by 188 votes to 140. The Tory members, who secured a temporary triumph, were, happily for their own comfort, unable to foresee that, one year afterwards, the same member, whose moderate proposal they were contemptuously rejecting, would rise with all the authority of office to introduce the great Reform Bill.

In fact, the commencement of a new reign was about to open a new era in English history. On June 26, 1830, George IV. died; and Ministers decided on winding up the work of the session in order that the dissolution, which was required by law, might take place as rapidly as possible. They were not suffered to do so without discussion. Lord Althorp desired, and Lord John supported his wish, that the House should at once proceed to settle the new civil list. The new Parliament-so Lord John contended-would be more likely to show complaisance than the old one, with the fear of an immediate dissolution before it. Ministers, however, had their way. Parliament was at once dissolved; the general election took place at a time when the country was agitated by the news of the Revolution which drove Charles X. from the throne of France; and, in the few constituencies where public opinion could make itself felt, Liberal politicians achieved unexpected and unusual successes.

The rising tide of Liberalism, however, bore no success for Lord John. He could not well return to his nomination borough in Ireland; and he doubted whether he should appeal

VOL. I.

L

to his old constituents in Huntingdonshire, or stand for his father's borough in Bedford. His father wrote to him—

MY DEAR JOHN,-I was in such a hurry when I saw you yesterday that I forgot to say anything about Hunts. But Wing thinks that they will nominate you, and Lord Milton thinks the same; nous verrons. In the meanwhile, I hope nothing may be done to mar our nominating you for Bedford should necessity require it.

The latter course was taken, and Lord John stood for Bedford. Lady Cowper1 wrote to him in the middle of the election

I hope you are safe. I am told you might have walked over the course for Huntingdon, and that Lord Russell 2 should have been put up for Bedford.

But safe he was not. Lord Ellenborough wrote in his diary on August 18

Lord J. Russell is not returned for Bedford; he lost it by one vote. He has published a good address, and is evidently very 'indignant.

Lord John had always one remedy for disappointments of this kind. He turned his back on England, and crossed the Channel. Paris, at that time, just recovering from the effects of the Revolution of July, was an interesting spot for any traveller to go to-and Lord John Russell was no ordinary traveller. He was in communication with the foremost men in France, and heard from their lips the history of the extraordinary mistakes which had cost Charles X. his throne, and which had robbed his Minister, the Prince de Polignac, of his liberty. There is still among his papers, in his own handwriting, a short memorandum on the information which he thus received. Other matters, too, were occupying Lord 1 Afterwards Lady Palmerston.

2 The only son of Lord Tavistock, afterwards eighth Duke of Bedford. He had just attained his majority in 1830.

3 The successful candidates were Messrs. Whitbread and Polhill.

John's attention. The French were so angry with the Minister who was, at any rate technically, responsible for the issue of the ordonnances of July, that they were clamouring for the Prince de Polignac's execution. The Prince's danger naturally created a profound sensation in this country. His wife was a daughter of Lord Rancliffe; his niece was married to Lord Tankerville; and Lord John, who had long been the friend of the Rancliffes, and whose favourite cousin, Gertrude, was married to Lord Tankerville's brother, did not require much moving to interest himself in an unfortunate statesman. Lord Holland, however, wrote to him

HOLLAND HOUSE: Sept. 10.

DEAR JOHN, Pray, in your intercourse with ruling and valuable people, say as much as you can—and all you can say will be truth of the good impression that clemency to the State prisoners, and especially to Polignac, will leave here. The interest felt about him does not in the least arise from doubt of his folly and political guilt, but from a knowledge of his gentle manners, extensive English connection, and familiarity and intercourse with English society. Poor Lady Tankerville is very wretched about him, and lenity shown him, if it can be shown with any safety to France, will, I am sure, propitiate public opinion, or at any rate beau monde opinion (which always has its weight in London) extremely. . . .—Yours,

VASSALL HOLLAND.

