to see ; but I have seen his mother, the widow of
the late Emperor Francis ā a nice old lady whom
to look on is to love ā and his brother the Arch-
78 THE BAR. [1837-
duke Francis, the heir-presumptive to the throne,
and his Archduchess and their two sons.
The sons present that dmy, boys of thirteen
and eleven, subsequently became ā the elder,
Francis Joseph, the present Emperor of
Austria ; and the younger, the unfortunate
Maximilian, Emperor of Mexico.
The next year (June 5, 1844) I was present
at a review of the Household Eegiments in
Windsor Park, where I saw another Emperor,
the Czar Nicholas of Eussia, then on a visit
to the Queen. It was a brilliant scene, with
the royalties and the Czar and the Duke of
Wellington in uniform ; Sir R. Peel mounted,
and in plain clothes. I afterwards had the
opportunity of observing the Czar and Sir R.
Peel in an oriel window of the Castle over-
looking the terrace, in close converse, possibly
discussino; the fate of the Sick Man. The
Czar made a tremendous impression on me.
A magnificent and princelike figure, 6 feet 3
high, in the prime of life, with a frank open
1853.] CZAR NICHOLAS. 79
expression of features, and a chivalrous de-
portment, the very type and embodiment of
majesty ā ZaoOeos <Ā£&><?. Eleven years after,
when the news of his death reached the
House of Commons, I exchanged a few words
in the lobby with Mr Gladstone, who referred
to the sight of the Emperor as he beheld him
in 1844, and spoke of him in the highest
terms of admiration as the most magnificent
specimen of a man he had ever beheld.
Although an outsider, I took the keenest
interest in everything which happened in the
political world. As a humble individual I
regretted in 1841 that the policy of Protec-
tion formed such a prominent cheval de
bataille at the elections. No doubt it in-
creased our majority in the counties. But Sir
Robert Peel had led us from the depression
of 1832 to the crowning victory of 1841 on
the great principle of resistance to organic
change, and with that he promised to find
remedies for proved abuses, and to promote
80 THE BAR. [1837-1853.
all well-considered reforms. This was a lofty
and patriotic policy. Important as I recog-
nised it to be to uphold the agricultural
interest, I was not prepared to fight at all
hazards on behalf of laws regulating the price
of corn, and dating from 1816. I watched
the agitation and followed the arguments
from year to year, and when Sir Eobert Peel
ceased to insist on the argument founded on
the independence of the country for a supply
of food, I thought that the game was up.
I was therefore already a convinced adherent
and a staunch supporter of the policy of
Repeal in 1846. In my judgment no charge
of treachery can be maintained, and the
change of opinion was honest, But we may
regret that Sir Robert had not taken his
supporters sooner into his confidence and
"educated" his party. And I am sure we
all rejoiced in the troublous times of 1848
that the question of cheap bread was no
longer before the country.
IV.
FIRST YEARS IN THE HOUSE, 1853-1857
F
1853-1857.] FIEST YEARS IN THE HOUSE. 83
IV.
FIRST YEARS IN THE HOUSE, 1853-1857.
M.P. FOR DURHAM CITY ā THE ABERDEEN GOVERNMENT A LITTLE
FLUKE ā NAVAL REVIEW AT SPITHEAD ā LORD JOHN RUSSELL'S
REFORM BILL ā THE CRIMEA ā DISRAELI AND SALISBURY ā MR
ROEBUCK'S VICTORY ā LORD PALMERSTON PRIME MINISTER ā
THE LORCHA ARROW ā THE CHINA DISSOLUTION ā PALMERSTON
VICTORIOUS.
Lord Aberdeen was Prime Minister when I
entered Parliament as M.P. for Durham city
in 1853. The Aberdeen Government was a
Coalition Government in the strict and odious
sense of the term ā such a Coalition as " Eng-
land does not love." Notoriously, it was the
result of intrigues whereby the Peelites,
who certainly brought many able men, were
to have the full share of the spoils of office,
84 FIRST YEARS IN THE HOUSE. [1853-
while Lord John Kussell was to bring the
votes. The country generally was not pre-
pared to see Lord Aberdeen at the head of
the Government. But the Peelites were
determined that the Prime Minister should
be found in their ranks, and Mr Gladstone's
time had not yet come. Moreover, Lord
Aberdeen was a persona grata at Court, and
had been a leading member of several Ad-
ministrations. But he was regarded as a Min-
ister for Foreign Affairs, and had not occu-
pied that commanding position in the country
or in Parliament which seemed to qualify
him for the highest post under the Crown.
