Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

ing the Established Church and Dissenters.1 The leaders were appealing to the judgment and sentiments of the people, while many of their adherents were still true to the ancient traditions of their party.

But these diversities, so far from weakening the Conservatives while in opposition, served to increase their strength, by favoring the interests, prejudices, and hopes of various. classes. Men who would have repealed the Catholic Relief Act, and withheld the grant for Maynooth; who deemed the Church in danger from the aggressions of Dissenters; who regarded protection to native industry as the cardinal maxim of political economy; who saw in progress nothing but democracy, were united with men who believed that the safety of the Church was compatible with the widest toleration of Catholics and Dissenters, that liberty would ward off democracy, and that native industry would flourish under free trade. All these men, having a common enemy, were, as yet, united; but their divergences of opinion were soon to be made manifest.2

Peel's second

Before the dissolution of 1841, they had become more than a match for the ministry; and having gained Sir Robert a considerable majority at the elections, they were ministry, again restored to power, under the masterly lead- 1841. ership of Sir Robert Peel. Such were the disrepute and unpopularity into which the Whigs had fallen, that Sir Robert Peel commenced his labors with prospects more hopeful than those of any minister since Mr. Pitt. He was now joined by Lord Stanley, Sir James Graham, and the Earl of Ripon,— seceders from the reform ministry of Earl Grey. He combined in his cabinet men who retained the confidence of the old Tory school, and men who gave promise of a policy as liberal and progressive as the Whigs had

1 Edinb. Rev., April, 1840, p. 288; Ann. Reg., 1840, pp. 64, 71. 2 A reviewer treating in April, 1840, of Sir Robert Peel and his party, said: "His ostracism may be distant, but to us it appears to be certain.". Edinb. Rev., April, 1840, p. 313.

ever professed. He was himself prepared for measures of wisdom, and the highest statesmanship; but such was the constitution of his party, and such the state of the country, that his policy was soon destined to destroy his own power, and annihilate his party.

His free-trade

During the late elections, a fixed duty on corn had been advocated by the Whigs, and free trade, on a more policy. extended scale, by the Corn-law League and many liberal supporters of Lord Melbourne's government. The Conservatives, as a body, had denounced the impolicy of these measures, and claimed protection for native industry.1 Their main strength was derived from the agricultural classes, who regarded any relaxation of the protective system as fatal to their interests. The Conservatives had taken issue with the Liberal party, on the policy of protection, and had triumphed. But the necessities of the country, and more advanced political science, were demanding increased supplies of food, and an enlarged field for commerce and the employment of labor. These were wants which no class or party, however powerful, could long withstand; and Sir Robert Peel, with the foresight of a statesman, perceived that by gradually adopting the principles of commercial freedom, he could retrieve the finances, and develop the wealth and industry of his country. Such a policy being repugnant to the feelings and supposed interests of his party, and not yet fully accepted by public opinion, he was obliged to initiate it with caution. The dangers of his path were shown by the resignation of the Duke of Buckingham, the representative of the agricultural interest,before the new policy had been announced. In 1842, the

1 "Sir Robert Peel solicited and obtained the confidence of the country in the general election of 1841, as against the whole free-trade policy embodied in the Whig budget of that year." "This budget, so scorned, so vilified, that it became the death-warrant of its authors, was destined, as it turned out, to be not the trophy, but the equipment of its conquerors, as the Indian, after a victory, dresses himself in the bloody scalp of his adver sary."- Quarterly Rev., Sept., 1846, p. 564.

minister maintained the sliding scale of duties upon corn; but relaxed its prohibitory operation. His bold revision of the customs' tariff in the same year, and the passing of the Canada Corn Bill in 1843, showed how little his views were in harmony with the sentiments of his party. They already distrusted his fidelity to protectionist principles; while they viewed with alarm the rapid progress of the Corn-law League, and the successful agitation for the repeal of the corn laws, to which he offered a dubious resistance.1 In 1845, the policy of free trade was again advanced by a further revision of the tariff. The suspicions of the protectionists were then expressed more loudly. Mr. Disraeli declared protection to be in "the same condition that Protestantism was in 1828;" and expressed his belief" that a Conservative government was an organized hypocrisy." 2

Repeal of the

The bad harvest of this year, and the failure of the potato crop, precipitated a crisis which the Cornlaw League and public opinion must erelong have Corn Laws. brought about; and, in December, Sir Robert Peel proposed to his colleagues the immediate repeal of the corn laws. It was not to be expected that a ministry, representing the landed interest, should at once adopt a policy repugnant to their pledges and party faith. They dissented from the advice of their leader, and he resigned. Lord John Russell, who had recently declared himself a convert to the repeal of the corn laws, was commissioned by Her Majesty to form a government; but failed in the attempt; when Sir Robert Peel, supported by all his colleagues except Lord Stanley,5

1 Lord Palmerston's speech, Aug. 10th, 1842; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., lxv. 1230; Lord Stanhope; Ibid., lxx. 578; Guizot's Life of Peel, 107, 125, 226. 2 Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., lxxviii. 1028; Disraeli's Lord G. Bentinck, 7; Guizot's Life of Peel, 235-240.

