time heavy with idleness and sycophancy. To Edinburgh he was sent, following the example of Palmerston, Henry Petty, Francis Horner, and others of that generation of Whigs. He was received into without personally taking part in his instruction, directed and superintended the course of his education at the university. Lord Tavistock had been sent to Cambridge, and it is interesting to compare the results of the respective educations of the two brothers. While Lord Tavistock we are told on his father's authority — received a "pretended education" only, Lord John, in the evening of life, declared that "he had his studies directed and his character developed by one of the best and the noblest, the most upright, the most benevolent, and the most liberal of all philosophers.' art of Latin verse with a smattering of Greek Testament, the result being that, with few exceptions, the scholars, while acquiring neither proficiency in classical versification nor real knowledge of Testament Greek, were yet effectually prevented the house of Professor Playfair, who, from learning anything else, so that even boys with strong literary instincts, like Lord John Russell, preferred to take refuge in the enjoyment afforded by such spectacles as a prize fight, finding more profit therein than in the regular school curriculum. Lord John in a memorandum dictated no less than thirty years later to Lady Russell, put it on record how "the hard life of a fag for in those days it was a hard life and the unwholesome food disagreed with me so much that (in the summer of 1804) my stepmother, the Duchess of Bedford, insisted with my father that I should be taken away and sent to a private tutor."* Ill-treatment tends to produce in a boy one of two very distinct results, determined in great part by physical causes. With those of a robuster type it not unfrequently turns the victim of to-day into the tyrant of to-morrow. But in a weakly frame it generally sows the seed of a hatred of oppression which lasts through life, and it may be counted fortunate if it does not, as with Shelley, utterly jaundice the mind and distort the imagination. From any such dangers Lord John Russell was preserved by a sensible and healthy home life, and by the strong mind contained in his puny frame; but there was certainly not the slightest danger of his losing, either at Sunbury or at Westminster, that love of personal liberty which befitted one brought up in the traditions of Woburn, and in the shadow of the great figures of the Russell family. In a letter to his father from Spain, written in 1809, Lord John expressed a strong dislike to the idea of “an endeavor to acquire Scotch knowledge in a Scotch town!" Yet to a mind so constituted, the training he received from 1809 to 1812, at Edinburgh, was more beneficial than a sojourn at either of the English Universities, where the atmosphere was at that • Walpole, Life of Lord John Russell, vol. i., p. 10. ↑ Ibid., p. 43. In the "Speculative Society," an association founded originally in 1864 by six young members of the university, for the purposes of debate and discussion, he found an opportunity to anticipate the Parliamentary successes of his after years, and his maiden essay, mysteriously headed " Whig Register No. 3," and marked by his own hand as probably written in 1810, deals at some length with the very subject with which his name was soon to become indissolubly connected · Parliamentary Reform. The last of three Spanish journeys was to have been followed by a more extended tour, comprising Sicily, Greece, Egypt, and Syria. But, in the spring of 1813, an event occurred which made his presence necessary in England. The death of General Fitzpatrick, the friend of Fox, one of the last of the old band of Whig statesmen whose names are familiar to students of the great Parliamentary struggle of 1782-3, the author of many brilliant squibs and versde-société, which, with the events and the ladies they celebrated, have faded into the dim and distant past, left vacant the Parliamentary seat for the borough of Tavistock, and Lord John Russell, although not yet of age, was returned by the good-natured electors, ever ready to Walpole, Life of Lord John Russell, vol. i., p. 44. oblige their friend and patron, the Duke of Bedford. This early entry into Parliament did not, however, interrupt his love of study, which, from an early age, had been specially devoted to the history of constitutional liberty in England, and of the many movements, social and religious, which at various times affected it. These studies, which he continued throughout his long career, soon tempted him into frequent authorship. But with the single exception of the concluding chapter in his now forgotten work on "The European Politics of the Eighteenth Century," his writings lacked (in all probability owing to want of sufficient leisure) that lima labor which is essential to true literary success. They contain, however, much valuable information for the historian, and many striking passages dictated by the author's long experience of affairs. The chapter just mentioned deals with the history of religious movements under the two first Georges. Lord Russell's own views, like those of so many of the Whig statesmen of the last century, leant in the direction of Unitarianism; and for such a mind the teachings of the Broad Church divines of the Georgian period had a natural attraction. His opinions might, perhaps, have been aptly expressed in the words of the apothegm which Landor places in the mouth of Sir Samuel Romilly, "Christianity lies not in belief, but in action." Yet he also fully realized, as will appear on reference to the passage just cited, that the theology of Broad Church divines, or even of the Unitarian Nonconformists of the eighteenth century, however