in his eyes, between the new and the old Ministers. Both had been colleagues, both were friends, of his own; and, while Lord Palmerston during his whole continuance of office had showed an increasing inclination to adopt a Conservative policy, Lord Derby had not been many weeks in power before he displayed a desire to conciliate his opponents by Liberal measures. Thus Lord John thought, to use his own expression, that the Tory turned Whig was quite as good a Minister for England as the Whig turned Tory. 'I am not so eager for office as you suppose '-he wrote to Lord Minto on March 16—

My present position of being able to say what I like is very agreeable. But, while Palmerston was in office, I was exposed to the charge of faction if I did not agree in every measure and almost every word that proceeded from the Ministry. That was a disagreeable position, and it is a pleasure to be relieved from it.

Nor should I be insensible to the honour of again leading the Whig party, who, I think, withdrew their confidence from me in a manner I did not deserve. But I shall not seek this, nor countenance any cabal among the Liberal party. Least of all should I think of leading any party of Radicals and Peelites. I refused last year to be involved in any entangling alliance, and I have repeated my repugnant disclaimer more than once.

Yet Lord John would have been justified in waging open war against the new Chancellor of the Exchequer. For Mr. Disraeli had hardly assumed office before he thought it necessary to repeat opinions which he had expressed twenty years before about the great Reform Act. He declared, 'Everybody now considers that there was in the concoction of that Bill a greater number of jobs than was ever perpetrated before;' and that, though its 'nominal object was to improve the representation of the people, [its] great substantial object was the consolidation of Whig power.'

The attack was made at Aylesbury; but the Duke of Bedford told his brother that he could not remain silent under it; and on March 15 Lord John referred to it in the House.

Who were the chief Ministers [he asked] concerned in the framing of that Bill? At the head of the Ministry of that day was Lord Grey, a man who for many years of his life had been kept out of power, for which he was eminently qualified, by his perseverance on behalf of an unpopular question. Another chief Minister of that day was Lord Althorp, a man of the purest public virtue. Moreover, all these plans and measures were submitted . . . to a Cabinet of which the Earl of Derby was a distinguished member.

Having thus successfully vindicated his first colleagues against Mr. Disraeli's reckless imputations, he went on to express his gratification at the correspondence which had just been published between Lord Malmesbury and the French Government.

I think the noble Lord now at the head of the Foreign Office is likely to carry on the affairs of that department with great regard for the dignity and interests of England.

It is a striking proof of the strained relations between Lord John and Lord Clarendon, that the latter declared that Lord John, in using these harmless words, had gone out of his way to insult him.1

Parliament, however, had sterner work before it than this preliminary skirmish. Lord Palmerston, before his defeat, had introduced a Bill for the better government of India. The Conservatives, after the formation of their Ministry, introduced an alternative measure for the purpose. It was soon evident that this scheme-the work of a brilliant but eccentric politician, Lord Ellenborough-had no chance of obtaining favour. Lord John had some intention of moving the rejection of the Bill, and communicated his views on the subject to Lord Granville. He received an assurance, through Mr. George Byng,2 that, if he took that course, he would be warmly supported both by Lord Palmerston and the late Cabinet. But reflection induced him to think that the government of India was too grave a matter to be sacrificed to the

1 Greville, 3rd series, ii. 180. Even Mr. Greville says that this shows the excessive soreness and ill-humour of the outgoing party.

2 The present Lord Strafford.

VOL. II.

U

exigencies of a party struggle. Lord Derby, speaking at the Mansion House early in April, threw out a suggestion for compromise; and Lord John, impressed with the good sense of the speech, sat down and wrote the following letter :—

Private]

PEMBROKE LODGE: April 1858.

MY DEAR LORD DERBY,-Your speech at the Mansion House induces me to write to you on an important subject. I agree with you in the wish that the India Bill may not be made 'the battlefield of party.' Now there are two Bills before the House of Commons-yours and Lord Palmerston's. You have a full right to have your Bill moved, and to ask the House of Commons for an opinion on the second reading. But this cannot be done without the consequence you deprecate. Nor could Lord Palmerston's Bill be put in the place of yours without a party struggle and a party victory. It has struck me that it would be possible in a committee of the whole House to pass resolutions which might form the groundwork of a Bill. This was the course pursued by Lord Liverpool in 1813, and he stated the reason for it with his usual candour and fairness. I should be inclined myself to propose this course, and I have prepared resolutions for the purpose. But it would be idle presumption in me to foist my views between the Government and the consideration of their Bill, unless I had their full consent for doing so. If, therefore, without entering into the substance of my resolutions, the form of proceeding appears to you conducive to the public interest, I will ask Mr. Disraeli a question on Monday, and guide myself by his reply. If, on the other hand, the Government think that the second reading of their Bill should be proceeded with on the 19th, I shall take such part as I shall think fit on that occasion without interposing any previous resolutions. I remain, yours faithfully,