3 Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., lxxxiii. 39; Peel's Mem., ii. 182-226; Disraeli's Lord G. Bentinck, 21-31.

4 Letter to the Electors of London, Nov. 22d, 1845; Peel's Mem., ii. 175. 5 Peel's Mem., ii. 226-251; Disraeli's Lord G. Bentinck, 30. Lord Wharncliffe died the day before Sir R. Peel's return to office. Ann. Reg., 1845, Chron. 320.

[blocks in formation]

resumed office; and ventured, in the face of a protectionist Parliament, wholly to abandon the policy of protection.1

Sir Robert

Peel's rela

tions with his party.

As a statesman, Sir Robert Peel was entitled to the gratitude of his country. No other man could then have passed this vital measure, for which he sacrificed the confidence of followers and the attachment of friends. But, as the leader of a party, he was unfaithful and disloyal. The events of 1829 were repeated in 1846. The parallel between "Protestantism and "protection" was complete. A second time he yielded to political necessity, and a sense of paramount duty to the state; and found himself committed to a measure, which he had gained the confidence of his party by opposing. Again was he constrained to rely upon political opponents to support him against his own friends. He passed this last measure of his political life, amid the reproaches and execrations of his party. He had assigned the credit of the Catholic Relief Act to Mr. Canning, whom he had constantly opposed; and he acknowledged that the credit of this measure was due to "the unadorned eloquence of Richard Cobden," the apostle of free trade, whom he had hitherto resisted. As he had braved the hostility of his friends for the public good, the people applauded his courage and self-sacrifice, — felt for him as he writhed under the scourging of his merciless foes, and pitied him when he fell, buried under the ruins of the great political fabric which his own genius had reconstructed, and his own hands had twice destroyed. But every one was sensible that, so long as party ties and obligations should continue to form an essential part of parliamentary

8

1 Peel's Mem., ii. 259; Disraeli's Lord G. Bentinck, 49–57; 108, 204–207. 2 See his own memorandum on the position of ministers, June 21st, 1846; Mem., ii. 288; Disraeli's Lord G. Bentinck, 119, &c.

8 Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., lxxxvii. 1054: Disraeli's Lord G. Bentinck, 307310.

4 Guizot's Life of Peel, 270, 289-298, 368; Disraeli's Lord G. Bentinck, 259,262,288.

government, the first statesman of his age had forfeited all future claim to govern.1

The fallen minister, accompanied by a few faithful friends, -the first and foremost men of his party,

were separated

forever from the main body of the Conservatives.

"They stood aloof, the scars remaining,
Like cliffs which had been rent asunder;
A dreary sea now flows between ; —
But neither heat, nor frost, nor thunder,
Shall wholly do away, I ween,

The marks of that which once hath been."

Obligations of

leader.

Men of all parties, whether approving or condemning the measures of 1829 and 1846, agreed that Sir Robert Peel's conduct could not be justified upon any a party of the conventional principles of party ethics. The relations between a leader and his followers are those of mutual confidence. His talents give them union and force: their numbers invest him with political power. They tender, and he accepts, the trust, because he shares and represents their sentiments. Viewing affairs from higher ground, he may persuade them to modify or renounce their opinions, in the interests of the state: but, without their concurrence, he has no right to use for one purpose that power which they have intrusted to him for another. He has received a limited authority, which he may not exceed without further instructions. If, contrary to the judgment of his party, he believes

1 On quitting office he said, "In relinquishing power I shall leave a name severely censured, I fear, by many who, on public grounds, deeply regret the severance of party ties,deeply regret that severance, not from interested or personal motives, but from the firm conviction that fidelity to party engagements, the existence and maintenance of a great party, constitutes a powerful instrument of government."-Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., lxxxvii.

1054.

So complete was the alienation of the Tory party from Sir R. Peel that even the Duke of Wellington, who coöperated with him in the repeal of the corn laws, concurred with Lord Derby in opinion, that it was impossible that he should ever place himself at the head of his party again, with any prospect of success. - Speech of Lord Derby at Liverpool, Oct. 29th,

« AnteriorContinuar »