The member for the city of Durham, who
had been elected at the general election in
1852, died shortly afterwards. At the by-
election Lord Adolphus Vane was the suc-
cessful candidate ; but he was unseated on
petition, and it was then, in the Conservative
interest, and with the influence of the Lon-
donderry family, that I was elected.
1857.] M.P. FOR DURHAM CITY. 85
[Party feeling was running high, and
some of the incidents connected with the
election are described in a letter of June
27, 1853 :ā
I am full of business to-day with all the arrange-
ments as to taking my seat. You will see by
the ' Times ' a very nasty account of our proceed-
ings after the declaration of the poll. I feared
we should have a row, as some hundred carpet-
weavers would not allow me to be heard, and
my men were as mad as possible to see me so
treated. So far, however, from the men being
drunk, when I got to my hotel they heard me
with perfect attention. My friends were all most
desirous that I should abstain from being chaired,
expecting it would cause a row ; but we deter-
mined to go round, and I went round for two
hours in an open carriage and 4 white horses,
the postilions in scarlet jackets, and I was very
well received throughout the town. From one
Eadical public-house they threw tobacco-pipes and
a glass of beer at me, but this was the only in-
sult I met with; and I had a number of beauti-
ful bouquets ā cactuses, red geraniums, roses, &c. ā
thrown into the carriage. I shall be terribly
86 FIRST YEARS IN THE HOUSE. [1853-
nervous the next fortnight, as they say they will
petition. It must be lodged before to - morrow
fortnight. I don't think it possible any one con-
nected with me can have given away a sixpence
or a glass of ale.]
When I came up to town to take my seat,
by some accident the return had not arrived,
and for one whole night I had to sit under the
gallery. One of the first to congratulate me
was my old Oxford friend Eoundell Palmer.
Mr Crowder came up, and after greeting me
with lofty dignity, added, " Oh, but you
know there's a petition against you, and
you'll be unseated." Sir Alexander Cock-
burn, then Attorney-General, came up, and
in his frank genial way said : " Glad to see
you here, my dear fellow. Our people talk
about a petition, but don't mind them, it will
come to nothing." As a matter of fact, there
was a talk of a petition, but nothing came of
it. The next day I took my seat, introduced
by Sir John Yarde Buller and Sir Robert
1857.] A SUCCESS AGAINST MINISTERS. 87
Harry Inglis, the representatives of my own
native county and my own University, and
of the undiluted Toryism of my boyhood and
my undergraduate days. A remarkable bit
of luck attended me soon after. I was auda-
cious enough to divide the House on the
third reading of the Charitable Trusts Bill,
August 8, 1853, and I was so fortunate as to
beat the Aberdeen Government. It is thus
recorded in Hansard : ā
Lord John Eussell proposed that the clause relat-
ing to exemptions be so altered as to exclude the
University of Durham from its operations. . . .
Mr Mowbray said the cases of the Durham and v
London Universities were very dissimilar, the for-
mer being regulated in accordance with the provi-
sions of an Act of Parliament.
House divided. Ayes 65, Noes 70 ; majority 5.
[This little fluke obtained for the new M.P.
some credit from his constituents at large.
An account of this is given in a letter to
my mother, dated August 10, 1853 : ā
88 FIRST YEARS IN THE HOUSE. [1853-
I don't know whether the news of my brilliant
success against Ministers on Monday night has
reached you; but the 'Times' having only given
Mr Mowbray credit for " a few words," it may not
have done so. I had just observed to a friend,
" Well, Durham is safe anyhow, for I have been
looking at the bill as reprinted, and find all is
right," when Lord John got up, and without any
notice, again proposed to omit the exemption of
Durham. I had to reiterate my arguments of
Monday, and say I should divide. My friends,
Sir E. Inglis and Sir J. Buller, Duckworth, &c,
said they would go with me, although they
feared I had no chance, from the subject being
one of local interest to Durham. I resolved to
divide, and on going into the lobby I found myself
supported by many friends of the London Uni-
versity. The result was, we beat the Government
by 70 to 65. I came home at 4 a.m. not a little
elated, because it was good fun to beat the Min-
isters, who had behaved in a mean shabby way,
and it will be a feather in my cap at Durham. It
has been the subject of a good deal of talk and
merriment.]
I was present at the naval review at Spit-
head, August 11, in the same year. There
1857.] NAVAL REVIEW AT SPITHEAD. 89
have been many reviews since, which I have
seen ; but there has never been any one equal
as a spectacle to what we then witnessed.