suited to educated minds, failed - as they ever must fail - to win popular affection; and that the Wesleyan movement, in all its complicated developments, amongst a people still seeking vainly in the establishment for something to supply the place of the spiritual discipline and thrilling ceremonial of the Roman Church was as natural a reaction against the frigid observance and scholarly doctrine of the day, as the movement of St. Francis against the crabbed theology and worldly apathy of medieval Italy. That his intimate knowledge of the inner life of religious England was a great source of strength in him as a politician, there can be no doubt. Apart from the social activity of the great religions denominations, and beyond the limits of the political struggles raging round the rival claims of Church and sect, which filled a great part of the period between 1832 and 1866, the current of religious thought has always run strong and deep in England, and has largely determined the course adopted by the masses of the people on the questions of the day, especially when moral issues are, or seem to be, at stake. Lord John Russell understood this better than most of his contemporaries. He was a consistent advocate of the perfect civil and polit ical equality of the Roman Catholics with their Protestant fellow-countrymen; yet in denouncing him as the most dangerous enemy of his Church, in educational and kindred questions, O'Connell was not far wrong. Nor was it otherwise than natural that the zealots of a paler ritualism within the precincts of the Anglican Church should have adopted a similar attitude to that of the great Irish Catholic orator. Since the Revolution of 1688 Liberalism in politics has, for the most part, been associated with breadth in religion. This was eminently the case with Lord John Russell. He knew that, by its very constitution and discipline, the Roman Church is essentially hostile to freedom. Were it otherwise, it would, by the very fact, be untrue to itself. That able and downright expositor of Roman Catholic claims, M. Louis Veuillot, once said: "When there is a Protestant majority, we claim religious liberty, because such is their principle; when we are in a majority we refuse it, because such is ours." In the writer of these words Lord John Russell would have recognized his natural enemy. But such outspoken antagonists as M. Veuillot and his school he would most undoubtedly have preferred to the insinuating advocates of that very Fata Morgana of doctrines, the marriage of Liberty with the Vatican. Lord John Russell, as we have seen, made his entrance into public life in the year 1813. The moment might have seemed singularly unpropitious to a professor of Whig principles; and if the. chance of gaining office and power were paired his reputation in Parliament and to be the measure of success, the outlook diminished his popularity with the counwas disheartening enough. But standing try. At the same time, it cannot fail to on the very threshold of a widening sphere excite increased admiration for the courof activity, and combining a rare degree age which alone enabled him to triumph of native enthusiasm with carly training over physical impediments serious enough in Liberal principles, he saw circumstances to have daunted another and a less resoenough to relieve the superficial gloom of lute mind. Courage, bordering, we may the political prospect. The period imme- say, on rashness, was indeed the key-note diately following the Battle of Waterloo to his whole career. Sydney Smith dewas one clearly calling for a reassertion of clared him "ignorant of moral fear," and the views of the Whig party. The very "that he did not know what it was," and core of their strength consisted in the expressing the same idea in a more belief in what has been called "the cause popular form- he declared that "Lord of civil and religious liberty." By this John, if called upon, would be ready to may be understood the belief that, gener- take command of the Channel Fleet, or ally speaking, the people will be better perform an operation for the stone." The able by themselves to manage their own comic illustrations of the day invariably affairs than by any form or outside inter- seize upon this trait in his character. A ference. This, like every other political knight, small of stature, he throws down doctrine, is subject to limitations, deter- the gauntlet before the giant Russia, for mined by the circumstances of time and he believes "God will defend the right;" place. Any person will probably be a or, in the same spirit, he is seen attacking more or less zealous Whig, according as the hydra-headed monster of corruption; his opinions tend to widen or restrict the again, we find him as the small boy who field of these limitations. But in the first chalks up "no popery," and then runs years of Lord John Russell's Parliamen- off; or, as the lad who quarrels with his tary life, there was evident danger of their fellow-servants, but cannot quite manage so far encroaching upon the principle as to get his own way from having asked too to threaten to swallow it up altogether. much. It was accordingly to the assertion of Of all the exploits of his political life the doctrines of civil and religious liberty the passage of the first Reform Bill that the life of Lord John was devoted; through the House of Commons is withand the extent of his contribution may be out a doubt that with which his name is realized by the simple enumeration of the most strongly associated in the public Parliamentary measures of which, during mind. Yet great as were his achievements his long career, he was the direct and re- with regard to this famous bill, it may sponsible sponsor; as well as of those be doubted whether even the struggle of which he