J. RUSSELL.

This letter is important because it shows Lord John's desire to help the new Government out of a present difficulty. But, as a matter of fact, it was never sent. Lord John probably thought that it would be more convenient to communicate the proposal to Lord Derby through some mutual friend, and so thinking kept back his letter. But there is no doubt that the proposal was communicated in some way to the Conservative chieftain. For on the Monday Lord John took

the exact course which in his letter he said he would take; Mr. Disraeli at once accepted Lord John's offer; and, in consequence, the Bill which transferred the government of India to the Crown became law in the session of 1858.

By his seasonable suggestion, Lord John had rendered a great service both to the Government and to the country. The former it had confirmed in power; the latter it had saved from the reproach that the government of two hundred millions of people had been made a battlefield of party. But, as usual, Lord John's motives were misunderstood, and his conduct abused.

The Times attacked him with the utmost bitterness, and there is a general clamour against him on the part of the late Government and their friends.1

Lord John, conscious that he had done his duty, cared very little for this clamour; and he had the satisfaction of observing that the existence of a Conservative Government promoted the acceptance of one reform for which he had vainly struggled. Ever since the General Election of 1847 Lord John had steadily demanded that the oath of abjuration -which no Jew could conscientiously take-should be altered, and that his own colleague, Baron Rothschild, should thus be enabled to take his seat for the City, which on three successive occasions had returned him as its representative. But the measure of relief, though regularly passed by the Commons, was as regularly rejected by the Lords. In 1857 Lord John endeavoured to evade the difficulty by a new expedient. He argued that an Act of William IV. empowered the Commons to substitute a new form of declaration for the abjuration oath ; 2 but the select committee, to which the suggestion was referred, failed to support its author; and the Jews still remained excluded from sitting in the Legislature. The Conservatives, however, on attaining office, found it inconvenient to continue the struggle. They decided on effecting by fresh legislation very much what Lord John had intended to accomplish with 1 Greville, 3rd series, ii. 185. 2 May's Const. Hist., iii. 186.

the aid of the Act of William. They consented to authorise either House, by resolution, not to substitute a declaration for the oath of abjuration, but to omit from that oath the words which were offensive to the Jew. Lord John thought it wiser to accept a compromise, which he did not wholly approve, than to continue a tedious struggle; and, the House adopting the same view, Baron Rothschild on July 26 at last took his seat. That night, oddly enough, the Baron and Lord John voted in opposite lobbies on the Corrupt Practices Bill. Four days later the Baron thus acknowledged Lord John's services :

PICCADILLY: July 30, 1858.

MY DEAR LORD JOHN,-Although I have endeavoured verbally to express my feelings of gratitude for your great exertions during our long struggle, and to offer you my sincere thanks for the kindness you have invariably shown to me, I know that I have done so too feebly and in terms which in no way could have conveyed to you my sentiments for the manner in which you undertook to plead our cause, and brought it to a triumphant issue. During the last eleven years I have taken up much of your valuable time, and I have often hesitated before I interrupted you in your more agreeable occupations; but on every occasion I have been most kindly received by you, and have always found you the true and sincere friend of the oppressed and the warm advocate of just and liberal measures. I remember with the greatest satisfaction the first time on the hustings that you introduced me as your friend; I hope that I have merited the sentiments which you then expressed, and that I shall continue to enjoy the good opinion of one for whom I have the greatest esteem and admiration.-Pray believe me, dear Lord John, your most sincere and devoted,

LIONEL DE ROTHSCHILD.

Though, however, the existence of a Conservative Government was evidently promoting Liberal measures, many of Lord John's friends disliked the state of things which had arisen. They though it anomalous and inconvenient for Conservatives to be promoting in office measures which they had opposed in opposition; and they considered a Ministry which was surrendering its principles unworthy of support. The managers of the party became consequently anxious for a policy of