There were twenty-five ships of war : six of
the line propelled by steam, three sailing-
ships of the line, and the steam frigates and
sloops. The "ei]emy"were represented by
three sailing-ships, Prince Regent, London,
and Queen, and other sailing-ships which were
anchored at sea some distance from Spithead.
The Queen and Prince Albert, on board the
Duke of Wellington, went out in pursuit of
the enemy. The Lords and Commons (the
latter on the Bulldog) followed with the rest
of the steam fleet, then put in requisition for
the first time. We encountered the enemy,
and a regular engagement ensued, with great
expenditure of powder. The Bulldog was in
the thick of the fight. It was a most excit-
ing scene, and a great contrast to what is
now exhibited when vessels carrying the
spectators move slowly along the line, while
90 FIRST YEARS IN THE HOUSE. [1853-
the magnificent navy of Great Britain remains
stationary, as idle as "a painted ship upon
a painted ocean." We returned to town by
a train timed for the House to meet at 10 p.m.
But a curious contretemps occurred. The
first part of the train, carrying the Speaker,
Lord Palmerston, and a large number of
members, of whom I was one, arrived punc-
tually. The second part carried the officer
of the House, who had with him the key of
the cupboard in which the mace was kept.
That did not arrive until 11 p.m. For an
hour members were kept waiting. No House
could be made without a mace. Inquiries
were made in every quarter ā in the House
of Lords first and afterwards elsewhere ā but
no mace of any sort or kind could be ob-
tained. Members waited for an hour in
remarkable costumes, and at last the neces-
sary business was soon transacted.
The year 1854 provided Parliament with
work for two sessions. First it had a Reform
1857.] LORD JOHN'S REFORM BILL. 91
Bill introduced by Lord John Russell with a
flourish of trumpets on February 13, and bear-
ing on its back the auspicious names of Lord
John himself and of Sir James Graham, the
authors of the first Reform Act of 1832. But
the introduction of such a bill at such a moment
did not please Lord Palmerston, or commend
itself to the common-sense of the House or
the country. On April 1 1 it was abandoned
by its authors. Lord John, who had charge
of it, was affected by deep emotion when he
announced its abandonment. He paused in
his speech, and was loudly and repeatedly
cheered by both sides of the House, because
all sympathised with his motives, although
they had no tears to shed over the unhappy
bantling.
On March 6 came the wondrous episode
of the great Budget, which revealed the
light-hearted way in which the Government
of the good Aberdeen drifted into the Rus-
sian war. We were told the Government
92 FIRST YEARS IN THE HOUSE. [1853-
hoped it would not be a prolonged struggle,
and we were asked to vote a sum of Ā£1,250,000
for extraordinary military service, to provide
25,000 men, being at the rate of Ā£50 per
head. This was met by doubling the income-
tax, then standing at 7d., for six months
only. And we were comforted by the as-
surance that the amount was the smallest
by which, under the most favourable cir-
cumstances, we could hope to see the gallant
forces leaving our shores brought back after
the completion of the object for which they
were sent. So that a Cabinet of all the
talents actually contemplated putting an
end to the ascendancy of the Czar and the
establishment of the integrity and indepen-
dence of the Ottoman empire, at a cost of a
million and a quarter, and after a six months'
campaign. Of course we had another Budget
in May, and the demands grew, until in
December we found that the job was not to
be done without enlisting foreign mercenaries.
Meanwhile tidings from the Crimea had
1857.] THE CRIMEAN WAR. 93
deeply stirred the heart of the nation. The
victory at the Alma, the slaughter at Bala-
clava, the tremendous struggle at Inkerman,
enabled a generation unused to war to realise
in some measure what war meant. And the
House met for the winter session in a stormy
mood. There were vacant places on our
own benches. Two familiar faces, one on
either side, Colonel Boyle and Colonel Blair,
were there no more. They were numbered
among the dead. And I can never forget
the pathetic reference to their fate in Mr
Bright's magnificent speech of December 22.
When we separated at Christmas, it was
obvious to many that the Coalition Govern-
ment was doomed.
One measure which passed into a law that
year was the Oxford University Reform Act.
Head a second time on April 2, it occupied
so long a time in Committee that it did not
reach the third reading until June 29. On
the second reading two men with a long
parliamentary career before them made
94 FIRST YEARS IN THE HOUSE. [1853-
speeches which attracted much attention :
one was Mr Byng, afterwards Viscount En-
field and Earl of Strafford ; the other Lord
Robert Cecil, now Marquis of Salisbury.
The first received many compliments both
in the House and from friends out of doors.
