The past week has been occupied by the Irish Coercion Bill in the House of Commons, on which George Bentinck made a furious and outrageous speech, attacking Peel with a coarseness and virulence which disgusted all but those to whom scurrility and insolence are particularly palateable. Stanley was very much annoyed at it, and nothing could be more injurious to the Protectionist party than such a speech from their elected leader. The gist of it was an accusation of his having 'hunted Mr. Canning to death' nineteen years ago. Peel replied on Friday night with a moderation that savoured of lowness of tone, and, as the House was with him, he had a fine opportunity for annihilating George Bentinck, if he had chosen to do so. He treated him much too leniently, but he vindicated himself in the matter of Canning with great success, and he is really indebted to his opponent for having given him the opportunity of doing so. I had myself been always under the impression that he had behaved very ill to Canning, and that he had avowed a change of opinion antecedent to his refusal to join him when he formed his Government in 1827; but he certainly proved that this was not the case, and made out that his refusal to join Canning was almost inevitable in his position. It was his misfortune to be the leader and advocate of a cause which was rapidly declining, but which it was becoming dangerous to sustain any longer. It should not be forgotten that when Canning took office it was with the understanding, probably with a stipulation, that he should not urge the Catholic question, and he never attempted to advance it.
CANNING AND PEEL.
Stanley got a tremendous dressing on Friday night from Grey, and still more from Brougham, who spoke, they say, in his very best House of Commons style, cutting up Stanley with admirable wit, and keeping the House of Lords in a roar at his expense for three-quarters of an hour, the very thing that would annoy him the most. He had been very arrogant about his own speech, talking of nobody having answered it, though the many fallacies it contained had been exposed and refuted over and over again. There are now again all sorts of reports and speculations about Peel's destiny and his intentions. Some fancy that, notwithstanding the declared opposition of George Bentinck and John Russell, the Coercion Bill will be carried, and again, that if it is lost, he will dissolve instead of resigning. I think nothing of either report, and am persuaded he will be beaten and will resign. The best thing for him would be to resign without being beaten, and if the Corn Bill passes the Lords in the next few days he may still do this. But I cannot make out that he and his friends are taking the right and dignified view of their position. They are very angry with the Whigs for opposing the Coercion Bill, and a very bitter and acrimonious conversation took place at Lady Peel's the other evening between Aberdeen and Clarendon, the former attacking the party of the latter and their conduct in respect to this Bill in terms wholly unwarrantable. It was a curious outbreak of temper, because Aberdeen and Clarendon have always been great friends, and the latter has constantly abstained from any opposition to his foreign policy, and lent himself on all occasions to any explanation he desired to make in the House of Lords, a forbearance and assistance not palateable to many of his own friends. Clarendon was very indignant, and poured in a broadside in reply; but they cooled afterwards, parted amicably, and Aberdeen next day wrote him a friendly note.
Clarendon told me yesterday that John Russell had done himself an injury by letting it be seen how anxious he is to go back into office, and that what the Speaker had said to me about his cold and uncordial support of Peel was felt and disliked by many others. He is not aware how little he is regarded in the country in comparison with Peel, or, if aware of it, the consciousness rankles in his mind, and embitters his naturally sour feelings against Peel. While Peel is thus tottering and about to fall, there is a disposition in the great towns, London included, to get up a manifestation in his favour, and to present addresses to him begging him not to resign.
June 19th.—A day or two after Peel's speech in reply to George Bentinck, Disraeli came down and renewed the fight not without effect, treating Peel's defence of himself as an attack on George Bentinck, who could not speak again. Dizzy undertook to speak for him. It was a labour of love to him, and he accordingly delivered a bitter philippic against Peel, reviewing the charge of George Bentinck and supporting it with a mass of fresh evidence culled out of Hansard, and worked very adroitly into a plausible and formidable attack, and again putting Peel on his defence. It was to the last degree virulent, but very able, and considerably effective. Peel rose (as it was said very much annoyed), begged the House to suspend its judgement, and promised a future and full explanation. The Protectionists have ever since been uproarious, and their papers have teemed with articles abusive of Peel. The Whigs, though more reserved and decorous in their language, are not indisposed to chime in, and treat the matter as a serious blow very damaging to Peel, and in short rejoice greatly in the injury which they think his character sustains, and whisper to the same effect as the Protectionists go bawling about. Meanwhile Peel has buckled on his armour, and declared that to-night he will make his defence. It is certainly a great occasion, and he has always rejoiced in personal altercation. If he has a clear conscience and a good case, this is the moment for his firing with effect upon his assailants, and he ought to take a far higher tone than he has ever yet done. It is at all events a curious and exciting exhibition, and wonderfully interesting to see how he comes out of it. There are generally in all matters of this sort various important details which it is impossible to produce, and I have little doubt that such is the case here. The real reason why so many of Canning's colleagues refused to serve under him in 1827 was that they had a bad opinion of him, and would not trust him. They knew of his intriguing, underhand practices, and though for the sake of not breaking up the party they would have gone on with him, some other person being head of the Government, they would not consent to his assuming that powerful and responsible post. This was a reason they did not and could not give at the time, and which it would be still more impossible to give now; and it is exceedingly possible that they, Peel as well as others, may have given reasons for their refusal which, though containing a part of the truth, did not contain the whole truth. Nothing is so difficult as to analyse such a case at such a distance of time, and, where something must be concealed, to present it in a perfect shape to public discussion. I well remember the correspondence between the Duke and Canning at the time, and how very much the Duke had the best of it, the sincerity and straightforwardness of the one appearing to great advantage against the finessing of the other. They knew very well that Canning was secretly negotiating with Brougham and Wilson.
DISTRUST OF CANNING.
June 20th.—Though ill with the gout, I made shift to hobble down to the House of Commons to hear Peel's defence last night. It was very triumphant, crushing George Bentinck and Disraeli, and was received with something like enthusiasm by the House. George Bentinck rose, in the midst of a storm of cheers at the end of Peel's speech, which lasted some minutes, in a fury which his well-known expression revealed to me, and, with the dogged obstinacy which super-eminently distinguishes him, and a no less characteristic want of tact and judgement, against all the feelings and sympathies of the House, endeavoured to renew and insist upon his charges. Nothing could be more injurious to himself and his party. I never heard him speak before, and was induced to stay for five minutes out of curiosity. I was surprised at his self-possession and fluency, and his noise and gesticulation were even greater than I was prepared for. John Russell spoke handsomely of Peel, and so did Morpeth, which was very wise of them and will be very useful. Nothing could be more miserable than the figure which the choice pair, George Bentinck and Disraeli, cut; and they got pretty well lectured from different sides of the House, but not half so well as they ought and might have been. However, this affair has been of great service to Peel, and sheds something of lustre over his last days. The abortive attempt to ruin his character, which has so signally failed and recoiled on the heads of his accusers, has gathered round him feelings of sympathy which will find a loud and general echo in the country.
FALL OF SIR ROBERT PEEL'S MINISTRY.