initiated, although, in several 1830-2 forms Lord John Russell's most cases, it fell to the lot of others to pass solid title to fame. His biographer justly them into law. Parliamentary Reform claims that the judgment of posterity scarcely in the future to be mentioned should be rather based on the performance without a thought of his name the of the more active period in a man's career Removal of Religious Disabilities, Pop- than on that of his declining vigor, or of ular Education, the Abolition of Church his occasionally energetic old age. A genRates, the Better Administration of Ire-eral concensus of opinion, to which Mr. land, the Reform of Municipal Govern- Gladstone has recently added the weight ment, the New Poor Law - these are but a few of the great measures with which his memory is identified. The mere mention of them tells a tale of Parliamentary labor and perseverance remarkable enough in itself; how much more so when we reflect on the delicate health which never ceased to hamper their author throughout the whole of his long career. This circumstance will, no doubt, serve to account for an apparent failure, in many instances, to force his own conclusions on ⚫ unwilling colleagues, as well as for doubts and hesitations which, especially during the period between 1851 and 1859, im of his authority, has settled upon the period of Lord John's leadership of the House of Commons during the government of Lord Melbourne, as fulfilling the above conditions even more than that of his first premiership, which may indeed be considered as a rather pale continuation of the Melbourne ministry; certainly far more than his second and short-lived administration. It was not only that his authority in the House and in the country was then at its height, but also that this authority was maintained in the face of a Parliamentary opposition of unrivalled ability, united by two Coercion Bills differed in some important particulars; but the reader will probably be of opinion that the real difference lay more in the altered character of the political situation than in any distinction of detail between the clauses of the two proposals. When Sir Robert Peel altered his views on the Corn Laws, there was a compact party in opposition, led by responsible leaders, who presumably would be able to conduct the queen's government. A resignation was consequently no idle form. But when the Whig party altered their views as to the necessity of coercion, not only had the necessity party in opposition capable of forming a government. A resignation would consequently have been merely a useless form of wasting time, and might have proved highly injurious to public interests. a closer political agreement than frequently exists on a front opposition bench, by personal ties which cemented the political alliance, and by the consciousness that they were slowly but steadily gaining ground, and were in fact playing a winning game. Of all Lord John's own colleagues, the ablest sat in the House of Lords, and his colleagues in the lower House were but of scant assistance to him. Thus, nearly the whole burden and heat of the day fell upon him alone. "He is a marvellous little man," wrote Charles Greville, "always equal to the occasion, afraid of nobody; fixed in his principles; clear in his ideas; collected in his man- of it become clearer, but there was no ner, and bold and straightforward in his disposition. He invariably speaks well, when a good speech is required from him, and this is upon every important occasion, for he gets no assistance from any of his colleagues, except now and then from Howick." In the House of Lords, again, which at that time was still able in its collective capacity to influence the fate of ministries, the Whig ministry, though well represented, were still, in the face of a formidable opposition, enjoying all the weight of the great authority of the Duke of Wellington, and, what was perhaps even more efficacious, the benefit of the unscrupulous leadership of Lord Lyndhurst; while on their flank hung Lord Brougham, | a remorseless foe, still smarting under the sting of those letters only recently given to the world, in which Lord Melbourne conveyed to his former colleague the decree of perpetual banishment from the woolsack and from office. Ireland was the principal difficulty of the Melbourne government, and Lord John Russell's first administration coincided in point of time with the great famine. The conduct of Lord John in first turning out Sir Robert Peel's government on the Coercion Bill of 1846, and subsequently himself introducing a Coercion Bill without even going through the form of resignation, will always remain one of the most doubtful passages of his long career, especially as this change of front was all the more conspicuous, owing to Sir Robert Peel having resigned at the time when he had executed his own famous volte face in regard to the Corn Laws; asking the queen to send for Lord John, and only consenting to resume office upon the failure of the Whig leader to form a ministry. Whig apologists have pointed out, and with a certain degree of truth, that the Charles Greville's Memoirs, i. 294. For Lord John Russell himself, it must be said that he was evidently far more opposed to coercive measures than any of his colleagues. His faith in liberty, and that "fund of genuine indignation against wrong," that "inexhaustible sympathy with human suffering," which Mr. Gladstone has told us he possessed, made him perhaps the most perfect representative of the hopes of those who held that a steady perseverance in the cause of reform would have the same results in Ireland as it met with in the Highlands of Scotland after 1845. For coercion he had more than once to assume the responsibility. It was, however, evidently to him "a hateful