Mr Disraeli remarked to me a few days after-
wards : " You heard two speeches the other
night ā one by Byng, who has received so
many congratulations in the House, and
letters from all the duchesses and countesses
in London ; the other by Robert Cecil. You
will not hear much of the first ; the latter
has made his mark as a real debater, and will
become a considerable man." The prediction
was verified. Lord Enfield was an excellent
Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs. Lord
Salisbury has been three times Prime Minister
of England.
We met in January in no mood to be
trifled with. The privations and sufferings
of our gallant troops had profoundly im-
1857.] MR ROEBUCK'S MOTION. 95
pressed men of all shades of opinion. Mr
Eoebuck gave notice of a motion for a Select
Committee to inquire into the condition of
our army before Sebastopol, and into the
conduct of the departments of the Govern-
ment whose duty it had been to minister to
the wants of that army. As soon as notice
was given, Lord John Russell resigned his
post as Lord President of the Council, as he
could not resist the motion ā a resignation
which he afterwards reconsidered, with the
result that he remained in office until July.
Mr Roebuck stated that although we had sent
out 54,000 men, the effective force was only
14,000. He brought forward his motion on
January 26. The House responded with
alacrity, and put an end to the Coalition
Government, by a majority of more than
2 to 1 :ā
Ayes for Roebuck . . . 305
Noes for Government . . . 148
Majority against Government 157
96 FIRST YEARS IN TEE HOUSE. [1853-
Lorcl Palmerston became Prime Minister,
all the stronger because he was supreme in
his own Cabinet, not hindered by half-hearted
colleagues. The Queen, the Parliament, and
the country were confident that he would
prosecute the war with vigour and energy,
bring it to a safe conclusion, and obtain a
just and honourable peace. The session
passed, upon the whole, with a fair amount
of tranquillity ; only one little incident
clouded the otherwise serene atmosphere.
On July 20 the Government brought for-
ward a resolution for a joint guarantee by
England and France of the interest on a
loan of Ā£5,000,000 to the Turkish Govern-
ment. The result was in the nature of
a surprise. An advance of Ā£2,000,000 to
Sardinia had already passed without oppo-
sition. But the Turkish loan found no
favour. Men of weight on both sides op-
posed it. It was carried by a majority of
3 only : ā
1857.] LORD PALMERSTON. 97
Ayes . . . . . . 135
Noes 132
No one knew at the moment how serious
the consequences of this vote might have
been. I have no recollection of any special
Whip. I strolled down from the Carlton
after dinner, as a matter of course, listened
to the debate, and voted against the Govern-
ment, with no intention whatever of embar-
rassing Lord Palmerston or hindering the
prosecution of the war; but we found next
day that had the vote been otherwise, an
immediate dissolution would have followed.
Lord Palmerston would have carried the
country with him in 1855 even more than
he did in 1857, and his opponents of all
shades of opinion ā Conservatives, Peelites,
and Kadicals ā would have been scattered
to the winds.
[In 1852 my father had undertaken the
office of Treasurer of the S.P.G., which he re-
G
98 FIRST YEARS IN THE HOUSE. [1853-
tained until 1873, when he gave it up. It
was in connection with his work for the
Society that he paid a visit to Hursley,
in 1855, which he described to my mother
in the following letter : ā
Dec. 5, 1855.
I got to Hursley Park about 5.30 on Saturday.
We dined at 7, and had the Bishop of Barbadoes,
the Kebles, and sundry neighbouring clergy. Sun-
day we had merely our own quartette ā Sir William,
Lady, and Miss Heathcote. On Monday we went
into Southampton in two carriages ā Sir William
and the Bishop of Barbadoes, the Bishop of Colombo
returning in place of the former bishop; Miss
Heathcote, Keble, myself, and Gilbert Heathcote
in a barouche. We had but a poor meeting for
the S.P.G. We had Melville Portal and his bride,
Lady Charlotte, in the house. Yesterday Lord
Eobert Cecil came also, so we had a remarkably
pleasant party : he is always an agreeable addition
to any party, and I was only sorry he did not
come on Monday instead of Tuesday. I suppose
our party represented pretty nearly the division
in our ranks on peace and war; for we had Sir
William and Robert Cecil for peace, and Melville
1857.] THE PEACE. 99
Portal and myself for war. However, the Funds
are going up ; and if it is true that Louis Napoleon
is determined there shall be peace, I suppose we
shall have to put up with the best terms we can
get from Russia. Hursley is an extremely nice
place ā quite a model house, parish, farm, &c.
Keble seems very happy and in good spirits : he
dined with us two days, and we paid him a visit
in his own house one morning.]
The session of 1856 began in February,
and ran its tranquil course until July.