A few days later, the following still closer appeal reached Lord John:

I have by chance heard that you are arrived. I am persuaded that you will think it very natural that I should be most anxious to have a few moments' conversation with you; at the same time it is most essential that it should not be known. Will you therefore, in humanity to a suffering fellow-creature, call at any hour most convenient on Mrs. Porter, Rue de Verneuil No. 31, and have the goodness to be announced as Mr. Browne.

I need not, I am persuaded, offer to Lord John Russell any further apology. My signature will plead my excuse. MARIE DE POLIGNAC.

September 18, 1830.

Years afterwards Lord John himself told the sequel of the story.

to ascertain what

I had sufficient

It happened to me to be in Paris soon after the Revolution of 1830. . . and . . . to be asked by some persons very nearly connected with Prince Polignac was likely to be the issue of his trial. acquaintance with the Ministers and Court of Louis Philippe . . to ascertain . . . that the enlightened Sovereign who now reigns over the French nation contemplated with horror the infliction of any capital punishment. . . . I took care to convey that information as soon as possible to those who were anxiously awaiting the result of any facts that came to my knowledge. But it was stated to me... that the lives of those unfortunate men . . . might be sacrificed to the vengeance and fury of a sanguinary mob. It was my fortune to be intimately acquainted, and I say it with pride and gratification, with General Lafayette, then in command of the National Guard of Paris. I wrote to him, and asked him for an interview on a subject of great importance. He did me the honour to come and visit me . . . and I then told him of the dangers which were apprehended for the lives of the Ministers then upon their trial. He stated immediately his opinion. . . that the offence which these Ministers had committed was punishable with death. He went on, however, to state that he never would promote . .7. that punishment on those Ministers. And, when I put to him the question 'Is there not danger that the National Guard should be forced and violence committed?' he answered with emotion, 'No! that must not, that shall not be.'1

Lord John remained in Paris till November, when events of more immediate importance to himself than the trial of the French Ministers necessitated his return to London. Parliament had met at the end of October, and on November 2 the Duke of Wellington, replying to a declaration of Lord Grey in favour of Reform, had made his famous statement that, if he had to devise a constitution himself, 'his great endeavour would be to form such a legislature as they possessed now.' This unwise eulogy hastened a catastrophe which would per1 Hansard, xxxiii, 1201. The Prince de Polignac was tried in December, and was sentenced to imprisoninent for life. He was released in 1836, on condition of his not returning to Paris.

haps in any case have occurred. Mr. Brougham, fresh from the triumph of carrying Yorkshire, gave notice of a motion for Parliamentary Reform for November 16. The Funds fell. The Ministers, alarmed at rumours of riot, persuaded the King to put off a visit to the City on November 9; and, finally defeated on a motion relating to the civil list on the 15th, placed their resignations in the King's hands on November 16.

On that day, so pregnant with mighty consequences to England, Lord John's friends had already made arrangements for obtaining him a seat in Parliament. Lord Ebrington, the eldest son of Lord Fortescue, had been returned for Devonshire and Tavistock; and, as he elected to sit for the county, a vacancy was created in the borough, which Lord John had represented in the Parliaments of 1812 and 1818. Arrangements were at once made for his election; and, before they were concluded, and while Lord John was canvassing the electors of Tavistock, Lord Grey decided on offering him office. It is, indeed, somewhat remarkable that the man who, by Lord Grey's own admission, had done more than any one, should not have been thought worthy of a seat in the Cabinet. But, in constructing his Government, Lord Grey was more anxious to found it on a broad basis than to promote the rising members of his own party, on whose support he could, in any circumstances, depend. Great, moreover, as were Lord John's Parliamentary services, he had no experience as an administrator, and his health was still so delicate that it was doubtful whether he could discharge the heavy duties of official business while he was subjected to the late hours of the House of Commons. For these reasons some secondary post was thought of for Lord John. It was at first contemplated that he should be Under-Secretary of Foreign Affairs, and the mouthpiece of that department in the House of Commons. But, when that arrangement became impracticable, he was ultimately assigned the sinecure office of Paymaster-General. How immediately his assistance was thought of will be seen. from the following letter written on the day which succeeded the Duke of Wellington's resignation :