alternative." He declared at Stroud in 1837 that "a Tory ministry had indeed effected a union with Ireland, but not a union of the interests, of the feelings, or of the affections of the people of England and Ireland; but a union bought with money." To this policy Lord John traced the virus of the political situation in Ireland. It was once stated by the late Mr. Isaac Butt, that some communications passed between the members of the Cabinet, at the time of the formation of the first Russell administration, in regard to a plan of Home Rule. No positive evidence of this has yet been adduced; but it is clear that Lord Mulgrave, afterwards Lord Normanby, the lord lieutenant during the greater portion of Lord Melbourne's administration, had strong inclinations in that direction, and in consequence of this the story probably originated. A letter written by him a few years after, when ambassador at Paris, to Lord John, will be read with interest, as showing how, even at that period, the condition of pub lic business in the House of Commons | small tenants, no improvement has been was beginning to excite the apprehensions made. In fact, you might as well propose of public men, and indicating the direction that a landlord should compensate the in which some statesmen were already looking for the remedy: rabbits for the burrows they have made on his land. It must embrace all who PARIS, April 3, 1848. have occupied the land for a certain numMY DEAR JOHN, ber of years (say five), and must give them In reading your speech the other day upon the state of business in the something like the tenant right of Ulster. House, I was more than ever struck with This, I know, is transfer of property, but what I have felt for many years is the hope- it is founded on a right acknowledged in less inefficiency of the legislative machine to the North, the most peaceful and orderly work the accumulated business of the country. province of Ireland. It has therefore a The period must arise when the doctrine as foundation of custom, which is a great to the division of labor must be applied to advantage." "It is quite true," he wrote legislation, as it has been to everything else, a few days after, "that landlords in Enand laws must be prepared beforehand for the finishing hand of the whole House, instead gland would not like to be shot like hares of, as now, going through so many stages and partridges by miscreants banded for there. It would be very desirable if one murderous purposes. But neither does could, at the same time, secure the prepara- any landlord in England turn out fifty pertion by the House, and in the manner in which sons at once, and burn their houses over most knowledge of details could be procured; their heads, giving them no provision for if, for instance, the Irish members met in the future. The murders are atrocious, so Dublin two months before the regular Session are the ejectments. The truth is that a for the discussion of purely Irish measures; civil war between landlords and tenants and that laws so prepared should be subject has been raging for eighty years, marked to only one decision, affirmative or negative, by barbarity on both sides." The vioin the whole House. Some proposal having lence of the extreme Tory faction, which some such basis would satisfy all that was had hitherto dominated Ireland, was trylegitimate in the desire for home legislation in Ireland, but would preserve the supremacy of the Imperial Parliament. Ever yours, At the time, however, to which we are now alluding, it was to reforms, political and social, especially in regard to the ten ure of land, that Lord John looked for a permanent remedy. Writing in regard to the stringent measures proposed in 1851, he said that "the new suppression of the violent symptoms of a disease which had continued from 1760 to the present time was an aggravation rather than a cure of the organic disorder. It satisfied the landlord class, and they were thereby encouraged to worse atrocities than before." "Whence," he continued, "this enmity? [of the people of Ireland]. From the mischievous cus. tom of growing potatoes and paupers on the soil, and from the violent means taken by the landlords to extirpate this evil." As a remedy for this condition of affairs, Lord John proposed a plan, the principal feature of which anticipated the legislation of 1870 and 1881. "It is clear to me," he wrote to Lord Clarendon, "that you do not meet the evil by the best law possible, giving tenants compensation for improve. ments. Lord Lansdowne says very truly that in the greater number of cases of Walpole, ii. 96. ing in the extreme; almost equally so was the scurrility of O'Connell and his followers. "But can we wonder at such things?" said Lord John, when reproached in Parliament with the faults of tone and temper of the Irish leaders; "your oppression taught them to hate your concessions to brave you; you exhibited to them how scanty was the stream of your bounty and how full the tribute of your fear." Sometimes he almost despaired. "In England," he once said, "I hope it may be true that there is no wrong without a remedy; in Ireland all is wrong and nothing a remedy."§ These, however, were but passing moments of despondency, and with the determination characteristic of the man, he returned, with an undaunted if heavy heart, to his labors in the cause of Irish reform. He was, in fact, a great believer in perseverance and pluck, and in respect of these qualities no Parliamentary leader of modern times has surpassed him. He also possessed a natural power of epigram and repartee of great value in debate, which his literary training strengthened and polished. In one of his earliest productions - a letter on Parliamentary corruption addressed to Lord Althorp - the Walpole, i. 463. ↑ Ibid., p. 465. |