Peace was in the air when we met, and
was already a fait accomjili, although the
Treaty of Paris was not signed until March
30, and the ratifications w 7 ere exchanged a
month later. The peace was regarded as
coming a little too early for us, and must
have been arranged rather to suit the views
of our ally the Emperor of the French, so
that it was not welcomed with the joy
which generally accompanies such an event.
The only important legislation of the year
was an act authorising the resignation
100 FIRST YEARS IN THE HOUSE. [1853-
of the sees of London and Durham by
Bishops Blomfield and Maltby, the act
which established a precedent for future
legislation by which all bishops of the
Church of England were enabled to resign
their sees.
The session of 1857 began on February
3 and ended on March 20. During the re-
cess there had been a certain approximation
between the regular Opposition and the Peel-
ites. We heard much of the " turbulent and
aggressive policy" of Lord Palmerston. In
the early part of the year we had constant
controversies between Mr Gladstone and Sir
G. Cornewall Lewis, in which the former
severely criticised the financial policy of the
then Chancellor of the Exchequer. After-
wards there were animated debates in both
Houses, when the Government was arraigned
for the support they had given to the high-
handed action of an unpopular official, Sir
John Bo wring, Governor of Hong - Kong.
1857.] THE LOUGH A ARROW. 101
There had been a dispute between him and
the Commissioner of the Chinese Govern-
ment about the lorcha Arrow, a China-built
vessel which carried the British flag and
claimed the right to British protection, and
a conflict had arisen in the Canton river.
In the Lords a motion by Lord Derby
censuring the Government was defeated by
a majority of 36 : ā
For Lord Derby . . . . 110
Against . . . . . 146
In our House, a resolution moved by Mr
Cobden and supported by Mr Disraeli and
the bulk of the Opposition, by Mr Glad-
stone and Sir James Graham, by Lord
John Eussell and Mr Eoebuck, was carried
by a majority of 16 : ā
For Mr Cobden . . . . 263
For the Government . . . 247
On the next day Lord Palmerston an-
nounced that there would be an appeal
102 FIRST YEARS IN THE HOUSE. [1853-1857.
to the country, and a dissolution followed
as soon as possible. The China dissolution,
as it was called, was a memorable event.
Mr Cobden and Mr Bright lost their seats
for the West Riding and Manchester. Lord
John Russell himself held his ground in the
City against Mr Raikes Currie, designated
by him as the young man from North-
ampton. Our ranks were sadly decimated,
and Lord Palmerston was maintained in
power with a majority enormously increased,
and apparently installed in Downing Street
for the rest of his natural life.
For the present I leave Lord Palmerston,
the favourite of the nation, victorious at the
polls, with forty years of parliamentary life
still before me.
THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, THEN
AND NOW
HOUSE OF COMMONS, THEN AND NOW. 105
V.
THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, THEN AND NOW.
EVERT PARLIAMENT ITS OWN CHARACTERISTICS ā FRATERNITY WITHIN
THE WALLS OF THE HOUSE ā MR BRADLAUGH ā WORK ON COM-
MITTEES ā DRESS IN THE HOUSE ā THE HOURS THE HOUSE
KEEPS ā " BROTHERTON ! BROTHERTON ! " ā LORD PALMERSTON
AND MR EWART.
It might be asked at this point, how far
the House of Commons as it was from
1853 to 1857 differed from the House of
the present day. I know it is the fashion
to say that there is a great decadence in
the tone and spirit as well as in the man-
ners of Parliament. I think this is greatly
exaggerated. Every Parliament has its own
special characteristics, which depend to some
extent upon the circumstances under which
106 HOUSE OF COMMONS, THEN AND NOW.
it came into existence, the authority of the
Speaker, and the personal influence of the
Leader. The Parliament of 1832-34 was
doubtless much affected by the excite-
ment which prevailed during the Reform
agitation of the two preceding years.
The Parliament of 1880 was turbulent
owing to the unsettled state of Ireland
and the excitement among the Irish mem-
bers within our walls. The short - lived
Parliament of 1885-86 represented the great
change which the lowering of the county
franchise had made in the rural constituen-
cies. But I believe the spirit which ani-
mates the House of Commons as a body is
much the same now as it has ever been ā
a patriotic spirit, conscious of the great
traditions which it inherits, and anxious to
work for the good of the Empire.
There is, and always has been, a very real
feeling of fraternity within the walls of the
House. If a man is willino; to learn and
MR BRADLAUGH. 107
willing to work, lie is recognised as a real
recruit, and is welcomed accordingly. He
comes in contact with other men, he respects
their opinions, he discards some of his old
prejudices, he gradually falls into line, and